Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None.

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act: None.

This annual report on Form 20-F contains forward-looking statements that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. All statements contained in this report, other than statements of historical fact, including statements regarding our and our Founded Entities' strategy, future operations, future financial position, future revenues, projected costs, prospects, plans and objectives of management, are forward-looking statements. The words “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “predict,” “project,” “target,” “potential,” “would,” “could,” “should,” “continue” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain these identifying words. The forward-looking statements in this annual report on Form 20-F include, among other things, statements about:

The risk factors described below are a summary of the principal risk factors associated with our business. These are not the only risks we face. You should carefully consider these risk factors, together with the risk factors incorporated by reference into Item 3D. of this annual report on Form 20-F and the other reports and documents filed by us with the SEC.

Pursuant to Rule 12b-23(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the information required in this annual report on Form 20-F for the 2022fiscal year ended December 31, 2023 (this "annual report on Form 20-F20-F") of PureTech Health plc (the “Company”) set out below is being incorporated by reference from PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023”, portions of which are included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F. Only the information set out below with specific reference to items and pages of PureTech's "Annual Report and Accounts 2022"2023" is deemed to be filed as part of this annual report on Form 20-F. Other information contained within PureTech's "Annual Report and Accounts 2022"2023" that is not specified, including graphs and tabular data, is not included in this annual report on Form 20-F and is not deemed to be filed as part of this annual report on Form 20-F. Photographs are also not included. References herein to PureTech's websites are textual references only and information on or accessible through such websites does not form part of and is not incorporated into this annual report on Form 20-F.

References below to major headings include all information under such major headings, including subheadings, unless such reference is a reference to a subheading, in which case such reference includes only the information contained under such subheading. Unless the context otherwise requires, “PureTech” and “PureTech Health” refer to the Company, which is comprised of PureTech and its Founded Entitiessubsidiaries (together, the “Group”). “Founded Entities” are comprised of “Controlled Founded Entities” and “Non-Controlled Founded Entities.” References in this annual report on Form 20-F to “Controlled Founded Entities” refer to Follica, Incorporated, Entrega, Inc. and Vedanta Biosciences, Inc., for all periods prior to May 25, 2022, Sonde Health Inc., and for all periods prior to June 10, 2021, Alivio Therapeutics, Inc. References to our “Non-Controlled Founded Entities” refer to Akili Interactive Labs, Inc., Karuna Therapeutics, Inc., VorBio, Inc. and Gelesis, Inc., for all periods following May 25, 2022, Sonde Health, Inc., and for all periods prior to December 18, 2019, resTORbio, Inc. PureTech formed each of its Founded Entities and has been involved in development efforts in varying degrees. In the case of each of the Company’s Controlled Founded Entities, the Company continues to maintain majority voting control. With respect to Non-Controlled Founded Entities, the Company may benefit from appreciation in its investment as a shareholder of such companies.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

The information (including tabular data) set forth or referenced under the heading “Risk Factor Annex" on pages 175186 to 211223 of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F is incorporated by reference.

The information set forth under the heading "History and Development of the Company" on page 174185 of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F is incorporated by reference.

For a description of our principal capital expenditures and divestitures for the three years ended December 31, 20222023 and for those currently in progress, see Item 5. “Operating and Financial Review and Prospects—A. Operating Results”.

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) maintains an internet website that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers, like us, that file electronically with the SEC. The address of that website is www.sec.gov. We also maintain an Internet website at www.puretechhealth.com. The information contained on, or that may be accessed through, our website is not part of, and is not incorporated into, annual report on Form 20-F.

The information (including graphs and tabular data) set forth under the following headings is incorporated by reference herein: “Highlights of the Year—2022”2023” (for the years of 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2022)2023) on page 1, “Components of Our Value”“PureTech's Hub-and-Spoke Model” on pages 6to 7, "PureTech’s Wholly Owned Programs"page 10, "Internal Program" on pages 8 topage 11, “ESG Report—Chapter 1: Patients-Ensuring Drug Efficacy and Safety” on page 22,33, “Risk Management—Risks related to regulatory approval" on page 4561 and "Risk Management—Risks related to intellectual property protection" on page 46,63, “Financial Review—Revenue” on page 54,71, in each case of PureTech's "Annual Report and Accounts 2022"2023" included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F, “Consolidated StatementsStatement of Comprehensive Income/(Loss),” “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 3.—Revenue” and “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 4.—Segment information,Information,” in each case of our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report on Form 20-F. Seasonality does not materially impact the Company's main business.

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries utilize rapidly advancing technologies and are characterized by intense competition. There is also a strong emphasis on intellectual property and proprietary products. Our pipeline builds on validated biology of known therapeutics while applying unique inventive steps that improve the clinical pharmacology. We further de-risk programs with key experiments at an early stage to validate the underlying value proposition. We believe that our technology, drug discovery and development expertise and capabilities enable such strong pipeline creation and provide us with a competitive advantage. However, we will continue to face competition from different sources including major pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, academic institutions, government agencies, and public and private research institutions. In addition, there are many companies that have approved therapeutics for some of our target indications. For any products that we eventually commercialize, we will not only compete with existing therapies but also compete with new therapies that may become available in the future.

In addition to the competition we will face from the parties described above, we face competition for certain of the product candidates we are developing internally.internally as well as the products we are advancing through our Founded Entities.

In the field of IPF,idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), there are two approved drugs, pirfenidone (Esbriet), marketed by Roche, and nintedanib (Ofev), marketed by Boehringer Ingelheim. These drugs have unfavorable tolerability profiles, leading to sustained unmet need for novel therapies. In May 2022, a generic version of pirfenidone was approved in the US. Generic pirfenidone is also starting to be prescribed in some EU countries. Other potential competitive product candidates in various stages of development include, but are not limited to: Fibrogen’s pamrevlumab in Phase 3 clinical trials, United Therapeutics’ treprostinil in Phase 3 clinical trials, Boehringer Ingelheim’s BI1015550 in Phase 3 development, BMS’ BMS-986278 in Phase 3 clinical development, Avalyn’s AP01 which is expected to enter a Phase 2 or 3 trial , Pliant Therapeutics’ PLN-74809 in Phase 2 clinical development, and Horizon Therapeutics’ HZN-825 in Phase 2 clinical development, BMS’ BMS-986278 in Phase 2 clinical development, and Galecto’s GB0139 in Phase 2 clinical development.

We are aware of one current drug product candidate targeting galectin-9, FibroGen’s FG-3165, which FibroGen has previously disclosed is expected to enter clinical developmentthat they are anticipating submitting an Investigational New Drug Application, or IND, for in the second halffirst quarter of 2023.2024. Additionally, if we are successful in developing LYT-200 as an immuno-oncology (IO) treatment we would expect to compete with currently approved IO therapies and those that may be developed in the future. Current marketed IO products include CTLA-4, such as BMS’ Yervoy, and PD-1/PD-L1, such as BMS’ Opdivo, Merck’s Keytruda and Genentech’s Tecentriq, and T cell engager immunotherapies, such as Amgen’s Blincyto. In addition, there are other academic groups and/or companies that may be involved in pre-clinical research centered around galectin-9 as a therapeutic target.

In the field of GABAA positive allosteric modulators, there are threefour approved drugs, allopregnanolone (Zulresso) and zuranolone (Zurzuvae), marketed by Sage Therapeutics, ganaxolone (Ztalmy), marketed by Marinus Pharmaceuticals, and cenobamate (Xcopri), marketed by SK Life Science. Other potential competitive product candidates in various stages of development include, but are not limited to, Sage Therapeutics’ SAGE-217 (zuranolone) which has completed a New Drug Application submission to the FDA, Abbvie/Cerevel’s darigabat in Phase 2 clinical development,, Roche’s alogabat and Sage’s SAGE-324, all in Phase 2 clinical development.

In the field of cannabidiol agents, there is one FDA approved drug, Epidiolex, marketed by Jazz Pharmaceuticals (originally GW Pharmaceuticals). Other potential competitive product candidates in various stages of development include Horizon/Zynerba Pharmaceuticals’ ZyGel in Phase 3 clinical development, Cardiol Therapeutics’ Cardiol Rx in Phase 2 clinical development.

We are aware of only one other agomelatine agent in development, Alto Neuroscience’s ALTO-300. ALTO-300 successfully completed a Phase 2a open-label trial to evaluate predictive biomarkers for efficacy and Emerald Health Pharmaceuticals’ EPH-101safety. ALTO-300 is now in Phase 2 clinical development.a placebo-

We are not aware of any direct competitors to our Glyph technology platform, but it may compete with new therapies that become available in the future to target the indications we are focused on.

Government authorities in the United States, at the federal, state and local level, and in other countries and jurisdictions, including the European Union, or EU, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, packaging, storage, recordkeeping, labeling, advertising, promotion, distribution, marketing, post-approval monitoring and reporting, and import and export of drugs, biological products and medical devices. The processes for obtaining regulatory approvals in the United States and in foreign countries and jurisdictions, along with subsequent compliance with applicable statutes and regulations, require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.

In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the FDCA, and its implementing regulations, and biologics under the FDCA and the Public Health Service Act and its implementing regulations. FDA approval is required before any new unapproved drug or dosage form, including a new use of a previously approved drug, can be marketed in the United States. Drugs and biologics are also subject to other federal, state, and local statutes and regulations. The process required by the FDA before such product candidates may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

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

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with GCP, which includes, among other things, the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent for their participation in any clinical study. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the study, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. A separate submission to the existing IND must be made for each successive clinical trial conducted during product development and for any subsequent protocol amendments. While the IND is active, progress reports summarizing the results of the clinical trials and nonclinical studies performed since the last progress report, among other information, must be submitted at least annually to the FDA, and written IND safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and investigators for serious and unexpected suspected adverse events, findings from other studies suggesting a significant risk to humans exposed to the drug, findings from animal or in vitro testing suggesting a significant risk to humans exposed to the drug, and any clinically important increased rate of a serious suspected adverse reaction compared to that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure.

Furthermore, an independent IRB for each site proposing to conduct the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial and its informed consent form before the clinical trial begins at that site, and must monitor the study until completed. Regulatory authorities, the IRB or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or that the trial is unlikely to meet its stated objectives. Some studies also include oversight by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical study sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board, which provides authorization for whether or not a study may move forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the study and may halt the clinical trial if it determines that

The clinical investigation of a drug is generally divided into three phases. Although the phases are usually conducted sequentially, they may overlap or be combined.

In some cases, the FDA may condition approval of an NDA or BLA for a product candidate on the sponsor’s agreement to conduct additional clinical studies after approval. In other cases, a sponsor may voluntarily conduct additional clinical studies after approval to gain more information about the drug.drug within the approved indication. Such post-approval studies are often referred to as Phase 4 clinical studies. Concurrent with clinical trials, companies may complete additional animal studies and develop additional information about the biological characteristics of the product candidate, and must finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final product, or for biologics, the safety, purity and potency.

The special protocol assessment, or SPA, process is designed to facilitate the FDA’s review and approval of certain drugs and biologics by allowing the FDA to evaluate the proposed design of certain preclinical studies and clinical trials, including among others, trials that are intended to form the primary basis for determining a product candidate’s efficacy. Upon specific request by a clinical trial sponsor, the FDA aims to evaluate the protocol and respond to a sponsor’s questions regarding, among other things, entry, criteria, dose selection, endpoints, trial conduct and data analyses, within 45 days of receipt of the request. The FDA ultimately assesses whether the protocol design and planned analysis of the trial are acceptable to support regulatory approval of the product candidate with respect to effectiveness of the indication studied. All agreements and disagreements between the FDA and the sponsor regarding an SPA must be clearly documented in an SPA letter or the minutes of a meeting between the sponsor and the FDA.

Even if the FDA agrees to the design, execution and analyses proposed in protocols reviewed under the SPA process, the FDA may rescind or alter its agreement where the FDA determines that a substantial scientific issue essential to determining the safety or efficacy of the product candidate has been identified after the trial has begun, which can include, but is not limited to, the following circumstances:

A documented SPA may be modified, and such modification will be deemed binding on the FDA review division, except under the circumstances described above, if the FDA and the sponsor agree in writing to modify the protocol and such modification is intended to improve the study. If the sponsor fails to follow the protocol that was agreed upon with FDA consistent with the SPA agreement, or makes substantive changes in the protocol without the FDA’s agreement, then FDA will consider the results from the study as a BLA or NDA review issue. The FDA will not be bound by an SPA agreement where the sponsor fails to conduct the trial in accordance with the agreed SPA.

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

In addition, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, an NDA or BLA or supplement to an NDA or BLA must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the biological product candidate for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. The FDA requires that a sponsor who is planning to submit a marketing application for a drug or biological product that includes a new active ingredient, new indication, new dosage form, new dosing regimen or new route of administration submit an initial pediatric study plan within sixty days after an end-of-Phase 2 meeting or as may be agreed between the sponsor and FDA. Unless otherwise required by regulation, PREA does not apply to any product candidate for an indication for which orphan designation has been granted.

The FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe and effective for its intended use and whether its manufacturing is sufficient to assure and preserve the product’s identity, strength, quality and purity. The FDA reviews a BLA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe, pure and potent and the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packed or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, purity and potency. When reviewing an NDA or BLA, the FDA may convene an advisory committee to provide clinical insight on application review questions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions.

Before approving an NDA or BLA, the FDA will typically inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving an NDA or BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP.

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

If the FDA approves a BLA or NDA, 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 or BLA with a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or 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 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.

Certain therapeutic products are comprised of multiple components, such as drug or biologic components and device components, that would normally be subject to different regulatory frameworks by the FDA and frequently regulated by different centers at the FDA. These products are known as combination products. Under the FDCA, the FDA is charged with assigning a center with primary jurisdiction, or a lead center, for review of a combination product. The determination of which center will be the lead center is based on the “primary mode of action” of the combination product. Thus, if the primary mode of action of a drug-device combination product is attributable to the drug product, the FDA center responsible for premarket review of the drug product would have primary jurisdiction for the combination product. The FDA has also established the Office of Combination Products to address issues surrounding combination products and provide more certainty to the regulatory review process. That office serves as a focal point for combination product issues for agency reviewers and industry. It is also responsible for developing guidance and regulations to clarify the regulation of combination products, and for assignment of the FDA center that has primary jurisdiction for review of combination products where the jurisdiction is unclear or in dispute. A combination product with a primary mode of action attributable to the drug or biologic component generally would be reviewed and approved pursuant to the drug approval processes set forth in the FDCA. In reviewing the NDA or BLA for such a product, however, FDA reviewers would consult with their counterparts in the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health to ensure that the device component of the combination product met applicable requirements regarding safety, effectiveness, durability and performance. In addition, under FDA regulations, combination products are subject to cGMP requirements applicable to both drugs and devices, including the Quality System Regulation, or QSR, currently applicable to medical devices.

The FDA offers a number of expedited development and review programs for qualifying product candidates. The fast track program is intended to expedite or facilitate the process for reviewing product candidates that meet certain criteria. Specifically, product candidates 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 candidate and the specific indication for which it is being studied. The sponsor of a fast track product candidate has opportunities for more frequent interactions with the review team during product development and, once an NDA or BLA is submitted, the application may be eligible for priority review. A fast track product candidate may also be eligible for rolling review, where the FDA may consider for review sections of the NDA or BLA on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the

A product candidate 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 candidate can receive breakthrough therapy designation if preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product candidate, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs or biologics, 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 candidate, including involvement of senior managers.

Any marketing application for a drug or biologic submitted to the FDA for approval, including a product candidate with a fast track designation and/or breakthrough therapy designation, may be eligible for other types of FDA programs intended to expedite the FDA review and approval process, such as priority review and accelerated approval.. An NDA or BLA is eligible for priority review if the product candidate has the potential to provide a significant improvement in the treatment, diagnosis or prevention of a serious disease or condition. For new-molecular-entity NDAs and original BLAs, 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 (as compared to ten months under standard review).

Additionally, depending on the designs of the applicable clinical trials, product candidates 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 candidate 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 confirmatory clinical studies to verify and describe the anticipated effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit.benefit and may require such confirmatory studies be underway prior to granting accelerated approval. Products receiving accelerated approval may be subject to expedited withdrawal procedures if the sponsor fails to conduct the required confirmatory studies in a timely manner or if such studies fail to verify the predicted 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.

Fast track designation, breakthrough therapy designation, priority review, and accelerated approval do not change the standards for approval but may expedite the development or approval process. Even if a product qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened. We may explore some of these opportunities for our product candidates as appropriate.

In 2012, the U.S. Congress authorized the FDA to award priority review vouchers to Sponsors of certain rare pediatric disease product applications. This program is designed to encourage development of new drug and biological products for prevention and treatment of certain rare pediatric diseases. Specifically, under this program, a sponsor who receives an approval for a drug or biologic for a “rare pediatric disease” may qualify for a voucher that can be redeemed to receive priority review of a subsequent marketing application for a different product. The Sponsor of a rare pediatric disease drug product receiving a priority review voucher may transfer (including by sale) the voucher to another sponsor. The voucher may be further transferred any number of times before the voucher is used, as long as the Sponsor making the transfer has not yet submitted the application. The FDA may also revoke any priority review voucher if the rare pediatric disease drug for which the voucher was awarded is not marketed in the U.S. within one year following the date of approval.

For purposes of this program, a “rare pediatric disease” is a (a) serious or life-threatening disease in which the serious or life-threatening manifestations primarily affect individuals aged from birth to 18 years, including age groups often called neonates, infants, children, and adolescents; and (b) rare diseases or conditions within the meaning of the Orphan Drug Act. On December 27, 2020, the Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher Program was extended. Under the current statutory sunset provisions, after September 30, 2024, FDA may only award a voucher for an approved rare pediatric disease product application if the Sponsor has rare pediatric disease designation for the drug, and that designation was granted by September 30, 2024. After September 30, 2026, FDA may not award any Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher.

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 or BLA. 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 or condition 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 or BLA, to market the same drug or biologic for the same disease or condition for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity or if the FDA finds that the holder of the orphan drug exclusivity has not shown that it can assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the orphan drug to meet the needs of patients with the disease or condition for which the drug or biologic was designated. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different drug or

A designated orphan drug may not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the disease or condition 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.

Any products manufactured or distributed 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 the FDA assesses an annual program fee for each product identified in an approved NDA or BLA. Drug and biologic 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 cGMPs, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements upon NDA or BLA holders and any third-party manufacturers. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated, and, depending on the significance of the change, may require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMPs and impose reporting requirements upon us and any third-party manufacturers that we may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMPs and other aspects of regulatory compliance.

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

The FDA closely regulates the marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of biologics. A company can make only those claims relating to safety and efficacy, purity and potency that are approved by the FDA and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other 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 many patients in varied circumstances. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. The FDA does, however, restrict manufacturer’s communications on the subject of off-label use of their products.

Section 505 of the FDCA describes three types of marketing applications that may be submitted to the FDA to request marketing authorization for a new drug. A Section 505(b)(1) NDA is an application that contains full reports of investigations of safety and efficacy. A 505(b)(2) NDA is an application that contains full reports of investigations of safety and efficacy but where at least some of the information required for approval comes from investigations that were not conducted by or for the applicant and for which the applicant has not obtained a right of reference or use from the person by or for whom the investigations were conducted. This regulatory pathway enables the applicant to rely, in part, on the FDA's prior findings of safety and efficacy for an existing product, or published literature, in support of its application. Section 505(j) of the FDCA establishes an abbreviated approval process for a generic version of approved drug products through the submission of an Abbreviated New Drug Application, or ANDA. An ANDA provides for marketing of a generic drug product that has the same active ingredients, dosage form, strength, route of administration, labeling, performance characteristics and intended use, among other things, to a previously approved product. ANDAs are termed "abbreviated" because they are generally not required to include preclinical (animal) and clinical (human) data to establish safety and efficacy. Instead, generic applicants must scientifically demonstrate that their product is bioequivalent to, or performs in the same manner as, the innovator drug through in vitro, in vivo, or other testing. The generic version must deliver the same amount of active ingredients into a subject's bloodstream in the same amount of time as the innovator drug and can often be substituted by pharmacists under prescriptions written for the reference listed drug. In seeking approval for a drug through an NDA, applicants are required to list with the FDA each patent with claims that cover the applicant's drug or a method of using the drug. Upon approval of a drug, each of the patents listed in the application for the drug is then published in the FDA's Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, commonly known as the Orange Book. Drugs listed in the Orange Book can, in turn, be cited by potential competitors in support of approval of an ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA.

concerning each such patent was favorably decided in the applicant's favor or settled, or such shorter or longer period as may be ordered by a court. This prohibition is generally referred to as the 30-month stay. In instances where an ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA applicant files a paragraph IV certification, the NDA holder or patent owner(s) regularly take action to trigger the 30-month stay, recognizing that the related patent litigation may take many months or years to resolve. Thus, approval of an ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA could be delayed for a significant period of time depending on the patent certification the applicant makes and the reference drug sponsor's decision to initiate patent litigation.

The Hatch-Waxman Act also establishes periods of regulatory exclusivity for certain approved drug products, during which the FDA cannot approve (or in some cases accept) an ANDA or 505(b)(2) application that relies on the branded reference drug. For example, the holder of an NDA, including a 505(b)(2) NDA, may obtain five years of non-patent data exclusivity upon approval of a new drug containing new chemical entities that have not been previously approved by the FDA. 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 therapeutic activity of the drug substance. During the exclusivity period, the FDA may not accept for review an ANDA or a 505(b)(2) NDA submitted by another company that contains the previously approved active moiety. However, an ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA may be submitted after four years if it contains a certification of patent invalidity or non-infringement. The Hatch-Waxman Act also provides three years of non-patent marketing exclusivity to the holder of an NDA (including a 505(b)(2) NDA) for a particular condition of approval, or change to a marketed product, such as a new formulation for a previously approved product, if one or more new clinical studies (other than bioavailability or bioequivalence studies) was essential to the approval of the application and was conducted/sponsored by the applicant. This three-year exclusivity period protects against FDA approval of ANDAs and 505(b)(2) NDAs for the condition of the new drug's approval. As a general matter, the three year exclusivity does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs or 505(b)(2) NDAs for generic versions of the original, unmodified drug product. 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 efficacy.

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are highly similar, or “biosimilar,” to or interchangeable with an FDA-approved reference biological product. Biosimilarity, which requires that there be no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of safety, purity, and potency, is generally shown through analytical studies, animal studies, and a clinical study or studies. Interchangeability requires that a product is biosimilar to the reference product and the product must demonstrate that it can be expected to produce the same clinical results as the reference product in any given patient and, for products that are administered multiple times to an individual, the biologic and the reference biologic may be alternated or switched after one has been previously administered without increasing safety risks or risks of diminished efficacy relative to exclusive use of the reference biologic. A product shown to be biosimilar or interchangeable with an FDA-approved reference biological product may rely in part on the FDA’s previous determination of safety and effectiveness for the reference product for approval, which can potentially reduce the cost and time required to obtain approval to market the product.

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

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

We are developing certain product candidates that utilize, or may utilize controlled substances regulated by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, DEA. The Controlled Substances Act of 1970, or CSA, establishes registration, security, recordkeeping, reporting, storage, distribution and other requirements administered by the DEA. The DEA is concerned with the control of handlers of controlled substances, and with the equipment and raw materials used in their manufacture and packaging, in order to prevent loss and diversion into illicit channels of commerce. The DEA regulates controlled substances as Schedule I, II, III, IV or V substances. Schedule I substances by definition have no established medicinal use, and may not be marketed or sold in the United States. A pharmaceutical product may be listed as Schedule II, III, IV or V, with Schedule II

Annual registration is required for any facility that manufactures, distributes, dispenses, imports or exports any controlled substance. The registration is specific to the particular location, activity and controlled substance schedule. For example, separate registrations are needed for import and manufacturing, and each registration will specify which schedules of controlled substances are authorized. The DEA typically inspects a facility to review its security measures prior to issuing a registration. Security requirements vary by controlled substance schedule, with the most stringent requirements applying to Schedule I and Schedule II substances. Required security measures include background checks on employees and physical control of inventory through measures such as cages, surveillance cameras and inventory reconciliations. Records must be maintained for the handling of all controlled substances, and periodic reports made to the DEA. Reports must also be made for thefts or losses of any controlled substance, and authorization must be obtained to destroy any controlled substance. In addition, special authorization and notification requirements apply to imports and exports.

To meet its responsibilities, the DEA conducts periodic inspections of registered establishments that handle controlled substances. Failure to maintain compliance with applicable requirements, particularly as manifested in loss or diversion, can result in

enforcement action. The DEA may seek civil penalties, refuse to renew necessary registrations, or initiate proceedings to revoke those registrations. In certain circumstances, violations could eventuate in criminal proceedings. Individual states also regulate controlled substances, and we and our contract manufacturers are also subject to state regulation on distribution of these products.

The FDA regulates the development, design, non-clinical and clinical research, manufacturing, safety, efficacy, labeling, packaging, storage, installation, servicing, recordkeeping, premarket clearance or approval, adverse event reporting, advertising, promotion, marketing and distribution, and import and export of medical devices to ensure that medical devices distributed domestically are safe and effective for their intended uses and otherwise meet the requirements of the FDCA.

Unless an exemption applies, each medical device commercially distributed in the United States requires either FDA clearance of a 510(k) premarket notification, or approval of a premarket approval, or PMA, application. Under the FDCA, medical devices are classified into one of three classes—Class I, Class II or Class III—depending on the degree of risk associated with each medical device and the extent of manufacturer and regulatory control needed to ensure its safety and effectiveness. Class I includes devices with the lowest risk to the patient and are those for which safety and effectiveness can be assured by adherence to the FDA’s General Controls for medical devices, which include compliance with the applicable portions of the QSR, facility registration and product listing, reporting of adverse medical events, and truthful and non-misleading labeling, advertising, and promotional materials. Class II devices are subject to the FDA’s General Controls, and special controls as deemed necessary by the FDA to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device. These special controls can include performance standards, post-market surveillance, patient registries and FDA guidance documents.

While most Class I devices are exempt from the 510(k) premarket notification requirement, manufacturers of most Class II devices are required to submit to the FDA a premarket notification under Section 510(k) of the FDCA requesting permission to commercially distribute the device. The FDA’s permission to commercially distribute a device subject to a 510(k) premarket notification is generally known as 510(k) clearance. Devices deemed by the FDA to pose the greatest risks, such as life-sustaining, life-supporting or some implantable devices, or devices that have a new intended use, or use advanced technology that is not substantially equivalent to that of a legally marketed device, are placed in Class III, requiring approval of a PMA. Some pre-amendment devices are unclassified, but are subject to FDA’s premarket notification and clearance process in order to be commercially distributed.

To obtain 510(k) clearance, a manufacturer must submit to the FDA a premarket notification demonstrating that the proposed device is “substantially equivalent” to a predicate device already on the market. A predicate device is a legally marketed device that is not subject to premarket approval, i.e., a device that was legally marketed prior to May 28, 1976 (pre-amendments device) and for which a PMA is not required, a device that has been reclassified from Class III to Class II or I, or a device that was found substantially equivalent through the 510(k) process. The FDA’s 510(k) clearance process usually takes from three to twelve months, but may take longer. The FDA may require additional information, including clinical data, to make a determination regarding substantial equivalence.

If the FDA agrees that the device is substantially equivalent to a predicate device currently on the market, it will grant 510(k) clearance to commercially market the device. If the FDA determines that the device is “not substantially equivalent” to a previously cleared device, the device is automatically designated as a Class III device. The device sponsor must then fulfill more rigorous PMA requirements, or can request a risk-based classification determination for the device in accordance with the “de novo” process, which is a route to market for novel medical devices that are low to moderate risk and are not substantially equivalent to a predicate device.

After a device receives 510(k) clearance, any modification that could significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a major change or modification in its intended use, will require a new 510(k) clearance or, depending on the modification, PMA approval or de novo reclassification. The FDA requires each manufacturer to determine whether the proposed change requires submission of a 510(k), de novo request or a PMA in the first instance, but the FDA can review any such decision and disagree with a manufacturer’s determination. If the FDA disagrees with a manufacturer’s determination, the FDA can require the manufacturer to cease marketing and/or request the recall of the modified device until 510(k) marketing clearance or PMA approval is obtained or a de novo request is granted. Also, in these circumstances, the manufacturer may be subject to significant regulatory fines or penalties.

Class III devices require PMA approval before they can be marketed, although some pre-amendment Class III devices for which FDA has not yet required a PMA are cleared through the 510(k) process. The PMA process is more demanding than the 510(k) premarket notification process. In a PMA, the manufacturer must demonstrate that the device is safe and effective, and the PMA must be supported by extensive data, including data from pre-clinical studies and human clinical trials. The PMA must also contain a full description of the device and its components, a full description of the methods, facilities, and controls used for manufacturing, and proposed labeling. Following receipt of a PMA, the FDA determines whether the application is sufficiently complete to permit a substantive review. If FDA accepts the application for review, it has 180 days under the FDCA to complete its review of a PMA, although in practice, the FDA’s review often takes significantly longer, and can take up to several years. An advisory panel of experts from outside the FDA may be convened to review and evaluate the application and provide recommendations to the FDA as to the approvability of the device. The FDA may or may not accept the panel’s recommendation. In addition, the FDA will generally conduct a pre-approval inspection of the applicant or its third-party manufacturers’ or suppliers’ manufacturing facility or facilities to ensure compliance with the QSR.

The FDA will approve the new device for commercial distribution if it determines that the data and information in the PMA constitute valid scientific evidence and that there is reasonable assurance that the device is safe and effective for its intended use(s). The FDA may approve a PMA with post-approval conditions intended to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device, or on some form of post-market surveillance when deemed necessary to protect the public health. or to provide additional safety and efficacy data for the device in a larger population or for a longer period of use. In such cases, the manufacturer might be required to follow certain patient groups for a number of years and to make periodic reports to the FDA on the clinical status of those patients. Failure to comply with the conditions of approval can result in material adverse enforcement action, including withdrawal of the approval.

Certain changes to an approved device, such as changes in manufacturing facilities, methods, or quality control procedures, or changes in the design performance specifications, which affect the safety or effectiveness of the device, require submission of a PMA supplement. PMA supplements often require submission of the same type of information as a PMA, except that the supplement is limited to information needed to support any changes from the device covered by the original PMA and may not require as extensive clinical data or the convening of an advisory panel.

Medical device types that the FDA has not previously classified as Class I, II, or III are automatically classified into Class III regardless of the level of risk they pose. The Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 established a route to market for low-to-moderate risk medical devices that are automatically placed into Class III due to the absence of a predicate device, called the “Request for Evaluation of Automatic Class III Designation,” or the de novo classification procedure. This procedure allows a manufacturer whose novel device is automatically classified into Class III to request down-classification of its medical device into Class I or Class II on the basis that the device presents low or moderate risk, rather than requiring the submission and approval of a PMA application. The enactment of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act, or FDASIA, streamlined the de novo classification pathway by permitting manufacturers toManufacturers may request de novo classification directly without first submitting a 510(k) pre-market notification to the FDA and receiving a not-substantially-equivalent determination.

Under FDASIA,The FDA is required to classify thea medical device within 120 days following receipt of thea de novo request, although, in practice, the process may take significantly longer. If the manufacturer seeks reclassification into Class II, the manufacturer must include a draft proposal for special controls that are necessary to provide a reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the medical device. If FDA grants the de novo request, the device may be legally marketed in the United States. However, the FDA may reject the request if the FDA identifies a legally marketed predicate device that would be appropriate for a 510(k) notification, determines that the device is not low-to-moderate risk, or determines that general controls would be inadequate to control the risks and/or special controls cannot be developed. After a device receives de novo classification, any modification that could significantly affect its safety or efficacy, or that would constitute a major change or modification in its intended use, will require a new 510(k) clearance or, depending on the modification, another de novo request or even PMA approval.

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

Regardless of the degree of risk presented by the medical device, clinical studies must be approved by, and conducted under the oversight of, an IRB for each clinical site. The IRB is responsible for the initial and continuing review of the IDE, and may pose additional requirements for the conduct of the study. If an IDE application is approved by the FDA and one or more IRBs, human clinical trials may begin at a specific number of investigational sites with a specific number of patients, as approved by

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

After a device is cleared or approved for marketing, numerous and pervasive regulatory requirements continue to apply. These include:

Manufacturing processes for medical devices are currently required to comply with the applicable portions of the QSR, which cover the methods and the facilities and controls for the design, manufacture, testing, production, processes, controls, quality assurance, labeling, packaging, distribution, installation and servicing of finished devices intended for human use. The QSR also requires, among other things, maintenance of a device master file, device history file, and complaint files. As a manufacturer, we are subject to periodic scheduled or unscheduled inspections by the FDA. Failure to maintain compliance with the QSR requirements could result in the shutdown of, or restrictions on, manufacturing operations and the recall or seizure of marketed products. The discovery of previously unknown problems with marketed medical devices, including unanticipated adverse events or adverse events of increasing severity or frequency, whether resulting from the use of the device within the scope of its clearance or off-label by a physician in the practice of medicine, could result in restrictions on the device, including the removal of the product from the market or voluntary or mandatory device recalls.

The FDA has broad regulatory compliance and enforcement powers. If the FDA determines that a manufacturer has failed to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, it can take a variety of compliance or enforcement actions, which may result in a variety of sanctions, including: warning letters, untitled letters, fines, injunctions, consent decrees and civil penalties; recalls, withdrawals, or administrative detention or product seizures; operating restrictions or partial suspension or total shutdown of production; refusing or delaying requests for 510(k) marketing clearance or PMA approvals of new products or modified products; withdrawing 510(k) clearances or PMA approvals that have already been granted; refusal to grant export approvals for; or criminal prosecution.

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

To market any product outside of the United States, we would need to comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries regarding safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials, marketing authorization, commercial sales and distribution of our products. The foreign regulatory approval process includes all of the risks associated with FDA approval set forth above, as well as additional country-specific regulation. Because biologically sourced raw materials are subject to unique contamination risks, their use may be restricted in some countries.

Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we must obtain approval of a product by the comparable regulatory authorities of foreign countries before we can commence clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries. Approval by one regulatory authority does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions. The approval process varies from country to country, can involve additional testing beyond that required by FDA, and may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval. The requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing, promotion, and reimbursement vary greatly from country to country.

Similar to the United States, the various phases of preclinical and clinical research in the EU are subject to significant regulatory controls.

Non-clinical studies are performed to demonstrate the health or environmental safety of new chemical or biological substances. Non-clinical studies (pharmaco-toxicological) must be conducted in compliance with the GLP principles, of good laboratory practice, or GLP, as set forth in EU Directive 2004/10/EC (unless otherwise justified for certain particular medicinal products – e.g., radio-pharmaceutical precursors for radio-labelling purposes). In particular, non-clinical studies, both in vitro and in vivo, must be planned, performed, monitored, recorded, reported and archived in accordance with the GLP principles, which define a set of rules and criteria for a quality system for the organizational process and the conditions for non-clinical studies. These GLP standards reflect the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development requirements.

Clinical trials of medicinal products in the EU must be conducted in accordance with EU and national regulations and the International Conference onCouncil for Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use, or ICH, guidelines on Good Clinical Practices, or GCP, as well as the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki. If the sponsor of the clinical trial is not established within the EU, it must appoint an EU entity to act as its legal representative. The sponsor must take out a clinical trial insurance policy, and in most EU member states, the sponsor is liable to provide ‘no fault’ compensation to any study subject injured in the clinical trial.

The regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the EU has been subject to recent changes. The EU Clinical Trials Regulation, or CTR, which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. Unlike directives, the CTR is directly applicable in all EU member states without the need for member states to further implement it into national law. The CTR notably harmonizes the assessment and supervision processes for clinical trials throughout the EU via a Clinical Trials Information System, which contains a centralized EU portal and database.

While the EU Clinical Trials Directive required a separate clinical trial application, or CTA, to be submitted in each member state in which the clinical trial takes place, to both the competent national health authority and an independent ethics committee, much like the FDA and IRB respectively, the CTR introduces a centralized process and only requires the submission of a single application for multi-center trials. The CTR allows sponsors to make a single submission to both the competent authority and an ethics committee in each member state, leading to a single decision per member state. The CTA must include, among other things, a copy of the trial protocol and an investigational medicinal product dossier containing information about the manufacture and quality of the medicinal product under investigation. The assessment procedure of the CTA has been harmonized as well, including a joint assessment by all member states concerned, and a separate assessment by each member state with respect to specific requirements related to its own territory, including ethics rules. Each member state’s decision is communicated to the sponsor via the centralized EU portal. Once the CTA is approved, clinical study development may proceed.

The CTR foresees a three-year transition period. The extent to which ongoing and new clinical trials will be governed by the CTR varies. Clinical trials for which an application was submitted (i) prior to January 31, 2022 under the EU Clinical Trials Directive, or (ii) between January 31, 2022 and January 31, 2023 and for which the sponsor has opted for the application of the EU Clinical Trials Directive remain governed by said Directive until January 31, 2025. After this date, all clinical trials (including those which are ongoing) will become subject to the provisions of the CTR.

Medicines used in clinical trials must be manufactured in accordance with Good Manufacturing Practice, or GMP. Other national and EU-wide regulatory requirements may also apply.

In order to market our product candidates in the EU and many other foreign jurisdictions, we must obtain separate regulatory approvals. More concretely, in the EU, medicinal products can only be commercialized after obtaining a marketing authorization, or MA. To obtain regulatory approval of a product candidate under EU regulatory systems, we must submit a MA application, or MAA. The process for doing this depends, among other things, on the nature of the medicinal product. There are two main types of MA.

Under the above described procedures, before granting the MA, the EMA or the competent authorities of the EU member states make an assessment of the risk-benefit balance of the product on the basis of scientific criteria concerning its quality, safety and efficacy. MAs have an initial duration of five years. After these five years, the authorization may be renewed on the basis of a reevaluation of the risk-benefit balance.

Furthermore, MA may also be granted “under exceptional circumstances” when the applicant can show that it is unable to provide comprehensive data on the efficacy and safety under normal conditions of use even after the product has been authorized and subject to specific procedures being introduced. This may arise in particular when the intended indications are very rare and, in the present state of scientific knowledge, it is not possible to provide comprehensive information, or when generating data may be contrary to generally accepted ethical principles. This MA is reserved to medicinal products to be approved for severe diseases or unmet medical needs and the applicant does not hold the complete data set legally required for the grant of a MA. The applicant does not have to provide the missing data and will never have to. Although the MA “under exceptional circumstances” is granted definitively, the risk-benefit balance of the medicinal product is reviewed annually and the MA is withdrawn in case the risk-benefit ratio is no longer favorable.

In the EU, innovative medicinal products (including both small molecules and biological medicinal products) generally receive eight years of data exclusivity and an additional two years of market exclusivity upon MA. The data exclusivity period, if granted, prevents generic or biosimilar applicants from referencing the innovator’s pre-clinical and clinical trial data contained in the dossier of the reference product when applying for a generic or biosimilar MA, for a period of eight years from the date on which the reference product was first authorized in the EU. During the additional two-year period of market exclusivity, a generic or biosimilar MA can be submitted, and the innovator’s data may be referenced, but no generic or biosimilar product can be marketed until the expiration of the market exclusivity period. The overall ten-year period willcan be extended to a maximum of 11 years if, during the first eight years of those ten years, the MA holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to their authorization, are determined to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with currently approved therapies. However, there is no guarantee that a product will be considered by the EU’s regulatory authorities to be a new chemical or biological entity, and products may not qualify for data exclusivity.

In the EU, there is a special regime for biosimilars, or biological medicinal products that are similar to a reference medicinal product but that do not meet the definition of a generic medicinal product, for example, because of differences in raw materials or manufacturing processes. For such products, the results of appropriate preclinical or clinical trials must be provided, and guidelines from the EMA detail the type of quantity of supplementary data to be provided for different types of biological product. There are no such guidelines for complex biological products, such as gene or cell therapy medicinal products, and so it is unlikely that biosimilars of those products will currently be approved in the EU. However, guidance from the EMA states that they will be considered in the future in light of the scientific knowledge and regulatory experience gained at the time.

The criteria for designating an “orphan medicinal product” in the EU are similar in principle to those in the United States. A medicinal product can be designated as an orphan if its sponsor can establish that: (1) the product is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions, (2) either (a) such condition affects no more than 5 in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) where it is unlikely that the marketing of the medicine would generate sufficient return in the EU to justify the necessary investment in its development, and (3) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of the condition mustthat have been authorized in the EU or, if such a method exists, the product in question would be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition.

Orphan designation must be requested before submitting an MAA. In the EU, orphan designation entitles a party to incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers, protocol assistance and access to the centralized procedure. Upon grant of a MA, orphan medicinal products are entitled to ten years of market exclusivity for the approved indication, which means that the competent authorities cannot accept another MAA, or grant a MA, or accept an application to extend a MA for a similar medicinal product for the same indication for a period of ten years. The period of market exclusivity is extended by two years for orphan medicinal products that have also complied with an agreed pediatric investigation plan,Pediatric Investigation Plan, or PIP. No extension to any supplementary protection certificate can be granted on the basis of pediatric studies for orphan indications.

This period may be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the orphan designation criteria are no longer met, including where it is shown that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity or where the prevalence of the condition has increased above the threshold. Additionally, MA may only be granted to a “similar medicinal product” for the same indication at any time, if (i) the holder of the MA for the original orphan medicinal product consents to a second orphan medicinal product application, (ii) the holder of the MA for the original orphan medicinal product cannot supply sufficient quantities of the orphan medicinal product, or (iii) the second applicant can establish that its medicinal product, although similar, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior to the authorized orphan medicinal product. A “similar medicinal product” is defined as a medicinal product containing a similar active substance or substances as contained in an authorized orphan medicinal product, and which is intended for the same therapeutic indication. Orphan designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process.

In the EU, MAAs for new medicinal products have to include the results of studies conducted in the pediatric population, in compliance with a PIP, with the EMA’s Pediatric Committee, or PDCO. The PIP sets out the timing and measures proposed to

generate data to support a pediatric indication of the drugproduct candidate for which MA is being sought. The PDCO can grant a deferral of the obligation to implement some or all of the measures of the PIP until there are sufficient data to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of the product in adults. Further, the obligation to provide pediatric clinical trial data can be waived by the PDCO when this data is not needed or appropriate because the product is likely to be ineffective or unsafe in children, the disease or condition for which the product is intended occurs only in adult populations, or when the product does not represent a significant therapeutic benefit over existing treatments for pediatric patients. Once the MA is obtained in all the EU member states and study results are included in the product information, even where such results are negative, the product is eligible for six months’ supplementary protection certificate extension (if any is in effect at the time of approval).

Controlled substances are not regulated at EU level and the EU legislation does not establish different classes of narcotic or psychotropic substances. However, the United Nations, or UN, Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961 and the UN Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971, or the UN Conventions, codify internationally applicable control measures to ensure the availability of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances for medical and scientific purposes. The individual EU member states are all signatories to these UN Conventions. All signatories have a dual obligation to ensure that these substances are available for medical purposes and to protect populations against abuse and dependence.

The UN Conventions regulate narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances as Schedule I, II, III, IV substances with Schedule II substances presenting the lowest relative risk of abuse among such substances and Schedule I and IV substances considered to present the highest risk of abuse.

The UN Conventions require signatories to require all persons manufacturing, trading (including exporting and importing) or distributing controlled substances to obtain a license from the relevant authority. Each individual export or import of a controlled substance must also be subject to an authorization. Before the relevant authority can issue an export authorization for a particular shipment, the exporter must provide the authority with a copy of the import authorization issued by the relevant authority of the importing country. Implementation of the obligations provided in the UN Conventions and additional requirements are regulated at national level and requirements may vary from one member state to another.

Similar to the United States, both MA holders and manufacturers of medicinal products are subject to comprehensive regulatory oversight by the EMA, the European Commission and/or the competent regulatory authorities of the member states. The holder of a MA must establish and maintain a pharmacovigilance system and appoint an individual qualified person for pharmacovigilance, or QPPV, who is responsible for the establishment and maintenance oversight of that system, and oversees the safety profiles of medicinal products and any emerging safety concerns. Key obligations include expedited reporting of suspected serious adverse reactions and submission of periodic safety update reports, or PSURs.

All new MAA must include a risk management plan, or RMP, describing the risk management system that the company will put in place and documenting measures to prevent or minimize the risks associated with the product. The regulatory authorities may also impose specific obligations as a condition of the MA. Such risk-minimization measures or post-authorization obligations may include additional safety monitoring, more frequent submission of PSURs, or the conduct of additional clinical trials or post-authorization safety studies.

The advertising and promotion of medicinal products is also subject to laws concerning promotion of medicinal products, interactions with physicians, misleading and comparative advertising and unfair commercial practices. All advertising and promotional activities for the product must be consistent with the approved summary of product characteristics, and therefore all off-label promotion is prohibited. Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medicines is also prohibited in the EU. Although general requirements for advertising and promotion of medicinal products are established under EU directives, the details are governed by regulations in each member state and can differ from one country to another.

Much like the Anti-Kickback Statue prohibition in the United States, the provision of benefits or advantages to physicians to induce or encourage the prescription, recommendation, endorsement, purchase, supply, order or use of medicinal products is also prohibited in the EU. The provision of benefits or advantages to induce or reward improper performance generally is usually governed by national EU member states anti-bribery laws. Infringement of these laws could result in substantial fines and imprisonment.

Payments made to physicians in certain EU member states must be publicly disclosed. Moreover, agreements with physicians often must be the subject of prior notification and/or approval by the physician’s employer, his or her competent professional organization and/or the regulatory authorities of the individual EU member states. These requirements are provided in national laws, industry codes or professional codes of conduct, applicable in the EU member states.

Failure to comply with EU and member state laws that apply to the conduct of clinical trials, manufacturing approval, MA of medicinal products and marketing of such products, both before and after grant of the MA, manufacturing of pharmaceutical products, statutory health insurance, bribery and anti-corruption or with other applicable regulatory requirements may result in administrative, civil or criminal penalties. These penalties could include delays or refusal to authorize the conduct of clinical trials, or to grant MA, product withdrawals and recalls, product seizures, suspension, withdrawal or variation of the MA, total or partial suspension of production, distribution, manufacturing or clinical trials, operating restrictions, injunctions, suspension of licenses, fines and criminal penalties.

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

The EU regulates medical devices and medicinal products separately, through different legislative instruments, and the applicable requirements will vary depending on the type of drug-device combination product. EU guidance has been published to help manufacturers select the right regulatory framework.

Drug-delivery products intended to administer a medicinal product where the medicinal product and the device form a single integral product are regulated as medicinal products in the EU. The EMA is responsible for evaluating the quality, safety and efficacy of MAAs submitted through the centralized procedure, including the safety and performance of the medical device in relation to its use with the medicinal product. The EMA or the EU member state national competent authority will assess the product in accordance with the rules for medicinal products described above but the device part must comply with Regulation (EU) No 2017/745, or the EU Medical Devices Regulation (including the general safety and performance requirements provided in Annex I). MAA must include—where available—the results of the assessment of the conformity of the device part with the EU Medical Devices Regulation contained in the manufacturer’s EU declaration of conformity of the device or the relevant certificate issued by a notified body. If the MAA does not include the results of the conformity assessment and where for the conformity assessment of the device, if used separately, the involvement of a notified body is required, the competent authority must require the applicant to provide a notified body opinion on the conformity of the device.

By contrast, in case of drug-delivery products intended to administer a medicinal product where the device and the medicinal product do not form a single integral product (but are e.g. co-packaged), the medicinal product is regulated in accordance with the rules for medicinal products described above while the device part is regulated as a medical device and will have to comply with all the requirements set forth by the EU Medical Devices Regulation.

The characteristics of non-integral devices used for the administration of medicinal products may impact the quality, safety and efficacy profile of the medicinal products. To the extent that administration devices are co-packaged with the medicinal product or, in exceptional cases, where the use of a specific type of administration device is specifically provided for in the product information of the medicinal product, additional information may need to be provided in the MAA for the medicinal product on the characteristics of the medical device(s) that may impact on the quality, safety and/or efficacy of the medicinal product.

The requirements regarding quality documentation for medicinal products when used with a medical device, including single integral products, co-packaged and referenced products, are outlined in the EMA guideline of July 22, 2021, which became applicable as of January 1, 2022.

The aforementioned EU rules are generally applicable in the EEA

In the EU, until May 25, 2021, medical devices were regulated by the Council Directive 93/42/EEC, or the EU Medical Devices Directive which has been repealed and replaced by Regulation (EU) No 2017/745, or the EU Medical Devices Regulation. Our Founded Entities' medical devices current certificates have been granted under the EU Medical Devices Directive whose regime is described below. However, as of May 26, 2021, some of the EU Medical Devices Regulation requirements apply in place of the corresponding requirements of the EU Medical Devices Directive with regard to registration of economic operators and of devices, post-market surveillance and vigilance requirements. Pursuing marketing of medical devices in the EU will notably require that our devices be certified under the new regime set forth in the EU Medical Devices Regulation when our current certificates expire..

Under the EU Medical Devices Directive, all medical devices placed on the market in the EU must meet the relevant essential requirements laid down in Annex I to the EU Medical Devices Directive, including the requirement that a medical device must be designed and manufactured in such a way that it will not compromise the clinical condition or safety of patients, or the safety and health of users and others. In addition, the device must achieve the performance intended by the manufacturer and be designed, manufactured, and packaged in a suitable manner. The European Commission has adopted various standards applicable to medical devices. These include standards governing common requirements, such as sterilization and safety of medical electrical equipment and product standards for certain types of medical devices. There are also harmonized standards relating to design and manufacture. While not mandatory, compliance with these standards is viewed as the easiest way to satisfy the essential requirements as a practical matter as it creates a rebuttable presumption that the device satisfies that essential requirement.

To demonstrate compliance with the essential requirements laid down in Annex I to the EU Medical Devices Directive, medical device manufacturers must undergo a conformity assessment procedure, which varies according to the type of medical device and its (risk) classification. As a general rule, demonstration of conformity of medical devices and their manufacturers with the essential requirements must be based, among other things, on the evaluation of clinical data supporting the safety and performance of the products during normal conditions of use. Specifically, a manufacturer must demonstrate that the device achieves its intended performance during normal conditions of use, that the known and foreseeable risks, and any adverse events, are minimized and acceptable when weighed against the benefits of its intended performance, and that any claims made about the performance and safety of the device are supported by suitable evidence. Except for low-risk medical devices (Class I non-sterile, non-measuring devices), where the manufacturer can self-assess the conformity of its products with the essential requirements (except for any parts which relate to sterility or metrology), a conformity assessment procedure requires the intervention of a notified body. Notified bodies are independent organizations designated by EU member states to assess the conformity of devices before being placed on the market. A notified body would typically audit and examine a product’s technical dossiers and the manufacturer’s quality system (the notified body must presume that quality systems which implement the relevant harmonized standards – which is ISO 13485:2016 for Medical Devices Quality Management Systems – conform to these requirements). If satisfied that the relevant product conforms to the relevant essential requirements, the notified body issues a certificationcertificate of conformity, which the manufacturer uses as a basis for its own declaration of conformity. The manufacturer may then apply the European Conformity, or CE mark, to the device, which allows the device to be placed on the market throughout the EU.

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

The regulatory landscape related to medical devices in the EU recently evolved. On April 5, 2017, the EU Medical Devices Regulation was adopted with the aim of ensuring better protection of public health and patient safety. The EU Medical Devices Regulation establishes a uniform, transparent, predictable and sustainable regulatory framework across the EU for medical devices and ensure a high level of safety and health while supporting innovation. Unlike the EU Medical Devices Directive, the EU Medical Devices Regulation is directly applicable in EU member states without the need for member states to implement into national law. This aims at increasing harmonization across the EU.

The EU Medical Devices Regulation became effective on May 26, 2021. In accordance with its recently extended transitional provisions, both (i) devices lawfully placed on the market pursuant to the EU Medical Devices Directive prior to May 26, 2021 and (ii) legacy devices lawfully placed on the EU market after May 26, 2021 in accordance with the transitional provisions of the EU Medical Devices Regulation may generally continue to be made available on the market or put into service, provided that the requirements of the transitional provisions are fulfilled. However, even in this case, manufacturers must comply with a number of new or reinforced requirements set forth in the EU Medical Devices Regulation, in particular the obligations described below.

The EU Medical Devices Regulation requires that before placing a device, other than a custom-made device, on the market, manufacturers (as well as other economic operators such as authorized representatives and importers) must register by submitting identification information to the electronic system (Eudamed), unless they have already registered. The information to be submitted by manufacturers (and authorized representatives) also includes the name, address and contact details of the person or persons responsible for regulatory compliance. The new Regulation also requires that before placing a device, other than a custom-made device, on the market, manufacturers must assign a unique identifier to the device and provide it along with other core data to the unique device identifier, or UDI, database. These new requirements aim at ensuring better identification and traceability of the devices. Each device – and as applicable, each package – will have a UDI composed of two parts: a device identifier, or UDI-DI, specific to a device, and a production identifier, or UDI-PI, to identify the unit producing the device. Manufacturers are also notably responsible for entering the necessary data on Eudamed, which includes the UDI database, and for keeping it up to date. The obligations for registration in Eudamed will become applicable at a later date (as Eudamed is not yet fully functional). Until Eudamed is fully functional, the corresponding provisions of the EU Medical Devices Directive continue to apply for the purpose of meeting the obligations laid down in the provisions regarding exchange of information, including, and in particular, information regarding registration of devices and economic operators.

All manufacturers placing medical devices intoon the market in the EU must comply with the EU medical device vigilance system which has been reinforced by the EU Medical Devices Regulation. Under this system, serious incidents and Field Safety Corrective Actions, or FSCAs, must be reported to the relevant authorities of the EU member states. These reports will have to be submitted through Eudamed – once functional – and aim to ensure that, in addition to reporting to the relevant authorities of the EU member states, other actors such as the economic operators in the supply chain will also be informed. Until Eudamed is fully functional, the corresponding provisions of the EU Medical Devices Directive continue to apply. Manufacturers are required to take FSCAs, which are defined as any corrective action for technical or medical reasons to prevent or reduce a risk of a serious incident associated with the use of a medical device that is made available on the market. A serious incident is any malfunction or deterioration in the characteristics or performance of a device on the market (e.g., inadequacy in the information supplied by the manufacturer, undesirable side-effect), which, directly or indirectly, might lead to either the death or serious deterioration of the health of a patient, user, or other persons, or to a serious public health threat. An FSCA may include the recall, modification, exchange, destruction or retrofitting of the device. FSCAs must be communicated by the manufacturer or its legal representative to its customers and/or to the end users of the device through Field Safety Notices. For similar serious incidents that occur with the same device or device type and for which the root cause has been identified or a FSCA implemented or where the incidents are common and well documented, manufacturers may provide periodic summary reports instead of individual serious incident reports.

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

The aforementioned EU rules are generally applicable in the EEA.

The EU regulatory landscape concerning in vitro diagnostic medical devices, or IVD MDs, recently evolved. On April 5, 2017 Regulation (EU) 2017/746 of the European Parliament and of the Council on IVD MDs and repealing Directive 98/79/EC and Commission Decision 2010/227/EU, or the IVDR, was adopted to establish a modernized and more robust EU legislative framework, with the aim of ensuring better protection of public health and patient safety. This aims at reducing the risk of discrepancies in interpretation across the different European markets.

The IVDR fully applies since May 26, 2022. The IVDR fully applies since May 26, 2022. IVD MDs lawfully placed on the market pursuant to the Directive 98/79/EC, or EU IVDD, prior to May 26, 2022 but there is a tiered system extending the grace period for many devices (depending on their risk classification) before they havemay generally continue to be fully compliantmade available on the market or put into service until May 26, 2027, provided that the requirements of the transitional provisions are fulfilled. However, even in

this case, manufacturers must comply with a number of new or reinforced requirements set forth in the regulation.EU IVDR. The IVDR among other things:

The aforementioned EU rules are generally applicable in the EEA.

In the EU, IVD MDs were regulated by Directive 98/79/EC, or the EU IVDD, which regulated the placing on the market, the CE marking, the essential requirements, the conformity assessment procedures, the registration obligations for manufactures and devices as well as the vigilance procedure. IVD MDs had to comply with the requirements provided for in the EU IVDD, and with further requirements implemented at national level (as the case may be).

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

Since the end of the Brexit transition period on January 1, 2021, Great Britain, or GB (England, Scotland and Wales) has not been directly subject to EU laws, however under the terms of the Ireland/Northern Ireland Protocol, EU laws generally apply to Northern Ireland. On February 27, 2023, the United Kingdom, or UK, Government and the European Commission reached a political agreement on the “Windsor Agreement” which will revise the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland in order to address some of the perceived shortcomings in its operation. Under the proposed changes, Northern Ireland wouldwill be reintegrated under the regulatory authority of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, or MHRA, with respect to medicinal products. These proposed changes need toThe UK Government has confirmed that the Windsor Agreement will come into effect on January 1, 2025, at which point the MHRA will be codified and agreed bysolely responsible for authorizing medicines for the respective parliaments of the United Kingdom, or UK, and EU before taking effect.Northern Ireland market. There could be additional uncertainty and risk around what these changes will mean to our business.

It is currentlyremains unclear as to what extent the UK Government will seek to align its regulations with the EU. The EU laws that have been transposed into UK law through secondary legislation remain applicable in Great Britain. However, under the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill 2022, which is currently before the UK parliament, any retained EU law not expressly preserved and “assimilated” into domestic law or extended by ministerial regulations (to no later than June 23, 2026) will automatically expire and be revoked by December 31, 2023. In addition,Britain;however, new legislation such as the (EU) CTR is not applicable in GB. Whilst the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement, or TCA, includes the mutual recognition of GMP inspections of manufacturing facilities for medicinal products and GMP documents issued, it does not contain wholesale mutual recognition of UK and EU pharmaceutical regulations and product standards. There may be divergent local requirements in Great Britain from the EU in the future, which may impact clinical and development activities that occur in the UK in the future. Similarly, clinical trial submissions in the UK will not be able to be bundled with those of EU countries within the EMA Clinical Trial Information System, or CTIS, adding further complexity, cost and potential risk to future clinical and development activity in the UK. Significant political and economic uncertainty remains about how much the relationship between the UK and EU will differ as a result of the UK’s withdrawal.

The UK government has passed a new Medicines and Medical Devices Act 2021, which introduces delegated powers in favor of the Secretary of State or an ‘appropriate authority’ to amend or supplement existing regulations in the area of medicinal products and medical devices. This allows new rules to be introduced in the future by way of secondary legislation, which aims to allow flexibility in addressing regulatory gaps and future changes in the fields of human medicines, clinical trials and medical devices.

With respect to medical devices (including IVD MDs), the TCA does not specifically refer to them but does provide for cooperation and exchange of information in the area of product safety and compliance, including market surveillance, enforcement activities and measures, standardization related activities, exchanges of officials, and coordinated product recalls (or other similar actions). For medical devices that are locally manufactured but use components from other countries, the “rules of origin” criteria will need to be reviewed. The rules for placing medical devices on the Northern Ireland market will differ from those in GB.

New regulations require allAll medical devices tomust be registered with the MHRA, and since January 1, 2022, manufacturers based outside the UK have been required to appoint a UK responsible person that has a registered place of business in the UK to register devices with the MHRA.

On June 26, 2022, the MHRA published its response to a 10-week consultation on the post-Brexit regulatory framework for medical devices and diagnostics. The MHRA seeks to amend the UK Medical Devices Regulations 2002, or the “UK MDR” (which continues to be based on the EU legislation which preceded the EU Medical Devices Regulation, primarily the EU Medical Devices Directive and the (EU) IVDD),EUIVDD, in particular to create a new access pathway to support innovation, create an innovative framework for regulating software and artificial intelligence as medical devices, reform in vitro diagnostic medical device regulation and foster sustainability through the reuse and remanufacture of medical devices. Regulations implementing the new regime were originally scheduled to come into force in July 2023, but the Government has recently confirmed that this date has been postponed untilcore elements of the new regime are likely to apply from July 2024.2025. Devices which have valid certification issued by EU notified bodies under the EU Medical Devices Regulation or EU Medical Devices Directive are subject to transitional arrangements. In its consultation response,The UK Government has introduced legislation which provides that CE marked medical devices may be placed on the MHRA indicated thatGreat Britain market to the future UK regulations will allowfollowing transitional timelines:

Following these transitional periods, it is expected that all medical devices will require a UK Conformity Assessment, or UKCA, mark. Manufacturers may choose to use the UKCA mark on a voluntary basis prior to the regulations coming into force. However, from July 2024,2025, products which do not have existing and valid CE certification under the EU Medical Devices Directive or EU Medical Devices Regulation and are therefore not subject to the transitional arrangements will be required to carry the UKCA mark if they are to be sold into the market in Great Britain. UKCA marking will not be recognized in the EU. The rules for placing medical devices on the market in Northern Ireland, which is part of the UK, differ from those in Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales) and continues to be based on EU law.

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

For other countries outside of the EU, the UK and the United States, such as countries in Eastern Europe, Latin America or Asia, the requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary from country to country. Additionally, 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.

If we further expand ourOur operations outside ofare subject to global anti-corruption laws, including the United States, we must dedicate additional resources to comply with numerous laws and regulations in each jurisdiction in which we plan to operate. TheUK Bribery Act 2020 (“Bribery Act”), the . US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act ("FCPA"), and other applicable laws which generally prohibit us, our employees, and intermediaries acting on our behalf from corruptly authorizing, promising, offering, or FCPA, prohibits any U.S. individual or business from paying, offering, authorizing payment or offering of anything of value,providing, directly or indirectly, anything else of value, to anygovernment officials or other persons to obtain or retain business or gain some other business advantage. The Bribery Act also prohibits: (i) “commercial” bribery of private parties, in addition to bribery involving domestic or foreign official, political partyofficials; (ii) the acceptance of bribes, as well as the giving of bribes; and (iii) “facilitation payments”, meaning generally low-level payments designed to secure or candidateexpedite routine governmental actions or other conduct that persons are already under obligations to perform. The Bribery Act also creates an offense applicable to corporate entities for failure to prevent bribery by our employees, officers, directors, and other third parties acting on our behalf, to which the purpose of influencing any act or decision of the foreign entity in order to assist the individual or business in obtaining or retaining business. The FCPA also obligates companies whose securities are listed in the United States to comply with certain accounting provisions requiring the companyonly defense is to maintain books and records that accurately and fairly reflect all transactions“adequate procedures” designed to prevent such acts of the corporation, including international subsidiaries, and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls for international operations.bribery.

Compliance with the FCPA is expensive and difficult, particularly in countries in which corruption is a recognized problem. In addition, the FCPAglobal anti-corruption laws presents particular challenges in the pharmaceutical industry, because, in many countries, hospitals are operated by the government, and doctors and other hospital employees are considered foreign officials. Certain paymentsWe have policies and procedures designed to hospitals in connectionpromote compliance with clinical trialsanti-corruption laws and other work have been deemedmay need to be improper payments to government officials and have led to FCPA enforcement actions.dedicate additional resources as our operations expand around the world.

Various laws, regulations and executive orders also restrict the use and dissemination outside of the United States, or the sharing with certain non-U.S. nationals, of information classified for national security purposes, as well as certain products and technical data relating to those products. If we expand our presence outside of the United States, it will require us to dedicate additional resources to comply with these laws, and these laws may preclude us from developing, manufacturing, or selling certain products and product candidates outside of the United States, which could limit our growth potential and increase our development costs.

Manufacturing, sales, promotion and other activities following product approval are also subject to regulation by numerous regulatory authorities in the United States in addition to the FDA, including the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, the Office of Inspector General and Office for Civil Rights, other divisions of the Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, the Department of Justice, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, the Occupational Safety & Health Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency and state and local governments.

Healthcare providers and third-party payors play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of drug products and other medical items and services. Arrangements with providers, consultants, third-party payors and customers are subject to broadly applicable fraud and abuse, anti-kickback, false claims laws, reporting of payments to physicians and teaching hospitals and patient privacy laws and regulations and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain our business and/or financial arrangements. Restrictions under applicable federal and state healthcare and data privacy and security laws and regulations, include the following:

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, in the event we obtain regulatory approval for any one of our products, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge and may not comply under one or more of such laws, regulations, and guidance. Law enforcement authorities are increasingly focused on enforcing fraud and abuse laws, and it is possible that some of our practices may be challenged under these laws. Violations of these laws can subject us to administrative, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, the exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs, individual imprisonment, reputational harm, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, as well as additional reporting obligations and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws. Efforts to ensure that our current and future business arrangements with third parties, and our business generally, will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs.

healthcare professionals or entities and many EU member states have adopted national “Sunshine Acts” which impose reporting and transparency requirements (often on an annual basis), similar to the requirements in the United States, on pharmaceutical companies. Certain countries also mandate implementation of commercial compliance programs, or require disclosure of marketing expenditures and pricing information.

In the United States and markets in other countries, patients who are prescribed treatments for their conditions and providers performing the prescribed services generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the associated healthcare costs. Thus, even if a product candidate is approved, sales of the product will depend, in part, on the extent to which third-party payors, including government health programs in the United States such as Medicare and Medicaid, commercial health insurers and managed care organizations, provide coverage, and establish adequate reimbursement levels for, the product. In the United States, no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for drug and other medical products exists among third-party payors. Although CMS determines whether and to what extent a new medicine will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare and private payors tend to follow CMS to a substantial degree, coverage and reimbursement for drug and other medical products can differ significantly from payor to payor. The process for determining whether a third-party payor will provide coverage for a product may be separate from the process for setting the price or reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the product once coverage is approved. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged, examining the medical necessity, and reviewing the cost-effectiveness of medical products and services and imposing controls to manage costs. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific products on an approved list, also known as a formulary, which might not include all of the approved products for a particular indication.

In order to secure coverage and reimbursement for any product that might be approved for sale, a company may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic or other studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of the product, in addition to the costs required to obtain FDA or other comparable regulatory approvals. Additionally, companies may also need to provide discounts to purchasers, private health plans or government healthcare programs. Nonetheless, product candidates may not be considered medically necessary or cost effective. A decision by a third-party payor not to cover a product could reduce physician utilization once the product is approved and have a material adverse effect on sales, our operations and financial condition. Additionally, a third-party payor’s decision to provide coverage for a product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Further, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage and reimbursement for the product, and the level of coverage and reimbursement can differ significantly from payor to payor. Factors payors consider in determining reimbursement are based on whether the product is:

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. Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for medical products. We cannot be sure that reimbursement will be available for any product candidate that we commercialize and, if reimbursement is available, the level of reimbursement. In addition, many pharmaceutical manufacturers must calculate and report certain price reporting metrics to the government, such as average sales price, or ASP, and best price. Penalties may apply in some cases when such metrics are not submitted accurately and timely. Further, these prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs.

In addition, in many foreign countries, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug pricing and reimbursement vary widely from country to country. In the EU, governments influence the price of pharmaceutical products through their pricing and reimbursement rules and control of national health care systems that fund a large part of the cost of those products to consumers. Member states are free to restrict the range of pharmaceutical products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement, and to control the prices and reimbursement levels of pharmaceutical products for human use. Some jurisdictions operate positive and negative list systems under which products may only be marketed once a reimbursement price has been agreed to by the government. Member states may approve a specific price or level of reimbursement for the pharmaceutical product, or alternatively adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company responsible for placing the pharmaceutical product on the market, including volume-based arrangements, caps and reference pricing mechanisms. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval, some of these countries may require the completion of clinical trials that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies. Other member states allow companies to fix their own prices for medicines, but monitor and control company profits. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our products. The downward pressure on health care costs has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. In addition, in some countries, cross-border imports from low-priced markets exert a commercial pressure on pricing within a country.

The containment of healthcare costs has become a priority of federal, state and foreign governments, and the prices of products have been a focus in this effort. Governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment

for one or more products for which a company or its collaborators receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.

In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and likely will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system directed at broadening the availability of healthcare, improving the quality of healthcare, and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. For example, in March 2010, the U.S. Congress enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively the ACA which, among other things, included changes to the coverage and payment for products under government health care programs. The ACA included provisions of importance to our potential product candidates that:

Since its enactment, there have been numerous judicial, administrative, executive, and legislative challenges to certain aspects of the ACA.

On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the ACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Prior to the Supreme Court’s decision, President Biden issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period from February 15, 2021 through August 15, 2021 for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace. The executive order also instructed certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the ACA.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. In August 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, included aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers, which went into effect in April 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2032 unless additional Congressional action is taken. In January 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several 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. More recently, on March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law, which eliminateseliminated the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set, beginning January 1, 2024. The rebate was previously capped at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, beginning January 1, 2024.price.

Moreover, payment methodologies may be subject to changes in healthcare legislation and regulatory initiatives. For example, CMS may develop new payment and delivery models, such as bundled payment models. In addition, recently there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their commercial products, which has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted state and federal 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 pharmaceutical products. On August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, was into law. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare (beginning in 2026), imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023), and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new discounting program (beginning in 2025). The IRA permits the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. On August 29, 2023, HHS announced the list of the first ten drugs that will be subject to price negotiations, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. For that and other reasons, it is currently unclear how the IRA will be effectuated.

Individual states in the United States have also become increasingly active in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. Furthermore, there has been increased interest by third

On May 30, 2018, the 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 drug manufacturer

to make its drug products available to eligible patients as a result of the Right to Try Act. Drug manufacturers who provide their investigational product under the Right to Try Act are required to submit to FDA an annual summary of the use of their drug.

Outside the United States, ensuring coverage and adequate payment for a product also involves challenges. Pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to government control in many countries. PricingIn the EU, pricing negotiations with government authorities can extend well beyond the receipt of regulatory approval for a product and may require a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of a product to other available therapies. The conduct of such a clinical trial could be expensive and result in delays in commercialization.

InHealth Technology Assessment, or HTA, of medicinal products in the EU is an essential element of the pricing and reimbursement schemes vary widely from countrydecision-making process in a number of EU member states. The outcome of HTA has a direct impact on the pricing and reimbursement status granted to country Some countries may require the completion of additional studies that comparemedicinal product. A negative HTA by a leading and recognized HTA body concerning a medicinal product could undermine the cost-effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies or so-called health technology assessments, in orderprospects to obtain reimbursement or pricing approval. For example, the EU provides options for its member states to restrict the range of products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. EU member states may approve a specific price for asuch product or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the product on the market. Other member states allow companies to fix their own prices for products, but monitor and control prescription volumes and issue guidance to physicians to limit prescriptions. Recently, many countriesnot only in the EU have increasedmember state in which the amountnegative assessment was issued, but also in other EU member states

In 2011, Directive 2011/24/EU was adopted at the EU level. This Directive establishes a voluntary network of discounts required on pharmaceuticals and these efforts could continue as countries attempt to manage healthcare expenditures, especially in light of the severe fiscal and debt crises experienced by many countriesnational authorities or bodies responsible for HTA in the EU. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription products, has become intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. Political, economic and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing negotiations, and pricing negotiations may continue after reimbursement has been obtained. Reference pricing used by variousindividual EU member states,states. The network facilitates and parallel trade, i.e., arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced member states, can further reduce prices. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any products, if approved in those countries.

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

We report under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, as a non-U.S. company with foreign private issuer status. As long as we qualify as a foreign private issuer under the Exchange Act, we will be exempt from certain provisions of the Exchange Act that are applicable to U.S. domestic public companies, including:

The information (including tabular data) set forth or referenced under the heading “Highlightsheading“Highlights of the Year—2022"2023" on page 1 and- "Components of Our Value”"PureTech's Hub-and-Spoke Model” on pages 6 to 7page 10 of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F is incorporated by reference.reference and "Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 1. Material Accounting Policies" in each case of our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report on Form 20-F .

The information (including tabular data) set forth or referenced under the headings “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 11.12. Property and Equipment” and “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 21. Leases”23. Leases and subleases” in each case of our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report on Form 20-F.

Not applicable.

You should read the following discussion and analysis, including those portions incorporated herein by reference, together with our consolidated financial statements, including the notes thereto, included elsewhere in this annual report on Form 20-F. Some of the information contained in this discussion and analysis or incorporated herein, including information with respect to our plans and strategy for our business and related financing, includes forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. As a result of many factors, including those factors set forth in the “Risk Factors” section incorporated herein by reference, our actual results could differ materially from the results described in or implied by these forward-looking statements.

Our audited consolidated financial statements as of and for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 2021 and 20202021 have been prepared in accordance with UK-adopted International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs). The audited consolidated financial statements also comply fully with IFRSs as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board ("IASB").

The following discussion contains references to the consolidated financial statements of PureTech Health plc and its consolidated subsidiaries, or the Company. These financial statements consolidate the Company’s subsidiaries and include the Company’s interest in associates and investments held at fair value. Subsidiaries are those entities over which the Company maintains control. Associates are those entities in which the Company does not have control for financial accounting purposes but maintains significant influence over the financial and operating policies. Where we have neither control nor significant influence for financial accounting purposes, we recognize our holding in such entity as an investment at fair value. For purposes of our consolidated financial statements, each of our Founded Entities are considered to be either a “subsidiary” or an “associate” depending on whether PureTech Health plc controls or maintains significant influence over the financial and operating policies of the respective entity at the respective period end date. For additional information regarding the accounting treatment of these entities, see Note 11. Material Accounting Policies of our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report on Form 20-F.

The information (including tabular data) set forth or referenced under the heading “Key Performance Indicators—2022”2023” on page 4967 of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F is incorporated by reference.

The information (including tabular data) set forth or referenced under the heading “Financial Review” on pages 68 to 80 of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F is incorporated by reference.

2022 Compared with 2021

The information (including tabular data) set forth or referenced under the heading “Risk Management” on pages 4460 to 4764 of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F is incorporated by reference.

The information (including tabular data) set forth or referenced under the following headings is incorporated by reference herein: "Viability" on page 48pages 65 to 66 and "Financial Review—Cash Flow and Liquidity" on pages 61 to 63page 69 of PureTech's "Annual Report and Accounts 2022"2023" included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F and “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 17.—Subsidiary Notes Payable”22. Long-term loan”, “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 20.—Long-term Loan”23. Leases and subleases”, “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 21.—Leases”, “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 22.—24. Capital and Financial Risk Management”Management ” and “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 23.—25. Commitments and Contingencies”, in each case of our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report on Form 20-F.

Under various license and collaboration agreements we are required to make milestone payments upon successful completion and achievement of certain intellectual property, clinical, regulatory and sales milestones. We will also be required to make royalty payments in connection with the sale of products developed under these agreements, if and when such sales occur. As of December 31, 2022,2023, these milestone events have not yet occurred and therefore the Company does not have a present obligation to make the related payments in respect of the licenses. We believe that the occurrence of many of these milestones is remote at this time. As of December 31, 20222023 payments in respect of contingent developmental milestones that are dependent on events that are outside the control of the Company but are reasonably possible to occur amounted to approximately $8.7$7.4 million. These milestone amounts represent an aggregate of multiple milestone payments depending on different milestone events in multiple agreements. The probability that all such milestone events will occur in the aggregate is remote. We are not able to predict when and if such milestone events will occur. Payments made to license IP represent the acquisition cost of intangible assets. For more information, see "Note 12 -13. Intangible Assets" to our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report on Form 20-F.

As of December 31, 2022,2023, our off-balance sheet arrangements consist of outstanding standby letters of credit. We have no other off-balance sheet arrangements that have had, or are reasonably likely to have, a material current or future effect on our consolidated financial statements or changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources. See “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 13.—14. Other Financial Assets” included in our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report on Form 20-F.

We consider the Group's working capital to be sufficient for its present requirements.

The information (including tabular data) set forth or referenced under the following headings is incorporated by reference herein: "Overview - Giving Life To Science" on page 31 and “ESG Report-Chapter 1:Report- Patients—Bioethics: R&D” on page 2032 of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F and "Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements - Note 4.-Segment4. Segment Information" of our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report on Form 20-F.

The information (including tabular data) set forth under the heading “Board of Directors” on pages 6682 to 68,84, “Management team” on pages 69 to 70page 85 and "Directors’ Report for the year ended December 31, 2022”2023” on pages 7893 to 8197 in each case of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022"2023" included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F is incorporated by reference.

The table below provides certain information regarding the diversity of our Board and Directors as of the date of this annual report.

The information (including graphs and tabular data) set forth under the following headings is incorporated by reference herein: “Directors’ Report for the year ended December 31, 2022”2023” on pages 7893 to 81,97, “Directors’ Remuneration Report for the year ended December 31, 2022”2023” on pages 86102 to 89,112, “Directors’ Remuneration Policy” on pages 90106 to 94,112, “Annual Report on Remuneration” on pages 95113 to 102,122, in each case of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F and “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 8.—Share-Based9. Share-based Payments” of our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report. References to the term audited within the "Annual Report on Remuneration" are not incorporated by reference within this Form 20-F.

The information (including graphs and tabular data) set forth under the headings "Board of Directors" on pages 6682 to 6884 “The Board” on pages 7186 to 75,90, “Report of the Nomination Committee” on page 82,98, “Report of the Audit Committee” on pages 8399 to 85,101, and "Directors' Remuneration Report for the year ended December 31, 2022"2023" on pages 90102 to 94112 in each case of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F is incorporated by reference.

The information (including tabular data) set forth under the heading “ESG Report—Chapter 2: People” on pages 2334 to 3139 of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F is incorporated by reference.

The information (including graphs and tabular data) set forth under the headings “Directors’ Report for the year ended December 31, 2022”2023” on pages 7893 to 8197 and “Annual Report on Remuneration” on pages 95113 to 102,122, in each case of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F is incorporated by reference. For information regarding the share ownership of our directors and executive officers, see Item 7.A - "Major Shareholders". References to the term audited within the "Annual Report on Remuneration" are not incorporated by reference within this Form 20-F.

The following table sets forth information with respect to the beneficial ownership of our ordinary shares as of by:

The column entitled “Percentage of Shares Beneficially Owned” is based on a total of 278,461,805270,209,101 ordinary shares outstanding as of March 31, 2023.2024.

Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules and regulations of the SEC and includes voting or investment power with respect to our ordinary shares. Ordinary shares subject to options that are currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days after March 31, 20232024 are considered outstanding and beneficially owned by the person holding the options for the purpose of calculating the percentage ownership of that person but not for the purpose of calculating the percentage ownership of any other person. Except as otherwise noted, the persons and entities in this table have sole voting and investment power with respect to all of the ordinary shares beneficially owned by them, subject to community property laws, where applicable. Except as otherwise set forth below, the address of the beneficial owner is c/o PureTech Health, 6 Tide Street, Suite 400, Boston, Massachusetts 02210. The information in the table below is based on information known to us or ascertained by us from public filings made by the shareholders. We have also set forth below information known to us regarding any significant change in the percentage ownership of our ordinary shares by any major shareholders during the past three years. The major shareholders listed below do not have voting rights with respect to their ordinary shares that are different from the voting rights of other holders of our ordinary shares.

We are not aware that the Company is directly owned or controlled by another corporation, any foreign government or any other natural or legal person(s) severally or jointly. We are not aware of any arrangement, the operation of which may result in a change of control of the Company.

The number of record holders in the United States is not representative of the number of beneficial holders nor is it representative of where such beneficial holders are resident since many of these ordinary shares were held by brokers or other nominees. As of March 31, 2023,2024, assuming that all of our ordinary shares represented by ADSs are held by residents of the United States, we estimate that approximately 30% of our outstanding ordinary shares were held in the United States by approximately 78 holders of record.

The information (including graphs and tabular data) set forth under the headings “Directors’ Report for the year ended December 31, 2022—2023—Substantial Shareholders” on page 7893 and “Annual Report on Remuneration” on pages 95113 to 102,122, in each case of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F is incorporated by reference.

To our knowledge, other than as disclosed in the table above, our other filings with the SEC, public disclosure, including without limitation Schedule 13 filings, and this annual report, there has been no significant change in the percentage ownership held by any major shareholder since January 1, 2020.2021.

The information (including graphs and tabular data) set forth under the following headings is incorporated by reference herein: headings “Directors’ Report for the year ended December 31, 2022—2023—Related party transactions” on page 79,95, “Highlights of the Year – 2022”2023” on page 1, "PureTech's Hub-and-Spoke Model" on page 10"and "Components of Our Value" on pages 6 to 7—"Founded Entities" on pages 1213 to 14,21, in each case of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F and “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 24—26. Related Parties Transactions” of our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report. For information regarding transactions with our Founded Entities, see Item 10.C - "Material Contracts."

Not applicable.

Please see the information below under the heading Item 18—“Financial Statements.”

We have never declared or paid any dividends on our ordinary shares, though we may consider doing so in the future depending on the progression of our business. Under English law, we may only pay dividends if our accumulated realized profits, which have not been previously distributed or capitalized, exceed our accumulated realized losses, so far as such losses have not been previously written off in a reduction or reorganization of capital. Therefore, we must have sufficient distributable profits before issuing a dividend. Distributable profits are determined at the holding company level and not on a consolidated basis. Subject to such restrictions and to any restrictions set out in the Articles of Association, declaration and payment of cash dividends in the future, if any, will be at the discretion of our Board of Directors (the "Board") (and in the case of final dividends, must be approved by our shareholders), and will depend upon such factors as results of operations, capital requirements, contractual restrictions, our overall financial condition or applicable laws and any other factors deemed relevant by the Board.

Except as otherwise disclosed in this annual report on Form 20-F and in the “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 28. Subsequent Events”, no significant change has occurred since the date of the most recent financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report on Form 20-F.

Our American Depositary Shares ("ADSs") have been listed on The Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “PRTC” since November 16, 2020. Prior to that date, there was no public trading market for our ADSs. Our ordinary shares have been trading on the main market of the London Stock Exchange since June 2015 under the ticker code “PRTC.” Prior to that date, there was no public trading market for our ordinary shares.

Not applicable.

Our ADSs have been listed on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “PRTC” since November 16, 2020 and our ordinary shares have been listed on the main market of the London Stock Exchange since June 2015.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Section 31 of the Companies Act 2006 provides that the objects of a company are unrestricted unless any restrictions are set out in the articles. There are no such restrictions in our Articles of Association ("Articles") and our objects are therefore unrestricted.

A copy of our Articles is attached as Exhibit 1.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F. The information called for by this Item is set forth in Exhibit 2.3 to this annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2022.2023.

Except as otherwise set forth below or as otherwise disclosed in this report, we are not currently, and have not been in the last two years, party to any material contract, other than contracts entered into in the ordinary course of business.

On August 10, 2018, we entered into a Lease Agreement with RBK I Tenant, LLC for certain premises of approximately 50,858 rentable square feet of space at 6 Tide Street, Boston, MA 02210. The lease commenced on April 26, 2019 for an initial term consisting of ten years and three months and there is an option to extend for two consecutive periods of five years each.

We have executed agreements with the members of the Board substantially in the form of our Form of Deed of Indemnity.

We entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement by and between Auspex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and PureTech Health LLC, dated July 15, 2019, pursuant to which Auspex assigned and transferred all patent claims, inventory, technology, contracts and related rights relating to LYT-100 to us. As consideration, we paid an upfront payment, which we do not deem material. In addition, Auspex is eligible to receive milestone payments of approximately $84 million in the aggregate depending upon specified developmental, regulatory and commercial achievements. In addition, for ten years following the first commercial sale of any commercialized product containing LYT-100, Auspex is eligible to receive low to middle single-digit royalties on the worldwide net sales of such product.

We entered into a Royalty Agreement with Follica, Incorporated, dated July 23, 2013, pursuant to which Follica agreed to pay us a two percent royalty on net sales by Follica or its sublicensees of (i) products involving skin disruption using any mechanical, energy or chemical based approaches, applying compounds to the skin, or any other approaches to the treatment of hair follicles or other dermatological disorders commercialized by Follica, (ii) processes involving such products, or (iii) services which use or incorporate any such product or process. In the event that Follica sublicenses the rights to any of these products, processes or services, Follica will be obligated to pay us low teen royalties on any income received from the sublicensee. Either party may terminate this agreement upon an uncured material breach by the other party. To date, we have not received any royalty payments pursuant to this agreement. We do not direct or control the development and commercialization of the intellectual property licensed pursuant to this agreement.

We entered into a Royalty and Sublicense Income Agreement with Gelesis, dated December 18, 2009, pursuant to which we are required to provide certain funding, management services and services relating to intellectual property. In exchange, Gelesis is required to pay us a royalty equal to 2 percent of all net product sales and 10 percent of gross sublicense income received on certain food products as a result of developing hydrogel-based products that are covered by a licensed patent that has issued and has not been revoked or abandoned. The royalty rate is subject to customary downward adjustments in the event Gelesis is required to pay third parties to obtain a license to intellectual property rights that are necessary for Gelesis to develop or commercialize our products. There are no milestone payment obligations under this agreement. Management services provided by us include advisory services on corporate strategy, general and administrative support including office space, supplies and administrative support, payroll services and website development and support. Gelesis’ obligation to pay royalties to us will terminate on a country-by-country basis upon termination or expiration of the underlying patents. To date, we have not received any royalty payments pursuant to this agreement. We do not direct or control the development and commercialization of the intellectual property sublicensed pursuant to this agreement.

We entered into an Exclusive Patent License Agreement with Karuna, dated March 4, 2011, pursuant to which we granted Karuna an exclusive license to patent rights relating to combinations of a muscarinic activator with a muscarinic inhibitor for the treatment of central nervous system disorders. Karuna agreed to make milestone payments to us of up to an aggregate of $10 million upon the achievement of specified development and regulatory milestones. In addition, for the term of this agreement Karuna is obligated to pay us low single-digit running royalties on the worldwide net sales of any commercialized product covered by the licenses granted under this agreement. In the event that Karuna sublicenses any of the patent rights granted under this agreement, Karuna will be obligated to pay us royalties within the range of 15 percent to 25 percent on any income received from the sublicensee, excluding royalties. Karuna may terminate this agreement for any reason with proper prior notice to us, provided that it would lose its rights to the underlying patents as a result. Either party may terminate this agreement upon an uncured material breach by the other party. To date, we have not received any royalty payments pursuant

to this agreement. We do not direct or control the development and commercialization of the intellectual property licensed pursuant to this agreement.

We entered into a Research and License Agreement with New York University, or NYU, on March 6, 2017, pursuant to which NYU granted to us an exclusive worldwide license to patents relating to certain therapeutic candidates, including LYT-200. In connection with this agreement, we are required to pay an annual license fee in addition to milestone payments upon the achievement of certain clinical and commercial milestones, both of which we deem immaterial. Additionally, for the term of this agreement, we are obligated to make low single digit royalty payments on the net sales of any commercialized product covered by the license granted under the agreement. In the event that we sublicense any of the patent rights granted under the Research and License Agreement, we will be obligated to pay NYU a low teen percentage of any royalties received by such sublicensee, provided that such payments are capped at a low single digit of net sales of any commercialized product by such sublicensee.

On January 13, 2022, Gelesis, Capstar Special Acquisition Corp., a Delaware corporation (“CPSR”), and CPSR Gelesis Merger Sub, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and wholly-owned subsidiary of CPSR (“Merger Sub”), consummated a business combination ("Gelesis Merger") pursuant to the business combination agreement, dated July 19, 2021, as amended on November 8, 2021 (the “Gelesis Business Combination Agreement”). Pursuant to the terms of the Gelesis Business Combination Agreement, Merger Sub merged with and into Gelesis, with Gelesis surviving the merger as a wholly-owned subsidiary of CPSR. In connection with the consummation of the Merger on the Closing Date, CPSR changed its name to Gelesis Holdings, Inc ("GLS"). As a result of the Gelesis Merger, among other things, each common share of Gelesis that was issued and outstanding immediately prior to the effective time of the Merger, after giving effect to the conversion of all preferred shares of Gelesis into common shares of Gelesis immediately prior to the effective time, was canceled and converted into the right to receive a number of shares of GLS Common Stock equal to an exchange ratio of approximately 2.59 multiplied by the number of common shares of Gelesis held by such holder immediately prior to the effective time. In addition, (a) all vested and unvested stock options of Gelesis were assumed by GLS and (b) each warrant of Old Gelesis was cancelled in exchange for a warrant to purchase shares of GLS, in each case based on an implied equity value of $675,000,000 as of the Closing.

Concurrently with the execution of the Gelesis Business Combination Agreement, on July 19, 2021, CPSR entered into subscription agreements (the “Subscription Agreements”) with certain investors, including us, pursuant to which we purchased 1.5 million shares of GLS common stock at a price of $10.00 per share, for an aggregate purchase price of $15.0 million (the “PIPE Financing”). The PIPE Financing was consummated concurrently with the closing of the Gelesis Merger.

On December 30, 2021, CPSR entered into a Backstop Agreement (the “Backstop Agreement”) with us and SSD2, LLC (“SSD2” and together with us, the “Backstop Purchasers”), pursuant to which the Backstop Purchasers agreed to purchase an aggregate of up to 1,500,000 shares of GLS common stock immediately prior to the closing at a cash purchase price of $10.00 per share (the “Backstop Purchase Shares”), resulting in aggregate proceeds of up to $15.0 million, which amount, when added to the proceeds from the PIPE Financing, would ensure that the minimum cash condition would be satisfied. Based on the number of redemptions at closing, we purchased 496,145 shares for an aggregate price of $5.0 million. In addition, at the closing of the sale of the Backstop Purchase Shares, GLS issued an additional 1,322,500 shares of common stock to us.

On the closing on January 13, 2022, Gelesis, CPSR, certain former directors of CPSR (the “Director Holders”) and certain former stockholders of Gelesis (collectively with Sponsor and the Director Holders, the “Holders”), including us, entered into an Amended and Restated Registration and Stockholder Rights Agreement, pursuant to which, among other things, the Holders agreed not to effect any sale or distribution of any equity securities of GLS held by any of them during a lock-up period (180 days after closing of the Gelesis Merger in the case of PureTech Health LLC), and GLS agreed to register for resale, pursuant to Rule 415 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, certain shares of common stock and other equity securities of GLS that are held by the parties thereto from time to time.

Upon a Payment Default under the Promissory Note that has not been cured by GLS after five days, (x) GLS will be required to issue a warrant to us (a “Promissory Note Warrant”) to purchase, at an exercise price of $0.01 per share, subject to adjustment, an aggregate of number of shares of GLS common stock equal to: (i) (A) 0.2 multiplied by (B) the amount of outstanding principal and accrued interest under the Promissory Note as of the date of conversion, divided by (ii) the volume weighted average price of the GLS common stock, as reported by the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”), for the five trading days (the “Common Stock VWAP”) occurring immediately prior to the date of exercise and (y) we may elect, at our option, to convert the outstanding principal and accrued interest under the Promissory Note into a number of shares of GLS common stock equal to (i) the amount of outstanding principal and accrued interest under the Promissory Note as of the date of conversion, divided by (ii) the lesser of the price per share of (A) the GLS common stock, as reported by the NYSE or (B) the Common Stock VWAP as of the day prior to the date of our conversion notice. The Promissory Note Warrant will be exercisable from the date of issuance and will expire on the date that is ten years from the date of issuance.

On February 21, 2023, we entered into a Note and Warrant Purchase Agreement (the “NPA”) with GLS, Gelesis (together with GLS, the “Notes Issuers”), Gelesis 2012, Inc. and Gelesis, LLC, as guarantors of the Convertible Notes, pursuant to which, for a cash purchase price of $5.0 million, (i) the Notes Issuers issued a short term secured convertible note in the aggregate principal amount of $5.0 million (the “Convertible Notes” and such initial issuance, the “Initial Notes”) to us and (ii) GLS issued warrants to purchase 23,688,047 shares of common stock of GLS (the “Warrants”) to us. The Convertible Notes are guaranteed by the domestic subsidiaries of Gelesis and are secured by a first-priority lien on any and all assets of GLS, including without limitation, intellectual property, regulatory filings and product approvals, clearances and marks worldwide (other than the

equity interests in Gelesis S.r.l. and assets held by Gelesis S.r.l.) and a pledge of the 100% of the equity interests of Gelesis and the domestic subsidiaries of the Notes Issuers. The Convertible Notes bear interest at a rate of 12% per annum, and were originally scheduled to mature on July 31, 2023, unless earlier converted or extended as described below. The Convertible Notes are not convertible, and the Warrants are not exercisable, until GLS receives stockholder approval of the issuance of the shares of common stock underlying the Convertible Note and the Warrants (the “Stockholder Approval”) in accordance with the terms thereof. Upon

In addition, pursuant to the NPA, we have agreed, upon the request of the Notes Issuers, to purchase from the Notes Issuers an additional $5.0 million principal amount of the Convertible Notes (the “Additional Notes”), and to purchase from GLS additional Warrants, representing warrant coverage of 170% of the principal amount of the Additional Notes, if (i) GLS and we, in our sole discretion, shall have agreed upon a satisfactory over-the-counter operating plan for GLS; (ii) GLS shall have successfully completed and submitted the usability study with respect to the OTC reclassification of its Plenity product; (iii) GLS shall have received Stockholder Approval on or prior to July 31, 2023; and (iv) other commercially reasonable customary conditions are satisfied.

IfOn May 1, 2023, (i) GLS receives Stockholder Approval priorthe Notes Issuers issued to July 31, 2023,us, for a cash purchase price of $2.0 million, an Additional Note in the aggregate principal amount of $2.0 million (the “$2.0 million Additional Note”), and (ii) GLS receives proceeds fromissued to us a warrant to purchase 192,307,692 shares of Common Stock of GLS (the “Second Closing Warrant”) at an exercise price of $0.0182 expiring on May 1, 2028. The $2.0 million Additional Note is convertible into a number of shares of Common Stock of GLS equal to (i) the saleprincipal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest, divided by (ii) the initial conversion price of additional Convertible$0.0182. The terms of the $2.0 million Additional Note are generally the same as the terms of Initial Notes issued on February 21, 2023, including interest rate, maturity, covenants, events of default, and collateral.

On May 26, 2023, (i) the Notes Issuers issued to other investorsus, for a cash purchase price of $0.35 million, an Additional Note in the aggregate principal amount of $0.35 million (the “$0.35 million Additional Note"), and (ii) GLS used to us a warrant to purchase 43,133,803 shares of Common Stock of GLS(the “Third Closing Warrant”) at least $10.0an exercise price of $0.0142 expiring on May 1, 2028. The $0.35 million priorAdditional Note is convertible into a number of shares of Common Stock of GL:S equal to July 31,(i) the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest, divided by (ii) the initial conversion price of $0.0142. The terms of the Additional Note are generally the same as the terms of the Initial Note issued on February 21, 2023, and the $2.0 million Additional Note.

On June 28, 2023, we entered into Amendment No. 3 to the NPA with the Notes Issuers and certain of its subsidiaries, which extended the maturity date of the Convertible Notes issued pursuant to the NPA to March 31, 2024, unless earlier converted or redeemed.

On September 20, 2023, the Notes Issuers issued to us, for alla cash purchase price of $1.5 million, an Additional Note in the aggregate principal amount of $1.5 million (the “$1.5 million Additional Note”). The $1.5 Million Additional Note is convertible into a number of shares of Common Stock of GLS equal to (i) the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest, divided by (ii) the initial conversion price of $0.0494. The $1.5 Million Additional Note is issued on the same terms (other than conversion price) and in the same form as the $3.0 Million Additional Note issued on June 12, 2023. In addition, the parties amended the NPA to increase the aggregate principal amount of Additional Notes issuable to us pursuant to the NPA was increased to $6.85 million.

The aggregate principal amount of Convertible Notes issued under the NPA shall be March 31, 2024.was $11.85 million.

During the terms of the Initial Notes and the Additional Notes, any term of any indebtedness, debt or equity-linked debt security incurred or issued by the Notes Issuers after the issuance of the Initial Notes that is more favorable than the terms of the Initial Notes or the Additional Notes (including warrant coverage), shall, at our option, automatically be incorporated into the Initial Notes, the Additional Notes and/or the Warrants (including warrant coverage).

The NPA provides that all shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the Convertible Notes and upon exercise of the Warrants shall be entitled to registration rights which require GLS to file a shelf registration statement to register such shares for resale.

On January 26, 2022, Akili entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Akili Merger Agreement”), by and among Akili, Social Capital Suvretta Holdings Corp. I (“SCS”), and Karibu Merger Sub, Inc., a Delaware corporation and a direct wholly ownedwholly-owned subsidiary of SCS (“Merger Sub”). Pursuant to the Akili Merger Agreement, among other things: (i) prior to the closing of the transactions contemplated by the Akili Merger Agreement, SCS will domesticate as a Delaware corporation in accordance with the DGCL, and the Cayman Islands Companies Act (As Revised), (ii) at the closing, upon the terms and subject to the conditions of the Merger Agreement, in accordance with the DGCL, Merger Sub will merge with and into Akili, with Akili continuing as the surviving corporation and a wholly ownedwholly-owned subsidiary of SCS (the “Merger”), (iii) at the closing, all of the outstanding capital stock of Akili and all options and warrants to acquire capital stock of Akili will be converted into the right to receive shares of common stock, par value $0.0001 per share, of SCS (after its domestication) (“SCS Common Stock”) or comparable equity awards that are settled or are exercisable for shares of SCS Common Stock, representing an aggregate of 60 million shares of SCS Common Stock, (iv) at the closing, SCS will be renamed “Akili, Inc.” and (v) at the closing, SCS will deposit into an escrow account for the benefit of the pre-Closing Akili stockholders, optionholders and warrantholders an aggregate number of shares of SCS Common Stock equal to 7.5% of the fully diluted shares of SCS Common Stock (including shares reserved under the equity incentive plan to be adopted by the combined company in connection with the Closing), determined as of immediately following the Closing (collectively, the “Earnout Shares”), which Earnout Shares will be subject to release from escrow to the pre-Closing Akili stockholders, optionholders and warrantholders in three equal tranches upon the daily volume weighted average price of a share of SCS Common Stock reaching $15.00/share, $20.00/share and $30.00/share, respectively, over any 20 trading days within any 30 consecutive trading day period following the closing and prior to the fifth anniversary of the closing, in each case, on the terms set forth in the Akili Merger Agreement. The Closing is subject to the satisfaction or waiver of certain closing conditions contained in the Merger Agreement, including the approval of SCS’s shareholders.

On May 25, 2022, we entered into a Series B Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement (the “Sonde Series B Agreement”) with Sonde and other investors pursuant to which certain other investors purchased shares of Sonde’s Series B Preferred Stock, and the $2.8 million principal amount and accrued interest outstanding under the convertible promissory notes previously issued to us by Sonde shall be converted into 1.1 million shares of Series B Preferred Stock of Sonde.

On March 22, 2023, we entered into a Royalty Purchase Agreement (the “Royalty Pharma Agreement”) with Royalty Pharma Investments 2019 ICAV (“Royalty Pharma”), pursuant to which Royalty Pharma acquired an interest in our royalty in Karuna’s KarXT for aggregate payments to us of up to $500.0 million. Pursuant to the Royalty Pharma Agreement, Royalty Pharma will receive 100% of the royalty payments that we had a right to receive from Karuna until Royalty Pharma receives $60.0 million in such royalty payments during a calendar year, after which Royalty Pharma will receive 33% and we will receive 67% of such royalty payments for such calendar year. We received an upfront payment of $100.0 million from Royalty Pharma upon closing and are eligible to receive up to $400.0 million in additional payments upon the achievement of certain regulatory and commercial milestones related to KarXT. The Karuna Acquisition had no impact on our rights or obligations under the Royalty Pharma Agreement with Karuna, which remains in full force and effect.

On April 24, 2023, we entered into a Secured Convertible Promissory Note Purchase Agreement with Vedanta and other investors pursuant to which we purchased a secured convertible promissory note (the “Vedanta Note”) from Vedanta in the principal amount of $5.0 million. The Vedanta Note bears interest at an annual rate of 9.0% and matures on the later of (i) November 1, 2025 and (ii) the date which is 60 days after all amounts owed under or in connection with Vedanta’s loan and security agreement with K2 HealthVentures LLC (if then in effect and outstanding) have been paid in full. The Vedanta Note is mandatorily convertible in a qualified equity financing and a qualified public offering into shares of Vedanta’s preferred stock or common stock, respectively. In addition, the Vedanta Note allows for optional conversion immediately prior to a non-qualified equity financing and for a pay-out in the case of a change of control transaction.

We are party to voting and investors’ rights agreements with certain of our Founded Entities as described below:

We are party to agreements containing market stand-off provisions with certain of our Founded Entities that restrict our ability to sell shares of such Founded Entities for 180 days (or for a period of time as specified below) after their initial public offerings or initial public listing through a business combination, or an underwritten offering, as follows:

We have certain registration rights provisions in agreements with our Founded Entities as follows:

We have certain preemptive rights of first refusal with respect to transfers of shares by other holders pursuant to the following agreements:

Other than certain economic sanctions which may be in place from time to time, there are currently no UK laws, decrees or other regulations restricting the import or export of capital or affecting the remittance of dividends or other payment to holders of ordinary shares who are non-residents of the United Kingdom. Similarly, other than certain economic sanctions which may be in force from time to time, there are no limitations relating only to nonresidents of the United Kingdom under English law or the Company's articles of association on the right to be a holder of, and to vote in respect of, the ordinary shares.

The following is a general summary of certain U.K. tax considerations relating to the ownership and disposal of an ordinary share or ADS and does not address all possible tax consequences relating to an investment in an ordinary share or ADS. It is based on U.K. tax law and generally published HM Revenue & Customs, or HMRC, practice (which may not be binding on HMRC) as of the date of this annual report on Form 20-F, both of which are subject to change, possibly with retrospective effect.

Save as provided otherwise, this summary applies only to a person who is the absolute beneficial owner of an ordinary share or ADS and who is resident (and, in the case of an individual, domiciled) in the United Kingdom for tax purposes and who is not resident for tax purposes in any other jurisdiction and does not have a permanent establishment or fixed base in any other jurisdiction with which the holding of an ordinary share or ADS is connected (“U.K. Holders”). A person (a) who is not resident (or, if resident, is not domiciled) in the United Kingdom for tax purposes, including an individual and company who trades in the United Kingdom through a branch, agency or permanent establishment in the United Kingdom to which an ordinary share or ADS is attributable, or (b) who is resident or otherwise subject to tax in a jurisdiction outside the United Kingdom, is recommended to seek the advice of professional advisors in relation to their taxation obligations.

This summary is for general information only and is not intended to be, nor should it be considered to be, legal or tax advice to any particular investor. It does not address all of the tax considerations that may be relevant to specific investors in light of their particular circumstances or to investors subject to special treatment under U.K. tax law. In particular:

This summary further assumes that a holder of an ordinary share or ADS is the beneficial owner of the underlying ordinary share for U.K. direct tax purposes.

POTENTIAL INVESTORS IN THE ORDINARY SHARES OR ADSs SHOULD SATISFY THEMSELVES PRIOR TO INVESTING AS TO THE OVERALL TAX CONSEQUENCES, INCLUDING, SPECIFICALLY, THE CONSEQUENCES UNDER U.K. TAX LAW AND HMRC PRACTICE OF THE ACQUISITION, OWNERSHIP AND DISPOSAL OF THE ORDINARY SHARES OR ADSs, IN THEIR OWN PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES BY CONSULTING THEIR TAX ADVISERS.

A dividend payment in respect of an ordinary share may be made without withholding or deduction for or on account of U.K. tax.

A dividend received by individual U.K. Holders may, depending on his or her particular circumstances, be subject to U.K. income tax on the gross amount of the dividend paid.

An individual holder of an ordinary share or ADS who is not a U.K. Holder will not be chargeable to U.K. income tax on a dividend paid by the company, unless such holder carries on (whether solely or in partnership) a trade, profession or vocation

in the United Kingdom through a permanent establishment in the United Kingdom to which the ordinary share or ADS is

All dividends received by a UK Holder from the Company or from other sources will form part of the UK Holder’s total income for UK income tax purposes and will constitute the top slice of that income. The rate of U.K. income tax that is chargeable on dividends received in the tax year 2022/2023 by (i) an additional rate taxpayer is 39.35 percent, (ii) a higher rate taxpayer is 33.75 percent, and (iii) a basic rate taxpayer is 8.75 percent. A nil rate of income tax will apply to the first £2,000 of taxable dividend income received by an individual U.K. Holder in a tax year. Note that from April 6, 2023 the dividend allowance will be reduced to £1,000, and that from April 6, 2024 the dividend allowance is expected to be reduced again to £500.

A U.K. Holder within the charge to U.K. corporation tax may be entitled to exemption from U.K. corporation tax in respect of dividend payments, provided the dividends qualify for exemption (which is likely) and certain conditions are met (including anti-avoidance conditions). If the conditions for the exemption are not satisfied, or such U.K. Holder elects for an otherwise exempt dividend to be taxable, U.K. corporation tax will be chargeable on the gross amount of a dividend. If potential investors are in any doubt as to their position, they should consult their own professional advisers.

A corporate holder of an ordinary share or ADS that is not a U.K. Holder will not be subject to U.K. corporation tax on a dividend received from the company, unless it carries on a trade in the United Kingdom through a permanent establishment to which the ordinary share or ADS is attributable. In these circumstances, such holder may, depending on its individual circumstances and if the exemption from U.K. corporation tax discussed above does not apply, be chargeable to U.K. corporation tax on dividends received from the company.

A disposal or deemed disposal of an ordinary share or ADS by an individual U.K. Holder may, depending on his or her individual circumstances, give rise to a chargeable gain or to an allowable loss for the purpose of U.K. capital gains tax. The principal factors that will determine the capital gains tax position on a disposal of an ordinary share or ADS are the extent to which the holder realizes any other capital gains in the tax year in which the disposal is made, the extent to which the holder has incurred capital losses in that or any earlier tax year and the level of the annual exemption for tax-free gains in that tax year (the “annual exemption”). The annual exemption for the 2023/2024 tax year is £12,300. Note that from April 6, 2023 the annual exemption will be reduced to £6,000, and that from April 6, 2024 the annual exemption is expected to be reduced again to £3,000. If, after all allowable deductions, an individual U.K. Holder’s total taxable income for the year exceeds the basic rate income tax limit, a taxable capital gain accruing on a disposal of an ordinary share or an ADS is taxed at the rate of 20 percent. In other cases, a taxable capital gain accruing on a disposal of an ordinary share or ADS may be taxed at the rate of 10 percent save to the extent that any capital gains exceed the unused basic rate tax band. In that case, the rate currently applicable to the excess would be 20 percent.

An individual U.K. Holder who ceases to be resident in the United Kingdom (or who fails to be regarded as resident in a territory outside the United Kingdom for the purposes of double taxation relief) for a period of five tax years or less than five years and who disposes of an ordinary share or ADS during that period of temporary non-residence may be liable to U.K. capital gains tax on a chargeable gain accruing on such disposal on his or her return to the United Kingdom (or upon ceasing to be regarded as resident outside the United Kingdom for the purposes of double taxation relief) (subject to available exemptions or reliefs).

A disposal (or deemed disposal) of an ordinary share or ADS by a corporate U.K. Holder may give rise to a chargeable gain or an allowable loss for the purpose of U.K. corporation tax. Any gain or loss in respect of currency fluctuations over the period of holding an ordinary share or an ADS are also brought into account on a disposal.

An individual holder who is not a U.K. Holder should not normally be liable to U.K. capital gains tax on capital gains realized on the disposal of an ordinary share or ADS unless such holder carries on (whether solely or in partnership) a trade, profession or vocation in the United Kingdom through a permanent establishment in the United Kingdom to which the ordinary share or ADS is attributable. In these circumstances, such holder may, depending on his or her individual circumstances, be chargeable to U.K. capital gains tax on chargeable gains arising from a disposal of his or her ordinary share or ADS.

A corporate holder of an ordinary share or ADS that is not a U.K. Holder will not be liable for U.K. corporation tax on chargeable gains realized on the disposal of an ordinary share or ADS unless: (i) it carries on a trade in the United Kingdom through a permanent establishment to which the ordinary share or ADS is attributable; or (ii) the corporate holder is disposing of an interest in a company and that disposal is of an asset that derives 75 percent or more of its gross asset value from UK land and that holder has a substantial indirect interest in UK land (broadly at least 25 percent at any time during the previous two years). In these circumstances, a disposal (or deemed disposal) of an ordinary share or ADS by such holder may give rise to a chargeable gain or an allowable loss for the purposes of U.K. corporation tax.

If, for the purposes of the Double Taxation Relief (Taxes on Estates of Deceased Persons and on Gifts) Treaty United States of America Order 1979 (S1 1979/1454) between the United States and the United Kingdom, an individual holder is domiciled at the time of their death or at the time of a transfer made during their lifetime in the United States and is not a national of the United Kingdom, any ordinary share or ADS beneficially owned by that holder should not generally be subject to U.K. inheritance tax, provided that any applicable U.S. federal gift or estate tax liability is paid, except where (i) the ordinary share or ADS is part of the business property of a U.K. permanent establishment or pertain to a U.K. fixed base used for the performance of independent personal services; or (ii) the ordinary share or ADS is comprised in a settlement unless, at the time the settlement was made, the settlor was domiciled in the United States and not a national of the U.K. (in which case no charge to U.K. inheritance tax should apply).

The stamp duty and stamp duty reserve tax, or SDRT, treatment of the issue, transfer and agreement to transfer an ordinary share outside a depositary receipt system or a clearance service are discussed in the paragraphs under “General” below. The stamp duty and SDRT treatment of such transactions in relation to such systems are discussed in the paragraphs under “Depositary Receipt Systems and Clearance Services” below. The discussion below relates to the holders of our ordinary shares or ADSs wherever resident, however it should be noted that special rules may apply to certain persons such as market makers, brokers, dealers or intermediaries.

The issue of an ordinary share or ADS does not give rise to a SDRT liability, according to the HM Revenue & Customs practice and recent case law and is not subject to stamp duty.

A transfer of an ordinary share will generally be subject to stamp duty at the rate of 0.5 percent of the consideration given for the transfer (rounded up to the next £5). An exemption from stamp duty is available on an instrument transferring an ordinary share where the amount or value of the consideration is £1,000 or less, and it is certified on the instrument that the transaction effected does not form part of a larger transaction or series of transactions in respect of which the aggregate amount or value of the consideration exceeds £1,000. The purchaser normally pays the stamp duty.

An unconditional agreement to transfer an ordinary share will normally give rise to a charge to SDRT at the rate of 0.5 percent of the amount or value of the consideration payable for the transfer. SDRT is, in general, payable by the purchaser. If a duly stamped transfer completing an agreement to transfer is produced within six years of the date on which the agreement is made (or, if the agreement is conditional, the date on which the agreement becomes unconditional) any SDRT already paid is generally repayable, normally with interest, and any SDRT charge yet to be paid is cancelled.

No stamp duty will, in practice, be payable on a written instrument transferring an ADS or on an unconditional agreement to transfer an ADS provided the instrument of transfer or the unconditional agreement to transfer is executed and remains at all times outside the UK. Where these conditions are not met, the transfer of, or agreement to transfer, an ADS could, depending on the circumstances, attract a charge to U.K. stamp duty at the rate of 0.5 percent of the value of the consideration. No SDRT will be payable in respect of an agreement to transfer an ADS.

Based on current HM Revenue & Customs practice and recent case law in respect of the European Council Directives 69/335/EC and 2009/7/EC, or the Capital Duties Directives, no SDRT is generally payable when shares are issued or transferred to a clearance service or depositary receipt system as an integral part of a raising of capital. HM Revenue & Customs has confirmed that it will continue not to apply the 1.5 percent stamp duty and SDRT charge on the issue of shares (and transfers integral to the raising of capital) into overseas clearance systems and depository receipt issuers once the U.K. leaves the European Union.EU. In addition, a recent Court of Justice of the European Union judgment (Air Berlin plc v HM Revenue & Customs (2017)) held on the relevant facts that the Capital Duties Directives preclude the taxation of a transfer of legal title to shares for the sole purpose of listing those shares on a stock exchange which does not impact the beneficial ownership of the shares, but, as yet, the U.K. domestic law and HM Revenue & Customs’ published practice remain unchanged and, accordingly, we anticipate that amounts on account of SDRT will continue to be collected by the depositary receipt issuer or clearance service. Holders of ordinary shares should consult their own independent professional advisers before incurring or reimbursing the costs of such a 1.5 percent SDRT charge.

Where an ordinary share or ADS is otherwise transferred (i) to, or to a nominee or an agent for, a person whose business is or includes the provision of clearance services or (ii) to, or to a nominee or an agent for a person whose business is or includes issuing depositary receipts, stamp duty or SDRT will generally be payable at the higher rate of 1.5 percent of the amount or value of the consideration given or, in certain circumstances, the value of the shares.

There is an exception from the 1.5 percent charge on the transfer to, or to a nominee or agent for, a clearance service where the clearance service has made and maintained an election under section 97A(1) of the Finance Act 1986, which has been approved by HM Revenue & Customs. It is understood that HM Revenue & Customs regards the facilities of DTC as a clearance service for these purposes and we are not aware of any section 97A election having been made by the DTC.

Any liability for stamp duty or SDRT in respect of a transfer into a clearance service or depositary receipt system, or in respect of a transfer within such a service, which does arise will strictly be accountable by the clearance service or depositary receipt system operator or their nominee, as the case may be, but will, in practice, be borne by the participants in the clearance service or depositary receipt system.

U.K. stamp duty will generally be due at a rate of 0.5% of the consideration paid (rounded up to the next £5.00) on a repurchase by the company of its ordinary shares.

The following discussion is a summary of the material U.S. federal income tax consequences to U.S. Holders and Non-U.S. Holders, each as defined below, of the acquisition, ownership and disposition of our ordinary shares or ADSs, but does not purport to be a comprehensive discussion of all the tax considerations that may be relevant to a decision to purchase our ordinary shares or ADSs. The effects of other U.S. federal tax laws, such as estate and gift tax laws, and any applicable state, local or non-U.S. tax laws, are not discussed. This discussion is based on current provisions of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, U.S. Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, published rulings and administrative pronouncements of the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, or the IRS, and judicial decisions, in each case as available on the date of this annual report on Form 20-F. All of the foregoing are subject to change, which change could apply retroactively and could affect the tax consequences described below. We have not, and will not, seek a ruling from the IRS with regard to the U.S. federal income tax treatment of an investment in our ordinary shares or ADSs, and there can be no assurance the IRS or a court will agree with the discussion below. This discussion is limited to U.S. Holders and Non-U.S. Holders of our ordinary shares or ADSs. This discussion addresses only the U.S. federal income tax considerations for holders that our ordinary shares or ADSs as capital assets within the meaning of Section 1221 of the Code (generally, property held for investment). This discussion does not address all U.S. federal income tax matters that may be relevant to a particular holder, including the impact of the Medicare contribution tax on net investment income and the alternative minimum tax. Each prospective investor should consult a professional tax advisor with respect to the tax consequences of the acquisition, ownership or disposition of our ordinary shares or ADSs. In addition, this discussion does not address tax considerations applicable to a holder of our ordinary shares or ADSs that may be subject to special tax rules including, without limitation, the following:

If an entity treated as a partnership or other pass-through entity for U.S. federal income tax purposes holds our ordinary shares or ADSs, the tax treatment of a partner in the partnership will generally depend upon the status of the partner, the activities of the partnership and certain determinations made at the partner level. A partner in a partnership or other pass-through entity that hold our ordinary shares or ADSs should consult his, her or its tax advisor regarding the tax consequences of acquiring, holding and disposing of our ordinary shares or ADSs through a partnership or other pass-through entity, as applicable.

For the purposes of this discussion, a “U.S. Holder” is a beneficial owner of our ordinary shares or ADSs that is (or is treated as), for U.S. federal income tax purposes:

For purposes of this discussion, a "Non-U.S. Holder" is a beneficial owner of our ordinary shares or ADSs that is not a U.S. Holder.

THIS DISCUSSION IS NOT TAX ADVICE. PERSONS CONSIDERING AN INVESTMENT IN ORDINARY SHARES OR ADSs SHOULD CONSULT THEIR TAX ADVISORS AS TO THE PARTICULAR TAX CONSEQUENCES APPLICABLE TO THEM RELATING TO THE ACQUISITION, OWNERSHIP AND DISPOSITION OF OUR ORDINARY SHARES OR ADSs, INCLUDING THE APPLICABILITY OF U.S. FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL TAX LAWS, ANY NON-U.S. TAX LAWS AND ANY INCOME TAX TREATY.

For U.S. federal income tax purposes, a holder of ADSs generally will be treated as the owner of the ordinary shares represented by such ADSs. Gain or loss will generally not be recognized on account of exchanges of ordinary shares for ADSs, or of ADSs for ordinary shares. References to ordinary shares in the discussion below are deemed to include ADSs, unless context otherwise requires.

Even though we are incorporated under the laws of England and Wales, due to the circumstances of its formation and the application of Section 7874 of the Code, the Company is treated as a U.S. domestic corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes. This has implications for all shareholders; we are subject to U.S. federal income tax as if we were a U.S. corporation, and distributions made by us are generally treated as U.S.-source dividends as described below and generally subject to U.S. dividend withholding tax.

As described in the section entitled “Dividend Distribution Policy,” we have never declared or paid any dividends on our ordinary shares, though we may consider doing so in the future depending on the progression of our business. If we do make distributions of cash or property on our ordinary shares or ADSs, such distributions will be treated as U.S.-source dividends includible in the gross income of a U.S. Holder as ordinary income to the extent of the our current and accumulated earnings and profits, as determined under U.S. federal income tax principles. To the extent the amount of a distribution exceeds tour current and accumulated earnings and profits, the distribution will be treated first as a non-taxable return of capital to the extent of a U.S. Holder’s adjusted tax basis in the ordinary shares or ADSs and thereafter as gain from the sale of such ordinary shares or ADSs. Subject to applicable limitations and requirements, dividends received on the ordinary shares or ADSs generally should be eligible for the “dividends received deduction” available to corporate shareholders. A dividend paid by us to a non-corporate U.S. Holder generally will be eligible for preferential rates if certain holding period requirements are met.

The U.S. dollar value of any distribution made by us in foreign currency will be calculated by reference to the exchange rate in effect on the date of the U.S. Holder’s actual or constructive receipt of such distribution, regardless of whether the foreign currency is in fact converted into U.S. dollars. If the foreign currency is converted into U.S. dollars on such date of receipt, the U.S. Holder generally will not recognize foreign currency gain or loss on such conversion. If the foreign currency is not converted into U.S. dollars on the date of receipt, such U.S. Holder will have a basis in the foreign currency equal to its U.S. dollar value on the date of receipt. Any gain or loss on a subsequent conversion or other taxable disposition of the foreign currency generally will be U.S.-source ordinary income or loss to such U.S. Holder.

A U.S. Holder will recognize gain or loss for U.S. federal income tax purposes upon a sale or other taxable disposition of its ordinary shares or ADSs in an amount equal to the difference between the amount realized from such sale or disposition and the U.S. Holder’s adjusted tax basis in the ordinary shares or ADSs. A U.S. Holder’s adjusted tax basis in the ordinary shares or ADSs generally will be the U.S. Holder’s cost for such ordinary shares or ADSs. Any such gain or loss generally will be U.S.-source capital gain or loss and will be long-term capital gain or loss if, on the date of sale or disposition, such U.S. Holder held the ordinary shares or ADSs for more than one year. Long-term capital gains derived by non-corporate U.S. Holders are eligible for taxation at reduced rates. The deductibility of capital losses is subject to significant limitations.

Payments of distributions on or proceeds arising from the sale or other taxable disposition of ordinary shares or ADSs generally will be subject to information reporting, and they may be subject to backup withholding if a U.S. Holder (i) fails to furnish such U.S. Holder’s correct U.S. taxpayer identification number (generally on IRS Form W-9), (ii) furnishes an incorrect U.S. taxpayer identification number, (iii) is notified by the IRS that such U.S. Holder has previously failed to properly report items subject to backup withholding, or (iv) fails to certify under penalty of perjury that such U.S. Holder has furnished its correct U.S. taxpayer identification number and that the IRS has not notified such U.S. Holder that it is subject to backup withholding.

Backup withholding is not an additional tax. Any amounts withheld under the backup withholding rules may be allowed as a refund or a credit against a U.S. Holder’s U.S. federal income tax liability, provided the required information is timely furnished to the IRS.

As described in the section entitled “Dividend Distribution Policy,” we have never declared or paid any dividends on our ordinary shares, though we may consider doing so in the future depending on the progression of our business. If we do make distributions of cash or property on our ordinary shares or ADSs, such distributions will constitute dividends for U.S. federal income tax purposes to the extent paid from our current or accumulated earnings and profits, as determined under U.S. federal income tax principles. Amounts not treated as dividends for U.S. federal income tax purposes will constitute a return of capital and first be applied against and reduce a Non-U.S. Holder’s adjusted tax basis in its ordinary shares or ADSs, but not below zero. Any excess will be treated as capital gain and will be treated as described below under “—Sale or Other Taxable Disposition.”

Subject to the discussion below on effectively connected income, dividends paid to a Non-U.S. Holder will be subject to U.S. federal withholding tax at a rate of 30% of the gross amount of the dividends (or such lower rate specified by an applicable income tax treaty, provided the Non-U.S. Holder furnishes a valid IRS Form W-8BEN or W-8BEN-E (or other applicable documentation) certifying qualification for the lower treaty rate). A Non-U.S. Holder that does not timely furnish the required documentation, but that qualifies for a reduced treaty rate, may obtain a refund of any excess amounts withheld by timely filing an appropriate claim for refund with the IRS. Non-U.S. Holders should consult their tax advisors regarding their entitlement to benefits under any applicable income tax treaty.

If dividends paid to a Non-U.S. Holder are effectively connected with the Non-U.S. Holder’s conduct of a trade or business within the United States (and, if required by an applicable income tax treaty, the Non-U.S. Holder maintains a permanent

establishment in the United States to which such dividends are attributable), the Non-U.S. Holder will be exempt from the U.S. federal withholding tax described above. To claim the exemption, the Non-U.S. Holder must furnish to the applicable withholding agent a valid IRS Form W-8ECI, certifying that the dividends are effectively connected with the Non-U.S. Holder’s conduct of a trade or business within the United States.

Any such effectively connected dividends will be subject to U.S. federal income tax on a net income basis at the regular rates. A Non-U.S. Holder that is a corporation also may be subject to a branch profits tax at a rate of 30% (or such lower rate specified by an applicable income tax treaty) on such effectively connected dividends, as adjusted for certain items. Non-U.S. Holders should consult their tax advisors regarding any applicable tax treaties that may provide for different rules.

A Non-U.S. Holder will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax on any gain realized upon the sale or other taxable disposition of our ordinary shares or ADSs unless:

Gain described in the first bullet point above generally will be subject to U.S. federal income tax on a net income basis at the regular rates. A Non-U.S. Holder that is a corporation also may be subject to a branch profits tax at a rate of 30% (or such lower rate specified by an applicable income tax treaty) on such effectively connected gain, as adjusted for certain items.

A Non-U.S. Holder described in the second bullet point above will be subject to U.S. federal income tax at a rate of 30% (or such lower rate specified by an applicable income tax treaty) on gain realized upon the sale or other taxable disposition of our ordinary shares or ADSs, which may be offset by U.S. source capital losses of the Non-U.S. Holder (even though the individual is not considered a resident of the United States), provided the Non-U.S. Holder has timely filed U.S. federal income tax returns with respect to such losses.

With respect to the third bullet point above, we believe we currently are not, and do not anticipate becoming, a USRPHC. Because the determination of whether we are a USRPHC depends, however, on the fair market value of our USRPIs relative to the fair market value of our non-U.S. real property interests and our other business assets, there can be no assurance we currently are not a USRPHC or will not become one in the future. Even if we are or were to become a USRPHC, gain arising from the sale or other taxable disposition of our ordinary shares or ADSs by a Non-U.S. Holder will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax if our ordinary shares or ADSs is “regularly traded,” as defined by applicable U.S. Treasury Regulations, on an established securities market and such Non-U.S. Holder owned, actually and constructively, 5% or less of our ordinary shares or ADSs throughout the shorter of the five-year period ending on the date of the sale or other taxable disposition or the Non-U.S. Holder’s holding period.

Non-U.S. Holders should consult their tax advisors regarding potentially applicable income tax treaties that may provide for different rules.

Payments of dividends on our ordinary shares or ADSs will not be subject to backup withholding, provided the applicable withholding agent does not have actual knowledge or reason to know the holder is a United States person and the holder either certifies its non-U.S. status, such as by furnishing a valid IRS Form W-8BEN, W-8BEN-E, or W-8ECI, or otherwise establishes an exemption. However, information returns are required to be filed with the IRS in connection with any distributions on our ordinary shares or ADSs paid to the Non-U.S. Holder, regardless of whether such distributions constitute dividends or whether any tax was actually withheld. In addition, proceeds of the sale or other taxable disposition of our ordinary shares or ADSs within the United States or conducted through certain U.S.-related brokers generally will not be subject to backup withholding or information reporting if the applicable withholding agent receives the certification described above and does not have actual knowledge or reason to know that such holder is a United States person or the holder otherwise establishes an exemption. Proceeds of a disposition of our ordinary shares or ADSs conducted through a non-U.S. office of a non-U.S. broker generally will not be subject to backup withholding or information reporting.

Copies of information returns that are filed with the IRS may also be made available under the provisions of an applicable treaty or agreement to the tax authorities of the country in which the Non-U.S. Holder resides or is established.

Backup withholding is not an additional tax. Any amounts withheld under the backup withholding rules may be allowed as a refund or a credit against a Non-U.S. Holder’s U.S. federal income tax liability, provided the required information is timely furnished to the IRS.

Withholding taxes may be imposed under Sections 1471 to 1474 of the Code (such Sections commonly referred to as the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, or FATCA) on certain types of payments made to non-U.S. financial institutions and certain other non-U.S. entities. Specifically, a 30% withholding tax may be imposed on dividends on, or (subject to the proposed U.S. Treasury Regulations discussed below) gross proceeds from the sale or other disposition of, our ordinary shares or ADSs paid to a “foreign financial institution” or a “non-financial foreign entity” (each as defined in the Code), unless (1) the foreign financial institution undertakes certain diligence and reporting obligations, (2) the non-financial foreign entity either certifies it does not have any “substantial United States owners” (as defined in the Code) or furnishes identifying information regarding each substantial United States owner, or (3) the foreign financial institution or non-financial foreign entity otherwise qualifies for an exemption from these rules. If the payee is a foreign financial institution and is subject to the diligence and reporting requirements in (1) above, it must enter into an agreement with the U.S. Department of the Treasury requiring, among other things, that it undertake to identify accounts held by certain “specified United States persons” or “United States

owned foreign entities” (each as defined in the Code), annually report certain information about such accounts, and withhold 30% on certain payments to non-compliant foreign financial institutions and certain other account holders. Foreign financial institutions located in jurisdictions that have an intergovernmental agreement with the United States governing FATCA may be subject to different rules.

Under the applicable U.S. Treasury Regulations and administrative guidance, withholding under FATCA generally applies to payments of dividends on our ordinary shares or ADSs. While withholding under FATCA would have applied also to payments of gross proceeds from the sale or other disposition of stock on or after January 1, 2019, proposed U.S. Treasury Regulations eliminate FATCA withholding on payments of gross proceeds entirely. Taxpayers generally may rely on these proposed TreasuryU.S.Treasury Regulations until final U.S. Treasury Regulations are issued.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

We are subject to the informational requirements of the Exchange Act. Accordingly, we are required to make certain filings with the SEC.SEC, including annual reports on Form 20-F and reports on Form 6-K. The SEC maintains a website at http://www.sec.gov from which filings may be accessed.

We also make available on our website, free of charge, our annual reports on Form 20-F and the text of our reports on Form 6-K, including any amendments to these reports, as well as certain other SEC filings, as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. Our website address is www.puretechhealth.com. The information contained on our website is not incorporated by reference into this annual report on Form 20-F.

Not applicable.

[Not applicable.]

The information (including graphs and tabular data) set forth under the following headings is incorporated by reference herein: “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Financial Risks” on pages 63 to 64page 79 of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F and in “Financial Statements—Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 22.—24. Capital and Financial Risk Management”Management ” in the audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report on Form 20-F.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Our ADSs are registered with Citibank, N.A., as depositary . Each ADS represents ten ordinary shares (or a right to receive ten ordinary shares) deposited with Citibank, N.A. (London), as custodian for the depositary in the United Kingdom. Citibank’s depositary offices are located at 388 Greenwich Street, New York, New York, 10013. ADSs represent ownership interests in securities that are on deposit with the depositary bank. ADSs may be represented by certificates that are commonly known as “American Depositary Receipts” or “ADRs.” The depositary bank typically appoints a custodian to safekeep the securities on deposit. In this case, the custodian is Citibank, N.A.—London Branch, located at Citigroup Centre Canary Wharf, London E14 5LB D.

A deposit agreement among us, the depositary, ADS holders and beneficial owners of ADSs issued thereunder sets out ADS holder rights as well as the rights and obligations of the depositary. New York law governs the deposit agreement and the ADSs. A copy of the deposit agreement is incorporated by reference as an exhibit 2.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F.

As an ADS holder, you will be required to pay the following fees under the terms of the deposit agreement:

As an ADS holder you will also be responsible to pay certain charges such as:

ADS fees and charges for (i) the issuance of ADSs, and (ii) the cancellation of ADSs are charged to the person for whom the ADSs are issued (in the case of ADS issuances) and to the person for whom ADSs are cancelled (in the case of ADS cancellations). In the case of ADSs issued by the depositary bank into DTC, the ADS issuance and cancellation fees and charges may be deducted from distributions made through DTC, and may be charged to the DTC participant(s) receiving the ADSs being issued or the DTC participant(s) holding the ADSs being cancelled, as the case may be, on behalf of the beneficial owner(s) and will be charged by the DTC participant(s) to the account of the applicable beneficial owner(s) in accordance with the procedures and practices of the DTC participants as in effect at the time. ADS fees and charges in respect of distributions and the ADS service fee are charged to the holders as of the applicable ADS record date. In the case of distributions of cash, the amount of the applicable ADS fees and charges is deducted from the funds being distributed. In the case of (i) distributions other than cash and (ii) the ADS service fee, holders as of the ADS record date will be invoiced for the amount of the ADS fees and charges and such ADS fees and charges may be deducted from distributions made to holders of ADSs. For ADSs held through DTC, the ADS fees and charges for distributions other than cash and the ADS service fee may be deducted from distributions made through DTC, and may be charged to the DTC participants in accordance with the procedures and practices prescribed by DTC and the DTC participants in turn charge the amount of such ADS fees and charges to the beneficial owners for whom they hold ADSs. In the case of (i) registration of ADS transfers, the ADS transfer fee will be payable by the ADS Holder whose ADSs are being transferred or by the person to whom the ADSs are transferred, and (ii) conversion of ADSs of one series for ADSs of another series, the ADS conversion fee will be payable by the Holder whose ADSs are converted or by the person to whom the converted ADSs are delivered.

In the event of refusal to pay the depositary bank fees, the depositary bank may, under the terms of the deposit agreement, refuse the requested service until payment is received or may set off the amount of the depositary bank fees from any distribution to be made to the ADS holder. Certain depositary fees and charges (such as the ADS services fee) may become payable shortly after the purchase of ADSs. Note that the fees and charges you may be required to pay may vary over time and may be changed by us and by the depositary bank. You will receive prior notice of such changes. The depositary bank may reimburse us for certain expenses incurred by us in respect of the ADR program, by making available a portion of the ADS fees charged in respect of the ADR program or otherwise, upon such terms and conditions as we and the depositary bank agree from time to time.

In accordance with the requirements of section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley, the following report is provided by management in respect of the Company’sGroup’s internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)):

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

/s/ KPMGThe effectiveness of the Group's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2023 has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears under Item 18 - "Financial Statements".

Other than the remediation of a previously disclosed material weaknesses as discussed below, there wereThere have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f)) that occurred during the period covered by this annual report on Form 20-F that hashave materially affected, or isare reasonably likely to materially affect, ourthe Group's internal control over financial reporting.

Our boardBoard of directorsDirectors has determined that each of Christopher Viehbacher and Sharon Barber-Lui, independent directorsdirector (under the standards set forth in Nasdaq Stock Market Rule 5605(a)(2) and Rule 10A-3 under the Exchange Act) and membersmember of our audit committee, are eachis an audit committee financial expert.expert as defined in Item 16A of Form 20-F under the Exchange Act.

Our Board of Directors has adopted a written Code of Business Conduct and Ethics. The Code of Business Conduct and Ethics applies to our directors, officers and employees, including our principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions. A current copy of the code is posted on the investor relations section of our website, which is located at www.puretechhealth.com.The information contained on, or that can be accessed through, our website is not and shall not be deemed to be part of this annual report on Form 20-F. Our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics is intended to meet the definition of “code of ethics” under Item 16B of Form 20-F under the Exchange Act. We will disclose on our website any amendment to, or waiver from, a provision of our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that applies to our directors or executive officers to the extent required under the rules of the SEC or Nasdaq. We granted no waivers under our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics in 2023.

The following table sets forth the aggregate fees billed to us for professional services rendered by PwC in 2023 and KPMG LLP in 2022 and 2021.the subsequent interim period through May 31, 2023.

The information set forth or referenced under the heading “Report of the Audit Committee” on pages 8399 to 85101 of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F is incorporated by reference.

The Audit Committee evaluates the qualifications, independence and performance of the independent auditor as well as pre-approves and reviews the audit and non-audit services to be performed by the independent auditor. In accordance with this policy, all services performed by and fees paid to KPMG LLP and PwC were approved by the Audit Committee.

Not applicable.

A summary of the significant ways in which the Company’s corporate governance practices differ from those followed by U.S. domestic companies under the Nasdaq corporate governance rules is set forth below.

The information (including tabular data) set forth or referenced under the headings “Directors’ Report for the year ended 31 December 2022—2023—Compliance with the UK Corporate Governance Code” (first paragraph only) on page 7994 of PureTech’s “Annual Report and Accounts 2022”2023” included as exhibit 15.1 to this annual report on Form 20-F is incorporated by reference.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as well as related rules subsequently implemented by the SEC, requires foreign private issuers, including our company, to comply with various corporate governance practices. In addition, Nasdaq rules provide that foreign private issuers may follow home country practice in lieu of the Nasdaq corporate governance standards, subject to certain exceptions and except to the extent that such exemptions would be contrary to U.S. federal securities laws. The home country practices followed by our company in lieu of Nasdaq rules are described below:

Other than as discussed above, we intend to comply with the rules generally applicable to U.S. domestic companies listed on Nasdaq. We may in the future, however, decide to use other foreign private issuer exemptions with respect to some or all of the other Nasdaq rules. Following our home country governance practices may provide less protection than is accorded to investors under Nasdaq rules applicable to domestic issuers.

We intend to take all actions necessary for us to maintain compliance as a foreign private issuer under the applicable corporate governance requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the rules adopted by the SEC and Nasdaq’s listing standards.

Because we are a foreign private issuer, our directors and senior management are not subject to short-swing profit and insider trading reporting obligations under Section 16 of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or Exchange Act.. They are, however, subject to the obligations to report changes in share ownership under Section 13 of the Exchange Act and related SEC rules.

See pages F-1 through F-56F-55 of this annual report.

The Exhibits listed in the Exhibit Index at the end of this annual report are filed as Exhibits to this annual report.

The registrant hereby certifies that it meets all of the requirements for filing on Form 20-F and that it has duly caused and authorized the undersigned to sign this annual report on its behalf.

Date: April 27, 202325, 2024