A registrational trial is a clinical trial that adequately meets regulatory agency requirements for the evaluation of a drug candidate’s efficacy and safety such that it can be used to justify the approval of the drug. Generally, registrational trials are Phase 3 trials but may be Phase 2 trials if the trial design provides a reliable assessment of clinical benefit, particularly in situations where there is an unmet medical need.

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

NDA Submission and Review

Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, the results of product development, nonclinical studies and clinical trials are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. The NDA must include all relevant data available from pertinent preclinical and clinical trials, including negative or ambiguous results as well as positive findings, together with detailed information relating to the product’s chemistry, manufacturing, controls, and proposed labeling, among other things. A determination by the FDA within 60 days of the receipt of an NDA to file the application for review for its completeness is initiated at the time of submission. If the FDA determines there is significance to the missing or incomplete information in the context of the proposed drug product, the proposed indication(s) and the amount of time needed to address any given deficiency, it can issue a refusal-to-file letter. The submission of an NDA requires payment of a substantial application user fee to FDA, unless a waiver or exemption applies.

Once an NDA has been submitted, the FDA’s goal is to review standard applications within ten months after it accepts the application for filing, or, if the application qualifies for priority review, six months after the FDA accepts the application for filing. In both standard and priority reviews, the review process is often significantly extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe and effective. The FDA may convene an advisory committee to provide clinical insight on application review questions. Before approving an NDA, the FDA will typically inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving an NDA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP. If the FDA determines that the application, manufacturing process or manufacturing facilities are not acceptable, it will outline the deficiencies in the submission and often will request additional testing or information. Notwithstanding the submission of any requested additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval.

After the FDA evaluates an NDA and conducts inspections of manufacturing facilities where the product will be produced, the FDA may issue an approval letter or a Complete Response letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A Complete Response letter will describe all of the deficiencies that the FDA has identified in the NDA. In issuing the Complete Response letter, the FDA may recommend actions that the applicant might take to place the NDA in condition for approval, including requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA may delay or refuse approval of an NDA if applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied, require additional testing or information and/or require post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor safety or efficacy of a product.

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

Expedited Development and Review Programs

The FDA offers a number ofseveral expedited development and review programs for qualifying drug candidates. The fast track program is intended to expedite or facilitate the process for reviewing new products that meet certain criteria. Specifically, new products are eligible for fast track designation if they are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the disease or 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 fast track product has opportunities for frequent interactions with the review team during product development and, once an NDA is submitted, the product may be eligible for priority review. A fast track product may also be eligible for rolling review, where the FDA may consider for review sections of the NDA on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the NDA, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the NDA and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the NDA.

A product intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition may also be eligible for breakthrough therapy designation to expedite its development and review. A product can receive breakthrough therapy designation if preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. The designation includes all of the fast track program features, as well as more intensive FDA interaction and guidance beginning as early as Phase 1 and an organizational commitment to expedite the development and review of the product, including involvement of senior managers.

Any product is eligible for priority review if it has the potential to provide a significant improvement in the treatment, diagnosis or prevention of a serious disease or condition compared to marketed products. For products containing new molecular entities, priority review designation means the FDA’s goal is to take action on the marketing application within six months of the 60-day filing date (compared with ten months under standard review).

Additionally, products studied for their safety and effectiveness in treating serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions may receive accelerated approval upon a determination that the product has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity, or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. As a condition of accelerated approval, the FDA will generally require the sponsor to perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing clinical trials to verify and describe the anticipated effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. In addition, the FDA currently requires, as a condition for accelerated approval, pre-approval of promotional materials, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product.

Orphan Drug Designation

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug or biologic intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or more than 200,000 individuals in the United States for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available in the United States a drug or biologic for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales in the United States for that drug or biologic. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. The orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review or approval process.

If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusive approval (or exclusivity), which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a full NDA, to market the same drug for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different drug or biologic for the same disease or condition, or the same drug or biologic for a different disease or condition. Among the other benefits of orphan drug designation are tax credits for certain research and a waiver of the application user fee.

A designated orphan drug may not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan designation. In addition, exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.

Post-Approval Requirements

Any products manufactured or distributed by us pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to record-keeping, reporting of adverse experiences, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, and advertising and promotion of the product. After approval, most changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications or other labeling claims, are subject to prior FDA review and approval. There also are continuing user fee requirements, under which FDA assesses an annual program fee for each product identified in an approved NDA. Drug manufacturers and their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements upon us and our third-party manufacturers. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated, and, depending on the significance of the change, may require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose reporting requirements upon us and any third-party manufacturers that we may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMP and other aspects of regulatory compliance.

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

The FDA closely regulates the marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of biologics and drugs. A company can make only those claims relating to safety and efficacy, purity and potency that are approved by the FDA and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. However, companies may share truthful and not misleading information that is otherwise consistent with a product’s FDA approved labeling. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in, among other things, adverse publicity, warning letters, corrective advertising and potential civil and criminal penalties. Physicians may prescribe legally available products for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and that differ from those tested by us and approved by the FDA. Such off-label uses are common across medical specialties. Physicians may believe that such off-label uses are the best treatment for patients in varied circumstances. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. The FDA does, however, restrict manufacturer’s communications on the subject of off-label use of their products.

FDA 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 an in vitro diagnostic is essential to the safe and effective use of the therapeutic product, then the FDA generally will require approval or clearance of the diagnostic at the same time that the FDA approves the therapeutic product. According to FDA guidance, a companion diagnostic device used to make treatment decisions in clinical trials of a drug generally will be considered an investigational device unless it is employed for an intended use for which the device is already approved or cleared. If used to make critical treatment decisions, such as patient selection, the diagnostic device generally will be considered a significant risk device under the FDA’s Investigational Device Exemption (“IDE”), regulations. Thus, the sponsor of the diagnostic device will be required to comply with the IDE regulations. According to the guidance, if a diagnostic device and a drug are to be studied together to support their respective approvals, both products can be studied in the same investigational trial, if the trial meets both the requirements of the IDE regulations and the IND regulations. The guidance provides that depending on the details of the trial plan and subjects, a sponsor may seek to submit an IND alone, or both an IND and an IDE.

Pursuing FDA approval of an in vitro companion diagnostic would require either a pre-market notification, also called 510(k) clearance, or a pre-market approval (“PMA”), for that diagnostic. The review of companion diagnostics involves coordination of review with the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health.

The PMA process, including the gathering of clinical and nonclinical data and the submission to and review by the FDA, can take several years or longer. The applicant must prepare and provide the FDA with reasonable assurance of the device’s safety and effectiveness, including information about the device and its components regarding, among other things, device design, manufacturing and labeling. PMA applications are subject to an application fee. In addition, PMAs for 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, the applicant must demonstrate that the diagnostic produces reproducible results. As part of the PMA review, the FDA will typically inspect the manufacturer’s facilities for compliance with the Quality System Regulation (“QSR”), which imposes elaborate testing, control, documentation and other quality assurance requirements.

U.S. Patent Term Restoration and Marketing Exclusivity

The term of a patent depends upon the laws of the country in which it is issued. In most jurisdictions, a patent term is 20 years from the earliest filing date of a non-provisional patent application. Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of the FDA approval of our drug candidates, one or more issued U.S. patents we obtain may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, commonly referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent restoration term of up to five years beyond the normal expiration of the patent, limited to the approved indication (or any additional indications approved during the period of extension), as compensation for patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. The patent term restoration period granted on a patent covering a product is generally one-half the time between the effective date of an IND and the submission date of an NDA, plus the time between the submission date of an NDA and the ultimate approval date of that application. However, patent term restoration cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date. Only one patent applicable to an approved product is eligible for extension and only those claims covering the approved product, a method for using it, or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. Additionally, the application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent in question. A patent that covers multiple products for which approval is sought can only be extended in connection with one of the approvals. The USPTO, in consultation with the FDA, reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration. In the future, we intend to apply for restoration of patent term for an issued patent we own, and if eligible for such restoration, to add patent term beyond its current expiration date, depending on the expected length of the clinical trials and other factors involved in the filing of the relevant NDA. There can be no assurance that any of our pending patent applications will be issued or that we will benefit from any patent term extension.

Marketing exclusivity provisions under the United States Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”) can also delay the submission or the approval of certain marketing applications for competing products. The FDCA provides a five-year period of non-patent marketing exclusivity within the United States to the first applicant to obtain approval of an NDA for a new chemical entity. A drug is a new chemical entity if the FDA has not previously approved any other new drug containing the same active moiety, which is the molecule or ion responsible for the action of the drug substance. During the exclusivity period, the FDA may not accept for review an abbreviated new drug application (“ANDA”), or a 505(b)(2) NDA submitted by another company for another drug based on the same active moiety, regardless of whether the drug is intended for the same indication as the original innovator drug or for another indication. However, an application may be submitted after four years if it contains a certification of patent invalidity or non-infringement to one of the patents listed with the FDA by the innovator NDA holder. The FDCA also provides three years of marketing exclusivity for an NDA, or supplement to an existing NDA, if new clinical investigations, other than bioavailability studies, that were conducted or sponsored by the applicant are deemed by the FDA to be essential to the approval of the application, for example new indications, dosages or strengths of an existing drug. This three-year exclusivity covers only the modification for which the drug received approval on the basis of the new clinical investigations and does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs or 505(b)(2) applications for drugs containing the active agent for the original indication or condition of use. Five-year and three-year exclusivity will not delay the submission or approval of a full NDA. However, an applicant submitting a full NDA would be required to conduct or obtain a right of reference to all of the preclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials necessary to demonstrate safety and effectiveness. Orphan drug exclusivity, as described below, may offer a seven-year period of marketing exclusivity, except in certain circumstances. Pediatric exclusivity is another type of regulatory market exclusivity in the United States. Pediatric exclusivity, if granted, adds six months to existing exclusivity periods and patent terms. This six-month exclusivity, which runs from the end of other exclusivity protection or patent term, may be granted based on the voluntary completion of a pediatric trial in accordance with an FDA-issued “Written Request” for such a trial.

European Drug Development

In Europe, our future drugs may also be subject to extensive regulatory requirements. As in the United States, medicinal products can only be marketed if a marketing authorization from the competent regulatory agencies has been obtained.

Similar to the United States, the various phases of preclinical and clinical research in Europe are subject to significant regulatory controls. Although the EU Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC has sought to harmonize the European Union clinical trials regulatory framework, setting out common rules for the control and authorization of clinical trials in the European Union, the European Union Member States have transposed and applied the provisions of the Directive differently. This has led to significant variations in the member state regimes. Under the current regime, before a clinical trial can be initiated it must be approved in each of the European Union countries where the trial is to be conducted by two distinct bodies: the National Competent Authority (“NCA”), and one or more Ethics Committees (“ECs”). Under the current regime, all suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions to the investigated drug that occur during the clinical trial have to be reported to the NCA and ECs of the Member State where they occurred.

In 2014, a new Clinical Trials Regulation 536/2014, replacing the current Directive, was adopted. The new Regulation will become directly applicable in all EU Member States (without national implementation) once the EU Portal and Database are fully functional. It is expected that the Regulation will apply in 2019. The new Regulation seeks to simplify and streamline the approval of clinical trials in the European Union. For example, the sponsor shall submit a single application for approval of a clinical trial via the EU Portal. As part of the application process, the sponsor shall propose a reporting Member State, who will coordinate the validation and evaluation of the application. The reporting Member State shall consult and coordinate with the other concerned Member States. If an application is rejected, it can be amended and resubmitted through the EU Portal. If an approval is issued, the sponsor can start the clinical trial in all concerned Member States. However, a concerned Member State can in limited circumstances declare an “opt-out” from an approval. In such a case, the clinical trial cannot be conducted in that Member State. The Regulation also aims to streamline and simplify the rules on safety reporting and introduces enhanced transparency requirements such as mandatory submission of a summary of the clinical trial results to the EU Database.

European Drug Review and Approval

In the European Economic Area (“EEA”), which is comprised of the 28 Member States of the European Union plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, medicinal products can only be commercialized after obtaining a Marketing Authorization (“MA”). There are two types of marketing authorizations.

The Community MA, which is issued by the European Commission through the Centralized Procedure, based on the opinion of the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (“CHMP”), of the EMA and which is valid throughout the entire territory of the EEA. The Centralized Procedure is mandatory for certain types of drugs, such as biotechnology medicinal drugs, orphan medicinal drugs, and medicinal drugs containing a new active substance indicated for the treatment of AIDS, cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, diabetes, autoimmune and viral diseases. The Centralized Procedure is optional for drugs containing a new active substance not yet authorized in the EEA, or for drugs that constitute a significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovation or which are in the interest of public health in the European Union.

National MAs, which are issued by the competent authorities of the Member States of the EEA and only cover their respective territory, are available for drugs not falling within the mandatory scope of the Centralized Procedure. Where a drug has already been authorized for marketing in a Member State of the EEA, this National MA can be recognized in other Member States through the Mutual Recognition Procedure. If the drug has not received a National MA in any Member State at the time of application, it can be approved simultaneously in various Member States through the Decentralized Procedure. Under the Decentralized Procedure, an identical dossier is submitted to the competent authorities of each of the Member States in which the MA is sought, one of which is selected by the applicant as the Reference Member State (“RMS”). The competent authority of the RMS prepares a draft assessment report, a draft summary of the drug characteristics (“SPC”), and a draft of the labeling and package leaflet, which are sent to the other Member States (“Member States Concerned”) for their approval. If the Member States Concerned raise no objections, based on a potential serious risk to public health, to the assessment, SPC, labeling, or packaging proposed by the RMS, the drug is subsequently granted a national MA in all the Member States (i.e. in the RMS and the Member States Concerned).

Under the above-described procedures, before granting the MA, the EMA or the competent authorities of the Member States of the EEA make an assessment of the risk-benefit balance of the drug on the basis of scientific criteria concerning its quality, safety and efficacy.

European Chemical Entity Exclusivity

In Europe, new chemical entities, sometimes referred to as new active substances, qualify for eight years of data exclusivity upon marketing authorization and an additional two years of market exclusivity. This data exclusivity, if granted, prevents regulatory authorities in the European Union from referencing the innovator’s data to assess a generic application for eight years, after which generic marketing authorization can be submitted, and the innovator’s data may be referenced, but not approved for two years. The overall ten-year period will be extended to a maximum of 11 years if, during the first eight years of those ten years, the marketing authorization holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to their authorization, are held to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies.

European Union General Data Protection Regulation

In addition to EU regulations related to the approval and commercialization of our products, we may be subject to the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”). The GDPR went into effect on May 25, 2018. The GDPR introduced new data protection requirements in the European Union, as well as potential fines for noncompliant companies of up to the greater of €20 million or 4% of annual global revenue. The regulation imposes numerous new requirements for the collection, use, storage and disclosure of personal information, including more stringent requirements relating to consent and the information that must be shared with data subjects about how their personal information is used, the obligation to notify regulators and affected individuals of personal data breaches, extensive new internal privacy governance obligations and obligations to honor expanded rights of individuals in relation to their personal information (e.g., the right to access, correct and delete their data). In addition, the GDPR includes restrictions on cross-border data transfers. The GDPR increased our responsibility and liability in relation to personal data that we process, and we may be required to put in place additional mechanisms to ensure compliance with the new EU data protection rules. Further, the United Kingdom’s vote in favor of exiting the EU, often referred to as Brexit, has created uncertainty with regard to data protection regulation in the United Kingdom. In particular, it is unclear whether the United Kingdom will enact data protection legislation equivalent to the GDPR and how data transfers to and from the United Kingdom will be regulated.

Rest of the World Regulation

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

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

Coverage and Reimbursement

Sales of our drugs will depend, in part, on the extent to which our drugs will be covered by third-party payors, such as government health programs, commercial insurance and managed healthcare organizations. These third-party payors are increasingly reducing reimbursements for medical drugs 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 drugs.

There may be significant delays in obtaining coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs, and coverage may be more limited than the purposes for which the drug is approved by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside of the United States. Moreover, eligibility for coverage and reimbursement does not imply that a drug will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including research, development, intellectual property protection, manufacture, sale and distribution expenses. Interim reimbursement levels for new drugs, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover our costs and may not be made permanent. Reimbursement rates may vary according to the use of the drug and the clinical setting in which it is used, may be based on reimbursement levels already set for lower-cost drugs and may be incorporated into existing payments for other services. Net prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. Third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement policies, but also have their own methods and approval process apart from Medicare determinations. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for our drug candidates, once approved, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.

We plan to develop, either by ourselves or with collaborators, in vitro companion diagnostic tests for our drug candidates for certain indications. We, or our collaborators, will be required to obtain coverage and reimbursement for these tests separate and apart from the coverage and reimbursement we seek for our drug candidates, once approved.

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

Healthcare Reform

In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of drug candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect a biopharmaceutical company’s abilitycontinue to profitably sell any approved drugs.

The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (“MMA”) established the Medicare Part D program to provide a voluntary prescription drug benefit to Medicare beneficiaries. Under Part D, Medicare beneficiaries may enroll in prescription drug plans offeredbe, proposals by private entities that provide coverage of outpatient prescription drugs. Unlike Medicare Parts A and B, Part D coverage is not standardized. Part D prescription drug plan sponsors are not required to pay for all covered Part D drugs, and each drug plan can develop its own drug formulary that identifies which drugs it will cover and at what tier or level. However, Part D prescription drug formularies must include drugs within each therapeutic category and class of covered Part D drugs, though not necessarily all the drugs in each category or class. Any formulary used by a Part D prescription drug plan must be developed and reviewed by a pharmacy and therapeutic committee. Government payment for some of the costs of prescription drugs may increase demand for drugs for which we obtain marketing approval. However, any negotiated prices for our drugs covered by a Part D prescription drug plan will likely be lower than the prices we might otherwise obtain. Moreover, while the MMA applies only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private third-party payors often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own payment rates. Any reduction in payment that results from the MMA may result in a similar reduction in payments from non-governmental third-party payors.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 provides funding for the federal government, state governments, regulators and third-party payors to comparecontrol or manage the effectivenessincreased costs of different treatments for the same illness. The plan for the research was published in 2012 byhealthcare and, more generally, to reform the U.S. Departmenthealthcare system. The biopharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of Healththese efforts and Human Services (“HHS”), the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the National Institutes for Health, and periodic reports on the status of the research and related expenditures are made to Congress. Although the results of the comparative effectiveness studies are not intended to mandate coverage policies for public or private third-party payors, it is not clear what effect, if any, the research will have on the sales of our drug candidates, if any such drug or the condition that they are intended to treat are the subject of a trial. It is also possible that comparative effectiveness research demonstrating benefits in a competitor’s drug could adversely affect the sales of our drug candidate. If third-party payors do not consider our drugs to be cost-effective compared to other available therapies, they may not cover our drugs after approval as a benefit under their plans or, if they do, the level of payment may not be sufficient to allow us to sell our drugs on a profitable basis.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amendedhas been significantly affected by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (“ACA”) enactedmajor legislative initiatives For example, in March 2010, has had a significant impactthe ACA was enacted, which was intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms, substantially changed the way healthcare industry. The ACA expanded coverage foris financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly impacts the uninsured while at the same time containing overall healthcare costs. With regardU.S. pharmaceutical industry.

There have been executive and Congressional efforts to pharmaceutical products, the ACA, among other things, addressed a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implantedmodify, repeal, or injected, increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and extended the rebate program to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations, established annual fees and taxes on manufacturers ofotherwise invalidate all, or certain branded prescription drugs, and a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must now agree to offer 70% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D.

Some of the provisions of, the ACA have yet to be fully implemented, while certain provisions have been subject to judicial and Congressional challenges as well as recent efforts byACA. For example, the current U.S. President’sTrump administration to repeal or replace certain aspects of the ACA. Since January 2017, the current U.S. President has signed two Executive Ordersissued several executive orders and other directives designed to delay the implementation of certain provisions of the ACA or otherwise circumvent some of the requirements for health insurance mandated by the ACA. Concurrently, Congress has considered legislation that would repeal or repeal and replace all or part of the ACA. While Congress has not passed comprehensive repeal legislation, Congress enacted the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, or the Tax Act, which, among other things, included a provision that repealed, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the ACA on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the "individual mandate". Further, the 2020 federal spending package eliminated, effective January 1, 2020, the ACA-mandated “Cadillac” tax on high-cost employer-sponsored health coverage and medical device tax and, effective January 1, 2021, also eliminated the health insurer tax. On December 14, 2018, a Texas U.S. District Court Judge ruled that the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the "individual mandate" was repealed by Congress as part of the Tax Act. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently reviewing this case, but it is unknown when a decision will be reached. Although the U.S. Supreme Court has enacted laws that modify certain provisionsyet to rule on the constitutionality of the ACA, on January 28, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period from February 15, 2021 through May 15, 2021 for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace. The executive order also instructs certain governmental agencies to review and itreconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the ACA. It is unclear how these lawsthe Supreme Court ruling, other such litigation, and other efforts to repeal and replace the ACAhealthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the ACA and our business.ACA.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. On August 2, 2011, theenacted to reduce healthcare expenditures. The Budget Control Act of 2011 among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress. A Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, tasked with recommending a targeted deficit reduction of at least $1.2 trillion for the years 2013 through 2021, was unable to reach required goals, thereby triggering the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This includesCongress, including aggregate reductions toof Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, started inyear. These reductions went into effect on April 1, 2013 and due to subsequent legislative amendments, will stayremain in effect through 20272030 unless additional congressionalCongressional action is taken. OnThese reductions have been temporarily suspended from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021 by COVID-19 relief legislation. Moreover, on January 2, 2013, the then-U.S. President signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (“ATRA”),was signed into law, which, among other things, alsofurther reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years.

Further,Recently there has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over the manner in which drugbiopharmaceutical manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several congressionalCongressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. At the federal level, the Trump administration used several means to propose or implement drug pricing reform, including through federal budget proposals, executive orders and policy initiatives. However, certain recent initiatives have stalled. For example, the current U.S. President’s administration releasedimplementation of a “Blueprint” to lower drug prices and reduce out-of-pocket costs of drugs that contains additional proposals to increase manufacturer competition, increase the negotiating power ofnew regulation removing safe harbor protection for certain federal healthcare programs, incentivizeprice reductions from pharmaceutical manufacturers to lowerplan sponsors under Part D has been delayed by the list price of their products and reduceBiden administration from January 1, 2022 to January 1, 2023 in response to ongoing litigation. Other regulations, such as the out-of-pocket costs of drug products paid by consumers. For example, in October 2018, CMS proposed a new rule that would require direct-to-consumer television advertisements of prescription drugs and biological products, for which payment is available through or under Medicare or Medicaid, to include in the advertisement the Wholesale Acquisition Cost, or list price, of that drug or biological product. On January 31, 2019, the HHS Office of Inspector General, proposed modifications to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute discount safe harbor for price reductions reflected at the purpose of reducing the cost of drug products to consumers which, among other things, if finalized, will affect discounts paid by manufacturers to Medicare Part D plans, Medicaid managed care organizations andpoint-of-sale, as well as a new safe harbor for certain fixed fee arrangements between pharmacy benefit managers working withand manufacturers have been delayed pending review by the Biden administration. On November 20, 2020, CMS issued an interim final rule implementing President Trump’s Most Favored Nation executive order, which would tie Medicare Part B payments for certain physician-administered drugs to the lowest price paid in other economically advanced countries, effective January 1, 2021. On December 28, 2020, the United States District Court in Northern California issued a nationwide preliminary injunction against implementation of the interim final rule. It is unclear whether the Biden administration will work to reverse these organizations. Although some of thesemeasures or pursue similar policy initiatives. At the state level, legislatures are increasingly passing legislation and other proposed measures may require additional authorization to become effective, Congress and the current U.S. President’s administration has each indicated that it will continue to seek new legislative and/or administrative measuresimplementing regulations designed to control drug costs.

Additionally,pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on May 30, 2018,certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Further, it is possible that additional governmental action is taken in response to the Trickett Wendler, Frank Mongiello, Jordan McLinn, and Matthew Bellina Right to Try Act of 2017 (“Right to Try Act”) 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 permission under the FDA expanded access program. There is no obligation for a pharmaceutical manufacturer to make its drug products available to eligible patients as a result of the Right to Try Act.ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Other Healthcare Laws

We may also be subject to healthcare regulation and enforcement by the federal government and the states and foreign governments where we may market our drug candidates, if approved. These laws include, without limitation, state and federal anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, privacy and security and physician sunshine laws and regulations.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, any person from knowingly and willfully offering, soliciting, receiving or paying remuneration, directly or indirectly, to induce either the referral of an individual, for an item or service or the purchasing or ordering of a good or service, for which payment may be made under federal healthcare programs such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs. The federal Anti-Kickback Statute is subject to evolving interpretations. In the past, the government has enforced the federal Anti-Kickback Statute to reach large settlements with healthcare companies based on sham consulting and other financial arrangements with physicians. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act. The majority of states also have anti-kickback laws, which establish similar prohibitions and in some cases may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers.

Additionally, the federal civil and criminal false claims laws, including the False Claims Act, and civil monetary penalties law, prohibits knowingly presenting or causing the presentation of a false, fictitious or fraudulent claim for payment to the U.S. government. Actions under the False Claims Act may be brought by the Attorney General or as a qui tam action by a private individual in the name of the government. The federal government is using the False Claims Act, and the accompanying threat of significant liability, in its investigation and prosecution of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies throughout the United States, for example, in connection with the promotion of products for unapproved uses and other sales and marketing practices. The government has obtained multi-million and multi-billion dollar settlements under the False Claims Act in addition to individual criminal convictions under applicable criminal statutes. Given the significant size of actual and potential settlements, it is expected that the government will continue to devote substantial resources to investigating healthcare providers’ and manufacturers’ compliance with applicable fraud and abuse laws.

The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) also created additional federal civil and criminal penalties for, among other actions, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors, knowingly and willfully embezzling or stealing from a healthcare benefit program, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense, and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up 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. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation.

There has also been a recent trend of increased federal and state regulation of payments and other transfers of value made to physicians and other healthcare providers. The ACA, through the Physician Payments Sunshine Act, imposesimposed new reporting requirements on drug manufacturers for payments and other transfers of value made by them to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors) and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. Drug manufacturers are required to submit annual reports to the government and these reports are posted on a website maintained by CMS.Beginning in 2022, applicable manufacturers also will be required to report such information regarding its payments and other transfers of value to physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, anesthesiologist assistants, certified registered nurse anesthetists and certified nurse midwives during the previous year. Certain states also mandate implementation of compliance programs, impose restrictions on drug manufacturer marketing practices and/or require the tracking and reporting of gifts, compensation and other remuneration to physicians.

We may also be subject to data privacy and security requirements that may impact the way in which we conduct research and operate our business. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH”), and their respective implementing regulations, including the final omnibus rule published on January 25, 2013, impose obligations, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information on covered entities, including certain healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses, as well as individuals and entities that provide services on behalf of a covered entity that involve individually identifiable health information, known as business associates.associates, as well as their covered subcontractors. In addition, we may be directly subject to certain state laws concerning data privacy and security. For example, California recently enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CPPA”CCPA”), which creates new individual privacy rights for California consumers (as defined in the law) and places increased privacy and security obligations on entities handling certain personal data of consumers or households. The CCPA requires covered companies to provide new disclosure to consumers about such companies’ data collection, use and sharing practices, provide such consumers new ways to opt-out of certain sales or transfers of personal information, and provide consumers with additional causes of action. The CCPA took effect on January 1, 2020, and the California Attorney General may bring enforcement actions for violations beginning July 1, 2020. The CCPA was amended in September 2018 and November 2019, and it remains unclear what, if any, further modifications will be made to this legislation or how it will be interpreted. As currently written, the CCPA may impact our business activities and exemplifies the vulnerability of our business to the evolving regulatory environment related to personal data and protected health information. Existing state laws governing the privacy and security of personally identifiable information, and, in some states, health information, impose differing requirements, thus complicating our compliance efforts.

Legal Proceedings

From timeIf our operations are found to time, we are involvedbe in various legal proceedings arising fromviolation of any of the normal course of business activities. We are not presently a party tofederal and state laws described above or any litigation the outcome of which, we believe, if determined adverselyother governmental regulations that apply to us, would individually or taken together have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results, cash flows, or financial condition. Defending such proceedings is costly and can impose a significant burden on management and employees, we may receive unfavorable preliminarybe subject to significant civil, criminal, and administrative penalties, including, without limitation, damages, fines, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, additional reporting obligations and oversight obligations, and the curtailment or interim rulingsrestructuring of our operations.

Human Capital Resources

In order to achieve the goals and expectations of our Company, it is crucial that we continue to attract and retain top talent. To facilitate talent attraction and retention, we strive to make our Company a safe and rewarding workplace, with opportunities for our employees to grow and develop in the course of litigationtheir careers, supported by strong compensation, benefits and there can be no assuranceshealth and wellness programs, and by programs that favorable final outcomes will be obtained.

Our Employeesbuild connections among our employees.

As of December 31, 2019,2020, we had 67 full-time68 employees, with 56including 55 in research and development and 1113 in general and administrative functions. As of December 31, 2019, 272020, 28 of our full-time employees had completed a Ph.D. or other advanced science or medical degree. We believe our employee relations are good.

NoneThe success of our business is fundamentally connected to the well-being of our employees. Accordingly, we are committed to their health, safety and wellness. We provide our employees and their families with access to a variety of innovative, flexible and convenient health and wellness programs, including benefits that provide protection and security so they can have peace of mind concerning events that may require time away from work or that impact their financial well-being; that support their physical and mental health by providing tools and resources to help them improve or maintain their health status and encourage engagement in healthy behaviors; and that offer choice where possible so they can customize their benefits to meet their needs and the needs of their families. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we implemented significant changes that we determined were in the best interest of our employees, is represented by a labor union or covered by collective bargaining agreements,as well as the communities in which we operate, and we have not experienced any work stoppages. We consider our relationswhich comply with government regulations. This includes having our employees work from home or remotely.

We provide robust compensation and benefits programs to be good.help meet the needs of our employees. In addition to salaries, these programs include competitive compensation packages, a 401(k) Plan, healthcare and insurance benefits and family leave, among others.

Our Facilities

Our corporate headquarters are located in South San Francisco, California, and comprise approximately 36,754 square feet of space, pursuant to an operating lease that expires in November 2026. This lease includes an option to extend for a further eight years, at market rates that prevail at the time of our election to extend.

We believe that these facilities are sufficient to meet our current needs. We also believe we will be able to obtain additional space, as needed, on commercially reasonable terms.

Corporate and Available Information

We were incorporated under the laws of the state of Delaware in March 2015 under the name FLX Bio, Inc. In April 2015, Flexus Biosciences, Inc. (“Flexus”) contributed and assigned to us the assets and rights relating primarily to its fms-like tyrosine kinase receptor 3, cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor and small molecule T_reg cancer immunotherapy in exchange for shares of our convertible preferred stock, which were immediately distributed to the preferred stockholders of Flexus. In May 2019, we changed our name to RAPT Therapeutics, Inc. Our principal executive offices are located at 561 Eccles Avenue, South San Francisco, California 94080. Our telephone number is (650) 489-9000. Our website address is www.rapt.com.

We file or furnish electronically with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act. We make copies of these reports available free of charge through our investor relations website as soon as reasonably practicable after we file or furnish them with the SEC.

Information contained on or accessible through our websites is not incorporated into, and does not form a part of, this Annual Report or any other report or document we file with the SEC, and any references to our websites are intended to be inactive textual references only.

Our business and investing in our common stock involvesinvolve a high degree of risk. You should consider and read carefully all of the risks and uncertainties described below, as well as other information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including our consolidated financial statements and related notes, our ‘‘Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” as well as our other public filings. The risks described below are not the only ones facing us. The occurrence of any of the following risks or additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe to be immaterial, could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, prospects and stock price. In such case, the market price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your original investment. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also impair our business operations and the market price of our common stock. This Annual Report on Form 10-K also contains forward-looking statements and estimates that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements as a result of specific factors, including the risks and uncertainties described below.

Risks Related to Our Business

We are a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company with a history of losses. We expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future and may never achieve or maintain profitability, which could result in a decline in the market value of our common stock.

We are a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company with a history of losses. Since our inception, we have devoted substantially all of our resources to research and development, including our drug discovery and development engine, preclinical studies, clinical trials, raising capital, building our management team and our intellectual property portfolio. Our net loss was $43.0$52.9 million and $36.1$43.0 million for the yearsyear ended December 31, 20192020 and 2018,2019, respectively. As of December 31, 2019,2020, we had an accumulated deficit of $162.0$214.8 million. Substantially all of our losses have resulted from expenses incurred in connection with our research and development programs and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. Through December 31, 2019, we have not generated any revenue. Furthermore, we do not expect to generate any revenue from product sales for the foreseeable future, and we expect to continue to incur significant operating losses for the foreseeable future due to the cost of research and development, preclinical studies, clinical trials and the regulatory approval process for our current and potential future drug candidates.

We expect our net losses to increase substantially as we advance the clinical development of our lead drug candidates, FLX475 and RPT193. However, the amount of our future losses is uncertain. Our ability to generate revenue from product sales and achieve or sustain profitability, if ever, will depend on, among other things, successfully developing drug candidates, obtaining regulatory approvals to market and commercialize drug candidates, manufacturing any approved products on commercially reasonable terms, entering into any future collaborations or other partnerships, establishing a sales and marketing organization or suitable third-party alternatives for any approved product and raising sufficient capital to finance our operations. If we, or any of our future partners, are unable to develop and commercialize one or more of our drug candidates, or if sales revenue from any drug candidate that receives regulatory approval is insufficient, we will not achieve or sustain profitability, which would have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

FLX475 and RPT193 are in clinical development, which may fail or suffer delays that materially and adversely affect their commercial viability.

We have no products on the market or that have gained regulatory approval. Other than FLX475 and RPT193, none of our drug candidates has ever been tested in humans. None of our drug candidates has advanced into late-stage development or a pivotal clinical trial and it may be years before any such trial is initiated, if at all. Our ability to achieve and sustain profitability depends on us developing, obtaining regulatory approval for and successfully commercializing one or more drug candidates, either alone or with partners.

Before obtaining regulatory approval for any of our drug candidates, we must conduct extensive preclinical studies and clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our drug candidates in humans. Although we have successfully completed preclinical studies and a Phase 1 clinical trial with healthy volunteers for FLX475, are conducting a Phase 1/2 clinical trial investigating FLX475 as a single agent and in combination with pembrolizumab in a broad range of tumors and have completed the initial Phase 1a single and multiple dose escalation cohorts of healthy volunteers of a seamless Phase 11a/1b trial of RPT193, more clinical trials are needed and there is no guarantee that the FDA will permit us to conduct additional clinical trials for FLX475, RPT193 or any other potential drug candidates. Further, we cannot be certain of the timely completion or outcome of our clinical trials and cannot predict if the FDA or other regulatory authorities will accept our proposed clinical programs, or if the outcome of our preclinical studies or clinical trials will ultimately support the further development of FLX475, RPT193 or any other potential drug candidates.

FLX475 and RPT193 are in clinical development, and we are subject to the risks of failure inherent in the development of drug candidates based on novel approaches, targets and mechanisms of action. Although FLX475 is currently in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial, there is no guarantee that FLX475 will benefit patients. In the ongoing Phase 1/2 clinical trial of FLX475, a partial response hasresponses have been observed in one NSCLC patient in the 50 mg FLX475 and pembrolizumab cohort.a small number of patients. It is possible that no responsefurther responses will be observed in other patients or that the observed partial response wasresponses in patients who received FLX475 and pembrolizumab were caused solely by the pembrolizumab administered to the patient and not by FLX475, or that the partial response wasresponses were spontaneous and unrelated to either FLX475 or pembrolizumab. Additionally, although RPT193 has shown activity in several preclinical models and we have completed the initial Phase 1a single and multiple dose escalation cohorts of healthy volunteers of a seamless Phase 11a/1b trial of RAPT193,RPT193, there is no guarantee that we will be able to proceed with clinical development of RPT193 or that it will benefit patients. Even though we have designed and selected our drug candidates to achieve an intended biological effect and to avoid certain others, and even if we have demonstrated this effect in preclinical models, there can be no assurance that the effect will be observed or avoided, as the case may be, in clinical trials or that the drug candidate will offer any significant clinical benefit to humans. Results in preclinical studies do not necessarily predict the results of clinical studies. Additionally, even though our drug candidates are designed to address the same indications as existing drugs and therapies, we have not conducted head-to-head clinical trials comparing our drug candidates with such existing drugs and therapies. Accordingly, you should consider our prospects in light of the costs, uncertainties, delays and difficulties frequently encountered by clinical and preclinical stage biopharmaceutical companies such as ours.

FLX475 is currently undergoing clinical development and testing as a single agent and in combination with pembrolizumab, which is supplied to us by Merck under our collaboration agreement with Merck. If Merck were to terminate our collaboration agreement, we may be forced to purchase pembrolizumab to continue our current and planned clinical trials or to pursue another anti-PD-1 therapy for co-administration with FLX475 in place of pembrolizumab, which may require us to restart preclinical studies or clinical trials, any of which could result in a change to our business plan and materially harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, if FLX475 is approved as a treatment in combination with pembrolizumab, then the availability of pembrolizumab for administration with FLX475 will affect our ability to commercialize FLX475. For example, if the supply of pembrolizumab were constrained for any reason it could have the effect of limiting the commercial uptake of FLX475, if approved for commercial sale.

We may not have the financial resources to continue development of, or to enter into new collaborations for, FLX475, and RPT193 or any potential future drug candidates. Our position may be exacerbated if we experience any issues that delay or prevent regulatory approval of, or our ability to commercialize, a drug candidate, such as:

Further, we and our potential future partners may never receive approval to market and commercialize any drug candidate. Even if we or a potential future partner obtainsobtain regulatory approval, the approval may be for targets, disease indications or patient populations that are not as broad as we intended or desired or may require labeling that includes significant use or distribution restrictions or safety warnings. We or a potential future partner may be subject to post-marketing testing requirements to maintain regulatory approval.

FLX475, RPT193 or other future drug candidates may not demonstrate the safety and efficacy necessary to support further clinical development or commercial viability.

We have completed a Phase 1 clinical trial with healthy volunteers for FLX475 and are conducting a Phase 1/2 clinical trial investigating FLX475 as a single agent and in combination with pembrolizumab. In addition, we have completed the initial Phase 1a single and multiple dose escalation cohorts of healthy volunteers of a seamless Phase 11a/1b trial of RPT193. We may ultimately discover that neither FLX475 nor RPT193 possesses certain properties that we currently believe are therapeutically effective or safe. For example, although RPT193 has exhibited encouraging results in preclinical models of atopic dermatitis and allergic asthma, it may not demonstrate the same properties in humans and may interact with human biological systems in unforeseen, ineffective or harmful ways. As a result, we may never succeed in developing a marketable product based on RPT193. If FLX475, RPT193 or any of our potential future drug candidates prove to be ineffective, unsafe or commercially unviable, our entire pipeline could have little, if any, value, which could require us to change our focus and approach to small molecule discovery and development, which would have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

The recent and ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has materially affected and could materially affectcontinue to impact our operations, including at our headquarters in the San Francisco Bay Area which is currently subject to a shelter-in-place order, and at our clinical trial sites, as well as the business or operations of our manufacturers, CROs or other third parties with whom we conduct business. Our

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused widespread adverse impacts to the economy and financial markets, and to our employees, manufacturers, CROs and other parties with whom we do business. The ultimate extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic impacts our business, could be adversely affected by the effectsfinancial condition, results of other future health epidemics or pandemics in regions where we or third parties on which we rely have significant manufacturing operations, clinical trial sites or other business operations.

Our business could be adversely affected by health epidemics in regions where we have concentrations of clinical trial sites or other business operations and could cause significant disruption in the operations of third-party manufacturerscash flows will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and CROs upon whom we rely. For example, in December 2019, a novel strain of coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, causing a disease referred to as COVID-19, was reported to have surfaced in Wuhan, China. Since then, COVID-19 has spread to multiple countries,cannot be predicted, including the United Statesduration and several European countries. In March 2020,severity of the World Health Organization declaredpandemic, any worsening or recurrence of the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic and the U.S. government imposed restrictions on travel between the United States, Europesuccess of actions taken to contain and certain other countries. Further, the President of the United States declared the COVID-19 pandemic a national emergency, invoking powers under the Stafford Act, the legislation that directs federal emergency disaster response. Similarly, the State of California declared a state of emergency related to the spread of COVID‑19, and the San Francisco Department of Public Health announced aggressive recommendations to reduce the spread of the disease. In March 2020, the health officers of six San Francisco Bay Area counties, including San Mateo County where our headquarters are located, issued shelter-in-place orders, which (i) direct all individuals living in those counties to shelter at their places of residence (subject to limited exceptions), (ii) direct all businesses and governmental agencies to cease non-essential operations at physical locations in those counties, (iii) prohibit all non-essential gatherings of any number of individuals, and (iv) order cessation of all non-essential travel. The shelter-in-place orders took effect on March 17, 2020 and will continue until April 7, 2020, unless further extended. In addition, on March 19, 2020, the Governor of California and the State Public Health Officer and Director of the California Department of Public Health issued an executive order that directs all individuals living in the State of California to stay at their place of residence for an indefinite period of time (subject to certain exceptions to facilitate authorized necessary activities) to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The executive order exempts certain individuals needed to maintain continuity of operations of critical infrastructure sectors.limit its impact.

In response to thesethe public health directives and orders implemented in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, in March 2020 we have implemented work-from-home policies for substantiallytransitioned to a remote working environment with limited lab operations. We re-started all lab operations and most of our employees.lab-based personnel and certain essential personnel returned to work at our facility in the second quarter of 2020. However, all other personnel are still working remotely. We do not know if and when we may have to close our laboratories and office location, or when our facility will reopen for all personnel. The effects of the executive order, theCOVID-19 containment measures, including travel bans and restrictions, quarantines, social distancing requirements, shelter-in-place orderorders and our work-from-home policiesbusiness shutdowns, have disrupted and may negatively impact productivity,continue to disrupt our business and delay our clinical programs and timelines, the magnitude of which will depend, in part, on the length and severity of the restrictions and other limitations on our ability to conduct our business in the ordinary course. These and similar, and perhaps more severe, disruptions in our operations could negatively impact our business, operating results and financial condition.

Quarantines, shelter-in-place, executive and similar government orders, or the perception that such orders, shutdowns or other restrictions on the conduct of business operations could occur, related to COVID-19 or other infectious diseases, could impact personnel at third-party manufacturing facilities in the United States and other countries, or the availability or cost of materials, which would disrupt our supply chain. In particular, some of our suppliers of certain materials used in the production of our drug products are located in the Hanmi Territory, India and Germany. While many of these materials may be obtained by more than one supplier, including suppliers outside of the Hanmi Territory, India and Germany, port closures and other restrictions resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic may disrupt our supply chain or limit our ability to obtain sufficient materials for manufacture of our drug candidates.

In addition, we expect our clinical trials have been affected and may continue to be affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. ClinicalFor example, in March 2020 we temporarily paused enrollment for a few months in the Phase 1b portion of our Phase 1a/1b trial to evaluate RPT193 in patients with atopic dermatitis due to circumstances and uncertainties created by the COVID-19 pandemic. Depending on the duration and severity of the pandemic, clinical site initiation and patient enrollment may be delayed due to prioritization of hospital resources toward the COVID-19 pandemic. Some patients may not be able to comply with clinical trial protocols if quarantines impede patient movement or interrupt healthcare services. Similarly, our ability to recruit and retain patients and principal investigators and site staff who, as healthcare providers, may have heightened exposure to COVID-19, may be impaired and would adversely impact our clinical trial operations. For example, while we originally intended to provide an initial data readout from the Phase 1/2 trial to evaluate FLX475 in patients with several types of “charged” tumors in the second quarter of 2020, we now expect that timeline will be delayed due to circumstances and uncertainties created by the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, we have temporarily paused enrollment in the Phase 1b portion of our seamless Phase 1 trial to evaluate RPT193 in patients with AD due to circumstances and uncertainties created by the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, monitors of certain of our clinical trial sites in the Hanmi Territory are not able to access the sites for activation, which could limit or delay enrollment.

The spread of COVID-19 which has caused a broad impact globally,pandemic may materially affect us economically. While the potential economic impact brought by COVID-19, and the duration of such impact, may be difficult to assess or predict, a widespread pandemic could result in significant disruption of global financial markets, reducing our ability to access capital, which could in the future negatively affect our liquidity. In addition, a recession or market correction resulting from the spread of COVID-19 could materially affect our business and the value of our common stock.

The COVID-19 global pandemic continues to evolve rapidly.evolve. The ultimate impactpotential impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic or a similar health epidemic ison us and third parties with whom we conduct business, including on our clinical studies and related timelines, as well as our preclinical activities, will depend on future developments that are highly uncertain and subjectcannot be predicted, such as the ultimate geographic spread of the disease, the duration of the outbreak, containment measures and other limitations and restrictions, business disruptions and the effectiveness of actions taken in the United States and other countries to change.contain and treat the disease. We do not yet know the full extent of potential delays or impacts on our business, our clinical trials, healthcare systems or the global economy as a whole. However, these impacts could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects, which could also have the effect of heightening many of the other risks and uncertainties described in this ‘‘Risk Factors’’ section.

We may not be successful in our efforts to use and expand our proprietary drug discovery and development engine to build a pipeline of drug candidates, and as an organization we have no history of successfully developing drugs.

A key element of our strategy is to use and expand our proprietary drug discovery and development engine to build a pipeline of potential drug candidates and advance these drug candidates through preclinical studies and clinical development for the treatment of various diseases. As an organization, we have never developed a drug candidate through to commercialization nor have we ever conducted a pivotal clinical trial. Although our research and development efforts to date have resulted in our identification and development of FLX475, RPT193 and other potential future drug candidates, neither our proprietary drug discovery and development engine nor our organization has a track record of success. Our current drug candidates may not be safe or effective therapeutics and we may not be able to develop any successful drug candidates. Our proprietary drug discovery and development engine is evolving and may not reach a state at which building a pipeline of drug candidates is possible. Even if we are successful in building our pipeline of drug candidates, the potential drug candidates that we identify may not be suitable for clinical development or generate acceptable clinical data, including unacceptable toxicity or other characteristics that indicate that the drug candidates are unlikely to be products that will receive marketing approval from the FDA or other regulatory authorities or achieve market acceptance. Even if the drug candidates we identify are suitable for clinical development, our lack of experience as an organization at developing drugs may cause us to fail in successfully developing the drug candidate through to commercialization. If we do not successfully develop and commercialize drug candidates, we will not be able to generate product revenue in the future.

Failure to successfully validate, develop and obtain regulatory approval for companion diagnostics for our drug candidates could harm our drug development strategy and operational results.

As one of the elements of our clinical development approach, we may seek to screen and identify subsets of patients who are more likely to benefit from our drug candidates. To achieve this, we may seek to develop and commercialize companion diagnostics by us or by third-party collaborators. Companion diagnostics are sometimes developed in conjunction with clinical programs for an associated product. The approval of a companion diagnostic as part of the product label would limit the use of the drug candidate to those patients who are more likely to benefit from our drug candidate.

Companion diagnostics are subject to regulation by the FDA and other regulatory authorities as medical devices and require separate clearance or approval prior to their commercialization. To date, the FDA has required premarket approval of all companion diagnostics for oncology therapies. We may encounter difficulties in developing and obtaining approval for these companion diagnostics. Any delay or failure by us or third-party collaborators to develop or obtain regulatory approval of a companion diagnostic could delay or prevent approval of our related drug candidates. The time and cost associated with developing a companion diagnostic may not prove to have been necessary in order to successfully market the product.

The market may not be receptive to our current or potential future drug candidates, and we may not generate any revenue from the sale or licensing of our drug candidates.

Even if regulatory approval is obtained for a drug candidate, including FLX475 or RPT193, we may not generate or sustain revenue from sales of such products. Market acceptance of our current and potential future drug candidates will depend on, among other factors:

If any drug candidate we commercialize fails to achieve market acceptance, it could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We may not be successful in our efforts to expand indications for approved drug candidates

Part of our drug development strategy is to clinically test and seek regulatory approval for our drug candidates in indications in which we believe there is the most evidence that we will be able to quickly generate PoCproof-of-concept data. We then intend to expand clinical testing and seek regulatory approvals in other indications within oncology and inflammatory diseases. Conducting clinical trials for additional indications for our drug candidates requires substantial technical, financial and human resources and is prone to the risks of failure inherent in drug development. We cannot provide you any assurance that we will be successful in our effort to obtain regulatory approval for our drug candidates for additional indications even if we obtain approval for an initial indication.

If we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by FLX475 or RPT193, our ability to market and derive revenue from the drug candidate could be compromised.

Undesirable side effects caused by FLX475, RPT193 or any other potential future drug candidate could cause regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. While we have not discovered any adverse side effects of FLX475 or RPT193 in healthy subjects that have limited our ability to test FLX475 or RPT193 in humans, it is possible that there will be undesirable side effects associated with their use. Results of our clinical trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of these side effects. In such an event, our trials could be suspended or terminated, and the FDA or other regulatory authorities could order us to cease further development, or deny approval, of a drug candidate for any or all targeted indications. Such side effects could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may materially and adversely affect our business and financial condition and impair our ability to generate revenues.revenue.

Further, clinical trials by their nature utilize a sample of the potential patient population. With a limited number of patients and limited duration of exposure, rare and severe side effects of a drug candidate may only be uncovered when a significantly larger number of patients are exposed to the drug candidate or when patients are exposed for a longer period of time.

If any of our current or potential future drug candidates receive regulatory approval and we or others identify undesirable side effects caused by one of these products, any of the following adverse events could occur, which could result in the loss of significant revenue to us and materially and adversely affect our results of operations and business:

We will need substantial additional funds to advance development of drug candidates and our drug discovery and development engine, and we cannot guarantee that we will have sufficient funds available in the future to develop and commercialize our current or potential future drug candidates.

Since our inception, we have used substantial amounts of cash to fund our operations and expect our expenses to increase substantially in the foreseeable future. Developing our drug candidates and conducting clinical trials for the treatment of cancer, inflammatory diseases and any other indications that we may pursue in the future will require substantial amounts of capital. Accordingly, we expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we continue the research and development of, initiate clinical trials of and seek marketing approval for, our drug candidates. In addition, if we obtain marketing approval for any of our drug candidates, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product sales, marketing, manufacturing and distribution. Furthermore, we expect to continue to incur additional costs associated with operating as a public company. Accordingly, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on attractive terms, we would be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development programs or future commercialization efforts.

As of December 31, 2019,2020, we had $77.4$111.5 million in cash and cash equivalents.equivalents and marketable securities. Based on current business plans, we believe that our current cash and cash equivalents including the net proceeds of approximately $69.7 million from our follow-on offering in February 2020,and marketable securities will provide sufficient funds to enable us to meet our obligations for at least the next twelve12 months. Our future capital requirements and the period for which we expect our existing resources to support our operations may vary significantly from what we expect. Our monthly spending levels vary based on new and ongoing research and development and other corporate activities. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with the development and commercialization of our current and potential future drug candidates and the extent to which we may enter into collaborations with third parties to participate in their development and commercialization, we are unable to estimate the amounts of increased capital outlays and operating expenditures associated with our current and anticipated preclinical studies, clinical trials and any approved marketing and commercialization activities. The timing and amount of our operating expenditures will depend largely on:

To date, we have primarily financed our operations through the sale of equity securities. We may seek to raise any necessary additional capital through a combination of public or private equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations, strategic alliances, licensing arrangements and other marketing and distribution arrangements. We cannot assure you that we will be successful in acquiring additional funding at levels sufficient to fund our operations or on terms favorable to us. If we are unable to obtain adequate financing when needed, we may have to delay, reduce the scope of or suspend one or more of our preclinical studies, clinical trials, research and development programs or commercialization efforts. To the extent that we raise additional capital through collaborations, strategic alliances or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our current and potential future drug candidates, future revenue streams or research programs or to grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. If we do raise additional capital through public or private equity or convertible debt offerings, the ownership interest of our existing stockholders will be diluted and the terms of these securities may include liquidation preferences or other rights that adversely affect our and our stockholders’ rights. If we raise additional capital through debt financing, we may be subject to covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends.

We do not expect to realize revenue from product sales in the foreseeable future, if at all, and unless and until our current and potential future drug candidates are clinically tested, approved for commercialization and successfully marketed.

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

Because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we intend to prioritize our efforts on specific research and development programs, including clinical development of FLX475, RPT193 or other future drug candidates. As a result, we may forgo or delay pursuit of other opportunities, including with potential future drug candidates that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and drug candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable drug candidates. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular drug candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that drug candidate through partnership, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such drug candidate.

We may not be able to enter into collaborations or strategic transactions on acceptable terms, if at all, which could adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize current and potential future drug candidates, impact our cash position and increase our expense.expenses.

From time to time, we may consider strategic transactions, such as collaborations, acquisitions of companies, asset purchases, joint ventures and out- or in-licensing of drug candidates or technologies. For example, we entered a Collaboration and License Agreement with Hanmi in December 2019, pursuant to which we granted Hanmi the exclusive rights to develop, manufacture and commercialize FLX475 in the Hanmi Territory. The competition for partners is intense, and the negotiation process may be time-consuming and complex. If we are not able to enter into collaborations or other strategic transactions, or continue our existing collaboration, we may not have access to required liquiditynecessary capital or expertise to further develop our potential future drug candidates or our drug discovery and development engine. Any such collaboration or other strategic transaction may require us to incur non-recurring or other charges, increase our near- and long-term expenditures and pose significant integration or implementation challenges or disrupt our management or business. We may acquire additional technologies and assets, form strategic alliances or create joint ventures with third parties that we believe will complement or augment our existing business, but we may not be able to realize the benefit of acquiring such assets. Conversely, any new collaboration that we do enter into may be on terms that are not optimal for us. These transactions would entail numerous operational and financial risks, including:

Accordingly, although there can be no assurance that we will undertake or successfully complete any collaborations or other strategic transactions of the nature described above, any transactions that we do complete may be subject to the foregoing or other risks and our business could be materially harmed by such transactions. Conversely, any failure to enter any collaboration or other strategic transaction that would be beneficial to us could delay the development and potential commercialization of our drug candidates and have a negative impact on the competitiveness of any drug candidate that reaches market.

In addition, to the extent that any of our current or future partners were to terminate a collaboration agreement, we may be forced to seek additional partnerships, which may be less favorable to us, or independently develop our current and future drug candidates, including funding preclinical studies or clinical trials, assuming marketing and distribution costs and obtaining, maintaining, enforcing and defending intellectual property rights or, in certain instances, abandoning drug candidates altogether, any of which could result in a change to our business plan and materially harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

If third parties on which we rely to conduct certain preclinical studies and clinical trials do not perform as contractually required, fail to satisfy regulatory or legal requirements or miss expected deadlines, our development program could be delayed with material and adverse impacts on our business and financial condition.

We rely on third-party clinical investigators, contract research organizations (“CROs”),CROs, clinical data management organizations and consultants to design, conduct, supervise and monitor certain preclinical studies and any clinical trials. Because we intend to rely on these third parties and will not have the ability to conduct certain preclinical studies or clinical trials independently, we will have less control over the timing, quality and other aspects of such preclinical studies and clinical trials than we would have had if we conducted them on our own. These investigators, CROs and consultants will not be our employees and we will have limited control over the amount of time and resources that they dedicate to our programs. These third parties may have contractual relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors, which may draw time and resources from our programs. The third parties with which we may contract might not be diligent, careful or timely in conducting our preclinical studies or clinical trials, resulting in the preclinical studies or clinical trials being delayed or unsuccessful.

If we cannot contract with acceptable third parties on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, or if these third parties do not carry out their contractual duties, satisfy legal and regulatory requirements for the conduct of preclinical studies or clinical trials or meet expected deadlines, our clinical development programs could be delayed and otherwise adversely affected. In all events, we will be responsible for ensuring that each of our preclinical studies and clinical trials are conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial. The FDA may require preclinical studies to be conducted in accordance with good laboratory practices and clinical trials to be conducted in accordance with good clinical practices, including for designing, conducting, recording and reporting the results of preclinical studies and clinical trials, to ensure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of clinical trial participants are protected. Our reliance on third parties that we do not control will not relieve us of these responsibilities and requirements. Any adverse development or delay in our clinical trials could have a material and adverse impact on our commercial prospects and may impair our ability to generate revenue.

If we encounter difficulties enrolling patients in our clinical trials, our clinical development activities could be delayed or otherwise adversely affected.

We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials for our current or potential future drug candidates if we are unable to locate and enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in these trials as required by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. In particular,For example, in March 2020 we are conducting a Phase 1/2 clinical trial investigating FLX475 as a single agent and in combination with pembrolizumab in a broad range of tumors and havetemporarily paused enrollment offor a few months in the Phase 1b portion of aour Phase 1 clinical1a/1b trial ofto evaluate RPT193 in AD patients.patients with atopic dermatitis due to circumstances and uncertainties created by the COVID-19 pandemic. We cannot predict how difficult it will be to enroll patients for our clinical trials in these indications.or whether we will be able to meet our anticipated timelines to provide initial data. We may experience difficulties in patient enrollment in our clinical trials for a variety of reasons. The enrollment of patients depends on many factors, including:

In addition, our future clinical trials will compete with other clinical trials for drug candidates that are in the same therapeutic areas as our drug candidates, and this competition will reduce the number and types of patients available to us, because some patients who might have opted to enroll in our trials may instead opt to enroll in a trial being conducted by one of our competitors. Since the number of qualified clinical investigators is limited, we expect to conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which will reduce the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials at such clinical trial sites. Additionally, because some of our clinical trials will be conducted in patients with advanced solid tumors, the patients are typically in the late stages of the disease and may experience disease progression or adverse events independent from our drug candidates, making them unevaluable for purposes of the trial and requiring additional enrollment. Delays in patient enrollment may result in increased costs or may affect the timing or outcome of the planned clinical trials, which could prevent completion of these trials and adversely affect our ability to advance the development of our drug candidates.

We may not be able to conduct, or contract others to conduct, animal testing in the future, which could harm our research and development activities.

Certain laws and regulations relating to drug development require us to test our drug candidates on animals before initiating clinical trials involving humans. Animal testing activities have been the subject of controversy and adverse publicity. Animal rights groups and other organizations and individuals have attempted to stop animal testing activities by pressing for legislation and regulation in these areas and by disrupting these activities through protests and other means. To the extent the activities of these groups are successful, our research and development activities may be interrupted or delayed.

Because we may rely on third parties for manufacturing and supply of our drug candidates, some of which are or may be sole source vendors, for preclinical and clinical development materials and commercial supplies, our supply may become limited or interrupted or may not be of satisfactory quantity or quality.

We currently rely on third-party contract manufacturers for our current and future clinical trial product materials and supplies. We do not produce any meaningful quantity of our drug candidates for clinical development, and we do not currently own manufacturing facilities for producing such supplies. Furthermore, some of our manufacturers represent our sole source of supplies of current and future clinical development materials, including our source for the manufacture of FLX475 and RPT193. We cannot assure you that our preclinical or current or future clinical development product supplies and commercial supplies will not be limited or interrupted, especially with respect to our sole source third-party manufacturing and supply partners, or will be of satisfactory quality or continue to be available at acceptable prices. In particular, any replacement of our manufacturers could require significant effort and expertise because there may be a limited number of qualified replacements. For our current and future sole source third-party manufacturing and supply partners, we may be unable to negotiate binding agreements with them or find replacement manufacturers to support our preclinical and current and future clinical activities at commercially reasonable terms in the event that their services to us becomes interrupted for any reason. We do not always have arrangements in place for a redundant or second-source supply for our sole source vendors in the event they cease to provide their products or services to us or do not timely provide sufficient quantities to us. Establishing additional or replacement sole source vendors, if required, may not be accomplished quickly. Any delays resulting from manufacturing or supply interruptions associated with our reliance on third-party manufacturing and supply partners, including those that are sole source, could impede, delay, limit or prevent our drug development efforts, which could harm our business, result of operations, financial condition and prospects.

The manufacturing process for a drug candidate is subject to FDA and other regulatory authority review. Suppliers and manufacturers must meet applicable manufacturing requirements and undergo rigorous facility and process validation tests required by regulatory authorities in order to comply with regulatory standards, such as current Good Manufacturing Practices (“cGMP”). If any of our manufacturers fails to comply with such requirements or to perform its obligations to us in relation to quality, timing or otherwise, or if our supply of components or other materials becomes limited or interrupted for other reasons, we may be forced to manufacture the materials ourselves, for which we currently do not have the capabilities or resources, or enter into an agreement with another third party, which we may not be able to do on reasonable terms, or at all. In some cases, the technical skills or technology required to manufacture our current and future drug candidates may be unique or proprietary to the original manufacturer and we may have difficulty transferring such skills or technology to another third party and a feasible alternative may not exist. These factors would increase our reliance on such manufacturer or require us to obtain a license from such manufacturer in order to have another third-party manufacture our drug candidates. If we are required to change manufacturers for any reason, we will be required to verify that the new manufacturer maintains facilities and procedures that comply with quality standards and with all applicable regulations and guidelines. The delays associated with the verification of a new manufacturer could negatively affect our ability to develop drug candidates in a timely manner or within budget.

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

Our third-party manufacturers may be unable to successfully scale manufacturing of FLX475, RPT193 or potential future drug candidates in sufficient quality and quantity, which would delay or prevent us from developing drug candidates and commercializing approved products, if any.

In order to conduct further clinical trials for FLX475 and RPT193, as well as any potential future drug candidates, we will need to manufacture large quantities of these drug candidates. We may continue to use third parties for our manufacturing needs. Our manufacturing partners may be unable to successfully increase the manufacturing capacity for any current or potential future drug candidate in a timely or cost-effective manner, or at all. In addition, quality issues may arise during scale-up activities. If our manufacturing partners are unable to successfully scale the manufacture of any current or potential future drug candidate in sufficient quality and quantity, the development, testing and clinical trials of that drug candidate may be delayed or infeasible, and regulatory approval or commercial launch of any potential resulting product may be delayed or not obtained, which could significantly harm our business.

If the market opportunities for our current and potential future drug candidates, including FLX475 and RPT193, are smaller than we believe they are, our ability to generate product revenuesrevenue may be adversely affected and our business may suffer.

Our understanding of the number of people who suffer from certain types of cancers and allergic inflammatory diseases that FLX475 and RPT193, respectively, may have the potential to treat is based on estimates. These estimates may prove to be incorrect, and new studies may demonstrate or suggest a lower estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The number of patients in the United States or elsewhere may turn out to be lower than expected, may not be otherwise amenable to treatment with our current or potential future drug candidates or patients may become increasingly difficult to identify and access, all of which would adversely affect our business prospects and financial condition. In particular, the treatable population for our candidates may be further reduced if our estimates of addressable populations are erroneous or sub-populations of patients do not derive benefit from FLX475 or RPT193.

Further, there are several factors that could contribute to making the actual number of patients who receive our current or potential future drug candidates less than the potentially addressable market, including the lack of widespread limited reimbursement for new therapies in many markets.

We face intense competition from entities that have developed or may develop drug candidates for the treatment of the diseases that we are currently targeting or may target in the future. If these companies develop technologies or drug candidates more rapidly than we do, or if their technologies or drug candidates are more effective, our ability to develop and successfully commercialize drug candidates may be adversely affected.

The development and commercialization of drugs and therapeutic biologics is highly competitive. We compete with a variety of large pharmaceutical companies, multinational biopharmaceutical companies, other biopharmaceutical companies and specialized biotechnology companies, as well as technology being developed at universities and other research institutions. Our competitors are often larger and better funded than we are. Our competitors have developed, are developing or will develop drug candidates and processes competitive with ours. Competitive therapeutic treatments include those that have already been approved and accepted by the medical community and any new treatments that are currently in development or that enter the market. We believe that a significant number of products are currently under development, and may become commercially available in the future, for the treatment of conditions for which we are developing or may try to develop drug candidates. There is intense and rapidly evolving competition in the biotechnology, biopharmaceutical, immuno-oncology and inflammation fields.

We are aware of a number ofnumerous companies that are developing biologics and small molecule drugs for the treatment of cancer and inflammatory diseases. Many of these companies are well-capitalized and, in contrast to us, have significant clinical experience, and may include our future partners. In addition, these companies compete with us in recruiting scientific and managerial talent. Our success will partially depend on our ability to obtain, maintain, enforce and defend patents and other intellectual property rights with respect to small molecule drugs or biologics that are safer and more effective than competing products. Our commercial opportunity and success will be reduced or eliminated if competing products that are safer, more effective or less expensive than the drugs we develop are or become available.

We expect to compete with small molecule, biologics and other therapeutic platforms and development companies, including, but not limited to, companies such as ChemoCentryx, Tusk/Roche and Agenus/Gilead for oncology, and Dermira/Lilly and AnaptysBio for inflammatory diseases. In addition, we expect to compete with large, multinational pharmaceutical companies that discover, develop and commercialize small molecule drugs and other therapeutics for use in treating cancer and inflammatory diseases such as AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca plc, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech and Sanofi/Regeneron. If FLX475, RPT193 or any other future drug candidate is eventually approved, it will compete with a range of treatments that are either in development or currently marketed.

Many of our competitors have significantly greater financial, technical, manufacturing, marketing, sales and supply resources or experience than we do. If we successfully obtain approval for any drug candidate, we will face competition based on many different factors, including the safety and effectiveness of our products, the ease with which our products can be administered, the timing and scope of regulatory approvals for these products, the availability and cost of manufacturing, marketing and sales capabilities, price, reimbursement coverage and patent position. Competing products could present superior treatment alternatives, including by being more effective, safer, less expensive or marketed and sold more effectively than any products we may develop. Competitive products may make any product we develop obsolete or noncompetitive before we recover the expense of developing and commercializing such product. Such competitors could also recruit our employees, which could negatively impact our level of expertise and our ability to execute our business plan.

Any inability to attract and retain qualified key management, technical personnel and employees would impair our ability to implement our business plan.

Our success largely depends on the continued service of key management, advisors and other specialized personnel, including Brian Wong, M.D., Ph.D., our President and Chief Executive Officer, Rodney Young, our Chief Financial Officer, William Ho, M.D., Ph.D., our Chief Medical Officer, and Dirk Brockstedt, Ph.D., our Chief Scientific Officer, as well as our ability to attract and retain other highly qualified personnel. The loss of one or more members of our executive team, management team or other key employees or advisors could delay our research and development programs and have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

The relationships that our key managers have cultivated within our industry make us particularly dependent upon their continued employment with us. We are dependent on the continued service of our technical personnel because of the highly technical nature of our drug candidates and technologies and the specialized nature of the regulatory approval process. Because our management team and key employees are not obligated to provide us with continued service, they could terminate their employment with us at any time without penalty.

Our future success will also depend in large part on our ability to attract and retain other highly qualified scientific, technical and management personnel, as well as personnel with expertise in clinical testing, manufacturing, governmental regulation and commercialization. We face significant competition for personnel from other companies, universities, public and private research institutions, government entities and other organizations.

As of December 31, 2019,2020, we had 6768 full-time employees. Our focus on the development of FLX475, RPT193 and other potential future drug candidates will require adequate staffing. We may need to hire and retain new employees to execute our future clinical development and manufacturing plans. We cannot provide assurance that we will be able to hire or retain adequate staffing levels to develop our current and potential future drug candidates or to run our operations or to accomplish all of our objectives.

We may experience difficulties in managing our growth and expanding our operations.

We have limited experience in product development. As our current and potential future drug candidates enter and advance through preclinical studies and any clinical trials, we will need to expand our development, regulatory and manufacturing capabilities or contract with other organizations to provide these capabilities for us.

We may also experience difficulties in the discovery and development of potential future drug candidates using our drug discovery and development engine if we are unable to meet demand as we grow our operations. In the future, we also expect to have to manage additional relationships with collaborators, suppliers and other organizations. Our ability to manage our operations and future growth will require us to continue to improve our operational, financial and management controls, reporting systems and procedures and to secure adequate facilities for our operational needs. We may not be able to implement improvements to our management information and control systems in an efficient or timely manner and may discover deficiencies in existing systems and controls.

If any of our drug candidates is approved for marketing and commercialization in the future and we are unable to develop sales, marketing and distribution capabilities on our own or enter into agreements with third parties to perform these functions on acceptable terms, we will be unable to successfully commercialize any such future products.

We currently have no sales, marketing or distribution capabilities or experience. We will need to develop internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities to commercialize each current and potential future drug candidate that gains FDA approval, which would be expensive and time-consuming, or enter into partnerships with third parties to perform these services. If we decide to market any approved products directly, we will need to commit significant financial and managerial resources to develop a marketing and sales force with technical expertise and supporting distribution, administration and compliance capabilities. If we rely on third parties with such capabilities to market any approved products or decide to co-promote products with partners, we will need to establish and maintain marketing and distribution arrangements with third parties, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to enter into such arrangements on acceptable terms or at all. In entering into third-party marketing or distribution arrangements, any revenue we receive will depend upon the efforts of the third parties and we cannot assure you that such third parties will establish adequate sales and distribution capabilities or be successful in gaining market acceptance for any approved product. If we are not successful in commercializing any product approved in the future, either on our own or through third parties, our business and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

Our present and potential future international operations may expose us to business, political, operational and financial risks associated with doing business outside of the United States.

Our business is subject to risks associated with conducting business internationally. Some of our suppliers and clinical trial centers are located outside of the United States, and we recently entered into an agreement with Hanmi with respect to clinical development and other activities in the Hanmi Territory. Furthermore, if we or any future collaborator succeeds in developing any products, we anticipate marketing them in the European Union and other jurisdictions in addition to the United States. If approved, we or our collaborator may hire sales representatives and conduct physician and patient association outreach activities outside of the United States. Doing business internationally involves a number of risks, including but not limited to:

Any of these factors could harm our ongoing international clinical operations and supply chain, as well as any future international expansion and operations and, consequently, our business, financial condition, prospects and results of operations.

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

Our future growth may depend, in part, on our ability to develop and commercialize drug candidates in foreign markets for which we may rely on partnering with third parties. We will not be permitted to market or promote any drug candidate before we receive regulatory approval from the applicable regulatory authority in a foreign market, and we may never receive such regulatory approval for any drug candidate. To obtain separate regulatory approval in foreign countries, we generally must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of such countries regarding safety and efficacy, and governing, among other things, clinical trials and commercial sales, pricing and distribution of a drug candidate, and we cannot predict success in these jurisdictions. If we obtain approval of any of our current or potential future drug candidates and ultimately commercialize any such drug candidate in foreign markets, we would be subject to risks and uncertainties, including the burden of complying with complex and changing foreign regulatory, tax, accounting and legal requirements and the reduced protection of intellectual property rights in some foreign countries.

Price controls imposed in foreign markets may adversely affect our future profitability.

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

Our business entails a significant risk of product liability, and our inability to obtain sufficient insurance coverage could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

As we conduct clinical trials of FLX475 and RPT193, we will be exposed to significant product liability risks inherent in the development, testing, manufacturing and marketing of cancer and inflammatory disease treatments. Product liability claims could delay or prevent completion of our development programs. If we succeed in marketing products, such claims could result in an FDA investigation of the safety and effectiveness of our products, our manufacturing processes and facilities, or our marketing programs and potentially a recall of our products or more serious enforcement action, limitations on the approved indications for which they may be used or suspension or withdrawal of approvals. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may also result in decreased demand for our products, injury to our reputation, costs to defend the related litigation, a diversion of management’s time and our resources, substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients and a decline in our stock price. Any insurance we have or may obtain may not provide sufficient coverage against potential liabilities. Furthermore, clinical trial and product liability insurance is becoming increasingly expensive. As a result, our partners or we may be unable to obtain sufficient insurance at a reasonable cost to protect us against losses caused by product liability claims that could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our employees, principal investigators, consultants and commercial partners may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements.

We are exposed to the risk of fraud or other misconduct by our employees, principal investigators, consultants and commercial partners. Misconduct by employees could include intentional failures to comply with FDA regulations, provide accurate information to the FDA, comply with manufacturing standards we may establish, comply with federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations, report financial information or data accurately or disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Such misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation. It is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a material and adverse effect on our business and financial condition, including the imposition of significant criminal, civil and administrative fines or other sanctions, such as monetary penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement,

imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government-funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, integrity obligations, reputational harm and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations.

Failure to comply with health and data protection laws and regulations could lead to government enforcement actions (which could include civil or criminal penalties), private litigation or adverse publicity and could negatively affect our operating results and business.

We and our current and any of our future collaborators may be subject to federal, state and foreign data protection laws and regulations (i.e., laws and regulations that address privacy and data security). In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including federal health information privacy laws (e.g., the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”), as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH”)), state data breach notification laws, state health information privacy laws and federal and state consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), that govern the collection, use, disclosure and protection of health-related and other personal information could apply to our operations or the operations of our collaborators. In addition, we may obtain health information from third parties (including research institutions from which we obtain clinical trial data) that are subject to privacy and security requirements under HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, or other privacy and data security laws. Depending on the facts and circumstances, we could be subject to criminalsignificant penalties if we knowingly obtain, use or disclose individually identifiable health information maintained by a HIPAA-covered entity or business associate in a manner that is not authorized or permitted by HIPAA.

International data protection laws, including Regulation 2016/679, known as the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), may also apply to health-related and other personal information obtained outside of the United States. The GDPR went into effect onin May 25, 2018. The GDPR introduced new data protection requirements in the European Union, as well as potential fines for noncompliant companies of up to the greater of €20 million or 4% of annual global revenue. The regulation imposes numerous new requirements for the collection, use, storage and disclosure of personal information, including more stringent requirements relating to consent and the information that must be shared with data subjects about how their personal information is used, the obligation to notify regulators and affected individuals of personal data breaches, extensive new internal privacy governance obligations and obligations to honor expanded rights of individuals in relation to their personal information (e.g., the right to access, correct and delete their data). In addition, the GDPR includes restrictions on cross-border data transfers. The GDPR increased our responsibility and liability in relation to personal data that we process where such processing is subject to the GDPR, and we may be required to put in place additional mechanisms to ensure compliance with the GDPR, including as implemented by individual countries. Further, the United Kingdom’s voteexit from the EU in favor of exiting the EU,January 2020, often referred to as Brexit, has created uncertainty with regard to data protection regulation in the United Kingdom. In particular, it is unclear how data transfers to and from the United Kingdom will be regulated.

In addition, California recently enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”), which took effect on January 1, 2020, creates new individual privacy rights for California consumers (as defined in the law) and places increased privacy and security obligations on entities handling personal data of consumers or households. The CCPA requires covered companies to provide new disclosure to consumers about such companies’ data collection, use and sharing practices, provide such consumers new ways to opt-out of certain sales or transfers of personal information and provide consumers with additional causes of action. The CCPA took effect on January 1, 2020, and the California Attorney General may bring enforcement actions for violations beginning July 1, 2020. The CCPA was amended in September 2018 and November 2019, and it remains unclear what, if any, further modifications will be made to this legislation or how it will be interpreted. As currently written, the CCPA maylikely impact our business activities and exemplifiesmay increase our compliance costs and potential liability. If we fail to comply with the vulnerability ofCCPA, we may face significant fines and penalties that could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Other states are beginning to pass similar laws, and some observers have noted that the evolving regulatory environment relatedCCPA could mark the beginning of a trend toward more stringent privacy legislation in the U.S., which could increase our potential liability and adversely affect our business. Such laws and regulations will be subject to personalinterpretation by various courts and other governmental authorities, thus creating potentially complex compliance issues for us and our future customers and strategic partners. In the event that we are subject to HIPAA, the CCPA or other U.S. privacy and data and protected health information.protection laws, any liability from failure to comply with the requirements of these laws could adversely affect our financial condition.

Compliance with U.S. and international data protection laws and regulations could require us to take on more onerous obligations in our contracts, restrict our ability to collect, use and disclose data or, in some cases, impact our ability to operate in certain jurisdictions. Failure to comply with U.S. and international data protection laws and regulations could result in government enforcement actions (which could include civil or criminal penalties), private litigation or adverse publicity and could negatively affect our operating results and business. Moreover, clinical trial subjects about whom we or any of our potential collaborators obtain information, as well as the providers who share this information with us, may contractually limit our ability to use and disclose the information. Claims that we have violated individuals’ privacy rights, failed to comply with data protection laws or breached our contractual obligations, even if we are not found liable, could be expensive and time consuming to defend and could result in adverse publicity that could harm our business.

If we, our CROs or our information technology (“IT”) vendors experience security or data privacy breaches or other unauthorized or improper access to, use of or destruction of personal data, we may face costs, significant liabilities, harm to our brand and business disruption.

In connection with our drug discovery and development engine and efforts, we or our CROs may collect and use a variety of personal data, such as name, mailing address, email addresses, phone number and clinical trial information. Although we have extensive measures in place to prevent the sharing and loss of patient data in our sample collection process associated with our drug discovery and development engine, any failure to prevent or mitigate security breaches or improper access to, use of or disclosure of our clinical data or patients’ personal data could result in significant liability under state (e.g., breach notification laws), federal (e.g., HIPAA, as amended by HITECH) and international law (e.g., the GDPR). Any failure to prevent or mitigate security breaches or improper access to, use of or disclosure of our clinical data or patients’ personal data may cause a material adverse impact to our reputation, affect our ability to conduct new studies and potentially disrupt our business. We may also rely on third-party IT vendors to host or otherwise process some of our data and that of users, and any failure by such IT vendor to prevent or mitigate security breaches or improper access to or disclosure of such information could have similarly adverse consequences for us. If we are unable to prevent or mitigate the impact of such security or data privacy breaches, we could be exposed to litigation and governmental investigations, which could lead to a potential disruption to our business.

We depend on sophisticated information technology systems to operate our business and a cyber-attack or other breach of these systems could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We rely on information technology systems that we or our CROs or other vendors, contractors or consultants operate to process, transmit and store electronic information in our or their day-to-day operations. The size and complexity of such information technology systems makes them vulnerable to a cyber-attack, malicious intrusion, breakdown, destruction, loss of data privacy or other significant disruption. A successful attack could result in the theft or destruction of intellectual property, data or other misappropriation of assets, or otherwise compromise our confidential or proprietary information and disrupt our operations. Cyber-attacks are becoming more sophisticated and frequent. We have invested in our systems and the protection and recoverability of our data to reduce the risk of an intrusion or interruption, and we monitor and test our systems on an ongoing basis for any current or potential threats. There can be no assurance that these measures and efforts will prevent future interruptions or breakdowns. If we or our CROs or other vendors, contractors or consultants fail to maintain or protect our information technology systems and data integrity effectively or fail to anticipate, plan for or manage significant disruptions to these systems, we or they could have difficulty preventing, detecting and controlling such cyber-attacks and any such attacks could result in losses described above as well as disputes with physicians, patients and our partners, regulatory sanctions or penalties, increases in operating expenses, expenses or lost revenuesrevenue or other adverse consequences, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, prospects and cash flows.

Our information technology and other internal infrastructure systems, including corporate firewalls, servers, leased lines and connection to the internet, face the risk of systemic failure that could disrupt our operations. A significant disruption in the availability of our information technology and other internal infrastructure systems could cause interruptions and delays in our research and development work.

If we do not comply with laws regulating the protection of the environment and health and human safety, our business could be adversely affected.

Our research, development and manufacturing involve the use of hazardous materials and various chemicals. We maintain quantities of various flammable and toxic chemicals in our facilities that are required for our research, development and manufacturing activities. We are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of these hazardous materials. We believe our procedures for storing, handling and disposing of these materials in our facilities comply with the relevant guidelines of the state of California and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the U.S. Department of Labor. Although we believe that our safety procedures for handling and disposing of these materials comply with the standards mandated by applicable regulations, the risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials cannot be eliminated. If an accident occurs, we could be held liable for resulting damages, which could be substantial. We are also subject to numerous environmental, health and workplace safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures, exposure to blood-borne pathogens and the handling of animals and biohazardous materials. Although we maintain workers’ compensation insurance to cover us for costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of these materials, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. Although we have some environmental liability insurance covering certain of our facilities, we may not maintain adequate insurance for all environmental liability or toxic tort claims that may be asserted against us in connection with our storage or disposal of biological or hazardous materials. Additional federal, state and local laws and regulations affecting our operations may be adopted in the future.future, including as a result of the COVID‑19 pandemic. We may incur substantial costs to comply with, and substantial fines or penalties if we violate, any of these laws or regulations.

Our current operations are concentrated in one location, and we or the third parties upon whom we depend may be adversely affected by natural or other disasters and our business continuity and disaster recovery plans may not adequately protect us from a serious disaster.

Our current operations are concentrated in the San Francisco Bay Area. Any unplanned event, such as earthquake, flood, fire, explosion, extreme weather, medical epidemic, pandemic, power shortage, telecommunication failure or other natural or manmade accidents or incidents that result in us being unable to fully utilize our facilities or the manufacturing facilities of our third-party contract manufacturers, or lose our repository of preclinical and clinical human samples and other valuable laboratory samples, may have a material and adverse effect on our ability to operate our business, particularly on a daily basis, andbasis. Such an event would have significant negative consequences on our financial and operating conditions. Loss of access to these facilities may result in increased costs, delays in the development of our drug candidates or interruption of our business operations. Natural disasters such as earthquakes or wildfires, both of which are prevalent in Northern California, floods or tsunamis could further disrupt our operations, and have a material negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. If a natural disaster, power outage or other event occurred that prevented us from using all or a significant portion of our headquarters, that damaged critical infrastructure, such as our research facilities or the manufacturing facilities of our third-party contract manufacturers, or that otherwise disrupted operations, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible, for us to continue our business for a substantial period of time. The disaster recovery and business continuity plans we have in place may prove inadequate in the event of a serious disaster or similar event. We may incur substantial expenses as a result of the limited nature of our disaster recovery and business continuity plans, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. As part of our risk management policy, we maintain insurance coverage at levels that we believe are appropriate for our business. However, in the event of an accident or incident at these facilities, we cannot assure you that the amounts of insurance will be sufficient to satisfy any damages and losses. If our facilities, or the manufacturing facilities of our third-party contract manufacturers, are unable to operate because of an accident or incident or for any other reason, even for a short period of time, any or all of our research and development programs may be harmed. Any business interruption may have a material and adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If we are unable to obtain, maintain, enforce or defend intellectual property rights related to our technology and current or future drug candidates, or if our intellectual property rights are inadequate, we may not be able to compete effectively.

Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain protection in the United States and other countries for our intellectual property rights and proprietary technology. We rely on patents and other forms of intellectual property rights to protect our current or future drug discovery and development engine, drug candidates, methods used to manufacture our current or future drug candidates and methods for treating patients using our current or future drug candidates. We do not currently own any patents or patent applications relating to our proprietary drug discovery and development engine.

The patent prosecution process is expensive, complex and time-consuming. Patent license negotiations also can be complex and protracted, with uncertain results. We may not be able to file, prosecute, maintain, enforce or license all necessary or desirable patents and patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. Although we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to confidential or patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, CROs, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection. The patent applications that we own or may in-license may fail to result in issued patents, and, even if they do issue as patents, such patents may not cover our current or future technologies or drug candidates in the United States or in other countries or provide sufficient protection from competitors. In addition, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued and its scope can be reinterpreted after issuance.

Further, although we make reasonable efforts to ensure patentability of our inventions, we cannot guarantee that all of the potentially relevant prior art relating to our patent applications and any issued patents we obtain has been found. For example, publications of discoveries in scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, and in some cases not at all. Additionally, pending patent applications that have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover our drug discovery and development engine, our drug candidates or the use of our technologies. We thus cannot know with certainty whether we or any of our future licensors were the first to make the inventions claimed in our pending patent applications or any issued patents we obtain, or that we or our any of our future licensors were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. For this reason, and because there is no guarantee that any prior art search is absolutely correct and comprehensive, we may be unaware of prior art that could be used to invalidate an issued patent or to prevent our pending patent applications from issuing as patents. Invalidation of any of our patent rights, including in-licensed patent rights, could materially harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Moreover, the patent positions of biopharmaceutical companies are generally uncertain because they may involve complex legal and factual considerations that have, in recent years, been the subject of legal development and change. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our pending patent rights is uncertain. The standards applied by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) and foreign patent offices in granting patents are not always certain and, moreover, are not always applied uniformly or predictably. For example, there is no uniform worldwide policy regarding patentable subject matter or the scope of claims allowable in patents. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our patent rights or narrow the scope of our patent protection.

Even if patents do successfully issue and even if such patents cover our current or any future technologies or drug candidates, third parties may challenge their validity, enforceability or scope, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable. Any successful challenge to any patents we own or may in-license could deprive us of rights necessary for the successful commercialization of any current or future technologies or drug candidates that we may develop. Likewise, if patent applications we own or may in-license with respect to our development programs and current or future technologies or drug candidates fail to issue, if their breadth or strength is threatened or if they fail to provide meaningful exclusivity, other companies could be dissuaded from collaborating with us to develop current or future technologies or drug candidates. Lack of valid and enforceable patent protection could threaten our ability to commercialize current or future products and could prevent us from maintaining exclusivity with respect to the invention or feature claimed in the patent applications. Any failure to obtain, or any loss of, patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business and ability to achieve profitability. We may be unable to prevent competitors from entering the market with a product that is similar to or the same as FLX475, RPT193 or other future drug candidates that emerge from our discovery program.

The filing of a patent application or the issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its ownership, inventorship, scope, patentability, validity or enforceability. Issued patents and patent applications may be challenged in the courts and in the patent office in the United States and abroad. For example, our patent applications or patent applications filed by any of our future licensors may be challenged through third-party submissions, opposition or derivation proceedings. By further example, issued patents may be challenged through reexamination, inter partes review or post-grant review proceedings before the USPTO or patent offices in other jurisdictions or in declaratory judgment actions or counterclaims. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could prevent the issuance of, reduce the scope of, invalidate or render unenforceable our patent rights; limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical products; allow third parties to compete directly with us without payment to us; or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patent rights is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future drug candidates. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Moreover, some of our intellectual property, including patents and patent applications, are or may in the future be co-owned with third parties. If we are unable to obtain an exclusive license to any such third-party co-owners’ interest in such intellectual property, including patents or patent applications, such co-owners may be able to license their rights to other third parties, including our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. We may need the cooperation of any such co-owners of our patent rights to enforce such patent rights against third parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business prospects and financial conditions.

If we fail to comply with our obligations under any license, collaboration or other intellectual property-related agreements, we may be required to pay damages and could lose intellectual property rights that may be necessary for developing, commercializing and protecting our current or future technologies or drug candidates or we could lose certain rights to grant sublicenses.

Any license, collaboration or other intellectual property-related agreements impose, and any future license, collaboration or other intellectual property-related agreements we enter into are likely to impose, various development, commercialization, funding, milestone, royalty, diligence, sublicensing, insurance, patent prosecution and enforcement or other obligations on us. If we breach any of these obligations, or use the intellectual property licensed to us in an unauthorized manner, we may be required to pay damages and the licensor may have the right to terminate the license. In spite of our best efforts, any of our future licensors might conclude that we have materially breached our license agreements and might therefore terminate the license agreements, thereby removing our ability to develop and commercialize products and technologies covered by these license agreements. Any license agreements we enter into may be complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We may seek to obtain licenses from licensors in the future, however, we may be unable to obtain any such licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In addition, if any of our future licensors terminate any such license agreements, such license termination could result in our inability to develop, manufacture and sell products that are covered by the licensed technology or could enable a competitor to gain access to the licensed technology. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and ability to achieve profitability.

Furthermore, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing, prosecution, maintenance, enforcement and defense of patents and patent applications that we license from third parties. Therefore, we cannot be certain that these patents and patent applications will be prepared, filed, prosecuted, maintained, enforced and defended in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. If our future licensors fail to prosecute, maintain, enforce and defend patents we may in-license, or lose rights to licensed patents or patent applications, our license rights may be reduced or eliminated. In such circumstances, our right to develop and commercialize any of our products or drug candidates that is the subject of such licensed rights could be materially adversely affected. In certain circumstances, our licensed patent rights are subject to our reimbursing our licensors for their patent prosecution and maintenance costs.

Moreover, our licensors may own or control intellectual property that has not been licensed to us and, as a result, we may be subject to claims, regardless of their merit, that we are infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the licensor’s intellectual property rights and the amount of any damages or future royalty obligations that would result if any such claims were successful would depend on the technology and intellectual property we use in products that we successfully develop and commercialize, if any. Therefore, even if we successfully develop and commercialize products, we may be unable to achieve or maintain profitability.

Patent terms may not be able to protect our competitive position for an adequate period of time with respect to our current or future technologies or drug candidates.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, the standard patent term is typically 20 years after filing. Various extensions may be available. Even so, the life of a patent and the protection it affords are limited. As a result, our patent portfolio provides us with limited rights that may not last for a sufficient period of time to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours. For example, given the large amount of time required for the research, development, testing and regulatory review of new drug candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized.

Extensions of patent term may be available, but there is no guarantee that we would succeed in obtaining any particular extension—and no guarantee any such extension would lengthen the patent term for a sufficient period of time to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours. In the United States, the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 permits a patent term extension of up to five years beyond the normal expiration of the patent, which is limited to the approved indication (oror any additional indications approved during the period of extension).extension. A patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond 14 years from the date of product approval; only one patent may be extended; and extension is available for only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it or a method for manufacturing it. The applicable authorities, including the FDA and the USPTO in the United States, and any equivalent regulatory authority in other countries, may not agree with our assessment of whether such extensions are available, and may refuse to grant extensions to any patents we obtain, or may grant more limited extensions than we request. An extension may not be granted or may be limited where there is, for example, a failure to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, failure to apply within applicable deadlines, failure to apply before expiration of relevant patents or some other failure to satisfy applicable requirements. If this occurs, our competitors may be able to launch their products earlier by taking advantage of our investment in development and clinical trials along with our clinical and preclinical data. This could have a material adverse effect on our business and ability to achieve profitability.

Changes in U.S. patent law or the patent law of other countries or jurisdictions could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our current or any future technologies or drug candidates.

Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States or elsewhere could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. The United States has enacted and implemented wide-ranging patent reform legislation. In 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the “Leahy-Smith Act”), was signed into law, which could increasehas increased the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of any issued patents we obtain. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art, may affect patent litigation and switch the U.S. patent system from a “first-to-invent” system to a “first-to-file” system. Under a first-to-file system, assuming the other requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application generally will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether another inventor had made the invention earlier. These provisions also allow third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and set forth additional procedures to challenge the validity of a patent by the USPTO administered post grant proceedings, including derivation, reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review and interference proceedings. The USPTO developed additional regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act and, in particular, the first-to-file provisions, became effective in 2013. Accordingly, it is not clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business. The Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increasehave increased the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of any issued patents we obtain, all of which could have a material adverse impact on our business prospects and financial condition.

As referenced above, for example, courts in the U.S. continue to refine the heavily fact-and-circumstance-dependent jurisprudence defining the scope of patent protection available for therapeutics, narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. This creates uncertainty about our ability to obtain patents in the future and the value of such patents. We cannot provide assurance that future developments in U.S. Congress, the federal courts and the USPTO will not adversely impact our patent rights. The laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that could weaken our and our licensors’ ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patent rights or patent rights that we might obtain or in-license in the future. Similarly, changes in patent law and regulations in other countries or jurisdictions or changes in the governmental bodies that enforce them or changes in how the relevant governmental authority enforces patent laws or regulations may have a material adverse effect on our and our licensors’ ability to obtain new patents or to protect and enforce our owned or in-licensed patent rights or patent rights that we may obtain or in-license in the future.

Other companies or organizations may challenge our patent rights or may assert patent rights that prevent us from developing and commercializing our current or future products.

Third parties may attempt to invalidate our intellectual property rights. Even if such rights are not directly challenged, disputes could lead to the weakening of our intellectual property rights. Our defense against any attempt by third parties to circumvent or invalidate our intellectual property rights could be costly to us, could require significant time and attention of our management and could have a material and adverse impact on our profitability, financial condition and prospects or ability to successfully compete.

Further, we cannot guarantee that we are aware of all patents and patent applications potentially relevant to our technology or products. There may be issued and pending patents that claim aspects of our current or potential future drug candidates and modifications that we may need for our current or potential future drug candidates. We may not be aware of potentially relevant third-party patents or applications for several reasons. For example, U.S. applications filed before November 29, 2000, and certain U.S. applications filed after that date that will not be filed outside the U.S. remain confidential until patents issue. Patent applications in the United States and elsewhere are published approximately 18 months after the earliest filing for which priority is claimed, with such earliest filing date being commonly referred to as the priority date. Therefore, patent applications covering our drug candidates or technologies could have been filed by others without our knowledge. Additionally, pending patent applications that have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover our drug candidates or the use of our technologies.

We may be subject to priority disputes, inventorship disputes and similar proceedings that could, if resolved unfavorably, narrow the scope of our intellectual property protection. We cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents do not exist that might be enforced against our drug candidates or technologies or future methods or products, resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our manufacture or sales or, with respect to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties or other forms of compensation to third parties, which could be significant.

Thus, it is possible that one or more third parties will hold patent rights to which we will need a license, which may not be available on reasonable terms or at all. If such third parties refuse to grant us a license to such patent rights on reasonable terms or at all, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to redesign our technology, drug candidates or the methods for manufacturing our drug candidates, or to develop or license replacement technology, all of which may not be commercially or technically feasible. In such case, we may not be able to market such technology or drug candidates and may not be able to perform research and development or other activities covered by these patents. This could have a material adverse effect on our ability to commercialize our drug candidates and our business and financial condition.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world, which could negatively impact our business.

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on current or future technologies or drug candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. Competitors or other third parties may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export infringing products to territories where we have patent protection or licenses but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products, and our patent or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Additionally, the laws of some foreign jurisdictions do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Many companies have encountered significant difficulties in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in such foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, including certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patent rights or the marketing of competing products in violation of our intellectual property and proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our intellectual property and proprietary rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and could divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business. Such proceedings could also put our patent rights at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us or any of our future licensors. We may not prevail in any lawsuits or other adversarial proceedings that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce such intellectual property and proprietary rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or in-license.

Further, many countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of its patents. If we or any of our licensors are forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position in the relevant jurisdiction may be impaired and our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating their intellectual property rights, the outcome of which would be uncertain and could have a material adverse impact on the success of our business.

Our commercial success depends, in part, upon our ability or the ability of any of our future collaborators to develop, manufacture, market and sell our current or any future drug candidates and to use our proprietary technologies without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the proprietary and intellectual property rights of third parties. The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by extensive and complex litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights.

We or any of our future licensors or strategic partners, may be party to, or be threatened with, adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our current or any potential future drug candidates and technologies, including derivation, reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review or interference proceedings before the USPTO and similar proceedings in jurisdictions outside of the United States, such as opposition proceedings. If we or our licensors or strategic partners are unsuccessful in any interference proceedings or other priority or validity disputes (including through any patent oppositions) to which we or they are subject, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights through the loss of one or more patents or our patent claims may be narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable. In some instances, we may be required to indemnify our licensors or strategic partners for the costs associated with any such adversarial proceedings or litigation. Third parties may also assert infringement, misappropriation or other claims against us, our licensors or our strategic partners based on existing patents or patents that may be granted in the future, as well as other intellectual property rights, regardless of their merit. There is a risk that third parties may choose to engage in litigation or other adversarial proceedings with us, our licensors or our strategic partners to enforce or otherwise assert their patent rights or other intellectual property rights. Even if we believe such claims are without merit, a court of competent jurisdiction could hold that these third-party patents and other intellectual property rights are valid, enforceable and infringed, which could have a material adverse impact on our ability to utilize our drug discovery and development engine or to commercialize our current or any future drug candidates. In order to successfully challenge the validity of any such U.S. patent in federal court, we would need to overcome a presumption of validity by presenting clear and convincing evidence of invalidity. There is no assurance that a court of competent jurisdiction, even if presented with evidence we believe to be clear and convincing, would invalidate the claims of any such U.S. patent.

Further, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to successfully settle or otherwise resolve such adversarial proceedings or litigation. If we are unable to successfully settle future claims on terms acceptable to us, we may be required to engage in or to continue costly, unpredictable and time-consuming litigation and may be prevented from or experience substantial delays in marketing our drug candidates. If we or any of our licensors or strategic partners are found to infringe, misappropriate or violate a third-party patent or other intellectual property rights, we could be required to pay damages, including treble damages and attorney’s fees, if we are found to have willfully infringed. In addition, we, or any of our licensors or strategic partners, may choose to seek, or be required to seek, a license from a third party, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. Even if a license can be obtained on commercially reasonable terms, the rights may be non-exclusive, which could give our competitors access to the same technology or intellectual property rights licensed to us, and we could be required to make substantial licensing and royalty payments. We also could be forced, including by court order, to cease utilizing, developing, manufacturing and commercializing our drug discovery and development engine or drug candidates deemed to be infringing. We may be forced to redesign current or future technologies or products. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our ability to generate revenue or achieve profitability and possibly prevent us from generating revenue sufficient to sustain our operations.

In addition, we or our licensors or strategic partners may find it necessary to pursue claims or to initiate lawsuits to protect or enforce our patent or other intellectual property rights. If we or our licensors or strategic partners were to initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering one of our drug candidates or our technology, the defendant could counterclaim that such patent is invalid or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, for example, claiming patent-ineligible subject matter, lack of novelty, indefiniteness, lack of written description, non-enablement, anticipation or obviousness. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO or made a misleading statement during prosecution. The outcome of such invalidity and unenforceability claims is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art of which we or our licensors or strategic partners and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity or unenforceability, we could lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection for one or more of our drug candidates. The narrowing or loss of our owned and licensed patent claims could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products. All of these events could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Patent and other intellectual property rights also will not protect our drug candidates and technologies if competitors or third parties design around such drug candidates and technologies without legally infringing, misappropriating or violating our patent or other intellectual property rights.

The cost to us in defending or initiating any litigation or other proceeding relating to our patent or other intellectual property rights, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial, and any litigation or other proceeding would divert our management’s attention and distract our personnel from their normal responsibilities. Such litigation or proceedings could materially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. Some of our competitors may be better able to more effectively sustain the costs of complex patent litigation because they have substantially greater resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could delay our research and development efforts and materially limit our ability to continue our operations. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with certain such proceedings, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, such announcements could have a material adverse effect on the price of our common stock.

Intellectual property rights of third parties could adversely affect our ability to commercialize our current or future technologies or drug candidates, and we might be required to litigate or obtain licenses from third parties to develop or market our current or future technologies or drug candidates, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all.

Because the immuno-oncology and inflammation disease landscapes are still evolving, it is difficult to conclusively assess our freedom to operate. Thus, we may unknowingly pursue development of a product or technology that infringes, misappropriates or otherwise violates third-party rights. There are numerous companies that have pending patent applications and issued patents broadly covering immune-therapies generally or covering small molecules directed against the same targets as, or targets similar to, those we are pursuing. Our competitive position may materially suffer if patents issued to third parties or other third-party intellectual property rights cover our current or future technologies, drug candidates or elements thereof or our manufacture or uses relevant to our development plans. In such cases, we may not be in a position to develop or commercialize current or future technologies, drug candidates or elements thereof unless we successfully pursue litigation to nullify or invalidate the third-party intellectual property right concerned, or enter into a license agreement with the intellectual property right holder, if available on commercially reasonable terms. There may be issued patents of which we are not aware, held by third parties, that, if found to be valid and enforceable, could be alleged to be infringed by our current or future technologies or drug candidates. There also may be pending patent applications of which we are not aware that may result in issued patents, which could be alleged to be infringed by our current or future technologies or drug candidates. Should such an infringement claim be successfully brought, we may be required to pay substantial damages or be forced to abandon our current or future technologies or drug candidates or to seek a license from any

patent holders. No assurances can be given that a license will be available on commercially reasonable terms, if at all.

Third-party intellectual property right holders may also actively bring infringement, misappropriation or other claims alleging violations of intellectual property rights against us. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to successfully settle or otherwise resolve such claims. If we are unable to successfully settle future claims on terms acceptable to us, we may be required to engage in or to continue costly, unpredictable and time-consuming litigation and may be prevented from or experience substantial delays in marketing our drug candidates. If we fail in any such dispute, in addition to being forced to pay damages, we may be temporarily or permanently prohibited from commercializing any of our current or future technologies or drug candidates that are held to be infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating third-party intellectual property rights. We might, if possible, also be forced to redesign current or future technologies or drug candidates so that we no longer infringe, misappropriate or violate the third-party intellectual property rights. Any of these events, even if we were ultimately to prevail, could require us to divert substantial financial and management resources that we would otherwise be able to devote to our business, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We may not be successful in obtaining necessary or exclusive rights to any drug candidates or products we may develop through acquisitions and in-licensing.

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

Patent rights we may in-license in the future may be subject to a reservation of rights by one or more third parties. For example, the research resulting in any in-licensed patent rights and technology may be funded in part by the U.S. government. As a result, the government may have certain rights, or march-in rights, to such patent rights and technology. When new technologies are developed with government funding, the government generally obtains certain rights in any resulting patents, including a non-exclusive license authorizing the government to use the invention for non-commercial purposes. These rights may permit the government to disclose our confidential information to third parties and to exercise march-in rights to use or allow third parties to use our licensed technology. The government can exercise its march-in rights if it determines that action is necessary because we fail to achieve practical application of the government-funded technology, because action is necessary to alleviate health or safety needs, to meet requirements of federal regulations or to give preference to U.S. industry. In addition, our rights in such inventions may be subject to certain requirements to manufacture products embodying such inventions in the United States. Any exercise by the U.S. government of such rights could harm our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed.

As referenced above, in addition to seeking patent protection for certain aspects of our current or future technologies and drug candidates, we also consider trade secrets, including confidential and unpatented know-how, important to the maintenance of our competitive position. However, trade secrets and know-how can be difficult to protect. We protect and plan to protect trade secrets and confidential and unpatented know-how, in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to such knowledge, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, CROs, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties. We also enter into confidentiality and invention or patent assignment agreements with our employees and consultants under which they are obligated to maintain confidentiality and to assign their inventions to us. Despite these efforts, we may not obtain these agreements in all circumstances and we cannot guarantee that we have entered into such agreements with each party that may have or have had access to our trade secrets or proprietary information.

Moreover, individuals with whom we have such agreements may not comply with their terms. Any of these parties may breach such agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for any such breaches. We may be forced to bring claims against third parties, including current or former employees or consultants, or defend claims that they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property, including our patent rights. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret, or securing title to an employee- or consultant-developed invention if a dispute arises, is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. If we are unsuccessful in any inventorship disputes to which we are subject, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as ownership of our patent rights. In addition, some courts in the United States and certain foreign jurisdictions disfavor or are unwilling to protect trade secrets. Further, if any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to prevent that competitor from using the technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position would be materially and adversely harmed.

We may be subject to claims that we or our employees or consultants have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets or other proprietary information of our employees’ or consultants’ former employers or their clients.

Many of our employees or consultants and our licensors’ employees or consultants were previously employed at universities or biotechnology or biopharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees and consultants do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that one or more of these employees or consultants or we have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information of any such individual’s current or former employers. Litigation or arbitration may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel or may be enjoined from using such intellectual property. Any such proceedings and possible aftermath would likely divert significant resources from our core business, including distracting our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. A loss of key research personnel or their work product could limit our ability to commercialize, or prevent us from commercializing, our current or future technologies or drug candidates, which could materially harm our business. Even if we are successful in defending against any such claims, litigation or arbitration could result in substantial costs and could be a distraction to management.

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

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other government fees on patents or applications will be due to be paid to the USPTO and various government patent agencies outside of the United States over the lifetime of our patent rights and any patent rights we may own or in-license in the future. The USPTO and various non-U.S. government patent agencies require compliance with several procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. We employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply with these requirements, and we may also be dependent on our licensors to take the necessary action to comply with these requirements with respect to our in-licensed intellectual property. In many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. There are situations, however, in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, potential competitors might be able to enter the market with similar or identical products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business prospects and financial condition.

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

Our trademarks or trade names may be challenged, infringed, circumvented, declared generic or determined to be infringing on other marks. We own a pending U.S. trademark application, but do not yet own a U.S. registered trademark, for our corporate name, “RAPT.” We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names or may be forced to stop using these names, which we use for name recognition by potential partners or customers in our markets of interest. If we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be materially adversely affected.

Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats to our business.

The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations and may not adequately protect our business. The following examples are illustrative:

As of December 31, 2019,2020, our commitments consisted of operating leases for our facilities of approximately 36,754 square feet. Under the terms of the agreements, we will have lease obligations net of sublease income, of $14.3$12.7 million from 20202021 through 2026.

We enter into contracts in the normal course of business with third-party contract organizations for clinical trials, non-clinical studies and testing, and other services and products for operating purposes. These contracts generally provide for termination following a certain period after notice and, therefore, we believe that our non-cancelable obligations under these agreements are not material and are not included in the table above.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We currently have not entered into and do not have any relationships with unconsolidated entities or financial collaborations, such as entities often referred to as structured finance or special purpose entities, which would have been established for the purpose of facilitating off-balance sheet arrangements or other contractually narrow or limited purpose.

Indemnification

As permitted under Delaware law and in accordance with our bylaws, we indemnify our officers and directors for certain events or occurrences while the officer or director is or was serving in such capacity pursuant to indemnification agreements. We believe the fair value of the indemnification rights and agreements is minimal. Accordingly, we have not recorded any liabilities for these indemnification rights and agreements as of December 31, 20192020 and 2018.2019.

JOBS Act Accounting Election

The Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 (the “JOBS Act”), permits an “emerging growth company” such as us to take advantage of an extended transition period to comply with new or revised accounting standards applicable to public companies. We are choosing to elect the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards pursuant to Section 107(b) of the JOBS Act until the earlier of the date we (i) are no longer an emerging growth company or (ii) affirmatively and irrevocably opt out of the extended transition period provided in the JOBS Act. As a result, our financial statements may not be comparable to companies that comply with new or revised accounting pronouncements as of public company effective dates.

We will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest of (1) the last day of our first fiscal year (a) following the fifth anniversary of the completion of the IPO, (b) in which we have total annual gross revenue of at least $1.07 billion, or (c) in which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of our common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700.0 million of the prior June 30th and (2) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt securities during the prior three-year period.

As a "smaller reporting company" as defined by Item 10 of Regulation S-K, we are not required to provide this information.

RAPT THERAPEUTICS, INC.

INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Stockholders and the Board of Directors of RAPT Therapeutics, Inc.

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of RAPT Therapeutics, Inc. (f/k/a FLX Bio, Inc.) (the Company) as of December 31, 20192020 and 2018,2019, the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss, convertible preferred stock and stockholders’ equity (deficit), and cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2019,2020, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “consolidated financial statements”). In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company at December 31, 20192020 and 2018,2019, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2019,2020, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

/s//s/ Ernst & Young LLP

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2017.

Redwood City, California

March 30, 202011, 2021

RAPT THERAPEUTICS, INC.

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(In thousands, except share and per share data)