Mesoblast Limited (MEOBF) Risk Factors

As a biological product, our allogeneic cellular medicine, RYONCIL, for the treatment of pediatrics with SR-aGVHD, requires regulatory approval from the FDA before it may legally be distributed in U.S. commerce. In particular, RYONCIL will require FDA approval of a BLA under Section 351 of the Public Health Service Act to be commercialized. We initiated the filing of this BLA application in May 2019 and completed the submission on January 31, 2020. The outcome of this BLA application is uncertain, and there is a risk that it may not be approved by the FDA. We have received Fast Track designation from the FDA for RYONCIL in pediatrics with SR-aGVHD. A biologic product that receives Fast Track designation can be eligible for regulatory benefits, including rolling BLA review. Rolling review of a BLA enables individual modules of the application to be submitted to and reviewed by the FDA on an ongoing basis, rather than waiting for all sections of a BLA to be completed before submission. We have now filed all components of this rolling submission. Priority Review was confirmed on March 31, 2020, and an action date of September 30, 2020 was advised. Fast Track designation may provide for a more streamlined development or approval process but it does not change the standards for approval and may be rescinded by the FDA if the product no longer meets the qualifying criteria. The FDA reviews a BLA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe, pure and potent and the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packed, or held meets standards designed to assure the product's continued safety, purity and potency.  During the course of review of our BLA, the FDA may request or require additional preclinical, clinical, chemistry and manufacturing, controls (or CMC), or other data and information. The development and provision of these data and information may be time consuming and expensive. Our failure to comply, or the failure of our contract manufacturers to satisfy, applicable FDA CMC requirements could result in a delay or failure to obtain approval of our BLA. If the FDA determines that the application, manufacturing process or manufacturing facilities are not acceptable, it will outline the deficiencies in our submission and may request additional testing or information. The testing and approval process requires substantial time, effort and financial resources, and may take several years to complete. In addition, the FDA or other regulatory agencies may find the data from our clinical studies insufficient to support marketing approval. For example, our Phase 3 study for RYONCIL, which met the primary clinical endpoint with statistical significance, was conducted as a single-arm study due to the seriousness of the condition, the rapid clinical deterioration of affected patients, the mounting literature suggesting a meaningful treatment effect, and the position in the medical community that a randomized controlled trial was neither feasible nor ethical in this patient population. While we have provided the FDA with comparator outcomes from control subjects, it is possible that the FDA may not find the data sufficient for approval. In addition, new government requirements, including those resulting from new legislation, may be established, or the FDA's policies may change, which could delay or prevent regulatory approval of our products under development. We have recently participated in an Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee ("ODAC") proceeding in connection with the FDA's review of the BLA for our SR-aGVHD product candidate. It is possible that we will have to participate in other Advisory Committee proceedings for other of our product candidates. FDA Advisory Committees are convened to conduct public hearings on matters of importance that come before the FDA, to review the issues involved, and to provide advice and recommendations to the FDA. New product candidates may be referred for review by Advisory Committees whether the FDA has identified issues or concerns in respect of such candidates or not. Advisory Committee input and recommendations may be used at the discretion of the FDA. Advisory Committee proceedings are in part conducted publicly. While the recommendations made by Advisory Committees in respect of marketing applications for any product are not dispositive, such determinations and recommendations are often influential, and may be made available publicly and to the advantage of our competitors. In addition, it is possible that safety findings and recommendations as well as other concerns and considerations raised by Advisory Committee members, who constitute a multi-disciplinary group of experts (including representatives and/or advocates from the consumer sector), may impact the FDA's review of our product candidate submissions or labeling unfavorably. Furthermore, commentary from Advisory Committee proceedings can figure into future product and other litigation. Even if we receive regulatory approval for our RYONCIL product, such approval may entail limitations on the indicated uses for which such product may be marketed and/or require post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor safety or efficacy of our product. The FDA may limit further marketing of our product based on the results of post-marketing studies, if compliance with pre- and post-marketing regulatory standards is not maintained, or if problems occur after our product reaches the marketplace such as later discovery of previously unknown problems or concerns with our product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with our manufacturing processes.

The regulatory approval process is expensive and the time and resources required to obtain approval from the FDA or other regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions to sell any product candidate is uncertain and approval may take years. Whether regulatory approval will be granted is unpredictable and depends upon numerous factors, including the discretion of the regulatory authorities. For example, governing legislation, approval policies, regulations, regulatory policies, or the type and amount of preclinical and clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate's clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. It is possible that none of our existing or future product candidates will ever obtain regulatory approval, even if we expend substantial time and resources seeking such approval. Further, regulatory requirements governing stem cell therapy products in particular have changed and may continue to change in the future. For example, in December 2016, the 21st Century Cures Act ("Cures Act") was signed into law in the United States. This law is designed to advance medical innovation, and includes a number of provisions that may impact our product development programs. For example, the Cures Act establishes a new "regenerative medicine advanced therapy" designation ("RMAT"), and creates a pathway for increased interaction with FDA for the development of products which obtain designations. Although the FDA has issued guidance documents in 2018, it remains unclear how and when the FDA will fully implement all deliverables under the Cures Act. Any regulatory review committees and advisory groups and any contemplated new guidelines may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional studies, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of our product candidates or lead to significant post-approval limitations or restrictions. As we advance our product candidates, we will be required to consult with these regulatory and advisory groups, and comply with applicable guidelines. If we fail to do so, we may be required to delay or discontinue development of our product candidates. Delay or failure to obtain, or unexpected costs in obtaining, the regulatory approval necessary to bring a product candidate to market could decrease our ability to generate sufficient revenue to maintain our business. Our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including the following: - we may be unable to successfully complete our ongoing and future clinical trials of product candidates;- we may be unable to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA or other regulatory authorities that a product candidate is safe, pure, and potent for any or all of a product candidate's proposed indications;- we may be unable to demonstrate that a product candidate's benefits outweigh the risk associated with the product candidate;- the FDA or other regulatory authorities may disagree with the design or implementation of our clinical trials;- the results of clinical trials may not meet the level of statistical significance required by the FDA or other regulatory authorities for approval;- the FDA or other regulatory authorities may disagree with our interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials;- a decision by the FDA, other regulatory authorities or us to suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time;- the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates may be inconclusive or may not be sufficient to support the submission of a Biologics License Application ("BLA"), or other submission or to obtain regulatory approval in the United States or elsewhere;- our third party manufacturers of supplies needed for manufacturing product candidates may fail to satisfy FDA or other regulatory requirements and may not pass inspections that may be required by FDA or other regulatory authorities;- the failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements following approval of any of our product candidates may result in the refusal by the FDA or similar foreign regulatory agency to approve a pending BLA or supplement to a BLA submitted by us for other indications or new product candidates; and - the approval policies or regulations of the FDA or other regulatory authorities outside of the United States may significantly change in a manner rendering our clinical data insufficient for approval. We or our collaborators may gain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates in some but not all of the territories available and any future approvals may be for some but not all of the target indications, limiting their commercial potential. Regulatory requirements and timing of product approvals vary from country to country and some jurisdictions may require additional testing beyond what is required to obtain FDA approval. Approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions, and approval by one foreign regulatory authority does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or by the FDA. The foreign regulatory approval process may include all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA approval.

On December 21, 2017, the FDA granted RMAT designation for our novel MPC therapy in the treatment of heart failure patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and left ventricular assist devices. While the Cures Act offers several potential benefits to drugs designated as RMATs, including eligibility for increased agency support and advice during development, priority review on filing, a potential pathway for accelerated approval based on surrogate or intermediate endpoints, and the potential to use patient registry data and other sources of real world evidence for post approval confirmatory studies, there is no assurance that any of these potential benefits will either apply to any or all of our drug candidates or, if applicable, accelerate marketing approval. RMAT designation does not change the evidentiary standards of safety and effectiveness needed for marketing approval. Furthermore, there is no certainty as to whether any of our product candidates that have not yet received RMAT designation under the Cures Act will receive such designation under the Cures Act. Designation as an RMAT is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe one of our products or product candidates meets the criteria for RMAT designation, the FDA may disagree. Additionally, for any product candidate that receives RMAT designation, we may not experience a faster development, review or approval process compared to conventional FDA procedures. The FDA may withdraw RMAT designation if it believes that the product no longer meets the qualifying criteria for designation.

Any of our product candidates that are approved in the United States or in other jurisdictions will continue to be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements relating to the quality, identity, strength, purity, safety, efficacy, testing, manufacturing, marketing, advertising, promotion, distribution, sale, storage, packaging, pricing, import or export, record-keeping and submission of safety and other post-market information for all approved product candidates. In the United States, this includes both federal and state requirements. In particular, as a condition of approval of a BLA, the FDA may require a REMS, to ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh the potential risks. 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. Moreover, regulatory approval may require substantial post-approval (Phase 4) testing and surveillance to monitor the drug's safety or efficacy. Delays in the REMS approval process could result in delays in the BLA approval process. In addition, as part of the REMS, the FDA could require significant restrictions, such as restrictions on the prescription, distribution and patient use of the product, which could significantly impact our ability to effectively commercialize our product candidates, and dramatically reduce their market potential thereby adversely impacting our business, results of operations and financial condition. Post-approval study requirements could add additional burdens, and failure to timely complete such studies, or adverse findings from those studies, could adversely affect our ability to continue marketing the product. Any failure to comply with ongoing regulatory requirements, as well as post-approval discovery of previously unknown problems, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing operations or processes, may significantly and adversely affect our ability to generate revenue from our product candidates, and may result in, among other things: - restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product candidates, withdrawal of the product candidates from the market, or voluntary or mandatory product recalls;- suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approval;- costly regulatory inspections;- fines, warning letters, or holds on clinical trials;- refusal by the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications filed by us or our collaborators, or suspension or revocation of BLAs;- restrictions on our operations;- product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products; or - injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties by FDA or other regulatory bodies. If regulatory sanctions are applied or if regulatory approval is withdrawn, the value of our business and our operating results will be adversely affected. The FDA's policies, or that of the applicable regulatory bodies in other jurisdictions, may change, and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we or our collaborators are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, are slow or unable to adopt new requirements or policies, or effect changes to existing requirements, we or our collaborators may no longer be able to lawfully market our product, and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business.

The use of embryonic stem cells ("ESCs"), for research and therapy has been the subject of considerable public debate, with many people voicing ethical, legal and social concerns related to their collection and use. Our cells are not ESCs, which have been the predominant focus of this public debate and concern in the United States and elsewhere. However, the distinction between ESCs and non-ESCs, such as our mesenchymal lineage adult stem cells, may be misunderstood by the public. Negative public attitudes toward stem cell therapy and publicity and harm from stem cell usage clinically by others could also result in greater governmental regulation of stem cell therapies, which could harm our business. The improper use of cells could give rise to ethical and social commentary adverse to us, which could harm the market demand for new products and depress the price of our ordinary shares and ADSs. Ongoing lack of understanding of the difference between ESCs and non-ESCs could negatively impact the public's perception of our company and product candidates and could negatively impact us. Additional government-imposed restrictions on, or concerns regarding possible government regulation of, the use of stem cells in research, development and commercialization could also cause an adverse effect on us by harming our ability to establish important partnerships or collaborations, delaying or preventing the development of certain product candidates, and causing a decrease in the price of our ordinary shares and ADSs, or by otherwise making it more difficult for us to raise additional capital. For example, concerns regarding such possible regulation could impact our ability to attract collaborators and investors. Also, existing and potential government regulation of stem cells may lead researchers to leave the field of stem cell research altogether in order to assure that their careers will not be impeded by restrictions on their work. This may make it difficult for us to find and retain qualified scientific personnel.

All entities involved in the preparation of therapeutics for clinical studies or commercial sale, including our existing manufacturers, including Lonza, are subject to extensive regulation. Components of a finished therapeutic product approved for commercial sale or used in late-stage clinical studies must be manufactured in accordance with current international Good Manufacturing Practice and other international regulatory 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 product candidates. We, our collaborators, or suppliers must supply all necessary documentation in support of a BLA on a timely basis and must adhere to current Good Laboratory Practice and current Good Manufacturing Practice regulations enforced by the FDA and other regulatory agencies through their facilities inspection program. Lonza and other suppliers have never produced a commercially approved cellular therapeutic product and therefore have not yet obtained the requisite regulatory authority approvals to do so. Before we can begin commercial manufacture of our products for sale in the United States, we must obtain FDA regulatory approval for the product, in addition to the approval of the processes and quality systems associated with the manufacturing of such product, which requires a successful FDA inspection of the facility handling the manufacturing of our product, including Lonza's manufacturing facilities. The novel nature of our product candidates creates significant challenges in regards to manufacturing. For example, the U.S. federal and state governments and other jurisdictions impose restrictions on the acquisition and use of tissue, including those incorporated in federal Good Tissue Practice regulations. We may not be able to identify or develop sources for the cells necessary for our product candidates that comply with these laws and regulations. In addition, the regulatory authorities may, at any time before or after product approval, audit or inspect a manufacturing facility involved with the preparation of our product candidates or raw materials or the associated quality systems for compliance with the regulations applicable to the activities being conducted. Although we oversee each contract manufacturer involved in the production of our product candidates, we cannot control the manufacturing process of, and are dependent on, the contract manufacturer for compliance with the regulatory requirements. If the contract manufacturer is unable to comply with manufacturing regulations, we may be subject to fines, unanticipated compliance expenses, recall or seizure of any approved products, total or partial suspension of production and/or enforcement actions, including injunctions, and criminal or civil prosecution. These possible sanctions would adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. If the manufacturer fails to maintain regulatory compliance, the FDA or other applicable regulatory authority can impose regulatory sanctions including, among other things, refusal to approve a pending application for a new drug product or biologic product, withdrawal of an approval, or suspension of production. As a result, our business, financial condition, and results of operations may be materially harmed.

Under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act ("FDCA"), and other laws, if any of our product candidates are approved by the FDA, we would be prohibited from promoting our products for off-label uses. This means, for example, that we would not be able to make claims about the use of our marketed products outside of their approved indications, and we would not be able to proactively discuss or provide information on off-label uses of such products, with very specific and limited exceptions. The FDA does not, however, prohibit physicians from prescribing products for off-label uses in the practice of medicine. Should the FDA determine that our activities constituted the promotion of off-label use, the FDA could issue a warning or untitled letter or, through the Department of Justice, bring an action for seizure or injunction, and could seek to impose fines and penalties on us and our executives. In addition, failure to follow FDA rules and guidelines relating to promotion and advertising can result in, among other things, the FDA's refusal to approve a product, the suspension or withdrawal of an approved product from the market, product recalls, fines, disgorgement of money, operating restrictions, injunctions or criminal prosecutions, and also may figure into civil litigation against us.

In the United States, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs. For example, in 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively, the Affordable Care Act, was passed. The Affordable Care Act is a sweeping law intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for healthcare and the health insurance industry, impose new taxes and fees on the healthcare industry and impose additional health policy reforms. There have been a number of judicial and congressional challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act, and we expect that with the current administration efforts will continue to repeal or significantly amend the Affordable Care Act. We can provide no assurance that the Affordable Care Act, as currently enacted or as amended in the future, will not adversely affect our business and financial results, and we cannot predict how future federal or state legislative or administrative changes relating to healthcare reform will affect our business. Currently, the outcome of potential reforms and changes to government negotiation/regulation to healthcare costs are unknown. If changes in policy limit reimbursements that we are able to receive through federal programs, it could negatively impact reimbursement levels from those payors and private payors, and our business, revenues or profitability could be adversely affected.

In some countries, particularly EU member states, Japan, Australia and Canada, the pricing of prescription drugs is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after receipt of marketing approval for a product. In addition, there can be considerable pressure by governments and other stakeholders on prices and reimbursement levels, including as part of cost containment measures. Political, economic and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing negotiations, and pricing negotiations may continue after reimbursement has been obtained. Reference pricing used by various EU member states and parallel distribution, or arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced member states, can further reduce prices. In some countries, we or our collaborators may be required to conduct a clinical trial or other studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of our product candidates to other available therapies in order to obtain or maintain reimbursement or pricing approval. Publication of discounts by third-party payors or authorities may lead to further pressure on the prices or reimbursement levels within the country of publication and other countries. If reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business, revenues or profitability could be adversely affected.

Healthcare fraud and abuse regulations are complex and can be subject to varying interpretations as to whether or not a statute has been violated. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include: - the federal Anti-Kickback Statute which prohibits, among other things, the knowing and willful payment of remuneration to induce or reward patient referrals, prescribing or recommendation of products, or the generation of business involving any item or service which may be payable by the federal health care programs (e.g., drugs, supplies, or health care services for Medicare or Medicaid patients);- the federal False Claims Act which prohibits, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment for government funds (e.g., payment from Medicare or Medicaid) or knowingly making, using, or causing to be made or used a false record or statement, material to a false or fraudulent claim for government funds;- the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, and its implementing regulations, imposes certain requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Among other things, HIPAA imposes civil and criminal liability for the wrongful access or disclosure of protected health information;- the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, created under Section 6002 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("ACA"), as amended, requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) to report information related to certain payments or other transfers of value made or distributed to physicians and teaching hospitals, or to entities or individuals at the request of, or designated on behalf of, those physicians and teaching hospitals and to report annually certain ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members;- the FDCA, which, among other things, regulates the testing, development, approval, manufacture, promotion and distribution of drugs, devices and biologics. The FDCA prohibits manufacturers from selling or distributing "adulterated" or "misbranded" products. A drug product may be deemed misbranded if, among other things, (i) the product labeling is false or misleading, fails to contain requisite information or does not bear adequate directions for use; (ii) the product is manufactured at an unregistered facility; or (iii) the product lacks the requisite FDA clearance or approval;- the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act ("FCPA"), which prohibits corrupt payments, gifts or transfers of value to non-U.S. officials; and - non-U.S. and U.S. state law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers. Any failure to comply with these laws, or the regulations adopted thereunder, could result in administrative, civil, and/or criminal penalties, and could result in a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, results of operations and financial condition. The federal fraud and abuse laws have been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers and a variety of health care professionals and healthcare organizations. Although the federal Anti-Kickback Statute has several statutory exemptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting certain common activities from prosecution, all elements of the potentially applicable exemption or safe harbor must be met in order for the arrangement to be protected, and prosecutors have interpreted the federal healthcare fraud statutes to attack a wide range of conduct by pharmaceutical companies. In addition, most states have statutes or regulations similar to the federal anti-kickback and federal false claims laws, which apply to items and services covered by Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payor. Administrative, civil and criminal sanctions may be imposed under these federal and state laws. Further, the current administration has indicated an interest in excluding transactions with certain payors or other healthcare providers from safe harbor protection. This may impact the manner in which manufacturers contract with payors, and negatively impact our market opportunities for our products. Further, the ACA, among other things, amended the intent standard under the Anti-Kickback Statute 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 makes clear that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim under the federal False Claims Act. Any violations of these laws, or any action against us for violation of these laws, even if we successfully defend against it, could result in a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, results of operations and financial condition.

Anti-corruption laws generally prohibit us and our employees and intermediaries from bribing, being bribed or making other prohibited payments to government officials or other persons to obtain or retain business or gain some other business advantage. Although we believe that we have adequate policies and enforcement mechanisms to ensure legal and regulatory compliance with the FCPA, the U.K. Bribery Act 2010 and other similar regulations, we participate in collaborations and relationships with third parties, and it is possible that any of our employees, subcontractors, agents or partners may violate any such legal and regulatory requirements, which may expose us to criminal or civil enforcement actions, including penalties and suspension or disqualification from U.S. federal procurement contracting. In addition, we cannot predict the nature, scope or effect of future regulatory requirements to which our international operations might be subject or the manner in which existing laws might be administered or interpreted. There is no assurance that we will be completely effective in ensuring our compliance with all applicable anti-corruption laws or other laws including trade related laws. If we are not in compliance with these laws, we may be subject to criminal and civil penalties, disgorgement and other sanctions and remedial measures, and legal expenses, which could have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity. Likewise, any investigation of any potential violations of these laws by respective government bodies could also have an adverse impact on our reputation, our business, results of operations and financial condition.

As a company whose ADSs are publicly traded in the United States, we have incurred and will continue to incur significant legal, accounting, insurance and other expenses. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act, Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and related rules implemented by the SEC and Nasdaq, have imposed various requirements on public companies including requiring establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls. Our management and other personnel will need to continue to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives, and we will need to add additional personnel and build our internal compliance infrastructure. Moreover, these rules and regulations have increased and will continue to increase our legal and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time-consuming and costly. These laws and regulations could also make it more difficult and expensive for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, our board committees or as our senior management. Furthermore, if we are unable to satisfy our obligations as a public company, we could be subject to delisting of the ADSs, fines, sanctions and other regulatory action and potentially regulatory investigations and enforcement and/or civil litigation.

We cannot guarantee that any preclinical testing or clinical trials will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. As a result, we may not achieve our expected clinical milestones. A failure can occur at any stage of testing. Events that may prevent successful or timely commencement, enrollment or completion of clinical development include: - problems which may arise as a result of our transition of research and development programs from licensors or previous sponsors;- delays in raising, or inability to raise, sufficient capital to fund the planned trials;- delays by us or our collaborators in reaching a consensus with regulatory agencies on trial design;- changes in trial design;- inability to identify, recruit and train suitable clinical investigators;- inability to add new clinical trial sites;- delays in reaching agreement on acceptable terms for the performance of the trials with contract research organizations ("CROs"), and clinical trial sites;- delays in obtaining required Institutional Review Board ("IRB"), approval at each clinical trial site;- delays in recruiting suitable clinical sites and patients (i.e., subjects) to participate in clinical trials and delays in accruing medical events necessary to complete any events-driven trial;- imposition of a clinical hold by regulatory agencies for any reason, including negative clinical results, safety concerns or as a result of an inspection of manufacturing or clinical operations or trial sites;- failure by CROs, other third parties or us or our collaborators to adhere to clinical trial requirements;- failure to perform in accordance with the FDA's current Good Clinical Practices ("cGCP"), or applicable regulatory guidelines in other countries;- delays in testing, validation, manufacturing and delivery of a product candidate to clinical trial sites;- delays caused by patients not completing participation in a trial or not returning for post-treatment follow-up;- delays caused by clinical trial sites not completing a trial;- failure to demonstrate adequate efficacy;- occurrence of serious adverse events in clinical trials that are associated with a product candidates and that are viewed to outweigh its potential benefits;- changes in regulatory requirements and guidance that require amending or submitting new clinical protocols; or - disagreements between us and the FDA or other regulatory agencies regarding a clinical trial design, protocol amendments, or interpreting the data from our clinical trials. In addition, our ongoing clinical trials may be affected by delays in monitoring and data collection as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, including due to prioritization of hospital resources, travel restrictions, and the inability to access sites for patient monitoring. In addition, some patients may be unable to comply with clinical trial protocols if quarantines or stay at home orders impede patient movement or interrupt health services. Delays, including delays caused by the above factors, can be costly and could negatively affect our or our collaborators' ability to complete clinical trials for our product candidates. If we or our collaborators are not able to successfully complete clinical trials or are not able to do so in a timely and cost-effective manner, we will not be able to obtain regulatory approval and/or will not be able to commercialize our product candidates and our commercial partnering opportunities will be harmed.

A product candidate that receives orphan drug designation can benefit from potential commercial benefits following approval. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a product candidate as an orphan drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as affecting (1) a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the United States, (2) a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States, or (3) an "orphan subset" of a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States. In the European Union ("EU"), the EMA's Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products grants orphan drug designation to promote the development of products that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition affecting not more than 10,000 persons in the EU. Currently, this designation provides market exclusivity in the U.S. and the EU for seven years and ten years, respectively, if a product is the first such product approved for such orphan indication. This market exclusivity does not, however, pertain to indications other than those for which the drug was specifically designated in the approval, nor does it prevent other types of drugs from receiving orphan designations or approvals in these same indications. Further, even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve a drug with similar chemical structure for the same condition if the FDA concludes that the new drug is clinically superior to the orphan product or a market shortage occurs. In the EU, orphan exclusivity may be reduced to six years if the drug no longer satisfies the original designation criteria or can be lost altogether if the marketing authorization holder consents to a second orphan drug application or cannot supply enough drug, or when a second applicant demonstrates its drug is "clinically superior" to the original orphan drug. Our remestemcel-L product candidate has received orphan drug designation for the treatment of aGVHD by the FDA and EMA, and our CHF product candidate, rexlemestrocel-L has received orphan drug designation from the FDA for prevention of post-implantation mucosal bleeding in end-stage CHF patients who require a left ventricular assist device ("LVAD"). If we seek orphan drug designations for other product candidates in other indications, we may fail to receive such orphan drug designations and, even if we succeed, such orphan drug designations may fail to result in or maintain orphan drug exclusivity upon approval, which would harm our competitive position.

Other than with respect to sales of products by our licensees, we have not commercially marketed, distributed or sold any products. The success of our business depends on our ability to develop and commercialize our lead product candidates. We have concentrated our product research and development efforts on our mesenchymal lineage adult stem cell platform, a novel type of stem cell therapy. Our future success depends on the successful development of this therapeutic approach. There can be no assurance that any development problems we experience in the future related to our mesenchymal lineage adult stem cells platform will not cause significant delays or unanticipated costs, or that such development problems can be solved. We may also experience delays in developing sustainable, reproducible and scalable manufacturing processes or transferring these processes to collaborators, which may prevent us from completing our clinical studies or commercializing our products on a timely or profitable basis, if at all. In addition, the clinical study requirements of the FDA, the EMA and other regulatory agencies and the criteria these regulators use to determine the safety and efficacy of a product candidate vary substantially according to the type, complexity, novelty and intended use and market of the potential product candidates. The regulatory approval process for novel product candidates such as ours can be more expensive and take longer to develop than for other, better known or extensively studied pharmaceutical or other product candidates. In addition, adverse developments in clinical trials of cell therapy products conducted by others may cause the FDA or other regulatory bodies to change the requirements for approval of any of our product candidates.

Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in clinical trials of our product candidates is critical to our success. The timing of our clinical trials depends on the speed at which we can recruit patients to participate in testing our product candidates as well as completion of required follow-up periods. In general, if patients are unwilling to participate in our stem cell therapy trials because of negative publicity from adverse events in the biotechnology or stem cell industries or for other reasons, including competitive clinical trials for similar patient populations, the timeline for recruiting patients, conducting trials and obtaining regulatory approval for our product candidates may be delayed. Additionally, we or our collaborators generally will have to run multi-site and potentially multi-national trials, which can be time consuming, expensive and require close coordination and supervision. If we have difficulty enrolling a sufficient number of patients or otherwise conducting clinical trials as planned, we or our collaborators may need to delay, limit or terminate ongoing or planned clinical trials, any of which would have an adverse effect on our business. If there are delays in accumulating the required number of trial subjects or, in trials where clinical events are a primary endpoint, if the events needed to assess performance of our clinical candidates do not accrue at the anticipated rate, there may be delays in completing the trial. These delays could result in increased costs, delays in advancing development of our product candidates, including delays in testing the effectiveness, or even termination of the clinical trials altogether. Patient enrollment and completion of clinical trials are affected by factors including: - size of the patient population, particularly in orphan diseases;- severity of the disease under investigation;- design of the trial protocol;- eligibility criteria for the particular trial;- perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate being tested;- proximity and availability of clinical trial sites for prospective patients;- availability of competing therapies and clinical trials;- efforts to facilitate timely enrollment in clinical trials;- patient referral practices of physicians and level and effectiveness of study site recruitment efforts; and - ability to monitor patients adequately during and after treatment. Once enrolled, patients may choose to discontinue their participation at any time during the trial, for any reason. Participants also may be terminated from the study at the initiative of the investigator, for example if they experience serious adverse clinical events or do not follow the study directions. If we are unable to maintain an adequate number of patients in our clinical trials, we may be required to delay or terminate an ongoing clinical trial, which would have an adverse effect on our business.

We plan to seek initial marketing approval for our product candidates in the United States and in select non-U.S. jurisdictions such as Europe, Japan and Canada. Conducting trials on a multinational basis requires collaboration with foreign medical institutions and healthcare providers. Our ability to successfully initiate, enroll and complete a clinical trial in multiple countries is subject to numerous risks unique to conducting business internationally, including: - difficulty in establishing or managing relationships with physicians, sites and CROs;- standards within different jurisdictions for conducting clinical trials and recruiting patients;- our ability to effectively interface with non-US regulatory authorities;- our inability to identify or reach acceptable agreements with qualified local consultants, physicians and partners;- the potential burden of complying with a variety of foreign laws, medical standards and regulatory requirements, including the regulation of pharmaceutical and biotechnology products and treatments, and anti-corruption/anti-bribery laws;- differing genotypes, average body weights and other patient profiles within and across countries from our donor profile may impact the optimal dosing or may otherwise impact the results of our clinical trials; and - the COVID-19 pandemic limiting our ability to commence and conduct studies, including recruiting patients. The complexity of conducting multinational clinical trials could negatively affect our or our collaborators' ability to complete trials as intended which could have an adverse effect on our business.

We are developing MPC-150-IM, which will focus on Class II-IV CHF, and RYONCIL, which will focus on SR-aGVHD. We have also started developing remestemcel-L in COVID-19 infected patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome ("ARDS") on ventilator support. The patients who receive our product candidates are very ill due to their underlying diseases. Generally, patients remain at high risk following their treatment with our product candidates and may more easily acquire infections or other common complications during the treatment period, which can be serious and life threatening. As a result, it is likely that we will observe severe adverse outcomes in patients during our Phase 3 and other trials for these product candidates,including patient death. If a significant number of study subject deaths were to occur, regardless of whether such deaths are attributable to our product candidates, our ability to obtain regulatory approval for the applicable product candidate may be adversely impacted and our business could be materially harmed. Should studies of a candidate product result in regulatory approval, any association with a significant number of study subject deaths could limit the commercial potential of an approved product candidate, or negatively impact the medical community's willingness to use our product with patients.

The scope and extent of patent protection for our product candidates are particularly uncertain. To date, our principal product candidates have been based on specific subpopulations of known and naturally occurring adult stem cells. We anticipate that the products we develop in the future will continue to include or be based on the same or other naturally occurring stem cells or derivatives or products thereof. Although we have sought and expect to continue to seek patent protection for our product candidates, their methods of use and methods of manufacture, any or all of them may not be subject to effective patent protection. Publication of information related to our product candidates by us or others may prevent us from obtaining or enforcing patents relating to these products and product candidates. Furthermore, others may independently develop similar products, may duplicate our products, or may design around our patent rights. In addition, any of our issued patents may be declared invalid. If we fail to adequately protect our intellectual property, we may face competition from companies who attempt to create a generic product to compete with our product candidates. We may also face competition from companies who develop a substantially similar product to our other product candidates that may not be covered by any of our patents. Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the U.S. can be less extensive than those in the U.S. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the U.S. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the U.S., or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the U.S. or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the U.S. These products may compete with our current or future products, if any, and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing. Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, 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. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

We maintain certain of our proprietary know-how and technological advances as trade secrets, especially where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or obtainable, including, but not exclusively, with respect to certain aspects of the manufacturing of our products. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. We take a number of measures to protect our trade secrets including, limiting disclosure, physical security and confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements. We enter into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, contract manufacturing partners, sponsored researchers and other advisors and third parties to protect our trade secrets and other proprietary information. These agreements may not effectively prevent disclosure of confidential information and may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. In addition, others may independently discover our trade secrets and proprietary information. Costly and time-consuming litigation could be necessary to enforce and determine the scope of our proprietary rights. Failure to obtain or maintain trade secret protection, or failure to adequately protect our intellectual property could enable competitors to develop generic products or use our proprietary information to develop other products that compete with our products or cause additional, material adverse effects upon our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may be forced to litigate to enforce or defend our intellectual property rights against infringement by competitors, and to protect our trade secrets against unauthorized use. In so doing, we may place our intellectual property at risk of being invalidated, unenforceable, or limited or narrowed in scope and may no longer be used to prevent the manufacture and sale of competitive product. Further, an adverse result in any litigation or other proceedings before government agencies such as the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO"), may place pending applications at risk of non-issuance. Further, interference proceedings, derivation proceedings, entitlement proceedings, ex parte reexamination, inter partes reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review, and opposition proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by the USPTO or any foreign patent authority may be used to challenge inventorship, ownership, claim scope, or validity of our patent applications. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential and proprietary information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation.

Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur significant expenses, and could distract our technical and/or management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the market price of our ADSs and ordinary shares. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to adequately conduct such litigation or proceedings. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of litigation proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources and personnel. In addition, the uncertainties associated with litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to conduct our clinical trials, continue our internal research programs, in-license needed technology or enter into strategic collaborations that would help us bring our product candidates to market. As a result, uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace.

Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. Assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, prior to March 2013, in the United States, the first to invent the claimed invention was entitled to the patent, while outside the United States, the first to file a patent application was entitled to the patent. After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the America Invents Act, enacted in September 2011, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that other requirements for patentability 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. Under the current patent laws, a third party that files a patent application in the USPTO before us for a particular invention could therefore be awarded a patent covering such invention even if we had made that invention before it was made by such third party. This requires us to be cognizant of the time from invention to filing of a patent application. The America Invents Act also includes a number of significant changes that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation and proceedings. These include allowing third party submissions of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures for attacking the validity of a patent through USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. Because a lower evidentiary standard applies in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standards applied in United States federal courts in actions seeking to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if challenged in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use available USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that would not otherwise have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party in a district court action. The new post-grant review (PGR) proceedings added as of September 2012 by the America Invents Act, which are similar to European "opposition" proceedings and provide third-party petitioners with the ability to challenge the validity of a patent on more expansive grounds than those permitted in other USTPO proceedings, allow for validity to be examined by the USPTO based not only on prior art patents and publications, but also on prior invalidating public use and sales, the presence of non-statutory subject matter in the patent claims and inadequate written description or lack of enablement. Discovery for PGR proceedings is accordingly likely to be expansive given that the issues addressed in PGR are more comprehensive than those addressed in other USPTO proceedings. Therefore, the America Invents Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our owned or in-licensed patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our owned or in-licensed issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. As compared to intellectual property-reliant companies generally, the patent positions of companies in the development and commercialization of biologics and pharmaceuticals are particularly uncertain. Recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. These rulings have created uncertainty with respect to the validity and enforceability of patents, even once obtained. Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that could have a material adverse effect on our existing patent portfolio and our ability to protect and enforce our intellectual property in the future.

There is a substantial amount of litigation, both within and outside the United States, involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biopharmaceutical industry. We may, from time to time, be notified of claims that we are infringing upon patents, trademarks, copyrights, or other intellectual property rights owned by third parties, and we cannot provide assurances that other companies will not, in the future, pursue such infringement claims against us or any third-party proprietary technologies we have licensed. Any such claims could also be expensive and time consuming to defend and divert management's attention and resources, and could delay or prevent us from commercializing our product candidates. Our competitive position could suffer as a result. Although we have reviewed certain third-party patents and patent filings that we believe may be relevant to our product candidates, we have not conducted a freedom-to-operate search or analysis for our product candidates, and we may not be aware of patents or pending or future patent applications that, if issued, would block us from commercializing our product candidates. Thus, we cannot guarantee that our product candidates, or our commercialization thereof, do not and will not infringe any third party's intellectual property.

We have manufactured clinical and commercial quantities of our mesenchymal lineage adult stem cell product candidates in manufacturing facilities owned by Lonza Walkersville, Inc. and Lonza Bioscience Singapore Pte. Ltd. (collectively referred to as "Lonza"). We have commenced manufacture of commercial batches in preparation for a successful BLA review, and subsequent launch. We anticipate a prior approval inspection of the facilities and our testing laboratories by the FDA. In the event that the inspections result in observations that need to be corrected, it may delay the approval and launch of this product. In addition, the production of any biopharmaceutical, particularly stem cell-based therapies, involves complex processes and protocols. We cannot provide assurance that such production efforts will enable us to manufacture our product candidates in the quantities and with the quality needed for clinical trials and/or any resulting commercialization. If we are unable to do so, our clinical trials and commercialization efforts, if any, may not proceed in a timely fashion and our business will be adversely affected. If any of our product candidates are approved for commercialization and marketing, we may be required to manufacture the product in large quantities to meet demand. Producing product in commercial quantities requires developing and adhering to complex manufacturing processes that are different from the manufacture of a product in smaller quantities for clinical trials, including adherence to additional and more demanding regulatory standards. Although we believe that we have developed processes and protocols that will enable us to consistently manufacture commercial-scale quantities of product, we cannot provide assurance that such processes and protocols will enable us to manufacture our product candidates in quantities that may be required for commercialization of the product with yields and at costs that will be commercially attractive. If we are unable to establish or maintain commercial manufacture of the product or are unable to do so at costs that we currently anticipate, our business will be adversely affected. We are focusing on the introduction of novel manufacturing approaches with the potential to result in efficiency and yield improvements to our current process. Certain of these novel approaches include modifying the media used in cell production. Another approach includes the development of 3-dimensional ("3D") bioreactor-based production for mesenchymal lineage adult stem cells. There is no guarantee that we will successfully complete either of these processes or meet all applicable regulatory requirements. This may be due to multiple factors, including the failure to produce sufficient quantities and the inability to produce cells that are equivalent in physical and therapeutic properties as compared to the products produced using our current manufacturing processes. In the event our transition to these improved manufacturing processes is unsuccessful, we may not be able to produce certain of our products in a cost-efficient manner and our business may be adversely affected.

We intend to implement a business model under which we control the manufacture and supply of our product candidates, including but not exclusively, through our product suppliers, including Lonza. We and the suppliers of our product candidates, including Lonza, have no experience manufacturing our product candidates at commercial scale. Accordingly, there can be no assurance as to whether we and our suppliers will be able to scale-up the manufacturing processes and implement technological improvements in a manner that will allow the manufacture of our product candidates in a cost effective manner. Our or our collaborators' inability to sell our product candidates at a price that exceeds our cost of manufacture by an amount that is profitable for us will have a material adverse result on the results of our operations and our financial condition.

We have relied upon and plan to continue to rely upon third-party entities, including CROs, academic institutions, hospitals and other third-party collaborators, to monitor, support, conduct and/or oversee preclinical and clinical studies of our current and future product candidates. We rely on these parties for execution of our nonclinical and clinical studies, and control only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory, and scientific standards and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. If we or any of these third-parties fail to comply with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory, and scientific standards, the clinical data generated in our clinical studies may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical studies before approving our marketing applications. If any of our relationships with these third parties terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative parties or do so on commercially reasonable terms. In addition, these parties are not our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such third parties, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our on-going nonclinical and clinical programs. If third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our protocols, regulatory requirements, or for other reasons, our clinical studies may be extended, delayed, or terminated and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. Third parties may also generate higher costs than anticipated. As a result, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase, and our ability to generate revenue could be delayed. Switching or adding additional third parties involves additional cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new third party commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can materially impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. Though we carefully manage our relationships with these third parties, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter similar challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, and prospects.

We do not currently have, nor do we plan to acquire, the infrastructure or capability internally to manufacture our mesenchymal lineage adult stem cell product candidates for use in the conduct of our clinical trials, and we currently lack the internal resources and the capability to manufacture any of our product candidates on a clinical or commercial scale. As a result, we currently depend on Lonza to manufacture our mesenchymal lineage adult stem cell product candidates. Relying on Lonza to manufacture our mesenchymal lineage adult stem cell product candidates entails risks, and Lonza may: - cease or reduce production or deliveries, raise prices or renegotiate terms;- be unable to meet any product specifications and quality requirements consistently;- delay or be unable to procure or expand sufficient manufacturing capacity, which may harm our reputation or frustrate our customers;- not have the capacity sufficient to support the scale-up of manufacturing for our product candidates;- have manufacturing and product quality issues related to scale-up of manufacturing;- experience costs and validation of new equipment facilities requirement for scale-up that it will pass on to us;- fail to comply with cGMP and similar international standards;- lose its manufacturing facility in Singapore, stored inventory or laboratory facilities through fire or other causes, or other loss of materials necessary to manufacture our product candidates;- experience disruptions to its operations by conditions unrelated to our business or operations, including the bankruptcy or interruptions of its suppliers;- experience carrier disruptions or increased costs that it will pass on to us;- fail to secure adequate supplies of essential ingredients in our manufacturing process;- experience failure of third parties involved in the transportation, storage or distribution of our products, including the failure to deliver supplies it uses for the manufacture of our product candidates under specified storage conditions and in a timely manner;- terminate agreements with us; and - appropriate or misuse our trade secrets and other proprietary information. Any of these events could lead to delays in the development of our product candidates, including delays in our clinical trials, or failure to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, or it could impact our ability to successfully commercialize our current product candidates or any future products. Some of these events could be the basis for FDA or other regulatory action, including injunction, recall, seizure or total or partial suspension of production. In addition, the lead time needed to establish a relationship with a new manufacturer can be lengthy and expensive, and we may experience delays in meeting demand in the event we must switch to a new manufacturer. We are expanding our manufacturing collaborations in order to meet future demand and to provide back-up manufacturing options, which also involves risk and requires significant time and resources. Our future collaborators may need to expand their facilities or alter the facilities to meet future demand and changes in regulations. These activities may lead to delays, interruptions to supply, or may prove to be more costly than anticipated. Any problems in our manufacturing process could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

The initial stage of manufacturing involves obtaining mesenchymal lineage adult stem cell-containing bone marrow from donors, for which we currently rely on our suppliers. Mesenchymal lineage adult stem cells are isolated from each donor's bone marrow and expanded to create a master cell bank. Each individual master cell bank comes from a single donor. A single master cell bank can source many production runs, which in turn can produce up to thousands of doses of a given product, depending on the dose level. The process of identifying new donor tissue, testing and verifying its validity in order to create new master cell banks and validating such cell bank with the FDA and other regulatory agencies is time consuming, costly and prone to the many risks involved with creating living cell products. There could be consistency or quality control issues with any new master cell bank. Although we believe we and our collaborators have the necessary know-how and processes to enable us to create master cell banks with consistent quality and within the timeframe necessary to meet projected demand and we have begun doing so, we cannot be certain that we or our collaborators will be able to successfully do so, and any failure or delays in creating new master cell banks may have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial conditions and growth prospects and could result in our inability to continue operations.

We and our collaborators depend on a limited number of suppliers for the materials, equipment and components required to manufacture our product candidates, as well as various "devices" or "carriers" for some of our programs (e.g., the catheter for use with MPC-150-IM, and the hyaluronic acid used for disc repair). The main consumable used in our manufacturing process is our media, which currently is sourced from fetal bovine serum ("FBS"). This material comes from limited sources, and as a result is expensive. Consequently, we or our collaborators may not be able to obtain sufficient quantities of our product candidates or other critical materials equipment and components in the future, at affordable prices or at all. A delay or interruption by our suppliers may also harm our business, and operating results. In addition, the lead time needed to establish a relationship with a new supplier can be lengthy, and we or our collaborators may experience delays in meeting demand in the event we must switch to a new supplier. The time and effort to qualify for and, in some cases, obtain regulatory approval for a new supplier could result in additional costs, diversion of resources or reduced manufacturing yields, any of which would negatively impact our operating results. Our and our collaborators' dependence on single-source suppliers exposes us to numerous risks, including the following: - our or our collaborators' suppliers may cease or reduce production or deliveries, raise prices or renegotiate terms;- our or our collaborators' suppliers may not be able to source materials, equipment or supplies and components required to manufacture our product candidates as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak;- we or our collaborators may be unable to locate suitable replacement suppliers on acceptable terms or on a timely basis, or at all; and - delays caused by supply issues may harm our reputation, frustrate our customers and cause them to turn to our competitors for future needs.

Our and our collaborators' ability to commercialize any products successfully will depend, in part, on the extent to which coverage and reimbursement for our products and related treatments will be available from government healthcare programs, private health insurers, managed care plans, and other organizations. Additionally, even if there is a commercially viable market, if the level of third-party reimbursement is below our expectations, our revenue and profitability could be materially and adversely affected. Third-party payors, such as government programs, including Medicare or Medicaid in the United States, or private healthcare insurers, carefully review and increasingly question the coverage of, and challenge the prices charged for medical products and services, and many third-party payors limit or delay coverage of or reimbursement for newly approved healthcare products. Reimbursement rates from private health insurance companies vary depending on the company, the insurance plan and other factors, including the third-party payor's determination that use of a product is: - a covered benefit under its health plan;- safe, effective and medically necessary;- appropriate for the specific patient;- cost-effective; and - neither experimental nor investigational. A current trend in the U.S. healthcare industry as well as in other countries around the world is toward cost containment. Large public and private payors, managed care organizations, group purchasing organizations and similar organizations are exerting increasing influence on decisions regarding the use of, and reimbursement levels for, particular treatments. In particular, third-party payors may limit the covered indications. Cost-control initiatives could decrease the price we might establish for any product, which could result in product revenue and profitability being lower than anticipated. There may be significant delays in obtaining coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs, and coverage may be more limited than the purposes for which the drug is approved by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Moreover, eligibility for coverage and reimbursement does not imply that a drug will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including research, development, manufacture, sale and distribution expenses. Interim reimbursement levels for new drugs, if applicable, may also be insufficient to cover our and any collaborator's costs and may not be made permanent. Reimbursement rates may vary according to the use of the drug and the clinical setting in which it is used, may be based on reimbursement levels already set for lower cost drugs and may be incorporated into existing payments and treatment codes for other services. Our inability to promptly obtain coverage and profitable payment rates from both government-funded and private payors for any approved products that we develop could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, our ability to raise capital needed to commercialize products and our overall financial condition. Furthermore, reimbursement systems in international markets vary significantly by country and by region, and reimbursement approvals must be obtained on a country-by-country basis. Our existing or future collaborators, if any, may elect to reduce the price of our products in order to increase the likelihood of obtaining reimbursement approvals which could adversely affect our revenues and profits. In many countries, including for example in Japan, products cannot be commercially launched until reimbursement is approved. Further, the post-approval price negotiation process in some countries can exceed 12 months. In addition, pricing and reimbursement decisions in certain countries can be affected by decisions taken in other countries, which can lead to mandatory price reductions and/or additional reimbursement restrictions across a number of other countries, which may thereby adversely affect our sales and profitability. In the event that countries impose prices which are not sufficient to allow us or our collaborators to generate a profit, our collaborators may refuse to launch the product in such countries or withdraw the product from the market, which would adversely affect sales and profitability.