UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021

OR

Commission File Number 001-40227

FINCH THERAPEUTICS GROUP, INC.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its Charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (617) 229-6499

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

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

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

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

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

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

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

The aggregate market value of common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant computed by reference to the price of the registrant’s common stock as of June 30, 2021, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was approximately $354.9 million (based on the last reported sale price on the Nasdaq Global Select Market as of such date). For this computation, the registrant has excluded the market value of all shares of common stock reported as beneficially owned by its executive officers, directors and stockholders that the registrant has concluded are affiliates of the registrant. This determination of affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes.

As of March 24, 2022, there were 47,532,573 outstanding shares of the registrant's common stock, par value of $0.001 per share.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Table of Contents

i

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. All statements other than statements of historical facts contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “contemplate,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” “seek,” “should,” “target,” “will” or “would,” or the negative of these words or other comparable terminology. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about:

These forward-looking statements are based on our management’s current expectations, estimates, forecasts and projections about our business and the industry in which we operate, and management’s beliefs and assumptions and are not guarantees of future performance or development. These forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including those described under “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this report. Moreover, we operate in a very competitive and rapidly changing environment, and new risks emerge from time to time. It is not possible for our management to predict all risks, nor can we assess the impact of all factors on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements we may make. In light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, the forward-looking events and circumstances discussed in this report may not occur and actual results could differ materially and adversely from those anticipated or implied in the forward-looking statements.

In addition, statements that “we believe” and similar statements reflect our beliefs and opinions on the relevant subject. These statements are based upon information available to us as of the date of this report, and while we believe such information forms a reasonable basis for such statements, such information may be limited or incomplete, and our statements should not be read to indicate that we have conducted an exhaustive inquiry into, or review of, all potentially available relevant information. These statements are inherently uncertain and investors are cautioned not to unduly rely upon these statements.

1

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING COMPANY REFERENCES

Unless the context otherwise requires, references in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to “FTG,” the “Company,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Finch Therapeutics Group, Inc. and its subsidiaries.

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING TRADEMARKS

All trademarks, trade names and service marks appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are the property of their respective owners.

RISK FACTORS SUMMARY

The following is a summary of the principal risks that could adversely affect our business, financial condition, operating results, cash flows or stock price. Discussion of the risks listed below, and other risks that we face, are discussed in the section titled “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

2

PART I

Item 1. Business.

Overview

We are a clinical-stage microbiome therapeutics company leveraging our Human-First Discovery platform to develop a novel class of orally administered biological drugs. The microbiome consists of trillions of microbes that live symbiotically in and on every human and are essential to our health. When key microbes are lost, the resulting dysbiosis can increase susceptibility to immune disorders, infections, neurological conditions, cancer and other serious diseases. We are developing novel therapeutics designed to deliver missing microbes and their clinically relevant biochemical functions to correct dysbiosis and the diseases that emerge from it. Our Human-First Discovery platform uses reverse translation to identify diseases of dysbiosis and to design microbiome therapeutics that address them. We believe that our differentiated platform, rich pipeline and the broad therapeutic potential of this new field of medicine position us to transform care for a wide range of unmet medical needs.

Our lead product candidate, CP101, is an orally administered complete microbiome therapeutic in development for the prevention of recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection, or CDI. In June 2020, we reported positive topline data from our Phase 2 placebo-controlled clinical trial of CP101 for the prevention of recurrent CDI, which we refer to as the PRISM3 trial, and in November 2021, we reported positive topline data from our open-label, Phase 2 clinical trial of CP101 for the prevention of recurrent CDI, which we refer to as the PRISM-EXT trial. We have designed a Phase 3 clinical trial, which we refer to as the PRISM4 trial, to serve as our second pivotal trial of CP101 for the prevention of recurrent CDI. On March 1, 2022, we announced that enrollment in PRISM4 was paused following receipt of a clinical hold letter on February 24, 2022 from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or the FDA, in connection with our investigational new drug application, or IND, for CP101, requesting additional information regarding our SARS-CoV-2 donor screening protocols, including, among other things, that we address the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the informed consent process, additional detail on how samples are shipped to the vendor performing the SARS-CoV-2 testing of the donor material and how inconclusive test results will be handled. We are also preparing to initiate a Phase 1b clinical trial of FIN-211 in autism spectrum disorder, or ASD; however, because FIN-211 includes donor-derived components, the clinical hold related to our IND for CP101 will also delay initiation of our clinical trial in ASD. We plan to manufacture additional lots of CP101 and FIN-211 to satisfy the FDA's requests related to SARS-CoV-2 screening and testing. We are currently evaluating the extent of the delay the clinical hold and related manufacturing activities will have on the timing for our clinical trials in CDI and ASD, which we expect to be at least one quarter based on manufacturing timelines; we describe the clinical hold and related matters further in the section entitled “Our Clinical Programs”.

CP101: Our Lead Product Candidate for the Prevention of Recurrent CDI

Our lead candidate, CP101, consists of a microbial community harvested from rigorously screened healthy donors that is lyophilized and formulated in orally administered capsules designed to release at the appropriate location in the gastrointestinal tract. CP101 is designed to deliver a complete microbiome, addressing the community-level dysbiosis that characterizes CDI. Patients with CDI suffer from severe diarrhea, which can progress to toxic megacolon and death, with more than 44,000 CDI-attributable deaths annually in the United States. In addition to the human cost, the economic impact of CDI is significant, with 2.4 million in-patient days and more than $5 billion in direct treatment costs each year in the United States alone. CDI often returns after cessation of antibiotic treatment because antibiotics do not address the dysbiosis that underlies this disease. We estimate there are approximately 200,000 cases of recurrent CDI annually in the United States.

In June 2020, we announced that PRISM3, the first pivotal trial of CP101, which was a randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled multi-center Phase 2 clinical trial, met its primary efficacy endpoint. Overall, 74.5% of participants who received a single administration of CP101 achieved a sustained clinical cure, defined as the absence of CDI through week 8, achieving statistical significance for the primary efficacy endpoint, with a clinically meaningful 33.8% relative risk reduction for CDI recurrence compared to placebo. In October 2021, we shared additional data from PRISM3 showing that the proportion of participants with sustained clinical cure (defined as absence of CDI recurrence) through week 24 remained significantly higher in the CP101 arm compared to the placebo arm. In PRISM3, the prevalence of adverse events was similar across CP101 and placebo arms, with no treatment-related serious adverse events in the CP101 arm.

In November 2021, we announced positive topline results from the 132-participant PRISM-EXT trial. The primary efficacy endpoint of the PRISM-EXT trial was sustained clinical cure (defined as absence of CDI recurrence) through 8 weeks post-treatment. Overall, 80.3% of participants who received a single oral administration of CP101 following standard-of-care, or SOC, antibiotics in PRISM-EXT achieved sustained clinical cure through week 8. At week 24, 78.8% of participants had

3

sustained clinical cure. In the PRISM-EXT trial, there were no treatment-related serious adverse events reported and CP101 exhibited an overall safety profile consistent with the profile observed in PRISM3. The PRISM-EXT results are consistent with and build on our previously reported PRISM3 results.

CP101 Program for the Treatment of Chronic HBV

Following a strategic review of our pipeline and business, we announced in March 2022 the decision to pause the development of CP101 for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus, or HBV. We believe this decision will allow us to maximize our working capital available for investment in our wholly-owned recurrent CDI and ASD programs. We may continue our research efforts in HBV in the future as our portfolio continues to mature.

Developing Capabilities for Targeted and Enriched Consortia Product Candidates

In addition to developing CP101, a Complete Consortia product candidate designed to address community-level dysbiosis, or disruption across many functional pathways and species, we are also developing Targeted Consortia product candidates that consist of individual bacteria grown from master cell banks to engage narrower pathway-level dysbiosis. The ability to pursue both of these product strategies enables us to tailor our product candidates to the pathophysiology of each indication. This combination of capabilities also enables us to pursue a third product strategy, Enriched Consortia, which addresses dysbiosis at both the community and pathway level. These product strategies are summarized in the schema below:

Our Human-First Discovery platform informs each of these product strategies using clinical interventional data, through a process of reverse translation. Core to this strategy is our ability to deploy our proprietary machine learning algorithms to mine clinical data generated internally and by third parties, including experience with fecal microbiota transplantation, or FMT, a procedure that has been used to restore the gut microbiome and address community-level dysbiosis. FMT is a procedure, not a product. It is not approved by the FDA, and there are no standards for testing, processing and delivery of FMT, though it typically requires a colonoscopy. Despite these limitations, FMT has been used to treat more than 60,000 patients, with hundreds of clinical studies ongoing across a range of disease areas. We believe that this data can be used to (1) identify diseases where addressing dysbiosis provides therapeutic benefit, (2) reveal the mechanisms that underlie these results and (3) uncover key microbes and functional pathways that drive these clinical outcomes. We believe this reverse translation strategy is the optimal approach to developing microbiome therapeutics, providing causal insights that cannot be gleaned from preclinical in vitro or in vivo experiments alone. We further believe that we are uniquely positioned to execute

4

on this strategy because of our proprietary FMT database and biorepository, our broad network of collaborators that supports the rapid growth of our data assets and our proprietary machine learning algorithms that enable the efficient translation of clinical data into therapeutic insights.

FIN-211: Our Product Candidate to Address Gastrointestinal and Behavioral Symptoms of ASD

We have used our Human-First Discovery platform to develop FIN-211, an Enriched Consortia product candidate that we are advancing to address the gastrointestinal and behavioral symptoms of ASD. Scientific research in human and animal models have highlighted the “gut-brain axis” linking dysbiosis to neurological and neurobehavioral conditions, as the microbiome impacts the enteric nervous system and the production of neurotransmitters. This basic research is supported by a growing body of third-party clinical research. An open-label, proof-of-concept FMT trial observed that, two years after treatment, 33% of the study participants who had previously been diagnosed with ASD were below the ASD diagnostic cutoff score for the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS), a commonly used ASD diagnostic tool. In another open-label randomized, controlled trial, children with ASD receiving FMT and behavioral therapy showed a statistically significant improvement in their behavioral symptoms compared to those receiving behavioral therapy alone. Both studies also observed marked improvements in the gastrointestinal symptoms that many autistic children suffer from. There are no FDA-approved therapies for the core symptoms of ASD and the total financial burden of care for this condition is estimated to exceed $100 billion in the United States annually. We have received feedback from the FDA that demonstrating a benefit for either gastrointestinal or behavioral symptoms of ASD could support a biologics license application. Building on our discussions with the FDA, we aim to continue to validate behavioral instruments as part of our clinical development plans. We have designed FIN-211 to address both behavioral and gastrointestinal aspects of ASD, which we plan to assess, along with safety and tolerability, in a Phase 1b clinical trial of FIN-211 in ASD. We believe FIN-211 has the potential to transform care for patients with ASD.

TAK-524 (formerly FIN-524) Ulcerative Colitis Development Program in Collaboration with Takeda

In collaboration with Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, or Takeda, we are also developing Targeted Consortia product candidates for inflammatory bowel disease. In August 2021, we announced that Takeda elected to accelerate its leadership role in the FIN-524 ulcerative colitis development program, now known as TAK-524. Accordingly, we transferred the program to Takeda for further development. The design of product candidate TAK-524 leverages computational and molecular analysis of data from 146 patients treated with FMT and 19 observational studies of an additional 2,210 patients. We believe that the development program for TAK-524, which is a Targeted Consortia product candidate composed of strains grown from master cell banks, is not affected by the clinical hold related to our IND for CP101.

FIN-525 for the Treatment of Crohn's Disease in Collaboration with Takeda

We continue to partner with Takeda on discovery efforts targeting the development of FIN-525 for the treatment of Crohn’s disease. We believe that the development program for FIN-525, which is a Targeted Consortia product candidate composed of strains grown from master cell banks, is not affected by the clinical hold related to our IND for CP101.

5

Our Pipeline

6

The Human Microbiome and its Impact on Disease

The human microbiome describes the community of more than 30 trillion microbes that reside on and inside the human body. By evolving together over millions of years, microbes and humans have developed an intricate and mutually beneficial relationship that has only recently been uncovered. Enabled by the genomic revolution, researchers have discovered that humans carry over 1,000-fold more microbial genes than host genes and that microbiome signaling is fundamentally intertwined with many aspects of human physiology ranging from immune and metabolic functions to neurological function and reproductive health. The deep inter-relationship between microbes and their human hosts is a co-evolution that has resulted in a learned dependency, leaving humans now reliant on inputs from this previously unrecognized organ system.

Disruption of the gut microbiome is associated with a large number of diseases that have dramatically increased in prevalence among populations in developed countries over the past century. We believe these epidemiological trends are linked to changes in the microbiome, which if reversed could potentially address an underlying cause of these diseases and change the epidemiology as a result. The rise of these chronic illnesses coincides with our adoption of a number of practices that disrupt the microbiome: more than 42 billion doses of antibiotics are administered annually, many killing 40-60% of microbial species in the gut; a third of babies in the United States today are born by caesarean sections, and are consequently unable to inherit this organ from their mother; and a highly sanitized and artificial environment, absent the environmental inputs expected by our microbiome, applies further pressure on this ecosystem within us. The effects of these environmental inputs coalesce around the gut microbiome resulting in dysbiosis and these changes are linked to a wide variety of chronic diseases. For example, antibiotic exposure doubles the risk of developing IBD, as well as significantly increases the risk of developing over 10 types of cancer. Early microbiome disruption is also associated with ASD, autoimmune indications such as celiac diseases, and allergies and asthma, and microbiome disruption later in life has been linked to neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease. Importantly, in multiple animal models, these diseases can be induced by microbiome disruption and corrected by restoration, providing evidence of causality. For several of these therapeutic areas, this has been further bolstered by clinical data with FMT.

The effects of gut microbiome dysbiosis reverberates throughout the body, both because immune cells are heavily concentrated in the gut, where more than 70% of the body’s immune cells are located, and because microbial metabolites enter systemic circulation, acting on organs throughout the body. For example, researchers at the California Institute of Technology showed that the transfer of the microbiome from human donors with ASD into microbiome-free mice promoted hallmark autistic behaviors. In addition, a large body of research has documented the connection between over a dozen different microbiome species and molecular pathways connecting the gut’s enteric nervous system to the brain. We believe the gut-brain axis is but one example of how the microbiome can provide therapeutic benefits to diseases beyond the gut.

Restoring the microbiome, or its inputs, is an opportunity to directly address the underlying causes of many diseases driven by dysbiosis. Many existing drugs target only the downstream symptoms of disease, for example, anti-tumor necrosis factor, or anti-TNF, biologics are prescribed to IBD patients to suppress systemic immunity, without addressing the underlying drivers of gut inflammation and immune dysregulation. This can lead to unintended side effects as well as an incomplete resolution of disease. Treating the root cause of disease is more likely to deliver a therapeutic breakthrough and for many diseases of dysbiosis, we believe that only through the restoration of the critical physiological role of the microbiome organ can this be achieved. Currently there are no microbiome therapeutics approved by the FDA. We believe that our ability to target both community- and pathway-level dysbiosis through our Human-First Discovery platform uniquely positions us to deliver on this transformational opportunity to improve human health through microbiome therapeutics.

7

Our Approach

We develop microbiome therapeutics following a three-stage process that combines aspects of traditional drug development with the unique opportunities enabled by our platform. In the first stage, Human-First Discovery, we use human data to identify promising clinical indications, microbial mechanisms and a consortia that engages these mechanisms. The second stage consists of IND-enabling activities, including bioprocess and formulation development, quality control and current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, production. The third stage is clinical development, in which we leverage customized pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic assays to understand optimal dosing and delivery. Importantly, data from clinical development can feed directly back into Human-First Discovery, enabling iterative development of differentiated follow-on product candidates.

8

9

Our Clinical Programs

CP101 for the Treatment of Recurrent CDI

Overview

Our lead product candidate, CP101, is an orally administered, complete microbiome therapeutic capsule designed to deliver an intact, functional microbiome to durably repair community-level dysbiosis. CP101 contains microbial communities harvested from rigorously screened, healthy human stool samples that have been purified, tested, stabilized, characterized and formulated in acid-resistant capsules to facilitate intestinal release after passage through the stomach.

Pathogen exclusion in CP101 is based on proprietary testing and characterization technology developed through discussions with the FDA; unlike other orally administered microbiome therapeutic candidates in development, it does not rely on non-specific biocides such as ethanol, which inactivate both beneficial and potentially pathogenic bacteria. Instead, our technology enables us to identify suitable microbial communities prior to manufacture, without requiring destructive interference in the healthy community needed to repair community-level dysbiosis. This enables CP101 to deliver a complete consortium of microbial communities rather than narrow and variable subsets of the microbiome. Our product qualification strategy is supported by the proprietary chemistry and processing techniques that optimize community viability during lyophilization, processing and administration. This fully integrated manufacturing process is designed to consistently deliver a complete microbiome.

Our production process for CP101 is designed to be scalable. We typically collect many samples from each donor and we are able to produce many treatments from each sample collected. As a result, a small pool of donors can support a large production base. For example, we believe a pool of 200 active donors could support production of approximately 100,000 treatments of CP101 annually. Furthermore, our process is designed to yield a favorable stability profile, with at least 24 months of stability at 2°–8°C and up to six months of stability at 25°C to allow for temperature excursions during delivery and administration. We believe this favorable stability profile will simplify supply chain logistics and enable more convenient care. CP101 has received Fast Track designation and Breakthrough Therapy designation from the FDA for the prevention of recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection, or recurrent CDI. Breakthrough Therapy designation provides expedited review and access to collaborate with the FDA on rapid development of CP101.

Clinical Hold

Following receipt of a clinical hold letter from the FDA related to our IND for CP101 on February 24, 2022, or the February 2022 Clinical Hold Letter, we paused enrollment in PRISM4, our Phase 3 clinical trial of CP101 in recurrent CDI. In the February 2022 Clinical Hold Letter, the FDA requested additional information about our SARS-CoV-2 donor screening protocols, including, for example, additional detail on how samples are shipped to the vendor performing the SARS-CoV-2 testing of the donor material and how inconclusive test results will be handled, as well as updating the informed consent process to address the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, including, for example, the limitations of laboratory screening.

In March 2020, at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA issued a public safety alert regarding the potential risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 virus through the use of donor-derived investigational microbiome therapies and the need for additional safety precautions. At that time, the FDA placed our IND for CP101 on partial clinical hold, requiring us to implement new SARS-CoV-2 screening measures for any microbiota material donated on or after December 1, 2019 and to address the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the informed consent process. At that time, the FDA also placed the IND of OpenBiome, a manufacturer that we had contracted with to produce clinical raw material, on a partial clinical hold for the same reasons. Notwithstanding the partial clinical hold notices, we were able to continue dosing patients in our then-ongoing PRISM-EXT trial of CP101 in recurrent CDI as all of the CP101 lots used for PRISM-EXT were manufactured from material donated prior to December 1, 2019.

In January 2021, OpenBiome was released from partial clinical hold after implementing, among other things, a direct testing method for SARS-CoV-2. In March 2021, we acquired certain manufacturing assets from OpenBiome, and in November

10

2021, we began dosing participants in PRISM4 with CP101 lots that had been screened for SARS-CoV-2 using the same testing method and vendor used by OpenBiome.

Following communications with the FDA in January 2022, on February 24, 2022, the FDA sent the February 2022 Clinical Hold Letter to us stating that the FDA required additional information about our SARS-CoV-2 screening protocols and related informed consent language, and that a clinical hold remains in effect until the FDA's requests have been satisfactorily addressed. The February 2022 Clinical Hold Letter did not reference any adverse clinical outcome experienced in any of our clinical trials. We have informed the FDA that participants were dosed in PRISM4 while the clinical hold was in effect and we are conducting a quality investigation of the matter. We are communicating with the FDA regarding the quality investigation, and we have committed to addressing any relevant findings prior to proceeding with enrollment in PRISM4. We have submitted a Complete Response to the February 2022 Clinical Hold Letter and we are communicating with the FDA to resolve the clinical hold as soon as possible.

On March 17, 2022, we received an additional letter from the FDA, or the March 2022 Letter, requesting changes to the testing algorithm used to diagnose suspected CDI recurrences in PRISM4, as well as additional information about the proposed statistical analysis plan for PRISM4 and the validation package for one of our release tests. We are unable to proceed with enrollment in PRISM4 until the FDA removes the clinical hold, we address findings from our related quality investigation, we complete related manufacturing activities to satisfy the FDA's requests related to SARS-CoV-2 screening and testing (which includes manufacturing additional lots of CP101), and we satisfactorily address the matters raised in the March 2022 Letter. We are currently evaluating the extent of the delay these activities will have on the anticipated timing for resuming enrollment in PRISM4 and, based on manufacturing timelines, we expect at least a one-quarter delay.

Indication Overview

Clostridioides difficile, or C. difficile, is a toxin-producing, spore-forming bacterium that causes severe and persistent diarrhea in infected individuals. C. difficile expresses toxins that lead to inflammation of the colon, severe diarrhea and abdominal pain, as well as potentially more serious clinical outcomes including toxic megacolon, perforation of the colon, and death. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention considers CDI to be one of the top five most urgent antibiotic resistant threats and the most common healthcare-associated infection in the United States. We estimate that there are over 450,000 cases of primary CDI and approximately 200,000 cases of recurrent CDI annually in the United States, collectively resulting in more than 44,000 CDI-attributable death per year. In addition to this human toll, the economic impact is substantial, with 2.4 million inpatient days and greater than $5 billion in direct treatment costs each year in the United States. Between 2001 and 2012, there was an increase in the annual CDI incidence of 43%; however, cases of multiply recurrent CDI increased 188% over that same period.

Rationale for Microbiome Therapeutics in Recurrent CDI

Dysbiosis: Observational clinical data suggests that patients with recurrent CDI have significant community-level dysbiosis compared to healthy controls, with reduced microbiome diversity, in part, due to the many courses of antibiotics that are typically used to treat these patients. Initial episodes of CDI are predominantly linked to treatment with antibiotics, creating a direct link between dysbiosis and disease onset.

Mechanism of Action: The microbiome plays an important role in the pathophysiology of recurrent CDI, and third-party preclinical models and human studies support our understanding of this mechanism. Among healthy individuals, an intact microbiome outcompetes C. difficile for its main energy source, primary bile acids produced by the host. This competitive exclusion enabled by an intact microbiome is described as colonization resistance. However, when there is community-level dysbiosis and competitors are eliminated, C. difficile, typically a poor competitor for bile acid metabolism, is able to overcome colonization resistance, resulting in infection. In addition to competing for resources, a healthy microbiome generates microbiome-derived secondary bile acids that inhibit residual C. difficile spores from germinating into their vegetative, toxin-producing form. Organisms that are able to convert primary bile acids into C. difficile-inhibiting secondary bile acids remove a food resource (primary bile acids) and create a potent inhibitor of toxin production (secondary bile acids). Antibiotics are able to suppress vegetative, toxin-producing C. difficile, but residual C. difficile spores are not susceptible to antibiotics and are able to persist. Accordingly, when an antibiotic course is complete, the residual C. difficile spores can germinate into vegetative, toxin-producing C. difficile, driving CDI recurrence, a key element of morbidity, mortality and cost in CDI care. Until the underlying microbiome dysbiosis is addressed, patients remain susceptible to CDI recurrence.

11

Third-Party Clinical Data: Numerous cohort studies, observations from clinical practice and small randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that FMT is able to prevent recurrent CDI. CP101 builds on these human data that suggest repairing community-level dysbiosis may restore colonization resistance and break the cycle of CDI recurrence.

Existing Therapeutics and Their Limitations

Antibiotics

Although antibiotics are considered standard of care to treat CDI, they also impair the diversity of the resident microbiome, affording a potential microbial niche for resident C. difficile spores to germinate into toxin-producing cells. Recurrence rates following antibiotic therapy are high as these agents exacerbate community-level dysbiosis. A commonly used CDI antibiotic, vancomycin, is non-specific and causes significant disruption to the microbiome. New generation medications, such as fidaxomicin, were designed as an alternative, narrow-spectrum antibiotic, with reduced activity against other microbes compared to vancomycin. Increasingly sophisticated and precision-targeted antibiotics can mitigate further harm to the microbiome but they do not address what we believe to be the root cause of recurrent CDI—the dysbiosis caused by antimicrobials.

Antibodies

Bezlotoxumab is an approved intravenous monoclonal antibody product that targets the toxins produced by C. difficile. However, like antibiotic therapy, it fails to repair dysbiosis, the underlying cause of recurrent CDI.

Probiotics

Probiotics are dietary supplements or foods that contain microbes and are typically derived from fermented foods such as yogurt. However, probiotics are not designed to durably colonize the human intestine and no clinical trials have demonstrated durable repair of dysbiosis with probiotics to date. Recent ACG guidelines have recommended against the use of probiotics for the prevention of CDI.

Fecal Microbiota Transplantation

FMT is the process of transplanting stool and accompanying microbes from healthy donors into patients suffering from diseases of dysbiosis. FMT has generated remarkable outcomes in CDI, supporting the rationale for targeting dysbiosis. However, FMT is a procedure, not a product, and often requires a colonoscopy for administration. There are no defined regulatory standards for screening, processing and delivery of FMT, and this treatment has not been approved by the FDA. There is no FDA-approved agent that addresses the community-level dysbiosis that underlies recurrent CDI.

Our Product Candidate: CP101

We have designed CP101 to break the cycle of CDI recurrence by restoring a complete microbiome. We believe that CP101 has the following advantages when compared to existing therapeutic approaches and other microbiome therapeutic candidates in development for the treatment of recurrent CDI:

12

Market Opportunity

Recurrent CDI represents a robust market opportunity and we estimate there are approximately 200,000 cases each year in the United States. As shown in the figure below, the first recurrence of CDI represents more than half of these cases. Unlike pivotal trials for other microbiome programs, the PRISM3 trial design included first recurrence CDI for patients 65 years of age or older, demonstrating benefit in a broad patient population.

We expect that prescriptions of CP101 will be predominantly fulfilled in the outpatient setting, through the specialty pharmacy channel. While initial presentation of recurrent CDI may occur either in the hospital setting or in the outpatient setting, the majority of hospitalized patients are discharged while being treated with standard-of-care antibiotics, prior to when CP101 would be administered. We believe that this outpatient setting, which provides favorable pricing and reimbursement dynamics relative to the hospital setting, will allow us to better realize value in the recurrent CDI market opportunity.

Clinical Trials of CP101 for the Treatment of Recurrent CDI

Overview

The development of CP101 for the prevention of recurrent CDI is supported by positive topline results from a Phase 1 open-label clinical trial (n=49), a Phase 2 placebo-controlled clinical trial referred to as the PRISM3 trial (n=198), and a Phase 2 open-label clinical trial referred to as the PRISM-EXT trial (n=132), as further summarized elsewhere in this Annual Report. CP101 is currently in late-stage clinical development and being evaluated in a Phase 3 clinical trial, referred to as the

13

PRISM4 trial, anticipated to enroll approximately 300 participants. We plan to have further discussions with the FDA regarding the size and make-up of the safety database for CP101, which could result in the need for additional studies. PRISM4 is currently on clinical hold, pending product availability and resolution of matters related to the February 2022 Clinical Hold Letter and the March 2022 Letter.


PRISM4 Trial
 

We have designed a Phase 3 clinical trial, which we refer to as the PRISM4 trial, to serve as our second pivotal trial of CP101 for the prevention of recurrent CDI. The PRISM4 trial is a multi-center trial expected to enroll approximately 300 adult participants with recurrent CDI. PRISM4 has two parts: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled part (Part A) and an optional, open-label treatment part (Part B). In Part A, eligible participants will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive either a one-time oral administration of CP101 or placebo after completing standard-of-care, or SOC, CDI antibiotics for their most recent CDI recurrence. The primary efficacy endpoint of the trial will be CDI recurrence through 8 weeks post-treatment. The primary safety endpoint is the incidence of treatment emergent adverse events through week 8. Secondary endpoints include safety and CDI recurrence through 24 weeks post-treatment. The design of Part A is shown below.

PRISM4 Part A Trial Design

Like our previously completed PRISM3 Phase 2 clinical trial, the PRISM4 trial will enroll participants with recurrent CDI, including participants experiencing their first CDI recurrence that are 65 years of age or older. At study entry, all guideline recommended test methods for C. difficile, including PCR- or toxin EIA-based test methods, will be accepted for the diagnosis of the qualifying episode of CDI.

Participants in Part A of the PRISM4 trial that experience a CDI recurrence within 8 weeks of randomization will have the option to enroll in the open-label, Part B component of the trial, in which they will receive CP101 following completion of SOC antibiotics.

On March 1, 2022, we announced that enrollment in PRISM4 was paused following receipt of the February 2022 Clinical Hold Letter. We have submitted a Complete Response to the February 2022 Clinical Hold Letter and we are communicating with the FDA to resolve the clinical hold and related matters, as described above in the section entitled "Clinical Hold".

PRISM3 Trial

We evaluated CP101 for the treatment of recurrent CDI in our pivotal PRISM3 trial, which represents the first positive pivotal trial with an orally administered complete microbiome product candidate. PRISM3 was a Phase 2, 1:1 randomized, placebo-controlled, multi-national trial designed to demonstrate the superiority of CP101 following standard-of-care CDI antibiotics compared to antibiotics alone in preventing recurrence among patients with recurrent CDI. A total of 206 participants were enrolled across 51 sites, of which 198 were evaluable. Patients were recruited from across all stages of recurrent CDI, including patients experiencing their first recurrence that were 65 years of age or older. Qualifying episodes of recurrent CDI were diagnosed using all standard-of-care laboratory tests, including PCR- or toxin EIA-based test methods. All participants were treated with standard-of-care CDI antibiotic therapy prior to randomization. Following antibiotic treatment, participants were randomized to receive either a one-time oral administration of CP101 or a placebo, without the need for bowel preparation. The trial design is shown below.

14

PRISM3 Trial Design

Baseline characteristics were balanced between the two study arms, with no meaningful clinical differences. Participants with a first CDI recurrence at study entry represented approximately 30% of the study population.

Treatment Groups Had No Meaningful Clinical Differences at Baseline

PRISM3 achieved its primary efficacy endpoint, which was sustained clinical cure defined as the absence of CDI recurrence through eight weeks following administration of study drug. Sustained clinical cure was determined by a blinded adjudication board of independent experts evaluating the totality of clinical and laboratory data including central laboratory data with PCR, toxin EIA and toxigenic culture testing. Following standard-of-care CDI antibiotics, 74.5% of participants treated with CP101 achieved sustained clinical cure, a statistically significant improvement over those receiving placebo (61.5%; p=0.0488), meeting the primary efficacy endpoint and representing a clinically meaningful 33.8% relative risk reduction for CDI recurrence, as shown below on the left. On long-term assessment, CP101 demonstrated clinically meaningful durability and the proportion of participants with sustained clinical cure, defined as the absence of CDI recurrence, through Week 24 remained significantly higher in the CP101 arm compared to placebo (73.5% [75/102] vs 59.4% [57/96], p=0.0347). Time-to-event analysis through Week 24 showed a statistically significant and durable benefit, favoring CP101 compared to placebo (p=0.018), as shown below on the right.

15

PRISM3 Extension Trial

PRISM-EXT was an open-label Phase 2 clinical trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of CP101 for the prevention of recurrent CDI. Initially, the study only enrolled participants who had previously enrolled in the randomized, placebo-controlled PRISM3 trial and experienced a CDI recurrence. After PRISM3 enrollment was complete, a protocol amendment expanded the inclusion criteria to allow participants with recurrent CDI to enroll directly in PRISM-EXT without having previously enrolled in PRISM3. The trial design is shown below.

PRISM3 Extension Trial Design

In November 2021, we reported positive topline results from the PRISM-EXT trial. A total of 132 participants were analyzed, including one cohort that directly enrolled in the trial following a recent CDI recurrence without having previously participated in PRISM3 (n=82) and one cohort that enrolled after experiencing a CDI recurrence following administration of placebo or a single dose of CP101 in PRISM3 (n=50). The primary efficacy endpoint was sustained clinical cure (defined as absence of CDI recurrence) through 8 weeks post-treatment. Overall, 80.3% of participants who received a single oral administration of CP101 following standard-of-care antibiotics in PRISM-EXT achieved sustained clinical cure (defined as absence of CDI recurrence) through week 8 and 78.8% had sustained clinical cure through week 24, as shown below. The PRISM-EXT results are consistent with and build on the previously reported PRISM3 results.

16

CP101 Demonstrated Robust Sustained Clinical Cure in PRISM-EXT

Among the 102 participants who were treated with CP101 in PRISM3, 20 were enrolled in PRISM-EXT and treated with a second dose of CP101. Of the participants who received either a single dose of CP101 in PRISM3 (n=82) or a second dose by enrolling in PRISM-EXT (n=20), a post-hoc analysis shows that a total of 90 participants achieved sustained clinical cure through 8 weeks after their final dose, resulting in a cumulative efficacy of 88.2% (n=102).

Phase 1 Clinical Trials

The first clinical trial to evaluate CP101 for the treatment of recurrent CDI was a 49 patient, single-center, open-label Phase 1 clinical trial conducted at the University of Minnesota. The trial enrolled patients who had experienced two or more recurrences of CDI. The primary endpoint was the safety and tolerability of CP101. Clinical success was defined as absence of CDI recurrence within two months post-treatment. No related SAEs occurred and 43 of the 49 patients treated achieved clinical success, resulting in an efficacy rate of 87.8% after treatment with CP101. Because the study was designed with a single arm and did not have concurrent control participants, the statistical significance of the observed efficacy rate was not assessed in this study. Approximately a third of patients reported mild, transient gastrointestinal symptoms following the treatment. Multiple doses were evaluated in this first cohort, including a high dose range (1.25-2.5x1012) and a low dose range (2.1-2.5x1011), with no meaningful dose response at the dosing levels tested. An intermediate dose of 6x1011 was selected for further process development and tested in an additional 10-patient cohort at the University of Minnesota. In this second cohort, seven of ten patients achieved clinical success through eight weeks following CP101. These promising clinical results from Phase 1 were used to secure Fast Track designation and Breakthrough Therapy designation from the FDA.

Safety and Tolerability

CP101 has been well-tolerated throughout all stages of development to date, and there have been no treatment-related SAEs reported. In the PRISM3 safety population, treatment-emergent AEs and treatment-related AEs were similar between treatment groups, with 16.3% (17/104) of participants in the CP101 arm versus 19.2% (19/99) of participants in the placebo arm experiencing treatment-related adverse events, or AEs, through 24 weeks. In the CP101 arm, treatment-related AEs were mild (Grade 1: 16/17) and moderate (Grade 2: 1/17), and primarily gastrointestinal in nature.

The most common treatment-emergent AEs reported in the CP101 arm through week 8 were predominantly gastrointestinal symptoms, as shown in the table below. Among the five most common adverse events in the CP101 arm, four adverse events were observed more frequently in participants treated with placebo relative to participants treated with CP101. For instance, we observed significantly fewer participants with abdominal pain among those treated with CP101 (30.8%) relative to those treated with placebo (59.6%; p<0.0001).

17

Most Frequent Adverse Events in the PRISM3 CP101 Arm Through Week 8

Additionally, in the 132-participant PRISM-EXT trial, there were no treatment-related SAEs reported and CP101 exhibited an overall safety profile consistent with the profile observed in PRISM3.

Pharmacokinetics

We used data from these clinical trials to confirm potential mechanisms underlying the clinical outcomes observed with CP101 for recurrent CDI. We used high-throughput sequencing to characterize the engraftment of CP101 Taxa, or groups of genetically similar bacteria, among participants treated in the PRISM3 study. As expected, participants treated with CP101 had dramatically higher engraftment of CP101 Taxa than patients treated with placebo, as shown in the graphic below, highlighting our ability to effectively deliver a viable consortia to the appropriate location in the gastrointestinal tract with our targeted oral capsule.

We also observed a strong relationship between engraftment of the microbes delivered in CP101 and clinical outcomes in PRISM3. Among patients with successful engraftment at week 1 following CP101 administration, 96.0% achieved a sustained clinical cure, while 54.2% of those without successful engraftment at week 1 achieved a sustained clinical cure (p < 0.001).

18

We believe one factor that may have reduced engraftment among some PRISM3 participants who received CP101 is the persistence of residual vancomycin, a broad spectrum antibiotic with activity against a number of CP101 microbes, prior to treatment with CP101. As part of the study protocol, all patients enrolled in PRISM3 completed a course of standard of care antibiotics, which could have included either vancomycin or fidaxomicin, prior to randomization and administration of study drug.

To limit the impact of residual standard of care antibiotics on CP101, participants in PRISM3 completed a minimum two-day antibiotic washout period prior to administration of study drug to provide time for antibiotic clearance from the colon. Recent scientific literature shows, however, that the stool concentration of vancomycin two days after cessation of administration remains at approximately 65% of peak concentrations and declines to approximately 15% of peak concentrations after a three-day washout. These data suggest that a two-day washout period may have been insufficient to clear residual vancomycin.

To address this limitation, we have extended the minimum antibiotic washout period prior to administration of CP101 in our PRISM4 trial from two days to four days.

Pharmacodynamics

We believe bile acid metabolism plays a key role in the pathogenesis of recurrent CDI. A healthy microbiome generates microbiome-derived secondary bile acids that inhibit residual C. difficile spores from germinating into their vegetative toxin-producing form. Patients with recurrent CDI have depleted secondary bile acids and a higher concentration of primary bile acids, a key energy source for C. difficile. There are eight microbial genes that are critical for the conversion of primary bile acids into secondary bile acids. We used high-throughput metagenomic sequencing to measure the presence of these genes before and after treatment with CP101. At baseline, we found participants with recurrent CDI had between zero and four of these genes, missing key components of the pathway. Among participants evaluated for pharmacodynamics in Phase 1 (n=5), we found that all participants had all eight genes at all timepoints measured after treatment with CP101, highlighting the ability of CP101 to restore an important pathway in the pathogenesis of recurrent CDI.

These data show that in keeping with similar host-targeted gene therapies, we are able to deliver a lasting transformation in the genetic capacity of the treated patient in a manner that improves clinical outcomes. With our treatment, however, we do not need to modify the host genome, instead we can deliver these genetic capabilities through microbes that are able to engraft and reproduce in the host. Importantly, because more than 99% of all genes found in humans are found in the microbiome, this opens a much broader suite of targets than those which are accessible through host-targeted gene therapies.

19

CP101 is Designed to Break the Cycle of CDI Recurrence by Restoring Bile Acid Metabolism

CP101 Restores Bile Acid Metabolism – A Key Biomarker for Treatment in Recurrent CDI

Chronic HBV

Following a strategic review of our pipeline and business, we announced in March 2022 the decision to pause the development of CP101 for the treatment of chronic HBV. We believe this decision will allow us to maximize our working capital available for investment in our wholly-owned recurrent CDI and ASD programs. We continue to believe that CP101, or other product candidates that we may develop in the future, may have the potential to treat chronic HBV, a chronic infection linked to microbiome dysbiosis. We may continue our research efforts in HBV in the future as our portfolio continues to mature.

FIN-211 to Address Symptoms of Autism Spectrum Disorder

Overview

FIN-211 is an orally administered, Enriched Consortia product candidate designed to deliver both a complete microbiome and targeted microbes not found in most healthy donors. We believe FIN-211 has the ability to address both the gastrointestinal and behavioral symptoms of autism spectrum disorder, or ASD.

Indication Overview

ASD is a behaviorally defined condition characterized by reduced social interaction, impaired communication skills and the presence of repetitive or restrictive behaviors. Beyond the core symptoms by which it is defined, ASD is recognized as a heterogeneous medical condition by the FDA, and patients can exhibit highly varied symptoms and behaviors such as irritability, heightened sensitivities and movement disorders. A subset of patients with ASD, comprising at least 30% of the

20

population, experience significant gastrointestinal symptoms, with the most common gastrointestinal symptom being constipation (ASD-C). There is a correlation between the severity of these gastrointestinal symptoms and the severity of behavioral symptoms. Standard treatments for constipation are often ineffective, which may be because the underlying biology of gastrointestinal symptoms is distinct in children with ASD compared to neurotypical children. We believe by addressing this underlying biology with a microbiome therapeutic, we will be able to improve ASD gastrointestinal symptom and neurobehavioral development.

The diagnosed prevalence of ASD is currently 1 in 44 for children in the United States, a prevalence that has increased substantially over the past few decades. Worldwide prevalence estimates vary but are thought to be similar in other developed countries. It is believed there are more than 4.6 million children and adults in the United States with ASD. By some estimates, the total financial burden of care for patients with ASD exceeds $100 billion in the United States annually.

Existing Therapeutics and Their Limitations

There is no FDA-approved pharmaceutical treatment for the core symptoms of ASD. The only widely accepted intervention with substantial supportive evidence is a form of long-term behavioral therapy, called Applied Behavioral Analysis, or ABA. Children with ASD usually begin ABA as soon as they are diagnosed, typically between ages 2-6 years, and are recommended to receive 30-40 hours of therapy every week. ABA may continue into adulthood and parents are often faced with making difficult choices between school or continuing ABA therapy. The only FDA-approved pharmaceutical treatment for ASD are anti-psychotics, which are only prescribed to treat the irritability that often accompanies ASD, but is not a core symptom of the disorder. While ASD-C may be treated with laxatives or enemas, these can be poorly tolerated and are often ineffective. As a result, a high unmet medical need remains across both gastrointestinal and behavioral symptoms.

Rationale for Microbiome Therapeutics in ASD

Dysbiosis: Microbiome signals, epidemiological risk factors and gut symptoms all suggest a link between ASD and the microbiome. ASD is frequently accompanied by severe gastrointestinal manifestations, revealing symptoms more proximal to the activities of the gut microbiome. Moreover, the risk of developing ASD is significantly increased among children born by caesarean section or those exposed to multiple courses of antibiotics early in life. Mouse studies have demonstrated the ability to transfer ASD-like symptoms by transferring stool from humans with ASD. Conversely, certain ASD-mouse models have shown that ASD-like symptoms can be reduced by microbiome transfer from a neurotypical donor.

Mechanism of Action: Once considered a strictly neurological condition, the modern view of ASD has evolved to encompass multiple systems, including interactions between the central nervous system, the enteric nervous system and the gut microbiome, also called the gut-brain axis. Many well-known neuro-active signaling molecules such as gamma-aminobutyric acid, or GABA, serotonin and oxytocin are either produced or modulated by the microbiome, which has led to efforts to better understand the role of the microbiome across a range of behavioral and neurological conditions, including ASD. Current research highlights several pathways in the gut-brain axis that may be key to ASD. Neuro-active metabolites that are exclusively produced by the microbiome, such as 4-ethylphenylsulfate, or 4EPS, are significantly elevated among children with ASD relative to neurotypical controls, and are capable of inducing ASD-like symptoms in mice. Oxytocin, a neuropeptide responsible for regulating social bonding and behavior, has long been a target for drug development in ASD, but exogenous agonism of oxytocin has been challenging due to a short half-life of oxytocin. Certain microbes can induce endogenous production of oxytocin, providing an alternative means to engage this important pathway. Preclinical work has demonstrated that introduction of oxytocin-inducing bacteria can restore neurotypical behavior in three independent ASD murine models. This rescue is dependent on the vagus nerve which connects the enteric nervous system in the gut with the central nervous system and was eliminated when the gene for the oxytocin receptor was knocked out. This pathway-level dysbiosis and previously described community-level dysbiosis suggest the potential role for an Enriched Consortia product strategy.

Third-Party Clinical Data: At least five investigator-sponsored clinical studies have found that the restoration of a healthy microbiome by FMT is associated with marked improvements in behavioral and gastrointestinal symptoms among children with ASD. An open-label proof-of-concept trial administering FMT for 8 weeks reported that, two years after treatment, most participants reported gastrointestinal symptoms remaining improved compared to baseline and 44% of study participants who had previously been diagnosed with ASD fell below the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) score cut-off used to classify autism. Even using a more stringent CARS score cut-off of 25, we find that 33% of participants no longer meet the diagnostic criteria for ASD, as shown in the below graph. Additionally, in a randomized, controlled trial, children with ASD receiving FMT and behavioral therapy showed a statistically significant improvement in their behavioral symptoms compared to the control group receiving behavioral therapy alone.

21

Behavioral Scores Improved Dramatically Over Two Years in an Open-Label,

Proof-of-Concept FMT Trial

Our Product Candidate: FIN-211

FIN-211 is an orally administered, Enriched Consortia product candidate designed to deliver both a complete microbiome and targeted microbes not found in most healthy donors. Based on our understanding of the biology of ASD, we have identified species capable of inducing oxytocin production and improving gastrointestinal barrier function. We believe these organisms may have important therapeutic benefits for individuals with ASD. These organisms are not ubiquitous in healthy donors, so our Complete Consortia product strategy would not generally include these microbes. Accordingly, we have decided to pursue an Enriched Consortia product strategy that includes both strains targeting oxytocin-production and a complete microbiome to address community-level dysbiosis, which we believe best positions FIN-211 to potentially address both the gastrointestinal and behavioral symptoms of ASD.

Clinical Development of FIN-211 to Address Symptoms of ASD

We are preparing to initiate a Phase 1b clinical trial, which we refer to as AUSPIRE, of FIN-211 in children with ASD (ages 5–17 years) with constipation. Although FIN-211 is not directly addressed in the February 2022 Clinical Hold Letter, it is an Enriched Consortia product candidate that includes donor-derived components. Because the February 2022 Clinical Hold Letter is concerned with SARS-CoV-2 screening measures for donor-derived microbiota material, the clinical hold will delay initiation of AUSPIRE and will require us to conduct additional manufacturing activities (including manufacturing additional components of FIN-211) in order to satisfy the FDA's requests related to SARS-CoV-2 screening and testing. We have submitted a Complete Response to the February 2022 Clinical Hold Letter and we are communicating with the FDA to resolve the clinical hold as soon as possible. We are evaluating the extent of the delay the clinical hold and the related manufacturing activities will have on the expected timing of AUSPIRE; based on manufacturing timelines, we expect at least a one-quarter delay.

Based on clinical FMT data and preclinical data with oxytocin-inducing strains, we believe FIN-211 is positioned to address both the gastrointestinal and behavioral symptoms of ASD. The FDA has indicated that either gastrointestinal or behavioral endpoints could support a biologics license application and we are evaluating both gastrointestinal and behavioral endpoints. Given the absence of FDA-approved therapies and building on our discussions with the FDA, we aim to continue to validate behavioral instruments as part of our clinical development plans. We believe FIN-211 can potentially address adults with ASD as well as both adults and children without gastrointestinal symptoms, expanding beyond our initial population of pediatrics with gastrointestinal symptoms where we expect to observe an enriched signal.

We believe this development strategy represents an attractive entry into the gut-brain axis, providing two opportunities to provide therapeutic benefit to patients with ASD, both for behavioral symptoms and lower-risk gastrointestinal endpoints. Furthermore, we believe that ASD could validate our microbiome-based approach to addressing additional gut-brain axis indications. We plan to leverage existing and emerging clinical data from our academic collaborators to inform the development strategy of future product candidates to address additional neurological disorders that are associated with the gut-brain axis.

22

TAK-524 (Ulcerative Colitis) & FIN-525 (Crohn’s Disease) for the Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Overview

TAK-524 (formerly known as FIN-524) and FIN-525 are each orally administered Targeted Consortia product candidates designed for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (TAK-524) and Crohn’s disease (FIN-525). We initially partnered with Takeda, a global leader in inflammatory bowel disease, or IBD, to develop TAK-524. TAK-524 comprises targeted strains identified by our Human-First Discovery platform, which do not require donors. Following the achievement of certain preclinical milestones in the development of TAK-524 for ulcerative colitis, we expanded our development partnership with Takeda to include FIN-525, a program to develop a live biotherapeutic product optimized for Crohn’s disease that also comprises targeted strains identified by our Human-First Discovery platform. In August 2021, Takeda accelerated its leadership role in TAK-524, taking responsibility for clinical development, while we continue to conduct discovery efforts on FIN-525. We believe that the development programs for TAK-524 and FIN-525, which are Targeted Consortia product candidates composed of strains grown from master cell banks, are not affected by the February 2022 Clinical Hold Letter.

Indication Overview

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease are the two principal sub-types of IBD. IBD comprises a set of heterogeneous autoimmune conditions that cause inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract. Symptoms of IBD include severe, chronic abdominal pain, diarrhea, gastrointestinal bleeding and weight loss. Patients have substantially higher risk of colon cancer, gastrointestinal perforations and infections, and many eventually require surgical resection of portions of their gastrointestinal tract or colectomy. Patients undergo periods of active disease (flares) accompanied by intermittent periods of little or no disease activity (remission). Over 3 million Americans and 10 million people globally are thought to suffer from IBD, and the incidence has increased rapidly over the past few decades. By some estimates, the total financial burden of care for patients with IBD exceeds $31 billion in the United States annually.

Existing Therapeutics and Their Limitations

The current treatment options vary by disease types and severity, and are designed to reduce inflammation, but do not address the underlying cause of disease. Active mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis is often treated with 5-ASA agents. However, over 70% of patients fail to enter remission. Active mild-moderate Crohn’s disease have limited therapeutic options. Corticosteroids are commonly used in active disease; however, the long-term side effect profile is poor and includes increased risk of infections, type 2 diabetes, weight gain, mood disturbances and hypertension. Biologic agents that suppress inflammatory cytokines or cell trafficking are not typically orally administered agents, and have poor rates of inducing remission. There is a single, recently approved oral biologic for moderate to severe Crohn’s disease; however, similar to other biologics, it is associated with increased risk for severe infections, blood clots and the development of malignancy. Commonly used anti-TNF biologic agents may lead to serious infections due to immunosuppression, and there have been reports of hepatosplenic T-cell lymphoma, a rare form of lymphoma that is fatal in some patients.

Overall, current treatments for IBD fail to address the underlying causes of inflammation, and there is a significant need for well-tolerated, easily administered, disease-modifying agents in IBD.

Rationale for Microbiome Therapeutics in IBD

Dysbiosis: Over the last decade, a number of lines of evidence have pointed to the promise of microbiome therapeutics in treating ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease. Inflammatory bowel disease is one of the suite of chronic inflammatory diseases that has risen dramatically in prevalence in developed nations marked by gastrointestinal dysbiosis.

Mechanism of Action: Extensive preclinical work has demonstrated the criticality of the microbiome, including specific microbial metabolites, in regulating gastrointestinal tract inflammation, predicting response to therapy and determining the risk of disease recurrence after surgery. The improvement of gut barrier integrity, reduction of local immune activation and modulation of gut inflammation are all modulated by the microbiome.

Third-Party Clinical Data: FMT studies in IBD were key in our decision to develop Targeted Consortia product candidates for ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease. Data from over 40 FMT studies, including five randomized, placebo-controlled trials in ulcerative colitis and one randomized, placebo-controlled trial in Crohn’s disease, have shown promising clinical outcomes. Some of these interventional studies also served as our main discovery datasets to select which strains and functions to include in our Targeted Consortia approach for IBD. Clinical studies with only spore-forming compositions have

23

yielded mixed results, highlighting the value of our approach, which leverages both spore-forming and non-spore forming compositions.

TAK-524 and FIN-525

TAK-524 is a Targeted Consortia product candidate of nine bacterial strains selected for the treatment of ulcerative colitis, and is orally administered in a lyophilized formulation. We designed this consortium to target three specific modes of action: two classes of immunoregulatory metabolites, each targeting a different set of host pathways, and donor strains linked to remission following FMT in patients with ulcerative colitis. Takeda now leads development of TAK-524.

FIN-525 is a discovery-stage program designing a Targeted Consortia product candidate for the treatment of Crohn’s disease. The strategy for this consortium, which is differentiated from ulcerative colitis, includes donor strains depleted in Crohn’s patients and linked to remission following FMT in these patients, as well as several classes of metabolites, each targeting a different set of host pathways.

TAK-524 and FIN-525 leverage data collected from over two dozen cohorts comprising over 2,300 patients, including six FMT studies in ulcerative colitis and five in Crohn’s disease. Our machine learning platform identified microbes and microbial functions deficient in patients with ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease compared to non-IBD controls. We tested these hypotheses with FMT data to identify the subset most likely to be causal, focusing on organisms consistently shown to be enriched among successful FMTs and subjects without IBD. To reduce the translational risk of these empirical signals, we isolated target organisms directly from specific donor samples that induced remission in clinical studies of FMT in IBD. In vitro and in vivo measurements on the isolated strains and consortia then confirmed the signals of biological activity hypothesized by our machine learning platform. We are currently conducting discovery efforts on FIN-525.

Our Collaborations and License Agreements

Takeda Collaboration

In January 2017, we entered into an agreement, or the Takeda Agreement, with Takeda, pursuant to which we granted Takeda a worldwide, exclusive license, with the right to grant sublicenses, under our rights in certain patents, patent applications and know-how to develop, have developed, manufacture, have manufactured, make, have made, use, have used, offer for sale, sell, have sold, commercialize, have commercialized and import our microbiome therapeutic candidate TAK-524 for the prevention, diagnosis, theragnosis or treatment of diseases in humans. We subsequently amended and restated the Takeda Agreement in October 2019 to provide a worldwide, exclusive license to a second microbiome therapeutic candidate, FIN-525. We further amended the Takeda Agreement in August 2021 to transition primary responsibility for further development and manufacturing activities of TAK-524 to Takeda in accordance with a transition plan, and Takeda assumed sole responsibility for regulatory matters with respect to TAK-524. In November 2021, we further amended the Takeda Agreement to enable us to carry out certain FIN-525 preliminary evaluation activities.

24

Under the terms of the Takeda Agreement, we agreed to design TAK-524 (a product candidate optimized for ulcerative colitis) for Takeda based on selection criteria within a product-specific development plan. We also agreed to conduct feasibility studies on FIN-525 (a program to develop a live biotherapeutic product optimized for Crohn’s disease) for Takeda, and Takeda can determine whether to initiate a full product-specific development plan for FIN-525 following its review of the data from our feasibility studies. The FIN-525 feasibility study was completed in March 2021. Takeda is to select one optimal microbial cocktail for each of TAK-524 and FIN-525 after completion of certain initial product development activities. Thereafter, prior to initiation of the first Phase 3 clinical trial for TAK-524 or FIN-525, as applicable, Takeda has the right to substitute the initially selected microbial cocktail for another microbial cocktail selected by Takeda from certain alternative cocktails that were designated by Takeda at the time of selecting the initial microbial cocktail.

Pursuant to the Takeda Agreement, we are primarily responsible for early-stage development activities for FIN-525 pursuant to an agreed upon development plan and budget, including potentially through Phase 2 clinical trials, subject to Takeda’s right to either co-develop a product with us at Phase 2 or assume responsibility for such development. After the successful completion of the first Phase 2 clinical trial for FIN-525, Takeda will assume primary responsibility for the Phase 3 clinical program. Initially, we are responsible for clinical supply of FIN-525; however, Takeda is required to assume responsibility for such manufacture and supply no later than six months after completion of the first Phase 2 clinical trial for the first FIN-525 product candidate. All such development and manufacturing activities will be overseen by certain joint committees. Pursuant to the August 2021 amendment to the Takeda Agreement, Takeda assumed primary responsibility for early-stage development and manufacturing activities with respect to TAK-524. Takeda also assumed sole responsibility for regulatory matters with respect to TAK-524. We remain responsible for certain development activities designated in the TAK-524 development plan, for which we will continue to receive reimbursement from Takeda.

Takeda is responsible for up to 110% of our budgeted full-time equivalent costs in connection with our development activities for TAK-524 (and FIN-525, if Takeda elects to initiate a full development plan for FIN-525) as well as all costs related to chemistry, manufacturing and control development or other development costs incurred after the initial selection of an optimal microbial cocktail. Takeda is solely responsible for all commercial activities related to the TAK-524 and FIN-525 product candidates, at its cost.

We have agreed that prior to completion of the first Phase 2 clinical trial for the first TAK-524 product candidate being developed with the intention of seeking U.S. regulatory approval, other than as part of any development activities under the Takeda Agreement, we shall not engage in any research and development directed toward any product candidate for the treatment of IBD, or access or use certain fecal microbiota source material or any data generated from that material in IBD for any purpose. Additionally, we have agreed that prior to completion of the first Phase 2 clinical trial for the first FIN-525 product candidate being developed with the intention of seeking U.S. regulatory approval, other than as part of any development activities under the Takeda Agreement, we shall not engage in any research and development directed toward any product for the treatment of Crohn’s disease, or access or use certain fecal microbiota source material or any data generated from that material in Crohn’s disease for any purpose. We have also agreed for the remainder of the term of the Takeda Agreement to certain restrictions on our access or use of certain bacterial strains having at least a threshold genetic relatedness to the strains incorporated into TAK-524 or FIN-525, our access or use of certain fecal microbiota source material, and our ability to conduct certain research and development directed toward products for the treatment of IBD and Crohn’s disease that contain bacterial strains having less than a threshold genetic divergence from the bacterial strains in TAK-524 and FIN-525, respectively.

Pursuant to the Takeda Agreement, we granted Takeda a right of first offer in the event that we seek to commence a program for the treatment of IBD, as well as an exclusive option to negotiate that the parties undertake an additional development program for a microbial composition.

In connection with entry into the Takeda Agreement, we received a one-time, upfront payment from Takeda in the amount of $10.0 million. Additionally, we received $4.0 million in the aggregate for the achievement of certain development milestones for TAK-524 therapeutic products and are entitled to receive up to $176.0 million in the aggregate, for the achievement of specified development, regulatory and commercial sale milestones for TAK-524 therapeutic products. We are entitled to receive up to $177.7 million in the aggregate, for the achievement of specified development, regulatory and commercial sale milestones for FIN-525 therapeutic products, subject, to certain specified reductions based upon the nature of the FIN-525 product and certain additional milestones to be negotiated by the parties. We are also entitled to receive up to $10.0 million for the first diagnostic product for each of TAK-524 and FIN-525, subject to certain reductions in the event that Takeda uses a third party to develop such diagnostic products. Pursuant to this agreement, Takeda is obligated to pay us a royalty on net sales of TAK-524 and FIN-525 products ranging from mid to high-single digits, subject to certain reductions. Such royalties are payable on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis, during the period beginning on the date of first commercial sale of such product in such country and ending on the later to occur of the expiration of the last-to-expire valid

25

claim of any patents or patent applications controlled by us and licensed in such country that covers the composition of matter of such product, the date that regulatory exclusivity of such product expires in such country, or eight years from the date of the first commercial sale of such product in such country.

The Takeda Agreement expires on the date of expiration of the last royalty payment obligation. Either party may terminate the Takeda Agreement in the event of an uncured material breach by the other party. Takeda has the right to terminate the Takeda Agreement, in whole or in party, on a program-by-program basis upon specified notice to us or immediately following the withdrawal of a product from any market as a result of bona fide concerns based on specific and verifiable information that such product is unsafe for administration to humans. Additionally, the parties may mutually agree to terminate the Takeda Agreement on a program-by-program basis.

Exclusive License Agreement with Arizona State University

In July 2017, we entered into a license agreement, or the Arizona State Agreement, with Skysong Innovations LLC (formerly Arizona Science and Technology Enterprises LLC), or Skysong, pursuant to which we obtained a worldwide, royalty-bearing, exclusive license, with the right to grant sublicenses, under certain patents and patent applications of Arizona State University to make, have made, use, have used, sell, have sold, offer to sell, have offered for sale, import, have imported, export or have exported products and services that are covered by such licensed patents. In July 2018, we subsequently amended the Arizona State Agreement to include certain additional patents and patent applications of Arizona State University. The patents and patent applications that we have exclusively licensed from Arizona State University under the Arizona State Agreement relate generally to compositions and methods to treat autism spectrum disorder and related symptoms and comorbidities. If issued, the patents within the licensed intellectual property would be expected to expire beginning in 2033.

Pursuant to the terms of the Arizona State Agreement, we are obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts in connection with the development and commercialization of products and services, the manufacture, use, sale, offering for sale, importation or exportation of which, but for the license granted under the Arizona State Agreement, would infringe one or more licensed patents, or licensed products. Such efforts are limited to the United States and include a specific performance milestone.

Under the terms of the Arizona State Agreement, we paid Skysong an upfront fee of $10,000 and reimbursed Skysong for prior patent prosecution expenses. Additionally, we have agreed to make a low-six digits milestone payment upon the first commercial sale of a product in each of the United States, England, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Japan, and a one-time commercial milestone payment in the low-seven digits upon the achievement of cumulative, worldwide net sales of all licensed products by us, our sublicensees or respective affiliates in the low-nine digits. We are also obligated to pay Skysong a low-single digit royalty on net sales of licensed products, including a minimum annual royalty payment in the mid-four digits to low-five digits that is creditable against the royalties due in such year. The royalty obligations continue on a country-by-country basis as to each licensed product until expiry of the last to expire claim within the licensed patents that covers such licensed product in such country. Moreover, we are obligated to pay a percentage of any non-royalty consideration received by us from a sublicensee in the high-second decile.

The Arizona State Agreement expires on the date of expiration of all royalty obligations. Upon expiration of our royalty obligations with respect to a licensed product in a country we will have a royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual license to such licensed product in such country. We may terminate the Arizona State Agreement earlier for any reason or upon an uncured material breach of the agreement by Skysong. Skysong may terminate the Arizona State Agreement earlier upon our uncured material breach of the agreement, our insolvency, our initiation of any proceeding or claim challenging the validity or enforceability of any licensed patent, or our failure to meet a specific performance milestone.

Exclusive Patent License Agreement with University of Minnesota

In March 2012, CIPAC Limited, an entity under the laws of Malta, or CIPAC, entered into a license agreement, or the UMN Agreement, with Regents of the University of Minnesota, or UMN, pursuant to which CIPAC obtained a worldwide, royalty-bearing, exclusive license, with the right to grant sublicenses, under certain patents and inventions of the University of Minnesota to make, have made, use, offer to sell or sell, offer to lease or lease, import, or otherwise offer to dispose or dispose of any product or service that is covered by such licensed patents. The UMN Agreement was subsequently amended in June 2014 and October 2014. In May 2015, CIPAC transferred its interest in the UMN Agreement to us. Subsequent to such transfer, the UMN Agreement was subsequently amended in December 2016 and September 2017. We amended and

26

restated the UMN Agreement in January 2022, to consolidate earlier amendments and extend the deadline for satisfying performance milestones by one year.

Pursuant to the terms of the UMN Agreement, we are obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to commercialize the licensed inventions and to manufacture and sell licensed products, including by meeting certain specific performance milestones.

Under the terms of the UMN Agreement, we paid UMN an aggregate upfront fee of $155,000, and are obligated to pay annual maintenance fees in the mid-four digits. We are also obligated to pay UMN a royalty on net sales of licensed products ranging in the low-single digits depending on which licensed patents cover such licensed product, subject to a minimum annual royalty payment escalating over time in the low-five digits to low-six digits payable at the end of each applicable year. Such minimum annual royalty payments begin in 2021. The royalty obligations continue on a country-by-country basis as to each licensed product until expiry of the last to expire claim within the licensed patents that covers such licensed product in such country. Moreover, we are obligated to pay a percentage of any non-royalty consideration received by us from a sublicensee in the high-second decile.

The UMN Agreement expires on the date of expiration of all claims under the licensed patents. We may terminate the UMN Agreement earlier upon an uncured material breach of the agreement by UMN. UMN may terminate the UMN Agreement earlier upon our uncured material breach of the agreement, our insolvency, or upon the commencement by us of any proceeding asserting or alleging the invalidity or unenforceability of the licensed patents.

Competition

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, including the field of microbiome therapeutics, are characterized by rapidly changing technologies, significant competition and a strong emphasis on intellectual property. While we believe that our scientific knowledge, technology and development experience provide us with competitive advantages, we face substantial competition from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies worldwide.

Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with currently approved therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future. We are aware of a number of companies focused on developing microbiome therapeutics in various indications. For CP101, we are aware that Seres Therapeutics, Inc. and Rebiotix Inc. each have a product candidate that has completed Phase 3 trials for recurrent CDI and are pursuing FDA approval to enable subsequent commercialization. In November 2021, Rebiotix filed a BLA for RBX-2660, their lead product in recurrent CDI, and Seres has indicated that they plan to file a BLA in 2022. In addition to these late-stage competitors, we are also aware of competitive microbiome therapies in earlier stages of clinical development, including VE303 (Vedanta Biosciences), NCTD-M3 (Destiny Pharma plc), MET-2 (NuBiyota), and RBX7455 (Rebiotix). Any advances in microbiome therapies made by a competitor may be used to develop therapies that could compete against any of our product candidates.

We are aware of a number of large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, as well as smaller, early-stage companies, that are pursuing the development of products and disease indications we are targeting. These companies include AbbVie Inc., Arena Pharmaceuticals Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Gilead Sciences, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline plc, Johnson & Johnson, Merck & Co., Inc., UCB S.A. and Vir Biotechnology, Inc. Potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, seek patent protection and establish collaborative arrangements for research, development, manufacturing and commercialization. Some of these competitive products and therapies are based on scientific approaches that are the same as or similar to our approach, and others may be based on entirely different approaches.

Many of our potential competitors, alone or with their strategic partners, have substantially greater financial, technical and other resources than we do, such as larger research and development, clinical, marketing and manufacturing organizations. Mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of competitors. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Competitors also may obtain FDA, EMA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. Additionally, technologies developed by our competitors may render our potential product candidates uneconomical or obsolete, and we may not be successful in marketing our product candidates against competitors.

27

The availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payors will also significantly affect the pricing and competitiveness of our products. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than us, which might result in competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market.

Many of the companies against which we may compete have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than us. Smaller or early stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

Intellectual Property

Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to obtain and maintain proprietary protection for our current and future product candidates, novel discoveries, product development technologies and know-how; to operate without infringing on the proprietary rights of others; and to prevent others from infringing our proprietary rights. Our policy is to seek to protect our proprietary position by, among other methods, filing or in-licensing U.S. and foreign patents and patent applications related to our proprietary technology that are important to the development and implementation of our business. We seek to obtain domestic and international patent protection, and endeavor to promptly file patent applications for new commercially valuable inventions. We file new patent applications as we conduct research and development, initiate new programs, and monitor the activities of others within the microbiome field. We also rely on trademarks, trade secrets, know-how, and continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our proprietary position.

The patent positions of biopharmaceutical companies like us are generally uncertain and involve complex legal, scientific and factual questions. In addition, the coverage claimed in a patent may be challenged in courts after issuance. Moreover, many jurisdictions permit third parties to challenge issued patents in administrative proceedings, which may result in further narrowing or even cancellation of patent claims. We cannot predict whether the patent applications we are currently pursuing will issue as patents in any particular jurisdiction or at all, whether the claims of any patent applications, should they issue, will cover our product candidates, or whether the claims of any issued patents will provide sufficient protection from competitors or otherwise provide any competitive advantage.

Because patent applications in the United States and certain other jurisdictions are maintained in secrecy for 18 months or potentially even longer, and because publication of discoveries in the scientific or patent literature often lags behind actual discoveries and patent application filings, we cannot be certain of the priority of inventions covered by pending patent applications. Accordingly, we may not have been the first to invent the subject matter disclosed in some of our patent applications or the first to file patent applications covering such subject matter.

Our patent portfolio leverages both offensive and defensive strategies to protect our business. We have a large and diverse patent portfolio consisting of more than 55 issued U.S. and foreign patents and more than 140 pending patent applications that we own or exclusively license from others. Our patent portfolio has broad applicability across the microbiome field, and provides protection for our lead product candidates CP101, FIN-211, TAK-524, FIN-525, as well as additional Complete, Enriched and Targeted Consortia product candidates that we may develop. For CP101 specifically, our patent portfolio includes more than ten U.S. patents that cover CP101 and methods of use and manufacture. These patents have expiration dates between 2031 and 2037.

Foundational Protection for Multiple Product Candidates

Many of our broadest patents and patent applications originate from patent families that embody pioneering work in the microbiome by Dr. Thomas Borody, a prolific inventor and founder of the Centre for Digestive Diseases in Australia, and Drs. Alexander Khoruts and Michael Sadowsky at the University of Minnesota. These patent families have priority dates that precede the entry into the microbiome field by many of our competitors. As a result, we have been successful in obtaining broad patent coverage from these patent families over the composition formulation, method of manufacture and method of using our product candidates. These patent families include:

28

Complete Consortia Product Candidates, including CP101

Our patent portfolio provides comprehensive patent protection for our Complete Consortia product candidates, including CP101. Representative patents and patent applications from our foundational patent families that have claims that cover CP101 and our Complete Consortia product candidates include:

Targeted Consortia Product Candidates

For our Targeted Consortia product candidates and their manufacture, our portfolio consists of several issued U.S. patents from our foundational patent families that provide patent coverage. We are also pursuing product-specific patent protection for each of our Targeted Consortia product candidates including TAK-524. Representative patents that we own and provide protection for our Targeted Consortia product candidates include issued U.S. patents (U.S. 10,610,551 and U.S. 10,278,997) covering compositions having lyophilized bacteria from the genus Bacteroides or the phylum Firmicutes derived from healthy donors and their manufacture, which are expected to expire in 2031.

29

Enriched Consortia Product Candidates

Our Enriched Consortia product candidates, such as FIN-211, are protected by many of the same patents and patent applications that cover our Complete Consortia product candidates. We also have patent protection for these Enriched Consortia product candidates specifically as well as various pending applications directed to these product candidates. Representative patents and patent applications that have claims that cover our Enriched Consortia product candidates include:

Patent Term

Generally, issued patents are granted a term of 20 years from the earliest claimed non-provisional filing date. In certain instances, patent term can be adjusted to recapture a portion of delay by the USPTO in examining the patent application (patent term adjustment) or extended to account for term effectively lost as a result of the FDA regulatory review period (patent term extension), or both. In some cases, the term of a U.S. patent may be shortened by terminal disclaimer, which reduces its term to that of an earlier-expiring patent.

Patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 is available for one U.S. patent that includes at least one claim covering the composition of matter of a first approved FDA drug product, or its methods of use or manufacture. The extended patent term cannot exceed the shorter of five years beyond the non-extended expiration of the patent or fourteen years from the date of the FDA approval of the drug product, and a patent cannot be extended more than once or for more than a single product. During the period of extension, if granted, the scope of exclusivity is limited to the approved product for approved uses. Some foreign jurisdictions, including Europe and Japan, have analogous patent term extension provisions, which allow for extension of the term of a patent that covers a drug approved by the applicable foreign regulatory agency. If and when our product candidates receive FDA approval, we expect to apply, if appropriate, for patent term extension on patents covering those product candidates, their methods of use and/or methods of manufacture.

Trade Secrets

In addition to patents, we rely on trade secrets and know-how to develop and maintain our competitive position. We typically rely on trade secrets to protect aspects of our business that are not amenable to, or that we do not consider appropriate for, patent protection. We protect trade secrets and know-how by establishing confidentiality agreements and invention assignment agreements with our employees, consultants, scientific advisors, contractors and collaborators. These agreements provide that all confidential information developed or made known during the course of an individual or entities’ relationship with us must be kept confidential during and after the relationship. These agreements also provide that all inventions resulting from work performed for us or relating to our business and conceived or completed during the period of employment or assignment, as applicable, shall be our exclusive property. In addition, we take other appropriate precautions, such as physical and technological security measures, to guard against misappropriation of our proprietary information by third parties.

30

Agreements with OpenBiome

Asset Purchase Agreement

In November 2020, we entered into an asset purchase agreement, or the OpenBiome Agreement, with Microbiome Health Research Institute, Inc., or OpenBiome, pursuant to which we acquired certain biological samples, including aliquots of human stool that have been used in clinical trials and under enforcement discretion for the treatment of CDI not responding to standard therapy, and obtained a perpetual license to certain OpenBiome technology, and, upon closing of the transaction, we acquired certain additional assets of OpenBiome, including capital equipment (comprising lab equipment) and contracts relating to the operating maintenance of a lab facility. In connection with entering into the OpenBiome Agreement, we terminated our existing agreements with OpenBiome, as such agreements were superseded by the OpenBiome Agreement and certain other agreements entered into concurrently with the OpenBiome Agreement.

In connection with the signing of the OpenBiome Agreement, OpenBiome granted us a worldwide, irrevocable and perpetual license, with the right to grant sublicenses (through multiple tiers) under certain of OpenBiome’s technology that is necessary or useful in the manufacture of products manufactured directly from stool from a stool donor source without the use of culturing or replication, which we refer to as Natural Products, including technology pertaining to the selection of human stool donors, the collection and processing of stool from human donors and the preparation of stool-based products, and under any improvements to our intellectual property previously developed by OpenBiome or developed by OpenBiome during a specified period of time after the closing of the transaction, in each case to exploit products and services. In addition to the foregoing license, except under certain limited circumstances, OpenBiome agreed to not license or transfer to our competitors any rights to those aspects of its manufacturing technology that are not publicly available as of the date of the OpenBiome Agreement.

Pursuant to the OpenBiome Agreement, for the period prior to the closing of the transaction we granted OpenBiome a worldwide, non-exclusive license under certain of our intellectual property rights to make, use, sell, offer for sale, import and export certain Natural Products solely for the treatment of recurrent CDI in the United States under an FDA policy of enforcement discretion and to conduct clinical research in all fields other than the diagnosis, treatment, palliation or prevention in humans of CDI not subject to an FDA policy of enforcement discretion, IBD, ASD or HBV. Additionally, for the period beginning on the closing of the transaction, we granted OpenBiome a worldwide, non-exclusive license under certain of our intellectual property rights to sell certain Natural Products manufactured prior to the closing of the transaction solely for the treatment of recurrent CDI in the United States under enforcement discretion, and to make, use, sell, offer for sale, import and export certain Natural Products for purposes of conducting clinical research in all fields other than the diagnosis, treatment, palliation or prevention in humans of CDI not subject to an FDA policy of enforcement discretion, IBD, ASD or HBV. Notwithstanding the foregoing license, OpenBiome has agreed to certain restrictions related to the use, sale and supply of such products in connection with clinical research of our competitors. Additionally, the license grant excludes any license to exploit a Natural Product wherein processed stool is lyophilized (such as in the case of CP101).

In connection with the signing of the OpenBiome Agreement, we paid OpenBiome $1.0 million in the form of an upfront payment and $150,000 as reimbursement for OpenBiome’s attorneys’ fees and expenses in connection the negotiation of the OpenBiome Agreement. On the closing of the transaction, we paid OpenBiome $2.25 million, plus an additional $1.6 million if no regulatory restrictions were in place preventing the sale and distribution of OpenBiome’s products under enforcement discretion as of the date of closing. In addition to the foregoing payments, we are obligated to pay to OpenBiome a low single digit royalty on net sales of Natural Products by us and our affiliates and a high single digit royalty of certain sublicensing revenue (including royalties) received in connection with Natural Products, as well as a low single digit royalty on net sales of TAK-524, FIN-525 and any product that is not a Natural Product or a product that comprises both material manufactured directly from stool from a stool donor source without the use of culturing or replication and drug substance or drug product comprising one or more active pharmaceutical ingredients, and, in either case contains one or more isolates derived from certain stool donors that are exclusive to us, or Cultured Products, by us and our affiliates and a high single digit percentage of certain sublicensing revenue (including royalties) received in connection with Cultured Products. On a country-by-country basis, our payment obligations with respect to Natural Products expires twenty-five years after first commercial sale of such Natural Product in such country, and, with respect to Cultured Products expires fifteen years after first commercial sale of such Cultured Product in such country. We are also obligated to pay OpenBiome up to $6.0 million in the aggregate upon achievement of certain development and regulatory milestones with Natural Products and $20.0 million in the aggregate upon achievement of certain commercial milestones with Natural Products.

31

LMIC License Agreement

In November 2020, concurrently with entering into the OpenBiome Agreement, we entered into a license agreement, or the LMIC Agreement, with OpenBiome, pursuant to which we granted OpenBiome a non-exclusive license, with the right to grant sublicenses, under certain of our patents, patent applications and know-how that are reasonably necessary or useful for the exploitation of products manufactured directly from stool from a stool donor source without the use of culturing or replication, or Natural Products, to make, use, sell, have sold, offer for sale and import Natural Products and formulated liquid suspensions derived from the stool of a stool donor source that may be incorporated into a Natural Product, in either case for the treatment in humans of malnutrition and neglected tropical diseases in certain low- and middle-income countries, or the LMIC Territory. The license grant excludes any license to exploit a Natural Product wherein processed stool is lyophilized (such as in the case of CP101) or to otherwise use the licensed intellectual property to lyophilize a product.

Pursuant to the LMIC Agreement, we own all improvements, enhancements or modifications to the licensed intellectual property (whether or not patentable) invented by either party during the term of the LMIC Agreement. OpenBiome has agreed to assign to us its interest in and to any such improvements, enhancements or modifications.

Pursuant to the LMIC Agreement, we are entitled to receive tiered royalties on net sales of Natural Products and products that incorporate formulated liquid suspensions derived from the stool of a stool donor source that may be incorporated into a Natural Product in the LMIC Territory ranging from mid-single digit to low-second decile. Royalties are payable on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis during the period beginning on the first commercial sale of such product in such country and ending on the later of the expiration of the last to expire valid claim from a licensed patent that covers such product or ten years from the date of the LMIC Agreement.

The LMIC Agreement expires on product-by-product and country-by-country basis upon expiry of the applicable royalty obligation for such product in such country. OpenBiome has the right to terminate the LMIC Agreement upon specified prior written notice to us. Either party may terminate the LMIC Agreement in the event of an uncured material breach by the other party of either the LMIC Agreement (or uncured breach by OpenBiome of the OpenBiome Agreement), provided that if such uncured material breach is limited to a breach of the LMIC Agreement in a particular country, our right to terminate the LMIC Agreement is limited to just such country. Either party may terminate the LMIC Agreement in the event of the insolvency of the other party. We may terminate the LMIC Agreement in the event that OpenBiome brings, or assists in bringing, a challenge to the validity, patentability, scope, construction, inventorship, ownership, enforceability or non-infringement of any licensed patent or patent application.

Government Regulation

Government authorities in the United States at the federal, state and local level and in other countries and jurisdictions including the European Union, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, marketing and export and import of biological products, such as our product candidates and any future product candidates. We, along with third-party contractors, will be required to navigate the various preclinical, clinical, manufacturing and commercial approval requirements of the governing regulatory agencies of the countries in which we wish to conduct studies or seek approval or licensure of our product candidates. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with applicable federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable regulatory requirements at any time during the product development process or post-approval may subject an applicant to delays in development or approval or licensure, as well as administrative or judicial sanctions.

Regulatory Approval of Biological Products in the United States

In the United States, biological products are subject to regulation under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, the Public Health Service Act, or PHSA, and their implementing regulations. Biological products are also subject to other federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations. The process required by the FDA before biological product candidates may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

32

Preclinical Studies

Before testing any biological product candidates in humans, the product candidate must undergo rigorous preclinical testing. Preclinical studies include laboratory evaluations of product biological characteristics, chemistry, toxicity, formulation and stability, as well as in vitro and animal studies to assess the potential for adverse events and in some cases to establish a rationale for therapeutic use. The conduct of preclinical studies is subject to federal and state regulations and requirements, including GLP regulations for safety/toxicology studies. An IND sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical studies, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature and plans for clinical studies, among other things, to the FDA as part of an IND. An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational product to humans and must become effective before human clinical trials may begin. The central focus of an IND submission is on the general investigational plan and the protocol(s) for clinical studies. Some long-term preclinical testing may continue after the IND is submitted. An IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless before that time the FDA raises concerns or questions related to one or more proposed clinical trials and places the trial on clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. As a result, submission of an IND may or may not result in the FDA allowing clinical trials to commence.

Clinical Trials

The clinical stage of development involves the administration of the investigational product to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of qualified investigators, generally physicians not employed by or under the trial sponsor’s control. Clinical trials must be conducted: (i) in compliance with federal regulations; (ii) in compliance with GCPs, an international standard meant to protect the rights and health of patients and to define the roles of clinical trial sponsors, administrators and monitors; as well as (iii) under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the trial, dosing procedures, subject selection and eligibility criteria, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated in the trial. Each protocol involving testing on U.S. patients and subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Furthermore, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an IRB for each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted to ensure that the risks to individuals participating in the clinical trials are minimized and are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits. The IRB also approves the informed consent form that must be provided to each clinical trial subject or his or her legal representative and must monitor the clinical trial until completed.

There also are requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical trials and completed clinical trial results to public registries. Information about certain clinical trials, including clinical trial results, must be submitted within specific timeframes for publication on the www.clinicaltrials.gov website. Information related to the investigational product, patient population, phase of investigation, clinical trial sites and investigators and other aspects of the clinical trial is then made public as part of the registration. Disclosure of the results of these clinical trials can be delayed in certain circumstances.

33

A sponsor who wishes to conduct a clinical trial outside of the United States may, but need not, obtain FDA authorization to conduct the clinical trial under an IND. If a foreign clinical trial is not conducted under an IND, the sponsor may submit data from the clinical trial to the FDA in support of a BLA. The FDA will accept a well-designed and well-conducted foreign clinical trial not conducted under an IND if, among other things, the clinical trial was conducted with qualified investigators in accordance with GCP requirements, and the FDA is able to validate the data through an onsite inspection if deemed necessary.

For purposes of BLA submission and approval, clinical trials are generally conducted in three sequential phases, known as Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3, which may overlap or be combined:

Post-approval clinical trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials, may be conducted after initial marketing approval. These clinical trials are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication, particularly for long-term safety follow-up.

The FDA may, at any time while clinical trials are ongoing under the IND, impose a partial or complete clinical hold based on concerns for patient safety and/or noncompliance with regulatory requirements. This order issued by the FDA would delay a proposed clinical study or cause suspension of an ongoing study until all outstanding concerns have been adequately addressed, and the FDA has notified the company that investigations may proceed. Additionally, the IRB, or the sponsor may suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including non-compliance with regulatory requirements or a finding that the patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the biological product candidate has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients. Additionally, some clinical trials are overseen by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical trial sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board or committee. This group provides authorization for whether a trial may move forward at designated checkpoints based on access to certain data from the trial and may halt the clinical trial if it determines that there is an unacceptable safety risk for subjects or other grounds, such as no demonstration of efficacy.

During all phases of clinical development, regulatory agencies require extensive monitoring and auditing of all clinical activities, clinical data, and clinical trial investigators. Annual progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted to the FDA. Written IND safety reports must be promptly submitted to the FDA and the investigators for serious and unexpected adverse events, any findings from other studies, tests in laboratory animals or in vitro testing that suggest a significant risk for human subjects, or any clinically important increase in the rate of a serious suspected adverse reaction over that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure. The sponsor must submit an IND safety report within fifteen calendar days after the sponsor determines that the information qualifies for reporting. The sponsor also must notify the FDA of any unexpected fatal or life-threatening suspected adverse reaction within seven calendar days after the sponsor’s initial receipt of the information.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and also must develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the biological product candidate as well as 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, companies must

34

develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality, potency and purity of the final biological product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the biological product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over their shelf life.

FDA Review Processes of Biological Products

Assuming successful completion of all required testing and clinical trials of a biological product candidate in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, the results of product development, nonclinical studies and clinical trials are submitted to the FDA as part of a BLA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. The BLA must include all relevant data available from preclinical studies and clinical trials, including negative or ambiguous results as well as positive findings, together with detailed information relating to the product candidate’s chemistry, manufacturing, controls, and proposed labeling, among other things. Data can come from company-sponsored clinical studies intended to test the safety and effectiveness of a use of the product candidate, or from a number of alternative sources, including studies initiated by independent investigators. To support marketing approval, the data submitted must be sufficient in quality and quantity to establish the identity, quality, safety, purity and potency of the investigational product to the satisfaction of the FDA. FDA approval of a BLA must be obtained before a biologic may be marketed in the United States.

The cost of preparing and submitting a BLA is substantial. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, each BLA must be accompanied by a substantial user fee. The FDA adjusts the PDUFA user fees on an annual basis. Fee waivers or reductions are available in certain circumstances, including a waiver of the application fee for the first application filed by a small business. Additionally, no user fees are assessed on BLAs for products designated as orphan drugs, unless the product also includes a non-orphan indication. The applicant under an approved BLA is also subject to an annual program fee.

The FDA reviews a submitted BLA to determine if it is substantially complete before the FDA accepts it for filing and may request additional information from the sponsor. The FDA must make a decision on accepting a BLA for filing within 60 days of receipt, and may refuse to file any BLA that it deems incomplete or not properly reviewable at the time of submission. In this event, the BLA must be resubmitted with any additional information requested. The resubmitted application is also subject to review before the FDA accepts it for filing. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review of the BLA. The FDA reviews a BLA to determine, among other things, whether the biological product candidate 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. Under the goals agreed to by the FDA under PDUFA, the FDA has ten months, from the filing date, in which to complete its initial review of an original BLA and respond to the applicant, and six months from the filing date of an original BLA designated for priority review. The FDA does not always meet its PDUFA goal dates for standard and priority BLAs, and the review process can be extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. This review typically takes twelve months from the date the BLA is submitted to the FDA because the FDA has approximately two months to make a “filing” decision. The review process and the PDUFA goal date for both standard and priority review BLAs may be extended by the FDA for three additional months to consider certain late-submitted information, or information intended to clarify information already provided in the submission within the last three months before the PDUFA goal date.

Before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically conduct a pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facilities for the new product to determine whether such facilities comply with cGMP requirements. The FDA will not approve the product 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.

The FDA also may inspect one or more clinical sites and audit data from clinical trials to ensure compliance with GCP requirements and the integrity of the data supporting safety, purity, and potency of the product candidate. Additionally, the FDA may refer applications for novel product candidates or product candidates that present difficult questions of safety or efficacy to an advisory committee, typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts, for review, evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions, if any. The FDA is not bound by recommendations of an advisory committee, but it generally considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions on approval.

After the FDA evaluates a BLA and conducts inspections of manufacturing facilities where the investigational product is produced, it will issue either an approval letter or a Complete Response Letter, or CRL. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the biological product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A CRL indicates that the review cycle of the application is complete and the application will not be approved in its present form. A CRL generally outlines the deficiencies in the BLA and may require additional clinical data, additional pivotal clinical trial(s)

35

and/or other significant and time-consuming requirements related to clinical trials, preclinical studies or manufacturing in order for the FDA to reconsider the application for approval. If a CRL is issued, the applicant may either resubmit the BLA, addressing all of the deficiencies identified in the letter, or withdraw the application or request an opportunity for a hearing. The FDA has committed to reviewing such resubmissions in two or six months from receipt, depending on the type of information included. Even if such data and information are submitted, the FDA may decide that the BLA does not satisfy the criteria for approval.

If regulatory approval of a product is granted, such approval will be granted for particular indications and may entail limitations to specific diseases and dosages or the indications for use for which such product may be marketed. For example, the FDA may require a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, to help ensure that the benefits of the biological product outweigh the potential risks to patients. A REMS is a safety strategy implemented 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. A REMS can include medication guides, communication plans for healthcare professionals and elements to assure a product’s safe use, or ETASU. An ETASU can include, but is not limited to, special training or certification for prescribing or dispensing the product, dispensing the product only under certain circumstances, special monitoring and the use of patient-specific registries. The requirement for a REMS can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the product. 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. In addition, the FDA may require, or companies may voluntarily pursue, one or more post-market clinical trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials, and testing and surveillance programs to further assess and monitor the product’s safety and effectiveness after approval, and may limit further marketing of the product based on the results of these post-marketing studies.

Orphan Drug Designation

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug or biological product candidate intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally 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 but for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making the product for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product in the United States.

Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting a BLA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation on its own does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process.

Among the benefits of orphan drug designation are tax credits for certain research and a waiver of the BLA application user fee. In addition, if a product that has orphan 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 exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same product for the same indication for seven years from the date of such approval, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan exclusivity by means of greater effectiveness, greater safety, or providing a major contribution to patient care, or in instances of drug supply issues. Competitors, however, may receive approval of either a different product for the same indication or the same product for a different indication. In the latter case, because healthcare professionals are free to prescribe products for off-label uses, the competitor’s product could be used off-label for the orphan indication despite another product’s orphan exclusivity.

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

36

Expedited Development and Review Programs

The FDA offers a number of expedited development and review programs for qualifying product candidates intended to address an unmet medical need in the treatment of a serious or life-threatening disease or condition. For example, Fast Track designation may be granted for products that are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition for which there is no effective treatment and where preclinical or clinical data demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the disease 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 biological product candidate can request the FDA to designate the candidate for a specific indication for Fast Track status concurrent with, or after, the submission of the IND for the candidate. The FDA must determine if the biological product candidate qualifies for Fast Track designation within 60 days of receipt of the sponsor’s request. The sponsor of a Fast Track product has opportunities for more frequent interactions with the applicable FDA review team during product development and, once a BLA is submitted, the product candidate may be eligible for priority review. A Fast Track product may also be eligible for rolling review, where the FDA may consider for review sections of the BLA on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the BLA, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the BLA and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the BLA. Any product submitted to the FDA for approval, including under the Fast Track program, may be eligible for other types of FDA programs intended to expedite development and review, such as priority review and accelerated approval.

Breakthrough Therapy designation may be granted for product candidates that are intended, alone or in combination with one or more other products, to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product may demonstrate substantial improvement over available therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. Under the Breakthrough Therapy program, the sponsor of a new biological product candidate may request that the FDA designate the candidate for a specific indication as a Breakthrough Therapy concurrent with, or after, the submission of the IND for the biological product candidate. The FDA must determine if the biological product qualifies for Breakthrough Therapy designation within 60 days of receipt of the sponsor’s request. The FDA may take certain actions with respect to product candidates designated as breakthrough therapies, including holding meetings with the sponsor throughout the development process, providing timely advice to the sponsor regarding development and approval, involving more senior staff in the review process, assigning a cross-disciplinary project lead for the review team and taking other steps to design the clinical studies in an efficient manner. The designation also includes all of the Fast Track program features, including eligibility for rolling review of BLA submissions if the relevant criteria are met.

Priority review may be granted for product candidates that are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in the safety and effectiveness of the treatment, diagnosis or prevention of serious conditions when compared to available therapies. The FDA will attempt to direct additional resources to the evaluation of an application for a new biological product designated for priority review in an effort to facilitate the review. For 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).

Accelerated approval may be granted for products that are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and that generally provide a meaningful therapeutic advantage to patients over existing treatments and demonstrates an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit or on the basis of an effect on an intermediate 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. In clinical trials, a surrogate endpoint is a measurement of laboratory or clinical signs of a disease or condition that is reasonably likely to predict the clinical benefit of the product candidate and substitutes for a direct measurement of how a patient feels, functions or survives. The accelerated approval pathway is contingent on a sponsor’s agreement to conduct additional post-approval confirmatory studies to verify and describe the product’s clinical benefit. These confirmatory trials must be completed with due diligence and, in some cases, the FDA may require that the trial be designed, initiated and/or fully enrolled prior to approval. Failure to conduct required post-approval studies, or to confirm a clinical benefit during post-marketing studies, would allow the FDA to withdraw the product from the market on an expedited basis. All promotional materials for product candidates approved under accelerated regulations are subject to prior review by the FDA prior to the intended date or dissemination or publication.

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 the time period for FDA review or approval may not be shortened. Furthermore, 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.

37

Pediatric Information and Exclusivity

Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, a BLA or supplement to a BLA for a novel product (e.g. new active ingredient, new indication, etc.) must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the biological product for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the biological product is safe and effective. The FDA may grant full or partial waivers, or deferrals, for submission of data. Unless otherwise required by regulation, PREA generally does not apply to any biological product for an indication for which orphan designation has been granted.

The Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act, or BPCA, provides a six-month extension of any exclusivity—patent or non-patent—for a biological product if certain conditions are met. Conditions for exclusivity include the FDA’s determination that information relating to the use of a new biological product in the pediatric population may produce health benefits in that population, the FDA making a written request for pediatric studies, and the applicant agreeing to perform, and reporting on, the requested studies within the statutory timeframe. Applications under the BPCA are treated as priority applications, with all of the benefits that designation confers.

Post-Approval Requirements for Biological Products

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, reporting updated safety and efficacy information, 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. Once a BLA is approved, a product will be subject to certain additional post-approval requirements, such as quality control, biological product manufacture, packaging and labeling procedures that must continue to conform to cGMPs after approval. Biologic manufacturers and certain of their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies. Manufacturers of biological products are required to comply with applicable requirements in the cGMP regulations, including quality control, quality assurance and maintenance of records and documentation. Biological product manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved biological products are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA, including those focused on manufacturing facilities to assess compliance with cGMPs. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated, and, depending on the significance of the change, may require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the areas of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMPs.

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

38

The FDA closely regulates the marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of biological products, such as those related to direct-to-consumer advertising, the prohibition on promoting products for uses or in patient populations that are not described in the product’s approved labeling (known as “off-label use”), industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, and promotional activities involving the internet. 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.

To help reduce the increased risk of the introduction of adventitious agents, the PHSA emphasizes the importance of manufacturing controls for products whose attributes cannot be precisely defined. The PHSA also provides authority to the FDA to immediately suspend licenses in situations where there exists a danger to public health, to prepare or procure products in the event of shortages and critical public health needs, and to authorize the creation and enforcement of regulations to prevent the introduction or spread of communicable diseases in the United States and between states.

After a BLA is approved, the product may also be subject to official lot release as a condition of approval. As part of the manufacturing process, the manufacturer is required to perform certain tests on each lot of the product before it is released for distribution. If the product is subject to official release by the FDA, the manufacturer submits samples of each lot of product to the FDA together with a release protocol showing a summary of the history of manufacture of the lot and the results of all of the manufacturer’s tests performed on the lot. The FDA may also perform certain confirmatory tests on lots of some products, such as viral vaccines, before releasing the lots for distribution by the manufacturer. In addition, the FDA conducts laboratory research related to the regulatory standards on the safety, purity, potency and effectiveness of biological products. As with drugs, after approval of a biological product candidate, manufacturers must address any safety issues that arise, are subject to recalls or a halt in manufacturing, and are subject to periodic inspection after approval.

U.S. Patent Term Restoration, Biosimilars and Exclusivity

Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of the FDA approval of the use of our biological product candidates, some of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent restoration term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. However, patent term restoration cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date. The patent term restoration period is generally one-half the time between the effective date of an IND and the submission date of a BLA plus the time between the submission date of a BLA and the approval of that application. Only one patent applicable to an approved biological product is eligible for the extension and the application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent. In addition, a patent can only be extended once and only for a single product. The United State Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, in consultation with the FDA, reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration. In the future, we may intend to apply for restoration of patent term for one of our patents, if and as applicable, to add patent life beyond its current expiration date, depending on the expected length of the clinical trials and other factors involved in the filing of the relevant BLA.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or collectively, the ACA, signed into law in 2010, includes a subtitle called The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products shown to be biosimilar to, or interchangeable with, an FDA-licensed reference biological product. This amendment to the PHS Act attempts to minimize duplicative testing. Biosimilarity, which requires that the biological product be highly similar to the reference product notwithstanding minor differences in clinically inactive components and that there be no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of safety, purity and potency, can be shown through analytical studies, animal studies and a clinical trial or trials. Interchangeability requires that a biological product be biosimilar to the reference product and that the product can be expected to produce the same clinical results as the reference product in any given patient and, for products administered multiple times to an individual, that the product and the reference product 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 biological product without such alternation or switch. However, complexities associated with the larger, and often more complex, structures of biological products, as well as the processes

39

by which such products are manufactured, pose significant hurdles to implementation of the abbreviated approval pathway that are still being worked out by the FDA.

Under the BPCIA an application for a biosimilar or interchangeable product may not be accepted by 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 of first licensure of the reference product. “First licensure” typically means the initial date the particular product at issue was licensed in the United States. Date of first licensure does not include the date of licensure of (and a new period of exclusivity is not available for) a biological product if the licensure is for a supplement for the biological product or for a subsequent application by the same sponsor or manufacturer of the biological product (or licensor, predecessor in interest or other related entity) for a change (not including a modification to the structure of the biological product) that results in a new indication, route of administration, dosing schedule, dosage form, delivery system, delivery device or strength, or for a modification to the structure of the biological product that does not result in a change in safety, purity or potency. 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.

International Regulation

In addition to regulations in the United States and Europe, a variety of foreign regulations govern clinical trials, commercial sales and distribution of product candidates. The approval process varies from country to country and the time to approval may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA or European Commission approval.

Coverage and Reimbursement

In the United States, market acceptance and sales of any product candidates that we commercialize, if approved, will depend in part on the extent to which reimbursement for these drugs and related treatments will be available from third-party payors, including government health administration authorities, managed care organizations, pharmacy benefit management organizations, and other private health insurers. Third-party payors decide which therapies they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. Reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the third-party payor’s determination that use of a product is a covered benefit under its health plan; safe, effective and medically necessary; appropriate for the specific patient; cost-effective; and neither experimental nor investigational.

While no uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement exists in the United States, third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own coverage and reimbursement policies. However, decisions regarding the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided for any product candidates that we develop will be made on a payor-by-payor basis. Therefore, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a drug does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage, and adequate reimbursement, for the drug. Additionally, a third-party payor’s decision to provide coverage for a therapy does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Each payor determines whether or not it will provide coverage for a therapy, what amount it will pay the manufacturer for the therapy, and on what tier of its formulary it will be placed. The position on a payor’s list of covered drugs, or formulary, generally determines the co-payment that a patient will need to make to obtain the therapy and can strongly influence the adoption of such therapy by patients and physicians. Patients who are prescribed treatments for their conditions and providers prescribing such services generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the associated healthcare costs. If coverage and adequate reimbursement is not available, or is available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates. Even if coverage is provided, the approved reimbursement amount may not be high enough to allow us to establish or maintain pricing sufficient to realize a sufficient return on our investment. Patients are unlikely to use our products unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover a significant portion of the cost of our products. Further, third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. Accordingly, third-party payors could require us to conduct additional studies, including post-marketing studies related to the cost-effectiveness of a product, to qualify for reimbursement, which could be costly and divert resources.

Outside of the United States, the commercialization of therapeutics is generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost containment initiatives in Europe, Canada and other countries has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of therapeutics such as our product candidates. In many countries, particularly the countries of the European Union, medical product prices are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental

40

authorities can take considerable time after a product receives marketing approval. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product candidate to other available therapies. In general, product prices under such systems are substantially lower than in the United States. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for products but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our product candidates. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our products may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits.

Further, the commercial success of any approved products will also depend in large part on the availability of insurance coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors, including government payors, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, and managed care organizations, which may be affected by existing and future healthcare reform measures designed to reduce the cost of healthcare. Moreover, coverage policies and third-party payor reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products for which we receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future. If government and other healthcare payors were not to provide adequate insurance coverage and reimbursement levels for one any of our products once approved, market acceptance and commercial success would be limited.

Other Healthcare Laws and Regulations and Legislative Reform

Healthcare Laws and Regulations

Healthcare providers, including physicians, and third-party payors in the United States and elsewhere will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our operations, including any arrangements with professionals, principal investigators, consultants, third-party payors and customers subject us to various federal and state fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws that may affect the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we would market, sell and distribute our products. Our current and future operations are subject to regulation by various federal, state, and local authorities in addition to the FDA, including but not limited to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (including the Office of Inspector General, Office for Civil Rights and the Health Resources and Services Administration), or HHS, the U.S. Department of Justice, or DOJ, and individual U.S. Attorney offices within the DOJ, and state and local governments. The healthcare laws that may affect our ability to operate include, but are not limited to:

41

42

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other current or future healthcare laws that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, 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, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could substantially disrupt our operations. Although effective compliance programs can mitigate the risk of investigation and prosecution for violations of these laws, these risks cannot be entirely eliminated. Any action against us for an alleged or suspected violation could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and could divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business, even if our defense is successful. In addition, if any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found not to be in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to significant criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs.

Legislative Reform

We operate in a highly regulated industry, and new laws, regulations and judicial decisions, or new interpretations of existing laws, regulations and decisions, related to healthcare availability, the method of delivery and payment for healthcare products and services could negatively affect our business, financial condition and prospects. There is significant interest in promoting healthcare reforms, and it is likely that federal and state legislatures within the United States and the governments of other countries will continue to consider changes to existing healthcare legislation.

For example, the United States and state governments continue to propose and pass legislation designed to reduce the cost of healthcare. In 2010, the U.S. Congress enacted the ACA, which included changes to the coverage and reimbursement of drug products under government healthcare programs such as:

43

There have been judicial, executive branch and congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, in 2017, the U.S. Congress enacted the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, or Tax Act, which eliminated the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the ACA on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate.” On June 17, 2021 the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds that argued the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress. Thus, the ACA will remain in effect in its current form. Further, prior to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, on January 28, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order that initiated a special enrollment period 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. It is possible that the ACA will be subject to judicial or congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how any such challenges and the health reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the ACA and our business.

In addition, there have been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the United States federal and state levels that seek to reduce healthcare costs. In 2011, the U.S. Congress enacted the Budget Control Act, which included provisions intended to reduce the federal deficit. The Budget Control Act resulted in the imposition of 2% reductions in Medicare payments to providers beginning in 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2031, absent additional congressional action. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act, and subsequent legislation, suspended the 2% Medicare sequester from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022. Under current legislation, the actual reduction in Medicare payments will vary from 1% in 2022 to up to 3% in the final fiscal year of this sequester. On March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, beginning January 1, 2024. In addition, in 2012, the U.S. Congress enacted the American Taxpayer Relief Act, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. If government spending is further reduced, anticipated budgetary shortfalls may also impact the ability of relevant agencies, such as the FDA, to continue to function at current levels, which may impact the ability of relevant agencies to timely review and approve research and development, manufacturing and marketing activities, which may delay our ability to develop, market and sell any product candidates we may develop. Moreover, any significant spending reductions affecting Medicare, Medicaid or other publicly funded or subsidized health programs that may be implemented, or any significant taxes or fees that may be imposed on us, as part of any broader deficit reduction effort or legislative replacement to the Budget Control Act, could have an adverse impact on our anticipated product revenues.

Furthermore, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several congressional inquiries and proposed legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. At the federal level, the former Trump administration used several means to propose implementing drug pricing reform, including through federal budget proposals, executive orders and policy initiatives. For example, on July 24, 2020 and September 13, 2020, President Trump signed several executive orders aimed at lowering drug prices. As a result, the FDA released a final rule and guidance in September 2020 providing pathways for states to build and submit importation plans for drugs from Canada. On November 20, 2020, CMS issued an interim final rule implementing President Trump’s Most Favored Nation executive order, which would tie Medicare Part B payments for certain physician-administered drugs to the lowest price paid in other economically advanced countries. As a result of litigation challenging the Most Favored Nation model, on December 27, 2021, CMS published a final rule that rescinded the Most Favored Nation model interim final rule. In July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, “Promoting Competition in the American Economy,” with multiple provisions aimed at prescription drugs. In response to Biden’s executive order, on September 9, 2021, HHS released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug pricing reform and sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue to advance these principles. No legislation or administrative actions have been finalized to implement these principles. In addition, Congress is considering drug pricing as part of other reform initiatives.

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. Further, it is possible that additional governmental action is taken in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We expect that additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future.

44

Employees and Human Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2021, we had 189 employees. Of these 189 employees, 156 are engaged in research and development activities and 33 are engaged in business development, finance, legal, information systems, facilities, human resources or administrative support. None of our employees is subject to a collective bargaining agreement. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing and integrating our existing and additional employees. The principal purpose of our 2021 Equity Incentive Plan is to attract, retain and motivate selected employees, consultants and directors through the granting of equity-based compensation awards.

We believe that our long-term success requires a diverse and inclusive workforce. We value diversity at all levels of the organization and continue to focus on extending our diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives across our entire workforce, including through our Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Committee, which is a cross-functional group designed to create programs focused on understanding employees’ intersecting identities, honoring differences and rooting out systemic inequity. In addition, we pride ourselves on an open culture that respects co-workers, values employees’ health and well-being and fosters professional development. We conduct regular employee engagement surveys, and our board of directors provides input on important decisions relating to these matters, including with respect to employee compensation and benefits and talent acquisition and retention.

Corporate Information

We were originally incorporated in Delaware in November 2014 and until September 21, 2017, or the Merger Date, we conducted our business through Finch Therapeutics, Inc., a Delaware corporation. On the Merger Date, pursuant to the terms of the agreement and plan of merger, or the Merger Agreement, Finch Therapeutics, Inc. and Crestovo Holdings LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, completed a merger of equals. Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement, each of Finch Therapeutics, Inc. and Crestovo Holdings LLC became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Finch Therapeutics Group, Inc. Crestovo Holdings LLC was renamed Finch Therapeutics Holdings LLC in November 2020.

Our principal executive office is located at 200 Inner Belt Road, Suite 400, Somerville, Massachusetts 02143. Our telephone number is (617) 229-6499. Our website address is www.finchtherapeutics.com. Information contained in, or accessible through, our website does not constitute a part of, and is not incorporated into, this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Available Information

We are subject to the informational requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and, accordingly, file reports, proxy statements and other information with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. The SEC maintains a website (http://www.sec.gov) that contains material regarding issuers that file electronically, such as ourselves, with the SEC.

We make available free of charge on our website our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC.

45

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Our business is subject to numerous risks. You should consider carefully the risks and uncertainties described below, in addition to other information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K as well as our other public filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. Any of the following risks could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects and cause the trading price of our common stock to decline.

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Capital Needs

We have a limited operating history, have incurred net losses in every year since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur net losses in the future.

We are a clinical-stage microbiome therapeutics company with a limited operating history. Since our inception, we have focused primarily on developing and progressing our product candidates through clinical development, organizing and staffing our company, research and development activities, establishing and protecting our intellectual property portfolio, including for our Human-First Discovery platform, and raising capital. Consequently, we have no meaningful operations upon which to evaluate our business and predictions about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history or a history of successfully developing and commercializing drug products. Investment in biopharmaceutical product development is highly speculative because it entails substantial upfront capital expenditures and significant risk that any potential product candidate will fail to demonstrate adequate effect or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval and become commercially viable. We have not yet demonstrated the ability to progress any product candidate through clinical trials, we have no products approved for commercial sale and we have not generated any revenue from product sales to date. We continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred losses in each period since our inception. For the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, we reported net losses of $58.2 million and $39.3 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2021, we had an accumulated deficit of $161.0 million. We expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect these losses to increase as we continue our research and development of, and seek regulatory approvals for our therapeutic product candidates CP101, for the prevention of recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection, or CDI, FIN-211, to address symptoms of autism spectrum disorder, or ASD, and any other current or future product candidates we may develop.

We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if, and as, we:

46

To become and remain profitable, we, our collaborators and any potential future collaborators must develop and eventually commercialize products with significant market potential. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities as to which we can make no assurances that we will be successful, including resolving the clinical hold on our IND for CP101, addressing findings from the related quality investigation, completing related manufacturing activities with respect to both CP101 and FIN-211, and providing additional information to the FDA regarding our PRISM4 protocol and the validation package for one of our release tests, which is utilized for both CP101 and FIN-211. We will also need to be successful in completing preclinical studies and clinical trials, obtaining marketing approval for product candidates, manufacturing, marketing and selling products for which we may obtain marketing approval and satisfying any post-marketing requirements. We may never succeed in any or all of these activities and, even if we do, we may never generate revenue that is significant or large enough to achieve profitability. If we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to become and remain profitable would decrease the value of our company and could impair our ability to raise capital, maintain our research and development efforts, expand our business or continue our operations. A decline in the value of our company also could cause you to lose all or part of your investment.

Even if we succeed in commercializing one or more of our product candidates, we will continue to incur substantial research and development and other expenditures to develop and market additional product candidates. We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our business. The size of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of future growth of our expenses and our ability to generate revenue. Our prior losses and expected future losses have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital.

We will require substantial additional funding to finance our operations. If we are unable to raise capital when needed, we could be forced to delay, reduce or terminate certain of our product development programs or other operations.

To date, we have primarily funded our operations through the IPO, private placements of equity securities and upfront and milestone payments received pursuant to our collaboration agreement with Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, or Takeda. We expect to spend substantial amounts to advance our product candidates into clinical development and to complete the clinical development of, seek regulatory approvals for and, if approved, commercialize, our product candidates. We will require additional capital, which we may raise through equity offerings, debt financings, marketing and distribution arrangements and other collaborations, strategic alliances and licensing arrangements or other sources to enable us to complete the development and potential commercialization of our product candidates. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. Our ability to raise capital is dependent on a number of factors, including the market demand for our common stock, which is uncertain. Our failure to raise capital as and when needed would have a negative effect on our financial condition and our ability to pursue our business strategy. In addition, attempting to secure additional financing may divert the time and attention of our management from day-to-day activities and harm our product candidate development efforts. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on acceptable terms, we would be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate certain of our research and development programs.

As of December 31, 2021, our cash and cash equivalents were $133.5 million. We believe that our existing cash on hand will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements into mid-2023. However, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations and planned activities. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:

47

Identifying potential product candidates and conducting preclinical testing and clinical trials is a time-consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete, and we may never generate the necessary data or results required to obtain regulatory approval and achieve product sales. In addition, CP101, FIN-211 and any future product candidates, if approved, may not achieve commercial success. Our commercial revenues, if any, will be derived from sales of products that we do not expect to be commercially available for several years, if at all. Accordingly, we will need to continue to rely on additional financing to achieve our business objectives. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. In addition, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on attractive terms, we could be forced to delay, reduce or altogether terminate our research and development programs or future commercialization efforts.

48

Raising additional capital will cause dilution to our stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to our product candidates.

Until such time, if ever, that we can generate substantial product revenue, we expect to finance our cash needs through public or private equity or debt financings, third-party funding, marketing and distribution arrangements, as well as other collaborations, strategic alliances and licensing arrangements, or any combination of these approaches. We do not have any committed external source of funds. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a stockholder. Debt and equity financings, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as redeeming our shares, making investments, incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, declaring dividends or placing limitations on our ability to acquire, sell or license intellectual property rights.

If we raise additional capital through future collaborations, strategic alliances or third-party licensing arrangements, we may have to relinquish certain valuable rights to our intellectual property, future revenue streams, research programs or product candidates, or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. If we are unable to raise additional capital when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our clinical development or future commercialization efforts, or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise develop and market ourselves.

Risks Related to the Development of Our Product Candidates

We are currently subject to a clinical hold on our IND for CP101. We need to resolve the FDA clinical hold issues in order to proceed with enrollment in our PRISM4 clinical trial and initiate our Phase 1b clinical trial in ASD. Our business may be adversely affected if the clinical hold is not resolved in a timely manner or if regulatory concerns lead to additional delays and/or FDA enforcement actions.

CP101 is our lead product candidate, and as announced on March 1, 2022, we paused enrollment in our Phase 3 clinical trial of CP101 in recurrent CDI, which we refer to as the PRISM4 trial, in response to receipt of a clinical hold letter from the FDA on February 24, 2022.

In March 2020, at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA issued a public safety alert regarding the potential risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 virus through the use of donor-derived investigational microbiome therapies and the need for additional safety precautions. At that time, the FDA placed our IND for CP101 on partial clinical hold, requiring us to implement new SARS-CoV-2 screening measures for any microbiota material donated on or after December 1, 2019 and to address the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the informed consent process. Following communications with the FDA in January 2022, on February 24, 2022, the FDA sent us a clinical hold letter, stating that the FDA required additional information about our SARS-CoV-2 screening protocols and related informed consent language, and that a clinical hold remains in effect until the FDA's requests have been satisfactorily addressed. We also received an additional letter from the FDA, dated March 17, 2022, requesting changes to the testing algorithm used to diagnose suspected CDI recurrences in PRISM4, as well as additional information regarding the proposed statistical analysis plan for PRISM4 and the validation package for one of our release tests, which is utilized for both CP101 and FIN-211.

We are unable to proceed with enrollment in the PRISM4 trial until: the FDA removes the clinical hold; we address findings from our ongoing quality investigation in connection with the clinical hold; we conduct additional manufacturing activities with respect to CP101 to satisfy certain of the FDA's requests related to SARS-CoV-2 screening and testing; and we satisfactorily address the FDA's additional questions regarding PRISM4 and the validation package for one of our release tests. Because FIN-211, our product candidate designed to address symptoms of ASD, includes donor-derived components, the clinical hold will also delay initiation of our Phase 1b clinical trial of FIN-211 and will require us to conduct additional manufacturing activities with respect to components of FIN-211 in order to satisfy the FDA's requests. If we are delayed longer than anticipated in successfully addressing the FDA’s concerns underlying the clinical hold and the subsequent letter regarding PRISM4, our costs and timelines associated with our clinical trials in recurrent CDI and ASD would change, potentially in a significant manner.

In November 2021, we began dosing participants in our PRISM4 trial with CP101. Since we dosed participants while the clinical hold was in effect, we may be subject to an additional clinical hold or FDA administrative, advisory, or enforcement actions, which could include, among other things, a warning letter, and the participants dosed during this time may not be considered part of the per protocol population and/or efficacy analysis for PRISM4. An additional clinical hold or FDA administrative, advisory, or enforcement actions could result in a significant delay in our development of CP101, FIN-211 and other current or future product candidates, a significant increase in costs, could delay or potentially jeopardize our ability

49

to commence product sales and generate revenue, could result in adverse publicity, and could cause a decline in our stock price, any of which may adversely affect our business. In addition, if we are unable to resolve the clinical hold favorably or if the FDA or other regulatory agencies express any concerns regarding the use of donor material in microbiome therapeutics, it could adversely affect our ability to develop CP101, FIN-211 and other current or future product candidates.

We are heavily dependent on the success of our product candidates, which are in clinical and preclinical development. If we are unable to advance our current or future product candidates through clinical trials, obtain marketing approval and ultimately commercialize any product candidates we develop, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of our product candidates, we must conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product candidates in humans. We are early in our product candidate development efforts, as CP101 is our only product candidate to reach clinical development to date. Because CP101 is our lead product candidate, and the IND for CP101 is currently under clinical hold by the FDA, if CP101 encounters safety or efficacy problems, development delays or regulatory issues or other problems, our development plans and business would be significantly harmed.

Our ability to generate product revenues, which we do not expect will occur for several years, if ever, will depend heavily on the successful development and eventual commercialization of CP101, FIN-211 and any other current or future product candidates we develop, which may never occur. CP101, FIN-211 and any other product candidates we develop will require additional preclinical and clinical development, management of clinical, preclinical, manufacturing and quality activities, marketing approval in the United States and other jurisdictions for specific indications for use, demonstrating effectiveness to pricing and reimbursement authorities, obtaining sufficient manufacturing supply for both clinical development and commercial production, building of a commercial organization and substantial investment and significant marketing efforts before we generate any revenues from product sales. The success of our current and future product candidates will depend on several factors, including the following:

50

Many of these risks are beyond our control, including the risks related to clinical development, the regulatory review process, potential threats to our intellectual property rights and the manufacturing, marketing and sales efforts of any future collaborators. If we are unable to develop, receive regulatory approval for, or successfully commercialize our current or future product candidates, or if we experience delays as a result of any of these risks or otherwise, our business could be materially harmed.

If we are not successful with respect to one or more of these factors in a timely manner or at all, we could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize CP101, FIN-211 or any other current or future product candidates we develop, which would materially harm our business. If we do not receive marketing approvals for our current and future product candidates, we may not be able to continue our operations.

Our product candidates are based on microbiome therapeutics, which is an unproven approach to therapeutic intervention.

All of our product candidates are based on microbiome therapy, a therapeutic approach that is designed to treat disease by restoring the function of a dysbiotic microbiome. We have not, nor to our knowledge, has any other company, received regulatory approval for a therapeutic based on this approach. We cannot be certain that our approach will lead to the development of approvable or marketable products. In addition, the efficacy potential of our microbiome therapeutics may vary based on indication and use in different patient populations including geographical areas. Finally, the FDA or other regulatory agencies may lack experience in evaluating the safety and efficacy of products based on microbiome therapeutics, which could result in a longer than expected regulatory review process or evolving FDA standards and guidance, increase our expected development costs and delay or prevent commercialization of our product candidates. Regulatory requirements governing microbiome therapies are still developing and may change in the future or may be influenced by our competitors’ product candidates if they receive FDA approval before we do. Regulatory authorities and advisory groups, and the new guidelines they promulgate, may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional preclinical studies or clinical trials, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of our current or future product candidates or lead to significant post-approval limitations or restrictions.

Microbiome therapies in general may not be successfully developed or commercialized or gain the acceptance of the public or the medical community. Our success will depend upon physicians who specialize in the treatment of diseases targeted by our product candidates that we pursue as drugs, prescribing potential treatments that involve the use of our product candidates in lieu of, or in addition to, existing treatments with which they are more familiar and for which greater clinical data may be available. Our success will also depend on consumer acceptance and adoption of our products that we commercialize. Adverse events in non-IND human clinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates, or in non-IND human clinical studies and clinical trials of others developing similar products or products that are perceived to be similar to ours, such as fecal microbiota transplant, or FMT, materials, as well as any other adverse findings that arise in connection with research and development in the microbiome field, could result in negative publicity and a decrease in demand for any product that we may develop. In addition, responses by the federal, state or foreign governments to negative public perception or ethical concerns may result in new legislation or regulations that could limit our ability to develop or commercialize any product candidates, obtain or maintain regulatory approval, identify alternate regulatory pathways to market or otherwise achieve profitability. More restrictive statutory regimes, government regulations or negative public opinion would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects and may delay or impair the development and commercialization of our product candidates or demand for any products we may develop.

Our microbiome therapeutics platform relies in part on third parties for biological materials, including human stool. Some biological materials have not always met our expectations or requirements, and any disruption in the supply of these

51

biological materials could materially adversely affect our business. For example, if any supplied biological materials are contaminated with pathogens or disease organisms, we would not be able to use such biological materials. Although we have control processes and screening procedures, biological materials are susceptible to damage and contamination and may contain active pathogens. While we screen for a broad set of pathogens as a part of our manufacturing process, the donated human stool may contain organisms of which we are not aware and that could have an adverse effect on the safety of our product candidates and on the outcomes of our preclinical studies or clinical trials. For example, our SARS-CoV-2 donor screening protocols may not be satisfactory to regulatory authorities, as the FDA has requested information about our protocols in the clinical hold letter we received in February 2022. Improper storage or shipment of these materials, by us or any third-party suppliers, may require us to destroy some of our raw materials or products which could create supply shortages, interruptions or other delays or require identification and contracting of additional third-party suppliers which we may not be able to do in a timely manner or on favorable terms.

Our relationship with OpenBiome may adversely affect our ability to develop our product candidates and subject us to increased liability.

The Microbiome Health Research Institute, Inc., or OpenBiome, is a non-profit organization that was co-founded in 2012 by our Chief Executive Officer and member of our board of directors, Mark Smith, Ph.D. OpenBiome operates a stool bank and sells and distributes fecal microbiota transplant products, or OpenBiome FMT Materials, for clinical research and for use in treating CDI not responding to standard therapy under its interpretation of the FDA’s policy of enforcement discretion. In July 2013, the FDA issued guidance stating that it intended to exercise a policy of enforcement discretion regarding the IND regulatory requirements for the use of FMT used to treat CDI not responding to standard therapies, provided that the treating physician obtains appropriate informed consent from the patient or his or her legally authorized representative. We have historically had a close relationship with OpenBiome and are currently and have previously been party to several agreements with OpenBiome related to, among other things, the license of various technology and intellectual property rights. In addition, Carolyn Edelstein, the co-founder and former Executive Director of OpenBiome, is married to Dr. Smith. Although we believe our agreements with OpenBiome have been negotiated at an arms-length basis, there may be a perception that the terms of any such agreements have not been fairly negotiated, which could increase regulatory scrutiny, adversely impact our reputation or otherwise impair our ability to operate effectively.

In 2016, we entered into a Master Strategic Affiliation Agreement with OpenBiome, or the Strategic Agreement, pursuant to which, among other things, we manufactured OpenBiome FMT Materials to specifications defined by OpenBiome for distribution and sale by OpenBiome through February 2019. These OpenBiome FMT Materials have been and may continue to be distributed and sold by OpenBiome, and administered to patients. The FDA may not agree with OpenBiome’s interpretation or application of the FDA’s enforcement discretion policy to its product distribution. We terminated the Strategic Agreement in 2020 as part of signing an asset purchase agreement, or the OpenBiome Agreement, and license agreement with OpenBiome, pursuant to which we acquired certain biological materials, equipment, and other assets, and cross-licensed certain intellectual property. The OpenBiome Agreement also retained certain existing intellectual property and biological materials licenses from the Master Strategic Affiliation Agreement into a stand-alone agreement. Although we are indemnified for causes of action relating to the distribution and sale of the OpenBiome FMT Materials, we may nonetheless become parties to potential product liability claims that are inherent in the research, development, manufacturing, marketing and use of pharmaceutical products such as OpenBiome FMT Materials.

Moreover, the availability of OpenBiome FMT Materials under the FDA’s policy of enforcement discretion, and for use in clinical research, may negatively prejudice and slow enrollment of clinical trials sponsored by us or our collaborators that are directed at the same or similar disease or condition, such as CDI. Additionally, while each of CP101 and FIN-211 is an orally administered biologic consisting of a complete microbiome and a distinct product from OpenBiome FMT Materials, with additional testing, manufacturing and control steps, it is possible that the FDA and others might perceive CP101, FIN-211 or any of our other product candidates as similar owing to their common raw material. The FDA has issued three safety alerts since 2019 related to the use of FMT treatment, including in March 2020 after OpenBiome reported occurrences of enteropathogenic E. coli and shigatoxin-producing E. coli in FMT recipients. This and similar adverse safety events associated with OpenBiome FMT Materials or other similar products manufactured or supplied by other third-party stool banks, physicians or others may cause the FDA to perceive CP101 or FIN-211 as unsafe and bring increased regulatory scrutiny to our clinical and manufacturing operations more broadly, lead to decreased confidence by patients and physicians in our product candidates, and result in reduced demand for any product that we may develop.

OpenBiome has also supplied us with biological materials derived from human stool, which we have used as raw materials, subject to additional testing, screening and processing, in the manufacture of our product candidates, such as CP101 and FIN-211, for use in our current and planned clinical trials. During the time we engaged OpenBiome to supply us with such human stool material, OpenBiome received a clinical hold from the FDA with respect to the need for new screening measures to

52

mitigate the risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from donor to recipient of its OpenBiome FMT materials, and the need for additional information regarding OpenBiome’s quality systems. This clinical hold was removed in January 2021. Although the OpenBiome clinical hold did not preclude us from receiving OpenBiome-supplied biological materials for our manufacturing activities, given that some materials were received while OpenBiome was under clinical hold, we may not be able to use these materials for such purposes if the FDA or other parties perceive such materials to be unsuitable for use in an investigational drug. For example, the FDA or other regulatory agencies may determine that the materials should not be used for reasons underlying the clinical hold, or different reasons. In addition, while we have tested these materials and reviewed manufacturing records to ensure they meet our quality standards, we are using an assay to screen for COVID-19 that the FDA may not deem acceptable; moreover, in its February 2022 clinical hold letter for our CP101 IND, the FDA requested additional information regarding this assay. In addition, we may not be able to recoup the costs associated with acquiring these biological materials from OpenBiome.

In addition, in connection with the closing of the transactions contemplated by the OpenBiome Agreement, we acquired certain capital equipment and assumed the contracts with certain service providers to which OpenBiome was a party. Although the OpenBiome Agreement is structured to exclude the assumption of any liabilities of OpenBiome, we may be subject to unknown liabilities with respect to the assets we have acquired or contracts we have assumed.

Clinical trials are difficult to design and implement, and they involve a lengthy and expensive process with uncertain outcomes. We may experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of CP101, FIN-211 or any other current or future product candidates.

Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process and our future clinical trial results may not be successful. We cannot guarantee that any of our ongoing and planned clinical trials will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all; for example, we have decided to pause development of CP101 in HBV at this time, which we believe will allow us to maximize our working capital available for investment in our wholly-owned recurrent CDI and ASD programs. Moreover, even if these trials are initiated or conducted on a timely basis, issues may arise that could result in the suspension or termination of such clinical trials.

We may experience delays in our ongoing clinical trials or preclinical studies and we do not know whether planned clinical trials will begin on time, need to be redesigned, enroll patients on time or in sufficient numbers, have sufficient drug supply for our product candidates on a timely basis or be completed on schedule, if at all. For example, enrollment in PRISM4 is currently paused following receipt from the FDA of a clinical hold letter on February 24, 2022. Further, because FIN-211 includes donor-derived components, the clinical hold will also delay initiation of our Phase 1b clinical trial in ASD. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing, and our ongoing and future clinical trials may not be successful. We also may experience numerous unforeseen events during our clinical trials that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize CP101, FIN-211 or any other current or future product candidates, including:

53

In addition, disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic may increase the likelihood that we encounter such difficulties or delays in initiating, enrolling, conducting or completing our planned and ongoing preclinical studies and clinical trials, as applicable. We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, or the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, or recommended for suspension or termination by the Data Safety Monitoring Board for such trial. A suspension or termination may be imposed due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a product or treatment, failure to establish or achieve clinically meaningful trial endpoints, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. Many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates. Further, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our clinical trial design and our interpretation of data from clinical trials, or may change the requirements for approval even after they have reviewed and commented on the design for our clinical trials.

Our product development costs will increase if we experience delays in clinical testing or marketing approvals. We do not know whether any of our clinical trials will begin as planned, will need to be restructured or will be completed on schedule, or at all. Significant clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates and may allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, potentially impairing our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and harming our business and results of operations. Any delays in our clinical development programs may harm our business, financial condition and results of operations significantly.

Our business and operations may be adversely affected by the evolving and ongoing COVID-19 global pandemic.

Our business and operations may be adversely affected by the effects of the ongoing COVID-19 global pandemic, which has resulted in various restrictions aimed at containing the virus, including public health directives and orders that, among other things and for various periods of time, directed individuals to shelter in place, directed businesses and governmental agencies to cease non-essential operations at physical locations, prohibited certain non-essential gatherings and events, and ordered cessation of non-essential travel. Future remote work policies and similar government orders or other restrictions on the conduct of business operations related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including as a result of variants of COVID-19, may negatively impact productivity and may disrupt our ongoing research and development activities and our clinical programs and timelines, the magnitude of which will depend, in part, on the length and severity of the restrictions and other limitations on our ability to conduct our business in the ordinary course. Further, such orders also may impact the availability or cost of materials, which would disrupt our supply chain and manufacturing efforts and could affect our ability to conduct ongoing and planned clinical trials and preparatory activities.

54

In connection with the COVID-19 pandemic, we experienced a slowdown to enrollment in our PRISM-EXT and PRISM4 clinical trials, as well as interruptions to operations at our donor centers, including certain periods during which we accepted limited donations due to staffing constraints. We may experience additional COVID-19 related disruptions in the future that could severely impact our clinical trials, including:

Known or unanticipated impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, including as a result of variants of COVID-19, may have a material adverse effect on our business. While the ultimate economic impact brought by, and the duration of, the COVID-19 pandemic are difficult to assess or predict, the pandemic has resulted, and could further result, in significant disruption of global financial markets, reducing our ability to access capital, which could in the future negatively affect our liquidity. In addition, a recession or market correction resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic could materially affect our business and the value of our common stock.

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to rapidly evolve. The extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic impacts our business and operations, including our clinical development and regulatory efforts, will depend on future developments that are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted with confidence at the time of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, such as the ultimate geographic spread of the disease, the duration of the outbreak, the impact of emerging variants, the duration and effect of business disruptions and the short- and long-term effects and ultimate effectiveness of the travel restrictions, quarantines, social distancing requirements, occupancy limits, vaccine mandates and business closures in the United States and other countries to contain and treat the disease, and the effectiveness and acceptance of vaccines. Accordingly, we do not yet know the full extent of potential delays or impacts on our business, our clinical and regulatory activities, healthcare systems or the global economy as a whole. However, these impacts could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

The demand for vaccines for COVID-19 and potential for manufacturing facilities and materials to be commandeered under the Defense Production Act of 1950, or equivalent foreign legislation, may make it more difficult to obtain materials or manufacturing slots for the products needed for our clinical trials, which could lead to delays in these trials. Moreover, since the Office of Vaccines Research and Review at FDA, which is responsible for review and approval of microbiome product candidates, is responsible for the review of COVID-19 vaccines, responses from FDA may be delayed. Many Review Divisions at FDA, including the Office of Vaccines Research and Review at FDA, have experienced delays in some timelines related to the Prescription Drug User Fee Act due to demands brought about by COVID-19.

In addition, to the extent the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic adversely affects our business and results of operations, it may also have the effect of heightening many of the other risks and uncertainties described in this “Risk Factors” section.

55

Our clinical trials may fail to demonstrate substantial evidence of the safety and efficacy of our product candidates or any future product candidates, which would prevent or delay or limit the scope of regulatory approval and commercialization.

To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to market and sell any of our product candidates, including CP101, FIN-211 and any other current or future product candidates, we must demonstrate through extensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that our investigational drug products are safe and effective for use in each targeted indication. Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical development process. Most product candidates that begin clinical trials are never approved by regulatory authorities for commercialization. We may be unable to establish clinical endpoints that applicable regulatory authorities would consider clinically meaningful, and a clinical trial can fail at any stage of testing. For example, in addition to gastrointestinal endpoints, our development program for FIN-211 in ASD includes exploration of behavioral endpoints, which are not yet well-established. If we fail to validate behavioral instruments for use in our ASD clinical protocols, we would not be able to rely upon those instruments or endpoints to support FDA approval. Further, the process of obtaining regulatory approval is expensive, often takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and can vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidates involved, as well as the target indications, patient population and regulatory agency. Prior to obtaining approval to commercialize CP101, FIN-211 and any other current or future product candidates in the United States or abroad, we, our collaborators or our potential future collaborators must demonstrate with substantial evidence from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials, and to the satisfaction of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, that such product candidates are safe and effective for their intended uses. For example, we plan to have further discussions with the FDA regarding the size and make-up of the safety database for CP101 which could result in the need for additional studies or delays in our development timelines.

Clinical trials that we conduct may not demonstrate the efficacy and safety necessary to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates. In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety or efficacy results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial procedures set forth in protocols, differences in the size and type of the patient populations, changes in and adherence to the clinical trial protocols and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. If the results of our ongoing or future clinical trials are inconclusive with respect to the efficacy of our product candidates, if we do not meet the clinical endpoints with statistical and clinically meaningful significance, or if there are safety concerns associated with our product candidates, we may be delayed in obtaining marketing approval, if at all. Additionally, any safety concerns observed in any one of our clinical trials in our targeted indications could limit the prospects for regulatory approval of our product candidates in those and other indications.

Even if the trials are successfully completed, clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and we cannot guarantee that the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will interpret the results as we do. More trials could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval, especially for indications such as ASD, for which clinical endpoints are not well-established. We cannot guarantee that the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will view our product candidates as having efficacy even if positive results are observed in clinical trials. Moreover, results acceptable to support approval in one jurisdiction may be deemed inadequate by another regulatory authority to support regulatory approval in that other jurisdiction. To the extent that the results of the trials are not satisfactory to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for support of a marketing application, approval of CP101, FIN-211 and any other current or future product candidates may be significantly delayed, or we may be required to expend significant additional resources, which may not be available to us, to conduct additional trials in support of potential approval of our product candidates. Even if regulatory approval is secured for a product candidate, the terms of such approval may limit the scope and use of the specific product candidate, which may also limit its commercial potential.

The results of preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Initial success in third-party studies or our ongoing clinical trials may not be indicative of results obtained when these trials are completed or in later-stage trials.

The results of nonclinical and preclinical studies and clinical trials may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. Furthermore, we have relied on third-party clinical research in order to inform certain aspects of our own clinical trials and preclinical studies. We have not independently verified the accuracy, safety or other results of such third-party studies, and we may be unable to replicate the results from such third-party studies. For example, insights gained from the use of FMT materials, including FMT clinical data, may not be predictive of our clinical trials, particularly given that the dosage form and potency, delivery mechanisms and manufacturing process vary significantly.

56

Accordingly, there can be no assurance that any of our clinical trials will ultimately be successful or support further clinical development of any of our product candidates. There is a high failure rate for product candidates proceeding through clinical trials. Many companies in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, including certain of our competitors in microbiome therapeutics, have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials after achieving positive results in early-stage development and we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, preclinical findings made while clinical trials were underway, or safety or efficacy observations made in preclinical studies and clinical trials, including previously unreported adverse events. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses and many companies that believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials nonetheless failed to obtain FDA approval. For example, we recently received a letter from the FDA requesting changes to the testing algorithm used to diagnose suspected CDI recurrences in PRISM4, which had been used in PRISM3. Additionally, products used in small early-stage studies may be from a limited number of donors, and it is possible that efficacy might be linked to the microbial community found in a specific donor or a limited set of donors, such that the results might not apply for a broader group of donors with varying microbial compositions. Any such setbacks in our clinical development could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Additionally, some of the clinical trials we conduct, including a portion of the PRISM4 trial, may include open-label trials conducted at a limited number of clinical sites on a limited number of patients. An “open-label” clinical trial is one where both the patient and investigator know whether the patient is receiving the investigational product candidate or either an existing approved product or placebo. Most typically, open-label clinical trials test only the investigational product candidate and sometimes may do so at different dose levels. Open-label clinical trials are subject to various limitations that may exaggerate any therapeutic effect as patients in open-label clinical trials are aware when they are receiving treatment. Open-label clinical trials may be subject to a “patient bias” where patients perceive their symptoms to have improved merely due to their awareness of receiving an experimental treatment. In addition, open-label clinical trials may be subject to an “investigator bias” where those assessing and reviewing the physiological outcomes of the clinical trials are aware of which patients have received treatment and may interpret the information of the treated group more favorably given this knowledge. Given that we plan to in the future conduct open-label clinical trials, the results from these clinical trials may not be predictive of future clinical trial results with these or other product candidates for which we include an open-label clinical trial when studied in a controlled environment with a placebo or active control.

Our product candidates may be associated with serious adverse, undesirable or unacceptable side effects or other properties or safety risks, which may delay or halt their clinical development, or prevent marketing approval. If such side effects are identified during the development of our product candidates or following approval we may suspend or abandon our development of such product candidates, the commercial profile of any approved label may be limited, or we may be subject to other significant negative consequences following marketing approval.

Undesirable side effects that may be caused by our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. While we have observed no treatment-related serious adverse events, or SAEs, to date in clinical trials of our lead product candidate CP101, the results from future preclinical studies and clinical trials of our other product candidates may identify safety concerns or other undesirable properties of our product candidates. Additionally, if we expand our product development for current or future product candidates into new patient populations or disease areas, side effects or adverse events not seen by our product candidates in earlier clinical research could emerge.

The results of our clinical trials of CP101, FIN-211 and future clinical trials of our other product candidates may show that our product candidates cause undesirable or unacceptable side effects or even death. In such an event, our trials could be suspended or terminated and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease further development of or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. The drug-related side effects could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and results of operations significantly.

Moreover, if our product candidates are associated with undesirable side effects in preclinical studies or clinical trials or have characteristics that are unexpected, we may elect to abandon their development or limit their development to more narrow uses or subpopulations in which the undesirable side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a risk-benefit perspective, which may limit the commercial expectations for the product candidate, if approved.

Additionally, adverse developments in clinical trials of pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical products conducted by others or with commercial products offered by others may cause the FDA or other regulatory oversight bodies to suspend or

57

terminate our clinical trials or change the requirements for approval of any of our product candidates or otherwise adversely impact the clinical and commercial development of our product candidates. Such adverse developments may cause the FDA to perceive CP101 or other current or future product candidates as unsafe and bring increased regulatory scrutiny to our clinical operations more broadly, lead to decreased confidence by patients, physicians and contract research organizations, or CROs, in our product candidates, and result in reduced demand for any product that we may develop if approved. For example, in June 2019, the FDA issued a safety alert regarding the risk of serious adverse reactions due to the transmission of multi-drug resistant organisms in connection with FMT treatment provided by a local, hospital-based FMT program. Two immunocompromised adults, one of whom later died, received FMT treatment from this hospital-based FMT program and subsequently developed infections caused by extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing E. coli. In March 2020, the FDA issued another safety alert regarding the potential of serious or life-threatening infections with the use of FMT treatment after OpenBiome reported occurrences of enteropathogenic E. coli and shigatoxin-producing E. coli in FMT recipients. Also in March 2020, FDA issued a safety alert regarding the potential risks of transmission of COVID-19 by FMT and placed our IND for CP101 on partial clinical hold.

Additionally, if any of our product candidates receives marketing approval and we or others later identify undesirable or unacceptable side effects caused by such products, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Any of these events could prevent us, our collaborators or our potential future partners from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the affected product or could substantially increase commercialization costs and expenses, which in turn could delay or prevent us from generating significant revenue from the sale of our product candidates, if approved.

We may find it difficult to enroll patients in our clinical trials, which could delay or prevent us from proceeding with, or otherwise adversely affect, clinical trials of our product candidates.

Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in clinical trials of our product candidates is critical to our success. The timely completion of our clinical trials in accordance with their protocols depends, among other things, on our ability to recruit a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate and remain in the trial until its conclusion. Patients may be unwilling to participate in our clinical trials because of negative publicity from adverse events related to novel therapeutic approaches, competitive clinical trials for similar patient populations, the existence of current treatments, such as FMT, or for other reasons, including the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and negative perceptions of our product candidates. For example, enrollment in PRISM4 commenced later than we anticipated due to, among other things, vendor delays and staffing shortages in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic. Enrollment in PRISM4 is currently paused following receipt from the FDA of a clinical hold letter on February 24, 2022, requesting additional information about our SARS-CoV-2 donor screening protocols. Further, because FIN-211 includes donor-derived components, the clinical hold will also delay initiation of our Phase 1b clinical trial in ASD. Any delays related to patient enrollment could result in increased costs, delays in advancing our product candidates, delays in testing the effectiveness of our product candidates or termination of the clinical trials altogether. We may not be able to identify, recruit and enroll a sufficient number of patients, or those with the required or

58

desired characteristics, to complete our clinical trials in a timely manner. Patient enrollment and trial completion is affected by many factors, including the:

Enrollment risks are heightened with respect to indications that are rare or orphan diseases, which may limit the pool of patients that may be enrolled in our planned clinical trials. For example, we are developing CP101 for the prevention of recurrent CDI, which does not have a large patient population, and, as a result, we may encounter difficulties enrolling subjects in our clinical trials evaluating CP101 for the prevention of recurrent CDI due, in part, to the small size of this patient population.

In addition, our clinical trials will compete with products that are available for use in the same therapeutic areas of our product candidates, and other clinical trials for product candidates that are in the same therapeutic areas as our product candidates, and this competition will reduce the number and types of patients available to us, because some patients who might have opted to enroll in our trials may instead opt to enroll in a trial being conducted by one of our competitors. For example, the availability of FMT materials for CDI not responding to standard therapies may affect our ability to enroll patients in our studies of CP101 in CDI. Since the number of qualified clinical investigators is limited, we expect to conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which will reduce the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials in such clinical trial site.

Delays in patient enrollment may result in increased costs or may affect the timing or outcome of our future clinical trials, which could prevent completion of these trials and adversely affect our ability to advance the development of our product candidates.

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

From time to time, we may publish interim, topline or preliminary data from our clinical trials. Preliminary and interim data from our clinical trials may change as more patient data become available. Preliminary or interim data from our clinical trials are not necessarily predictive of final results. Preliminary and interim data are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues, more patient data become available and we issue our final clinical trial report. Interim, topline and preliminary data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result,

59

preliminary, topline and interim data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Material adverse changes in the final data compared to the interim data could significantly harm our business prospects. In addition, certain patient and product samples from our clinical trials are or will be retained by third parties and used by them for further research and studies, and the data from such studies may be inconsistent or contrary to the results from our earlier clinical trials.

Further, others, including regulatory agencies, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, interpretations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate or product, if any, and our company in general. For example, regulatory agencies may disagree with our inclusion or exclusion of certain trial subjects from our clinical trial data or our interpretation of such data. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular preclinical study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is the material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure, and any information we determine not to disclose may ultimately be deemed significant with respect to future decisions, conclusions, views, activities or otherwise regarding a particular product, if any, product candidate or our business. If the preliminary and interim data that we report differ from actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, operating results, prospects or financial condition.

Preclinical development is uncertain. Our preclinical programs may experience delays or may never advance to clinical trials, which would adversely affect our ability to obtain regulatory approvals or commercialize these programs on a timely basis or at all, which would have an adverse effect on our business.

Before we can commence clinical trials for any product candidate, we may be required to complete extensive preclinical studies that support any future Investigational New Drug, or IND, applications in the United States, or similar applications in other jurisdictions. Conducting preclinical testing is a lengthy, time-consuming and expensive process and delays associated with product candidates for which we are directly conducting preclinical testing and studies may cause us to incur additional operating expenses. We cannot be certain of the timely completion or outcome of our preclinical testing and studies for CP101, FIN-211 or our other current or future product candidates and cannot predict if the FDA will accept our proposed clinical programs or if the outcome of our preclinical testing and foreign clinical trials will ultimately support the further development of our other product candidates. As a result, we cannot be sure that we will be able to submit INDs or similar applications for our preclinical programs on the timelines we expect, if at all, and we cannot be sure that submission of INDs or similar applications will result in the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities allowing clinical trials to begin.

The regulatory approval processes of the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities are lengthy, time consuming and inherently unpredictable, and if we are ultimately unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, our business will be substantially harmed.

The time required to obtain approval by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities is unpredictable but typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. In addition, approval policies, laws or regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. We have not obtained regulatory approval for any product candidate and it is possible that none of our existing product candidates or any product candidates we may seek to develop in the future will ever obtain regulatory approval.

Our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including the following:

60

This lengthy approval process as well as the unpredictability of future clinical trial results may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market any of our product candidates, which would significantly harm our business, financial condition and results of operations. The FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process, and determining when or whether regulatory approval will be obtained for any of our product candidates. Even if we believe the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities.

In addition, even if we were to obtain approval, regulatory authorities may approve any of our product candidates for fewer or more limited indications than we request, may not approve the price we intend to charge for our products, if any, may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials, or may approve a product candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of that product candidate. Any of the foregoing scenarios could materially harm the commercial prospects for our product candidates.

Even if we receive regulatory approval of a product candidate, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with such product candidate.

If any of our product candidates are approved, they will be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements for manufacturing, testing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, record-keeping, conduct of post-marketing studies and submission of safety, efficacy and other post-market information, including both federal and state requirements in the United States and requirements of comparable foreign regulatory authorities. In addition, we will be subject to continued compliance with cGMP and GCP requirements for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval.

Manufacturers and manufacturers’ facilities are required to comply with extensive FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authority requirements, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to cGMP regulations. As such, we and our contract manufacturers will be subject to continual review and inspections to assess compliance with cGMP and adherence to commitments made in any BLA, other marketing application, and previous responses to inspection

61

observations. Accordingly, we and others with whom we work must continue to expend time, money, and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production and quality control.

Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our product candidates may be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. The FDA may also require a REMS program as a condition of approval of our product candidates, which could entail requirements for long-term patient follow-up, a medication guide, physician communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. In addition, if the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority approves our product candidates, we will have to comply with requirements including submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports and registration.

The FDA may impose consent decrees or 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 our product candidates, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with our third-party manufacturers or manufacturing and testing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information; imposition of post-market studies or clinical trials to assess new safety risks; or imposition of distribution restrictions or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences include, among other things:

The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising, and promotion of products that are placed on the market. Products may be promoted only for the approved indications 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 and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability including, among other things, adverse publicity, warning letters, corrective advertising and potential civil and criminal penalties. Physicians may prescribe, in their independent professional medical judgment, 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. 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. The federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion of off-label use and has enjoined companies from engaging in off-label promotion. The FDA and other regulatory agencies have also required that companies enter into consent decrees or permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed. However, companies may share truthful and not misleading information that is otherwise consistent with a product’s FDA approved labeling.

The holder of a BLA must submit new or supplemental applications and obtain approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling, or manufacturing process. We could also be asked to conduct post-marketing clinical trials to verify the safety and efficacy of our products in general or in specific patient subsets. If original marketing approval was obtained via the accelerated approval pathway, we could be required to conduct a successful post-marketing clinical trial to

62

confirm clinical benefit for our products. An unsuccessful post-marketing study or failure to complete such a study could result in the withdrawal of marketing approval.

The policies of the FDA and of comparable foreign regulatory authorities may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

We may in the future conduct clinical trials for product candidates outside the United States, and the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not accept data from such trials.

We have previously conducted, and plan in the future to conduct, one or more clinical trials outside the United States, including in, but not limited to, Canada, Europe, Australia, New Zealand and Hong Kong. The acceptance of study data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States or another jurisdiction by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority may be subject to certain conditions or may not be accepted at all. In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the basis for marketing approval in the United States, the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (i) the data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice; and (ii) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to GCP regulations. Additionally, the FDA’s clinical trial requirements, including sufficient size of patient populations and statistical powering, must be met. Many foreign regulatory authorities have similar approval requirements. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. Results for our clinical trials may differ by jurisdiction as a result of varying standards of care or local restrictions on reimbursement from third-party payors for clinical trials, thereby affecting the willingness of the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority to accept such data. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States or the applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which could be costly and time-consuming, and which may result in product candidates that we may develop not receiving approval for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction. In addition, conduct of clinical trials on a global basis may expose us to geopolitical risks impacting the ability of institutions and patients to participate in our trials.

We may pursue the development of certain of our product candidates in combination with other therapies, and regulatory approval, safety or supply issues with these other therapies may delay or prevent the development and approval of our product candidates.

In the near future, we may explore the use of our product candidates in combination with other therapies, including those that are not yet approved. If we choose to develop a product candidate for use in combination with an approved therapy, we are subject to the risk that the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could revoke approval of, or that safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise with, the therapy used in combination with our product candidate. If the therapies we use in combination with our product candidates are replaced as the standard of care, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to conduct additional clinical trials, or we may not be able to obtain adequate reimbursement from third-party payors. The occurrence of any of these risks could result in our product candidates, if approved, being removed from the market or being less successful commercially.

Where we develop a product candidate for use in combination with a therapy that has not been approved by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, we will not be able to market our product candidate for use in combination with such an unapproved therapy, unless and until the unapproved therapy receives regulatory approval. These unapproved therapies face the same risks described with respect to our product candidates currently in development, including serious adverse effects and delays in their clinical trials. In addition, other companies may also develop their products or product candidates in combination with the unapproved therapies with which we are developing our product candidates for use in combination. Any setbacks in these companies’ clinical trials, including the emergence of serious adverse effects, may delay or prevent the development and approval of our product candidates.

If the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities do not approve or revoke their approval of, or if safety, efficacy, manufacturing, or supply issues arise with, therapies we choose to evaluate in combination with any of our product candidates, we may be unable to obtain regulatory approval of or to commercialize such product candidates in combination with these therapies.

63

Risks Related to the Manufacture of Our Product Candidates

The manufacture of our product candidates is complex and we may encounter difficulties in production, particularly with respect to process development or scaling-up of our manufacturing capabilities.

Our product candidates are biologics that consist of bacteria and may include other microorganisms. The process of manufacturing our products is complex, highly regulated and subject to multiple risks. The manufacture of our product candidates involves complex processes, including obtaining biological material (human stool) from qualified third-party donors for CP101 and FIN-211. As a result of these complexities, the cost to manufacture our product candidates in particular is generally higher than traditional small molecule chemical compounds, and the manufacturing process is less reliable and is more difficult to reproduce.

Further, as our product candidates are developed through early- to late-stage clinical trials towards approval and commercialization, we may make alterations to these products and their method of manufacture and use, including changes to our manufacturing processes, in an effort to optimize processes and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives, and any of these changes could cause our product candidates to perform differently than they did in the past and affect the results of planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials. In such circumstances, the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities may require that we conduct bridging comparability testing or other additional clinical studies to confirm the clinical relevance of prior data. For example, early prototype versions of CP101 were manufactured by investigators at the University of Minnesota using certain different techniques and equipment than we have used and intend to use as we continue to advance CP101.

Historically, early versions of CP101 were manufactured using unoptimized processes by third-party research collaborators that we have not used, or do not intend to use, in more advanced clinical trials or commercialization. We have, and may continue to, alter our manufacturing processes, product release criteria, dose strength or dosing regimen, and other aspects of CP101 to optimize it for late-stage clinical trials or commercialization. Although we are working to develop commercially viable processes, doing so is a difficult and uncertain task, and there are risks associated with scaling to the level required for advanced clinical trials or commercialization, including, among others, cost overruns, potential problems with process scale-out, process reproducibility, stability issues, lot consistency, and timely availability of reagents or raw materials. As a result of these challenges, we may experience delays in our clinical development and/or commercialization plans. For example, in recent correspondence, the FDA has asked for additional information regarding the validation package for one of our release tests, which is utilized for both CP101 and FIN-211; that validation package will need to be reviewed by the FDA before we are able to proceed with enrollment in PRISM4, which could delay the trial. If we receive additional questions from the FDA regarding the validation package, the timelines for our trials could be further delayed.

We are still in the process of developing and scaling-up our manufacturing processes and quality systems for certain of our other product candidates. These products contain proprietary bacterial strains that have never been manufactured in a scale sufficient for use in a clinical trial or for commercialization. We can make no assurances that we will be able to manufacture these products, or components of these products, in a cost effective manner or at the level required for clinical trials or commercialization.

Further, we plan in the future to conduct one or more clinical trials outside the United States. Jurisdictions outside of the United States, including Europe, have distinct regulatory requirements that our facilities, materials, manufacturing processes, and quality systems may not satisfy. If we are unable to meet required standards, we may be unable to conduct trials or commercialize our product candidates in certain jurisdictions outside of the United States.

We rely on third-party donors of biological material to manufacture certain product candidates such as CP101 and FIN-211, and if we do not obtain an adequate supply of acceptable material from those qualified donors, the clinical and commercial supply of these product candidates may be adversely impacted.

We use human stool from extensively-screened third-party donors as starting material in the manufacture of several of our product candidates, including CP101 and FIN-211. The stool that is received from these third-party donors is tested for certain pathogens and processed without the use of replication or culturing to form an active ingredient in our products. Our ability to manufacture CP101, FIN-211 and other product candidates using donor-derived materials at clinical and commercial scale depends on obtaining a consistent and adequate supply of stool material. We are not currently aware of alternative sources of supply that would be sufficient to meet our clinical and commercial needs. Therefore, any delay of our ability to manufacture using donor-derived materials could significantly impact our clinical timelines.

64

In the past, we have relied on stool donor programs operated by OpenBiome and the University of Minnesota for the supply of human stool material used in the manufacture of our product candidates, including CP101. In connection with the Asset Purchase Agreement with OpenBiome, we have licensed certain technology and have acquired assets that enable our internal stool donor program in support of the clinical development and commercialization of CP101 and our other product candidates.

The stool donor program on which we rely involves the screening of potential human stool donors using defined screening criteria. Only a small fraction of potential human donors that we will evaluate will be able to meet these criteria and enroll in our donor program. There can be no assurances that we will have enough qualified third-party donors within our donor program, or enough material derived from donors in our program, to meet clinical or commercial demand. We may also have difficulty enrolling and retaining enough qualified donors in our donor program. If we are unable to enroll a sufficient number of qualified donors in our stool donor program, or if we are unable to retain donors within our program or receive enough stool from donors within our program, our ability to manufacture CP101, FIN-211 and other product candidates may be delayed or adversely impacted.

While the stool donor program on which we rely involves extensive screening of potential entrants, we can make no assurances that it will screen for, or be able to identify, all diseases and conditions that could adversely affect the health of persons who use or consume products that contain biological material from those donors. The screening processes may fail to identify certain existing diseases or conditions in the humans that we evaluate for entry into our donor program. In addition, donors enrolled in our donor program may develop new diseases or conditions, or the worsening of pre-existing or underlying diseases or conditions, that we may fail to identify. The use of stool material from a third-party donor who has a certain condition or disease may result in material adverse effects to our business, including supply chain disruptions resulting from the recall or destruction of affected starting material or product, or adverse reactions in patients who use or consume products derived from that donor. For example, in March 2020, the FDA required retrospective testing and the recall and destruction of the affected product after OpenBiome, a supplier of human stool material, reported occurrences of enteropathogenic E. coli and shigatoxin-producing E. coli in FMT recipients.

While we extensively test the biological materials that we receive from qualified third-party donors or suppliers for the presence of certain pathogens and other microorganisms, there can be no assurances that we will detect all pathogens and other microorganisms in our products, which could result in an adverse reaction in persons who use or consume our products. Our testing processes may fail to identify pathogens in the stool that we receive from donors within our donor program, or such testing processes may be unacceptable to regulatory authorities. For example, in the clinical hold letter we received on February 24, 2022 for our CP101 IND, the FDA requested more information with respect to, among other things, our SARS-CoV-2 testing methods. In addition, the emergence of new pathogens could affect the availability of stool donors, or require us to develop new testing processes to test both new and existing material and product, either of which could cause delays or shortage in the manufacture and distribution of our products. The presence of pathogens in the stool material that we receive from third-party donors may also result in adverse reactions in persons who use or consume products that are derived from that material. Additionally, regulatory or industry pathogen testing requirements may change over time, possibly making it more challenging to locate qualified donors, or requiring the development and validation of new test methods, which could adversely affect our ability to collect adequate supply and increase costs related to product manufacturing. For example, screening for enteropathogenic E. coli has resulted in exclusion of otherwise qualified donors.

We operate our own manufacturing facility for certain product candidates, which requires significant resources and we may fail to successfully operate our facility, which could adversely affect our clinical trials and the commercial viability of our product candidates.

We recently completed construction of our manufacturing facility to support the manufacture of our product candidates, including CP101 and FIN-211, for use in clinical development or for potential commercial sale. We may not be able to manufacture enough product at this facility to meet the clinical and commercial demand for our product candidates. We also cannot be sure that the manufacturing processes employed by us will result in products that will be safe and effective or that we will be able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA or other regulatory authorities that our quality management systems are sufficient to ensure such results. Moreover, we may run into delays or cost overruns in connection with the qualification and validation of our manufacturing facility, including the transfer of technology into that recently completed facility, which would increase our net losses and have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital. For example, the FDA may find deficiencies in our technology transfer process or require one or more comparability studies of our drug product using test methods that we would need to develop. The actual cost to manufacture and process our product candidates could be greater than we expect and could materially and adversely affect the commercial viability of our product candidates, if approved. There is a lack of third-party CMOs willing or able to manufacture whole community product candidates like CP101 and FIN-211. If we are unable to successfully manufacture and process our product candidates, we

65

might not be able to produce some of our products at a level that would be sufficient to meet our clinical and commercial needs.

The manufacture of microbiome therapeutics is complex and requires significant expertise, including the development of advanced manufacturing techniques and process controls. Manufacturers of products derived from human biological material often encounter difficulties in production, particularly in scaling out and validating initial production and ensuring the absence of contamination. These problems include difficulties with production costs and yields, quality control, including stability of the product, quality assurance testing, operator error, shortages of qualified personnel, as well as compliance with strictly enforced federal, state and foreign regulations. Furthermore, if contaminants are discovered in our supply of raw materials or in our manufacturing facilities or manufacturing facilities operated by our third-party suppliers, such manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination. We cannot assure you that any stability or other issues relating to the manufacture of our product candidates will not occur in the future.

Our operations will remain subject to review and oversight by the FDA and the FDA could object to our use of our manufacturing facility. Prior to licensure to manufacture our product candidates, we must first receive approval from the FDA, which we may never obtain. Such approval may be contingent on a pre-approval inspection of our manufacturing facility. Even if approved, we would be subject to ongoing periodic unannounced inspection by the FDA and corresponding state agencies to ensure strict compliance with cGMP and other government regulations. Our license to manufacture product candidates will be subject to continued regulatory review.

In addition, we may fail to manage the logistics of storing and shipping our product candidates, particularly as our product candidates are required to be stored at certain pre-defined refrigerated temperatures. Storage failures and shipment delays and problems caused by us, our vendors or other factors not in our control, such as weather, could result in loss of usable product or prevent or delay the delivery of product candidates to patients. We may also experience manufacturing difficulties due to resource constraints or as a result of labor disputes. If we were to encounter any of these difficulties, our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates would be jeopardized.

Risks Related to the Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

We have never commercialized a product candidate and may experience delays or unexpected difficulties in obtaining regulatory approval for our current or future product candidates for our initial or potential additional indications.

We have never obtained regulatory approval for, or commercialized, a drug. It is possible that the FDA may refuse to accept any or all of our planned BLAs for substantive review or may conclude after review of our data that our application is insufficient to obtain regulatory approval for any product candidates. If the FDA does not approve any of our planned BLAs, it may require that we conduct additional costly clinical, nonclinical or manufacturing validation studies before it will reconsider our applications. Depending on the extent of these or any other FDA-required studies, approval of any BLA or other application that we submit may be significantly delayed, possibly for several years, or may require us to expend more resources than we have available. Any failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approvals would prevent us from commercializing our current or future product candidates, generating revenues and achieving and sustaining profitability. It is also possible that additional studies, if performed and completed, may not be considered sufficient by the FDA to approve any BLA or other application that we submit. If any of these outcomes occur, we may be forced to abandon the development of our product candidates, which would materially adversely affect our business and could potentially cause us to cease operations. We face similar risks for our applications in foreign jurisdictions.

We currently have no marketing and sales organization and have no experience as a company in marketing products. If we are unable to establish marketing and sales capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our product candidates, if approved, we may not be able to generate product revenue.

We currently have no sales, marketing or distribution capabilities and have no experience in marketing products. We intend to develop an in-house marketing organization and sales force, which will require significant capital expenditures, management resources and time. We will have to compete with other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to recruit, hire, train and retain marketing and sales personnel.

If we are unable or decide not to establish internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, we will pursue arrangements with third-party sales, marketing, and distribution collaborators regarding the sales and marketing of our products, if approved. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to establish or maintain such arrangements on favorable terms or at all, or if we are able to do so, that these third-party arrangements will provide effective sales forces or marketing

66

and distribution capabilities. Any revenue we receive will depend upon the efforts of such third parties, which may not be successful. We may have little or no control over the marketing and sales efforts of such third parties and our revenue from product sales may be lower than if we had commercialized our product candidates ourselves. We also face competition in our search for third parties to assist us with the sales and marketing efforts of our product candidates.

There can be no assurance that we will be able to develop in-house sales and distribution capabilities or establish or maintain relationships with third-party collaborators to commercialize any product in the United States or overseas.

We have received Fast Track designation for CP101 for the prevention of recurrent CDI, and we may seek Fast Track designation for our other product candidates. Even if received, Fast Track designation may not actually lead to a faster review or approval process and does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval.

We have received Fast Track designation for CP101 for the prevention of recurrent CDI, and we may seek Fast Track designation for our other product candidates. If a drug or biologic is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and the product demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for this condition, the sponsor may apply for Fast Track designation for a particular indication. There is no assurance that the FDA will grant this status to any of our other proposed product candidates. If granted, Fast Track designation makes a product eligible for more frequent interactions with FDA to discuss the development plan and clinical trial design, as well as rolling review of the application, which means that the company can submit completed sections of its marketing application for review prior to completion of the entire submission. Marketing applications of product candidates with Fast Track designation may qualify for priority review under the policies and procedures offered by the FDA, but the Fast Track designation does not assure any such qualification or ultimate marketing approval by the FDA. The FDA has broad discretion whether or not to grant Fast Track designation, so even if we believe a particular product candidate is eligible for this designation, there can be no assurance that the FDA would decide to grant it. Even if we do receive Fast Track designation, we may not experience a faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional FDA procedures, and receiving a Fast Track designation does not provide any assurance of ultimate FDA approval. In addition, the FDA may withdraw Fast Track designation at any time if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program.

We have received Breakthrough Therapy designation for CP101 for the prevention of recurrent CDI, and we may seek Breakthrough Therapy designation for our other product candidates. Even if received, Breakthrough Therapy designation may not actually lead to a faster review or approval process and does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval.

We have received Breakthrough Therapy designation for CP101 for the prevention of recurrent CDI, and may, in the future, apply for Breakthrough Therapy designation for other product candidates in the United States. A Breakthrough Therapy product candidate is defined as a product candidate that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that such product candidate may demonstrate substantial improvement on one or more clinically significant endpoints over existing therapies. The FDA will seek to ensure the sponsor of a Breakthrough Therapy product candidate receives: (i) intensive guidance on an efficient drug development program; (ii) intensive involvement of senior managers and experienced staff on a proactive, collaborative and cross-disciplinary review; and (iii) a rolling review process whereby the FDA may consider reviewing portions of a BLA before the sponsor submits the complete application. Product candidates designated as breakthrough therapies by the FDA may be eligible for priority review if supported by clinical data.

Designation as a Breakthrough Therapy is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe one of our product candidates meets the criteria for designation as a Breakthrough Therapy, the FDA may disagree. In any event, the receipt of a Breakthrough Therapy designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to products considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and, in any event, does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even though CP101 has been designated as a Breakthrough Therapy product candidate, the FDA may later decide that it no longer meets the conditions for designation or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened.

Due to our limited resources and access to capital, we must, and have in the past decided to, prioritize development of certain product candidates over other potential product candidates. These decisions may prove to have been wrong and may adversely affect our ability to develop our own programs, our attractiveness as a commercial partner and may ultimately have an impact on our commercial success.

67

Because we have limited resources and access to capital to fund our operations, we must decide which product candidates to pursue and the amount of resources to allocate to each. For example, we have decided to pause development of CP101 in HBV, which we believe will allow us to maximize our working capital available for investment in our wholly-owned recurrent CDI and ASD programs. Our decisions concerning the allocation of research, collaboration, management and financial resources toward particular product candidates or therapeutic areas may not lead to the development of viable commercial products and may divert resources away from better opportunities. Similarly, our decisions to delay, terminate or collaborate with third parties in respect of certain product development programs may also prove not to be optimal and could cause us to miss valuable opportunities. If we make incorrect determinations regarding the market potential of our product candidates or misread trends in the biopharmaceutical industry, in particular for our lead product candidate, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected and may cause us to reprioritize our planned trials and use of funds for planned trials.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates, the products may not gain market acceptance among physicians, patients, hospitals and others in the medical community.

The use of microbiome therapies is a recent development and may not become broadly accepted by physicians, patients, hospitals and others in the medical community. Various factors will influence whether our product candidates are accepted in the market, including:

If our product candidates are approved for commercialization but fail to achieve market acceptance among physicians, patients, hospitals or others in the medical community, we will not be able to generate significant revenue.

In addition, although our product candidates differ in certain ways from other microbiome approaches, SAEs or deaths in other clinical trials involving the microbiome, or in clinical trials involving therapeutic approaches similar to ours, even if not ultimately attributable to our product or product candidates, could result in increased government regulation, unfavorable public perception and publicity, potential regulatory delays in the testing or licensing of our product candidates, stricter labeling requirements for those product candidates that are licensed, and a decrease in demand for any such product candidates.

68

Even if our products achieve market acceptance, we may not be able to maintain that market acceptance over time if new products or technologies are introduced that are more favorably received than our products, are more cost effective or render our products obsolete.

If the market opportunities for our product candidates are smaller than we believe they are, even assuming approval of a product candidate, our business may suffer.

Our projections of both the number of people who are affected by diseases within our potential target indications, as well as the subset of these people who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates, are based on our beliefs and estimates. These estimates have been derived from a variety of sources, including the scientific literature, healthcare utilization databases and market research, and may prove to be incorrect. Further, new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The number of patients may turn out to be lower than expected. Likewise, the potentially addressable patient population for each of our product candidates may be limited or may not be amenable to treatment with our product candidates, and new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, which would adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We face substantial competition, which may result in others developing or commercializing drugs before or more successfully than us.

The biopharmaceutical industry is characterized by intense competition and rapid innovation. Our competitors may be able to develop other drugs that are able to achieve similar or better results that our product candidates. Our potential competitors include major multinational pharmaceutical companies, established biotechnology companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and universities and other research institutions. Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial, technical and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations and well-established sales forces. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly as they develop novel approaches to treating disease indications that our product candidates are also focused on treating. Established pharmaceutical companies may also invest heavily to accelerate discovery and development of novel therapeutics or to in-license novel therapeutics that could make the product candidates that we develop obsolete. Mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated in our competitors. Competition may increase further as a result of advances in the commercial applicability of technologies and greater availability of capital for investment in these industries. Our competitors, either alone or with collaborative partners, may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing on an exclusive basis drug or biologic products that are more effective, safer, more easily commercialized or less costly than our product candidates or may develop proprietary technologies or secure patent protection that we may need for the development of our technologies and products. We believe the key competitive factors that will affect the development and commercial success of our product candidates are efficacy, safety, tolerability, reliability, convenience of use, price and reimbursement.

We face competition from segments of the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other related markets that pursue the development of microbiome therapies. We are aware of a number of companies focused on developing microbiome therapeutics in various indications. For CP101, we are aware that Seres Therapeutics, Inc. and Rebiotix, Inc. each have a product candidate that has completed Phase 3 trials for recurrent CDI and are pursuing FDA approval to enable subsequent commercialization. In November 2021, Rebiotix filed a BLA for RBX-2660, their lead product in recurrent CDI, and Seres has indicated that they plan to file a BLA in 2022. In addition, we face competition from other therapies which are designed to treat the indications targeted by our product candidates.

We anticipate that we will continue to face intense and increasing competition as new treatments enter the market and advanced technologies become available. There can be no assurance that our competitors are not currently developing, or will not in the future develop, products that are equally or more effective or are more economically attractive than any of our current or future product candidates. Competing products may gain faster or greater market acceptance than our products, if any, and medical advances or rapid technological development by competitors may result in our product candidates becoming non-competitive or obsolete before we are able to recover our research and development and commercialization expenses. If we or our product candidates do not compete effectively, it may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

69

If either we or our collaborators obtain approval to commercialize any of our product candidates outside of the United States, a variety of risks associated with international operations could adversely affect our business.

If any of our product candidates are approved for commercialization, we may seek to enter into agreements with third parties to market them in certain jurisdictions outside the United States. We expect that we would be subject to additional risks related to international pharmaceutical operations, including:

As an organization, we have no prior experience in these areas. In addition, there are complex regulatory, tax, labor and other legal requirements imposed by individual countries in Europe with which we may need to comply. If we are unable to successfully manage the challenges of international expansion and operations, our business and operating results could be harmed.

Coverage and adequate reimbursement may not be available for CP101, FIN-211 or any other current or future product candidates, which could make it difficult for us to sell profitably or at all, if approved.

Market acceptance and sales of any product candidates that we commercialize, if approved, will depend in part on the extent to which reimbursement for these drugs and related treatments will be available from third-party payors, including government health administration authorities, managed care organizations, pharmacy benefit management organizations, and other private health insurers. Microbiome therapy is a novel therapeutic approach and neither we nor, to our knowledge, any other company has received regulatory approval for a therapeutic based on this approach. We cannot be certain that third-party payors will provide sufficient reimbursement for any product candidates that we commercialize, if approved. Third-party payors decide which therapies they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. Reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the third-party payor’s determination that use of a product is:

70

While no uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement exists in the United States, third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own coverage and reimbursement policies. However, decisions regarding the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided for any product candidates that we develop will be made on a payor-by-payor basis. Therefore, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a drug does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage, and adequate reimbursement, for the drug. Obtaining positive Medicare coverage and reimbursement will be critical to the commercial success of CP101, if approved, as a large portion of the patient population with CDI are Medicare beneficiaries. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for CP101 or any current or future product candidate for which we receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future. Thus, if we are not able to secure coverage and Medicare reimbursement at sufficient levels, we may not be able to reach our intended target market for CP101, if approved, which would adversely affect our revenue and profits. Additionally, a third-party payor’s decision to provide coverage for a therapy does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Each payor determines whether or not it will provide coverage for a therapy, what amount it will pay the manufacturer for the therapy, and on what tier of its formulary it will be placed. The position on a payor’s list of covered drugs, or formulary, generally determines the co-payment that a patient will need to make to obtain the therapy and can strongly influence the adoption of such therapy by patients and physicians. We expect that the price of CP101, if approved, will be substantial, so the availability of coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors will be necessary to make CP101 assessable to patients. Patients who are prescribed treatments for their conditions and providers prescribing such services generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the associated healthcare costs. If coverage and adequate reimbursement is not available, or is available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates. Even if coverage is provided, the approved reimbursement amount may not be high enough to allow us to establish or maintain pricing sufficient to realize a sufficient return on our investment. Patients are unlikely to use our products unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover a significant portion of the cost of our products.

Third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. We cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement will be available for any drug that we commercialize and, if reimbursement is available, what the level of reimbursement will be. Inadequate coverage and reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any drug for which we obtain marketing approval. If coverage and adequate reimbursement are not available, or are available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize CP101 or any other current or future product candidates that we develop. Outside the United States, the commercialization of therapeutics is generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost containment initiatives in Europe, Canada and other countries has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of therapeutics such as our product candidates. In many countries, particularly the countries of the European Union, medical product prices are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after a product receives marketing approval. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product candidate to other available therapies. In general, product prices under such systems are substantially lower than in the United States. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for products but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our product candidates. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our products may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits.

Even if we are successful in obtaining regulatory approval, commercial success of any approved products will also depend in large part on the availability of insurance coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors, including government payors, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, and managed care organizations, which may be affected by existing and future healthcare reform measures designed to reduce the cost of healthcare. Third-party payors could require us to conduct additional studies, including post-marketing studies related to the cost-effectiveness of a product, to qualify for reimbursement, which could be costly and divert our resources. Further, coverage policies and third-party payor reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products for which we receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future. If government and other healthcare payors were not to provide adequate insurance coverage and reimbursement levels for one any of our products once approved, market acceptance and commercial success would be limited.

71

We may become exposed to costly and damaging liability claims, either when testing our product candidates in the clinic or at the commercial stage, and our product liability insurance may not cover all damages from such claims.

We are exposed to potential product liability and professional indemnity risks that are inherent in the research, development, manufacturing, marketing and use of biopharmaceutical products. While we currently have no products that have been approved for commercial sale, from 2017 to 2019, we manufactured FMT materials, produced to specifications defined by OpenBiome, that were and may still be distributed and sold by OpenBiome for use under its interpretation of the FDA’s policy of enforcement discretion for CDI not responding to standard therapies and for use in clinical research. This past use, as well as the current and future use of product candidates by us and our collaborators in clinical trials, and the potential sale of any approved products in the future, may expose us to liability claims. The FDA may not agree with OpenBiome’s interpretation or application of the FDA’s enforcement discretion policy to its product distribution activities, including its distributions to clinical sites without an IND in place with the FDA. These claims might be made by patients who use the product, healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies, our collaborators or others selling such products. Any claims against us, regardless of their merit, could be difficult and costly to defend and could materially adversely affect the market for our product candidates or any prospects for commercialization of our product candidates. Although the clinical trial process is designed to identify and assess potential side effects, it is always possible that a product, even after regulatory approval, may exhibit unforeseen side effects. If any of our product candidates were to cause adverse side effects during clinical trials or after approval of the product candidate, we may be exposed to substantial liabilities. Physicians and patients may not comply with any warnings that identify known potential adverse effects and patients who should not use our product candidates. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

Although we believe we maintain adequate product liability insurance for our product candidates, it is possible that our liabilities could exceed our insurance coverage. We intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products if we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates. However, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or obtain insurance coverage that will be adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise. If a successful product liability claim or series of claims is brought against us for uninsured liabilities or in excess of insured liabilities, our assets may not be sufficient to cover such claims and our business operations could be impaired.

Should any of the events described above occur, this could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to Government Regulation

Our relationships with customers, healthcare providers, including physicians, and third-party payors are subject, directly or indirectly, to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws, health information privacy and security laws, and other healthcare laws and regulations. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face substantial penalties.

Healthcare providers, including physicians, and third-party payors in the United States and elsewhere will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our current and future arrangements with healthcare professionals, principal investigators, consultants, customers and third-party payors subject us to various federal and state fraud and abuse laws and other healthcare laws, including, without limitation, the

72

federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal civil and criminal false claims laws and the law commonly referred to as the Physician Payments Sunshine Act and regulations promulgated under such laws. These laws will impact, among other things, our clinical research, proposed sales, marketing and educational programs, and other interactions with healthcare professionals. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy laws by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct or may conduct our business. The laws that will affect our operations include, but are not limited to:

73

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including, without limitation, civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, reputational harm, exclusion from participating in federal and state funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, contractual damages, diminished profits and future earnings, reputational harm and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could harm our business.

The risk of our being found in violation of these laws is increased by the fact that many of them have not been fully interpreted by the regulatory authorities or the courts, and their provisions are open to a variety of interpretations. Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. Any action taken against us for violation of these laws, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. The shifting compliance environment and the need to build and maintain robust and expandable systems to comply with multiple jurisdictions with different compliance and/or reporting requirements increases the possibility that a healthcare company may run afoul of one or more of the requirements.

Even if we obtain FDA approval of any of our product candidates, we may never obtain approval for or commercialize any of them in any other jurisdiction, which would limit our ability to realize their full market potential.

In order to market any products in any particular jurisdiction, we must establish and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements on a country-by-country basis regarding safety and efficacy.

Approval by the FDA in the United States does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions. However, the failure to obtain approval in one jurisdiction may negatively impact our ability to obtain approval elsewhere. In addition, clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and regulatory approval in one country does not guarantee regulatory approval in any other country.

Approval processes vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and validation and additional administrative review periods. Seeking foreign regulatory approval could result in difficulties and increased costs for us and require additional preclinical studies or clinical trials that could be costly and time consuming. Regulatory requirements can vary widely from country to country and could delay or prevent the introduction of our products in those countries. We do not have any product candidates approved for sale in any jurisdiction, including in international markets, and we do not have experience in obtaining regulatory approval in international markets. If we fail to comply with regulatory requirements in international markets or to obtain and maintain required approvals, or if regulatory approvals in international markets are delayed, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of any product we develop will be unrealized.

74

If approved, our product candidates will be regulated as biologics, and thus may face competition from biosimilars approved through an abbreviated regulatory pathway.

We anticipate that our product candidates will be regulated as biological products. The ACA includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological 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 BLA for the competing product containing the sponsor’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity, and potency of the other company’s product. The law is complex and is still being interpreted and implemented by the FDA. As a result, its ultimate impact, implementation, and meaning are subject to uncertainty.

We believe that any of our product candidates approved as a biological product under a BLA should qualify for the 12-year period of exclusivity. However, there is a risk that this exclusivity could be shortened due to congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider our investigational medicines to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for generic competition sooner than anticipated. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of litigation. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once licensed, will be substituted for any one of our reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biological products is not yet clear, and will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing.

If competitors are able to obtain marketing approval for biosimilars referencing our products, our products may become subject to competition from such biosimilars, with the attendant competitive pressure and consequences.

Healthcare legislative or regulatory reform measures may have a negative impact on our business and results of operations.

In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and continue to be, several legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities, and affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval.

Among policy makers and payors in the United States and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and/or expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. For example, in March 2010, the ACA was passed, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both the government and private insurers, and significantly impacts the United States pharmaceutical industry. The ACA, among other things: (i) established an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports certain specified branded prescription drugs and biologic agents apportioned among these entities according to their market share in some government healthcare programs; (ii) expanded the entities eligible for discounts under the 340B drug pricing program; (iii) increased the statutory minimum rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program to 23.1% and 13% of the average manufacturer price for most branded and generic drugs, respectively, and capped the total rebate amount for innovator drugs at 100% of the Average Manufacturer Price, or AMP; (iv) expanded the eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs by, among other things, allowing states to offer Medicaid coverage to additional individuals and by adding new eligibility categories for individuals with income at or below 133% of the federal poverty level, thereby potentially increasing manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability; (v) created a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for certain drugs and biologics that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected; (vi) created a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program in which, as a condition of coverage of its products under Medicare Part D, manufacturers must now agree to offer 50% (increased to 70% pursuant to the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, or BBA, effective as of 2019); (vii) created a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research; and (viii) established the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation at CMS to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending, potentially including prescription drug.

75

There have been executive, judicial and congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. While Congress has not passed comprehensive repeal legislation, several bills affecting the implementation of certain taxes under the ACA have been signed into law. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, or Tax Act, included a provision that repealed, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the ACA on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate.”

Further, on June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds that argued the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress. Thus, the ACA will remain in effect in its current form. Further, prior to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, on January 28, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order that initiated a special enrollment period 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. It is possible that the ACA will be subject to judicial or congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how any such challenges and the healthcare reform efforts of the Biden Administration will impact the ACA and our business.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. These changes include aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year pursuant to the Budget Control Act of 2011, which began in 2013, and due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2031, unless additional congressional action is taken. However, COVID-19 relief legislation suspended the 2% Medicare sequester from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022. Under current legislation, the actual reduction in Medicare payments will vary from 1% in 2022 to up to 3% in the final fiscal year of this sequester. The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. Additionally, on March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, beginning January 1, 2024. These laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare, Medicaid and other healthcare funding, which could have an adverse effect on customers for our product candidates, if approved, and, accordingly, our financial operations.

Additionally, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny in the United States of pharmaceutical pricing practices in light of the rising cost of prescription drugs and biologics. Such scrutiny has resulted in several recent congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for products. At the federal level, the former Trump administration used several means to propose or implement drug pricing reform, including through federal budget proposals, executive orders and policy initiatives. For example, on July 24, 2020 and September 13, 2020, former President Trump announced several executive orders related to prescription drug pricing that sought to implement several of the former administration’s proposals. As a result, the FDA released a final and guidance rule in September 2020, providing pathway for states to build and submit importation plans for drugs from Canada. Further, on November 20, 2020 CMS issued an interim final rule implementing the Most Favored Nation, or MFN, model under which Medicare Part B reimbursement rates will be calculated for certain drugs and biologicals based on the lowest price drug manufacturers receive in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries with a similar gross domestic product per capita. As a result of litigation challenging the MFN model, on December 27, 2021, CMS published a final rule that rescinded the MFN model interim final rule. In July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, “Promoting Competition in the American Economy,” with multiple provisions aimed at prescription drugs. In response to Biden’s executive order, on September 9, 2021, the HHS released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug pricing reform and sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue as well as potential administrative actions HHS can take to advance these principles. No legislation or administrative actions have been finalized to implement these principles. In addition, Congress is considering drug pricing as part of other reform initiatives. At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological 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.

We expect that these and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved drug. Any reduction in

76

reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize our drugs. It is also possible that additional governmental action is taken in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

In addition, FDA regulations and guidance may be revised or reinterpreted by the FDA in ways that may significantly affect our business and our products. The Trump administration took several executive actions, including the issuance of a number of Executive Orders, that could impose significant burdens on, or otherwise materially delay, the FDA’s ability to engage in routine oversight activities such as implementing statutes through rulemaking, issuance of guidance, and review and approval of marketing applications. It is difficult to predict how these requirements will be interpreted and implemented and the extent to which they will impact the FDA’s ability to exercise its regulatory authority. If these executive actions impose restrictions on the FDA’s ability to engage in oversight and implementation activities in the normal course, our business may be negatively impacted. Any new regulations or guidance, or revisions or reinterpretations of existing regulations or guidance, may impose additional costs or lengthen FDA review times for CP101, FIN-211 or any other current or future product candidates. We cannot determine how changes in regulations, statutes, policies, or interpretations when and if issued, enacted or adopted, may affect our business in the future. Such changes could, among other things, require:

Such changes would likely require substantial time and impose significant costs, or could reduce the potential commercial value of CP101, FIN-211 or any other current or future product candidates, and could materially harm our business and our financial results. In addition, delays in receipt of or failure to receive regulatory clearances or approvals for any other products would harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Disruptions at the FDA, the SEC and other government agencies caused by funding shortages or global health concerns could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, prevent new products and services from being developed or commercialized in a timely manner or otherwise prevent those agencies from performing normal business functions on which the operation of our business may rely, which could negatively impact our business.

The ability of the FDA to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and statutory, regulatory, and policy changes. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of the SEC and other government agencies on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities, is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs or biologics to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, including most recently from December 22, 2018 to January 25, 2019, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA and the SEC, have had to furlough critical FDA, SEC and other government employees and stop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

If we or our third-party manufacturers and suppliers fail to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business.

We are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures and the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. Our research and development activities involve the use of biological and hazardous materials and produce hazardous waste products. We generally contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and wastes. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials, which could cause an interruption of our commercialization efforts, research and development efforts and business operations, environmental damage resulting in costly clean-up and liabilities under applicable laws and regulations governing the use, storage, handling and disposal of these materials and specified waste

77

products. Although we believe that the safety procedures utilized by our third-party manufacturers for handling and disposing of these materials generally comply with the standards prescribed by these laws and regulations, we cannot guarantee that this is the case or eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials. In such an event, we may be held liable for any resulting damages and such liability could exceed our resources and state or federal or other applicable authorities may curtail our use of certain materials and/or interrupt our business operations. Furthermore, environmental laws and regulations are complex, change frequently and have tended to become more stringent. We cannot predict the impact of such changes and cannot be certain of our future compliance. In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. These current or future laws and regulations may impair our research, development or production efforts. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.

Although we maintain workers’ compensation insurance to cover us for costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of hazardous materials or other work-related injuries, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. We do not carry specific biological waste or hazardous waste insurance coverage, workers compensation or property and casualty and general liability insurance policies that include coverage for damages and fines arising from biological or hazardous waste exposure or contamination.

We are subject to U.S. anti-corruption, export control, sanctions, and other trade laws and regulations. We can face serious consequences for violations.

We are subject to anti-corruption laws, including the U.S. domestic bribery statute contained in 18 U.S.C. 201, the U.S. Travel Act, and the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended. These anti-corruption laws generally prohibit companies and their employees, agents, and intermediaries from authorizing, promising, offering, or providing, directly or indirectly, corrupt or improper payments or anything else of value to recipients in the public or private sector. We can be held liable for the corrupt or illegal activities of our agents and intermediaries, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have actual knowledge of such activities. We are also subject to other U.S. laws and regulations governing export controls, as well as economic sanctions and embargoes on certain countries and persons.

Violations of these laws can result in substantial criminal fines and civil penalties, imprisonment, the loss of trade privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm, and other consequences. Likewise, any investigation of potential violations of such laws could also have an adverse impact on our reputation, our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Risks Related to Our Dependence on Third Parties

We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties, including independent clinical investigators, contracted laboratories and CROs, to conduct our preclinical studies and clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates and our business could be substantially harmed.

We have relied upon and plan to continue to rely upon third parties, including independent clinical investigators, contracted laboratories and third-party CROs, to conduct our preclinical studies and clinical trials in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements and to monitor and manage data for our ongoing preclinical and clinical programs. We rely on these parties for execution of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and control only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies and trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal and regulatory requirements and scientific standards, and our reliance on these third parties does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our third-party contractors and CROs are required to comply with good laboratory practices, or GLPs, as applicable, and GCP requirements, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for all of our products in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GLPs and GCPs through periodic inspections of laboratories conducting GLP studies, trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we, our investigators or any of our CROs or contracted laboratories fail to comply with applicable GLPs and GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable, the statistical analysis and clinical meaning of our datasets could be compromised and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may limit our ability to include impacted data or require us to perform additional preclinical studies or clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. For example, we identified GCP compliance issues at two clinical trial sites that participated in our PRISM3 study. In consultation with the FDA, we terminated those two sites and excluded data from the trial participants at those sites. While we monitor our clinical trial sites, we cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our preclinical studies or clinical trials comply with

78

all applicable GLP or GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product, including biologic product, produced in compliance with applicable cGMP regulations. Our failure or the failure of any third parties with whom we may contract comply with these regulations may require us to repeat preclinical studies or clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.

Further, these laboratories, investigators and CROs are not our employees and we will not be able to control, other than by contract, the amount of resources, including time, which they devote to our product candidates and clinical trials. If independent laboratories, investigators or CROs fail to devote sufficient resources to the development of our product candidates, or if their performance is noncompliant, fraudulent or substandard, it may delay or compromise the prospects for approval and commercialization of any product candidates that we develop. Such laboratories, investigators and CROs may make errors while conducting trials or other clinical development activities, which could render any data derived therefrom incorrect or unusable. In addition, the use of third-party service providers requires us to disclose our proprietary information to these parties, which could increase the risk that this information will be misappropriated.

Our CROs have the right to terminate their agreements with us in the event of an uncured material breach. In addition, some of our CROs have an ability to terminate their respective agreements with us if we make a general assignment for the benefit of our creditors or if we are liquidated.

If any of our relationships with these third-party laboratories, CROs or clinical investigators terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative laboratories, CROs or investigators or to do so in a timely manner or on commercially reasonable terms. If laboratories, CROs or clinical investigators do not successfully carry out their legal, regulatory or contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our preclinical or clinical protocols, regulatory requirements, professional standards of integrity or for other reasons, our preclinical or clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. As a result, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed.

Switching or adding additional laboratories or CROs (or investigators) involves additional cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new laboratory or CRO commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can materially impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. Though we carefully manage our relationships with our contracted laboratories and CROs, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter similar challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, clinical investigators may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and may receive cash or equity compensation in connection with such services. If these relationships and any related compensation result in perceived or actual conflicts of interest, or the FDA concludes that the financial relationship may have affected the interpretation of the preclinical study or clinical trial, the integrity of the data generated at the applicable preclinical study or clinical trial site may be questioned and the integrity or validity of the preclinical study or clinical trial itself may be jeopardized, which could result in the delay or rejection by the FDA. Any such delay or rejection could prevent us from commercializing our clinical-stage product candidate or any future product candidates.

We rely on third parties to supply and manufacture our product candidates, and we expect to continue to rely on third parties to manufacture our products, if approved. The development of such product candidates and the commercialization of any products, if approved, could be stopped, delayed or made less profitable if any such third party fails to provide us with sufficient quantities of product candidates or products or fails to do so at acceptable quality levels or prices or fails to maintain or achieve satisfactory regulatory compliance. We have not, nor to our knowledge, has any other company, received regulatory approval for a therapeutic based on this approach.

We do not currently have the infrastructure or capability internally to manufacture all our product candidates for use in the conduct of our preclinical studies and clinical trials or for commercial supply, if our products are approved. We rely on, and expect to continue to rely on, contract manufacturing organizations, or CMOs. Any replacement of our CMOs could require significant effort and expertise because there may be a limited number of qualified CMOs. This could be particularly problematic where we rely on a single-source supplier. Additionally, our current CMOs may fail to manufacture our product candidates or placebo due to technical difficulties or other issues beyond our control. For example, while our CMO has experience manufacturing similar microbial products, FIN-211 contains a specific bacterial strain that our CMO has never manufactured in a scale sufficient for commercialization and which it may be unable to supply in the quantities and at the

79

rates we anticipate requiring. Furthermore, we have limited stability data for this material, and if we determine that its stability profile is insufficient for our needs, our trials could be delayed and the commercial potential for FIN-211 could be reduced. We can make no assurances that we will be able to manufacture our product candidates, or components of our product candidates, in a cost-effective manner or at the level required for clinical trials or commercialization. Reliance on third-party providers may expose us to more risk than if we were to manufacture our product candidates ourselves. We are dependent on our CMOs for the production of our product candidates in accordance with relevant regulations, such as cGMP, which includes, among other things, quality control, quality assurance and the maintenance of records and documentation. Moreover, many of the third parties with whom we contract may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting product development activities that could harm our competitive position.

Our third-party manufacturers may be subject to damage or interruption from, among other things, fire, natural or man-made disaster, disease outbreaks or public health pandemics, power loss, telecommunications failure, unauthorized entry, computer viruses, denial-of-service attacks, acts of terrorism, human error, vandalism or sabotage, financial insolvency, bankruptcy and similar events. For example, the extent to which COVID-19 may impact our manufacturing and supply chain will depend on future developments that are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including new information that may emerge concerning the severity of COVID-19 and the actions to contain COVID-19 or treat its impact, among others.

If we were to experience an unexpected loss of supply of or if any supplier were unable to meet our demand for any of our product candidates, we could experience delays in our research or planned clinical trials or commercialization. We could be unable to find alternative suppliers of acceptable quality, in the appropriate volumes who could meet our timelines at an acceptable cost. Moreover, our suppliers are often subject to strict manufacturing requirements and rigorous testing requirements, which could limit or delay production. The long transition periods necessary to switch manufacturers and suppliers, if necessary, could significantly delay our preclinical studies, our clinical trials and the commercialization of our products, if approved, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operation.

In complying with the applicable manufacturing regulations of the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, we and our third-party suppliers must spend significant time, money and effort in the areas of design and development, testing, production, record-keeping and quality control to assure that the products meet applicable specifications and other regulatory requirements. The failure to comply with these requirements could result in an enforcement action against us, including the seizure of products and shutting down of production. We and any of these third-party suppliers may also be subject to audits by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities. If any of our third-party suppliers fails to comply with cGMP or other applicable manufacturing regulations, our ability to develop and commercialize the products could suffer significant interruptions. We face risks inherent in relying on CMOs, as any disruption, such as a fire, natural hazards, vandalism or an outbreak of contagious disease affecting the CMO or any supplier of the CMO could significantly interrupt our manufacturing capability. In case of a disruption, we will have to establish alternative manufacturing sources. This would require substantial capital on our part, which we may not be able to obtain on commercially acceptable terms or at all. Additionally, we would likely experience months of manufacturing delays as the CMO builds or locates replacement facilities and seeks and obtains necessary regulatory approvals. If this occurs, we will be unable to satisfy manufacturing needs on a timely basis, if at all.

Our current and future collaborations will be important to our business. If we are unable to enter into new collaborations, or if these collaborations are not successful, our business could be adversely affected.

A part of our strategy is to strategically evaluate and, as deemed appropriate, enter into partnerships in the future when strategically attractive, including potentially with major biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies. We have limited capabilities for product development and do not yet have any capability for commercialization. Accordingly, we may enter into collaborations with other companies to provide us with important technologies and funding for our programs and technology. If we fail to enter into or maintain collaborations on reasonable terms or at all, our ability to develop our existing or future research programs and product candidates could be delayed, the commercial potential of our product could change and our costs of development and commercialization could increase. Furthermore, we may find that our programs require the use of intellectual property rights held by third parties, and the growth of our business may depend in part on our ability to acquire or in-license these intellectual property rights.

80

For example, we are currently party to a collaboration agreement with Takeda, pursuant to which we have agreed to collaborate in the clinical development of our product candidates TAK-524 for the treatment of ulcerative colitis and FIN-525 for the treatment of Crohn’s disease. This and any future collaborations we enter into may pose a number of risks, including, but not limited to, the following:

If our collaborations do not result in the successful discovery, development and commercialization of product candidates or if one of our collaborators terminates its agreement with us, we may not receive any future research funding or milestone or royalty payments under such collaboration. All of the risks relating to product development, regulatory approval and commercialization described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K also apply to the activities of our therapeutic collaborators.

Additionally, if one of our collaborators terminates its agreement with us, we may find it more difficult to attract new collaborators and our perception in the business and financial communities could be adversely affected.

We face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborative partners. Our ability to reach a definitive agreement for a partnership will depend, among other things, upon an assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed partnership and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. These factors may include the design or results of preclinical studies or clinical trials, the likelihood of regulatory approval, the potential

81

market for the subject product candidate, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering such product candidate to patients, the potential of competing products, the existence of any uncertainty with respect to our ownership of technology (which can exist if there is a challenge to such ownership regardless of the merits of the challenge) and industry and market conditions generally. The collaborator may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a partnership could be more attractive than the one with us.

We may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to do so, we may have to curtail the development of the product candidate for which we are seeking to collaborate, reduce or delay its development program or one or more of our other development programs, delay its potential commercialization, reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we do not have sufficient funds, we may not be able to further develop product candidates or bring them to market and generate product revenue.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If we are unable to obtain or protect intellectual property rights related to any of our product candidates, we may not be able to compete effectively in our market.

We rely upon a combination of patents, trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our product candidates. Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other intellectual property protection in the United States and in other countries with respect to our proprietary technology and product candidates.

We cannot offer any assurances about which of our patent applications will issue, the breadth of any resulting patent or whether any of the issued patents will be found to be infringed, invalid and unenforceable or will be threatened by third parties. We cannot offer any assurances that the breadth of our granted patents will be sufficient to stop a competitor from developing and commercializing a product, including a biosimilar product that would be competitive with one or more of our product candidates. Furthermore, any successful challenge to these patents or any other patents owned by or licensed to us after patent issuance could deprive us of rights necessary for the successful commercialization of any of our product candidates. Further, if we encounter delays in regulatory approvals, the period of time during which we could market a product candidate under patent protection could be reduced.

The patent prosecution process is expensive and time-consuming. We may not be able to prepare, file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a commercially reasonable cost or in a timely manner or in all jurisdictions. It is also possible that we may fail to identify patentable aspects of inventions made in the course of development and commercialization activities before it is too late to obtain patent protection on them. Moreover, depending on the terms of any future in-licenses to which we may become a party, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain the patents, covering technology in-licensed from third parties. Therefore, these patents and patent applications may not be prosecuted and enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business.

In addition to the protection provided by our patent estate, we rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not amenable to patent protection. Although we generally require all of our employees to assign their inventions to us, and all of our employees, consultants, advisors and any third parties who have access to our proprietary know-how, information, or technology to enter into confidentiality agreements, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed, or that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed. Moreover, our competitors may independently develop knowledge, methods and know-how equivalent to our trade secrets. Competitors could purchase our products, if approved, and replicate some or all of the competitive advantages we derive from our development efforts for technologies on which we do not have patent protection. If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to prevent them, or those to whom they communicate it, from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position would be harmed.

We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data and trade secrets by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. While we have confidence in these

82

individuals, organizations and systems, our agreements or security measures may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. Also, if the steps taken to maintain our trade secrets are deemed inadequate, we may have insufficient recourse against third parties for misappropriating the trade secret. In addition, others may independently discover our trade secrets and proprietary information. For example, the FDA is considering whether to make additional information publicly available on a routine basis, including information that we may consider to be trade secrets or other proprietary information, and it is not clear at the present time how the FDA’s disclosure policies may change in the future. If we are unable to prevent material disclosure of the non-patented intellectual property related to our technologies to third parties, and there is no guarantee that we will have any such enforceable trade secret protection, we may not be able to establish or maintain a competitive advantage in our market, which could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on our products for an adequate amount of time, and if we do not obtain protection under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments and similar non-United States legislation for extending the term of patents covering each of our product candidates, our business may be materially harmed.

Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. Depending upon the timing, duration and conditions of FDA marketing approval of our product candidates, one or more of our United States patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments, and similar legislation in the European Union. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent term extension of up to five years for a patent covering an approved product as compensation for effective patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. A patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval. Only one patent may be extended per approved drug product, and only those claims covering the approved drug product, a method for using it, or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. However, we may not receive an extension if we fail to apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the length of the extension could be less than we request. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we can enforce our patent rights for that product will be impacted and our competitors may obtain approval to market competing products sooner. As a result, our revenue from applicable products could be reduced and could have a material adverse effect on our business.

If we fail to comply with our obligations in our current and future intellectual property licenses with third parties, we could lose rights that are important to our business.

We are reliant upon licenses to certain patent rights and proprietary technology for the development of our product candidates, in particular our license agreements with University of Minnesota and Skysong Innovations LLC. These license agreements impose diligence, development and commercialization timelines and milestone payment, royalty, insurance and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with our obligations, our licensors may have the right to terminate our licenses, in which event we might not be able to develop, manufacture or market any product that is covered by the intellectual property we in-license from such licensor and may face other penalties. Such an occurrence would materially adversely affect our business prospects.

Licenses to additional third-party technology and materials that may be required for our development programs may not be available in the future or may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition. We do not control the prosecution, maintenance and enforcement of all of our licensed and sublicensed intellectual property relating to our product candidates, and we thus require the cooperation of our licensors and any upstream licensor, including Skysong Innovations LLC and the University of Minnesota, which may not be forthcoming. Therefore, we cannot be certain that the prosecution, maintenance and enforcement of these patent rights will be in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. If we or our licensor fail to maintain such patents, or if we or our licensor lose rights to those patents or patent applications, the rights we have licensed may be reduced or eliminated and our right to develop and commercialize any of our product candidates that are the subject of such licensed rights could be adversely affected. In addition to the foregoing, the risks associated with patent rights that we license from third parties will also apply to patent rights we may own in the future. Further, if we fail to comply with our development obligations under our license agreements, we may lose our patent rights with respect to such agreement on a territory-by-territory basis, which would affect our patent rights worldwide.

Termination of our current or any future license agreements would reduce or eliminate our rights under these agreements and may result in our having to negotiate new or reinstated agreements with less favorable terms or cause us to lose our rights

83

under these agreements, including our rights to important intellectual property or technology. Any of the foregoing could prevent us from commercializing our other product candidates, which could have a material adverse effect on our operating results and overall financial condition.

In addition, intellectual property rights that we in-license in the future may be sublicenses under intellectual property owned by third parties, in some cases through multiple tiers. The actions of our licensors may therefore affect our rights to use our sublicensed intellectual property, even if we are in compliance with all of the obligations under our license agreements. Should our licensors or any of the upstream licensors fail to comply with their obligations under the agreements pursuant to which they obtain the rights that are sublicensed to us, or should such agreements be terminated or amended, our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates may be materially harmed.

Patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our future patents.

Our ability to obtain patents is highly uncertain because, to date, some legal principles remain unresolved, and there has not been a consistent policy regarding the breadth or interpretation of claims allowed in patents in the United States. Furthermore, the specific content of patents and patent applications that are necessary to support and interpret patent claims is highly uncertain due to the complex nature of the relevant legal, scientific, and factual issues. Changes in either patent laws or interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our patent protection.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on actions by the United States Congress, the federal courts and the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce patents that we have owned or licensed or that we might obtain in the future. An inability to obtain, enforce, and defend patents covering our proprietary technologies would materially and adversely affect our business prospects and financial condition.

Similarly, changes in patent laws and regulations in other countries or jurisdictions, changes in the governmental bodies that enforce them or changes in how the relevant governmental authority enforces patent laws or regulations may weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce patents that we may obtain in the future. Further, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States and Europe. As a result, we may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our intellectual property both in the United States and abroad. For example, if the issuance in a given country of a patent covering an invention is not followed by the issuance in other countries of patents covering the same invention, or if any judicial interpretation of the validity, enforceability or scope of the claims or the written description or enablement, in a patent issued in one country is not similar to the interpretation given to the corresponding patent issued in another country, our ability to protect our intellectual property in those countries may be limited. Changes in either patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may materially diminish the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our patent protection.

We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

Competitors may infringe the patents for which we have applied. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In certain circumstances it may not be practicable or cost effective for us to enforce our intellectual property rights fully, particularly in certain developing countries or where the initiation of a claim might harm our business relationships. We may also be hindered or prevented from enforcing our rights with respect to a government entity or instrumentality because of the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

If we initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering one of our product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our product or product candidate is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are common, and there are numerous grounds upon which a third party can assert invalidity or unenforceability of a patent. In an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that the patent claims we are asserting are invalid and/or unenforceable, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patent claims do not cover the technology in question. Third

84

parties may also initiate legal proceedings against us claiming that our patents are not infringed, invalid and/or unenforceable. For example, on December 1, 2021, Rebiotix Inc. and Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. (collectively, "Rebiotix"), filed a complaint against us in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The complaint seeks a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity with respect to seven United States Patents owned by us. On February 7, 2022, we filed an answer and counterclaims against Rebiotix for infringement of three of the patents. On March 7, 2022, we filed an amended answer and counterclaims, in which we, together with the Regents of the University of Minnesota (“UMN”), alleged infringement by Rebiotix of three United States Patents owned by UMN and exclusively licensed to us. Third parties may also raise similar claims before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, post grant review, inter partes review and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (for example, opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in revocation of or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our product candidates. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which we, our patent counsel, and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, we may lose some, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on our product candidates. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could have a material adverse impact on our business. Moreover, even if we are successful in any litigation, we may incur significant expense in connection with such proceedings, and the amount of any monetary damages may be inadequate to compensate us for damage as a result of the infringement and the proceedings.

Interference proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patent applications. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or force us to take a license under the patent rights of the prevailing party, if available. Furthermore, our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms. Our defense of litigation or interference proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. We may not be able to prevent misappropriation of our intellectual property rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the United States.

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

We may be unsuccessful in licensing or acquiring intellectual property from third parties that may be required to develop and commercialize our product candidates.

A third party may hold intellectual property, including patent rights that are important or necessary to the development and commercialization of our product candidates. It may be necessary for us to use the patented or proprietary technology of third parties to commercialize our product candidates, in which case we would be required to acquire or obtain a license to such intellectual property from these third parties, and we may be unable to do so on commercially reasonable terms or at all. The licensing or acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and several more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment or at all. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights or maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to abandon development of the relevant program or product candidate, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

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

Our commercial success depends, in part, upon our ability and the ability of future collaborators, if any, to develop, manufacture, market and sell our product candidates and use our proprietary technologies without infringing the proprietary rights and intellectual property of third parties. The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by extensive and complex litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights. We may in the future become party to, or be threatened with, adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our

85

product candidates and technology, including interference proceedings, post grant review and inter partes review before the USPTO or equivalent foreign regulatory authority. Third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on existing patents or patents that may be granted in the future, regardless of their merit. Numerous patents and pending applications are owned by third parties in the fields in which we are developing product candidates, both in the United States and elsewhere. Moreover, it is difficult for industry participants, including us, to identify all third-party patent rights that may be relevant to our product candidates and technologies because patent searching is imperfect due to differences in terminology among patents, incomplete databases and the difficulty in assessing the meaning of patent claims. We may fail to identify relevant patents or patent applications or may identify pending patent applications of potential interest but incorrectly predict the likelihood that such patent applications may issue with claims of relevance to our technology. In addition, we may be unaware of one or more issued patents that would be infringed by the manufacture, sale or use of a current or future product candidate, or we may incorrectly conclude that a third-party patent is invalid, unenforceable or not infringed by our activities. Additionally, pending patent applications that have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover our technologies, our products or the use of our products.

There is a risk that third parties may choose to engage in litigation with us to enforce or to otherwise assert their patent rights against us. Even if we believe such claims are without merit, a court of competent jurisdiction could hold that third-party patents are valid, enforceable and infringed, which could have a negative impact on our ability to commercialize our current and any future product candidates. In order to successfully challenge the validity of any such U.S. patent in federal court, we would need to overcome a presumption of validity. As this burden is a high one requiring us to present clear and convincing evidence as to the invalidity of any such U.S. patent claim, there is no assurance that a court of competent jurisdiction would invalidate the claims of any such U.S. patent. Foreign courts will have similar burdens to overcome in order to successfully challenge a third party claim of patent infringement.

We are aware of a patent estate with granted claims in the United States, Japan and China that may impact our competitive position with respect to one of our preclinical product candidates. While we believe that the granted claims may not be valid and that they may be reasonably challenged for validity, there can be no assurance that any such challenge would be successful. If we are found to infringe a third party’s valid and enforceable intellectual property rights, we could be required to obtain a license from such third party to continue developing, manufacturing and marketing our product candidates and technology. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors and other third parties access to the same technologies licensed to us, and it could require us to make substantial licensing and royalty payments. We could be forced, including by court order, to cease developing, manufacturing and commercializing the infringing technology or product candidate. In addition, we could be found liable for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees, if we are found to have willfully infringed a patent or other intellectual property right. A finding of infringement could prevent us from manufacturing and commercializing our product candidates or force us to cease some or all of our business operations, which could materially harm our business. Claims that we have misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants, or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties.

We employ individuals who were previously employed at other biotechnology or biopharmaceutical companies. In addition, we use publications that are subject to copyright, as well as proprietary information and materials from third parties in our research. Some of the information and materials we use from third parties may be subject to agreements that include restrictions on use or disclosure. Although we strive to ensure proper safeguards, we cannot guarantee strict compliance with such agreements, nor can we be sure that our employees, consultants and advisors do not use proprietary information, materials, or know-how of others in their work for us. We may be subject to claims that we or our employees, consultants, or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed confidential information of our employees’ former employers or other third parties. We may also be subject to claims that former employers or other third parties have an ownership interest in our future patents. In addition, we may be subject to claims that we are infringing other intellectual property rights, such as trademarks or copyrights, or misappropriating the trade secrets of others, and to the extent that our employees, consultants or contractors use intellectual property or proprietary information owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the rights in related or resulting know-how and inventions. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. There is no guarantee of success in defending these claims, and even if we are successful, litigation could result in substantial cost and be a distraction to our management and other employees.

86

We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our future patents and other intellectual property.

We may also be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators, or other third parties have an ownership interest in our patent applications, our future patents, or other intellectual property, including as an inventor or co-inventor. We may be subject to ownership or inventorship disputes in the future arising, for example, from conflicting obligations of consultants, contractors or others who are involved in developing our product candidates. Although it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the conception or development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who, in fact, conceives or develops intellectual property that we regard as our own, and we cannot be certain that our agreements with such parties will be upheld in the face of a potential challenge, or that they will not be breached, for which we may not have an adequate remedy. The assignment of intellectual property rights may not be self-executing or the assignment agreements may be breached, and litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or ownership. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

Reliance on third parties requires us to share our trade secrets, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secrets will be misappropriated or disclosed to others.

If we rely on third parties to manufacture or commercialize our product candidates, or if we collaborate with additional third parties for the development of such product candidates, we may need to, at times, share trade secrets with them. We may also conduct joint research and development programs that may require us to share trade secrets under the terms of our research and development partnerships or similar agreements. We seek to protect our trade secrets and other proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements with third parties prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, including our trade secrets. Despite the contractual provisions employed when working with third parties, the need to share trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by our competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others, or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how and trade secrets, a competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

In addition, these agreements typically restrict the ability of our advisors, employees, third-party contractors and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our trade secrets. Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, we may not be able to prevent the unauthorized disclosure or use of our technical know-how or other trade secrets by the parties to these agreements. Moreover, we cannot guarantee that we have entered into such agreements with each party that may have or have had access to our confidential information or proprietary technology and processes. Monitoring unauthorized uses and disclosures is difficult, and we do not know whether the steps we have taken to protect our proprietary technologies will be effective. If any of the collaborators, scientific advisors, employees, contractors and consultants who are parties to these agreements breaches or violates the terms of any of these agreements, we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach or violation, and we could lose our trade secrets as a result. Moreover, if confidential information that is licensed or disclosed to us by our partners, collaborators, or others is inadvertently disclosed or subject to a breach or violation, we may be exposed to liability to the owner of that confidential information. Enforcing a claim that a third party illegally obtained and is using our trade secrets, like patent litigation, is expensive and time consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, courts outside the United States are sometimes less willing to protect trade secrets.

We may enjoy only limited geographical protection with respect to certain patents and we may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

Filing and prosecuting patent applications and defending patents covering our product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection or where enforcement rights are not as strong as those in the United States or Europe. These products may compete with our product candidates, and our future patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient defend our rights adequately.

In addition, we may decide to abandon national and regional patent applications before they are granted. The examination of each national or regional patent application is an independent proceeding. As a result, patent applications in the same family

87

may issue as patents in some jurisdictions, such as in the United States, but may issue as patents with claims of different scope or may even be refused in other jurisdictions. It is also quite common that depending on the country, the scope of patent protection may vary for the same product candidate or technology. For example, certain jurisdictions do not allow for patent protection with respect to method of treatment.

While we seek to protect our intellectual property rights in our expected significant markets, we cannot ensure that we will be able to initiate or maintain similar efforts in all jurisdictions in which we may wish to market our product candidates. Accordingly, our efforts to protect our intellectual property rights in such countries may be inadequate, which may have an adverse effect on our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates in all of our expected significant foreign markets. If we encounter difficulties in protecting, or are otherwise precluded from effectively protecting, the intellectual property rights important for our business in such jurisdictions, the value of these rights may be diminished, and we may face additional competition from others in those jurisdictions.

The laws of some jurisdictions do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws or rules and regulations in the United States and Europe and many companies have encountered significant difficulties in protecting and defending such rights in such jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets, and other intellectual property rights, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our future patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in other jurisdictions, whether or not successful, could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our future patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing as patents, and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

Some countries also have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, some countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In those countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patents. If we are forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be impaired.

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

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other government fees on patents and/or applications will be due to be paid to the USPTO and various government patent agencies outside of the United States over the lifetime of our patents and/or applications and any patent rights we may obtain in the future. Furthermore, the USPTO and various non-United States government patent agencies require compliance with several procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. In many cases, an inadvertent lapse of a patent or patent application can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. There are situations, however, in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patents or patent applications, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, potential competitors might be able to enter the market, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Any trademarks we have obtained or may obtain may be infringed or otherwise violated, or successfully challenged, resulting in harm to our business.

We expect to rely on trademarks as one means to distinguish our product candidates, if approved for marketing, from the drugs of our competitors. Once we select new trademarks and apply to register them, our trademark applications may not be approved. Third parties may oppose or attempt to cancel our trademark applications or trademarks, or otherwise challenge our use of the trademarks. In the event that our trademarks are successfully challenged, we could be forced to rebrand our drugs, which could result in loss of brand recognition and could require us to devote resources to advertising and marketing new brands. Our competitors may infringe or otherwise violate our trademarks and we may not have adequate resources to enforce our trademarks. Any of the foregoing events may have a material adverse effect on our business.

88

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

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

Should any of these events occur, they could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

Risks Related to Our Business Operations, Employee Matters and Managing Growth

Our future success depends on our ability to retain key executives and to attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel.

We are highly dependent on our management team, including Mark Smith, Ph.D., our Chief Executive Officer. Each member of our management team may currently terminate their employment with us at any time. The loss of the services of any of these persons could impede the achievement of our research, development and commercialization objectives. We do not currently maintain “key person” life insurance on the lives of our executives or any of our employees.

Recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and clinical personnel and, if we progress the development of any of our product candidates, commercialization, manufacturing and sales and marketing personnel, will be critical to our success. The loss of the services of our executive officers or other key employees could impede the achievement of our research, development and commercialization objectives and seriously harm our ability to successfully implement our business strategy. Furthermore, replacing executive officers and key employees may be difficult and may take an extended period of time because of the limited number of individuals in our industry with the breadth of skills and experience required to successfully develop, gain regulatory approval of and commercialize our product candidates. Competition to hire from this limited pool is intense, and we may be unable to hire, train, retain or motivate these key personnel on acceptable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for similar personnel. We also experience competition for the hiring of scientific and clinical personnel from universities and research institutions. Over the last several years, the challenges of recruiting and retaining employees across the biotechnology industry, and in the Boston area specifically, have increased substantially due to current industry job market dynamics. In addition, we rely on consultants and advisors, including scientific and clinical advisors, to assist us in formulating our research and development and commercialization strategy. Our consultants and advisors may have commitments under consulting or advisory contracts with other entities that may limit their availability to us. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high-quality personnel, our ability to pursue our growth strategy will be limited.

89

We may experience difficulties in managing the growth of our organization, which could disrupt our operations.

As of December 31, 2021, we had 189 full-time employees, including 156 employees engaged in research and development. As our clinical development and commercialization plans and strategies develop, and as we continue operating as a public company, we may need additional managerial, operational, sales, marketing, financial, legal and other personnel. Future growth would impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including:

Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize our product candidates will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth, and our management may also have to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from day-to-day activities in order to devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities.

We currently rely, and for the foreseeable future will continue to rely, in substantial part on certain independent organizations, advisors and consultants to provide certain services. The services include substantially all aspects of clinical trial management and manufacturing for certain of our product candidates. We cannot assure you that the services of independent organizations, advisors and consultants will continue to be available to us on a timely basis when needed, or that we can find qualified replacements. In addition, if we are unable to effectively manage our outsourced activities or if the quality or accuracy of the services provided by consultants is compromised for any reason, our preclinical studies or clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain marketing approval of our product candidates or otherwise advance our business. We cannot assure you that we will be able to manage our existing consultants or find other competent outside contractors and consultants on economically reasonable terms, or at all.

If we are not able to effectively expand our organization by hiring qualified new employees and expanding our groups of consultants and contractors, we may not be able to successfully implement the tasks necessary to further develop and commercialize our product candidates and, accordingly, may not achieve our research, development and commercialization goals.

Our internal computer systems, or those of our collaborators or other contractors or consultants, may fail or suffer security breaches, which could result in a significant disruption of our product development programs and our ability to operate our business effectively.

Our internal computer systems and those of our current and any future collaborators and other contractors or consultants are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. Cyber-attacks are increasing in their frequency, sophistication and intensity, and have become increasingly difficult to detect. Cyber-attacks could include the deployment of harmful malware, ransomware, denial-of-service attacks, social engineering and other means to affect service reliability and threaten the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information. Cyber-attacks also could include phishing attempts or e-mail fraud to cause payments or information to be transmitted to an unintended recipient. The COVID-19 pandemic has generally increased the attack surface available for exploitation, as more companies and individuals work online and work remotely, and as such, the risk of a cybersecurity incident potentially occurring, and our investment in risk mitigations against such an incident, is increasing. For example, there has been an increase in phishing and spam emails as well as social engineering attempts from “hackers” hoping to use the recent COVID-19 pandemic to their advantage.

While we have not experienced any significant system failure, accident or security breach to date, if such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a disruption of our development programs and our business operations, whether due to a loss of our trade secrets or other proprietary information or other similar disruptions. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed or future clinical trials by us or our CROs could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. Additionally, any such event that leads to unauthorized access, use or disclosure of personal information, including personal information regarding our patients or employees, could harm our reputation, cause us not to comply with federal and/or state breach notification laws and foreign law equivalents and otherwise subject us to liability under laws and regulations that protect the privacy and security of personal information. Furthermore, because the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access to, or to sabotage, systems change frequently and often are not recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures. Security breaches and other inappropriate access can be difficult to

90

detect, and any delay in identifying them may lead to increased harm of the type described above. While we have implemented security measures to protect our information technology systems and infrastructure, such measures may not prevent service interruptions or security breaches that could adversely affect our business and to the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability, our competitive position could be harmed and the further development and commercialization of our product candidates could be delayed.

Business disruptions could seriously harm our future revenue and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses.

Our operations, and those of our CROs, CMOs and other contractors and consultants, could be subject to earthquakes, power shortages, telecommunications failures, water shortages, floods, hurricanes, typhoons, fires, extreme weather conditions, medical epidemics and other natural or man-made disasters or business interruptions, for which we are predominantly self-insured. The occurrence of any of these business disruptions could seriously harm our operations and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses. We rely on third-party manufacturers to produce certain of our product candidates. Our ability to obtain clinical supplies of our product candidates could be disrupted if the operations of these suppliers are affected by a man-made or natural disaster or other business interruption.

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

We and any current and future collaborators may be subject to federal, state, municipal and foreign data protection laws and regulations, such as laws and regulations that address privacy and data security. In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including federal health information privacy laws, state data breach notification laws, state health information privacy laws, and federal and state consumer protection laws, including Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, that govern the collection, use, disclosure and protection of health-related and other personal information could apply to our operations or the operations of our collaborators. In addition, we may obtain health information from third parties, including research institutions from which we obtain clinical trial data, that are subject to privacy and security requirements under HIPAA, as amended by HITECH. Depending on the facts and circumstances, we could be subject to civil, criminal, and administrative penalties if we obtain, use, or disclose individually identifiable health information maintained by a HIPAA-covered entity in a manner that is not authorized or permitted by HIPAA.

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

We are subject to a variety of privacy and data security laws, and our failure to comply with them could harm our business.

We maintain a large quantity of sensitive information, including confidential business and personal information in connection with the conduct of our clinical trials and related to our employees, and we are subject to laws and regulations governing the privacy and security of such information. In the United States, there are numerous federal and state privacy and data security laws and regulations governing the collection, use, disclosure and protection of personal information, including federal and state health information privacy laws, federal and state security breach notification laws, and federal and state consumer protection laws. Each of these laws, the requirements of which sometimes evolve with amendments, regulations and case law, can be subject to varying interpretations. In addition, new laws regulating privacy and data security continue to be passed in jurisdictions all over the world. In May 2018, a new privacy regime, the General Data Protection Regulation, or the GDPR, took effect in the European Economic Area, or the EEA. The GDPR governs the collection, use, disclosure, transfer or other processing of personal data of European persons. Among other things, the GDPR imposes requirements regarding the security of personal data and notification of data processing obligations to the competent national data processing

91

authorities, changes the lawful bases on which personal data can be processed, expands the definition of personal data and requires changes to informed consent practices, as well as more detailed notices for clinical trial subjects and investigators. In addition, the GDPR increases the scrutiny of transfers of personal data from clinical trial sites located in the EEA to the United States and other jurisdictions that the European Commission does not recognize as having “adequate” data protection laws, and imposes substantial fines for breaches and violations (up to the greater of €20 million or 4% of our consolidated annual worldwide gross revenue). The GDPR also confers a private right of action on data subjects and consumer associations to lodge complaints with supervisory authorities, seek judicial remedies and obtain compensation for damages resulting from violations of the GDPR.

In addition, within the United States, states regularly adopt new laws or amending existing laws, requiring attention to frequently changing regulatory requirements. For example, California enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act, or the CCPA, on June 28, 2018. This law, which took effect on January 1, 2020, became enforceable by the California Attorney General on July 1, 2020, and has been dubbed the first “GDPR-like” law in the United States. The CCPA gives California residents expanded rights to access and delete their personal information, opt out of certain personal information sharing and receive detailed information about how their personal information is used by requiring covered companies to provide new disclosures to California consumers (as that term is broadly defined) and provide such consumers new ways to opt-out of certain sales of personal information. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for data breaches that is expected to increase data breach litigation. The CCPA may increase our compliance costs and potential liability. While there is currently an exception for protected health information that is subject to HIPAA and clinical trial regulations, as currently written, the CCPA may impact certain of our business activities. In addition, some observers have noted that the CCPA could mark the beginning of a trend toward more stringent privacy legislation in the United States as other states develop similar laws and we have already seen other states propose laws that are similar to the CCPA.

Compliance with these and any other applicable privacy and data security laws and regulations is a rigorous and time-intensive process, and we may be required to put in place additional mechanisms ensuring compliance with the new data protection rules. If we fail to comply with any such laws or regulations, we may face significant fines and penalties that could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Furthermore, the laws are not consistent, and compliance in the event of a widespread data breach is costly.

Our employees, principal investigators, consultants and commercial partners may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including non-compliance with regulatory standards and requirements and insider trading.

We are exposed to the risk of fraud or other misconduct by our employees, principal investigators, consultants and commercial partners. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional failures to comply with FDA regulations or the regulations applicable in other jurisdictions, provide accurate information to the FDA and other regulatory authorities, comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations in the United States and abroad, report financial information or data accurately or disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Such misconduct also could involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials or interactions with the FDA or other regulatory authorities, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. It is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from government investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with these laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could result in significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participating in government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, contractual damages, reputational harm and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could have a negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

92

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

An active trading market for our common stock may not develop and you may not be able to resell your shares of our common stock at an attractive price, if at all.

Prior to our IPO in March 2021, there was no public market for our common stock. Although our common stock is currently listed on The Nasdaq Global Select Market, we cannot assure you that an active trading market for our shares will develop or be sustained. If an active market for our common stock does not develop or is not sustained, it may be difficult for you to sell shares you purchased at an attractive price or at all. An inactive market may also impair our ability to raise capital to continue to fund our operations by selling our common stock and may impair our ability to acquire other companies or technologies by using our common stock as consideration.

The market price of our common stock has been and is likely to continue to be volatile and fluctuate substantially, which could result in substantial losses for our common stock.

The market price of our common stock has been and is likely to continue to be volatile. The stock market in general and the market for biopharmaceutical or pharmaceutical companies in particular, has experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies, including very recently in connection with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, which has resulted in decreased stock prices for many companies notwithstanding the lack of a fundamental change in their underlying business models or prospects. The market price for our common stock may fluctuate significantly in response to numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control, including the factors listed below and other factors described in this “Risk Factors” section:

93

In addition, in the past, stockholders have initiated class action lawsuits against pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies following periods of volatility in the market prices of these companies’ stock. Such litigation, if instituted against us, could cause us to incur substantial costs and divert management’s attention and resources from our business.

If equity research analysts do not publish research or reports, or publish unfavorable research or reports, about us, our business or our market, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common stock will be influenced by the research and reports that equity research analysts publish about us and our business. As a newly public company, we have only limited research coverage by equity research analysts. Equity research analysts may elect not to provide research coverage of our common stock, and such lack of research coverage may adversely affect the market price of our common stock. If at any time we do have equity research analyst coverage, we do not have any control over the analysts or the content and opinions included in their reports. The price of our stock could decline if one or more equity research analysts downgrade our stock or issue other unfavorable commentary or research. If one or more equity research analysts ceases coverage of our company or fails to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our stock could decrease, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.

Sales of our common stock in the public market could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could occur at any time. If our stockholders sell, or the market perceives that our stockholders intend to sell, substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, the market price of our common stock could decline significantly. Many of our existing equity holders have substantial unrecognized gains on the value of the equity they hold, and therefore they may take steps to sell their shares or otherwise secure the unrecognized gains on those shares. We are unable to predict the timing of or the effect that such sales may have on the prevailing market price of our common stock.

In addition, we have registered the shares of common stock subject to options or other equity awards issued or reserved for future issuance under our 2017 Equity Incentive Plan, as amended, or the 2017 Plan, our 2021 Equity Incentive Plan, or the 2021 Plan, and our 2021 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, or the ESPP. Such shares will be available for sale in the public market subject to vesting arrangements and exercise of options or warrants and the restrictions of Rule 144 in the case of our affiliates.

Additionally, the holders of a significant number of shares of our common stock, or their transferees, have rights, subject to some conditions, to require us to file one or more registration statements covering their shares or to include their shares in registration statements that we may file for ourselves or other stockholders. If we were to register the resale of these shares, they could be freely sold in the public market. If these additional shares are sold, or if it is perceived that they will be sold, in the public market, the trading price of our common stock could decline.

Concentration of ownership of our common stock among our existing executive officers, directors and principal stockholders may prevent new investors from influencing significant corporate decisions.

As of December 31, 2021, our executive officers, directors and beneficial owners of 5% or more of our common stock and their respective affiliates beneficially owned greater than 50% of our outstanding common stock. As a result, these persons, acting together, would be able to significantly influence all matters requiring stockholder approval, including the election and removal of directors, any merger, consolidation, sale of all or substantially all of our assets, or other significant corporate transactions.

94

Some of these persons or entities may have interests different than yours. For example, because many of these stockholders purchased their shares at prices substantially below the current market price of our common stock and have held their shares for a longer period, they may be more interested in selling our company to an acquirer than other investors, or they may want us to pursue strategies that deviate from the interests of other stockholders.

We are an “emerging growth company” and a “smaller reporting company” and, as a result of the reduced disclosure and governance requirements applicable to emerging growth companies and smaller reporting companies, our common stock may be less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the JOBS Act, and we intend to take advantage of some of the exemptions from reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including:

We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we will rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be more volatile. We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions until we are no longer an emerging growth company. We will remain an emerging growth company until December 31, 2026 or, if earlier, (i) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have total annual gross revenue of at least $1.07 billion, (ii) the date on which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of our common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the prior June 30th, or (iii) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period.

Even after we no longer qualify as an emerging growth company, we may, under certain circumstances, still qualify as a “smaller reporting company,” which would allow us to take advantage of many of the same exemptions from disclosure requirements, including reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements.

We incur significant costs and demands upon management as a result of being a public company.

As a public company listed in the United States, we incur significant legal, accounting and other costs. These costs could negatively affect our financial results. In addition, changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance and public disclosure, including regulations implemented by the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, and the Nasdaq Stock Market, or Nasdaq, may increase legal and financial compliance costs and make some activities more time-consuming. These laws, regulations and standards are subject to varying interpretations and, as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. We intend to invest resources to comply with evolving laws, regulations and standards, and this investment may result in increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management’s time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities. If notwithstanding our efforts to comply with new laws, regulations and standards, we fail to comply, regulatory authorities may initiate legal proceedings against us and our business may be harmed.

Failure to comply with these rules might also make it more difficult for us to obtain some types of insurance, including director and officer liability insurance, and we might be forced to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. The impact of these events could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, on committees of our board of directors or as members of senior management.

95

If we fail to maintain proper and effective internal controls, our ability to produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis could be impaired.

We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and the rules and regulations of Nasdaq. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting.

Commencing with our fiscal year ending December 31, 2022, we must provide a management certification of our internal control over financial reporting in our 2022 Annual Report on Form 10-K, as required by Section 404(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. This certification will state the responsibility of our management to establish and maintain an adequate internal control structure and procedures for financial reporting and will also contain an assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. The requirement to provide an internal control over financial reporting certification will require that we incur additional professional fees and internal costs. Furthermore, when we lose our status as an “emerging growth company” and a “smaller reporting company,” our independent registered public accounting firm will be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. Prior to our IPO in March 2021, we have never been required to test our internal control within a specified period, and, as a result, we may experience difficulty in meeting these reporting requirements in a timely manner.

We may identify weaknesses in our system of internal financial and accounting controls and procedures that could result in a material misstatement of our financial statements. Our internal control over financial reporting will not prevent or detect all errors and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the control system’s objectives will be met. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances of fraud will be detected.

If we are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, or if we are unable to maintain proper and effective internal controls, we may not be able to produce timely and accurate financial statements. If that were to happen, the market price of our stock could decline and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the stock exchange on which our common stock is listed, the SEC or other regulatory authorities.

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial statements in a timely manner, which may adversely affect our business, investor confidence in our company and the market value of our common stock.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain effective internal controls for financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures. We are not yet required, under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, to furnish a report by management on, among other things, the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. This assessment will also need to include disclosure of any material weaknesses identified by our management in our internal control over financial reporting. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting that results in more than a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act also generally requires an attestation from our independent registered public accounting firm on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. However, for as long as we remain an emerging growth company, we intend to take advantage of the exemption permitting us not to comply with the independent registered public accounting firm attestation requirement.

In March 2021, in connection with our IPO and in the course of reviewing our 2019 financial statement for our IPO, management and our independent registered public accounting firm identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting as we did not design and maintain effective review and approval controls over certain transactions and accounts.

The material weaknesses in our system of internal controls as of December 31, 2019 related to (1) an ineffective control environment, including a lack of sufficient accounting personnel and personnel with financial reporting expertise; (2) ineffective controls over cutoff, recording and classification of certain accounts, and the valuation and recognition of intangible assets acquired in a business combination that occurred in 2017; (3) ineffective risk assessment controls, including those policies and practices that would identify changes in our business practices, which could significantly impact our consolidated financial statements and system of internal controls; and (4) ineffective monitoring of controls related to the financial close and reporting process. As a result, there were adjustments required in connection with closing our books and

96

records and preparing our 2019 financial statements. During 2021, we hired additional finance and accounting personnel with appropriate expertise to perform specific functions and build out our financial infrastructure, implemented improved processes and internal controls and further developed and documented our accounting policies and financial reporting procedures, including ongoing senior management review and audit committee oversight. Management concluded that, as a result of the implementation of these actions, the previously-identified material weaknesses have been remediated as of December 31, 2021.

We cannot assure you that there will not be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting in the future. During the evaluation and testing process, if we identify one or more material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, we will be unable to assert that our internal control over financial reporting is effective. Any failure to maintain internal control over financial reporting could severely inhibit our ability to accurately report our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. If we are unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, or if our independent registered public accounting firm determines we have a material weakness or significant deficiency in our internal control over financial reporting once that firm begins its Section 404 reviews, we could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, the market price of our common stock could decline, and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, the SEC or other regulatory authorities. Failure to remedy any material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, or to implement or maintain other effective control systems required of public companies, could also restrict our future access to the capital markets.

Changes in U.S. tax law could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

The rules dealing with U.S. federal, state, and local income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Treasury Department. Changes to tax laws (which changes may have retroactive application) could adversely affect us or holders of our common stock. In recent years, many such changes have been made and changes are likely to continue to occur in the future. Future changes in U.S. tax laws could have a material adverse effect on our business, cash flow, financial condition or results of operations. We urge investors to consult with their legal and tax advisors regarding the implications of potential changes in U.S. tax laws on an investment in our common stock.

We might not be able to utilize a significant portion of our net operating loss carryforwards.

We expect to generate significant federal and state net operating loss, or NOL, carryforwards in the future. These NOL carryforwards could expire unused and be unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. Under the Tax Cuts and Jobs, or the Tax Act, as modified by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act, or CARES Act, federal NOLs incurred in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 and in future taxable years may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such federal NOLs incurred in the taxable year beginning after December 31, 2020 is limited. It is uncertain how various states will respond to the Tax Act and CARES Act. In addition, under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and corresponding provisions of state law, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” which is generally defined as a greater than 50% change, by value, in its equity ownership over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOL carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. The completion of our IPO in March 2021, together with private placements and other transactions that have occurred since our inception, may trigger such an ownership change pursuant to Section 382. We have not yet completed a Section 382 analysis. We may experience ownership changes as a result of subsequent shifts in our stock ownership, some of which may be outside of our control. If an ownership change occurs and our ability to use our NOL carryforwards is materially limited, it would harm our future operating results by effectively increasing our future tax obligations.

Because we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future, capital appreciation, if any, will be your sole source of gains and you may never receive a return on your investment.

You should not rely on an investment in our common stock to provide dividend income. We have not declared or paid cash dividends on our common stock to date. We currently intend to retain our future earnings, if any, to fund the development and growth of our business. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our common stock will be your sole source of gain for the foreseeable future. Investors seeking cash dividends should not purchase our common stock.

97

Provisions in our corporate charter documents and under Delaware law may prevent or frustrate attempts by our stockholders to change our management and hinder efforts to acquire a controlling interest in us, and the market price of our common stock may be lower as a result.

There are provisions in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws that may make it difficult for a third party to acquire, or attempt to acquire, control of our company, even if a change of control was considered favorable by you and other stockholders. For example, our board of directors will have the authority to issue up to 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock. The board of directors can fix the price, rights, preferences, privileges, and restrictions of the preferred stock without any further vote or action by our stockholders. The issuance of shares of preferred stock may delay or prevent a change of control transaction. As a result, the market price of our common stock and the voting and other rights of our stockholders may be adversely affected. An issuance of shares of preferred stock may result in the loss of voting control to other stockholders.

In addition, we are subject to the anti-takeover provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which regulates corporate acquisitions by prohibiting Delaware corporations from engaging in specified business combinations with particular stockholders of those companies. These provisions could discourage potential acquisition proposals and could delay or prevent a change of control transaction. They could also have the effect of discouraging others from making tender offers for our common stock, including transactions that may be in your best interests. These provisions may also prevent changes in our management or limit the price that investors are willing to pay for our stock.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware and the federal district courts of the United States of America will be the exclusive forums for substantially all disputes between us and our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or employees.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for the following types of actions or proceedings under Delaware statutory or common law:

The provisions would not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Exchange Act. Furthermore, Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all such Securities Act actions. Accordingly, both state and federal courts have jurisdiction to entertain such claims. To prevent having to litigate claims in multiple jurisdictions and the threat of inconsistent or contrary rulings by different courts, among other considerations, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation will further provide that the federal district courts of the United States of America will be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause or causes of action arising under the Securities Act, including all causes of action asserted against any defendant to such complaint. While the Delaware courts have determined that such choice of forum provisions are facially valid, a stockholder may nevertheless seek to bring a claim in a venue other than those designated in the exclusive forum provisions. In such instance, we would expect to vigorously assert the validity and enforceability of the exclusive forum provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation. This may require significant additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions and there can be no assurance that the provisions will be enforced by a court in those other jurisdictions.

These exclusive forum provisions may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or other employees, which may discourage lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and other employees. If a court were to find either exclusive-forum provision in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur further significant additional costs associated with resolving the dispute in other jurisdictions, all of which could seriously harm our business.

98

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

None.

Item 2. Properties.

Our principal office is located in Somerville, Massachusetts, where we lease approximately 36,285 square feet of research and development, laboratory and office space under a lease that terminates in 2026. Additionally, we entered into a ten-year lease in August 2021 for approximately 61,139 square feet of office and laboratory space in Charlestown, Massachusetts. The lease commences in 2022 upon completion of construction of the leased space (see Note 5). We believe that these facilities will be adequate for our near-term needs.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

On December 1, 2021, Rebiotix Inc. and Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. (collectively, “Rebiotix”) filed a complaint against us in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The complaint seeks a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity with respect to seven United States Patents owned by us: U.S. Patent Nos. 10,675,309 (the “‘309 patent”); 10,463,702 (the “‘702 patent”); 10,328,107 (the “‘107 patent”); 10,064,899; 10,022,406; 9,962,413; and 9,308,226. On February 7, 2022, we filed an answer and counterclaims against Rebiotix for infringement of the ’107, ’702, and ’309 patents. On March 7, 2022, we filed an amended answer and counterclaims, in which we, together with the Regents of the University of Minnesota (“UMN”), alleged infringement by Rebiotix of three U.S. Patents owned by UMN and exclusively licensed to us: U.S. Patent Nos. 10,251,914, 10,286,011, and 10,286,012. The U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware set a trial date for a 5-day trial beginning on May 20, 2024. The pending lawsuit is subject to inherent uncertainties, and the actual legal fees and costs will depend upon many unknown factors. The outcome of the pending lawsuit cannot be predicted with certainty.

We may also be a party to litigation and subject to claims incident to the ordinary course of business. Although the results of litigation and claims cannot be predicted with certainty, we currently believe that the final outcome of these ordinary course matters will not have a material adverse effect on our business. Regardless of the outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on us because of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources and other factors.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.

Not applicable.

99

PART II

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

Market Information

Our common stock trades under the symbol “FNCH” on the Nasdaq Global Select Market and has been publicly traded since March 19, 2021. Prior to this time, there was no public market for our common stock. On March 24, 2022, the closing price of our common stock on The Nasdaq Global Select Market was $5.19 per share.

Holders of Our Common Stock

As of March 24, 2022, there were approximately 77 stockholders of record of shares of our common stock, one of which is Cede & Co., a nominee for Depository Trust Company, or DTC. All of the shares of common stock held by brokerage firms, banks and other financial institutions as nominees for beneficial owners are deposited into participant accounts at DTC, and are considered to be held of record by Cede & Co. as one stockholder.

Dividends

We have never declared or paid any dividends on our capital stock. We currently intend to retain all available funds and any future earnings for the operation and expansion of our business and, therefore, we do not anticipate declaring or paying cash dividends in the foreseeable future. The payment of dividends will be at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on our results of operations, capital requirements, financial condition, prospects, contractual arrangements, any limitations on payment of dividends present in any future debt agreements and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

None.

Issuer Purchase of Equity Securities

None.

Item 6. [Reserved]

100

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

You should read the following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations together with our consolidated financial statements and the related notes and other financial information included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Some of the information contained in this discussion and analysis or set forth elsewhere in this report, including information with respect to our plans and strategy for our business, 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 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, our actual results could differ materially from the results described in or implied by the forward-looking statements contained in the following discussion and analysis. You should carefully read the section titled “Risk Factors” set forth in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K to gain an understanding of the important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from our forward-looking statements. Please also see the section titled “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.” You should, therefore, not rely on these forward-looking statements as representing our views as of any date subsequent to the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Overview

We are a clinical-stage microbiome therapeutics company leveraging our Human-First Discovery platform to develop a novel class of orally administered biological drugs. The microbiome consists of trillions of microbes that live symbiotically in and on every human and are essential to our health. When key microbes are lost, the resulting dysbiosis can increase susceptibility to immune disorders, infections, neurological conditions, cancer and other serious diseases. We are developing novel therapeutics designed to deliver missing microbes and their clinically relevant biochemical functions to correct dysbiosis and the diseases that emerge from it. Our Human-First Discovery platform uses reverse translation to identify diseases of dysbiosis and to design microbiome therapeutics that address them. We believe that our differentiated platform, rich pipeline and the broad therapeutic potential of this new field of medicine position us to transform care for a wide range of unmet medical needs.

Our lead product candidate, CP101, is an orally administered complete microbiome therapeutic in development for the prevention of recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection, or CDI. In June 2020, we reported positive topline data from our Phase 2 placebo-controlled clinical trial of CP101 for the prevention of recurrent CDI, which we refer to as the PRISM3 trial, and in November 2021, we reported positive topline data from our open-label, Phase 2 clinical trial of CP101 for the prevention of recurrent CDI, which we refer to as the PRISM-EXT trial. We have designed a Phase 3 clinical trial, which we refer to as the PRISM4 trial, to serve as our second pivotal trial of CP101 for the prevention of recurrent CDI. On March 1, 2022, we announced that enrollment in PRISM4 was paused following receipt of a clinical hold letter on February 24, 2022 from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or the FDA, in connection with our investigational new drug application, or IND, for CP101, requesting additional information regarding our SARS-CoV-2 donor screening protocols, including, among other things, that we address the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the informed consent process, additional detail on how samples are shipped to the vendor performing the SARS-CoV-2 testing of the donor material and how inconclusive test results will be handled. We are also preparing to initiate a Phase 1b clinical trial of FIN-211 in autism spectrum disorder, or ASD; however, because FIN-211 includes donor-derived components, the clinical hold related to our IND for CP101 will also delay initiation of our clinical trial in ASD. We plan to manufacture additional lots of CP101 and FIN-211 to satisfy the FDA's requests related to SARS-CoV-2 screening and testing. We are currently evaluating the extent of the delay the clinical hold and related manufacturing activities will have on the timing for our clinical trials in CDI and ASD, which we expect to be at least one quarter; we describe the clinical hold and related matters further above in the section entitled “Item 1. Business--Our Clinical Programs”.

Following a strategic review of our pipeline and business, we announced in March 2022 the decision to pause the development of CP101 for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus, or HBV. We believe this decision will allow us to maximize our working capital available for investment in our wholly-owned recurrent CDI and ASD programs. We continue to partner with Takeda on the development of targeted microbiome therapeutics for inflammatory bowel disease. We believe that development of our targeted microbiome therapeutics, which are composed of strains grown from master cell banks, is not affected by the clinical hold.

Since our inception, we have focused primarily on developing and progressing our product candidates through clinical development, organizing and staffing our company, research and development activities, establishing and protecting our intellectual property portfolio, including for our Human-First Discovery platform, and raising capital. We do not have any product candidates approved for sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales. Since our inception, we have funded our operations primarily with proceeds from the IPO, the sale of convertible preferred stock and from collaboration revenue.

101

On March 12, 2021, we effected a 1-for-14.444 reverse stock split of our issued and outstanding shares of common stock and redeemable convertible preferred stock, as well as effected a proportional adjustment to the existing conversion ratios for our redeemable convertible preferred stock. All historical share and per share information shown herein and in our audited financial statements and related notes have been retroactively adjusted to give effect to the reverse stock split.

On March 18, 2021, we completed an IPO in which we issued and sold 7,500,000 shares of our common stock at a public offering price of $17.00 per share, resulting in aggregate gross proceeds of $127.5 million. On April 20, 2021, we issued and sold 192,877 additional shares of common stock, pursuant to the underwriters’ partial exercise of their overallotment option, at a public offering price of $17.00 per share, for aggregate gross proceeds of $3.3 million. Inclusive of the underwriters’ option to purchase additional shares, we received approximately $118.8 million in net proceeds from the IPO after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering costs. Upon completion of the IPO, all 31,253,609 shares of outstanding redeemable convertible preferred stock automatically converted into 31,253,609 shares of common stock.

Since our inception, we have incurred significant operating losses. Our net losses were $58.2 million and $39.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively. As of December 31, 2021, we had an accumulated deficit of $161.0 million. We expect to continue to generate operating losses and negative operating cash flows for the foreseeable future if and as we:

We will not generate any revenue from product sales unless and until we successfully complete clinical development and obtain regulatory approval for one or more of our product candidates. If we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, we expect to incur significant expenses related to developing our internal commercialization capability to support product sales, marketing and distribution.

As a result, we will need substantial additional funding to support our operating activities as we advance our product candidates through clinical development, seek regulatory approval and prepare for and, if any of our product candidates are approved, proceed to commercialization. Until such time, if ever, that we can generate substantial product revenue, we expect to finance our cash needs through equity offerings, debt financings or other capital sources, including collaborations, licenses or similar arrangements. However, we may be unable to raise additional funds or enter into such other arrangements when needed or on favorable terms, if at all.

If we are unable to obtain funding, we will be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate some or all of our research and development programs, product portfolio expansion or commercialization efforts, which could adversely affect our business prospects, or we may be unable to continue operations. Although we continue to pursue these plans, there is no assurance that we will be successful in obtaining sufficient funding on terms acceptable to us to fund continuing operations, if at all.

We expect that our existing cash and cash equivalents of $133.5 million as of December 31, 2021 will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements into mid-2023. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could exhaust our available capital resources sooner than we expect. See “—Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

102

COVID-19 Business Update

In response to the ongoing global COVID-19 pandemic, we established a cross-functional task force and have implemented business continuity plans designed to address and mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our employees and our business, including our clinical trials. We have taken measures to secure our research and development activities, while work in laboratories and facilities has been organized to reduce risk of COVID-19 transmission. The extent of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, including variants of COVID-19, on our business, operations and clinical development timelines and plans remains uncertain, and will depend on certain developments, including the duration and spread of the outbreak, including with respect to variants of the virus, and its impact on our clinical trial enrollment, trial sites, contract research organizations, or CROs, contract manufacturing organizations, and other third parties with whom we do business, as well as its impact on regulatory authorities and our key scientific and management personnel. Given the global economic slowdown, the overall disruption of global healthcare systems and the other risks and uncertainties associated with the pandemic, our business, financial condition and results of operations ultimately could be materially adversely affected. We continue to closely monitor the COVID-19 pandemic as we evolve our business continuity plans, clinical development plans and response strategy.

Components of Our Results of Operations

Revenue

We have no products approved for commercial sale. We have not generated any revenue from product sales and do not expect to generate any revenue from the sale of licensed products for the foreseeable future. Our revenue to date has been generated primarily through collaboration and license agreements. We recognize revenue over our expected performance period under each agreement. We expect that our revenue for the next several years will be derived primarily from our current collaboration agreement and any additional collaborations that we may enter into in the future, and any collaboration revenue we generate will fluctuate from period to period as a result of the timing and amount of milestones and other payments. To date, we have not received any royalties under our collaboration agreement with Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, or Takeda. However, during the year ended December 31, 2020, we received royalties in the aggregate of $0.3 million pursuant to our 2019 Asset Purchase and License Agreement, or APL Agreement, with OpenBiome, which was terminated in November 2020. We will continue to earn royalties under the OpenBiome Agreement based on sales of FMT materials.

Collaboration and License Agreement with Takeda

In January 2017, we entered into a research collaboration and exclusive license agreement, or the Takeda Agreement, with Takeda, pursuant to which we granted Takeda a worldwide, exclusive license, with the right to grant sublicenses, under our rights in certain patents, patent applications and know-how to develop, have developed, manufacture, have manufactured, make, have made, use, have used, offer for sale, sell, have sold, commercialize, have commercialized and import our microbiome therapeutic candidate TAK-524, for the prevention, diagnosis, theragnosis or treatment of diseases in humans. We subsequently amended and restated the Takeda Agreement in October 2019 to provide a similar worldwide, exclusive license to a second microbiome therapeutic candidate, FIN-525. We amended the Takeda Agreement in August 2021 to transition primary responsibility for further development and manufacturing activities with respect to TAK-524 from us to Takeda in accordance with a transition plan, and Takeda will assume sole responsibility for regulatory matters with respect to TAK-524. In November 2021, we amended the Takeda Agreement to enable us to carry out certain FIN-525 preliminary evaluation activities.

In connection with entry into the Takeda Agreement, we received a one-time, upfront payment from Takeda in the amount of $10.0 million. Additionally, we received $4.0 million in the aggregate for the achievement of certain development milestones for TAK-524 therapeutic products and are entitled to receive up to $176.0 million in the aggregate, for the achievement of specified development, regulatory and commercial sale milestones for TAK-524 therapeutic products. We are entitled to receive up to $177.7 million in the aggregate, for the achievement of specified development, regulatory and commercial sale milestones for FIN-525 therapeutic products, subject, to certain specified reductions based upon the nature of the FIN-525 product and certain additional milestones to be negotiated by the parties. We are also entitled to receive up to $10.0 million for the first diagnostic product for each of TAK-524 and FIN-525, subject to certain reductions in the event that Takeda uses a third party to develop such diagnostic products. None of these milestones were impacted by the amendments to the Takeda Agreement noted above. Revenue under the Takeda Agreement is recognized as our research and development services are provided and is recorded as collaboration revenue on our consolidated statement of operations.

103

Agreements with OpenBiome

We have historically collaborated with OpenBiome under several agreements related to, among other things, the license of various technology and intellectual property rights, and the supply of certain materials, as further described below.

In February 2017, we entered into the Quality System and Supply Agreement, or QSS Agreement, with OpenBiome, which was subsequently amended in September 2017 and was partially terminated in February 2019. Under the QSS Agreement, OpenBiome granted us an exclusive license, eligible for sublicense, of certain OpenBiome technology and intellectual property. Additionally, we acquired certain assets of OpenBiome for use in manufacturing and supplying product. The QSS Agreement allowed us to use the licensed OpenBiome technology and intellectual property for our own research and development efforts in exchange for up to $27.5 million in milestone payments associated with development and commercialization efforts. We were responsible for providing support to OpenBiome related to manufacturing product, produced to OpenBiome’s specifications, which has been included as service revenue in our consolidated statements of operations. Revenue under the QSS Agreement was recorded as either contract manufacturing revenue or royalty revenue in our consolidated statements of operations.

On November 19, 2020, we entered into the LMIC License Agreement, or the LMIC Agreement, with OpenBiome, pursuant to which we granted OpenBiome a non-exclusive royalty-bearing license, with the right to grant sublicenses, under certain patents, patent applications, and know-how that are reasonably necessary or useful for the exploitation of products manufactured directly from stool from a stool donor source without the use of culturing or replication, or certain natural products. The license granted to OpenBiome excludes a license under our intellectual property to exploit a lyophilized Natural Product (such as CP101) where processed stool is lyophilized. The only consideration provided to us under the LMIC Agreement is in the form of future royalties on net sales of these products, which are not currently commercially viable. We are entitled to receive tiered royalties on net sales of certain products, ranging from mid-single digit to low second decile digits on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis. We did not recognize any revenue related to the LMIC Agreement for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, as there are currently no products available for sale.

Also on November 19, 2020, we entered into an asset purchase agreement with OpenBiome, or the OpenBiome Agreement, the effect of which was to terminate certain existing agreements with OpenBiome and internalize some of the functions for which we have previously relied on OpenBiome. Pursuant to the OpenBiome Agreement, we acquired certain biological samples and obtained a license to certain OpenBiome technology and, upon closing of the transaction, which occurred March 1, 2021, we acquired certain additional assets, including biological samples, capital equipment and contracts. As of December 31, 2021, we have made payments of $5.0 million to OpenBiome related to the OpenBiome Agreement, which is the full amount agreed upon. We are also required to pay certain milestones up to $26.0 million upon the occurrence of certain research and development events, regulatory approvals, and commercial sales, and low single digit royalties on net sales of products on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis, as well as a mid-single digit royalties on sublicensing revenue related to such products.

Operating Expenses

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses consist primarily of costs incurred for our research activities, including our discovery efforts and the development of our product candidates. We expense research and development costs as incurred, which include:

104

Costs for external development activities are recognized based on an evaluation of the progress to completion of specific tasks using information provided to us by our vendors. Payments for these activities are based on the terms of the individual agreements, which may differ from the pattern of costs incurred, and are reflected in our consolidated financial statements as prepaid or accrued research and development expenses. Nonrefundable advance payments for goods or services to be received in the future for use in research and development activities are recorded as prepaid expenses and expensed as the related goods are delivered or the services are performed.

Research and development activities are central to our business model. We expect that our research and development expenses will continue to increase for the foreseeable future as we initiate and conduct clinical trials for our product candidates and continue to discover and develop additional product candidates. If any of our product candidates enter into later stages of clinical development, they will generally have higher development costs than those in earlier stages of clinical development, primarily due to the increased size and duration of later-stage clinical trials. There are numerous factors associated with the successful commercialization of any product candidates we may develop in the future, including future trial design and various regulatory requirements, many of which cannot be determined with accuracy at this time based on our stage of development. Additionally, future commercial and regulatory factors beyond our control will impact our clinical development program and plans. We do not allocate certain employee-related costs, external costs directly related to our Human First Discovery platform, and other indirect costs to specific research and development programs because these costs are deployed across multiple product programs under development and, as such, are classified as costs of our platform research.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries and other related costs, including stock-based compensation, for personnel in our executive, finance, corporate and business development and administrative functions. General and administrative expenses also include professional fees for legal, patent, accounting, auditing, tax and consulting services, travel expenses and facility-related expenses, which include direct depreciation costs and allocated expenses for rent and maintenance of facilities and other operating costs.

We expect that our general and administrative expenses will increase in the future as we increase our general and administrative headcount to support our continued research and development and potential commercialization of our product candidates and expand our corporate headquarters. We also expect to incur increased expenses associated with being a public company, including costs of accounting, audit, legal, regulatory and tax compliance services, director and officer insurance costs, and investor and public relations costs.

Total Other Income, Net

Gain on Extinguishment of PPP Loan

Gain on extinguishment of PPP Loan relates to the forgiveness of our PPP Loan, under the Paycheck Protection Program, or the PPP, of the CARES Act.

Interest Income

Interest income primarily consists of interest earned on our cash and cash equivalents. Our interest income has not been significant due to low interest earned on cash balances related to our sweep account.

Gain (Loss) on Disposal of Fixed Assets

Gain on disposal of fixed assets relates to the gain we realized when we sold certain lab equipment during the year ended December 31, 2021.

Other (Expense) Income, Net

Other income (expense), net primarily consists of realized gains and losses on foreign exchange.

105

Results of Operations

Comparison of the Years Ended December 31, 2021 and 2020

The following table summarizes our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020 (in thousands):

Revenue

Revenue of $18.5 million and $7.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively, primarily consisted of collaboration revenue earned under the Takeda Agreement. Our collaboration revenue increased by $11.2 million in 2021 primarily due to our completion of the performance obligation under the Takeda Agreement.

Research and Development Expenses

The following table summarizes our research and development expenses for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020 (in thousands):

Research and development expenses for the year ended December 31, 2021, were $57.3 million, as compared to $33.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2020. The increase of $24.1 million in research and development expense for fiscal year 2021 included a $20.5 million increase in our platform related costs, which is primarily driven by a $10.4 million increase in personnel costs, a $4.4 million increase in manufacturing related expenses, a $1.9 million increase in external costs, and a $1.4 million increase in donor related costs. With the execution of the OpenBiome Agreement in the first quarter of 2021, we enhanced our internal manufacturing and platform research capabilities, which drove an overall increase in platform related costs, as we continue to build our platform and prepare for the future development of commercial supply needs. Additionally, there was a $3.7 million increase in expenses related to the expansion and development of our ASD program driven by a $2.1 million increase in external costs and a $1.0 million increase in personnel costs. The change also

106

included a $2.4 million increase in expenses related to the expansion and development of our HBV program driven by a $1.1 million increase in personnel costs and $0.8 million in contract manufacturing costs.

This increase was offset by a $3.1 million decrease in costs related to our CDI program, driven by a $1.2 million decrease in external costs, as we brought more of our development activities in-house upon execution of the OpenBiome Agreement, as well as a $1.0 million decrease in personnel related costs. Additionally, we had a $1.3 million decrease in IBD program expenses driven primarily by personnel costs.

General and Administrative Expenses

The following table summarizes our general and administrative expenses for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020 (in thousands):