Avalon GloboCare (ALBT) Risk Analysis

Our business is subject to or impacted by extensive and frequently changing laws and regulations in the United States (including at both the federal and state levels) and the other jurisdictions in which we engage in business. While we seek to conduct our business in compliance with all applicable laws, many of the laws and regulations applicable to us are vague or indefinite and have not been extensively interpreted by the courts, including many of those relating to: - billing and reimbursement of clinical testing;- certification or licensure of clinical laboratories;- the anti-self-referral and anti-kickback laws and regulations;- the laws and regulations administered by the FDA;- the corporate practice of medicine;- operational, personnel and quality requirements intended to ensure that clinical testing services are accurate, reliable and timely;- physician fee splitting;- relationships with physicians and IDNs;- marketing to consumers;- privacy of patient data and other personal information;- safety and health of laboratory employees; and - handling, transportation and disposal of medical specimens, infectious and hazardous waste and radioactive materials. These laws and regulations may be interpreted or applied by a prosecutorial, regulatory or judicial authority in a manner that could require us to make changes in our operations, including our pricing and/or billing practices. We may not be able to maintain, renew or secure required permits, licenses or any other regulatory approvals needed to operate our business or commercialize our services. If we fail to comply with applicable laws and regulations, or if we fail to maintain, renew or obtain necessary permits, licenses and approvals, we could suffer civil and criminal penalties, fines, exclusion from participation in governmental healthcare programs and the loss of various licenses, certificates and authorizations necessary to operate our business, as well as incur additional liabilities from third-party claims. If any of the foregoing were to occur, our reputation could be damaged and important business relationships with third parties could be adversely affected. We also are subject from time to time to qui tam claims brought by former employees or other "whistleblowers." The federal and state governments continue aggressive enforcement efforts against perceived healthcare fraud. Legislative provisions relating to healthcare fraud and abuse provide government enforcement personnel substantial funding, powers, penalties and remedies to pursue suspected cases of fraud and abuse. In addition, the government has substantial leverage in negotiating settlements since the amount of potential damages far exceeds the rates at which we are reimbursed for our services, and the government has the remedy of excluding a non-compliant provider from participation in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, these types of investigations and related litigation can result in: - diversion of management time and attention;- expenditure of large amounts of cash on legal fees, costs and payment of damages;- increases to our administrative, billing or other operating costs;- limitations on our ability to continue some of our operations;- enforcement actions, fines and penalties or the assertion of private litigation claims and damages;- decreases to the amount of reimbursement related to diagnostic information services performed;- adverse affects to important business relationships with third parties;- decreased demand for our services; and/or - injury to our reputation. Changes in applicable laws and regulations may result in existing practices becoming more restricted, or subject our existing or proposed services to additional costs, delay, modification or withdrawal. Such changes also could require us to modify our business objectives.

The commercial laboratory testing industry is subject to extensive U.S. regulation, and many of these statutes and regulations have not been interpreted by the courts. CLIA extends federal oversight to virtually all clinical laboratories operating in the U.S. by requiring that they be certified by the federal government or by a federally approved accreditation agency. The sanction for failure to comply with CLIA requirements may be suspension, revocation or limitation of a laboratory's CLIA certificate, which is necessary to conduct business, as well as significant fines and/or criminal penalties. In addition, we are subject to regulation under state law. State laws may require that laboratories and/or laboratory personnel meet certain qualifications, specify certain quality controls or require maintenance of certain records. In the future, we may also operate laboratories outside of the U.S. and become subject to laws governing its laboratory operations in the other countries where it operates. Applicable statutes and regulations could be interpreted or applied by a prosecutorial, regulatory or judicial authority in a manner that would adversely affect our business. Potential sanctions for violation of these statutes and regulations include significant fines and the suspension or loss of various licenses, certificates and authorizations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, compliance with future legislation could impose additional requirements on us, which may be costly.

U.S. and state government payers, such as Medicare and Medicaid, as well as insurers, including MCOs, have increased their efforts to control the cost, utilization and delivery of healthcare services. From time to time, Congress has considered and implemented changes in Medicare fee schedules in conjunction with budgetary legislation. The first phase of reductions pursuant to PAMA came into effect on January 1, 2018, and will continue annually subject to certain delays in implementation and phase-in limits through 2026, and without limitations for subsequent periods. Further reductions due to changes in policy regarding coverage of tests or other requirements for payment, such as prior authorization, diagnosis code and other claims edits, may be implemented from time to time. Reimbursement for pathology services performed by us is also subject to statutory and regulatory reduction. Reductions in the reimbursement rates and changes in payment policies of other third-party payers may occur as well. Such changes in the past have resulted in reduced payments as well as added costs and have decreased test utilization for the commercial laboratory industry by adding more complex new regulatory and administrative requirements. Further changes in third-party payer regulations, policies, or laboratory benefit or utilization management programs may have a material adverse effect on our business. Actions by federal and state agencies regulating insurance, including healthcare exchanges, or changes in other laws, regulations, or policies may also have a material adverse effect upon our business.

We may be unable to attract and retain those qualified officers, directors and members of board committees required to provide for effective management because of the rules and regulations that govern publicly held companies, including, but not limited to, certifications by principal executive officers. The enactment of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act has resulted in the issuance of a series of related rules and regulations and the strengthening of existing rules and regulations by the SEC, as well as the adoption of new and more stringent rules by national securities exchanges. The perceived increased personal risk associated with these changes may deter qualified individuals from accepting roles as directors and executive officers. Further, some of these changes heighten the requirements for board or committee membership, particularly with respect to an individual's independence from the corporation and level of experience in finance and accounting matters. We may have difficulty attracting and retaining directors with the requisite qualifications. If we are unable to attract and retain qualified officers and directors, the management of our business and our ability to obtain or retain listing of our shares of common stock on any national securities exchange could be adversely affected.

As a healthcare company, our operations, clinical trial activities and interactions with healthcare providers may be subject to extensive regulation in the U.S., particularly if we receive FDA approval for any of its products in the future. For example, if we receive FDA approval for a product for which reimbursement is available under a federal healthcare program (e.g., Medicare, Medicaid), it would be subject to a variety of federal laws and regulations, including those that prohibit the filing of false or improper claims for payment by federal healthcare programs (e.g. the federal False Claims Act), prohibit unlawful inducements for the referral of business reimbursable by federal healthcare programs (e.g. the federal Anti-Kickback Statute), and require disclosure of certain payments or other transfers of value made to U.S.-licensed physicians and teaching hospitals or Open Payments. We are not able to predict how third parties will interpret these laws and apply applicable governmental guidance and may challenge our practices and activities under one or more of these laws. If our past or present operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws, we could be subject to civil and criminal penalties, which could hurt our business, our operations and financial condition. 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 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 pharmaceutical 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 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 FCA. The civil monetary penalties statute imposes penalties against any person or entity that, among other things, is determined to have presented or caused to be presented a claim to a federal healthcare program that the person knows or should know is for an item or service that was not provided as claimed or is false or fraudulent. Federal false claims and false statement laws, including the federal FCA, prohibit, among other things, any person or entity from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment to, or 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 prohibits, among other offenses, knowingly and willfully executing a scheme to defraud any health care benefit program, including private payors, or falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for items or services under a health care benefit program. To the extent that we act as a business associate to a healthcare provider engaging in electronic transactions, we may also be subject to the privacy and security provisions of HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, which restricts the use and disclosure of patient-identifiable health information, mandates the adoption of standards relating to the privacy and security of patient-identifiable health information, and requires the reporting of certain security breaches to healthcare provider customers with respect to such information. Additionally, many states have enacted similar laws that may impose more stringent requirements on entities like ours. Failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations could result in substantial penalties and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. Many states also have similar 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. Our products, once approved, may be eligible for coverage under Medicare and Medicaid, among other government healthcare programs. Accordingly, we may be subject to a number of obligations based on their participation in these programs, such as a requirement to 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 and biological products 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 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. 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. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the federal and state healthcare laws described above or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including without limitation, civil, criminal and/or administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, 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, 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.

The regulations that govern marketing approvals, pricing, coverage and reimbursement for new drugs and cell based therapies vary widely from country to country. Some countries require approval of the sale price of a drug before it can be marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or product licensing approval is granted. In some foreign markets, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. Although we intend to monitor these regulations, our programs are currently in earlier stages of development and we will not be able to assess the impact of price regulations for a number of years. As a result, we might obtain regulatory approval for a product in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations that delay our commercial launch of the product and negatively impact the revenues we are able to generate from the sale of the product in that country. 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. However, there may be significant delays in obtaining coverage for newly-approved cell based therapies. Moreover, eligibility for coverage does not necessarily signify that a cell based therapy will be reimbursed in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including research, development, manufacture, sale and distribution costs. Also, interim payments for new cell based therapy if applicable, may be insufficient to cover our costs and may not be made permanent. Thus, even if we succeed in bringing one or more products to the market, these products may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective, and the amount reimbursed for any products may be insufficient to allow us to sell our products on a competitive basis. Because our programs are in earlier stages of development, we are unable at this time to determine their cost effectiveness, or the likely level or method of reimbursement. In addition, 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 product candidate that we successfully develop. Increasingly, the third party payors who reimburse patients or healthcare providers, such as government and private insurance plans, are seeking greater upfront discounts, additional rebates and other concessions to reduce the prices for pharmaceutical products. If the price we are able to charge for any products we develop, or the reimbursement provided for such products, is inadequate in light of our development and other costs, our return on investment could be adversely affected. We currently expect that certain drugs we develop may need to be administered under the supervision of a physician on an outpatient basis. Under currently applicable U.S. law, certain drugs that are not usually self-administered (including injectable cell based therapies) may be eligible for coverage under Medicare through Medicare Part B. Specifically, Medicare Part B coverage may be available for eligible beneficiaries when the following, among other requirements have been satisfied: - the product is reasonable and necessary for the diagnosis or treatment of the illness or injury for which the product is administered according to accepted standards of medical practice;- the product is typically furnished incident to a physician's services;- the indication for which the product will be used is included or approved for inclusion in certain Medicare-designated pharmaceutical compendia (when used for an off-label use); and - the product has been approved by the FDA. Average prices for cell therapies 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 and cell based therapy from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the U.S. Reimbursement rates under Medicare Part B would depend in part on whether the newly approved product would be eligible for a unique billing code. Self-administered, outpatient drugs and cell based therapies are typically reimbursed under Medicare Part D, and cell based therapies that are administered in an inpatient hospital setting are typically reimbursed under Medicare Part A under a bundled payment. It is difficult for us to predict how Medicare coverage and reimbursement policies will be applied to our products in the 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. Third party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policies and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates. These coverage policies and limitations may rely, in part, on compendia listings for approved therapeutics. Our inability to promptly obtain relevant compendia listings, coverage, and adequate reimbursement from both government-funded and private payors for new cell based therapies that we develop and for which we obtain regulatory approval could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, our ability to raise capital needed to commercialize products and our financial condition. We expect that these and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and lower reimbursement, and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government-funded 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 cell based therapies, once marketing approval is obtained. We believe that the efforts of governments and third party payors to contain or reduce the cost of healthcare and legislative and regulatory proposals to broaden the availability of healthcare will continue to affect the business and financial condition of pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical companies. A number of legislative and regulatory changes in the healthcare system in the U.S. and other major healthcare markets have been proposed, and such efforts have expanded substantially in recent years. These developments could, directly or indirectly, affect our ability to sell our products, if approved, at a favorable price. For example, in the United States, in 2010, the U.S. Congress passed the ACA, a sweeping law intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of health spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional policy reforms. Among the provisions of the ACA addressing coverage and reimbursement of pharmaceutical products, of importance to our potential therapeutic candidates are the following: - increases to pharmaceutical manufacturer rebate liability under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program due to an increase in the minimum basic Medicaid rebate on most branded prescription drugs and the application of Medicaid rebate liability to drugs used in risk-based Medicaid managed care plans;- the expansion of the 340B Drug Pricing Program to require discounts for "covered outpatient drugs" sold to certain children's hospitals, critical access hospitals, freestanding cancer hospitals, rural referral centers, and sole community hospitals;- requirements imposed on pharmaceutical companies are required to offer discounts on brand-name cell based therapy to patients who fall within the Medicare Part D coverage gap, commonly referred to as the "Donut Hole";- requirements imposed on pharmaceutical companies to pay an annual non-tax-deductible fee to the federal government based on each company's market share of prior year total sales of branded drugs to certain federal healthcare programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid, Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense; and - for products classified as biologics, marketing approval for a follow-on biologic product may not become effective until 12 years after the date on which the reference innovator biologic product was first licensed by the FDA, with a possible six-month extension for pediatric products. After this exclusivity ends, it may be possible for biosimilar manufacturers to enter the market, which is likely to reduce the pricing for the innovator product and could affect our profitability if our products are classified as biologics. Separately, pursuant to the health reform legislation and related initiatives, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, is working with various healthcare providers to develop, refine, and implement Accountable Care Organizations, or ACOs, and other innovative models of care for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, including the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Initiative, the Comprehensive Primary Care Initiative, the Duals Demonstration, and other models. The continued development and expansion of ACOs and other innovative models of care will have an uncertain impact on any future reimbursement we may receive for approved therapeutics administered by these organizations.

Even if U.S. regulatory approval is obtained, the FDA may still impose significant restrictions on a product's indicated uses or marketing, or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies. If any of our products were granted accelerated approval, FDA could require post-marketing confirmatory trials to verify and describe the anticipated effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. FDA may withdraw approval of a drug or indication approved under the accelerated approval pathway if a trial required to verify the predicted clinical benefit of the product fails to verify such benefit; other evidence demonstrates that the product is not shown to be safe or effective under the conditions of use; the applicant fails to conduct any required post-approval trial of the drug with due diligence; or the applicant disseminates false or misleading promotional materials relating to the product. In addition, the FDA currently requires as a condition for accelerated approval the pre-approval of promotional materials, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product. Given the number of recent high-profile adverse safety events with certain drug and cell related products, the FDA may require, as a condition of approval, costly risk management programs, which may include safety surveillance, restricted distribution and use, patient education, enhanced labeling, special packaging or labeling, expedited reporting of certain adverse events, pre-approval of promotional materials, and restrictions on direct-to-consumer advertising. Furthermore, heightened Congressional scrutiny on the adequacy of the FDA's drug approval process and the FDA's efforts to assure the safety of marketed cell based therapy has resulted in the proposal of new legislation addressing drug safety issues. If enacted, any new legislation could result in delays or increased costs during the period of product development, clinical trials, and regulatory review and approval, as well as increased costs to assure compliance with any new post-approval regulatory requirements. Any of these restrictions or requirements could force us to conduct costly studies or increase the time for us to become profitable. For example, any labeling approved for any of our product candidates may include a restriction on the term of its use, or it may not include one or more of our intended indications. Our product candidates will also be subject to ongoing FDA requirements for the labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, record-keeping, and submission of safety and other post-market information on the cell based therapy. New issues may arise during a product lifecycle that did not exist, or were unknown, at the time of product approval, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured. Since approved products, manufacturers, and manufacturers' facilities are subject to continuous review and periodic inspections, these new issues post-approval may result in voluntary actions by us or may result in a regulatory agency imposing restrictions on that product or us, including requiring withdrawal of the product from the market or for use in a clinical study. If our product candidates fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, such as good manufacturing practices, a regulatory agency may: - issue warning letters;- require us to enter into a consent decree, which can include imposition of various fines, reimbursements for inspection costs, required due dates for specific actions, and penalties for noncompliance;- impose other civil or criminal penalties;- suspend regulatory approval;- suspend any ongoing clinical trials;- refuse to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications filed by us;- impose restrictions on operations, including costly new manufacturing requirements; or - seize or detain products or require a product recall.