UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020

OR

Commission File Number 001-38419

Arcus Biosciences, Inc.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its Charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (510) 694-6200

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 the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the Registrant, based on the closing price of the shares of common stock on The New York Stock Exchange on June 30, 2020, was $1,250,372,984. This excludes 8,400,392 shares of the Registrant’s Common Stock held by executive officers, directors and stockholders affiliated with directors outstanding at June 30, 2020. Exclusion of such shares should not be construed to indicate that any such person possesses the power, direct or indirect, to direct or cause the direction of the management or policies of the registrant or that such person is controlled by or under common control with the registrant.

The number of shares of Registrant’s Common Stock outstanding as of February 12, 2021 was 70,876,222.

Table of Contents

i

INFORMATION REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K (Annual Report) includes forward-looking statements. All statements regarding future events, results or other future matters contained in this Annual Report are forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to, statements about:

The words “believe,” “may,” “will,” “estimate,” “continue,” “anticipate,” “design,” “intend,” “expect,” “could,” “plan,” “potential,” “predict,” “seek,” “should,” “would” or the negative version of these words and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. We have based these forward-looking statements on our current expectations and projections about future events and trends that we believe may affect our financial condition, results of operations, strategy, short- and long-term business operations and objectives and financial needs.

These forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including those described in the Risk Factor Summary below and in Item 1A of this Annual Report, “Risk Factors.” Moreover, we operate in a very competitive and rapidly changing environment. 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 Annual Report may not occur and actual results could differ materially and adversely from those anticipated or implied in the forward-looking statements.

1

You should not rely upon forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee that the future results, advancements, discoveries, levels of activity, performance or events and circumstances reflected in the forward-looking statements will be achieved or occur. Moreover, except as required by law, neither we nor any other person assumes responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statements for any reason after the date of this Annual Report to conform these statements to actual results or to changes in our expectations.

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 Annual Report on Form 10-K, 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.

RISK FACTOR SUMMARY

2

3

4

PART I

Item 1. Business

Company Overview

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on creating best-in-class cancer therapies. Our initial focus has been on well-characterized biological pathways with significant scientific data supporting their importance. We have built a robust and highly efficient drug discovery capability to create highly differentiated small molecules, which we have the ability to develop in combinations with our monoclonal antibodies through rationally designed, indication-specific trial designs. Our vision is to create, develop and commercialize highly differentiated combination cancer therapies.

Our Clinical Development Pipeline

The following chart summarizes our clinical pipeline. In 2020, we entered into an Option, License and Collaboration Agreement (Gilead Collaboration Agreement) with Gilead Sciences, Inc. (Gilead), whereby Gilead obtained an exclusive license to zimberelimab and a time-limited exclusive option to all of our current and future programs during the 10-year collaboration term. For each program to which Gilead exercises their option, the parties will co-develop globally and co-commercialize the program in the U.S., subject to certain exceptions, and Gilead will have the right to commercialize the program outside of the United States, subject to the rights of our existing partners to certain territories. In 2017, we entered into an Option and License Agreement (Taiho Agreement) with Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (Taiho) pursuant to which Taiho has a time-limited option to exclusively license the development and commercialization rights to each of our programs for Japan and certain other territories in Asia (excluding China). To date, Taiho has exercised their option rights to our adenosine receptor antagonist program (including etrumadenant) and our anti-PD-1 program (including zimberelimab).

We currently have four clinical-stage investigational products:

5

We conduct our clinical trials in the U.S. and internationally in geographic regions that are impacted by COVID-19 to varying degrees. While we have seen relatively robust enrollment across our ongoing Arcus-sponsored studies, we expect to see volatility as local governments respond to resurgences and the emergence of new strains, each of which may result in the prolonged reinstitution, extension or enhancement of shelter-in-place measures. The American Cancer Society has also reported that the pandemic has led to declines in screening, diagnosis and treatment for cancer patients, which will impact the enrollment of patients in clinical trials targeting early stage cancers and retention of patients overall in our trials. Patient safety remains our paramount concern and we continue to collaborate with our existing and with new investigational sites to implement measures to minimize disruptions to patients and ensure continued access to treatment, in accordance with health authority guidance. We are unable to predict the full impact of this pandemic on our clinical programs.

6

Our Strategy

Our overarching vision is to create a broad portfolio of best-in-class oncology therapeutics and develop combinations that bring transformative clinical benefits over current treatment options. Our clinical development approach aims to generate meaningful data in the most efficient manner possible in order to rapidly advance our investigational products through clinical trials. Some of the key elements of our strategy include:

7

Our Product Portfolio

Domvanalimab, our Anti-TIGIT Antibody

Because of our early belief that anti-TIGIT antibodies have the potential to become the next backbone immunotherapy, we in-licensed domvanalimab in 2016 and are rapidly advancing this molecule through clinical development. We believe that domvanalimab will be the second or third anti-TIGIT antibody to enter into registrational trials.

TIGIT is now widely believed to play an important role in suppressing the immune response to cancer. The primary ligand for TIGIT (T-cell immunoreceptor with Ig and ITIM domains) is CD155, a protein that plays both inhibitory and stimulatory roles in regulating the activity of effector immune cells such as T and NK cells. TIGIT is an inhibitory receptor highly expressed on T cells displaying an exhausted phenotype, tumor-infiltrating T_reg, and NK cells. The ligands for TIGIT are broadly expressed on multiple cell types in the tumor micro-environment, including cancer cells, immune cells such as dendritic cells, and stromal cells such as endothelial cells. CD155 binding to TIGIT results in inhibition of immune cells.

In addition to TIGIT, CD155 binds, with lower affinity, to DNAM-1 (also known as CD226), a stimulatory receptor also expressed on T cells and NK cells. As a result, when anti-TIGIT antibodies bind to TIGIT, thereby blocking the TIGIT:CD155 interaction, they not only block an inhibitory signal on T cells and NK cells but also free up CD155 to bind to and activate DNAM-1, leading to increased activation of T cells and NK cells.

In our Phase 1 dose-escalation study for domvanalimab, we demonstrated the ability to have complete target coverage at very low doses. We have established intravenous dose schedules (every 2 or 3 weeks) and continue to evaluate additional doses and dose schedules in this Phase 1 study.

Our ongoing ARC-7 study is a randomized Phase 2 study evaluating the combination of domvanalimab and zimberelimab, with or without etrumadenant, versus zimberelimab monotherapy in first-line PD-L1≥50% NSCLC. We initiated this study in 2020 based on our strong belief that anti-TIGIT antibodies can build upon the efficacy of monotherapy anti-PD-(L)1 treatment in this patient population. We expect to conduct an interim analysis for this study in the second quarter of 2021.

We have initiated our first registrational trial for domvanalimab, ARC-10, which will evaluate domvanalimab in combination with zimberelimab versus zimberelimab monotherapy versus chemotherapy in the same patient population as ARC-7. This trial has been designed to support potential regulatory filings for both domvanalimab and zimberelimab combination therapy and zimberelimab monotherapy. In addition, we have entered into a clinical collaboration with AstraZeneca to evaluate domvanalimab in combination with durvalumab in PACIFIC-8, a registrational trial in Stage 3 NSCLC, a setting where durvalumab is already approved. We are also evaluating additional registrational trial opportunities for domvanalimab in combination with other therapies in various tumor types.

There has been significantly increased activity from competitors evaluating anti-TIGIT combination therapies across multiple tumor types, including recently announced randomized, potentially pivotal, trials in lung cancer and other indications. Notably, at ASCO 2020, Roche presented data from its Phase 2 CITYSCAPE study which demonstrated that tiragolumab, its anti-TIGIT antibody, in combination with atezolizumab demonstrated a 66% overall response rate (ORR) in a subset of patients with high levels of PD-L1 compared to 24% for atezolizumab alone. Because of our early start in the development of domvanalimab and our aggressive clinical development plans, we believe that we are well positioned to establish ourselves as one of the leaders in the anti-TIGIT antibody field.

Etrumadenant, our Dual A_2a/A_2b Adenosine Receptor Antagonist

Etrumadenant is a small molecule targeting the ATP-adenosine pathway. Under conditions of cellular damage or cell death, such as in response to certain chemotherapies, large amounts of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) are released into the extracellular environment, where it is converted into adenosine monophosphate by the enzyme CD39 and then into adenosine by the enzyme CD73. However, the generation of large amounts of extracellular adenosine results in an immunosuppressive response that counteracts some of the potentially beneficial effects of chemotherapy.

Etrumadenant, which is an orally bioavailable, highly potent and reversible antagonist of the adenosine A_2a and A_2b receptors, is unlike most other clinical-stage adenosine receptor antagonists, which only target one of the two receptors. We believe that activation of the A_2a receptors on T cells and NK cells mediates a significant portion of

8

the immunosuppressive effects of adenosine but that binding of adenosine to A_2b receptors on myeloid cells also contributes significantly to intra-tumoral immune suppression; consequently, etrumadenant could prove to have more robust anti-tumor effects and activity in a broader range of tumor types than other A_2a or A_2b antagonists in clinical development.

We have evaluated etrumadenant in four Phase 1/1b studies (ARC-2, ARC-3, ARC-4 and ARC-5) across multiple tumor types and with different combination therapies, including with zimberelimab and standard-of-care chemotherapies. In all these studies, etrumadenant demonstrated a tolerable safety profile and 150 mg was established as the recommended daily dose of etrumadenant across all combinations evaluated. These studies further included expansion cohorts to evaluate etrumadenant in the following tumor types: advanced colorectal cancer, triple negative breast cancer, EGFR-mutated lung cancer and metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer. Based on the results from the expansion cohorts, we have designed the following randomized trials to compare etrumadenant combinations against active comparators:

Since adenosine can be produced from various sources besides CD73 in different tumor types, such as prostatic acid phosphatase in prostate cancer, it is possible that inhibiting the adenosine pathway through multiple mechanisms may be needed in certain cancers like prostate cancer.

In addition, we entered into a clinical collaboration with Genentech whereby they are evaluating etrumadenant in two of their ongoing Phase 1b/2 MORPHEUS platform studies:

All these studies support our overall strategy of generating meaningful, randomized data on our investigational products in the fastest and most efficient manner possible.

AB680, our CD73 Inhibitor

AB680 targets the ATP-adenosine pathway, specifically the CD73 enzyme, which plays a critical role in the last step of the process of extracellular ATP conversion into adenosine. CD73 inhibition should therefore be a highly effective approach to inhibiting adenosine-mediated immune suppression, as it could significantly suppress adenosine generation.

9

We believe AB680 was the first small-molecule CD73 inhibitor to enter clinical development. While there are several anti-CD73 antibodies in development, we believe that a small-molecule approach to CD73 inhibition could offer several advantages, including:

In our initial study of AB680 in healthy volunteers, AB680 was well tolerated in single and multi-day administration and demonstrated a half-life consistent with dosing every two weeks. At the highest doses tested, AB680 also achieved significant inhibition of CD73 activity following a single dose.

We are currently evaluating AB680 in ARC-8, our Phase 1/1b clinical study in first-line metastatic pancreatic cancer in combination with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (NP/Gem), standard-of-care chemotherapies used for advanced pancreatic cancer, and zimberelimab. We selected pancreatic cancer as the initial indication to pursue for AB680 given its high level of CD73 expression and the anticipated immunogenicity of the chemotherapy.

We presented initial results from the 25mg, 50mg, 75mg and 100mg (all dosed every two weeks) cohorts from the dose-escalation portion of ARC-8 at the ASCO 2021 Virtual Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium (ASCO GI) in January 2021. These results demonstrated encouraging safety and clinical data:

The last drug to be approved in the first-line metastatic pancreatic cancer setting was Abraxane® (nab-paclitaxel) in combination with gemcitabine, which demonstrated a 23% ORR and 48% DCR in its Phase 3 registrational study.

Based on these results, we opened the dose-expansion portion of this trial using an AB680 dose of 100mg every two weeks and expect to open a control arm in this study shortly. Given the lack of significant additive toxicity from AB680, we are also exploring a 125mg dose of AB680 in the dose-escalation portion. Additionally, we have opened

10

arms to evaluate AB680 in combination with etrumadenant with and without zimberelimab in our ARC-6 and ARC-9 studies and plan to explore AB680 in other tumor types and settings that we believe are associated with high levels of adenosine.    

Zimberelimab, our Anti-PD-1 Antibody

In 2017, we in-licensed zimberelimab from WuXi Biologics. Zimberelimab is a fully human IgG4 antibody that was discovered by WuXi Biologics using the transgenic rat platform from Open Monoclonal Technology. The biochemical, biological and preclinical properties of zimberelimab have been shown by WuXi Biologics and us to be comparable to those of the marketed anti-PD-1 antibodies nivolumab and pembrolizumab.

We are currently using zimberelimab as the cornerstone of our combination strategy and it is being evaluated in combination with our other molecules in all of our ongoing clinical studies. Our registrational ARC-10 study includes a zimberelimab monotherapy arm and is designed to support the potential approval of zimberelimab as monotherapy.  

In 2019, Taiho exercised its option to obtain development and commercialization rights to zimberelimab for Japan and certain other territories in Asia (excluding China). In 2020, Gilead received rights to zimberelimab as part of our partnership agreement with them. Together, we and Gilead will co-develop zimberelimab globally and co-commercialize zimberelimab in the U.S. Gilead has the right to commercialize zimberelimab outside the United States, subject to Taiho’s existing commercialization rights and Gloria Biosciences’s commercialization rights in China.

Our Early-Stage Drug Discovery Programs

We have active early stage discovery efforts focused on the creation of additional development candidates aimed at regulating various aspects of the anti-tumor immune response as well as other cancer-intrinsic pathways which we believe play an important role in many human cancers. These include AB308, our FcR-enabled anti-TIGIT antibody, which received IND clearance in January 2021 and is expected to enter a clinical trial shortly, as well as several small molecules aimed at modulating key biological pathways in various types of cancer that are responsible for the abnormal growth and resistance to current therapies. The targets for these programs include HIF-2a, PAK4, and Axl. We anticipate selecting small molecule development candidates and initiating CMC/preclinical development for at least two of these new programs, followed by initiation of clinical development for at least one of them in 2021.

In addition, in December 2020, we announced a collaboration to discover anti-CD39 antibodies with WuXi Biologics. CD39 represents another key node along the ATP-adenosine pathway and rounds out our portfolio of ATP-adenosine targeting molecules.

Commercialization Plans

Subject to timely exercise of their respective option rights, the Taiho Agreement provides us with a potential commercialization partner for Japan and certain other Asian countries, and the Gilead Collaboration Agreement provides us with a potential commercialization partner for the rest of the world. Under our Gilead Collaboration Agreement, we retain co-promotion rights for the U.S. Therefore, we intend to build the necessary infrastructure and sales, marketing and commercial product distribution capabilities to co-promote our products, if approved, for the United States. Clinical data, the size of the addressable patient population, and the size of the commercial infrastructure and manufacturing needs may all influence or alter our commercialization plans.

License and Collaboration Agreements

Gilead Agreements

On May 27, 2020, we entered into the Gilead Collaboration Agreement, a Common Stock Purchase Agreement, and an Investor Rights Agreement, (collectively, the Gilead Agreements), each with Gilead. The transactions under these agreements closed on July 13, 2020 following expiration of the antitrust waiting period. Pursuant to the Gilead Collaboration Agreement, Gilead obtained an exclusive option to acquire an exclusive license to all of our current and future clinical programs during the 10-year collaboration term, contingent upon Gilead’s payment of up to $400.0 million over the collaboration term, and, for those programs that enter clinical development prior

11

to the end of the collaboration term, for up to an additional three years thereafter. Gilead may exercise its option, on a program-by-program basis, upon payment of an option fee that ranges from $200 million to $275 million per program for our clinical programs in existence at the date of the agreement, and $150 million per program for all of our other programs that enter clinical development thereafter. If Gilead exercises its option with respect to our TIGIT program, we are also eligible to receive up to $500 million in potential U.S. regulatory approval milestones with respect to domvanalimab. Pursuant to the Gilead Collaboration Agreement, upon closing, Gilead made a $175 million upfront cash payment and obtained an exclusive license to our zimberelimab program.

Upon Gilead’s exercise of its option to a program, the companies will co-develop, equally share global development costs and equally share all profits and losses for the United States, subject to certain opt-out rights for us, expense caps on our spending and true-up adjustments. For each optioned program, provided we have not exercised our opt-out rights, we have an option to co-promote in the United States. Gilead will obtain rights to exclusively commercialize any optioned programs outside of the U.S., subject to the rights of our existing partners to any territories, and Gilead will pay to us tiered royalties as a percentage of revenues ranging from the high teens to the low twenties.

The Gilead Collaboration Agreement is subject to termination by either party for the other party’s uncured material breach or insolvency, and by Gilead with sufficient prior written notice. Other customary termination rights are further provided in the Gilead Collaboration Agreement.

In addition to the Gilead Collaboration Agreement, we and Gilead entered into a Common Stock Purchase Agreement and an Investor Rights Agreement, which we refer to as the Equity Agreements, pursuant to which Gilead made an upfront equity investment of $200 million by purchasing from us 5,963,029 shares of our common stock at a purchase price of $33.54 per share. Gilead also has the right, at its option, to purchase additional shares from us, up to a maximum ownership of 35% of our then-outstanding voting common stock, from time to time over the next five years, at a purchase price equal to the greater of a 20% premium to market (based on a trailing five-day average closing price) at the time Gilead exercises such option, and the $33.54 initial purchase price. The Equity Agreements also include a three-year standstill and a two-year lockup and provide Gilead with registration rights commencing at the end of the lockup period, pro rata participation rights in certain future financings and the right to designate two individuals to be appointed to our Board of Directors.

On January 31, 2021, we and Gilead entered into an Amended and Restated Common Stock Purchase Agreement, which amended and restated in its entirety the Common Stock Purchase Agreement, pursuant to which Gilead purchased from us 5,650,000 shares of our common stock at a purchase price of $39.00 per share. All other terms of the original Common Stock Purchase Agreement, including Gilead’s option to purchase additional shares from us, up to a maximum ownership of 35% of our then-outstanding common stock, remain unchanged.

Taiho Option and License Agreement

In 2017, we entered into the Taiho Agreement, pursuant to which Taiho provided $35.0 million of non-refundable, non-creditable cash payments to us during the first three years of the agreement in exchange for an exclusive option, over a five-year period (the Option Period), to in-license the development and commercialization rights to clinical stage investigational products from our portfolio (each, an Arcus Program) for Japan and certain other territories in Asia (excluding China) (the Taiho Territory). As of December 31, 2019, Taiho has paid us the full $35.0 million obligation pursuant to the terms of the agreement. If we do not initiate IND-enabling studies for at least five Arcus Programs prior to the expiration of the Option Period, Taiho may elect to extend the Option Period, up to a maximum of seven years for the Option Period, subject to an extension fee. If Taiho elects to exercise any such options, the license described above will be granted under terms and conditions set forth in the agreement. Under such terms, Taiho is obligated to pay an option exercise payment for each option exercise of between $3.0 million to $15.0 million, with the amount dependent on the development stage of the applicable Arcus Program for which the option is exercised. In addition, Taiho is obligated to pay to us clinical, regulatory and commercialization milestones of up to $275.0 million with respect to each program for which Taiho exercises the option and been granted the applicable license, as well as royalties ranging from high single digits to mid-teens, on net sales in Taiho’s territories. Royalties will be payable on a licensed product-by-licensed product and country-by-country basis during the period of time commencing on the first commercial sale of a licensed product in a country and ending upon the later of: (i) ten (10) years from the date of first commercial sale of such licensed product in such country; and (ii) expiration of the last-to-expire valid claim of our patents covering the manufacture, use or sale or exploitation of such licensed product in such country.

12

In July 2018, Taiho exercised its option to our adenosine receptor antagonist program, which includes etrumadenant, and in November 2019, Taiho exercised its option to our anti-PD-1 program, which includes zimberelimab. Upon such exercises, Taiho is responsible for the development and commercialization of licensed products from within the programs in the Taiho Territory.

This agreement will remain in effect until (i) expiration of the last option exercise period if Taiho has not exercised any of its options or (ii) if Taiho has exercised any of its options, expiry of all royalty terms for the licensed products.

WuXi Biologics License Agreement

Our license agreement (the WuXi PD-1 Agreement) with WuXi Biologics Ireland Limited (successor-in-interest to WuXi Biologics (Cayman) Inc., WuXi Biologics), which we entered into in 2017 as subsequently amended, provides us with an exclusive license to develop, use, manufacture, and commercialize products that include an anti-PD-1 antibody, including zimberelimab, throughout the world except for Greater China and Thailand. We have made upfront and milestone payments under the WuXi PD-1 Agreement totaling $31.0 million and incurred sub-license fees of $11.3 million as of December 31, 2020 and we may be required to make additional clinical and regulatory milestone payments, commercialization milestone payments up to $375.0 million, and royalty payments that range from high single-digits to low teens of net sales beginning on the first commercial sale and ending on the later of (i) ten (10) years following such first commercial sale and (ii) the expiry of all patents that may subsequently be issued or granted that cover the product in such country, hereafter referred to as the royalty term. We are also required to pay WuXi Biologics a percentage in the low double digits of certain sublicense income that we receive from our sublicensees in direct connection with our sublicensees’ rights to use WuXi Biologics’s patents, patent applications and know-how. For the year ended December 31, 2020, we made milestone payments of $5.0 million and incurred sub-license fees of $10.1 million under the WuXi PD-1 Agreement, all recorded within research and development expense.

We are obligated to appoint WuXi Biologics as our exclusive manufacturer of such licensed products for a specified period of time subject to certain exceptions. Our sublicensees, however, may manufacture, at any time, certain portions of their requirements for such product subject to certain conditions. We made certain covenants not to commercialize any anti-PD-1 antibody licensed or obtained by us after the date of the license agreement with WuXi Biologics other than anti-PD-1 antibodies licensed from WuXi Biologics, subject to certain exceptions as set forth in the WuXi Agreement. This agreement terminates, on a licensed product-by-licensed product and country-by-country basis, on expiration of the royalty term for such licensed product for the applicable country.

Abmuno License Agreement

In 2016, we entered into a license agreement (the Abmuno Agreement) with Abmuno Therapeutics LLC (Abmuno) for a worldwide exclusive license to develop, use, manufacture, and commercialize products that include an anti-TIGIT antibody, including domvanalimab. Under the agreement, we have made upfront and milestone payments totaling $9.6 million as of December 31, 2020 and we may be required to make additional clinical, regulatory and commercialization milestone payments of up to $98.0 million.

The Abmuno Agreement terminates on the latest of (i) the expiry of the last-to-expire Abmuno licensed patent that covers a product that contains an anti-TIGIT antibody, (ii) the date on which there is no longer an Abmuno licensed patent application that is still pending and has been pending for a certain period of time that covers a product that contains an anti-TIGIT antibody and (iii) 10 years from the date of first commercial sale.

Manufacturing and Supply

We do not own or operate, and currently have no plans to establish, any manufacturing facilities. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of our investigational products for preclinical and clinical testing, as well as for commercial manufacture if any of our investigational products obtain marketing approval. We also rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties to package, label, store and distribute our investigational products, as well as for our commercial products if marketing approval is obtained. We believe that this strategy allows us to maintain a more efficient infrastructure by eliminating the need for us to invest in our own manufacturing facilities, equipment and personnel while also enabling us to focus our expertise and resources on the development of our investigational products. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, our third-party contract manufacturers continue to operate at or near normal levels and, at this time and subject to further COVID-19

13

implications, we believe we currently have sufficient drug supply for our ongoing clinical studies and we do not anticipate any disruptions to our drug supply chain.

To date, we have obtained active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) and drug product for our investigational products from single-source third party contract manufacturers. We are in the process of developing our supply chain for each of our investigational products and intend to put in place framework agreements under which third-party contract manufacturers will generally provide us with necessary quantities of API and drug product on a project-by-project basis based on our development needs. With respect to zimberelimab, we agreed, as part of our license agreement with WuXi Biologics, that WuXi Biologics would be our exclusive manufacturer of zimberelimab with respect to clinical and commercial supplies until a certain number of years after marketing approval for zimberelimab, subject to certain exceptions.

As we advance our investigational products through development, we will consider our lack of redundant supply for the API and drug product for each of our investigational products to protect against any potential supply disruptions.

We generally expect to rely on third parties for the manufacture of any companion diagnostics we may develop.

Competition

The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary products. While we believe that our technology, development experience and scientific knowledge provide us with competitive advantages, we face potential competition from many different sources, including large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, seek patent protection and establish collaborative arrangements for the research, development, manufacturing and commercialization of cancer immunotherapies. Any investigational products that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with new immunotherapies that may become available in the future.

We will compete in the segments of the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other related markets that develop immuno-oncology treatments. There are many other companies that have commercialized and/or are developing immuno-oncology treatments for cancer including large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, such as AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Pfizer in partnership with Merck KGaA, Regeneron in partnership with Sanofi Genzyme and Roche/Genentech.

For our dual adenosine receptor antagonist, etrumadenant, we are aware that Incyte has initiated clinical development of a dual adenosine receptor antagonist and we are aware of clinical-stage selective adenosine A_2aR antagonists being developed by other companies, including AstraZeneca, Corvus, CStone, iTeos Therapeutics and Novartis, and a clinical-stage selective adenosine A_2bR antagonist being developed by Palobiofarma. To our knowledge, there are no adenosine receptor antagonists approved for the treatment of cancer and the most advanced is in Phase 2 development.

For our small molecule CD73 inhibitor, AB680, we are aware of several pharmaceutical companies developing antibodies against this target, including Akeso, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Corvus, Novartis, Symphogen and Tracon/I-Mab, all of whom have advanced their CD73 antibodies into clinical development. Other pharmaceutical companies, such as Boehringer Ingelheim, Calithera, Eli Lilly, Merck and ORIC, have small-molecule programs against this target, of which only Eli Lilly has advanced its CD73 inhibitor into clinical development. To our knowledge, there are no approved CD73 inhibitors and the most advanced is in Phase 2 development.

For our anti-PD-1 antibody, zimberelimab, multiple large pharmaceutical companies have already received regulatory approvals for their anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies, including AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Pfizer in partnership with Merck KGaA, Regeneron in partnership with Sanofi Genzyme and Roche/Genentech, and there are also many other anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 antibodies in clinical development.

For our anti-TIGIT antibody, domvanalimab, we are aware of several pharmaceutical companies developing antibodies against this target, including Agenus, Beigene, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Compugen, Roche/Genentech, Innovent, iTeos Therapeutics, Merck KGaA, Mereo and Seattle Genetics. To our knowledge, there are no approved anti-TIGIT antibodies and the most advanced agent is in Phase 3 development.

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

14

approvals and marketing approved drugs than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and diagnostic industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These potential competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and enrolling subjects for our clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

We could see a reduction or elimination of our commercial opportunity if our 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 or our collaborators may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or foreign 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 or our collaborators are able to enter the market. The key competitive factors affecting the success of all of our investigational products, if approved, are likely to be their efficacy, safety, convenience, price, the effectiveness of companion diagnostics (if required), the level of biosimilar or generic competition and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payors.

Intellectual Property

Our commercial success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection in the United States and other countries for our investigational products, to operate without infringing valid and enforceable patents and proprietary rights of others, and to prevent others from infringing on our proprietary or intellectual property rights. We seek to protect our proprietary position by filing, in the United States and other foreign jurisdictions, patent applications intended to cover the composition of matter of our investigational products, their methods of use, and related discoveries, technologies, inventions and improvements that may be commercially important to our business. We may also 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 also intend to take advantage of regulatory protection afforded through data exclusivity, market exclusivity and patent term extensions where available.

As of February 1, 2021, we have issued U.S. patents directed to compositions of matter with respect to our adenosine receptor antagonist, CD73 inhibitor and anti-TIGIT antibody programs. As of February 1, 2021, our company-owned and licensed patent portfolio consists of 18 pending or issued U.S. patent applications, 8 pending Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) patent applications, and approximately 250 pending or issued foreign patent applications directed to compositions of matter, methods of synthesis and methods of use. The term of any patents that issue will vary in accordance with the laws of each jurisdiction, but is typically 20 years from the earliest effective filing date. Our issued patents and any patents that may issue in the future from our company-owned or licensed pending applications are projected to expire between 2035 and 2041, absent any patent term adjustments or extensions.

The patent positions for biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies like us are generally uncertain and can involve complex legal, scientific and factual issues. Changes in either the patent laws or their interpretation in the United States and other countries may diminish our ability to protect our investigational products and enforce the patent rights that we own or license, and could affect the value of such intellectual property. With respect to both company-owned and licensed intellectual property, we cannot guarantee that the patent applications we are currently pursuing or may file in the future will issue as patents in any particular jurisdiction or whether the claims of any issued patents will provide sufficient proprietary protection from competitors. Our competitors may independently develop similar investigational products or technologies that are outside the scope of the rights granted under any issued patents that we own or exclusively in-license. We cannot be sure that any patents granted to us will be commercially useful in protecting our products or their methods of use or manufacture. Moreover, even issued patents do not guarantee us the right to commercialize our products. For example, third parties may have blocking patents that could be used to prevent us from commercializing or manufacturing our investigational products.

Because of the extensive time required for development, testing and regulatory review of an investigational product, it is possible that, before a product can be commercialized, any patent protection for such product may expire or remain in force for only a short period following commercialization, thereby reducing the commercial advantage the patent provides. In the United States, the term of a patent covering an FDA-approved product may, in certain cases, be eligible for a patent term extension under the Hatch-Waxman Act as compensation for the loss of patent term

15

during the FDA regulatory review process. The period of extension may be up to five years, but cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval. Only one patent among those eligible for an extension and only those claims covering the approved product, a method for using it or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. Similar provisions are available in Europe and in certain other jurisdictions to extend the term of a patent that covers an approved product. While we intend to seek patent term extensions in any jurisdictions where they are available, there is no guarantee that the applicable authorities, including the FDA, will agree with our assessment of whether such extensions should be granted, and even if granted, the length of such extensions.

Government Regulation

Government Regulation and Product Approval

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, packaging, storage, recordkeeping, labeling, advertising, promotion, distribution, marketing, post-approval monitoring and reporting, and import and export of therapeutic products. The processes for obtaining regulatory approvals in the United States and in foreign countries and jurisdictions, along with subsequent compliance with applicable statutes and regulations and other regulatory authorities, require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.

FDA Approval Process

In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates drugs and biological products under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), the Public Health Service Act (PHSA), and implementing regulations. These laws and other federal and state statutes and regulations, govern, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, storage, recordkeeping, approval, labeling, promotion and marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, sampling, and import and export of therapeutic products. 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 applicable U.S. requirements may subject a company to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions, such as clinical hold, FDA refusal to approve pending regulatory applications, warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, civil penalties, and criminal prosecution.

The process required by the FDA before a drug or biological product may be marketed in the United States generally includes the following:

16

Satisfaction of FDA pre-market approval requirements typically takes many years and the actual time required may vary substantially based upon the type, complexity, and novelty of the investigational product or disease. A clinical hold may occur at any time during the life of an IND and may affect one or more specific trials or all trials conducted under the IND.

Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluation of an investigational product’s chemistry, formulation, and toxicity, as well as animal trials to assess the characteristics and potential safety and efficacy of the investigational product. The conduct of the preclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements, including GLP. The results of preclinical testing are submitted to the FDA as part of an IND along with other information, including information about an investigational product’s chemistry, manufacturing and controls, and a proposed clinical trial protocol. Long term preclinical tests, such as animal tests of reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity, may continue after the IND is submitted. A 30-day waiting period after the submission of each IND is required prior to the commencement of clinical testing in humans. If the FDA has neither commented on nor questioned the IND within this 30-day period, the clinical trial proposed in the IND may begin. Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product to healthy volunteers or subjects under the supervision of a qualified investigator. Clinical trials must be conducted: (i) in compliance with federal regulations; (ii) in compliance with GCP, an international standard meant to protect the rights and health of subjects and to define the roles of clinical trial sponsors, administrators, and monitors; as well as (iii) under protocols detailing the objectives of the trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety, and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. Each protocol involving testing on U.S. subjects and subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND.

The FDA may order the temporary or permanent discontinuation of a clinical trial at any time, or impose other sanctions if it believes that the clinical trial either is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements or presents an unacceptable risk to the clinical trial subjects. The trial protocol and informed consent information for subjects in clinical trials must also be submitted to an institutional review board (IRB) for approval. An IRB may also require the clinical trial at the site to be halted, either temporarily or permanently, for failure to comply with the IRB’s requirements, or may impose other conditions. The study sponsor may also suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a determination that the subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk.

Clinical trials to support NDAs/BLAs for marketing approval are typically conducted in three sequential phases, but the phases may overlap. In Phase 1, the initial introduction of the investigational product usually into healthy human subjects, the investigational product is tested to assess metabolism, pharmacokinetics, pharmacological actions, side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, early evidence on effectiveness. Phase 2 usually involves trials in a limited patient population to determine the effectiveness of the investigational product for a particular indication, dosage tolerance, and optimal dosage, and to identify common adverse effects and safety risks. If an investigational product demonstrates evidence of effectiveness and an acceptable safety profile in Phase 2 evaluations, Phase 3 trials are undertaken to obtain additional information about clinical efficacy and safety in a larger number of subjects, typically at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites, to permit the FDA to evaluate the overall benefit risk relationship of the investigational product and to provide adequate information for the labeling of the investigational product. In most cases, the FDA requires two adequate and well-controlled Phase 3 clinical trials to demonstrate the efficacy of the investigational product. A single Phase 3 trial may be sufficient in certain circumstances.

17

Concurrent with clinical trials, sponsors usually complete additional animal safety studies and also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the investigational product and finalize a process for manufacturing commercial quantities of the investigational product in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the investigational product and the manufacturer must develop methods for testing the quality, purity and potency of the investigational product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the investigational product does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its proposed shelf-life. After completion of the required clinical testing, an NDA, for a drug investigational product, or a BLA, for a biological investigational product, is prepared and submitted to the FDA. FDA approval of the NDA or BLA is required before marketing of the product may begin in the United States. The NDA or BLA must include the results of all preclinical, clinical, and other testing and a compilation of data relating to the investigational product’s pharmacology, chemistry, manufacture, and controls. The cost of preparing and submitting an NDA or BLA is substantial. The submission of most NDAs and BLAs is additionally subject to a substantial application user fee, and the applicant under an approved NDA or BLA is also subject to program user fees. These fees are typically increased annually.

The FDA has 60 days from its receipt of an NDA or BLA to determine whether the application will be accepted for filing based on the agency’s threshold determination that it is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. The FDA may refuse to file any NDA or BLA that it deems incomplete or not properly reviewable at the time of submission, and may request additional information. In this event, the NDA or BLA must be resubmitted with the additional information and the resubmitted application also is subject to review before the FDA accepts it for filing. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review. The FDA has agreed to certain performance goals in the review of NDAs and BLAs. Most such applications for standard review investigational products are reviewed within ten months of the date the FDA files the NDA or BLA; most applications for priority review investigational products are reviewed within six months of the date the FDA files the NDA or BLA. Priority review can be applied to an investigational product that the FDA determines has the potential to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and, if approved, would be a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness compared to available therapies. The review process for both standard and priority review 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.

Among other things, the FDA reviews an NDA to determine whether the product is safe and effective for its intended use, a BLA to determine whether the product is safe, pure, and potent, and in each case, whether the investigational product is being manufactured in accordance with cGMP. The FDA may also refer applications for novel investigational products, or investigational products 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. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it generally follows such recommendations.

Before approving an NDA or BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP. Additionally, the FDA will inspect the facility or the facilities at which the investigational product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve the investigational 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. To assure GCP and cGMP compliance, an applicant must incur significant expenditures of time, money and effort in the areas of training, record keeping, production and quality control.

Notwithstanding the submission of relevant data and information, the FDA may ultimately decide that the NDA or BLA does not satisfy the criteria for approval and deny approval. Data obtained from clinical trials are not always conclusive. The FDA may disagree with our trial design or interpret data from preclinical studies and clinical trials differently than we interpret the same data. If the agency decides not to approve the NDA or BLA in its present form, the FDA will issue a complete response letter that describes all of the specific deficiencies in the application identified by the FDA. The deficiencies identified may be minor, for example, requiring labeling changes, or major, for example, requiring additional clinical trials. If a complete response letter is issued, the applicant may either resubmit the NDA or BLA, addressing the deficiencies identified in the letter, or withdraw the application. If, or when, those deficiencies have been addressed to the FDA’s satisfaction in a resubmission of the NDA or BLA, the FDA will issue an approval letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug or biological product in the United States with specific prescribing information for specific indications.

18

Even if an investigational product receives regulatory approval, the approval may be significantly limited to specific indications and dosages or the indications for use may otherwise be limited, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. Further, the FDA may require that certain contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling. The FDA may impose restrictions and conditions on product distribution, prescribing, or dispensing in the form of a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS), or otherwise limit the scope of any approval. REMS can include medication guides, communication plans for healthcare professionals, and elements to assure safe use (ETASU). ETASU can include, but are not limited to, special training or certification for prescribing or dispensing, dispensing only under certain circumstances, special monitoring, and the use of patient registries. The requirement for a REMS can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the product. In addition, the FDA may require post marketing clinical trials, sometimes referred to as “Phase 4” clinical trials, designed to further assess a product’s safety and effectiveness, and testing and surveillance programs to monitor the safety of approved products that have been commercialized.

Foreign Clinical Trials to Support an IND, NDA, or BLA

The FDA will accept as support for an IND, NDA, or BLA a well-designed, well-conducted, non-IND foreign clinical trial if it was conducted in accordance with GCP and the FDA is able to validate the data from the trial through an on-site inspection, if necessary. A sponsor or applicant who wishes to rely on a non-IND foreign clinical trial to support an IND must submit the following supporting information to the FDA to demonstrate that the trial conformed to GCP:

19

Regulatory applications based solely on foreign clinical data meeting these criteria may be approved if the foreign data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice, the trials have been performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence, and the data may be considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by FDA or, if FDA considers such an inspection to be necessary, FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. Failure of an application to meet any of these criteria may result in the application not being approvable based on the foreign data alone.

Expedited Development and Review Programs

The FDA has various programs, including Fast Track, priority review, accelerated approval and breakthrough therapy, which are intended to expedite or simplify the process for reviewing investigational products, or provide for the approval of an investigational product on the basis of a surrogate endpoint. Even if an investigational product qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the investigational product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or that the time period for FDA review or approval will be lengthened. Generally, investigational products that are eligible for these programs are those for serious or life-threatening conditions, those with the potential to address unmet medical needs and those that offer meaningful benefits over existing treatments. For example, Fast Track is a process designed to facilitate the development and expedite the review of investigational products to treat serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions and fill unmet medical needs. Priority review is designed to give an investigational product that treats a serious condition and, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness, an initial review within eight months as compared to a standard review time of twelve months.

Although Fast Track and priority review do not affect the standards for approval, the FDA will attempt to facilitate early and frequent meetings with a sponsor of a Fast Track designated investigational product and expedite review of the application for an investigational product designated for priority review. Accelerated approval provides for an earlier approval for a new investigational product that meets the following criteria: is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, generally provides a meaningful advantage over available therapies and demonstrates an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality (IMM) that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on IMM or other clinical benefit. A surrogate endpoint is a laboratory measurement or physical sign used as an indirect or substitute measurement representing a clinically meaningful outcome. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require that a sponsor of an investigational product receiving accelerated approval perform post-marketing clinical trials to verify and describe the predicted effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical endpoint, and the product may be subject to accelerated withdrawal procedures.

In addition to the Fast Track, accelerated approval and priority review programs discussed above, the FDA also provides Breakthrough Therapy designation. A sponsor may seek FDA designation of an investigational product as a “breakthrough therapy” if the investigational product is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other therapeutics, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the investigational product may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development.

20

Orphan Drug Designation

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to a drug or biological product intended to treat a rare disease or condition—generally a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or if it affects more than 200,000 individuals in the United States, there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making a product available in the United States for such disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product.

Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting a marketing application for the therapeutic for that particular disease or condition. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan Drug Designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding toward clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user-fee waivers. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process. The FDA may revoke orphan drug designation, and if it does, it will publicize the drug is no longer designated as an orphan drug.

If an investigational product with orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease for which it has such designation, the investigational product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same investigational product for the same indication, except in very limited circumstances, for seven years. Orphan drug exclusivity, however, could also block the approval of one of our investigational products for seven years if a competitor obtains approval of the same investigational product as defined by the FDA or if our investigational product is determined to be contained within the competitor’s investigational product for the same indication or disease.

21

Patent Term Restoration and Marketing Exclusivity

After approval, owners of relevant drug or biological product patents may apply for up to a five year patent extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Act. The allowable patent term extension is calculated as half of the product’s testing phase—the time between IND and NDA or BLA submission—and all of the review phase—the time between NDA or BLA submission and approval, up to a maximum of five years. The time can be shortened if the FDA determines that the applicant did not pursue approval with due diligence. The total patent term after the extension may not exceed 14 years.

For patents that might expire during the application phase, the patent owner may request an interim patent extension. An interim patent extension increases the patent term by one year and may be renewed up to four times. For each interim patent extension granted, the post-approval patent extension is reduced by one year. The director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office must determine that approval of the investigational product covered by the patent for which a patent extension is being sought is likely. Interim patent extensions are not available for an investigational product for which an NDA or BLA has not been submitted.

Market exclusivity provisions under the FDCA also can delay the submission or the approval of certain applications. The FDCA provides a five-year period of non-patent marketing exclusivity within the U.S. to the first applicant to gain approval of an NDA for a new chemical entity. An investigational product is a new chemical entity if the FDA has not previously approved any other new investigational product containing the same active moiety, which is the molecule or ion responsible for the action of the investigational product substance. During the exclusivity period, the FDA may not accept for review an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) or a 505(b)(2) NDA submitted by another company for another version of such investigational product where the applicant does not own or have a legal right of reference to all the data required for approval. However, an application may be submitted after four years if it contains a certification of patent invalidity or non-infringement. The FDCA also provides three years of marketing exclusivity for an NDA, 505(b)(2) NDA or supplement to an approved NDA if new clinical investigations, other than bioavailability studies, that were conducted or sponsored by the applicant are deemed by the FDA to be essential to the approval of the application, for example, for new indications, dosages or strengths of an existing investigational product. This three-year exclusivity covers only the conditions associated with the new clinical investigations and does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs for investigational products containing the original active agent. Five-year and three-year exclusivity will not delay the submission or approval of a full NDA. However, an applicant submitting a full NDA would be required to conduct or obtain a right of reference to all of the preclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials necessary to demonstrate safety and effectiveness.

Biosimilars

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological investigational products shown to be highly similar to or interchangeable with an FDA licensed reference biological product. Biosimilarity sufficient to reference a prior FDA-approved product requires that there be no differences in conditions of use, route of administration, dosage form, and strength, and no clinically meaningful differences between the biological investigational product and the reference product in terms of safety, purity, and potency. Biosimilarity must be shown through analytical trials, animal trials, and a clinical trial or trials, unless the Secretary of Health and Human Services waives a required element. A biosimilar investigational product may be deemed interchangeable with a prior approved product if it meets the higher hurdle of demonstrating that it can be expected to produce the same clinical results as the reference product and, for products administered multiple times, the biologic and the reference biologic may be switched after one has been previously administered without increasing safety risks or risks of diminished efficacy relative to exclusive use of the reference biologic.

A reference biologic is granted 12 years of exclusivity from the time of first licensure of the reference product, and no application for a biosimilar can be submitted for four years from the date of licensure of the reference product. The first biologic investigational product submitted under the abbreviated approval pathway that is determined to be interchangeable with the reference product has exclusivity against a finding of interchangeability for other biologics for the same condition of use for the lesser of (i) one year after first commercial marketing of the first interchangeable biosimilar, (ii) 18 months after the first interchangeable biosimilar is approved if there is no patent challenge, (iii) 18 months after resolution of a lawsuit over the patents of the reference biologic in favor of the first

22

interchangeable biosimilar applicant, or (iv) 42 months after the first interchangeable biosimilar’s application has been approved if a patent lawsuit is ongoing within the 42-month period.

Post-approval Requirements

Once an approval is granted, the FDA may withdraw the approval if compliance with regulatory requirements is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product may result in restrictions on the product or even complete withdrawal of the product from the market. After approval, some types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications, manufacturing changes and additional labeling claims, are subject to further FDA review and approval. In addition, the FDA may under some circumstances require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the effect of approved products that have been commercialized, and the FDA under some circumstances has the power to prevent or limit further marketing of a product based on the results of these post-marketing programs. Any product manufactured or distributed by us or our collaborators pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things:

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 may be subject to significant liability. However, physicians may, in their independent medical judgment, prescribe legally available products for off-label uses. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments but the FDA does restrict manufacturer’s communications on the subject of off-label use of their products.

Manufacturers, their subcontractors, and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drug and 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 and some state agencies for compliance with cGMP, including data integrity requirements, and other laws. The FDA periodically inspects manufacturing facilities to assess compliance with ongoing regulatory requirements, including cGMP, which impose extensive procedural, substantive and record-keeping requirements upon us and third-party manufacturers engaged by us if our products are approved. In addition, changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated, and, depending on the significance of the change, may require FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations would also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose reporting and documentation requirements upon us and our third-party manufacturers. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMP and other aspects of regulatory compliance. Failure to comply with the statutory and regulatory requirements can subject a manufacturer to possible legal or regulatory actions, such as warning letters, suspension of manufacturing, seizures of products, injunctive actions or other civil penalties. We cannot be certain we or our present or future third-party manufacturers or suppliers will be able to comply with the cGMP regulations and other ongoing FDA regulatory requirements. If we or our present or future third-party manufacturers or suppliers are not able to comply with these requirements, the FDA may halt our clinical trials or require us to recall a product from distribution.

23

In addition, therapeutic manufacturers in the United States must comply with applicable provisions of the Drug Supply Chain Security Act and provide and receive product tracing information, maintain appropriate licenses, ensure they only work with other properly licensed entities, and have procedures in place to identify and properly handle suspect and illegitimate product.

Disclosure of Clinical Trial Information

Sponsors of clinical drug trials (other than Phase 1 trials) are required to register and disclose certain clinical trial information. Information related to the investigational product, comparator(s), patient population, phase of investigation, trial sites and investigators and other aspects of the clinical trial is made public as part of the registration. Sponsors are also obligated to disclose the results of their clinical trials after completion. Disclosure of the results of certain trials may be delayed until the new product or new indication being studied has been approved. However, there are evolving rules and increasing requirements for publication of trial-related information, and it is possible that data and other information from trials involving drugs that never garner approval could in the future be required to be disclosed. In addition, publication policies of major medical journals mandate certain registration and disclosures as a pre-condition for potential publication, even when this is not presently mandated as a matter of law. Competitors may use this publicly available information to gain knowledge regarding the progress of development programs.

Additional Controls for Biological 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 biological 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 biological products, 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.

FDA Regulation of Companion Diagnostics

If use of an in vitro diagnostic is essential to safe and effective use of a drug or biologic product, then the FDA generally will require approval or clearance of the diagnostic, known as a companion diagnostic and regulated by FDA as a medical device, at the same time that the FDA approves the investigational product. The review of an in vitro companion diagnostic in conjunction with the review of an investigational product involves coordination of review between internal organizations within FDA. Most companion diagnostics require approval of a premarket approval application (PMA). The PMA process, including the gathering of clinical and preclinical data and the submission to and review by the FDA, can take several years or longer. It involves a rigorous premarket review during which the applicant must prepare and provide the FDA with reasonable assurance of the device’s safety and effectiveness and information about the device and its components regarding, among other things, device design, manufacturing and labeling. PMAs are subject to a substantial application fee. In addition, PMAs for certain devices must generally include the results from extensive preclinical and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety and effectiveness of the device for each indication for which FDA approval is sought. In particular, for a diagnostic, the applicant must demonstrate that the diagnostic produces reproducible results when the same sample is tested multiple times by multiple users at multiple laboratories. As part of the PMA review, the

24

FDA will typically inspect the manufacturer’s facilities for compliance with the Quality System Regulation (QSR) which imposes elaborate testing, control, documentation and other quality assurance requirements.

PMA approval is not guaranteed, and the FDA may ultimately respond to a PMA submission with a not approvable determination based on deficiencies in the application and require additional clinical trial or other data that may be expensive and time-consuming to generate and that can substantially delay approval. If the FDA’s evaluation of the PMA application is favorable, the FDA typically issues an approvable letter requiring the applicant’s agreement to specific conditions, such as changes in labeling, or specific additional information, such as submission of final labeling, in order to secure final approval of the PMA. If the FDA concludes that the applicable criteria have been met, the FDA will issue a PMA for the approved indications, which can be more limited than those originally sought by the applicant. The PMA can include post-approval conditions that the FDA believes necessary to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device, including, among other things, restrictions on labeling, promotion, sale and distribution.

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

Other U.S. Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements

In the United States, our activities are potentially 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, other divisions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (such as the Office of Inspector General and the Health Resources and Service Administration), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and individual U.S. Attorney offices within the DOJ, and state and local governments. For example, sales, marketing and scientific/educational grant programs may have to comply with the anti-fraud and abuse provisions of the Social Security Act, the false claims laws, the privacy and security provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and similar state laws, each as amended, as applicable.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, any person or entity, from knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving any remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase, lease or order of any item or service reimbursable, in whole or in part, under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare programs. The term remuneration has been interpreted broadly to include anything of value. The Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between therapeutic product manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, and formulary managers on the other. There are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution. The exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly and practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchasing or recommending may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. Failure to meet all of the requirements of a particular applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the conduct per se illegal under the Anti-Kickback Statute. Instead, the legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all of its facts and circumstances. Our practices may not in all cases meet all of the criteria for protection under a statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor.

Additionally, the intent standard under the Anti-Kickback Statute was amended by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (ACA), to a stricter standard such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, the ACA codified case law that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal False Claims Act (FCA) (discussed below).

The federal false claims, including the FCA, which imposes significant penalties and can be enforced by private citizens through civil qui tam actions, and civil monetary penalty laws prohibit any person or entity from, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment to, or

25

approval by, the federal healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, or knowingly making, using, or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim to the federal government. A claim includes “any request or demand” for money or property presented to the U.S. government. For instance, historically, pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. Other companies have been prosecuted for causing false claims to be submitted because of the companies’ marketing of the product for unapproved, off-label, and thus generally non-reimbursable, uses.

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

Also, many states have similar, and typically more prohibitive, fraud and abuse statutes or regulations that apply to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payor. Additionally, to the extent that our product is sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws.

We may be subject to data privacy and security regulations by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH) and its implementing regulations, imposes requirements on “covered entities,” including certain healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses, and their respective “business associates” that create, receive, maintain or transmit individually identifiable health information for or on behalf of a covered entity as well as their covered subcontractors relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s privacy and security standards directly applicable to business associates. HITECH also created four new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce HIPAA and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, many state laws govern the privacy and security of health information in specified circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways, are often not pre-empted by HIPAA, and may have a more prohibitive effect than HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.

Certain of our products, once approved, may be administered by a physician. Under currently applicable U.S. law, certain products not usually self-administered (including injectable drugs) may be eligible for coverage under Medicare through Medicare Part B. Medicare Part B is part of original Medicare, the federal health care program that provides health care benefits to the aged and disabled, and covers outpatient services and supplies, including certain pharmaceutical products, that are medically necessary to treat a beneficiary’s health condition. As a condition of receiving Medicare Part B reimbursement for a manufacturer’s eligible drugs or biologicals, the manufacturer is required to participate in other government healthcare programs, including the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and the 340B Drug Pricing Program. The Medicaid Drug Rebate Program requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to enter into and have in effect a national rebate agreement with the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) as a condition for states to receive federal matching funds for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs furnished to Medicaid patients. Under the 340B Drug Pricing Program, the manufacturer must extend discounts to entities that participate in the program.

In addition, many pharmaceutical manufacturers must calculate and report certain price reporting metrics to the government, such as average sales price (ASP) and best price. Penalties may apply in some cases when such metrics are not submitted accurately and timely. Further, these prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. It is difficult to predict how Medicare coverage and reimbursement policies will be applied to our products in the

26

future and coverage and reimbursement under different federal healthcare programs are not always consistent. Medicare reimbursement rates may also reflect budgetary constraints placed on the Medicare program.

Additionally, the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act (Sunshine Act) within the ACA, and its implementing regulations, require that certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biological and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) report annually to CMS information related to certain payments or other transfers of value made or distributed to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors) and teaching hospitals, or to entities or individuals at the request of, or designated on behalf of, the physicians and teaching hospitals and to report annually certain ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. Effective January 1, 2022, these reporting obligations will extend to include transfers of value made to physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, anesthesiologist assistants, certified registered nurse anesthetists and certified nurse midwives during the previous year. Failure to report accurately could result in penalties. In addition, many states also govern the reporting of payments or other transfers of value, many of which differ from each other in significant ways, are often not pre-empted, and may have a more prohibitive effect than the Sunshine Act, thus further complicating compliance efforts.

In order to distribute products commercially, we must comply with state laws that require the registration of manufacturers and wholesale distributors of drug and biological products in a state, including, in certain states, manufacturers and distributors who ship products into the state even if such manufacturers or distributors have no place of business within the state. Some states also impose requirements on manufacturers and distributors to establish the pedigree of product in the chain of distribution, including some states that require manufacturers and others to adopt new technology capable of tracking and tracing product as it moves through the distribution chain. Several states have enacted legislation requiring pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to establish marketing compliance programs, file periodic reports with the state, make periodic public disclosures on sales, marketing, pricing, clinical trials and other activities, and/or register their sales representatives, as well as to prohibit pharmacies and other healthcare entities from providing certain physician prescribing data to pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for use in sales and marketing, and to prohibit certain other sales and marketing practices. All of our activities are potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws.

Ensuring business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations is a costly endeavor. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the federal and state healthcare laws described above or any other current or future governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including without limitation, civil, criminal and/or administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, injunctions, private “qui tam” actions brought by individual whistleblowers in the name of the government, or refusal to allow us to enter into government contracts, contractual damages, reputational harm, administrative burdens, 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 adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement

Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any investigational products for which we may obtain regulatory approval. In the United States and in foreign markets, sales of any products for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale will depend, in part, on the extent to which third-party payors provide coverage and establish adequate reimbursement levels for such products. In the United States, third-party payors include federal and state healthcare programs, private managed care providers, health insurers and other organizations. Adequate coverage and reimbursement from governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid in the United States, and commercial payors are critical to new product acceptance.

27

Our ability to commercialize any products successfully also will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers and other organizations. Government authorities and third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which therapeutics they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. Coverage and reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including the third-party payor’s determination that use of a therapeutic is:

We cannot be sure that reimbursement will be available for any product that we commercialize and, if coverage and reimbursement are available, what the level of reimbursement will be. Coverage may also be more limited than the purposes for which the product is approved by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product for which we obtain regulatory approval. Additionally, our collaborators will be required to obtain coverage and reimbursement for any companion diagnostic tests they develop separate and apart from the coverage and reimbursement we seek for our product candidates, once approved.

Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price, examining the medical necessity, and reviewing the cost-effectiveness of medical products, therapies and services, in addition to questioning their safety and efficacy. Obtaining reimbursement for our products may be particularly difficult because of the higher prices often associated with branded drugs and drugs administered under the supervision of a physician. We may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of our products, in addition to the costs required to obtain FDA approvals. Our investigational products may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective. Obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval of a product from a government or other third-party payor is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us to provide to each payor supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data for the use of our product on a payor-by-payor basis, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained. A payor’s decision to provide coverage for a product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Further, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage for the product. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any investigational product that we successfully develop.

Different pricing and reimbursement schemes exist in other countries. In the European Union, governments influence the price of pharmaceutical products through their pricing and reimbursement rules and control of national health care systems that fund a large part of the cost of those products to consumers. Some jurisdictions operate positive and negative list systems under which products may only be marketed once a reimbursement price has been agreed. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval, some of these countries may require the completion of clinical trials that compare the cost effectiveness of a particular investigational product to currently available therapies. Other member states allow companies to fix their own prices for medicines, but monitor and control company profits. The downward pressure on health care costs has become intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. In addition, in some countries, cross-border imports from low-priced markets exert a commercial pressure on pricing within a country.

The marketability of any investigational products for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale may suffer if the government and third-party payors fail to provide adequate coverage and reimbursement. In addition, emphasis on managed care, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations, and additional legislative changes in the United States has increased, and we expect will continue to increase, the pressure on healthcare pricing. The downward pressure on the rise in healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription medicines, medical devices and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become very intense. Coverage policies and third-party 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.

28

Healthcare Reform

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 investigational products, restrict or regulate post-approval activities, and affect the ability to profitably sell investigational products for which marketing approval is obtained. 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, the ACA has substantially changed healthcare financing and delivery by both governmental and private insurers. Among the ACA provisions of importance to the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, in addition to those otherwise described above, are the following:

There remain legal and political challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, in December 2017, Congress repealed the tax penalty for an individual’s failure to maintain ACA-mandated health insurance that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate” as part of a tax reform bill. On December 14, 2018, a Texas U.S. District Court Judge ruled that the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress as part of the Tax Act. Additionally, on December 18, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit upheld the District Court ruling that the individual mandate was unconstitutional and remanded the case back to the District Court to determine whether the remaining provisions of the ACA are invalid as well. The United States Supreme Court is currently reviewing this case, but it is unknown when a decision will be reached. Although

29

the U.S. Supreme Court has yet to rule on the constitutionality of the ACA, on January 28, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period from February 15, 2021 through May 15, 2021 for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace. The executive order also instructs certain governmental agencies to review and 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 unclear how the Supreme Court ruling, other such litigation, and the healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the ACA and our business.

Further legislation or regulation could be passed that could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations. Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. For example, in August 2011, President Obama signed into law the Budget Control Act of 2011, which, among other things, created the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to recommend to Congress proposals in spending reductions. The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction did not achieve a targeted deficit reduction of at least $1.2 trillion for fiscal years 2012 through 2021, triggering the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This includes aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect beginning on April 1, 2013 and will stay in effect through 2030 unless additional Congressional action is taken. However, the Medicare sequester reductions under the Budget Control Act of 2011 are suspended from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Additionally, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed federal legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. At the federal level, the Trump administration budget proposal for fiscal year 2021 included a $135 billion allowance to support legislative proposals seeking to reduce drug prices, increase competition, lower out-of-pocket drug costs for patients, and increase patient access to lower-cost generic and biosimilar drugs. Further, the Trump administration previously released a “Blueprint” to lower drug prices and reduce out of pocket costs of drugs that contained proposals to increase drug manufacturer competition, increase the negotiating power of certain federal healthcare programs, incentivize manufacturers to lower the list price of their products, and reduce the out of pocket costs of drug products paid by consumers. On July 24, 2020 and September 13, 2020, the Trump administration announced several executive orders related to prescription drug pricing that attempt to implement several of the administration’s proposals. The FDA also released a final rule, effective November 30, 2020, implementing a portion of the importation executive order providing guidance for states to build and submit importation plans for drugs from Canada. Further, on November 20, 2020, HHS finalized a regulation removing safe harbor protection for price reductions from pharmaceutical manufacturers to plan sponsors under Part D, either directly or through pharmacy benefit managers, unless the price reduction is required by law. The implementation of this rule has been delayed by the Biden administration from January 1, 2022 to January 1, 2023 in response to ongoing litigation. The rule also creates a new safe harbor for price reductions reflected at the point-of-sale, as well as a new safe harbor for certain fixed fee arrangements between pharmacy benefit managers and manufacturers, the implementation of which have also been delayed pending review by the Biden administration until March 22, 2021. On November 20, 2020, CMS issued an interim final rule implementing President Trump’s Most Favored Nation executive order, which would tie Medicare Part B payments for certain physician-administered drugs to the lowest price paid in other economically advanced countries, effective January 1, 2021. On December 28, 2020, the United States District Court in Northern California issued a nationwide preliminary injunction against implementation of the interim final rule. However, it is unclear whether the Biden administration will work to reverse these measures or pursue similar policy initiatives. Individual states in the United States have also become increasingly aggressive in passing legislation and implementing 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.

We anticipate that current and future healthcare reform measures could result in additional downward pressure on coverage and the price that we receive for any approved product, and could seriously harm our business. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare and 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 products. Such reforms could have an adverse effect on anticipated revenue from investigational products that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatory approval and may affect our overall financial condition and ability to develop investigational products. Further, it is possible that additional government action is taken in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

30

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), prohibits any U.S. individual or business from paying, offering, or authorizing payment or offering of anything of value, directly or indirectly, to any foreign official, political party or candidate for the purpose of influencing any act or decision of the foreign entity in order to assist the individual or business in obtaining or retaining business. The FCPA also obligates companies whose securities are listed in the United States to comply with accounting provisions requiring us to maintain books and records that accurately and fairly reflect all transactions of the corporation, including international subsidiaries, and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls for international operations.

Additional Regulation

In addition to the foregoing, state and federal laws regarding environmental protection and hazardous substances, including the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Resource Conservancy and Recovery Act and the Toxic Substances Control Act, affect our business. These and other laws govern our use, handling and disposal of various biological, chemical and radioactive substances used in, and wastes generated by, our operations. If our operations result in contamination of the environment or expose individuals to hazardous substances, we could be liable for damages and governmental fines. We believe that we are in material compliance with applicable environmental laws and that continued compliance therewith will not have a material adverse effect on our business. We cannot predict, however, how changes in these laws may affect our future operations.

Other Regulations

We are also subject to numerous federal, state and local laws relating to such matters as safe working conditions, manufacturing practices, environmental protection, fire hazard control, and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances. We may incur significant costs to comply with such laws and regulations now or in the future.

Rest of World Government Regulation

In addition to regulations in the United States, we will be subject to a variety of regulations in other jurisdictions governing, among other things, clinical trials and any commercial sales and distribution of our products. Whether or not we obtain FDA approval to conduct clinical trials or market a product, we must obtain the requisite approvals from regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions prior to the commencement of clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries. The requirements and process governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary from country to country. In all cases, again, the clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with GCP and the applicable regulatory requirements. Because biologically sourced raw materials are subject to unique contamination risks, their use may be restricted in some countries.

Australia

Conducting clinical trials for therapeutic drug candidates in Australia is subject to regulation by Australian regulatory bodies. The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and the National Health and Medical Research Council set the codes of Good Clinical Practice (GCP) for clinical research in Australia, and compliance with these codes is mandatory. Australia has also adopted international codes, such as those promulgated by the International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (the ICH). The ICH guidelines must be complied with across all fields of clinical research, including those related to pharmaceutical quality, nonclinical and clinical data requirements and trial designs. The basic requirements for preclinical data to support a first-in-human trial under ICH guidelines are applicable in Australia. Requirements related to adverse event reporting in Australia are similar to those required in other major jurisdictions.

Clinical trials conducted using “unapproved therapeutic goods” in Australia, being those which have not yet been evaluated by the TGA for quality, safety and efficacy must occur pursuant to either the Clinical Trial Notification Scheme (CTN Scheme), or the Clinical Trial Exemption Scheme (CTX Scheme). In each case, the trial is supervised by a Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) an independent review committee set up under guidelines of the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council that ensures the protection of rights, safety and well-being of human subjects involved in a clinical trial. A HREC does this by reviewing, approving and providing continuing examination of trial protocols and amendments, and of the methods and material to be used in obtaining and documenting informed consent of the trial subjects.

31

The CTN Scheme broadly involves:

Under the CTX Scheme:

A sponsor cannot commence a trial under the CTX Scheme until written advice has been received from the TGA regarding the application and approval for the conduct of the trial has been obtained from an ethics committee and the institution at which the trial will be conducted.

Approval for inclusion in the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods (ARTG) is required before a pharmaceutical product may be marketed (or imported, exported or manufactured) in Australia. In order to obtain registration of the product on the ARTG, it is required that:

Europe

Similar to the United States and Australia, the conduct of clinical trials in the EU are subject to regulatory controls. Under the current EU Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC (Directive), before a clinical trial can be initiated in the EU, it must be approved in each of the EU countries where the trial is to be conducted by two distinct bodies: the national Competent Authority and one or more Ethics Committees. In 2014, the EU adopted a new Clinical Trials Regulation 536/2014 (Regulation) to replace the current Directive, with a three-year transition period. The Regulation aims to simplify and streamline the approval of clinical trials in the EU. For example, the sponsor shall submit a single application for approval of a clinical trial via the EU portal. As part of the application process, the sponsor shall propose a reporting Member State, who will coordinate the validation and evaluation of the application. The reporting Member State shall consult and coordinate with the other concerned Member States. If an application is rejected, it can be amended and resubmitted through the EU portal. If an approval is issued, the sponsor can start the clinical trial in all concerned Member States. However, a concerned Member State can in limited circumstances declare an “opt-out” from an approval. In such a case, the clinical trial cannot be conducted in that Member State. The Regulation also aims to streamline and simplify the rules on safety reporting, and introduces enhanced transparency requirements such as mandatory submission of a summary of the clinical trial results to the EU database. The Regulation will become directly applicable in all EU Member States once the centralized portal and database for clinical trials are fully functional.

The Directive will still apply for three years from the date of application of the Regulation for clinical trial applications submitted before the date of application of the Regulation and for clinical trial applications submitted under the Directive within one year after the date of application of the Regulation.

32

Commercialization of our investigational products may only occur in the EU following approval of a marketing application, which can be obtained through either a centralized or a decentralized procedure:

We will be subject to additional regulations with respect to any activities we conduct in the EU. For example, the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) applies to health-related and other personal data of individuals in the European Union. The GPDR, which went into effect in May 2018, imposes more stringent operational requirements on processors and controllers of personal data, including, for example, expanded disclosures about how personal data is collected, used and shared, limitations on retention of personal data, more stringent requirements pertaining to genetic, biometric and health data, mandatory data breach notification requirements, and higher standards for controllers to demonstrate valid consent for certain data processing activities. The GDPR further provides that European Union Member States may implement their own additional laws and regulations in relation to the processing of genetic, biometric or health data, which could result in differences in the GDPR’s implementation among Member States. The GDPR increases our responsibility and liability in relation to personal data that we process, and we must put in place additional mechanisms to ensure compliance with the new EU data protection rules.

Human Capital Resources

Our culture and values can be defined by one overarching concept: We do the right things for the right reasons. We take pride in hard work and approach our mission—to create, develop and commercialize highly differentiated combination cancer therapies that have the potential to cure—with a great sense of urgency. We recognize that our employees are a critical component to our success and we strive to attract the best talent from a range of sources, including an internship program through which we have developed strong relationships with multiple universities to foster talent and attract skilled graduates. In 2020, we added 105 new employees to our team and expect more growth in 2021, with a focus on expanding our expertise and capabilities in research, clinical development and across our organization.

We recognize that attracting skilled talent is only one part of the equation. We endeavor to retain and motivate our employees by empowering them to make the decisions they are most qualified and best positioned to decide and by providing opportunities for growth and development, such as through our education reimbursement program. We focus on wellness through our CEO-funded lunch program, a quarterly stipend to assist with wellness and commuter expenses, and our coverage of 95% of the costs for healthcare benefits. Since the COVID pandemic, we have increased our focus on safety and wellness. In March 2020, we voluntarily transitioned our employees, including our laboratory-based personnel, to work-from-home prior to the institution of state and local shelter-in-place orders. While we were able to transition our non-laboratory operations to remote work arrangements, this was not possible for our laboratory-based personnel. Despite a shutdown in our laboratory operations into June 2020, we did not institute any furlough or salary reductions. In connection with the resumption of our laboratory operations, we instituted regular COVID-19 testing services in order to minimize the risk to our employees.

33

As of February 1, 2021, we had 236 full-time employees, 92 of whom hold Ph.D. or M.D. degrees or R.N. certifications. Of these employees, 184 were engaged in research and development activities and 52 were engaged in general and administrative activities. None of our employees are represented by labor unions or covered by collective bargaining agreements. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

Corporate Information

We were incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware in April 2015. Our principal executive offices are located at 3928 Point Eden Way, Hayward, CA 94545, and our telephone number is (510) 694-6200. Our website address is www.arcusbio.com. The information on, or that can be accessed through, our website is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

We operate and manage our business as one reportable and operating segment. See Note 2 to our audited financial statement included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information.

We file Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and other information with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Our filings with the SEC are available free of charge on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov and on our website under the “Investors” tab as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC.

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

You should consider carefully the following risk factors, together with all the other information in this report, including our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto, and in our other public filings with the SEC. The occurrence of any of the following risks could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or growth prospects or cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements we have made in this report and those we may make from time to time. You should consider all of the risk factors described when evaluating our business.

Risks Related to the Impact of COVID-19

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and related risks could have a material adverse impact on our research and development programs and financial condition.

The degree to which COVID-19 impacts our business operations, research and development programs and financial condition will depend on future developments, including the ultimate duration and/or severity of the outbreak, the impact of any resurgences and new strains that emerge, actions by government authorities to contain the spread of the virus, the timing, availability and effectiveness of any vaccines, and when and to what extent normal economic and operating conditions can resume. The American Cancer Society has reported that the pandemic has led to declines in screening, diagnosis and treatment for patients, which will adversely impact the enrollment of patients in clinical trials targeting early stage cancers and retention of patients overall in our trials. While we conduct our clinical trials in the U.S. and internationally in geographic regions that are impacted by COVID-19 to varying degrees, due to the foregoing factors, we are unable to predict the full impact of this pandemic on our clinical programs.

Our discovery programs were impacted by the suspension in our laboratory-based operations from mid-March to late June. Despite the return of our laboratory-based personnel back into our facilities, our laboratories are operating at reduced capacity due to employee safety measures, such as social distancing requirements and shift work. This has delayed the advancement of one of two preclinical programs that we had expected would enter the clinic in the first quarter of 2021. A clinical trial for the first program is expected to begin shortly; however, the pandemic has delayed the second program until the second half of 2021.

The full impact of the COVID-19 outbreak remains highly uncertain and subject to change. In connection with our resumption of laboratory operations, we instituted regular COVID-19 testing services in order to minimize the risk to our employees. These additional operating costs, along with the absence of any furlough or measures to reduce personnel costs despite reduced laboratory capacity, will have an adverse impact on our financial condition.

In addition, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, including governmental and other actions to combat it such as the imposition of the shelter-in-place and other public health orders, may exacerbate the effects of the risks described below.

34

Risks Related to our Limited Operating History, Financial Position and Capital Requirements

We are an early-stage immuno-oncology company with a limited operating history. We have incurred annual net losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future. We have never generated any revenue from product sales and may never be profitable.

We are an early-stage immuno-oncology company with a limited operating history that may make it difficult to evaluate the success of our business to date and to assess our future viability. All of our investigational products are in development, and none have been approved for commercial sale. We have never generated any revenue from product sales and have incurred net losses each year since we commenced operations. For the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, our net losses were $122.9 million and $84.7 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2020, we had an accumulated deficit of $328.2 million. We expect that it will be several years, if ever, before we have an investigational product ready for commercialization. We expect to incur increasing levels of operating losses over the next several years and for the foreseeable future as we advance our investigational products. Our prior losses, combined with expected future losses, have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity (deficit) and working capital.

To become and remain profitable, we must develop and eventually commercialize a product with significant market potential. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including completing preclinical studies and clinical trials of our investigational products, obtaining marketing approval for these investigational products, manufacturing, marketing and selling those products for which we may obtain marketing approval and satisfying any post-marketing requirements. We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we succeed in commercializing one or more of our investigational products, we may never generate revenues that are significant or large enough to achieve profitability. In addition, as a young business, we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other known and unknown challenges. If we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis and we will continue to incur substantial research and development and other expenditures to develop and market additional investigational products. Our failure to become and remain profitable would decrease the value of the 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 could also cause our stockholders to lose all or part of their investment.

We may need to obtain additional funding to finance our operations and complete the development and any commercialization of our investigational products. If we do not receive substantial opt-in, milestone or royalty payments from our existing collaboration agreements, or are unable to raise additional capital when needed, we may be forced to restrict our operations or delay, reduce or eliminate our product development programs.

The development of biopharmaceutical investigational products is capital intensive. Since our inception, we have used substantial amounts of cash to fund our operations and expect our expenses to increase substantially during the next few years as our investigational products enter and advance through preclinical studies and clinical trials and we expand our clinical, regulatory, quality and manufacturing capabilities. In addition, if we obtain marketing approval for any of our investigational products, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to marketing, sales, manufacturing and distribution.

As of December 31, 2020, we had $735.1 million of cash, cash equivalents and investments. In February 2021 we raised an additional $220.4 million from the sale to Gilead Sciences, Inc. (Gilead) of 5,650,000 shares of our common stock. While we believe that our cash position will be sufficient to fund our anticipated level of operations through 2023, our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:

35

We cannot guarantee that future financing will be available in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, if at all. Any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our investigational products. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on attractive terms, we would be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development programs or future commercialization efforts. In addition, if we are able to raise additional capital, raising additional capital may cause dilution to our stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to our technologies or investigational products.

Risks Related to the Discovery and Development of our Investigational Products

We are early in our development efforts. If we are unable to develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize our investigational products, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

We have no products approved for sale and our most advanced investigational products are in Phase 2 trials and concurrently advancing into registrational trials. We may subsequently learn of certain information or data that the FDA may request, which may necessitate conducting additional preclinical studies or generating additional information at significant cost in terms of both time and expense, including under a clinical hold imposed on an investigational new drug application (IND). Even if we conducted the additional studies or generated the additional information requested, the FDA could disagree that we have satisfied their requirements, all of which will cause significant delays and expense to our programs.

As we advance our clinical programs, we will need to expand our clinical operations, quality and regulatory capabilities to support these activities. In part because of our limited infrastructure, experience conducting clinical trials as a company and regulatory interactions, we cannot be certain that our clinical trials will be completed on time, that our planned clinical trials will be initiated on time, if at all, that our planned development programs would be acceptable to the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, or that, if approval is obtained, such investigational products can be successfully commercialized.

Our ability to generate product revenue, which we do not expect will occur for many years, if ever, will depend heavily on our ability to successfully complete the above activities and any other activities required for the successful development and eventual commercialization of one or more of our investigational products. The success of our investigational products will further depend on factors such as:

36

If we do not achieve one or more of these factors in a timely manner, we could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize our investigational products, which would materially harm our business.

Clinical drug development is a lengthy, expensive and uncertain process. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials are not always predictive of future results. Any investigational product that we advance into clinical trials may not achieve favorable results in later clinical trials, if any, or receive marketing approval.

The research and development of drugs and biological products is an extremely risky industry. Only a small percentage of investigational products that enter the development process ever receive marketing approval. Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of any investigational product, we must complete preclinical development and then conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our investigational products in humans. Clinical testing is expensive, can take many years to complete and its outcome is uncertain.

The results of preclinical and early clinical trials of our investigational products and other products with the same mechanism of action may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Clinical trial failure may result from a multitude of factors including flaws in study design, dose selection, placebo effect, patient enrollment criteria and failure to demonstrate favorable safety or efficacy traits. As such, failure in clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered setbacks in the advancement of clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. Based upon negative or inconclusive results, we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical trials or preclinical studies. In addition, data obtained from clinical trials are susceptible to varying interpretations, and regulators may not interpret our data as favorably as we do, which may further delay, limit or prevent marketing approval. In particular, results from uncontrolled trials, meaning trials in which there is no control group such as a placebo group, are inherently difficult to interpret. Clinical trials evaluating two or more investigational products in combination that have not yet been approved can compound these difficulties. As a key element of our strategy is the development of intra-portfolio combinations, our early clinical trials may test more than one investigational product in uncontrolled studies, such as our Phase 1/1b clinical trials for etrumadenant in which we evaluated etrumadenant in combination with zimberelimab. Furthermore, as more investigational products within a particular class of drugs proceed through clinical development to regulatory review and approval, the amount and type of clinical data that may be required by regulatory authorities may increase or change.

37

We currently have four investigational products in clinical development and their risk of failure is high. We are unable to predict if these investigational products or any of our future investigational products that advance into clinical trials will prove safe or effective in humans or will obtain marketing approval. If we are unable to complete preclinical or clinical trials of current or future investigational products, due to safety concerns, or if the results of these trials are not satisfactory to convince regulatory authorities of their safety or efficacy, we will not be able to obtain marketing approval for commercialization. Even if we are able to obtain marketing approvals for any of our investigational products, those approvals may be for indications that are not as broad as desired or may contain other limitations that would adversely affect our ability to generate revenue from sales of those products. Moreover, if we are not able to differentiate our product against other approved products within the same class of drugs, or if any of the other circumstances described above occur, our business would be materially harmed and our ability to generate revenue from that class of drugs would be severely impaired.

Enrollment and retention of subjects in clinical trials is expensive and time consuming, can be made more difficult or rendered impossible by competing treatments, clinical trials of competing investigational products, and public health epidemics, each of which could result in significant delays and additional costs in our product development activities, or in the failure of such activities.

We may encounter delays in enrolling, or be unable to enroll and maintain, a sufficient number of subjects to complete any of our clinical trials. Patient enrollment and retention in clinical trials is a significant factor in the timing of clinical trials and depends on many factors, including the size of the patient population required for analysis of the trial’s primary endpoints, the nature of the trial protocol, our ability to recruit clinical trial investigators with the appropriate competencies and experience, the existing body of safety and efficacy data with respect to the investigational product, the number and nature of competing products or investigational products and ongoing clinical trials of competing investigational products for the same indication, the proximity of subjects to clinical trial sites, the eligibility criteria for the clinical trial and our ability to obtain and maintain subject consents.

For example, enrollment of oncology subjects in our clinical trials evaluating zimberelimab may be hampered by nivolumab from Bristol-Myers Squibb and pembrolizumab from Merck, both of which are approved and on the market. Subjects may opt to be treated with an approved product rather than our anti-PD-1 antibody investigational product. In addition, Roche/Genentech have initiated Phase 3 trials with their anti-TIGIT antibody, which could reduce the number of clinical sites and subjects available for ARC-7, our Phase 2 trial evaluating combinations with domvanalimab (our anti-TIGIT antibody) and ARC-10, our Phase 3 trial evaluating zimberelimab monotherapy and zimberelimab plus domvanalimab combination therapy versus chemotherapy. Similarly, we are aware that AstraZeneca is conducting a broad clinical program with its A_2aR antagonist in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), and we may compete for clinical sites and enrollment in this patient population, which may adversely impact the rate of enrollment of the different cohorts of our Phase 2 platform trial evaluating combinations with etrumadenant in mCRPC.

Public health outbreaks, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, will also have an adverse impact our clinical trial operations. The limited resources available at investigational sites will limit their ability to initiate new studies, screen and enroll subjects, conduct and report all patient assessments and hinder their ability to collect all patients samples, which may impact our ability to assess the activity of our investigational products in a timely manner.

Furthermore, any negative results that we may report in clinical trials of our investigational products may make it difficult or impossible to recruit and retain subjects in other clinical trials of that same investigational product. Delays in patient enrollment may result in increased costs or may affect the timing or outcome of the planned clinical trials, which could prevent completion of these trials and adversely affect our ability to advance the development of our investigational products. Failures in planned subject enrollment or retention may result in increased costs or program delays and could render further development impossible.

38

If we do not achieve our product development goals in the time frames we announce and expect, the commercialization of our investigational products may be delayed, our share price may decline and our commercial prospects may be adversely affected.

Drug development is inherently risky and uncertain. The actual timing of our development milestones can vary significantly compared to our estimates, in some cases for reasons beyond our control, for any number of reasons, including:

These and other factors may also lead to the suspension or termination of clinical trials, and ultimately the denial of regulatory approval of an investigational product. Any delays in achieving our development goals may allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do and adversely affect our commercial prospects and cause our stock price to decline.

39

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

From time to time, we publish preliminary or interim data from our clinical studies. Preliminary data remain subject to audit confirmation and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. Interim data are also subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. As a result, preliminary and interim data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Material adverse changes in the final data could significantly harm our business prospects.

Serious adverse events, undesirable side effects or other unexpected properties of our investigational products may be identified during development or after approval, which could lead to the discontinuation of our clinical development programs, refusal by regulatory authorities to approve our investigational products or limitations on the use of our investigational products or, if discovered following marketing approval, revocation of marketing authorizations or subsequent limitations on the use of our investigational products.

To date, we have only tested our clinical-stage investigational products in a relatively small number of oncology subjects. As we continue our development of these investigational products and initiate clinical trials of our additional investigational products, serious adverse events, undesirable side effects or unexpected characteristics may emerge causing us to abandon these investigational products or limit their development to more narrow uses or subpopulations in which the serious adverse events, undesirable side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a risk-benefit perspective. Even if our investigational products initially show promise in these early clinical trials, the side effects of drugs are frequently only detectable after they are tested in large, Phase 3 clinical trials or, in some cases, after they are made available to patients on a commercial scale after approval. Sometimes, it can be difficult to determine if the serious adverse or unexpected side effects were caused by the investigational product or another factor, especially in oncology subjects who may suffer from other medical conditions and be taking other medications. If serious adverse or unexpected side effects are identified during development and are determined to be attributed to our investigational product, we may be required to develop a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) to mitigate those serious safety risks, which could impose significant distribution and use restrictions on our products.

Drug-related side effects could also affect subject recruitment or the ability of enrolled subjects to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business prospects significantly.

In addition, if one or more of our investigational products receives marketing approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such products, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular investigational product, if approved, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

Adverse findings from clinical trials conducted by third parties investigating the same investigational products as us in different territories could adversely affect our development program.

Lack of efficacy, adverse events, undesirable side effects or other adverse findings may emerge in clinical trials conducted by third parties investigating the same investigational products as us in different territories. For example,

40

we and Guangzhou Gloria Biosciences, Co. (Gloria Biosciences, formerly known as Harbin Gloria Pharmaceuticals Co. Ltd.) each licensed our rights to the same anti-PD-1 antibody (which we refer to as zimberelimab) from WuXi Biologics (Cayman) Inc. (WuXi Biologics). Gloria Biosciences refers to this antibody as GLS-010 and is conducting clinical trials with GLS-010 in China. We have no control over their clinical trials or development program, and adverse findings from the results or their conduct of clinical trials could adversely affect our development of zimberelimab or even the viability of zimberelimab as an investigational product. We may be required to report Gloria Biosciences’ adverse events or unexpected side effects to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, which could, among other things, order us to cease further development of zimberelimab. We may face similar risks from any independent development conducted with our investigational products by Taiho and Gilead, following any exercise of their respective options to our programs.

A key element of our strategy is the development of intra-portfolio combinations. If we are not successful in discovering, developing and commercializing investigational products that take advantage of different mechanisms of action to achieve superior outcomes relative to the use of single agents or other combination therapies, our ability to achieve our strategic objectives would be impaired.

A key element of our strategy is to build a broad portfolio of investigational products that will allow for the development of intra-portfolio combinations. We believe that by developing or licensing these investigational products, we can control the combinations we pursue and, if and when approved, maximize the commercial potential of these combinations. However, these combinations have not been tested before and may fail to demonstrate synergistic activity against immunological targets, may fail to achieve superior outcomes relative to the use of single agents or other combination therapies, may exacerbate adverse events associated with one of the investigational products when used as monotherapy, or may fail to demonstrate sufficient safety or efficacy traits in clinical trials to enable us to complete those clinical trials or obtain marketing approval for the combination therapy. In addition, our early clinical trials may test more than one investigational product in uncontrolled studies, and it may be difficult to interpret the results of those uncontrolled trials.

We expect that our anti-PD-1 antibody, zimberelimab, will form the backbone of many of our intra-portfolio combinations. In the event that zimberelimab were to fail to demonstrate sufficient safety and efficacy, we would need to identify alternatives for accessing an anti-PD-1 antibody. In the event we are unable to do so or are unable to do so on commercially reasonable terms, our business and prospects would be materially harmed.

All of our investigational products are targeting mechanisms that other companies are pursuing as either monotherapy or combination products. As such, even if we are successful in developing combination therapies, competition from other investigational products in the same class which are either already approved or further along in development than ours may prevent us from realizing the commercial potential of our combination therapies and prevent us from achieving our strategic objectives.

Our intra-portfolio combination strategy relies on discovering, developing and commercializing highly differentiated small molecules. If we are not able to differentiate our small molecules from other products which are approved or in development, our business prospects would be materially adversely affected.

Our combination therapy strategy relies on discovering and developing differentiated small molecules with ideal pharmacologic properties for the targeted pathway to complement our antibody investigational products, which we believe will form the backbone of our combination therapies. We conduct in our laboratories those activities that we consider to be critical for creating a development candidate with optimal properties. These activities include medicinal chemistry, assay development, assessment of compound potency and selectivity, in vitro and in vivo pharmacokinetic profile evaluation, in vivo pharmacology and exploratory safety evaluation, among others. As such, we have invested heavily in these internal capabilities and over 75% of our current workforce is dedicated to research and development.

In addition, any small molecules we discover and design may, on further study, be shown to have harmful side effects or other characteristics that indicate that they are unlikely to be medicines that will receive marketing approval and achieve market acceptance. If we are unable to identify suitable compounds with ideal pharmacological properties and which are differentiated from other investigational products in development for preclinical and clinical development, our business and prospects would be materially harmed.

41

Certain of our investigational products may require companion diagnostics in certain indications. Failure to successfully develop, validate and obtain regulatory clearance or approval for such tests could harm our product development strategy or prevent us from realizing the full commercial potential of our investigational products.

Companion diagnostics are subject to regulation by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities as a medical device and may require separate regulatory authorization prior to commercialization. Certain clinical trials that we are conducting, or may in the future conduct, include the use of a diagnostic test to help identify eligible patients. For example, we are conducting a clinical trial in collaboration with Strata Oncology (Strata) to evaluate zimberelimab in patients in a tumor-agnostic fashion utilizing Strata’s precision drug development platform and proprietary biomarkers. We also have significant efforts directed to identifying changes in various cells and proteins to understand their relationship, if any, to the clinical activity observed in our clinical trials and to assess if such cells and/or proteins could be used as predictive biomarkers to select for patients more likely to respond to our investigational products. However, we cannot be certain that we will be able to identify any such biomarkers, that such biomarkers will result in us identifying the appropriate patients for our investigational products or that we or any third party collaborators will be able to validate any diagnostic tests incorporating any predictive biomarkers we may identify.

We currently do not have any plans to develop diagnostic tests internally. We are therefore dependent on the sustained cooperation and effort of third-party collaborators in developing and, if our investigational products are approved for use only with an approved companion diagnostic test, obtaining approval and commercializing these tests. If these parties are unable to successfully develop companion diagnostics for these investigational products, or experience delays in doing so, the development of our investigational products may be adversely affected and we may not be able to obtain marketing authorization for these investigational products. Furthermore, our ability to market and sell, as well as the commercial success, of any of our investigational products that require a companion diagnostic will be tied to, and dependent upon, the receipt of required regulatory authorization and the continued ability of such third parties to make the companion diagnostic commercially available on reasonable terms in the relevant geographies. Any failure to develop, validate, obtain and maintain marketing authorization and supply for a companion diagnostic we need will harm our business prospects.

The design or our execution of our ongoing and future clinical trials may not support marketing approval.

The design or execution of a clinical trial can determine whether its results will support marketing approval, and flaws in the design or execution of a clinical trial may not become apparent until the clinical trial is well advanced. In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety or efficacy results between different trials with the same investigational product due to numerous factors, including differences in trial protocols, size and type of the patient populations, variable adherence to the dosing regimen or other protocol requirements and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. The FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process and in determining when or whether marketing approval will be obtained for any of our investigational products. Our investigational products may not be approved even if they achieve their primary endpoints in any Phase 3 clinical trials or registrational trials we or our collaborators conduct. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our trial designs and our interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials. In addition, any of these regulatory authorities may change requirements for the approval of an investigational product even after reviewing and providing comments or advice on a protocol for a pivotal Phase 3 or registrational clinical trial that has the potential to result in FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ approval. Any of these regulatory authorities may also approve an investigational product for fewer or more limited indications than we request or may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials. Even if the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities approve an investigational product, they may not approve the labeling claims that we believe would be necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of our investigational products.

We have conducted, and continue to conduct, portions of our clinical trials outside the United States, and the FDA may not accept data from trials conducted in foreign locations.

We have conducted, and we expect to continue to conduct, portions of our clinical trials outside the United States. For example, ARC-10, our Phase 3 trial evaluating zimberelimab monotherapy and zimberelimab plus domvanalimab combination therapy versus chemotherapy, does not include any clinical sites in the United States. Although the FDA may accept data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States, acceptance of these data is subject to certain conditions imposed by the FDA. For example, the clinical trial must be well designed and

42

conducted and performed by qualified investigators in accordance with ethical principles. The trial population must also adequately represent the U.S. population, and the data must be applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice in ways that the FDA deems clinically meaningful. In general, the patient population for any clinical trials conducted outside the United States must be representative of the population for whom we intend to label the product in the United States. In addition, while these clinical trials are subject to the applicable local laws, FDA acceptance of the data will be dependent upon its determination that the trials also complied with all applicable U.S. laws and regulations. We cannot assure you that the FDA will accept data from trials conducted outside the United States. If the FDA does not accept the data from such clinical trials, we would likely need to conduct additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay or permanently halt our development of our investigational products.

Risks Related to Reliance on Third Parties, Manufacturing and Commercialization

We expect to depend on our collaboration with Gilead for the research, development, manufacture and commercialization of our investigational products. If this collaboration is not successful, our business could be adversely affected.

In May 2020, we entered into an option, license and collaboration agreement (the Gilead Collaboration Agreement) with Gilead Sciences, Inc. (Gilead) pursuant to which Gilead obtained an exclusive option to all of our current and future programs during the 10-year collaboration term contingent upon Gilead’s payment of up to $400.0 million. Upon Gilead’s exercise of its option to a program, the companies will co-develop and equally share global development costs, subject to certain opt-out rights for us, and expense caps on our spending and related subsequent adjustments. For each optioned program, provided we have not exercised our opt-out rights, we have an option to co-promote in the United States and share equally all associated profits and losses. Gilead has the right to exclusively commercialize any optioned programs outside of the U.S., subject to the rights of our existing partners to any territories, and will pay us tiered royalties as a percentage of revenues ranging from the high teens to the low twenties. In connection with the entering into of the Gilead Collaboration Agreement, we and Gilead also entered into a common stock purchase agreement and an investor rights agreement. Our agreements with Gilead pose a number of risks including, but not limited to, the following:

43

We rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials and perform some of our research and preclinical studies. If these third parties do not satisfactorily carry out their contractual duties or fail to meet expected deadlines, our development programs may be delayed or subject to increased costs, each of which may have an adverse effect on our business and prospects.

We do not have the ability to conduct all aspects of our preclinical testing or clinical trials ourselves. As a result, we are and expect to remain dependent on third parties to conduct our ongoing clinical trials and any future clinical trials of our investigational products. The timing of the initiation and completion of these trials will therefore be partially controlled by such third parties and may result in delays to our development programs. Specifically, we expect CROs, clinical investigators, and consultants to play a significant role in the conduct of these trials and the subsequent collection and analysis of data. However, we will not be able to control all aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol and legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on the CROs and other third parties does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our CROs are required to comply with GCP requirements, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA, the Competent Authorities of the Member States of the European Economic Area, Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for all of our investigational products in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCP requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, clinical trial investigators and clinical trial sites. If we or any of our CROs or clinical trial sites fail to comply with applicable GCP requirements, the data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable, and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under cGMP regulations. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to stop and/or repeat clinical trials, which would delay the marketing approval process.

There is no guarantee that any such CROs, clinical trial investigators or other third parties on which we rely will devote adequate time and resources to our development activities or perform as contractually required. If any of these third parties fail to meet expected deadlines, adhere to our clinical protocols or meet regulatory requirements, otherwise performs in a substandard manner, or terminates its engagement with us, the timelines for our development programs may be extended or delayed or our development activities may be suspended or terminated. If any of our clinical trial sites terminates for any reason, we may experience the loss of follow-up information on subjects enrolled in such clinical trials unless we are able to transfer those subjects to another qualified clinical trial site, which may be difficult or impossible. In addition, clinical trial investigators for our clinical trials 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 or comparable foreign regulatory authorities concludes that the financial relationship may have affected the interpretation of the trial, the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site may be questioned and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized, which could result in the delay or rejection of any marketing application we submit by the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority. Any such delay or rejection could prevent us from commercializing our investigational products.

Furthermore, these third parties may also have relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct our clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols, we will not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, marketing approvals for our investigational products and will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize our products.

We contract with third parties for the manufacturing and supply of investigational products for use in preclinical testing and clinical trials, which supply may become limited or interrupted or may not be of satisfactory quality and quantity.

We do not have any manufacturing facilities. We produce in our laboratory relatively small quantities of compounds for evaluation in our research programs. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture

44

of our investigational products for preclinical and clinical testing, as well as for commercial manufacture if any of our investigational products are approved. We currently have limited manufacturing arrangements and expect that each of our investigational products will only be covered by single source suppliers for the foreseeable future. In particular, we have an exclusive relationship with WuXi Biologics, located in China, for the manufacture of our investigational biologics, zimberelimab and domvanalimab. While we have not yet experienced any disruptions in the supply of our investigational products as a result of the COVID-19 health crisis, our reliance on limited manufacturing and supply relationships increases the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of our investigational products or products, if approved, or such quantities at an acceptable cost or quality, which could delay, prevent or impair our development or commercialization efforts.

Furthermore, all entities involved in the preparation of therapeutics for clinical trials or commercial sale, including our existing contract manufacturers for our investigational products, are subject to extensive regulation. Components of a finished therapeutic product approved for commercial sale or used in clinical trials must be manufactured in accordance with cGMP requirements. These regulations govern manufacturing processes and procedures, including record keeping, and the implementation and operation of quality systems to control and assure the quality of investigational products and products approved for sale. Poor control of production processes can lead to the introduction of contaminants, or to inadvertent changes in the properties or stability of our investigational products that may not be detectable in final product testing. We or our contract manufacturers must supply all necessary documentation in support of a New Drug Application (NDA) or Biologics License Application (BLA) on a timely basis and must adhere to the FDA’s Good Laboratory Practice regulations and cGMP regulations enforced by the FDA through its facilities inspection program. Comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require compliance with similar requirements. The facilities and quality systems of our third-party contractor manufacturers must pass a pre-approval inspection for compliance with the applicable regulations as a condition of marketing approval of our investigational products. We do not control the manufacturing process of, and are completely dependent on, our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with cGMP regulations.

In the event that any of our manufacturers fails to comply with such requirements or to perform its obligations to us in relation to quality, timing or otherwise, or if our supply of components or other materials becomes limited or interrupted for other reasons, we may be forced to manufacture the materials ourselves, for which we currently do not have the capabilities or resources, or enter into an agreement with another third party, which we may not be able to do on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. In particular, any replacement of our manufacturers could require significant effort and expertise because there may be a limited number of qualified replacements. In some cases, the technical skills or technology required to manufacture our investigational products may be unique or proprietary to the original manufacturer and we may have difficulty transferring such skills or technology to another third party and a feasible alternative may not exist. These factors would increase our reliance on such manufacturer or require us to obtain a license from such manufacturer in order to have another third party manufacture our investigational products. If we are required to change manufacturers for any reason, we will be required to verify that the new manufacturer maintains facilities and procedures that comply with quality standards and with all applicable regulations and guidelines. The delays associated with the verification of a new manufacturer could negatively affect our ability to develop investigational products in a timely manner or within budget. Our or a third party’s failure to execute on our manufacturing requirements, to do so on commercially reasonable terms and comply with cGMP could adversely affect our business in a number of ways, including:

45

We, or our third-party manufacturers, may be unable to successfully produce or scale-up manufacturing of our investigational products in sufficient quality and quantity, which would delay or prevent us and/or our third-party collaborators from conducting clinical trials and developing our investigational products.

We, or our third-party manufacturers, will need to manufacture and supply large quantities of our investigational products to support our clinical development plans. With respect to investigational products from optioned programs, we, or our third-party manufacturers, may need to produce additional quantities to support the scope of our joint clinical development program with Gilead, Gilead’s additional evaluations with its own proprietary products or Taiho’s independent clinical development plans. Furthermore, we are a party to various collaboration and supply arrangements, such as our clinical trial collaboration with Genentech to evaluate etrumadenant and atezolizumab utilizing the MORPHEUS platform. We, or our manufacturing partners, may be unable to successfully increase the manufacturing capacity for any of our investigational products in a timely or cost-effective manner, or at all, to support these collective needs. In addition, quality issues may arise during scale-up activities. If we or our manufacturing partners are unable to successfully produce or scale up the manufacture of our investigational products in sufficient quality and quantity, the development, testing and clinical trials of that investigational product may be delayed or become infeasible, and marketing approval or commercial launch of any resulting product may be delayed or not obtained, which could significantly harm our business.

Changes in methods of investigational product manufacturing or formulation may result in additional costs or delay.

As investigational products progress through preclinical to late stage clinical trials to marketing approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as the investigational product’s specifications, manufacturing methods and formulation, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize yield and manufacturing batch size, minimize costs and achieve consistent quality and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives. Any of these changes could cause our investigational products to perform differently and affect the results of planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials conducted with the altered materials. This could delay completion of clinical trials, require the conduct of bridging clinical trials or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of our investigational products and jeopardize our ability to commercialize our investigational products and generate revenue.

The manufacture of biologics is complex and our third-party manufacturers may encounter difficulties in production. If any of our third-party manufacturers encounter such difficulties, our ability to provide supply of our investigational products for clinical trials or our products for patients, if approved, could be delayed or prevented.

Manufacturing biologics, especially in large quantities, is often complex and may require the use of innovative technologies to handle living cells. Each lot of an approved biologic must undergo thorough testing for identity, strength, quality, purity and potency. Manufacturing biologics requires facilities specifically designed for and validated for this purpose, and sophisticated quality assurance and quality control procedures are necessary. Slight deviations anywhere in the manufacturing process, including filling, labeling, packaging, storage and shipping and quality control and testing, may result in lot failures, product recalls or spoilage. When changes are made to the manufacturing process, we may be required to provide preclinical and clinical data showing the comparable identity, strength, quality, purity or potency of the products before and after such changes. If microbial, viral or other contaminations are discovered at the facilities of our manufacturer, such facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination, which could delay clinical trials and adversely harm our business. The use of biologically derived ingredients can also lead to allegations of harm, including infections or allergic reactions, or closure of product facilities due to possible contamination.

In addition, there are risks associated with large scale manufacturing for clinical trials or commercial scale including, among others, cost overruns, potential problems with process scale-up, process reproducibility, stability issues, compliance with good manufacturing practices, lot consistency and timely availability of raw materials. Even if we obtain marketing approval for any of our investigational products, there is no assurance that our manufacturers will be able to manufacture the approved product to specifications acceptable to the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, to produce it in sufficient quantities to meet the requirements for the potential commercial launch of the product or to meet potential future demand. If our manufacturers are unable to produce sufficient quantities for clinical trials or for commercialization, our development and commercialization efforts

46

would be impaired, which would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our 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.

Because we rely on third parties to research and develop and to manufacture our investigational products, we must share trade secrets with them. We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our advisors, employees, third-party contractors and consultants 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 independent discovery of our trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business.

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, although our agreements may contain certain limited publication rights. For example, any academic institution that we may collaborate with will likely expect to be granted rights to publish data arising out of such collaboration and any joint research and development programs may require us to share trade secrets under the terms of our research and development or similar agreements. Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, our competitors may discover our trade secrets, either through breach of our agreements with third parties, independent development or publication of information by any of our third-party collaborators. A competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets would impair our competitive position and have an adverse impact on our business.

Our employees, clinical trial investigators, CROs, consultants, vendors, collaboration partners and any potential 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, clinical trial investigators, CROs, consultants, vendors, collaboration partners and any potential commercial partners. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct or disclosure of unauthorized activities to us that violates: (i) FDA laws and regulations or those of comparable foreign regulatory authorities, including those laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate information, (ii) manufacturing standards, (iii) federal and state health and data privacy, security, fraud and abuse, government price reporting, transparency reporting requirements, and other healthcare laws and regulations in the United States and abroad, or (iv) laws that require the true, complete and accurate reporting of financial information or data. Such misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. We have adopted a code of conduct applicable to all of our employees, as well as a disclosure program and other applicable policies and procedures, but 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 governmental 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 have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions.

47

Even if we receive marketing approval, we may not be successful in commercializing our investigational products.

We have no sales, marketing or distribution capabilities or experience. If any of our investigational products ultimately obtains regulatory approval, we, whether alone or in collaboration with Gilead for programs that we commercialize together, may not be able to effectively or successfully market the product due to a number of factors, including:

If any of our investigational products for which we have or retain sales and marketing responsibilities are approved, we must either develop a sales and marketing organization, which would be expensive and time consuming, or outsource these functions to other third parties. We may be unable to recruit and retain adequate numbers of effective sales and marketing personnel, and if we enter into arrangements with third parties to perform sales, marketing and distribution services our product revenue or the profitability of these product revenue to us are likely to be lower than if we were to market and sell any medicines that we develop ourselves.

Our or our collaborators’ inability to successfully market and sell any of our investigational products, if approved, could have a material adverse effect on our business and our overall financial condition.

Even if we receive marketing approval for one or more of our investigational products, our commercial success is dependent on obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval for a product from a government or other third-party payor, which coverage may be delayed or may not be sufficient to cover our costs.

Our commercial success is dependent on obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval for a product from a government or other third-party payor, which is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us and any collaborators to provide supporting scientific, clinical and cost effectiveness data for the use of our products to the payor. There may be significant delays in obtaining such coverage and reimbursement for newly approved products, and coverage may be more limited than the purposes for which the product is approved by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Moreover, eligibility for coverage and reimbursement does not imply that a product will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including research, development, intellectual property, manufacture, sale and distribution expenses. Interim reimbursement levels for new products, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover our costs and may not be made permanent. Obtaining reimbursement for our products may be particularly difficult because of the higher prices often associated with branded therapeutics and therapeutics administered under the supervision of a physician. Additionally, our collaborators, will be required to obtain coverage and reimbursement for any related companion diagnostics tests they develop separate and apart from the coverage and reimbursement we seek for our product candidates, once approved.

Reimbursement may also impact the demand for, and the price of, any product for which we obtain marketing approval. Assuming we obtain coverage for a given product by a third-party payor, the resulting reimbursement payment rates may not be adequate or may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. Patients who are prescribed medications for the treatment of their conditions, and their prescribing physicians, generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the costs associated with those medications. Patients are unlikely to use our products unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover all or a significant portion of the cost of our products. Therefore, coverage and adequate reimbursement is critical to new product acceptance and we expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of any of our investigational products due to the

48

trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations, and additional legislative changes.

Our ability to obtain coverage and reimbursement approval for any of our investigational products, if approved, could have a material adverse effect on the demand for that investigational product, and on our business and our overall financial condition.

Even if our investigational products are approved by the FDA, they may never be approved or commercialized outside the United States, which would limit our ability to realize their full market potential.

In order to market any products outside the United States, we or our collaborators must establish and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries regarding safety and efficacy. Clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and regulatory approval in one country does not mean that regulatory approval will be obtained in any other country. Approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and validation and additional administrative review periods. Seeking foreign regulatory approvals could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us or our collaborators and may require additional preclinical studies or clinical trials which would 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. Satisfying these and other regulatory requirements is costly, time consuming, uncertain and subject to unanticipated delays. In addition, our or our collaborators’ failure to obtain regulatory approval in any country may delay or have negative effects on the process for regulatory approval in other countries. We do not have any investigational products approved for sale in any jurisdiction, including international markets, and we do not have experience in obtaining regulatory approval in international markets. If we or our collaborators fail to comply with regulatory requirements in international markets or fail to obtain and maintain required approvals, our ability to realize the full market potential of our products will be harmed.

Any investigational products for which we intend to seek approval as biologic products may face competition sooner than anticipated.

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) 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 twelve years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed. During this twelve-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 the sponsor’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of its product. The law is complex and is still being interpreted and implemented by the FDA. As a result, any such processes could have a material adverse effect on the future commercial prospects for our biological products.

Zimberelimab and domvanalimab are biological products and we may develop additional biological products in the future. We believe that any of our current and future investigational products approved as a biological product under a BLA should qualify for the twelve-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 products to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for biosimilar competition sooner than anticipated. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, could be substituted for any one of our reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biological products will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing.

49

Risks Related to our In-Licenses and Other Strategic Agreements

We are currently party to several in-license agreements under which we acquired rights to use, develop, manufacture and/or commercialize certain of our investigational products. If we breach our obligations under these agreements, we may be required to pay damages, lose our rights to these investigational products or both, which would adversely affect our business and prospects.

We rely, in part, on license and other strategic agreements, which subject us to various obligations, including diligence obligations with respect to development and commercialization activities, reporting and notification obligations, payment obligations for achievement of certain milestones and royalties on product sales, negative covenants and other material obligations. We may need to devote substantial time and attention to ensuring that we successfully integrate these transactions into our existing operations and are compliant with our obligations under these agreements, which may divert management’s time and attention away from our research and development programs or other day-to-day activities. If we fail to comply with the obligations under our license agreements or use the intellectual property licensed to us in an unauthorized manner, we may be required to pay damages and our licensors may have the right to terminate the license. If our license agreements are terminated, we may not be able to develop, manufacture, market or sell the products covered by our agreements and those being tested or approved in combination with such products. Such an occurrence could materially adversely affect the value of the investigational product being developed under any such agreement and any other investigational products being developed or tested in combination. For example, we intend to test many of our small-molecule investigational products with zimberelimab, which we in-licensed from WuXi Biologics. In the event we breach our license agreement with WuXi Biologics, and WuXi Biologics terminates our license agreement, we would be unable to test those combinations, or we would have to negotiate a new or reinstated agreement, which may not be available to us on equally favorable terms, or at all.

In addition, the agreements under which we license intellectual property or technology to or from third parties are complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected investigational products.

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 research program or investigational product and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could suffer.

We may not realize the benefits of any acquisitions, in-license or other collaborations or strategic alliances that we enter into.

We have entered into in-license agreements with multiple licensors and option agreements to enable the development and commercialization of our investigational products worldwide. In the future, we may seek to enter into acquisitions or additional licensing arrangements with third parties to expand our pipeline or that we believe will complement or augment our development and commercialization efforts with respect to our investigational products and any future investigational products that we may develop. These transactions can entail numerous operational and financial risks, including exposure to unknown liabilities, disruption of our business and diversion of our management’s time and attention in order to manage a collaboration or develop acquired products, investigational products or technologies, incurrence of substantial debt or dilutive issuances of equity securities to pay transaction consideration or costs, higher than expected collaboration, acquisition or integration costs, write-downs of assets or goodwill or impairment charges, increased amortization expenses, difficulty and cost in facilitating the collaboration or combining the operations and personnel of any acquired business, impairment of relationships with key suppliers, manufacturers or customers of any acquired business due to changes in management and ownership and the inability to retain key employees of any acquired business. As a result, if we enter into in-license, acquisition or collaboration agreements, or strategic partnerships, we may not be able to realize the benefit of such transactions if we are unable to successfully integrate them with our existing operations and company culture, which could delay our timelines or otherwise adversely affect our business.

50

We also cannot be certain that, following a strategic transaction or license, we will achieve the revenue or specific net income that justifies such transaction or such other benefits that led us to enter into the arrangement. For example, under the Gilead Collaboration Agreement, for each program Gilead exercises its option to, it will pay an option fee that ranges from $200 million to $275 million for our current clinical programs, and $150 million per program for all other programs that enter clinical development. Furthermore, we and Gilead will equally share global development costs, as well as profits and losses for the United States, subject to certain opt-out rights for us, and expense caps on our spending and related subsequent adjustments. If Gilead does not exercise its option to develop a program, our capital requirements relating to that development program will significantly increase and we may need to seek a new partner in order to develop and commercialize our investigational products from that program. Failure to realize the benefits of any collaborations or strategic alliances may further cause us to curtail the development of an investigational product, reduce or delay its development program or one or more of our other development programs, delay its potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any planned sales or marketing activities, or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to fund and undertake development or commercialization activities on our own, we will need to obtain additional expertise and additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we fail to enter into collaborations and do not have sufficient funds or expertise to undertake the necessary development and commercialization activities, we may not be able to further develop our investigational products or bring them to market and generate product sales revenue, which would harm our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

We may wish to acquire rights to future assets through in-licensing or may attempt to form collaborations in the future with respect to our investigational products, but may not be able to do so, which may cause us to alter or delay our development and commercialization plans.

The development and potential commercialization of our investigational products may require substantial additional capital to fund expenses. Pursuant to the Gilead Collaboration Agreement, Gilead has an exclusive option to acquire an exclusive license to all of our current and future clinical programs during the 10-year collaboration term. Given the breadth of the collaboration, our ability to form new collaborations in the future will be limited. If Gilead declines to exercise its option to a program, we may need to enter into new collaborations for such programs with companies that have more resources and experience than us. We may not be successful in these efforts because third parties may not view our investigational products as having the requisite potential to demonstrate safety and efficacy. If and when we collaborate with a third party for development and commercialization of an investigational product, we can expect to relinquish some or all of the control over the future success of that investigational product to the third party. Our ability to reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. Those factors may include the following:

The collaborator may also consider alternative investigational products or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us for our investigational product. We may also be restricted under any license agreements from entering into agreements on certain terms or at all with potential collaborators. Collaborations are complex and time-consuming to negotiate and document. In addition, there have been a significant number of recent business combinations among large pharmaceutical companies that have resulted in a reduced number of potential future collaborators and changes to the strategies of the combined company. As a result, we may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely

51

basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to do so, we may have to curtail the development of such investigational product, reduce or delay one or more of our other development programs, delay the potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any planned sales or marketing activities for such investigational product, or increase our expenditures and undertake development, manufacturing or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development, manufacturing 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 our investigational products or bring them to market and generate product revenue.

Our operating activities may be restricted by certain covenants in our license and other strategic agreements, which could limit our development and commercial opportunities.

In connection with certain of our acquisitions, in-license or other collaborations or strategic alliances, we may agree to and be bound by negative covenants which may limit our development and commercial opportunities. For example, pursuant to our in-license of anti-PD-1 antibodies from WuXi Biologics, we made certain covenants to not commercialize any anti-PD-1 antibody licensed or obtained by us after the date of the license agreement with WuXi Biologics other than anti-PD-1 antibodies licensed from WuXi Biologics, subject to certain exceptions as set forth in our license agreement with WuXi Biologics. Furthermore, we agreed in our license agreement that WuXi Biologics would be our exclusive manufacturer of anti-PD-1 antibodies licensed thereunder until a certain number of years has elapsed following commercialization of such an anti-PD-1 antibody and that we would utilize WuXi Biologics as our exclusive provider of CMC development services for our biologic investigational products for five years from the date of our license agreement, subject to certain exceptions in each case. These exclusivity provisions may inhibit our development efforts, prevent us from forming strategic collaborations to develop and potentially commercialize any other anti-PD-1 antibody investigational products and may materially harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Risks Related to Intellectual Property

If we are unable to obtain and maintain sufficient intellectual property protection for our investigational products, or if the scope of the intellectual property protection is not sufficiently broad, our competitors could develop and commercialize products similar or identical to ours, and our ability to successfully commercialize our products may be adversely affected.

Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection in the United States and other countries with respect to our investigational products and research programs. We seek to protect our proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and abroad related to our novel discoveries and technologies that are important to our business, however, we cannot predict:

Obtaining and enforcing patents is expensive and time-consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications, or maintain and/or enforce patents that may issue based on our patent applications, at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development results before it is too late to obtain patent protection. Although we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators,

52

contract research organizations, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach these agreements and disclose such results before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection.

We also cannot be certain that the claims in our pending patent applications directed to our investigational products and/or technologies will be considered patentable by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or by patent offices in foreign countries. One aspect of the determination of patentability of our inventions depends on the scope and content of the “prior art,” information that was or is deemed available to a person of skill in the relevant art prior to the priority date of the claimed invention. There may be prior art of which we are not aware that may affect the patentability of our patent claims or, if issued, affect the validity or enforceability of a patent claim. Even if the patents do issue based on our patent applications, third parties may challenge the validity, enforceability or scope thereof, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, patents in our portfolio may not adequately exclude third parties from practicing relevant technology or prevent others from designing around our claims. If the breadth or strength of our intellectual property position with respect to our investigational products is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to develop and threaten our ability to commercialize our investigational products. In the event of litigation or administrative proceedings, we cannot be certain that the claims in any of our issued patents will be considered valid by courts in the United States or foreign countries.

We may not identify relevant third-party patents or may incorrectly interpret the relevance, scope or expiration of a third party patent which might adversely affect our ability to develop and market our products.

We cannot guarantee that any of our patent searches or analyses, including the identification of relevant patents, the scope of patent claims or the expiration of relevant patents, are complete or thorough, nor can we be certain that we have identified each and every third party patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of our investigational products in any jurisdiction.

The scope of a patent claim is determined by an interpretation of the law, the written disclosure in a patent and the patent’s prosecution history. Our interpretation of the relevance or the scope of a patent or a pending application may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to market our products. We may incorrectly determine that our products are not covered by a third party patent or may incorrectly predict whether a third party’s pending application will issue with claims of relevant scope. Our determination of the expiration date of any patent in the United States or abroad that we consider relevant may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our investigational products. Our failure to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our products.

In the future, we may need to obtain additional licenses of third-party technology that may not be available to us or are available only on commercially unreasonable terms, and which may cause us to operate our business in a more costly or otherwise adverse manner that was not anticipated.

From time to time we may be required to license technology from additional third parties to further develop or commercialize our investigational products. Should we be required to obtain licenses to any third-party technology, including any such patents required to manufacture, use or sell our investigational products, such licenses may not be available to us on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. The inability to obtain any third-party license required to develop or commercialize any of our investigational products could cause us to abandon any related efforts, which could seriously harm our business and operations.

We may become involved in lawsuits alleging that we have infringed the intellectual property rights of third parties or to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property, which litigation could be expensive, time consuming and adversely affect our ability to develop or commercialize our investigational products.

The coverage of patents is subject to interpretation by the courts, and the interpretation is not always uniform. There is a substantial amount of intellectual property litigation in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, and we may become party to, or threatened with, litigation or other adversarial proceedings regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our products candidates. Third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on existing or future intellectual property rights. For example, we are aware of certain patents owned or exclusively licensed by Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) having claims directed broadly to treating cancer with anti-PD-1 antibodies (the BMS Patents), which expire in 2023 and 2024. The BMS Patents have been and may in the future be

53

the subject of litigation. If the validity of the BMS Patents is upheld following all such challenges, and if we receive regulatory approval for zimberelimab prior to expiration of the BMS Patents, then we may need to delay our commercialization of zimberelimab or we may need to obtain a license from BMS, which license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. If we were sued for patent infringement, we would need to demonstrate that our investigational products, products or methods either do not infringe the patent claims of the relevant patent or that the patent claims are invalid or unenforceable, and we may not be able to do this. Proving invalidity may be difficult. For example, in the United States, proving invalidity in court requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption of validity enjoyed by issued patents. If we are found to infringe a third party’s intellectual property rights, we could be forced, including by court order, to cease developing, manufacturing or commercializing the infringing investigational product or product. Alternatively, we may be required to obtain a license from such third party in order to use the infringing technology and continue developing, manufacturing or marketing the infringing investigational product. 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 access to the same technologies licensed to us. 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. A finding of infringement could prevent us from commercializing our investigational products or force us to cease some of our business operations, which could materially harm our business.

In addition, we may find that competitors are infringing our patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time consuming and divert the time and attention of our management and scientific personnel. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe their patents, in addition to counterclaims asserting that our patents are invalid or unenforceable, or both. In any patent infringement proceeding, there is a risk that a court will decide that a patent of ours is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, and that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue. There is also a risk that, even if the validity of such patents is upheld, the court will construe the patent’s claims narrowly or decide that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue on the grounds that our patent claims do not cover the invention. An adverse outcome in a litigation or proceeding involving our patents could limit our ability to assert our patents against those parties or other competitors, and may curtail or preclude our ability to exclude third parties from making and selling similar or competitive products. Any of these occurrences could adversely affect our competitive business position, business prospects and financial condition. Similarly, if we assert trademark infringement claims, a court may determine that the marks we have asserted are invalid or unenforceable, or that the party against whom we have asserted trademark infringement has superior rights to the marks in question. In this case, we could ultimately be forced to cease use of such trademarks. Even if we establish infringement, the court may decide not to grant an injunction against further infringing activity and instead award only monetary damages, which may or may not be an adequate remedy.

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 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 shares of our common stock. Moreover, we cannot assure you that we will have sufficient financial or other resources to defend or pursue such litigation, which typically last for years before they are concluded. Even if we are successful in these proceedings, we may incur substantial costs and the time and attention of our management and scientific personnel could be diverted in pursuing these proceedings, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and operations. In addition, we may not have sufficient resources to bring these actions to a successful conclusion.

Because of the expense and uncertainty of litigation, we may not be in a position to enforce our intellectual property rights against third parties.

Because of the expense and uncertainty of litigation, we may conclude that even if a third party is infringing our issued patent, any patents that may be issued as a result of our pending or future patent applications or other intellectual property rights, the risk-adjusted cost of bringing and enforcing such a claim or action may be too high or not in the best interest of our company or our stockholders. In such cases, we may decide that the more prudent course of action is to simply monitor the situation or initiate or seek some other non-litigious action or solution.

54

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

We could in the future be subject to claims that we or our employees have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed alleged trade secrets or other confidential information of former employers or competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees and consultants do not use the intellectual property, proprietary information, know-how or trade secrets of others in their work for us, we may become subject to claims that we caused an employee to breach the terms of his or her non-competition or non-solicitation agreement, or that we or these individuals have, inadvertently or otherwise, used or disclosed the alleged trade secrets or other proprietary information of a former employer or competitor.

While we may litigate to defend ourselves against these claims, even if we are successful, litigation could result in substantial costs and could be a distraction to management. If our defenses to these claims fail, in addition to requiring us to pay monetary damages, a court could prohibit us from using technologies or features that are essential to our investigational products, if such technologies or features are found to incorporate or be derived from the trade secrets or other proprietary information of the former employers. Moreover, any such litigation or the threat thereof may adversely affect our reputation, our ability to form strategic alliances or sublicense our rights to collaborators, engage with scientific advisors or hire employees or consultants, each of which would have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

Patents are of national or regional effect, and filing, prosecuting and defending patents on all of our investigational products throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. As such, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Further, the legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to pharmaceuticals or biologics, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. In addition, certain developing countries, including China and India, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In those countries, we and our licensors may have limited remedies if patents are infringed or if we or our licensors are compelled to grant a license to a third party, which could materially diminish the value of those patents. This could limit our potential revenue opportunities. 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.

Changes in patent law in the United States and other jurisdictions could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our investigational products.

As is the case with other biopharmaceutical companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. However, the patent position of biopharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and has in recent years been the subject of much litigation, resulting in court decisions, including Supreme Court decisions, that have increased uncertainties as to the ability to obtain and enforce patent rights in the future. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other countries could increase the uncertainties and costs. For example, in September 2011 the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the America Invents Act) was signed into law and included a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law as then existed. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art and provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents. These include allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. After March 2013, under the America Invents Act, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that the other statutory requirements are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third party was the first to invent the claimed invention. However, the America Invents Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

55

The U.S. 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. Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. courts, the USPTO and the relevant law-making bodies in other countries, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future.

We may rely on trade secret and proprietary know-how which can be difficult to trace and enforce and, if we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed.

In addition to seeking patents for some of our technology and investigational products, we may also rely on trade secrets, including unpatented know-how, technology and other proprietary information, to maintain our competitive position. Elements of our investigational product, including processes for their preparation and manufacture, may involve proprietary know-how, information, or technology that is not covered by patents, and thus for these aspects we may consider trade secrets and know-how to be our primary intellectual property. Any disclosure, either intentional or unintentional, by our employees, the employees of third parties with whom we share our facilities or third party consultants and vendors that we engage to perform research, clinical trials or manufacturing activities, or misappropriation by third parties (such as through a cybersecurity breach) of our trade secrets or proprietary information could enable competitors to duplicate or surpass our technological achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market.

Trade secrets and know-how can be difficult to protect. We require our employees to enter into written employment agreements containing provisions of confidentiality and obligations to assign to us any inventions generated in the course of their employment. We and any third parties with whom we share facilities enter into written agreements that include confidentiality and intellectual property obligations to protect each party’s property, potential trade secrets, proprietary know-how, and information. We further seek to protect our potential trade secrets, proprietary know-how, and information in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who are given access to them, such as our corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, contract research organizations, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties. With our consultants, contractors, and outside scientific collaborators, these agreements typically include invention assignment obligations. Despite these efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor or other third party, we would have no right to prevent them 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 or other third party, our competitive position would be harmed.

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

We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our patents or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. The failure to name the proper inventors on a patent application can result in the patents issuing thereon being unenforceable. Inventorship disputes may arise from conflicting views regarding the contributions of different individuals named as inventors, the effects of foreign laws where foreign nationals are involved in the development of the subject matter of the patent, conflicting obligations of third parties involved in developing our investigational products or as a result of questions regarding co-ownership of potential joint inventions. Litigation may be necessary to resolve these and other claims challenging inventorship and/or ownership. Alternatively, or additionally, we may enter into agreements to clarify the scope of our rights in such intellectual property. 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.

56

Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on our investigational products for an adequate amount of time.

Patent rights are of limited duration. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new investigational products, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such investigational products are commercialized. Even if patents covering our investigational products are obtained, once the patent life has expired for a product, we may be open to competition from biosimilar or generic products. A patent term extension based on regulatory delay may be available in the United States. However, only a single patent can be extended for each marketing approval, and any patent can be extended only once, for a single product. Moreover, the scope of protection during the period of the patent term extension does not extend to the full scope of the claim, but instead only to the scope of the product as approved. Laws governing analogous patent term extensions in foreign jurisdictions vary widely, as do laws governing the ability to obtain multiple patents from a single patent family. Additionally, 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. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or restoration, or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we will have the right to exclusively market our product will be shortened and our competitors may obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration, and our revenue could be reduced, possibly materially.

Risks Related to our Business Operations

We expect to expand our research and development capabilities and, as a result, we may encounter difficulties in managing our growth, which could disrupt our operations.

In order to maximize the potential of our Gilead Collaboration Agreement, we expect to significantly grow our discovery and clinical development capabilities. To support this growth, we will need to increase the number of employees in clinical operations, biostatistics and data management, quality, regulatory affairs and, if any of our investigational products receives marketing approval, sales, marketing and distribution. To manage our anticipated future growth, we must:

Our future financial performance and our ability to develop, manufacture and commercialize our investigational products will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth, and our management may also have to divert financial and other resources, and 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.

If we are not able to effectively expand our organization by hiring 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 investigational products and, accordingly, may not achieve our research, development and commercialization goals.

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

Our industry has experienced a high rate of turnover in recent years. Our ability to compete in the highly competitive biopharmaceuticals industry depends upon our ability to attract, retain and motivate highly skilled and experienced personnel with scientific, medical, regulatory, manufacturing and management skills and experience. We conduct our operations in the San Francisco Bay Area, a region that is home to many other biopharmaceutical companies as well as many academic and research institutions, resulting in fierce competition for qualified personnel. We may not be able to attract or retain qualified personnel in the future due to the intense competition for a limited number of qualified personnel among biopharmaceutical companies. Many of the other biopharmaceutical companies against which we compete have greater financial and other resources, different risk profiles and a longer history in the industry than we do. Our competitors may provide higher compensation, more diverse opportunities

57

and/or better opportunities for career advancement. Any or all of these competing factors may limit our ability to continue to attract and retain high quality personnel, which could negatively affect our ability to successfully develop and commercialize our investigational products and to grow our business and operations as currently contemplated.

We are highly dependent on the services of our founders, Terry Rosen, Ph.D., who serves as our Chief Executive Officer, and Juan Jaen, Ph.D., who serves as our President.

We are highly dependent on the services of our founders, Terry Rosen, Ph.D., who serves as our Chief Executive Officer, and Juan Jaen, Ph.D., who serves as our President. Although we have entered into employment agreements with them, they are not for a specific term and each of them may terminate their employment with us at any time, though we are not aware of any present intention of either of these individuals to leave us.

Drs. Rosen and Jaen have significant experience identifying and developing biopharmaceuticals. We believe that their drug discovery and development experience, and overall biopharmaceutical company management experience, would be difficult to replace. However, the historical results, past performance and/or acquisitions of companies with which they were affiliated do not necessarily predict or guarantee similar results for our company. Further, Drs. Rosen and Jaen have certain other business and personal commitments outside of serving as the Chief Executive Officer and President of Arcus, including serving on the boards of other companies and foundations, which may result in diversion of their focus and attention on our company.

We face substantial competition, which may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing products more quickly or marketing them more successfully than us. If their investigational products are shown to be safer or more effective than ours, then our commercial opportunity will be reduced or eliminated.

We compete in the segments of the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other related markets that develop immunotherapies for the treatment of cancer, which is highly competitive with rapidly changing standards of care. As such, our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our 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 or that would render any products that we may develop obsolete or non-competitive. Our competitors also may obtain marketing 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.

Some of the other products in the same class as our investigational products have already been approved or are further along in development. With respect to our dual adenosine receptor antagonist, etrumadenant, we are aware that Incyte has initiated clinical development of a dual adenosine receptor antagonist and we are aware of clinical-stage selective adenosine A_2aR antagonists being developed by other companies, including AstraZeneca, Corvus, CStone, iTeos Therapeutics and Novartis, and a clinical-stage selective adenosine A_2bR antagonist being developed by Palobiofarma. For our small-molecule CD73 inhibitor, AB680, we are aware of several pharmaceutical companies developing antibodies against this target, including Akeso, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Corvus, Novartis, Symphogen and Tracon/I-Mab, all of whom have advanced their CD73 antibodies into clinical development. Other pharmaceutical companies, such as Boehringer Ingelheim, Calithera, Eli Lilly, Merck and ORIC, have small-molecule programs against this target, of which only Eli Lilly has advanced its CD73 inhibitor into clinical development. Regarding our anti-PD-1 antibody, zimberelimab, multiple large pharmaceutical companies have already received regulatory approvals for their anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies, including AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Pfizer in partnership with Merck KGaA, Regeneron in partnership with Sanofi Genzyme and Roche/Genentech, and there are also many other anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 antibodies in clinical development. With respect to our anti-TIGIT antibody, domvanalimab, we are aware of several pharmaceutical companies developing antibodies against this target, including Agenus, Beigene, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Compugen, Roche/Genentech, Innovent, iTeos Therapeutics, Merck KGaA, Mereo and Seattle Genetics. To our knowledge, there are no approved anti-TIGIT antibodies and the most advanced agent is in Phase 3 development.

As more investigational products within a particular class of drugs proceed through clinical development to regulatory review and approval, the amount and type of clinical data that may be required by regulatory authorities may increase or change. Consequently, the results of our clinical trials for investigational products in those class will likely need to show a risk benefit profile that is competitive with or more favorable than those products and investigational products in order to obtain marketing approval or, if approved, a product label that is favorable for

58

commercialization. If the risk benefit profile is not competitive with those products or investigational products, or if the approval of other agents for an indication or patient population significantly alters the standard of care with which we tested our investigational products, we may have developed a product that is not commercially viable, that we are not able to sell profitably or that is unable to achieve favorable pricing or reimbursement. In such circumstances, our future product revenue and financial condition would be materially and adversely affected.

Many of our competitors, such as large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies like AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Novartis and Roche/Genentech, have longer operating histories and significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical studies, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller and other early stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These third parties compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and subject enrollment for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

The key competitive factors affecting the success of all of our programs are likely to be their efficacy, safety, convenience, and availability of reimbursement. If we are not successful in developing, commercializing and achieving higher levels of reimbursement than our competitors, we will not be able to compete against them and our business would be materially harmed.

The development and commercialization of zimberelimab may face strong competition from other anti-PD-1 antibodies that have already received marketing approval by larger companies with substantial resources and more experience developing, manufacturing and commercializing biologic compounds.

As discussed above, some companies, such as AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Pfizer in partnership with Merck KGaA, Regeneron in partnership with Sanofi Genzyme and Roche/Genentech, have anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies that are approved and on the market, and continue to develop and seek regulatory approval for their respective anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies for additional oncology indications. For example, in June 2020, the U.S. FDA granted accelerated approval to Keytruda^® (pembrolizumab) for the treatment of patients with solid tumors that have high tumor mutational burden. Many other companies are developing anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies for various oncology indications that are further along in development than zimberelimab. This competitive environment could limit our development opportunities for zimberelimab or compromise our ability to successfully enroll our ongoing and future clinical trials with zimberelimab by limiting the availability of clinical trial investigators, sites and/or subjects which could slow, delay or limit the progress of zimberelimab’s development. As a result of these or other problems and risks, we may never receive marketing approval for zimberelimab, may not realize the full commercial potential of zimberelimab as monotherapy or in combination with our other investigational products, may never recoup our financial investment or may never generate significant value or revenue from this asset.

Our internal information technology systems, or those of our third-party CROs or other contractors or consultants, are subject to failure, security breaches, loss or leakage of data, and other disruptions, which could result in a material disruption of our investigational products’ development programs, compromise sensitive information related to our business or prevent us from accessing critical information, potentially exposing us to notification obligations, liability or reputational damage and otherwise adversely affecting our business.

We are increasingly dependent upon information technology systems, infrastructure and data to operate our business. In the ordinary course of business, we collect, store and transmit confidential information, including but not limited to intellectual property, proprietary business information and personal information. It is critical that we do so in a secure manner to maintain the confidentiality, integrity and availability of such confidential information. We also have outsourced elements of our operations to third parties, and as a result we manage a number of third party contractors who have access to our confidential information.

Despite the implementation of security measures, given their size and complexity and the increasing amounts of confidential information that they maintain, our internal information technology systems and those of our third-party CROs and other contractors and consultants are vulnerable to breakdown or other damage or interruption from service interruptions, system malfunction, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures, as well as security breaches from inadvertent or intentional actions by our employees, contractors,

59

consultants, business partners, and/or other third parties, or from cyber-attacks by malicious third parties (including 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), which may compromise our system infrastructure or lead to data leakage. We have experienced at least one intrusion into our computer systems, and, although our investigation indicates that it did not have a material adverse effect on our operations, there can be no assurance of a similar result in the future. We cannot assure you that our data protection efforts and our investment in information technology will prevent other breakdowns, data leakages, breaches in our systems or other cyber incidents that could have a material adverse effect upon our reputation, business, operations or financial condition. Furthermore, as the cyber-threat landscape evolves, these attacks are growing in frequency, sophistication and intensity, and becoming increasingly difficult to detect. There can be no assurance that we and our third-party CROs and other contractors and consultants will be successful in detecting, preventing or fully recovering systems or data from all breakdowns, service interruptions, attacks or breaches of systems that could adversely affect our business and operations and/or result in the loss or disclosure of critical or sensitive data, which could result in financial, legal, business or reputational harm to us.

To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and reputational damage and the further development and commercialization of our drug candidates could be delayed. In addition, the loss of clinical trial data for our investigational products could result in delays in our marketing approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. Furthermore, significant disruptions of our internal information technology systems or security breaches could result in the loss, misappropriation, and/or unauthorized access, use, or disclosure of, or the prevention of access to, confidential information (including trade secrets or other intellectual property, proprietary business information, and personal information), which could result in financial, legal, business, and reputational harm to us. In particular, any such event that leads to unauthorized access, use, or disclosure of personal information, including personal information regarding our clinical trial subjects or employees, could harm our reputation directly, compel us to comply with federal and/or state breach notification laws and foreign law equivalents, subject us to mandatory corrective action, and otherwise subject us to liability under laws and regulations that protect the privacy and security of personal information, which could result in significant legal and financial exposure and reputational damages that could potentially have an adverse effect on our business.

Unfavorable global economic and trade conditions could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Our results of operations could be adversely affected by general conditions in the global economy and in the global financial markets and global trade. The current global economic conditions are highly volatile due to the COVID-19 pandemic and government restrictions on movement, which may lead to disruptions in the capital and credit markets and reduce our ability to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. Furthermore, we conduct, and we expect to continue to conduct, portions of our clinical trials outside the United States, and unfavorable economic conditions resulting in the weakening of the U.S. dollar would make those clinical trials more costly to operate. A weak or declining economy could also strain our suppliers, possibly resulting in supply disruption.

Adverse trade conditions may further impact our operating results or financial condition by increasing the cost of our operations. For example, we have an exclusive relationship with WuXi Biologics, located in China, for the manufacture of zimberelimab and domvanalimab and for biologics CMC development and if tariffs are imposed on the investigational products they manufacture for us, such tariffs would have an adverse impact on our operating results and financial condition. Any of the foregoing could harm our business and we cannot anticipate all of the ways in which the current economic climate and financial market conditions could adversely impact our business.

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

Our future profitability may depend, in part, on our ability to commercialize our investigational products in foreign markets for which we may rely on collaboration with third parties. We are not permitted to market or promote any of our investigational products before we receive marketing approval from the applicable regulatory authority in that foreign market, and we may never receive such marketing approval for any of our investigational products. To obtain marketing approval in many foreign countries, we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory

60

requirements of such countries regarding safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials and commercial sales, pricing and distribution of our investigational products, and we cannot predict success in these jurisdictions. If we obtain approval of our investigational products and ultimately commercialize our investigational products in foreign markets, we would be subject to additional risks and uncertainties, including:

Foreign sales of our investigational products could also be adversely affected by the imposition of governmental controls, political and economic instability, trade restrictions and changes in tariffs.

We or the third parties upon whom we depend may be adversely affected by earthquakes, fires or other natural disasters and our business continuity and disaster recovery plans may not adequately protect us from a serious disaster.

Our headquarters and main research facility are located in the San Francisco Bay Area, which in the past has experienced severe earthquakes and fires. If these earthquakes, fires, other natural disasters, terrorism and similar unforeseen events beyond our control prevented us from using all or a significant portion of our headquarters or research facility, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible for us to continue our business for a substantial period of time. We do not have a disaster recovery or business continuity plan in place and may incur substantial expenses as a result of the absence or limited nature of our internal or third party service provider disaster recovery and business continuity plans, which, particularly when taken together with our lack of earthquake insurance, could have a material adverse effect on our business. Furthermore, integral parties in our supply chain are operating from single sites, increasing their vulnerability to natural disasters or other sudden, unforeseen and severe adverse events. If such an event were to affect our supply chain, it could have a material adverse effect on our ability to conduct our clinical trials, our development plans and business.

Our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes may be limited.

We have incurred substantial losses during our history and our ability to generate profits in the future is uncertain. Unused losses for the tax year ended December 31, 2017 and prior tax years will carry forward to offset future taxable income, if any, until such unused losses expire. Unused losses generated after December 31, 2017, under current tax law will not expire and may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such net operating losses in tax years beginning after December 31, 2020 will be limited to 80% of current year taxable income in any given year. In addition, both our current and our future unused losses may be subject to limitation under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (IRC), if we undergo an “ownership change,” generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in its equity ownership by certain stockholders over a three-year period. We performed an analysis under IRC Section 382 and 383 through October 31, 2020 with respect to our net operating loss and credit carryforwards. We concluded that an ownership change, as defined under IRC Section 382, occurred in the current year and in previous years. While we do not expect such ownership changes to result in the expiration of our net operating loss and credit carryforwards prior to utilization,

61

we are subject to an annual limitation on the use of tax attributes. The limitation on our ability to use our net operating loss and credit carryforwards could reduce our ability to use a portion of our tax attributes to offset future taxable income, which could result in us being required to make material cash tax payments.

However, our sale of 5,650,000 shares of our common stock to Gilead in February 2021, as well as future equity issuances, may result in an additional ownership change. As a result, our ability to use all of our pre-change net operating loss carryforwards (NOLs) and other pre-change tax attributes (such as research tax credits) to offset our post-change income or taxes may be subject to limitations that could result in increased future tax liability to us. Similar provisions of state tax law may also apply to limit our use of accumulated state tax attributes. In addition, at the state level, there may be periods during which the use of NOLs is suspended or otherwise limited, including a recent California franchise tax law change limiting the usability of California state NOLs to offset taxable income in taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2020 and before January 1, 2023, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed. Therefore, even if we attain profitability, we may be unable to use all or a material portion of our NOLs and other tax attributes, which could adversely affect our future cash flows.

Risks Related to Our Industry

Product liability lawsuits against us could cause us to incur substantial liabilities and could limit our commercialization of any investigational products that we may develop.

We face an inherent risk of product liability exposure related to the testing of our investigational products in human clinical trials and will face an even greater risk if we commercially sell any products that we may develop. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against claims that our investigational products or products caused injuries, we could incur substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

Although we maintain product liability insurance coverage, it may not be adequate to cover all liabilities that we may incur. We anticipate that we will need to increase our insurance coverage as our investigational products advance through clinical trials and if we successfully commercialize any products. Insurance coverage is increasingly expensive. We may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in an amount adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise.

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

We and any potential collaborators may be subject to federal, state, and foreign data protection laws and regulations (i.e., laws and regulations that address privacy and data security). In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including federal health information privacy laws, state data breach notification laws, state health information privacy laws, and federal and state consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the FTC 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 federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) as

62

amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009 (HITECH). Depending on the facts and circumstances, we could be subject to significant penalties if we violate HIPAA.

The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data security continues to evolve, and we expect that there will continue to be new proposed laws, regulations and industry standards relating to privacy and data security in the United States, the EU and other jurisdictions. This increased focus on privacy and data security issues may negatively affect our operating results and our business. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA), which took effect on January 1, 2020, gives California residents expanded rights to access and require deletion of their personal information, opt out of certain personal information sharing, and receive detailed information about how their personal information is used. In addition, the CCPA authorizes private lawsuits to recover statutory damages for certain data breaches. While it exempts some data regulated by HIPAA and certain clinical trials data, the CCPA may increase our compliance costs and potential liability with respect to other personal information we collect about California residents. Some observers note that the CCPA could mark the beginning of a trend toward more stringent privacy legislation in the U.S., which could increase our potential liability and adversely affect our business.

International data protection laws also apply to health-related and other personal data obtained outside the United States. In the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation) took effect in May 2018 and imposes, in some cases, stricter obligations than data protection laws in the United States on the use of health-related and other personal data. These requirements include the obligation to appoint data protection officers in certain circumstances, rights for individuals to be “forgotten” and to data portability, and the obligation to make public notification of significant data breaches. Under the General Data Protection Regulation, data protection authorities can also impose administrative fines of up to 4% of our total worldwide turnover or up to €20 million (whichever is higher). In addition, the General Data Protection Regulation only permits the transfer of personal data outside the European Economic Area (EEA) to countries that offer a level of data protection deemed adequate by the European Commission, unless an approved data transfer mechanism is in place. One such mechanism was invalidated by the European Court of Justice, adding to the complexity of transferring personal data outside the EEA. The General Data Protection Regulation increases our responsibility and liability in relation to personal data that we process, and we must put in place additional mechanisms to ensure compliance with the new EU data protection rules.

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

Our business operations expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse, transparency, government price reporting, 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.

Our operations are subject, either directly or indirectly through our customers and third party payors, to various U.S. federal and state health care laws, including fraud and abuse, transparency and other healthcare laws and regulations, and similar laws in other jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. These laws may impact, among other things, our research and proposed sales, marketing and education programs and constrain the business of financial arrangements and relationships with healthcare providers, physicians and other parties through which we market, sell and distribute our products for which we obtain marketing approval. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include, but are not limited to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute; federal civil and criminal false claims laws, such as the False Claims Act (FCA); HIPAA; federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws; the federal transparency requirements under the Physician Payments Sunshine Act; state and foreign law equivalents of each of these federal laws; and state and foreign laws that require pharmaceutical companies to implement compliance programs. Many of these laws are discussed in detail in “Item 1. Business” above.

The scope and enforcement of each of these laws is uncertain and subject to rapid change in the current environment of healthcare reform. Federal and state enforcement bodies have continued their scrutiny of interactions between

63

healthcare companies and healthcare providers, which has led to a number of investigations, prosecutions, convictions and settlements in the healthcare industry. Responding to investigations can be time-and resource-consuming and can divert management’s attention from the business. Any such investigation or settlement could increase our costs or otherwise have an adverse effect on our business.

Ensuring that our business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will likely be costly. We have entered into consulting and advisory board arrangements with physicians and other healthcare providers, including some who could influence the use of our investigational products, if approved. Because of the complex and far-reaching nature of these laws, regulatory agencies may view these transactions as prohibited arrangements that must be restructured, or discontinued, or for which we could be subject to other significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties such as 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. If any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs.

Changes in healthcare law and implementing regulations, as well as changes in healthcare policy, may impact our business in ways that we cannot currently predict, and may have a significant adverse effect 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 investigational products, restrict or regulate post-approval activities, and affect the ability to profitably sell investigational products for which marketing approval is obtained. 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 additional detail regarding health care reform activities that may impact our business, see “Business—Government Regulation—Healthcare Reform” above.

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

U.S. and foreign anti-corruption, anti-money laundering, export control, sanctions, and other trade laws and regulations (collectively, Trade Laws) prohibit, among other things, companies and their employees, agents, clinical research organizations, legal counsel, accountants, consultants, contractors, and other partners from authorizing, promising, offering, providing, soliciting, or receiving directly or indirectly, corrupt or improper payments or anything else of value to or from recipients in the public or private sector. Violations of Trade 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. We have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or government-affiliated hospitals, universities, and other organizations. We also expect our non-U.S. activities to increase over time. We expect to rely on third parties for research, preclinical studies, and clinical trials and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, patent registrations, and other marketing approvals. We can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of our personnel, agents, or partners, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have prior knowledge of such activities.

If we 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, and the third parties with whom we share our facilities, 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. Each of our operations involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological and radioactive materials. Each of our operations also 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. We could be held liable for

64

any resulting damages in the event of contamination or injury resulting from the use of hazardous materials by us or the third parties with whom we share our facilities, and any liability could exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties.

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, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. We do not maintain insurance for environmental liability or toxic tort claims that may be asserted against us in connection with our storage or disposal of biological, hazardous or radioactive materials.

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 and development. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.

Risks Related to Owning our Common Stock

The stock price of our common stock has been and may continue to be volatile or may decline regardless of our operating performance.

The market price of our common stock has fluctuated and may fluctuate significantly in response to numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control, including:

In addition, the stock markets have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have affected and continue to affect the market prices of equity securities of many immuno-oncology companies. Stock prices of many immuno-oncology companies have fluctuated in a manner unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of those companies. In the past, stockholders have filed securities class action litigation following periods of market volatility. If we were to become involved in securities litigation, it could subject us to substantial costs, divert resources and the attention of management from our business and adversely affect our business.

65

The amount of our future losses is uncertain and our quarterly operating results may fluctuate significantly or may fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts, each of which may cause our stock price to fluctuate or decline.

Our quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate significantly in the future due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control and may be difficult to predict, including the following:

The cumulative effects of these factors could result in large fluctuations and unpredictability in our quarterly and annual operating results. As a result, comparing our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. This variability and unpredictability could also result in our failing to meet the expectations of industry or financial analysts or investors for any period. If our revenue or operating results fall below the expectations of analysts or investors or below any forecasts we may provide to the market, or if the forecasts we provide to the market are below the expectations of analysts or investors, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Such a stock price decline could occur even when we have met any previously publicly stated guidance we may provide.

The concentration of our stock ownership will likely limit our stockholders’ ability to influence corporate matters, including the ability to influence the outcome of director elections and other matters requiring stockholder approval.

Based upon shares outstanding as of February 12, 2021, our executive officers, directors and the holders of more than 5% of our outstanding common stock, in the aggregate, beneficially owned approximately 36.4% of our common stock. Gilead also owns approximately 19.5% of our outstanding common stock, and we have appointed its two designees to our board of directors pursuant to the terms of our investor rights agreement. As a result, these stockholders, acting together, will have significant influence over all matters that require approval by our stockholders, including the election of directors and approval of significant corporate transactions. Corporate actions might be taken even if other stockholders oppose them. This concentration of ownership might also have the effect of delaying or preventing a change of control of our company that other stockholders may view as beneficial.

66

Delaware law and provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws could make a merger, tender offer or proxy contest difficult, thereby depressing the trading price of our common stock.

Our status as a Delaware corporation and the anti-takeover provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law may discourage, delay or prevent a change in control by prohibiting us from engaging in a business combination with an interested stockholder for a period of three years after the person becomes an interested stockholder, even if a change of control would be beneficial to our existing stockholders. In addition, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws contain provisions that may make the acquisition of our company more difficult, including the following:

In addition, as a Delaware corporation, we are subject to Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. These provisions may prohibit large stockholders, in particular those owning 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock, from merging or combining with us for a certain period of time. A Delaware corporation may opt out of this provision by express provision in its original certificate of incorporation or by amendment to its certificate of incorporation or bylaws approved by its stockholders. However, we have not opted out of this provision.

These and other provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, amended and restated bylaws and Delaware law could make it more difficult for stockholders or potential acquirers to obtain control of our board of directors or initiate actions that are opposed by our then-current board of directors, including delay or impede a merger, tender offer or proxy contest involving our company. The existence of these provisions could negatively affect the price of our common stock and limit opportunities for our stockholders to realize value in a corporate transaction.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum 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 and our bylaws provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, any action asserting a breach of fiduciary duty, any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to the Delaware General

67

Corporation Law, our certificate of incorporation or our bylaws or any action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. In addition, to prevent having to litigate claims in multiple jurisdictions and the threat of inconsistent or contrary rulings by different courts, among other considerations, our bylaws provide that the federal district courts of the United States will be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. These choice of 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 and may discourage these types of lawsuits. While the Delaware courts have determined that these types 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 these provisions, which 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.

General Risk Factors

Sales of substantial amounts of our outstanding shares may cause the price of our common stock to decline.

The price of our common stock could decline if there are substantial sales of our common stock, particularly sales by our directors, executive officers and significant stockholders, or if there is a large number of shares of our common stock available for sale and the market perceives that sales will occur. Certain of our stockholders have rights, subject to some conditions, to require us to file registration statements covering their shares or to include their shares in registration statements that we may file for ourselves or our stockholders, subject to market standoff and lockup agreements. We have also registered shares of common stock that we have issued and may issue under our employee equity incentive plans. These shares can be sold freely in the public market upon issuance, subject to vesting conditions and, in the case of our affiliates, volume limitations under Rule 144 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

If we fail to maintain proper and effective internal controls, our ability to produce accurate and timely financial statements could be impaired, which could result in sanctions or other penalties that would harm our business.

We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the rules and regulations of the New York Stock Exchange. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls over financial reporting.

Our internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. 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. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will not in the future identify one or more material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, which may have a negative impact on our ability to timely and accurately produce financial statements, may result in a material misstatement of our consolidated financial statements or may negatively impact the confidence level of our stockholders and other market participants with respect to our reported financial information.

Ensuring that we have adequate internal controls over financial reporting is a costly and time-consuming effort that needs to be re-evaluated frequently. To the extent necessary, implementing any changes to our internal controls may distract our officers and employees, entail substantial costs to modify our existing processes and take significant time to complete. These changes may not, however, be effective in maintaining the adequacy of our internal controls, and any failure to maintain that adequacy, or consequent inability to produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis, could increase our operating costs and harm our business.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

68

Item 2. Properties

As of December 31, 2020, our corporate headquarters, which includes executive offices and research and development and business operations, consist of approximately 136,293 square feet of leased office and laboratory space in an office park in Hayward, California. We also lease approximately 109,237 square feet of space in Brisbane, California in a lease expected to commence in 2021. The lease terms for these facilities expire from 2025 to 2031, subject to options for us to extend the lease term. We intend to add new facilities or expand existing facilities as we add employees and enter new locations, and we believe that suitable additional or substitute space will be available as needed to accommodate any such expansion of our operations.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

We are not currently a party to any material legal proceedings. From time to time, we may become involved in legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of our business. Regardless of outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on us due to defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources, negative publicity, reputational harm and other factors.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

None.

69

PART II

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

Market Information and Holders of Record

Our common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “RCUS.”

As of January 31, 2021, we had 80 stockholders of record as reported by our transfer agent. This does not include beneficial owners whose shares are held in street name.

Dividend Policy

We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our capital stock. We intend to retain all available funds and any future earnings, if any, to fund the development and expansion of our business and we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. Any future determination to declare dividends will be made at the discretion of our board of directors.

Performance Graph

The following graph compares the cumulative stockholders returns from March 15, 2018 (first day of trading of our common stock), through December 31, 2020 for (i) our common stock, (ii) the S&P Biotechnology Index and (iii) S&P 500 Index, assuming $100 invested on March 15, 2018, and reinvestment of dividends if paid. The stockholder return shown on the graph below is not necessarily indicative of future performance, and we do not make or endorse any predictions as to future stockholder returns. This graph shall not be deemed “soliciting material” or be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liabilities under that Section, and shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any of our filings under the Securities Act, whether made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation language in any such filing.

70

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

The following table summarizes repurchases of our common stock during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2020:

All of the shares repurchased, as reflected in the table above, were repurchases of unvested shares of our common stock that had been issued upon early exercise of stock options. Upon termination of employment of a person holding unvested shares, we are entitled to repurchase the unvested shares.

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

The following selected financial data should be read in conjunction with Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplemental Data” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.