Ocular Therapeutix (OCUL) Risk Analysis

We face an inherent risk of product liability exposure related to the use of our product candidates that we develop in human clinical trials, including AXPAXLI. We face an even greater risk for any products we develop and commercially sell or have sold, including DEXTENZA and ReSure Sealant. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against claims that our product candidates or products caused injuries, we will incur substantial liabilities.  Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in: - decreased demand for any products or product candidates that we develop;- injury to our reputation and significant negative media attention;- withdrawal of clinical trial participants;- significant costs to defend the related litigation;- substantial monetary awards to trial participants or subjects;- loss of revenue;- reduced time and attention of our management to pursue our business strategy; and - the inability to commercialize any products that we develop. We currently hold product liability insurance coverage; however these policies may not be adequate to cover all liabilities that we may incur and we may need to increase our insurance coverage as we expand our clinical trials of AXPAXLI and our sales of DEXTENZA and any product candidates for which we may obtain marketing approval. We may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in an amount adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise.

Income, sales, use or other tax laws, statutes, rules, or regulations could be enacted or amended at any time, which could affect our business or financial condition, including causing potentially adverse impacts to our effective tax rate, tax liabilities, and cash tax obligations. For example, the IRA was signed into law in August 2022, and the OBBBA was signed into law in July 2025. The IRA introduced new tax provisions, including a one percent excise tax imposed on certain stock repurchases by publicly traded companies. The one percent excise tax generally applies to any acquisition of stock by the publicly traded company (or certain of its affiliates) from a stockholder of the company in exchange for money or other property (other than stock of the company itself), subject to a de minimis exception. Thus, the excise tax could apply to certain transactions that are not traditional stock repurchases. The OBBBA contains numerous tax law changes including tax rate extensions and changes to the business interest deduction limitation, the expensing of domestic research and development expenditures (in contrast to the continued capitalization and amortization of foreign research and development expenditures), the bonus depreciation deduction rules, and the international tax framework; we do not expect, however, that these changes will have a significant effect on our business or financial condition. Regulatory guidance under the IRA, the OBBBA, and other tax-related legislation is and continues to be forthcoming, and such guidance could ultimately increase or lessen the impact of these laws on our business and financial condition. In addition, it is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to changes to federal tax legislation.

The regulatory framework for the collection, use, safeguarding, sharing, transfer and other processing of information worldwide is rapidly evolving and is likely to remain uncertain for the foreseeable future. Globally, virtually every jurisdiction in which we operate has established its own data security and privacy frameworks with which we must comply. For example, the collection, use, disclosure, transfer, or other processing of personal data regarding individuals in the European Union, including personal health data, is subject to the EU General Data Protection Regulation, or the GDPR, which took effect across all member states of the European Economic Area, or EEA, in May 2018. The GDPR is wide-ranging in scope and imposes numerous requirements on companies that process personal data, including requirements relating to processing health and other sensitive data, obtaining consent of the individuals to whom the personal data relates, providing information to individuals regarding data processing activities, implementing safeguards to protect the security and confidentiality of personal data, providing notification of data breaches, and taking certain measures when engaging third-party processors. The GDPR increases our obligations with respect to clinical trials conducted in the EEA by expanding the definition of personal data to include coded data and requiring changes to informed consent practices and more detailed notices for clinical trial subjects and investigators. In addition, the GDPR also imposes strict rules on the transfer of personal data to countries outside the European Union, including the United States and, as a result, increases the scrutiny that clinical trial sites located in the EEA should apply to transfers of personal data from such sites to countries that are considered to lack an adequate level of data protection, such as the United States. The GDPR also permits data protection authorities to require destruction of improperly gathered or used personal information and/or impose substantial fines for violations of the GDPR, which can be up to four percent of global revenues or 20 million Euros, whichever is greater, and it also confers a private right of action on data subjects and consumer associations to lodge complaints with supervisory authorities, seek judicial remedies, and obtain compensation for damages resulting from violations of the GDPR. In addition, the GDPR provides that EU Member States may make their own further laws and regulations limiting the processing of personal data, including genetic, biometric or health data. Similar laws and regulations have been approved, or are expected to be approved, in several jurisdictions beyond the European Union. There are ongoing concerns about the ability of companies to transfer personal data from the European Union to other countries. In July 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union, or the CJEU, invalidated the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield framework, or Privacy Shield, one of the mechanisms used to legitimize the transfer of personal data from the EEA to the U.S. While we were not self-certified under the Privacy Shield, this CJEU decision has led to increased scrutiny on data transfers from the European Union to the United States generally and increase our costs of compliance with data privacy legislation as well as our costs of negotiating appropriate privacy and security agreements with our vendors and business partners. Following the CJEU decision, in October 2022, President Biden signed an executive order to implement the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework, which would serve as a replacement to the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield. The European Commission initiated the process to adopt an adequacy decision for the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework , or DPF in December 2022, and has now adopted an adequacy decision to permit data transfers from the European Union to the United States going forward. This development permits data transfers at this point under this framework and more broadly has made international data transfers more straightforward, but these provisions are being challenged in court. The recent election in the United States and the new administration may also impact whether the DPF remains an adequate data transfer framework. The continuing uncertainty around this issue may further impact our business operations in the European Union. On June 23, 2016, the electorate in the United Kingdom. voted in favor of leaving the European Union, commonly referred to as Brexit. As with other issues related to Brexit, there are open questions about how personal data will be protected in the United Kingdom and whether personal information can transfer from the European Union to the U.K. Following the withdrawal of the U.K. from the European Union, the U.K. Data Protection Act 2018 applies to the processing of personal data that takes place in the United Kingdom and includes parallel obligations to those set forth by GDPR. While the Data Protection Act of 2018 in the United Kingdom that "implements" and complements the GDPR has achieved Royal Assent on May 23, 2018 and is now effective in the United Kingdom, it is unclear whether transfer of data from the EEA to the United Kingdom will remain lawful under the GDPR. The U.K. government has already determined that it considers all 27 EU Member States and EEA member states to be adequate for the purposes of data protection, ensuring that data flows from the United Kingdom to the EU/EEA remain unaffected. In addition, a recent decision from the European Commission appears to deem the United Kingdom as being "essentially adequate" for purposes of data transfer from the European Union to the United Kingdom, although this decision may be re-evaluated in the future. The United Kingdom and the United States also have agreed on a framework for personal data to be transferred between the United Kingdom and the United States, called the U.K.-U.S. Data Bridge. The U.K.-U.S. Data Bridge may be challenged in the future. Continuing uncertainty about these data transfers, including the possibility of future changes, may impact our business operations. There are multiple privacy and data security laws that may impact our business activities in the United States. These laws are evolving and may increase both our obligations and our regulatory risks in the future. In the health care industry generally, under the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, HHS has issued regulations to protect the privacy and security of protected health information, or PHI, used or disclosed by covered entities including certain healthcare providers, health plans and healthcare clearinghouses. HIPAA also imposes certain obligations on the business associates of covered entities that obtain protected health information in providing services to or on behalf of covered entities. HIPAA may apply to us in certain circumstances and may also apply to our business partners in ways that may impact our relationships with them. Any clinical trials we conduct will be regulated by Subpart A of 45 CFR 46, also known as the Common Rule, which also includes specific privacy-related provisions. In addition to federal privacy regulations, there are a number of state laws governing confidentiality and security of health information that may be applicable to our business. In addition to possible federal civil and criminal penalties for HIPAA violations, state attorneys general are authorized to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce HIPAA and seek attorney's fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, state attorneys general (along with private plaintiffs) have brought civil actions seeking injunctions and damages resulting from alleged violations of HIPAA's privacy and security rules. State attorneys general also have authority to enforce state privacy and security laws. Moreover, new laws and regulations governing privacy and security may be adopted in the future as well. In addition to potential enforcement by the HHS, we could also be potentially subject to privacy enforcement from the Federal Trade Commission, or the FTC. The FTC has been particularly focused on the unpermitted processing of health and genetic data through its recent enforcement actions and is expanding the types of privacy violations that it interprets to be "unfair" under Section 5 of the FTC Act, as well as the types of activities it views to trigger the Health Breach Notification Rule (which the FTC also has the authority to enforce). The agency is also in the process of developing rules related to commercial surveillance and data security. We will need to account for the FTC's evolving rules and guidance for proper privacy and data security practices in order to mitigate risk for a potential enforcement action, which may be costly. Finally, both the FTC and HHS's enforcement priorities (as well as those of other federal regulators) may be impacted by the change in administration and new leadership. These shifts in enforcement priorities may also impact our business. There are also increased restrictions at the federal level relating to transferring sensitive data (including certain kinds of clinical data) outside of the United States to certain foreign countries. The DOJ recently finalized a rule implementing Executive Order 14117, which creates restrictions related to the transfer of sensitive United States data to countries such as China. The "Preventing Access to Americans' Bulk Sensitive Personal Data and United States Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern" regulations establish a new regulatory regime that may have a significant impact in connection with the transfer of sensitive United States personal data to "countries of concern" (i.e., China (including Hong Kong and Macau), Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and Venezuela). This rule prohibits (1) United States data brokers from licensing or otherwise transferring a wide variety of sensitive United States persons data to China (among other locations) and (2) all United States persons from knowingly engaging in any "covered data transaction" with "countries of concern" or "covered persons" involving access to bulk human genomic, epigenomic, proteomic, or transcriptomic data, or with human biospecimens from which such data can be derived. The rule defines six categories of "sensitive personal data": covered personal identifiers, precise geolocation data, biometric identifiers, human genomic data, personal health data, and personal financial data. In addition, the Protecting Americans' Data from Foreign Adversaries Act, or PADFA, which came into effect in 2025, prohibits data brokers from selling, licensing, transferring, disclosing, trading, or providing access to "personally identifiable sensitive data" of Americans to foreign adversaries, namely China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea, or entities controlled by a foreign adversary. Although the DOJ's rule and the PADFA share a common purpose, the PADFA focuses more on categories of data rather than transactions. PADFA includes 16 categories of "sensitive data," including biometric information, precise geolocation information, and genetic information. Collectively, the DOJ's rule and PADFA, as well as other similar provisions that may be passed in the future, may create both operational challenges and legal risks for our business. New laws also are being considered at the state level. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act, or CCPA-which went into effect on January 1, 2020-is creating similar risks and obligations as those created by GDPR, though the CCPA does currently exempt certain information collected as part of a clinical trial subject to the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, known as the Common Rule. The CCPA also has been amended through a recent referendum in California that creates additional obligations beginning in 2023. In addition to California, at least eighteen other states have passed comprehensive privacy laws similar to the CCPA. These laws are either in effect or will go into effect over the next few years. Like the CCPA, these laws create obligations related to the processing of personal information, as well as special obligations for the processing of "sensitive" data, which includes health data in some cases. Some of the provisions of these laws may apply to our business activities. There are also states that are strongly considering legislation that will go into effect in 2026 and beyond. Congress has also been debating passing a federal privacy law. There are also states that are specifically regulating health information that may affect our business. For example, Washington state passed a health privacy law in 2023 that regulates the collection and sharing of health information, and the law also has a private right of action, which further increases the relevant compliance risk. Connecticut and Nevada have also passed similar laws regulating consumer health data, and more states are considering such legislation. These laws may impact our business activities, including our identification of research subjects, relationships with business partners and ultimately the marketing and distribution of our products. A broad range of legislative measures also have been introduced at the federal level. Accordingly, failure to comply with federal and state laws (both those currently in effect and future legislation) regarding privacy and security of personal information could expose us to fines and penalties under such laws. There also is the threat of consumer class actions related to these laws and the overall protection of personal data. Even if we are not determined to have violated these laws, government investigations into these issues typically require the expenditure of significant resources and generate negative publicity, which could harm our reputation and our business. Given the breadth and depth of changes in data protection obligations, preparing for and complying with these requirements is rigorous and time intensive and requires significant resources and a review of our technologies, systems and practices, as well as those of any third-party collaborators, service providers, contractors or consultants that process or transfer personal data collected in applicable jurisdictions. These changes in laws or regulations associated with the enhanced protection of certain types of sensitive data, such as healthcare data or other personal information from our clinical trials, could require us to change our business practices and put in place additional compliance mechanisms, may interrupt or delay our development, regulatory and commercialization activities and increase our cost of doing business, and could lead to government enforcement actions, private litigation and significant fines and penalties against us and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

We currently rely on third parties for some aspects of the production of DEXTENZA and our product candidates, including AXPAXLI, for commercialization and preclinical testing and clinical trials.  While we expect that our existing manufacturing facilities, or any expansions of our existing facilities or additional facilities that we might build, will be sufficient to meet our requirements for manufacturing DEXTENZA and any of our product candidates for which we may obtain marketing approval, including AXPAXLI, we may in the future need to rely on third-party manufacturers for some aspects of the manufacture of our products or product candidates. We also depend on single-source suppliers for certain materials used in the manufacturing of our products and product candidates, including our supply of polyethylene glycol, or PEG, the molecule that forms the basis of our hydrogels, and other raw materials of our products and product candidates and for sterilization and packaging of the finished product. We do not have any long-term supply agreements in place for the clinical or commercial supply of any drug substances or raw materials for DEXTENZA or any of our product candidates, including AXPAXLI. We purchase drug substance and raw materials, including the chemical constituents for our hydrogel, from independent suppliers on a purchase order basis. We cannot ensure that our suppliers will remain in business, have sufficient capacity or supply to meet our needs or that they will not be purchased by one of our competitors or another company that is not interested in continuing to work with us. Our use of single-source suppliers of raw materials and other components used in the manufacturing of our products and product candidates could expose us to several risks, including disruptions in supply, price increases or late deliveries. Any performance failure or refusal to supply drug substance or raw materials on the part of our existing or future suppliers could delay clinical development, marketing approval or commercialization of our products. If our current suppliers do not perform as we expect, we may be required to replace one or more of these suppliers. Establishing additional or replacement suppliers could take a substantial amount of time, and it may be difficult to establish replacement suppliers who meet our quality standards and applicable regulatory requirements. For example, we depend on a sole source supplier for the supply of our PEG.  This sole source supplier may be unwilling or unable to supply PEG to us reliably, continuously and at the levels we anticipate or are required by the market.  Although we believe that there are a number of potential long-term replacements to our suppliers, including our PEG supplier, we may incur added costs and delays in identifying and qualifying any such replacements. Reliance on third parties for aspects of the supply of our products and product candidates entails additional risks, including: - reliance on the third party for regulatory compliance and quality assurance;- the possible misappropriation of our proprietary information, including our trade secrets and know-how;- the possible breach of an agreement by the third party; and - the possible termination or nonrenewal of an agreement by the third party at a time that is costly or inconvenient for us. Third-party suppliers or manufacturers may not be able to comply with our specifications, quality assurance standards, cGMP regulations or similar regulatory requirements outside the United States.  Our failure, or the failure of our third parties, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including clinical holds, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of product candidates or products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our products and product candidates. Further, reliance on third-party suppliers or manufacturers may adversely affect our future profit margins and our ability to commercialize any products that receive regulatory approval on a timely and competitive basis.

The development and commercialization of new drug and device products is highly competitive.  We face competition with respect to our products and product candidates and will face competition with respect to any other product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future, from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies worldwide. Potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, seek patent protection and establish collaborative arrangements for research, development, manufacturing and commercialization. Our products and product candidates target markets that are already served by a variety of competing products based on a number of active pharmaceutical ingredients.  Many of these existing products have achieved widespread acceptance among physicians, patients and payors for the treatment of ophthalmic diseases and conditions.  In addition, many of these products are available on a biosimilar or generic basis, and our products and product candidates may not demonstrate sufficient additional clinical benefits to physicians, patients or payors to justify a higher price compared to biosimilar or generic products.  In many cases, insurers or other third-party payors, particularly Medicare, encourage the use of biosimilar, generic or off-label products.  As a result, our products face, and product candidates, if approved, will face, competition from drugs based on the same or similar active pharmaceutical ingredients but that are administered in a different manner, typically through eye drops or intravitreal injections. For example, in wet AMD and diabetic retinal disease, AXPAXLI will compete with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor, or anti-VEGF, compounds administered in their current formulation and prescribed for the treatment of wet AMD as these agents can in some instances deliver more than one or two months of therapeutic effect, as well as products based on gene therapy, if such products are approved. Anti-VEGF products that are currently approved by the FDA for the treatment of wet AMD include Vabysmo (faricimab), Eylea HD (aflibercept 8 mg), Lucentis (ranibizumab), Eylea (aflibercept 2 mg), Beovu (brolicizumab), and Susvimo (ranibizumab Port Delivery System). Biosimilars to ranibizumab and aflibercept 2 mg are commercially available as well. Products that are currently approved by the FDA for the treatment of various diabetic retinal disease indications include Vabysmo, Eylea HD, Lucentis, Eylea, Beovu and Susvimo. The FDA-approved labels for Vabysmo and Eylea HD contemplate dosing as infrequently as once every 16 weeks for a proportion of patients with wet AMD or diabetic retinal disease. The cancer therapy Avastin (bevacizumab) is used off-label for the treatment of wet AMD and diabetic retinal disease as well. Other companies have advanced into Phase 3 clinical development biodegradable, programmed-release drug delivery product candidates that could compete with our products and product candidates, including EyePoint Pharmaceuticals which initiated two Phase 3 trials of their product candidate DURAVYU for the treatment of wet AMD in 2024 and two Phase 3 trials of DURAVYU for the treatment of DME in 2025, and 4DMT which initiated two Phase 3 trials of their product candidate 4D-150 for the treatment of wet AMD in 2025.  Multiple companies are in early-stage development to explore alternative means to deliver anti-VEGF, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, or TKI, products in an extended-delivery fashion to the back of the eye. In addition, other companies are evaluating novel mechanisms of action for retinal diseases. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient, are less expensive than our products or have better reimbursement. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. To the extent our patents and other intellectual property do not preclude a generic or other manufacturer from marketing a product similar or the same as ours, we may also face generic competition. See "Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property – We may be unable to obtain and maintain patent protection for our technology and products, or the scope of the patent protection obtained may not be sufficiently broad, such that our competitors could develop and commercialize technology and products similar or identical to ours, and our ability to successfully commercialize our technology and products may be impaired." Many of the companies against which we are competing or against which we may compete in the future have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than we do.  Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors.  Smaller and other early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.  These third parties compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific, manufacturing, marketing, and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and subject registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

We sell DEXTENZA in the United States primarily to a small number of specialty distributors, or SDs. These customers then subsequently resell DEXTENZA to ASCs, HOPDs, and physicians' offices, which we refer to as in-market customers when purchasing through the SD channel. We also sell DEXTENZA directly to a small population of ASCs and physicians' offices, which we refer to as direct customers when purchasing through the direct sales channel. We are heavily dependent on a small number of SDs for our sales of DEXTENZA. For example, for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023, three SDs accounted for a combined percentage of our total revenue of 75%, 77%, and 85%, respectively. We also experience significant concentration of sales at the in-market customer level. For example, for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023, one in-market customer accounted for approximately 17%, 18%, and 19% of our gross sales of DEXTENZA before adjustments, respectively. A loss of a significant SD, direct customer, or in-market customer may result in a significant reduction in sales of DEXTENZA and would adversely affect our results of operations. We expect the significant SD concentration, as well as the significant concentration at the in-market customer level, to continue for the foreseeable future and a similar dynamic may develop for any future products we may commercialize, including AXPAXLI if approved. Our ability to generate and grow sales for DEXTENZA and any other product we may commercialize, including AXPAXLI if approved, will depend, in part, on the extent to which our SDs are able to provide adequate distribution of these products, as well as the continued demand for DEXTENZA from our most significant in-market customers and direct customers. Although we believe we can find additional SDs, if necessary, and continue to broaden our base of direct customers, our revenue during any period of disruption of sales could suffer and we might incur additional costs. In addition, our SDs are responsible for a significant portion of our accounts receivables, net, balances. For example, as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, three SDs accounted for 82% and 82% of our accounts receivables, net, balances, respectively. The loss of any significant SD or direct customer, or the loss of a significant in-market customer, a significant reduction in sales we make to them, any cancellation of orders they have made with us, or any failure to pay for the product we have sold to them could adversely affect our results of operations. Sales of DEXTENZA and any other product we may commercialize, including AXPAXLI if approved, may also be adversely impacted by vertical integration of private payor healthcare and insurance programs, health maintenance organizations, and pharmacy benefit managers, or further consolidation among the healthcare providers served or operated by our SDs if, for example, one or more consolidated groups of healthcare providers determines not to use, or decides to switch from, such marketed product in favor of a competing product.

In the spring of 2025, the U.S. government initiated a series of tariff-related actions against U.S. trading partners. On April 2, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order announcing a "baseline" reciprocal tariff of 10% on all U.S. trading partners effective April 5, 2025, and higher individualized reciprocal tariffs on 57 countries (with certain product exemptions for pharmaceutical-related products, among others). Previously, the Trump Administration had imposed a 25% tariff on Canada and Mexico for goods not covered by the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA, and tariffs due to drug trafficking equaling 20% on imports from China. In response, several countries threatened retaliatory measures, including Canada and China, which then imposed retaliatory tariffs. Prior to when the country-specific reciprocal tariffs were scheduled to take effect, the Trump Administration delayed the effective date of such tariffs for all countries except China to August 1, 2025. Later, the United States and China reached a framework agreement that ultimately resulted in the suspension of the higher reciprocal tariffs on China until November 10, 2025. Shortly before that expiration date, the United States and China reached a one-year agreement with an expiration of November 10, 2026, that includes the continued suspension of the heightened reciprocal tariffs on China and delayed enforcement of new U.S. export rules targeting affiliates of blacklisted firms. Since the April reciprocal tariffs announcement, the European Union, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, among others, have reached deals with the U.S. that include reduced tariff rates to varying levels and other measures. On July 31, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order detailing new reciprocal tariff rates for individual countries that took effect on August 7, 2025. The new reciprocal rates, which are consistent with the rates reflected in the trade deals already announced, range from 10% to 41%. The new rates do not apply to Canada, China, Mexico and a few other countries. For China, the 10% baseline reciprocal tariff announced in April remains in effect, in addition to a minimum of a 10% tariff due to drug trafficking. Regarding Canada and Mexico, the rate remains 25% for goods that are not covered by the USMCA for Mexico and, effective August 1, 2025, was increased to 35% on imports from Canada that are not covered by the USMCA. President Trump also announced a further 10% increase on non-USMCA goods from Canada, but it is unclear when such increase will take effect. The European Union, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland (and Liechtenstein), the United Kingdom and others have reached agreements with the U.S. that cap pharmaceutical tariffs at 15%. In addition, an agreement with Malaysia provides a zero percent tariff exemption for pharmaceutical products that are not patented in the U.S. and are used in pharmaceutical applications, and an agreement with Switzerland and Lichenstein caps tariffs on pharmaceuticals imported from those two countries at 15 percent. Finally, an agreement with Taiwan concluded on January 15, 2026, eliminates tariffs on generic pharmaceuticals and their active ingredients imported from Taiwan. Sustained uncertainty about, or the further escalation of, trade and political tensions between the United States and China could result in a disadvantageous research and manufacturing environment in China, particularly for U.S.-based companies, including retaliatory restrictions that hinder or potentially inhibit our ability to rely on CMOs and other service providers that operate in China. Separately, in April 2025, the Department of Commerce initiated an investigation under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 into the impact on U.S. national security of the imports of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients, including finished drug products, medical countermeasures, critical inputs such as active pharmaceutical ingredients, and key starting materials, and derivative products of those items. On September 25, 2025, via a post on Truth Social, President Trump announced that, beginning October 1, 2025, all branded or patented drugs imported in the U.S. would face a 100% tariff. At the same time, President Trump indicated that these tariffs could be avoided by building pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities in the U.S. Thereafter, President Trump delayed the October 1st effective date of the tariffs on branded or patented pharmaceutical products announcing that the administration had now "begun preparing" tariffs on manufacturers that do not build in the U.S. or enter into a most-favored-nation drug pricing agreement with the Trump Administration. As a result of changes in tariffs that have been announced and/or implemented, and the underlying uncertainty currently surrounding international trade, we could experience a negative impact to our costs of materials and production processes, and supply chain disruptions and delays as a result of any new tariff policies or trade restrictions. If we are unable to obtain necessary raw materials or product components in sufficient quantity and in a timely manner due to disruptions in the global supply chain caused by macroeconomic events and conditions, the development, testing and clinical trials of our product candidates may be delayed or infeasible, and regulatory approval or commercial launch of any resulting product may be delayed or not obtained, which could significantly harm our business. We cannot yet predict the effect of the U.S. tariffs on imports, or the extent to which other countries will impose quotas, duties, tariffs, taxes or other similar restrictions upon imports or exports in the future, nor can we predict future trade policy or the terms of any renegotiated trade agreements and their impact on our business. Further, some of our collaborators and suppliers are located in China. Trade tensions and conflicts between the United States and China have been escalated in recent years and, as such, we are exposed to the possibility of product supply disruption and increased costs and expenses in the event of changes to the laws, rules, regulations and policies of the governments of the United States or China, or due to geopolitical unrest and unstable economic conditions.