UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020

OR

Commission file number: 001-37507

NANTKWEST, INC.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its Charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (858) 633-0300

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant, based on the closing price of the shares of common stock on the Nasdaq Global Select Market on June 30, 2020, was approximately $415.4 million.

The number of shares of the Registrant’s common stock outstanding as of March 3, 2021 was 109,344,573.

Table of Contents

Explanatory Note

As used in this Annual Report on Form 10‑K, or Annual Report, for the year ended December 31, 2020, the terms “NantKwest,” “the company,” “our,” “us” or “we” refer to NantKwest, Inc. and/or its subsidiaries.

i

PART I

Forward-Looking Statements

This Annual Report on Form 10-K, or this Annual Report, may contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the federal securities laws made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, including those set forth under Part I, Item 1A, “Risk Factors”, in this Annual Report. Except as required by law, we assume no obligation to update these forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. These statements, which represent our current expectations or beliefs concerning various future events, may contain words such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “estimate” or other words indicating future results, though not all forward-looking statements necessarily contain these identifying words. Such statements may include, but are not limited to, statements concerning the following:

1

In addition, you should refer to Part I, Item 1A, “Risk Factors” of this Annual Report for a discussion of other important factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. As a result of these factors, we cannot assure you that the forward-looking statements in this Annual Report will prove to be accurate. Furthermore, if one or more of these forward-looking statements prove to be inaccurate, the inaccuracy may be material. In light of the significant uncertainties in these forward-looking statements, you should not regard these statements as a representation or warranty by us or any other person that we will achieve our objectives and plans in any specified time frame, or at all. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

This Annual Report also contains estimates, projections and other information concerning our industry, our business, and the markets for certain diseases, including data regarding the estimated size of those markets, and the incidence and prevalence of certain medical conditions. Information that is based on estimates, forecasts, projections, market research or similar methodologies is inherently subject to uncertainties and actual events or circumstances may differ materially from events and circumstances reflected in this information. Unless otherwise expressly stated, we obtained this industry, business, market, and other data from reports, research surveys, studies, and similar data prepared by market research firms and other third parties, industry, medical and general publications, government data, and similar sources.

Item 1. Business.

Overview

We are a pioneering clinical-stage immunotherapy company focused on harnessing the power of the innate immune system by using our natural killer cells, or NK cells, to treat cancer and viral infectious diseases. NK cells are the body’s first line of defense due to their innate ability to rapidly seek and destroy abnormal cells, such as cancer or virally infected cells, without prior exposure or co-activation by other support molecules that are typically required to train and activate adaptive immune cells such as T‑cells.

A critical aspect of our strategy is to invest significantly in innovating new therapeutic candidates, based upon our proprietary activated NK, or aNK, cell platform, and conducting clinical testing and scale manufacturing of our most promising biologic product candidates. We believe our aNK cell is capable of being manufactured as a cell-based “off-the-shelf” therapy that can be molecularly engineered in a variety of ways to boost its killing capabilities against cancers and virally infected cells.

2

We retain worldwide commercial rights to clinical and research data, intellectual property and know-how developed with our aNK cells, as well as clinical grade master and working cell banks of aNK, haNK and t‑haNK cell lines.

Agreement and Plan of Merger with ImmunityBio, Inc.

On December 21, 2020, NantKwest and ImmunityBio, Inc. (ImmunityBio) entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the Merger Agreement), pursuant to which NantKwest and ImmunityBio agreed to combine their businesses. The Merger Agreement provides that a wholly owned subsidiary of NantKwest will merge with and into ImmunityBio (the Merger), with ImmunityBio continuing as the surviving company and being renamed NantCell, Inc., upon the terms and subject to the conditions therein. At the effective time of the Merger (the Effective Time), NantKwest’s name, as the parent of NantCell, Inc., will be changed to “ImmunityBio, Inc.”

At the Effective Time, each share of ImmunityBio common stock issued and outstanding immediately prior to the Effective Time, subject to certain exceptions as set forth in the Merger Agreement, will be converted automatically into a right to receive 0.8190 shares of NantKwest common stock. At the Effective Time, each share of NantKwest common stock issued and outstanding immediately prior to the Effective Time, will remain an issued and outstanding share of the combined company. At the Effective Time, each outstanding option, warrant or restricted stock unit to purchase ImmunityBio common stock will be converted (using the merger exchange ratio of 0.8190) into an option, warrant or restricted stock unit, respectively, on the same terms and conditions immediately prior to the Effective Time, to purchase shares of common stock of the combined company.

Upon consummation of the Merger, on a fully-diluted basis, ImmunityBio stockholders and NantKwest stockholders will own approximately 72% and 28%, respectively, of the outstanding shares of common stock of the combined company. It is estimated that, immediately following the closing date, Dr. Patrick Soon‑Shiong, our Executive Chairman and principal stockholder, and his affiliates will beneficially own, in the aggregate, approximately 82% of the common stock of the combined company.

Following consummation of the Merger, shares of common stock of the combined company are expected to be listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “IBRX”.

Under the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the Merger Agreement, the closing of the Merger depends on a number of conditions being satisfied, including approval of the Merger by holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of NantKwest common stock as of the NantKwest record date (excluding all shares of NantKwest common stock beneficially owned by Dr. Patrick Soon‑Shiong and his affiliates Cambridge Equities, LP and Chan Soon‑Shiong Family Foundation or any of their respective controlled affiliates or any of the directors or executive officers of NantKwest or ImmunityBio).

On February 1, 2021, our Registration Statement on Form S-4, which was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in connection with the Merger, was declared effective by the SEC.

A special meeting of the stockholders of NantKwest will be held on March 8, 2021 to consider and vote on a proposal to approve the issuance of shares of common stock of NantKwest to security holders of ImmunityBio, and to consider and vote on a proposal to approve the Merger. Only holders of record of NantKwest common stock at the close of January 29, 2021, will be entitled to notice of and to vote at the special meeting.

We expect the Merger to close in the first quarter of 2021, subject to receipt of the requisite stockholder approvals and satisfaction of other customary closing conditions.

The Merger is expected to be accounted for as a transaction between entities under common control as Dr. Patrick Soon‑Shiong is the controlling stockholder of each of NantKwest and ImmunityBio. Upon the closing of the Merger, the net assets of ImmunityBio will be combined with those of NantKwest at their historical carrying amounts and the companies will be presented on a combined basis for all historical periods presented.

Our Off-the-Shelf Approach

Multiple Modes of aNK Directed Tumor Cell Killing.   Our NK platform has demonstrated the ability to induce cell death in cancers and virally infected cells through a variety of concurrent mechanisms including:

3

All three modes of killing; Innate Killing, Antibody-Mediated Killing, and CAR-Directed Killing, are employed by our proprietary t‑haNK platform, which combines all the enhanced NK killing functions of aNK, haNK and taNK into a single product platform.

Our primary target therapeutic area is cancer, with a heavy emphasis on solid tumors. According to the National Cancer Institute, almost 1.9 million new cancer cases are expected to be diagnosed in the U.S. during 2021, adding to the 16.9 million already living with cancer. In addition, we plan to advance therapies for hematologic malignancies and virally induced infectious diseases.

Innate Killing—the aNK Platform.   We have developed a unique NK cell platform, which we believe is capable of being manufactured as a cell-based “off-the-shelf” therapy that can be molecularly engineered in a variety of ways to boost its killing capabilities against cancers and virally infected cells. Unlike normal natural killer cells, our NK cells do not express the key inhibitory receptors that diseased cells often exploit to turn off the killing function of natural killer cells and escape elimination. We have developed a unique aNK cell, which omits key inhibitory receptors, while preserving critical activation receptors that enable selective innate targeting and killing of distressed and diseased cells. They do so through the recognition and binding of stress-proteins that are overexpressed on the surfaces of

Our aNK cells are also designed to deliver a more lethal blow to their target by delivering a larger payload of lytic enzymes and cytokines responsible for both direct and indirect killing when compared to other natural killer cells isolated from healthy donors. This is due to the higher density of lytic granules and larger cell volume possessed by aNK cells when compared to that of donor-derived natural killer cells. We believe that our aNK cells can be produced at commercial scale as a ‘living drug’ using our proprietary manufacturing and distribution processes to adequately address select global cancer markets.

Several phase I safety studies with unmodified aNK cells have been conducted in a variety of bulky hematological cancers and solid tumors, enrolling 46 patients in a range of dose levels and schedules with encouraging evidence of single-agent activity and a durable remission, including some complete responses in liquid tumors. Based on these earlier clinical trials, we have further modified our aNK platform through virus-free molecular engineering designed to leverage additional modes of killing available to aNKs, including antibody-mediated killing, the haNK platform, and both antibody-mediated and CAR-directed antigen targeted killing, the t‑haNK platform.

Antibody-Mediated Killing—the haNK Platform.   We have genetically engineered our aNK cell platform using a virus-free method to overexpress high-affinity CD16 receptors, which bind to antibodies. These antibody-targeted haNK cells are designed to directly bind to IgG1-type antibodies, such as avelumab, trastuzumab, cetuximab and rituximab with the intention of enhancing the cancer-killing efficacy of these antibodies by boosting the population of competent natural killer cells that can kill cancer cells through ADCC. Antibody products are abundantly utilized to treat cancer and it is estimated that they generate over $100 billion in reported annual sales. A growing number of studies suggest that clinically meaningful responses to these antibody therapies correlate directly with the overall health of a patient’s natural killer cell population and whether they express the high-affinity variant of the CD16 receptor. Currently available literature estimates that only approximately 10% to 15% of the addressable patient population eligible for antibody therapies carry high-affinity CD16 receptors. This implies that our haNK product candidate may have significant market potential as a combination therapy to potentially address a large number of patients who do not carry high-affinity CD16 receptors and, as a result, exhibit a poorer response to antibody therapies. We therefore intend to develop our haNK product candidate as a combination therapy with widely-used U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, approved antibody products such as avelumab, trastuzumab, cetuximab and rituximab. Current Good Manufacturing Practice, or cGMP, master and working cell banks of our haNK product candidate have been successfully established and will serve as our source for product for our clinical trials and, if approved, commercialization going forward. We have optimized our manufacturing process partly by designing our haNK product candidate to not require IL‑2 cytokine supplementation to the growth media every few days, thereby enabling us to overcome a technically challenging and costly limitation that many other natural killer cell-based therapies face. We have also successfully established processes for large-scale production, cryopreservation and long-term storage of final dose forms, thereby optimizing production efficiencies and allowing for on-demand availability with minimal handling at the infusion sites. Our cryopreserved haNK product candidate has been cleared for clinical testing in several phase Ib/II clinical trials, including our phase II Merkel cell cancer study.

4

CAR-Directed Killing—the taNK Platform.   We have genetically engineered our aNK platform to express CARs that target tumor-specific antigens found on the surfaces of cancers and virally infected cells. Our taNK cells are designed to bind directly to these surface antigens and induce cell death through the release of toxic granules directly into the tumor cells and release of cytokines and chemokines to recruit additional innate and adaptive immune responses, including the recruitment of cytotoxic T‑cells. These tumor antigens include checkpoint ligands, such as PD‑L1 and B7‑H4 as well as well-established tumor proteins such as CD19, HER2 and EGFR, all of which can be targeted individually by our engineered taNK products.

Preclinical evidence has been mounting which indicates that taNK cell activation through the binding of its CAR receptors to these cancer specific proteins may be potent enough to override many of the pre-existing inhibitory signals and immunosuppressive factors present in the tumor microenvironment that may be responsible for tumor resistance.

CAR-Directed and Antibody-Mediated Killing—the t‑haNK Platform. Our newest and most promising platform for the development of therapeutic product candidates is an innovative, bioengineered combination of our haNK and taNK platforms that incorporates all the features of our haNK platform together with a CAR. The resulting line of product candidates under this platform avails itself to all three modes of killing: innate, antibody-mediated and CAR-directed killing. These product candidates also include one or more additional expression elements such as functional cytokines, chemokines and trafficking factors, making them amongst the most versatile in our portfolio. These product candidates are intended to be combined with commercially available therapeutic antibodies to effectively target either two different epitopes of the same cancer specific protein or two entirely different cancer specific proteins. In addition to our two t‑haNK product candidates, PD‑L1.t‑haNK, currently in phase II testing, and CD19.t‑haNK, cleared to commence phase I testing, we believe a pipeline of prominent CARs for t‑haNK, including HER2 and EGFR, which are nearing IND submission, and others that are advancing through clinical enabling studies, will enable us to potentially address an even broader range of cancers as part of a chemotherapy-free combination regimen.

The Nant Cancer Vaccine.   The Nant Cancer Vaccine, or NCV, program is a personalized therapy regimen, which utilizes our “off-the-shelf” NK cell platform as the backbone of the regimen. NCV consists of an initial tumor-conditioning regimen followed by a molecularly-informed immunologic conditioning therapy. More specifically, NCV combines the novel delivery of metronomic, albumin-linked low-dose chemotherapy in conjunction with certain other agents, followed by a sequenced administration of tumor-associated antigen vaccines and an IL‑15 superagonist fusion protein, all of which potentiate our NK cell therapy to potentially drive immunogenic cell death while avoiding the ravages of toxic high-dose chemotherapy. By inducing immunogenic cell death and enhancing a patient’s innate and adaptive immune system, NCV is designed to attain a long-term, durable response in multiple cancer types with a potential for lower toxicity and improved efficacy and quality of life in comparison with current standards of care. We believe ultimately that employing our NK cell therapy in the context of NCV will be a highly effective combination for long term clinical success over available standards of care that employ maximum tolerated dose, tolerogenic cell death and immune system compromise.

Potential Advantages of Our aNK Platform Over T‑Cell and Other Current Immunotherapies

The immune system has two components: innate immune cells, such as natural killer cells, which are always primed and ready to attack diseased cells, and adaptive immune cells, such as T‑cells, which are recruited and educated through a series of antigen presentation and clonal expansion, eventually mounting a delayed response. Our proprietary aNK platform is specifically designed to potentially address many of the limitations associated with current adaptive autologous cellular immunotherapies. We believe key limitations of adaptive autologous immunotherapy are the need to isolate adequate amounts of naive T‑cells from a cancer patient in a lengthy procedure called leukapheresis and the requirement for a complex individualized genetic transfection and expansion campaign to manufacture each patient’s therapy. As a consequence, current autologous CAR‑T cell therapies, in large part, are limited to patients from highly selected hematological cancers and leave many patients ineligible for treatment. Additionally, patients must undergo lympho-depleting chemotherapy prior to receiving CAR‑T therapy and rely on engraftment, thereby exposing themselves to life-threatening serious adverse events for extended periods. For instance, recipients of CD19 CAR‑T therapy develop life-long B‑cell aplasia and hypogammaglobulinemia, requiring immunoglobulin infusion therapy. Acutely, patients may develop cytokine release syndrome or acute or chronic neurotoxicities. Due to these and other events, treatment with CAR‑T requires intensive inpatient and long term monitoring. In contrast, our allogeneic “off-the-shelf” NK cells can be infused in the outpatient setting and do not rely on the patient as the source of suitable immune cells for processing, thereby availing every cancer patient as a potential candidate for on-demand treatment. In addition, our NK cell therapy is intended to be combined with immune potentiating agents, rather than immuno-depleting agents with the interest of driving a more natural and long-lasting adaptive immune response. This is largely due to the unique versatility of our cell products, which more closely approximates the characteristics of a drug rather than a transplant. Most cell-based immunotherapies are limited to one or a constrained number of doses due to product limitations and cost burdens, thereby

5

driving the need for immune-ablative therapies and reliance on long-term engraftment to achieve clinically meaningful results. In comparison, our NK cell based therapies can be re-dosed regularly throughout the year and at much higher dose levels without the same product limitations, cost burdens, reliance on long-term engraftment and potential exposure to long-term toxicities.

For these reasons, we believe that our approach includes the following advantages:

Experienced Management Team

Since the founding of our company in 2002, we have assembled a team of proven, experienced and visionary leaders in biotechnology. Our team is led by Patrick Soon‑Shiong, MBBch, FRCS (C), FACS, who has served as our Chairman since March 2015. Dr. Soon‑Shiong was first introduced to us in 2007 when our technology was at a very early stage of development and he provided us with advice and scientific development strategies, including demonstration of activity in the clinical setting following irradiation of the cells and demonstration of safety and activity following multiple infusions in patients with both end-stage solid and liquid tumors. Dr. Soon‑Shiong made an equity investment in our company in December 2014 and joined as our Chief Medical Officer in January 2015. Dr. Soon‑Shiong became our Chairman in March 2015 and served as our Chief Executive Officer, or CEO, from March 2015 until October 2020. Effective October 2020, Dr. Soon‑Shiong has served as our Executive Chairman of the board of directors. Dr. Soon‑Shiong, a renowned surgeon and scientist, has pioneered novel therapies for both diabetes and cancer, published over 100 scientific papers in the U.S., and has been issued over 230 worldwide patents on groundbreaking advancements spanning a myriad of fields. He performed the first encapsulated islet stem cell transplant in a diabetic patient in the U.S. He invented, developed and launched the first nanoparticle delivery system of human albumin, abraxane. Dr. Soon‑Shiong was founder, Chairman and CEO of American Pharmaceutical Partners (sold to Fresenius SE for approximately $4.6 billion in 2008), Abraxis BioScience (sold to Celgene Corporation for approximately $3.8 billion in 2010), and NantWorks, an ecosystem of companies to create a transformative global health information and next generation pharmaceutical development network.

6

Richard Adcock was appointed as our CEO in October 2020. Prior to joining NantKwest, Mr. Adcock served as CEO of Verity Health from January 2018 to September 2020. Verity Health was previously affiliated with Dr. Soon‑Shiong until 2018. Prior to Verity Health, Mr. Adcock served in various capacities at Sanford Health, including as its Chief Innovation Officer, President, Executive Vice President and Director from 2004 to 2017. Prior to Sanford Health, Mr. Adcock served as Global Engineering Director at GE Healthcare from 1999 to 2003.

Barry Simon, M.D., our President and Chief Administrative Officer, who was our CEO from May 2007 until March 2015 and our President and Chief Operating Officer from March 2015 to December 2016, brings decades of drug development and executive leadership experience from Roche Labs, F. Hoffmann‑La Roche, Connetics Corp. and Immunomedics, having successfully contributed to Biologics License Applications, or BLAs, and commercial drug launches for Xeloda, Pegasys, Kytril, Fortovase, Valcyte, Fuzeon and Tamiflu.

We have experienced executives leading our research and development, manufacturing, preclinical and clinical development, regulatory and medical affairs, finance and other critical areas of our business, and we continue to build our manufacturing and administrative infrastructure.

Company Vision

We aspire to be the premier immunotherapy company, with the ultimate goal of harnessing the power of the innate immune system—with the NK cell at its core—to pioneer precision medicine in treatments for cancers and viral infectious diseases.

Our Core Strategies

Our goal of becoming the world leader in immunotherapy for cancers and other diseases can be realized through a major reframing of how we apply the collective knowledge amassed in this field to date. This starts with precisely determining the ‘molecular address’ of the target disease and leveraging this knowledge in the selection and staging of both tumor and immune conditioning agents in accordance with our understanding of biological mechanisms of action and the natural order of immune biology. Metronomic, low-doses of certain agents would be utilized to potentiate cellular stress and boost tumor immunogenicity, while an array of other agents would be applied selectively and sequentially to propagate a meaningful and lasting adaptive immune response. We believe that by utilizing the NK cell as the backbone and central coordinator as we engage and sequentially orchestrate the entire ecosystem of immune cells, we can effectively empower the patient’s own immune system to regain control by becoming its own ‘drug factory’ that can establish and once again maintain a cancer-free environment in the body. The key elements of our strategy include:

7

8

Our Therapeutic Platforms

Leveraging Our Assets

We have developed a pre-clinical portfolio of t‑haNK products based on the combined attributes of our existing haNK and taNK platforms. We have also advanced our haNK product candidate into clinical trials across several solid-tumor types, which incorporates a comprehensively orchestrated tumor and immune-conditioning regimen known as the Nant Cancer Vaccine, or NCV, and generated compelling safety and activity data. We now plan to advance our lead clinical candidates from the haNK and t‑haNK platforms into checkpoint inhibitor and IL‑15 superagonist fusion protein combination trials in select cancer indications.

Our aNK Platform is the Foundation for Our haNK, taNK and t‑haNK Product Candidates.  Based on the unique characteristics of our aNK cells, we continue to expand the potential therapeutic applications of this platform through molecular engineering designed to leverage the multiple modes of killing available to aNK cells, including (1) innate plus antibody-mediated killing, the haNK platform; (2) innate plus antigen targeted killing, the taNK platform; and (3) a combination of all three, the t‑haNK platform, as illustrated below.

9

Antibody-Mediated Killing - the haNK Platform. We have genetically engineered our aNK cells to both overexpress high-affinity CD16 receptors and the IL‑2 cytokine. These haNK cells are well suited to directly bind to concurrently administered therapeutic antibodies such as avelumab, trastuzumab, cetuximab and rituximab to potentially enhance their targeted cancer killing effects through ADCC, as illustrated below.

10

CAR-Directed Killing - the taNK Platform. We have genetically modified our aNK cells to incorporate CARs that target cancer specific proteins typically found on the surface of cancer cells. These taNK cells are designed to directly bind to these surface proteins in a variety of solid and hematological cancers and induce cell death through the release of toxic granules directly into the tumor cell and the release of cytokines and chemokines, which recruit additional innate and adaptive immune responses, including the recruitment of cytotoxic T‑cells. CARs are complex molecules that are designed to traverse the cell membrane and are comprised of four elements: (1) the antibody-derived single-chain Fv fragment, or scFv, which appears on the external membrane surface of the taNK cell, where it is exposed and available to bind to cancer specific antigens; (2) a transmembrane hinge region; (3) a CD28 co-stimulatory domain; and (4) one of several signaling domain segments which resides on the internal surface of the membrane where, upon external scFv binding, it is available to signal the activation cascade to release cytotoxic compounds to destroy the targeted cancer cell. Unlike CAR‑T and T‑cell receptor therapies, taNK killing is human leukocyte antigen, or HLA, independent for “off-the-shelf” applications and does not depend on additional (second-generation) co-stimulatory domains, such as 4‑1BB or OX40, which are often necessary in CAR‑T cells for immune cell activation and survival.

11

CAR-Directed and Antibody-Mediated Killing - the t‑haNK Platform. We have genetically engineered our aNK cells to exhibit all three mechanisms of killing, thereby imparting CAR targeted killing via cancer specific antigens, ADCC based killing as mediated by antibody products, innate killing inherent to natural killer cells, as well as independence from IL‑2 supplementation for expansion and viability. Based on this unique arrangement, t‑haNK cells can target two distinct cancer antigens at once: one via its CD16 receptor together with an antibody such as rituximab (CD20), and the other through its CAR receptor (i.e. PD‑L1), as illustrated below.

12

In the taNK and t‑haNK cell lines, the activation signaling that results from the binding of the CARs to the tumor-specific antigens can be strong enough to overcome both cancer escape mechanisms and suppressive factors present in the tumor microenvironment. These tumor antigens encompass three categories of proteins, all of which can be targeted individually by our engineered taNK products:

The table below is a partial list of CAR modified aNK products in the literature and their intended tumor types.

Non-Clinical Validation of Lenti- and Retroviral Generated taNK Cell Lines; a Compelling Case for Virus-Free t‑haNK-Based Therapies.  We are preparing a novel lineup of virus-free t‑haNK product candidates that are cryopreserved, CAR expressing cell lines based on our haNK cell therapeutic, one of which is progressing through a phase II clinical trial. Our rapid advancement of the virus-free t‑haNK platform has enabled us to discontinue all use of viral vectors as a means to genetically enhance our platforms. These next-generation products avoid the safety concerns associated with the use of retro- and lentivirus sequences, incorporate the high-affinity CD16 receptor for enhanced antibody-mediated killing, as well as IL‑2 for IL‑2 growth independence, which can potentially reduce production costs and enhance clinical efficacy.

13

Latest Addition to Our Platforms

Our GMP-in-a-Box Approach

NantKwest is leading the efforts to generate allogeneic and autologous-sourced cell based products, the most advanced of which are our cytokine enriched memory-like NK, or ceNK, and mesenchymal stem cell, or MSC, therapeutics. We utilize a scalable GMP production process that combines the use of ImmunityBio’s (a related party) semi-automated manufacturing equipment and software, cytokine expansion and activation reagents, including ImmunityBio’s N‑803, and unique user-friendly processing methods, all of which are proprietary. We have optimized processes for generating both fresh and cryopreserved clinical dose forms of ceNK cells with 100% purity (in the allogeneic setting) from a variety of sources, including cord blood and allogeneic and autologous peripheral blood. We have also optimized processes for generating fresh and cryopreserved clinical dose forms of MSCs from cord blood, cord tissue and allogeneic bone marrow sources. We avoid the use of both feeder-layers and feeder-layer derived substances for activation as well as other commonly applied additives that frequently create downstream issues in achieving a high-quality, operator-friendly reproducible final dose form and have been able to generate multiple dose forms from each donor product, both of which are critical features in achieving scalability.

Cytokine Enriched Natural Killer (ceNK) Cell Platform.   Cytokine-induced memory-like NK cells are a unique set of lymphocytes that differentiate after a brief pre-activation with interleukin‑12 (IL‑12), IL‑15, and IL‑18 and exhibit enhanced responses to cytokine re-stimulation that include enhanced interferon‑g production and cytotoxicity against leukemic cell lines. These cells have been isolated and characterized by their unique cell-surface marker profile and their highly desirable feature of immune-memory, marked by their pronounced anti-cancer activity for weeks to months in duration, which has made these cells a research focus for more than a decade.

Based on published literature, we believe the ability to generate these memory-like cells at clinically meaningful quantities has been limited to the work performed at Washington University by T.A. Fehniger, et al. Published data so far has been limited to the acute myeloid leukemia patient population in the post-allogeneic, haploidentical stem cell transplantation setting, for which the Fehniger group has generated enough cells to provide a one-time dose of these cytokine-activated, memory-like natural killer cells.

Our cytokine enriched natural killer cell program is based on the ability to enrich and expand donor-sourced natural killer cells in a GMP facility to a clinically relevant scale, which allows for the production of a pure cytokine activated and expanded NK cell population that possesses the unique phenotype we specifically refer to as M‑ceNK cells.

14

We have developed a unique ability to generate a portfolio of distinct ceNK cell products through the application of ImmunityBio’s proprietary GMP-in-a-Box bioreactors and cytokines and our proprietary methods and overall expertise in scale manufacturing of NK cell based products.

Mesenchymal Stem Cell (MSC) Platform.   Bone marrow-derived allogeneic MSCs are considered to be a prominent cell type to treat degenerative diseases and autoimmune disorders. MSCs are reported to be immunoprivileged, allowing for transplantation of allogeneic MSCs without the risk of being rejected by the host immune system. MSCs have been found to be capable of modulating immune responses, thereby reducing inflammation as well as immunopathology and protecting alveolar epithelial cells during acute respiratory distress syndrome, or ARDS, including that triggered by cytokine storm. More importantly, MSCs demonstrated promising activity in reducing the non-productive inflammation and in promoting lung generation in a phase II clinical trial, as well as in patients with ARDS in clinical practice. As a result, we believe MSCs have the potential to alleviate the SARS‑CoV‑2-derived cytokine storm and ARDS, and thereby have an effect on the treatment of subsequent chronic respiratory dysfunction and lung fibrosis.

We have developed and optimized procedures and proprietary protocols to generate multiple dose forms of MSC products from a single bone marrow or cord tissue sample, in a scalable format using ImmunityBio’s GMP-in-a-Box system.

Development Update on our Product Candidates

Our leading programs reside in two core disease areas: Oncology, which includes our haNK and PD‑L1.t‑haNK programs, and COVID‑19, which includes our joint BM‑Allo‑MSC therapeutic and hAd5 vaccine programs. We also have a pipeline of IND-ready t‑haNK and ceNK projects in both solid and liquid cancers.

Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is one of the deadliest cancers for patients in the U.S. Pancreatic cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related death in the U.S., behind only lung cancer and colorectal cancer, and is expected to become the second-leading cause after lung cancer by the early 2020’s. The overall five-year survival rate is just 9%. In 2019, an estimated 56,770 people were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in the U.S., and approximately 45,750 of those newly diagnosed will die from the disease. Pancreatic cancer is the ninth-most commonly diagnosed cancer in women and the tenth-most commonly diagnosed cancer in men. Only about 20% to 30% of cases are found early enough to treat surgically, before the cancer has spread, and surgery gives the only chance that this cancer can be eradicated. Treatment options for pancreatic cancer patients include surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and clinical trials. Pancreatic cancer is uniformly accepted as an area of serious unmet medical need, with five-year relative survival rates by SEER stage at diagnosis of 37% for localized, 12% for regional, 3% for distant, and 9% for all SEER stages combined.

15

QUILT 88 is a phase II, open-label, randomized, three-cohort comparative study of PD‑L1.t‑haNK, N‑803 and aldoxorubicin in combination with standard-of-care therapy versus standard-of-care therapy alone for front-line maintenance, second-line and third-line or greater treatment of 298 subjects with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Each of the three cohorts are being conducted as standalone studies:

Cohorts A and B will have their own control arms while cohort C will be conducted as a single-arm, open-label study. Safety and progression-free survival for cohorts A and B will be compared within the groups using RECIST Version 1.1 criteria based on blinded independent central review. Secondary objectives include initial safety and additional efficacy measures, including overall response rate, complete response rate, durability of response, disease control rate, and overall survival.

All three study cohorts of the trial are open and actively enrolling patients at Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian in Orange County, California, the Immuno-Oncology Clinic, Inc. in Los Angeles County, California, and Avera McKennan Hospital and University Health Center in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, the latter serving patients in the tri-state area of Iowa, Nebraska and South Dakota. More than 50 patients are currently enrolled in or being evaluated for the trial.

In our initial Cancer Moonshot QUILT trials of haNK and avelumab (PD‑L1 checkpoint inhibitor) for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, we explored the hypothesis that by activating the patient’s own immune system, a paradigm change in cancer therapy could evolve to eradicate cancer cells without high-dose chemotherapy. From 2017 to 2020, multiple QUILT clinical trials exploring the combination of haNK cell therapy, immune-modulating antibodies, adenovirus-based cancer vaccines, and low-dose chemotherapy provided preliminary results showing the median survival rate can be more than doubled, compared to historical controls, from three months to eight months.

In an expanded access program for patients with advanced metastatic pancreatic cancer who had no available approved treatment options, a complete remission was achieved when replacing haNK and PD‑L1 checkpoint inhibitor avelumab with PD‑L1.t‑haNK and four out of five patients are alive 8 to 16 months since beginning treatment on these expanded protocols as of January 12, 2021.

16

On the basis of these initial studies, we initiated our QUILT 88 trials in metastatic pancreatic cancer in October 2020. While the data are still early study in cohort C, for which the primary endpoint is overall survival, 15 out of 18 (83%) of the patients enrolled with second-line or greater pancreatic cancer remain alive as of January 12, 2021.

17

Triple Negative Breast Cancer

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women in the U.S., the second most common cause of cancer death, and the main cause of death in women ages 45 to 55 years. In 2019, the latest year for which incidence data are available, 268,600 women in the U.S. were diagnosed with breast cancer, and an estimated 41,760 women died of the disease. Triple Negative Breast Cancer, or TNBC, accounts for approximately 15% of all breast cancers. Of these TNBC cases, about 75% are "basal-like." TNBC is a subtype of breast cancer that lacks expression of the estrogen receptor, or ER, and progesterone receptor, or PR, and does not overexpress the human epidermal growth factor 2 receptor, or HER2, protein. TNBC is an important area of research for both researchers and clinicians alike because:

The prevalence of TNBC is highest in premenopausal African American women. A recent report notes that 39% of all African American premenopausal women diagnosed with breast cancer are diagnosed with TNBC. The prevalence of TNBC in this same age group in non-African American women is much lower, at approximately 15%. After adjusting for age and stage at diagnosis, African American women were almost three times more likely than white women to have triple-negative tumors. These ethnic or menopausal differences are not seen in either the ER+/HER2+ breast cancer subgroup or the ER+/HER2– subgroup. Five-year relative survival rates for TNBC by SEER stage at diagnosis are 91% for localized, 65% for regional, and 11% for distant.

TNBC has fewer treatment options than other types of invasive breast cancer. This is because the cancer cells do not have the estrogen or progesterone receptors or enough of the HER2 protein to make hormone therapy or targeted drugs work. If the cancer has not spread to distant sites, surgery is an option. Chemotherapy might be given first to shrink a large tumor followed by surgery. Chemotherapy might also be given after surgery to reduce the chances of the cancer coming back. Radiation might also be an option depending on certain features of the tumor.

Because hormone therapy and HER2 drugs are not choices for women with TNBC, chemotherapy is often used. In cases where the cancer has spread to other parts of the body (i.e., stage IV) chemotherapy and other treatments that can be considered include PARP inhibitors, platinum chemotherapy, or immunotherapy.

QUILT 3.067 is a phase II, open-label, single-arm trial evaluating the same novel triple combination of “off-the-shelf” haNK cell therapy with N‑803 and avelumab following a tumor conditioning regimen in subjects that have progressed on or after standard-of-care therapy for TNBC. Patient follow-up concluded during the third quarter of 2020 for the long-term responders in the trial and final data is being collated for a final study report. We last reported an overall response rate by immune response RECIST criteria in 6 of 9 patients (67%), a complete response rate in 3 of 9 patients (33%) (one unconfirmed), a median progression-free survival by immune response RECIST criteria of 14.3 months and a median overall survival of 20.2 months.

With the recent FDA approval of sacituzumab in patients with third-line TNBC, based on a 33% overall response rate, we believe that the addition of PD‑L1.t‑haNK and N‑803 may result in meaningful improvements in clinical outcomes. As such, we are preparing for an open-label, randomized controlled phase III trial of PD‑L1.t‑haNK and N‑803 in combination with sacituzumab versus sacituzumab alone. For the primary objective, we will compare the overall response rate between the two arms using RESIST criteria in solid tumors, Version 1.1. Secondary objectives will include assessments of safety, event-free survival, overall survival and durability of response using the same RESIST Version 1.1 criteria. The study will contain a safety lead-in phase in which the safety and tolerability of sacituzumab + PD‑L1.t‑haNK + N‑803 will be assessed prior to the Phase III portion of the study. We anticipate filing an IND in the first quarter of 2021.

18

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Lung cancer is the second most common cancer. The American Cancer Society estimates that about 235,760 new cases of lung cancer will be diagnosed in the U.S. in 2021 and an estimated 131,880 patients will die of the disease. Non-small cell lung cancer, or NSCLC, is often insidious, producing no symptoms until the disease is well advanced. NSCLC makes up about 80% to 85% of all lung cancers. The three main types of NSCLC are squamous cell carcinoma, and non-squamous cell carcinoma, consisting of adenocarcinoma and large cell carcinoma. Adenocarcinoma is the most common form of lung cancer in the U.S., among both men and women. Squamous cell carcinoma, is the second most prevalent, accounting for 25% of all lung cancers. Large cell carcinoma is the smallest, accounting for approximately 10% of NSCLC tumors. Early recognition of symptoms may be beneficial to outcome. At initial diagnosis, 20% of patients have localized disease, 25% of patients have regional metastasis, and 55% of patients have distant spread of disease. Symptoms depend on the location of cancer.

The five-year survival rate for NSCLC is 24%. However, it is important to note that survival rates depend on several factors, including the subtype of lung cancer, and the stage of disease. For people with localized NSCLC, which means the cancer has not spread outside of the lung, the overall five-year survival rate is 61%. For regional NSCLC, which means the cancer has spread outside of the lung to nearby areas, the five-year survival rate is approximately 35%. If the cancer has spread to distant parts of the body, called metastatic lung cancer, the five-year survival rate is 6%. As a result of new effective treatments, this number is changing, although better therapies are acutely needed.

QUILT 3.055 is a phase IIb, open-label, multi-cohort study of combination immunotherapy in patients with NSCLC who have previously received treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Patients are eligible to enter into the cohort designated to receive third-line combination immunotherapy consisting of PD‑L1.t‑haNK cell therapy, N‑803 and a checkpoint inhibitor after progressing on one of four other treatment cohorts within the study. The primary efficacy endpoint of the study is overall response rate per RECIST Version 1.1. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, overall survival and durability of response using RECIST Version 1.1 criteria. The IND amendment to include this third-line study cohort has been authorized by the FDA. Observed responses in this trial will guide our plans to conduct a subsequent phase II trial in second-line NSCLC patients.

19

Merkel Cell Carcinoma

Merkel cell carcinoma, or MCC, is a rare and aggressive skin cancer that arises from uncontrolled growth of cells in the skin. Increasing in incidence, approximately 2,000 new cases are reported in the U.S. each year. Patients with metastatic or locally advanced MCC have an extremely poor prognosis, with less than 20% of patients surviving longer than five years. Typically, these patients are treated with a range of drugs, including chemotherapy, which can result in significant side effects. Although new immune therapies have the potential to improve survival, MCC is still fatal for a majority of patients who have progressed on or after treatment with a checkpoint inhibitor and represents an unmet medical need.

QUILT 3.063 is our phase II, open-label, single-arm trial evaluating the novel triple combination of “off-the-shelf” haNK cell therapy with N‑803 and avelumab, without chemotherapy in subjects that have progressed after treatment with a checkpoint inhibitor for MCC. This trial is currently open at multiple centers across the U.S. As a rare disease, with approximately 2,000 patients being diagnosed in the U.S. each year, MCC patients often require regional referral and additional travel to a clinical trial site. The ongoing COVID‑19 pandemic has continued to have an impact on enrollment due in part to limitations in travel and study accessibility as well as a significant reduction in patient referrals. In response to this, we will continue to implement measures to increase local community awareness of the trial as we add new sites. While we remain cautiously optimistic, it may require additional time to reach our interim data readout.

Additional Oncology Programs Update

We anticipate pursuing additional indications for our PD‑L1.t‑haNK product candidate, such as in the neoadjuvant setting in combination with N‑803 and a checkpoint inhibitor for newly diagnosed patients with head and neck squamous cells cancers in collaboration with the National Cancer Institute. In the near future we also plan to initiate a series of phase I first-in-human trials with our IND-ready t‑haNK products HER2.t‑haNK, EGFR.t‑haNK and the FDA authorized CD19.t‑haNK. Likewise, we are nearing an IND filing for a phase I ceNK trial in locally advanced solid cancers.

COVID‑19 Programs Update

QUILT‑COVID‑19‑MSC is a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled phase Ib study to assess the safety of therapeutic treatment with immunomodulatory bone marrow-derived MSC, or BM‑Allo‑MSC, in adults with severe COVID‑19 infection. This clinical trial will evaluate the safety and efficacy of BM‑Allo‑MSC versus best supporting care in treating patients with severe disease requiring ventilator support during COVID‑19 infection. A total of 45 subjects receiving care in the critical care or ICU setting for COVID‑19 will be enrolled in this study. Subjects will be randomized in a 2:1 fashion to the experimental and control arms, respectively. Primary endpoints include incidence of adverse events, mortality and number of ventilator-free days within 60 days of randomization. All subjects will also be assessed using the standard National Early Warning Score, or NEWS score (Royal College of Physicians 2012).

A second, more efficient commercial source of MSC cells has been developed in-house, using cord tissue. Consequently, we recently filed a second IND for CT‑Allo‑MSC cells using the same trial design and plan to shift our clinical trial effort to this new protocol, which we plan to open at several clinical sites in Southern California, including Hoag Hospital in Newport Beach, California.

QUILT 4001 is an hAd5 adenoviral COVID vaccine trial operated by our affiliate, ImmunityBio, under a Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration Agreement, described below. This phase Ib, open-label study will evaluate the safety, reactogenicity and immunogenicity of prophylactic vaccination with a second generation E1, E2b and E3 deleted human adenovirus‑5 vaccine in normal healthy volunteers. The test article is an hAd5‑S‑Fusion+N‑ETSD vaccine which encodes for an optimized spike protein (S‑Fusion), to enhance stability and cell surface expression of the receptor binding domain of the SARS‑CoV‑2 spike protein, and a Nucleocapsid protein with an enhanced T‑cell stimulation domain (N‑ETSD) to enhance cell-mediated immunity. Two cohorts of ten subjects will receive either 5×10¹⁰ or 1×10¹¹ virus particles per dose on days 1 and 22 and a third cohort of fifteen patients would receive the highest safe dose administered in the two initial cohorts. Safety and activity will be assessed for up to twelve months after the second dose. Toxicities will be graded using the Guidance for Industry - Toxicity Grading Scale for Healthy Adult and Adolescent Volunteers Enrolled in Preventive Vaccine Clinical Trials (2007).

20

As a result of the emergence of rapidly evolving resistance mutations in the spike protein, an IND amendment has been filed under the ongoing QUILT 4001 to incorporate a sublingual (SL) formulation of the hAd5‑S‑Fusion+N‑ETSD vaccine, thereby expanding the trial to a total of 60 patients across six study cohorts. In addition, a second IND has been filed to test an oral formulation in a separate phase Ib trial in the U.S. This trial, QUILT 4005, will study an additional 40 patients across four cohorts. The oral formulation employed is stable at room temperatures, which may help alleviate cold-chain logistics issues that have slowed deployment of currently approved COVID‑19 vaccines. Additionally, the oral and SL formulations are designed to enhance IgA secretion and may confer greater protection against infection. On February 11, 2021, we announced that the IND amendment for QUILT 4001 and the new IND for QUILT 4005 have been authorized by the FDA. These studies are now actively enrolling patients at Hoag Hospital, in Newport Beach, California. Once these new formulations have been tested for safety and immunogenicity, we will then proceed with a planned phase II/III trial using the most optimal combination.

The following table summarizes our current development programs:

N-803 is an IL-15RαFc Superagonist, a proprietary therapeutic cytokine designed to induce expansion of native NK and CD8+ T‑cells without concurrent stimulation of T‑regulatory cells; Aldoxorubicin (Aldox) is a proprietary albumin-bound doxorubicin complex that is designed to preferentially accumulate in a tumor’s low pH environment. Both agents are in late-stage clinical development by our affiliate, ImmunityBio, which has exclusive, worldwide rights to the agents. Avelumab is an FDA approved checkpoint inhibitor marketed by Pfizer.

* Program owned by NantKwest and subject to Joint Development Agreement with ImmunityBio.

† Program owned by ImmunityBio and subject to Joint Development Agreement with NantKwest.

‡ QUILT number not yet designated.

Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration Agreement with ImmunityBio

On August 21, 2020, we entered into a definitive agreement, which we refer to as the Collaboration Agreement, with ImmunityBio to pursue collaborative joint development, manufacturing and marketing of certain COVID‑19 therapeutics and vaccines. The terms of the Collaboration Agreement supersede and replace the terms of the binding term sheet executed on May 22, 2020. Through their efforts, the parties agreed to jointly develop ceNK, haNK, MSC, hAd5, and N‑803, a novel IL‑15 superagonist fusion protein, for the prevention and treatment of SARS‑CoV‑2 viral infections and associated conditions in humans, including without limitation, COVID‑19. Pursuant to the Collaboration Agreement, we have contributed our ceNK, haNK, and MSC product candidates and certain of our manufacturing capabilities, and ImmunityBio has contributed their hAd5 and N‑803 product candidates. hAd5 has been developed as a vaccine, and ceNK, haNK, MSC and N‑803 have each been developed as therapeutics for treating COVID‑19 at various stages of infection.

21

From and after the effective date of the Collaboration Agreement, the parties will share equally in all costs relating to developing and manufacturing of the product candidates globally with the exception of certain laboratory equipment purchases that will be borne solely by us. With the exception of N‑803, we will be primarily responsible for the manufacture of each product. Each party will be responsible for the regulatory affairs and the commercialization relating to its contributed products. The global net profits from the collaboration products will be shared 60%/40% in favor of the party contributing the product on which the sales are based except if the parties mutually agree because of certain circumstances. All net profits from sales of combined collaboration products will be shared equally. This collaboration is supervised by a joint steering committee, which is comprised of an equal number of representatives from both parties. The term of the agreement will be five years and it is renewable for an additional five year period upon mutual agreement. Each party will also have a right to terminate in the event of material breach, bankruptcy, or insolvency.

In this Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration, we contributed the following programs:

ImmunityBio contributed the following programs:

In addition to the above programs contributed by each party, we have contributed our manufacturing capabilities in the form of facilities, equipment, personnel and related know-how, including our GMP manufacturing facility in El Segundo, California, and ImmunityBio has contributed certain manufacturing equipment and related technology and know-how. To date, NantKwest and ImmunityBio have each prepared a GMP-ready manufacturing plant for COVID‑19 vaccine production, which we and ImmunityBio expect will have a combined estimated capacity to produce sufficient clinical supply for our planned studies in 2021. We have prepared one of our GMP manufacturing facilities previously used to manufacture product for our oncology trials to manufacture and produce the hAd5 vaccine candidate and have readied a new, well-equipped location to manufacture and produce clinical products for our oncology trials, which resulted in additional facilities and related facility operating costs starting in the third quarter of 2020. We have established a clinical product inventory to continue to supply clinical product for our ongoing oncology trials while this new facility was being readied. The new facility will resume clinical product supply for our oncology trial starting in early 2021. In addition, we have repurposed some of our personnel overseeing quality of our oncology programs to support the Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration. We also expect to hire additional staff to support the Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration. We believe the Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration will have no material impact on our current oncology efforts and trials, and we expect that we will be able to continue to manufacture adequate product to continue our ongoing oncology trials.

Competition

The biopharmaceutical industry is characterized by intense and dynamic competition to develop new technologies and proprietary therapies. Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will have to compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future. We believe that our base proprietary aNK platform, differentiated haNK, taNK and t‑haNK product candidates, strategic collaborations and cell-based immunotherapy expertise may provide us with competitive advantages. However, we face potential competition from various sources, including larger and better-funded pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, as well as from academic institutions, governmental agencies and public and private research institutions. The key competitive factors affecting the success of any approved product will include its efficacy, safety profile, pricing, and method of administration, as well as the level of promotional activity invested in it.

Our haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK product candidates compete with other cell and molecule-based immunotherapy approaches using or targeting natural killer cells, NKT cells, T‑cells, and dendritic cells. Competitors focused on CAR‑T related treatment approaches include AbbVie Inc., Atara Biotherapeutics, Inc., Precigen Corporation, Inc., Allogene Therapeutics, Inc., Bristol‑Myers Squibb Company, Beijing Immunochina Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd., Cellular Biomedicine Group, Inc., iCell Gene Therapeutics LLC, JW Therapeutics Co., Ltd., Amgen, Inc., Leucid Bio Ltd., Bellicum Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Medisix Therapeutics Pte Ltd., Bluebird Bio, Inc., Mesoblast Ltd., Calibr/Scripps Research, Mustang Bio, Inc., Carina Biotech, Inc., CARsgen Therapeutics, CRISPR Therapeutics, Inc., GEMoaB Monoclonals GmbH, Nanjing Legend Biotechnology Co., Ltd, Cartherics Pty Ltd, Novartis AG, Pfizer, Inc., Cellectis SA, Poseida Therapeutics, Inc., Prepromene Bio, Inc., Celularity, Inc., Servier Laboratories, Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc., Celyad SA, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, Fortress Biotech, Inc., TC BioPharm Ltd., Tessa Therapeutics Pte Ltd, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Tmunity Therapeutics, Inc., Transposagen Biopharmaceuticals, Inc., Humanigen, Inc., Immune Therapeutics, Inc., and Xyphos, Inc./Astellas.

22

Competitor companies focused on other T‑cell based approaches include Adaptimmune Ltd., Adicet Bio, Inc., Autolus Therapeutics, plc, Cell Medica Limited, Eureka Therapeutics, Inc., Formula Pharmaceuticals, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline plc., Green Cross LabCell Corp., Immatics Biotechnologies GmbH, Immunocore Limited, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc., Kiadis Pharma Netherlands B.V., Lion TCR Pte Ltd., MolMed, S.p.A., Precision Biosciences, Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Noile‑Immune Biotech, Inc., Anixa Biosciences, Inc., Beam Therapeutics Inc., BioNTech SE, Cartesian Therapeutics, Inc., Marker Therapeutics, Inc., Refuge Biotechnologies, Inc., Repertoire Immune Medicines, Inc., Sensei Biotherapeutics, Inc., Senti Biosciences, Inc., TCR² Therapeutics Inc., TScan Therapeutics, Inc., and Takara Bio, Inc.

Competitor companies focused on dendritic cell based approaches include Argos Therapeutics, Inc., Biovest International, Inc., ImmunoCellular Therapeutics, Ltd., Merck & Co, Inc./Immune Design, Inc., Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Precigen Corporation, Inc., Medigene AG, and Northwest Biotherapeutics, Inc.

Competitor companies focused on natural killer cell based approaches include Acepodia, Inc., Carabou Biosciences, Inc., Catamaran Bio Inc., Celularity, Inc., Century Therapeutics, Inc., Cytovia Therapeutics, Inc., Glycostem Therapeutics BV, Kiadis Pharma Netherlands B.V./CytoSen Therapeutics, Inc., Dragonfly Therapeutics, Inc., Editas Medicine, Inc., EMERcell, Exacis Biotherapeutics, Inc., Fate Therapeutics, Inc., Gamida Cell, Ltd., INmune Bio Inc., Nkarta Therapeutics, Inc., Onkimmune Ltd., Oncternal Therapeutics, Inc., NKMax America, Artiva Biotherapeutics/Merck, HebeCell Corp., Vycellix, Inc., oNKo‑innate Pty Ltd., ONK Therapeutics Limited, Sanofi, S.A., Shoreline Biosciences, Inc., Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, XNK Therapeutics AB, Zelluna Immunotherapy AS, and Ziopharm Oncology, Inc.

Competitor companies focused on large molecule immunotherapy approaches, including those overlapping the natural killer cell space, include Cytomx Therapeutics, Inc., Compass Therapeutics, Inc., Innate Pharma SA, Nektar Therapeutics, Inc., and Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc.

Other potential immunotherapy competitors include Affimed GmbH, AgenTus Therapeutics, Inc., Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Codiak Biosciences, Glycostem Therapeutics BV, Kuur Therapeutics Limited, Triumvira Immunologics, Incysus Therapeutics, Inc., GammaDelta Therapeutics Ltd., Lyell Immunopharma, Inc., and GT Biopharma, Inc.

There are currently four approved T‑cell based treatments that are marketed by Novartis AG, Gilead Sciences/Kite Pharma (two therapeutics), and the Bristol‑Myers Squibb Company. There is currently one approved dendritic cell-based cancer vaccine marketed by Dendron Pharmaceuticals, LLC for the treatment of metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer.

Competitor companies focused on COVID‑19 cell therapy currently include AstraZeneca plc, Athersys, Inc./Healios K.K., Capricor Therapeutics, Inc., CAR‑T (Shanghai) Biotechnology, Cellavita Pesquisa Científica Ltda, Cellenkos, Inc., Cellular Biomedicine Group, Inc., Celularity, Inc., Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc., Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chongqing Sidemu Biotechnology Technology/ImmunCyte Life Sciences, Inc., Enlivex Therapeutics Ltd, Green Cross LabCell Corp., Hope Biosciences, Johnson & Johnson, Mesoblast Limited, Moderna, Inc., NovaVax, Inc., Orbsen Therapeutics Limited, Pfizer, Inc./BioNTech SE, Pluristem Therapeutics, Inc., Rigshospitalet, Tianhe Stem Cell Biotechnologies Inc., University of Minnesota/Fate Therapeutics, Inc., and Xinjiang Medical University.

In addition, a very large number of companies, government agencies and academic centers around the world are developing COVID‑19 vaccines, and many of these entities are in more advanced stages of development than ImmunityBio, including some that have started Phase II and/or III clinical trials or already have emergency regulatory approval in some regions. Even if ImmunityBio’s COVID‑19 vaccine candidate is ultimately approved for marketing, the value of our profit-sharing opportunity would be adversely impacted if other COVID‑19 vaccines are approved earlier or show better efficacy or safety than ImmunityBio’s COVID‑19 vaccine candidate.

Many of our competitors, either alone or with their strategic partners, have substantially greater financial, technical and human resources than we do, as well as significantly greater experience in the discovery and development of product candidates, obtaining FDA and other regulatory approvals of treatments and commercializing those treatments. Accordingly, our competitors may be more successful than us in obtaining approval for treatments and achieving widespread market acceptance. Our competitors’ treatments may be more effective, or more effectively marketed and sold, than any treatment we may commercialize, and they may render our treatments obsolete or non-competitive before we can recover the expenses of developing and commercializing any of our treatments.

Mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, and establishing clinical study sites and subject registration for clinical studies, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. Smaller or clinical-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.

23

We anticipate that we will face intense and increasing competition as new therapies enter the market and advanced technologies become available. We expect any treatments that we develop and commercialize to compete on the basis of, among other things, efficacy, safety, convenience of administration and delivery, price, the level of generic competition and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payors.

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have a better safety profile, are more convenient or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. 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. In addition, we expect that our therapeutic products, if approved, will be priced at a significant premium over competitive generic products and our ability to compete may be affected in many cases by insurers or other third-party payors seeking to encourage the use of generic products.

Intellectual Property

We strive to protect and enhance the proprietary technology, inventions, and improvements that are commercially important to our business, including seeking, maintaining, and defending patent rights, whether developed internally or licensed from third parties. Our policy is to seek to protect our proprietary position by, among other methods, filing patent applications in the U.S. and in jurisdictions outside of the U.S. related to our proprietary technology, inventions, improvements, and product candidates that are important to the development and implementation of our business. We seek to consistently file follow-on patent applications on further improvements and features of our NK cell-based products, thereby adding additional layers of protection and reducing reliance on our original patents that would be the earliest to expire and may be subject to challenge. We also rely on trade secrets and know-how relating to our proprietary technology and product candidates, continuing innovation, and in-licensing opportunities to develop, strengthen, and maintain our proprietary position in the field of natural killer cell-based immunotherapy. We expect to rely on data exclusivity, market exclusivity, patent term adjustments and patent term extensions when available, as well as on regulatory protection afforded through orphan drug designations. Our commercial success may depend in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other proprietary protection for our technology, inventions, and improvements; to preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets; to maintain our licenses to use intellectual property owned by third parties; to defend and enforce our proprietary rights, including our patents; and to operate without infringing on the valid and enforceable patents and other proprietary rights of third parties.

We have developed and in-licensed numerous patents and patent applications and we possess substantial know-how and trade secrets relating to the development and commercialization of natural killer cell-based immunotherapy product candidates, including related manufacturing processes and technology. As of December 31, 2020, our owned and licensed patent portfolio consists of 66 patents and pending patent applications and provisional filings in the U.S. disclosing subject matter directed to certain of our proprietary technology, inventions, and improvements and our most advanced product candidates, as well as 216 licensed and owned patents and pending applications in 24 jurisdictions outside of the U.S., including 26 Patent Cooperation Treaty applications, that, in many cases, are counterparts to the foregoing U.S. patents and patent applications. For example, these patents and patent applications include claims directed to:

As for the NK cell-based immunotherapy products and processes we develop and commercialize, in the normal course of business, we intend to pursue, when possible, composition, method of use, dosing and formulation patent protection. We may also pursue patent protection with respect to manufacturing and drug development processes and technology. The patents and patent applications outside of the U.S. in our portfolio are held primarily in Europe, Canada, Australia, China, Japan and Korea.

24

Individual patents extend for varying periods of time, depending upon the date of filing of the patent application, the date of patent issuance, and the legal term of patents in the countries in which they are obtained. Generally, patents issued for applications filed in the U.S. are effective for 20 years from the earliest effective filing date. The patent term may be adjusted to compensate for delayed patent issuance, when such delays are caused by the patent office or successful appeals against patent office actions. There is no limit on this patent term adjustment. In addition, in certain instances, a patent term can be extended to recapture a portion of the term effectively lost as a result of the FDA regulatory review period. The restoration period cannot be longer than five years and the total patent term, including the restoration period, must not exceed 14 years following FDA approval. The duration of patents outside of the U.S. varies in accordance with provisions of applicable local law, but typically is also 20 years from the earliest effective filing date. Our issued patents are anticipated to expire at varying intervals through 2039. If patents are issued on our pending patent applications, the resulting patents are projected to expire at various dates through 2040. However, the actual protection afforded by a patent varies on a product-by-product basis, from country-to-country, and depends upon many factors, including the type of patent, the scope of its coverage, the availability of regulatory-related extensions, the availability of legal remedies in a particular country, and the validity and enforceability of the patent.

The patent positions of companies like ours are generally uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions. No consistent policy regarding the scope of claims allowable in patents in the field of immunotherapy has emerged in the U.S. The patent situation outside of the U.S. is even more uncertain. Changes in either the patent laws or their interpretation in the U.S. and other countries may diminish our ability to protect our inventions and enforce our intellectual property rights, and more generally could affect the value of our intellectual property. In particular, our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, offering to sell, or importing products that infringe our intellectual property will depend in part on our success in obtaining and enforcing patent claims that cover our technology, inventions, and improvements. With respect to both licensed and company-owned intellectual property, we cannot be sure that patents will be granted with respect to any of our pending patent applications or with respect to any patent applications filed by us in the future, nor can we be sure that any of our existing patents or any patents that may be granted to us in the future will be commercially useful in protecting our products and the methods used to manufacture those products. Moreover, even our issued patents do not guarantee us the right to practice our technology in relation to the commercialization of our products. However, the area of patent and other intellectual property rights in biotechnology is an evolving one with many risks and uncertainties, and third parties may have blocking patents that could be used to prevent us from commercializing our patented product candidates and practicing our proprietary technology. Our issued patents and those that may issue in the future may be challenged, invalidated, or circumvented, which could limit our ability to stop competitors from marketing related products or limit the length of the term of patent protection that we may have for our product candidates. In addition, the rights granted under any issued patents may not provide us with protection or competitive advantages against competitors with similar technology. Furthermore, our competitors may independently develop similar technologies. For these reasons, we may have competition for our product candidates. Moreover, because of the extensive time required for development, testing and regulatory review of a potential product, it is possible that, before any particular product candidate can be commercialized, any related patent may expire or remain in force for only a short period following commercialization, thereby reducing any advantage of the patent.

As of December 31, 2020, our worldwide trademark portfolio was comprised of (i) 12 U.S. trademark registrations; (ii) two pending U.S. trademark application; (iii) 28 foreign trademark registrations, six of which are Madrid Protocol International registrations; and (iv) 24 pending foreign trademark applications.

We may also rely, in some circumstances, on trade secrets to protect our technology. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. We seek to protect our technology and product candidates, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with those who have access to our confidential information, including our employees, contractors, consultants, collaborators, and advisors. We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our proprietary technology and processes by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. Although we have confidence in these individuals, organizations, and systems, agreements or security measures may be breached and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or may be independently discovered by competitors. To the extent that our employees, contractors, consultants, collaborators, and advisors use intellectual property owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the rights in related or resulting know-how and inventions. For risks related to our proprietary technology, inventions, improvements and products, please see Part I, Item 1A, “Risk Factors – Risks Related to Intellectual Property” and “Legal Proceedings” of this Annual Report.

25

Collaboration Agreements

Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration Agreement.  As discussed above, on August 21, 2020, we entered into a definitive agreement, which we refer to as the Collaboration Agreement, with ImmunityBio to pursue collaborative joint development, manufacturing and marketing of certain COVID‑19 therapeutics and vaccines.

Cost Sharing Agreement.  In January 2020, but effective on October 1, 2019, we entered into a Cost Allocation Agreement with ImmunityBio and its subsidiaries to co-sponsor and conduct certain combination clinical trials (each a Joint Study) pursuant to clinical trial protocols wherein at least one investigational agent is a proprietary therapeutic drug candidate owned or controlled by NantKwest and at least one other investigational agent is a proprietary therapeutic drug candidate owned or controlled by ImmunityBio. Prior to initiating any activities for a Joint Study the parties agreed to enter into written work orders describing, amongst other things, development and management responsibilities, allocation of Joint Study costs and expenses, regulatory responsibilities, and any other matters relating to the Joint Study.

Under the Cost Allocation Agreement, each of ImmunityBio and the company will receive exclusive rights to any new intellectual property developed that relates solely to its respective study drug, and the parties will have joint co-equal rights in any other intellectual property. The Cost Allocation Agreement expires on June 22, 2022 with the option to renew for additional successive one-year terms, but work orders for any joint studies still in process at the time of termination will continue until the applicable study is completed.

We and ImmunityBio are splitting certain costs related to these joint studies equally in accordance with the terms of the Cost Allocation Agreement and related work orders. Shared Joint Study costs include cost related to conducting the Joint Study development activities, such as personnel related costs, as well as all costs associated with regulatory matters. Costs and expenses incurred in connection with the development, manufacturing, supply, delivery, and pre-patient administration dosing mechanism of each party’s study drug, are excluded from the shared Joint Study costs.

In January 2020, but effective on October 1, 2019, we executed Work Order Number One with ImmunityBio, pursuant to the Cost Allocation Agreement. Under Work Order Number One, the parties are conducting a clinical trial pursuant to the protocol titled QUILT 3.063: A phase 2 study of combination therapy with an IL‑15 superagonist (N‑803), off-the-shelf CD16‑targeted natural killer cells (haNK), and avelumab without cytotoxic chemotherapy in subjects with Merkel Cell Carcinoma (MCC) that has progressed on or after treatment with a checkpoint inhibitor. The ImmunityBio study drug included in this Joint Study is ImmunityBio’s proprietary IL‑15 superagonist known as N‑803, and our study drug is our proprietary “off-the-shelf” CD16-targeted natural killer cell therapy known as haNK. We are the sponsor of this Joint Study for purposes of regulatory matters, including submissions, correspondence, and communications. Additionally, we are designated as the contracting party to execute agreements with third and related parties relating to the Joint Study.

In July 2020, but effective on June 22, 2020, we executed Work Order Number Two with ImmunityBio, pursuant to the Cost Allocation Agreement. Under Work Order Number Two, the parties are conducting a clinical trial pursuant to the protocol titled QUILT 88: Open-label, randomized, comparative phase 2 study of combination immunotherapy with standard-of-care chemotherapy versus standard-of-care chemotherapy for first and second line treatment of locally or advanced metastatic pancreatic cancer. The ImmunityBio study drugs included in the joint study are ImmunityBio’s proprietary IL‑15 superagonist (N‑803) and Aldoxorubicin Hydrochloride (Aldoxorubicin), and our study drug is PD‑L1.t‑haNK. ImmunityBio is the sponsor of this Joint Study for purposes of regulatory matters, including submissions, correspondence, and communications with the FDA. Additionally, ImmunityBio is designated as the contracting party to execute agreements with third and related parties relating to this Joint Study.

Licenses

Viracta Therapeutics, Inc. In May 2017, we entered into an agreement with Viracta Therapeutics, Inc., or Viracta, to grant us exclusive worldwide rights to Viracta’s phase II drug candidate, VRx‑3996, for use in combination with our platform of NK cell therapies. In consideration for the license, we are obligated to pay to Viracta (i) mid-single digit percentage royalties of net sales of licensed products for therapeutic use, and (ii) milestone payments ranging from $10.0 million to $25.0 million for various regulatory approvals and cumulative net sales levels. We may terminate the agreement, in our sole discretion, in whole or on a product-by-product and/or country by country basis, at any time upon 90 days’ prior written notice. In addition, either party may terminate the agreement in the event of a material breach or for bankruptcy of the other party.

26

Hans G. Klingemann, M.D., Ph.D. We hold the worldwide rights, title and interest to the NK‑92 cell line, and we believe that we control commercial use of our NK‑92 cells in key territories. We also maintain and exclusively control the only clinical grade master cell bank for NK‑92. The original NK‑92 cell line was isolated by Hans G. Klingemann, M.D., Ph.D., our founder and Vice President of Research and Development, and all patents and patent applications pertaining to this cell line are now in the name of NantKwest, Inc. or ZelleRx Corporation, our former name. In February 2003, we obtained an exclusive, worldwide license from Dr. Klingemann to the NK‑92 cell line, and related NK‑92 patents and know-how, that had been assigned to him by the British Columbia Cancer Agency, to manufacture, use and sell products covered by the scope of any valid claim in any of the licensed patents. Dr. Klingemann subsequently assigned the cell line and those patents to us, but we are still obligated to pay a single-digit royalty on sales of licensed products to Dr. Klingemann, as well as to pay the British Columbia Cancer Agency a small percentage of our profits from the sale of the NK‑92 cell line that Dr. Klingemann obtained from them.

Fox Chase Cancer Center.  In July 2004, we entered into an exclusive license agreement with Fox Chase Cancer Center, or Fox Chase, pursuant to which we were granted an exclusive, worldwide, sublicensable license under certain patents and know-how pertaining to CD16 receptors-bearing NK‑92 cell lines. We agreed to pay Fox Chase low single-digit royalties on sales of licensed products. We are also obligated to pay Fox Chase a percentage of the royalties and other compensation we receive from sublicensees of our rights from Fox Chase. Fox Chase is obligated to assign the licensed patents to us if we commence a phase III clinical trial of a licensed product and, if this does not occur, our license expires when the last of the licensed patents expires. In late May 2020, we received a letter from Fox Chase alleging breaches of our license. If the letter is found to be a proper notice of termination and the alleged breaches are confirmed and found to be material, we will lose the licensed rights. We do not consider these licensed rights to be material.

Rush University Medical Center. In March 2004, we entered into a license agreement with Rush University Medical Center, pursuant to which Rush University Medical Center granted us an exclusive, worldwide, sublicensable license to certain intellectual property related to clinical use of NK‑92 to develop and commercialize products and processes for the treatment of melanoma and renal cancer, or for the diagnosis or treatment of non-melanoma and non-renal cancer. In consideration for the license, we were obligated to pay to Rush University Medical Center single-digit royalties on sales of licensed products with a minimum royalty payment of $25,000 per year for 12 years. The agreement also provided for payments upon completion of certain clinical, regulatory and commercialization milestones. We also agreed to pay to Rush University Medical Center a portion of certain payments that we receive under sublicensing arrangements. The license had a term of 12 years from 2006, the year in which royalty payments were first made, and included customary termination rights for both parties. Beginning in 2018, this license converted to a perpetual, irrevocable, fully paid royalty-free, exclusive license.

University Health Network. In May 2005, we entered into a license agreement with University Health Network, or UHN, pursuant to which we obtained from UHN an exclusive, worldwide, sublicensable license to certain intellectual property relating to NK‑92 clinical trials data from UHN to develop and commercialize products and processes for the diagnosis and treatment of certain hematological malignancies. Our license from UHN will automatically expire if we have not filed for regulatory approval or launched a licensed product within specified periods of time, and also includes other customary termination rights for both parties.

Joint Development and License Agreements

Precigen Corporation, Inc. (formerly known as Intrexon Corporation). In February 2010, we entered into a 17‑year agreement with Precigen Corporation, Inc., or Precigen, pursuant to which we granted to Precigen a worldwide, sublicensable license which may be exclusive with respect to certain indications designated by Precigen, under certain patents relating to NK‑92 cells to develop and commercialize modified NK‑92 cells that express Precigen’s proprietary gene sequences for use as therapeutic and prophylactic agents in humans in specified therapeutic areas. Precigen paid us a one-time license fee and is also obligated to pay non-material milestone payments with respect to specific indications, a royalty on net sales of the licensed products and a portion of the revenue Precigen receives from third party sublicensees of its rights from us. Precigen has the right to terminate the agreement upon 180 days’ notice and both parties have the right to terminate the agreement for the other’s uncured breach of the agreement.

We have licensed or sub-licensed our cell lines and intellectual property to numerous other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for non-clinical uses such as laboratory testing. Such licenses generally require the licensee to pay an upfront fee and annual research and commercial fees for products sold using our intellectual property and cell lines.

Supply Agreements

We have, and expect that we will continue, to enter into supply agreements with third parties and related parties to provide investigational agents to be used in our clinical trials.

27

Anticipated Agreements and Considerations

In addition to the collaboration and license agreements discussed above, we may enter into a commercial agreement relating to an IL‑15 superagonist product developed by ImmunityBio, if the proposed merger with ImmunityBio is not consummated, and we are also pursuing certain strategic research and/or license agreements with third parties to develop our product candidate pipeline. These types of agreements do not typically specify how sales will be apportioned between the parties upon successful commercialization of the product. As a result, we cannot guarantee that we will receive a percentage of the revenue that is at least proportional to the costs that we will incur in commercializing the product candidate. Furthermore, if Dr. Soon-Shiong was to cease his affiliation with us or with NantWorks, any affiliated entities may be unwilling to continue their relationships with us on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, which in turn may impede our ability to control the supply chain for our combination therapies.

Government Regulation

The FDA and other regulatory authorities at federal, state, and local levels, as well as in foreign countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, import, export, safety, effectiveness, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, record keeping, approval, advertising, promotion, marketing, post-approval monitoring, and post-approval reporting of biologics such as those we are developing. We, along with third-party contractors, will be required to navigate the various preclinical, clinical and commercial approval requirements of the governing regulatory agencies of the countries in which we wish to conduct studies or seek approval or licensure of our product candidates. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local, and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.

The process required by the FDA before biologic product candidates may be marketed in the U.S. generally involves the following:

The testing and approval process requires substantial time, effort and financial resources, and we cannot be certain that any approvals for our product candidates will be granted on a timely basis, if at all. Prior to beginning the first clinical trial with a product candidate, we must submit an IND to the FDA. An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational new drug product to humans. The central focus of an IND submission is on the general investigational plan and the protocol(s) for clinical studies. The IND also includes results of animal and in vitro studies assessing the toxicology, pharmacokinetics, pharmacology, and pharmacodynamic characteristics of the product; chemistry, manufacturing, and controls information; and any available human data or literature to support the use of the investigational product. An IND must become effective before human clinical trials may begin. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA, within the 30‑day time period, raises safety concerns or questions about the proposed clinical trial. In such a case, the IND may be placed on clinical hold and the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns or questions before the clinical trial can begin. Submission of an IND therefore may or may not result in FDA authorization to begin a clinical trial.

28

When a clinical trial using genetically engineered cells is conducted at, or sponsored by, institutions receiving National Institutes of Health, or NIH, funding for recombinant DNA research, prior to the submission of an IND to the FDA, a protocol and related documentation is submitted to and the study is registered with the NIH Office of Biotechnology Activities, or OBA, pursuant to the NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules, or NIH Guidelines. Compliance with the NIH Guidelines is mandatory for investigators at institutions receiving NIH funds for research involving recombinant DNA, and many companies and other institutions not otherwise subject to the NIH Guidelines voluntarily follow them. The NIH is responsible for convening the Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee, or RAC, a federal advisory committee that discusses protocols that raise novel or particularly important scientific, safety, or ethical considerations at one of its quarterly public meetings. The OBA will notify the FDA of the RAC’s decision regarding the necessity for full public review of a protocol. RAC proceedings and reports are posted to the OBA web site and may be accessed by the public. If the FDA allows the IND to proceed, but the RAC decides that full public review of the protocol is warranted, the FDA will request at the completion of its IND review that sponsors delay initiation of the protocol until after completion of the RAC review process.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with cGCPs, which include the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent for their participation in any clinical study. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the study, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. A separate submission to the existing IND must be made for each successive clinical trial conducted during product development and for any subsequent protocol amendments. Furthermore, an independent IRB, for each site proposing to conduct the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial and its informed consent form before the clinical trial begins at that site, and must monitor the study until completed. Regulatory authorities, the IRB or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or that the trial is unlikely to meet its stated objectives. Some studies also include oversight by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical study sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board, which provides authorization for whether or not a study may move forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the study and may halt the clinical trial if it determines that there is an unacceptable safety risk for subjects or other grounds, such as no demonstration of efficacy. There are also requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical studies and clinical study results to public registries.

For purposes of BLA approval, human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap.

Phase I, phase II and phase III testing may not be completed successfully within a specified period, if at all, and there can be no assurance that the data collected will support FDA approval or licensure of the product. Concurrent with clinical trials, companies may complete additional animal studies and develop additional information about the biological characteristics of the product candidate, and must finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. To help reduce the risk of the introduction of adventitious agents with use of biological products, the Public Health Service Act, or PHSA, emphasizes the importance of manufacturing control for products whose attributes cannot be precisely defined. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final product, or for biologics, the safety, purity and potency. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

Further, as a result of the COVID‑19 pandemic, we may be required to develop and implement additional clinical trial policies and procedures designed to help protect subjects from the COVID‑19 virus. For example, the FDA has issued guidance on conducting clinical trials during the pandemic, which describes a number of considerations for sponsors of clinical trials impacted by the pandemic, including certain reporting requirements, and additional guidance on GMP considerations for responding to COVID‑19 infection and other topics. We may be required to make further adjustments to our clinical trials or business operations based on current or future guidance and regulatory requirements as a result of the COVID‑19 pandemic.

29

BLA Submission and Review by the FDA

Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, the results of product development, nonclinical studies and clinical trials are submitted to the FDA as part of a BLA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. The BLA must include all relevant data available from pertinent preclinical and clinical studies, including negative or ambiguous results, as well as positive findings, together with detailed information relating to the product’s chemistry, manufacturing, controls, and proposed labeling, among other things. Data can come from company-sponsored clinical studies intended to test the safety and effectiveness of a use of the product or from a number of alternative sources, including studies initiated by investigators. The submission of a BLA requires payment of a substantial user fee to the FDA, and the sponsor of an approved BLA is subject to annual product and establishment user fees. These fees typically increase annually. A waiver of user fees may be obtained under certain limited circumstances.

Within 60 days following submission of the application, the FDA reviews a BLA to determine if it is substantially complete before the agency accepts it for filing. The FDA may refuse to file any BLA that it deems incomplete or not properly reviewable at the time of submission and may request additional information. In this event, the BLA must be resubmitted with the additional information. Once a BLA has been filed, the FDA’s goal is to review the application within ten months after it accepts the application for filing, or, if the application relates to an unmet medical need in a serious or life-threatening indication, six months after the FDA accepts the application for filing. The review process is often significantly extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. 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. The FDA may convene an advisory committee to provide clinical insight on application review questions. Before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities comply with cGMP requirements and are adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. FDA regulations also require tissue establishments to register and list their HCT/Ps with the FDA and, when applicable, to evaluate donors through screening and testing. Additionally, before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with cGCP. If the FDA determines that the application, manufacturing process or manufacturing facilities are not acceptable, it will outline the deficiencies in the submission and often will request additional testing or information. Notwithstanding the submission of any requested additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval.

The testing and approval process requires substantial time, effort and financial resources, and each may take several years to complete. The FDA may not grant approval on a timely basis, or at all, and we may encounter difficulties or unanticipated costs in our efforts to secure necessary governmental approvals, which could delay or preclude us from marketing our products. After the FDA evaluates a BLA and conducts inspections of manufacturing facilities where the investigational product and/or its drug substance will be produced, the FDA may issue an approval letter, a complete response letter, or a not approval letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A complete response letter indicates that the review cycle of the application is complete and the application is not ready for approval. A complete response letter may request additional information or clarification. The FDA may delay or refuse approval of a BLA if applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied, require additional testing or information and/or require post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor safety or efficacy of a product.

If regulatory approval of a product is granted, such approval may entail limitations on the indicated uses for which such product may be marketed. For example, the FDA may approve the BLA with a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, plan to mitigate risks, which could include medication guides, physician communication plans, or other restrictions to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. The FDA also may condition approval on, among other things, changes to proposed labeling or the development of adequate controls and specifications. Once approved, the FDA may withdraw the product approval if compliance with pre- and post-marketing regulatory standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the marketplace. The FDA may require one or more phase IV post-market studies and surveillance to further assess and monitor the product’s safety and effectiveness after commercialization, and may limit further marketing of the product based on the results of these post-marketing studies. 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.

30

A sponsor may seek approval of its product candidate under programs designed to accelerate the FDA’s review and approval of new drugs and biological products that meet certain criteria. Specifically, new drugs and biological products are eligible for fast track designation if they are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the condition. For a fast track product, the FDA may consider sections of the BLA for review on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted if relevant criteria are met. A fast track designated product candidate may also qualify for priority review, under which the FDA sets the target date for FDA action on the BLA at six months after the FDA accepts the application for filing. Priority review is granted when there is evidence that the proposed product would be a significant improvement in the safety or effectiveness of the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of a serious condition. If criteria are not met for priority review, the application is subject to the standard FDA review period of ten months after the FDA accepts the application for filing. Priority review designation does not change the scientific/medical standard for approval or the quality of evidence necessary to support approval.

Under the accelerated approval program, the FDA may approve a BLA on the basis of either a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity, or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. Post-marketing studies or completion of ongoing studies after marketing approval are generally required to verify the biologic’s clinical benefit in relationship to the surrogate endpoint or ultimate outcome in relationship to the clinical benefit. In addition, the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act, or FDASIA, which was enacted and signed into law in 2012, established breakthrough therapy designation. A sponsor may seek FDA designation of its product candidate as a breakthrough therapy if the product candidate is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs or biologics, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the therapy may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. Sponsors may request the FDA to designate a breakthrough therapy at the time of, or any time after, the submission of an IND, but ideally before an end-of-phase II meeting with the FDA. If the FDA designates a breakthrough therapy, it may take actions appropriate to expedite the development and review of the application, which may include holding meetings with the sponsor and the review team throughout the development of the therapy; providing timely advice to, and interactive communication with, the sponsor regarding the development of the drug to ensure that the development program to gather the nonclinical and clinical data necessary for approval is as efficient as practicable; involving senior managers and experienced review staff, as appropriate, in a collaborative, cross-disciplinary review; assigning a cross-disciplinary project lead for the FDA review team to facilitate an efficient review of the development program and to serve as a scientific liaison between the review team and the sponsor; and considering alternative clinical trial designs when scientifically appropriate, which may result in smaller or more efficient clinical trials that require less time to complete and may minimize the number of patients exposed to a potentially less efficacious treatment. Breakthrough designation also allows the sponsor to file sections of the BLA for review on a rolling basis. We may seek designation as a breakthrough therapy for some or all of our product candidates.

Fast track designation, priority review and breakthrough therapy designation do not change the standards for approval but may expedite the development or approval process.

Orphan Drugs

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug or biologic intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as a disease or condition with a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the U.S., or a patient population greater than 200,000 individuals in the U.S. and when there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available the drug or biologic in the U.S. will be recovered from sales in the U.S. for that drug or biologic. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting a BLA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA.

If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for a particular active ingredient for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a full BLA, to market the same biologic for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity or if the FDA finds that the holder of the orphan drug exclusivity has not shown that it can assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the orphan drug to meet the needs of patients with the disease or condition for which the drug was designated. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different drug or biologic for the same disease or condition, or the same drug or biologic for a different disease or condition. Among the other benefits of orphan drug designation are tax credits for certain research and a waiver of the BLA application user fee.

31

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

Post-Approval Requirements

Any products manufactured or distributed by us pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to record keeping, reporting of adverse experiences, periodic reporting, distribution, and advertising and promotion of the product. After approval, most changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications or other labeling claims, are subject to prior FDA review and approval. There also are continuing, annual user fee requirements for any marketed products and the establishments at which such products are manufactured, as well as new application fees for supplemental applications with clinical data. Biologic manufacturers and their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements upon us and any third-party manufacturers that we may decide to use. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated, and, depending on the significance of the change, may require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose reporting requirements upon us, and any third party manufacturers, that we may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMP and other aspects of regulatory compliance. We cannot be certain that we or our present or future suppliers will be able to comply with the cGMP regulations and other FDA regulatory requirements. If our present or future suppliers are not able to comply with these requirements, the FDA may, among other things, halt our clinical trials, require us to recall a product from distribution, or withdraw approval of the BLA.

Future FDA and state inspections may identify compliance issues at our facilities or at the facilities of contract manufacturers that may disrupt production or distribution, or require substantial resources to correct. In addition, discovery of previously unknown problems with a product or the failure to comply with applicable requirements may result in restrictions on a product, manufacturer or holder of an approved BLA, including withdrawal or recall of the product from the market or other voluntary, FDA-initiated or judicial action that could delay or prohibit further marketing.

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

The FDA closely regulates the marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of biologics. A company can make only those claims relating to safety and efficacy, purity and potency that are approved by the FDA and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in, among other things, adverse publicity, warning letters, corrective advertising and potential civil and criminal penalties, and exclusion from participation in governmental health programs, like Medicare and Medicaid. Physicians may prescribe legally available products for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and that differ from those tested by us and approved by the FDA. Such off-label uses are common across medical specialties. Physicians may believe that such off-label uses are the best treatment for many patients in varied circumstances. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. The FDA does, however, restrict manufacturer’s communications on the subject of off-label use of their products.

32

Other Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements

Our sales, promotion, medical education, clinical research and other activities following product approval will be subject to regulation by numerous regulatory and law enforcement authorities in the U.S. in addition to the FDA, including potentially the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Justice, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, other divisions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and state and local governments. Our promotional and scientific/educational programs must comply with the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the False Claims Act, physician payment transparency laws, privacy laws, security laws, and additional federal and state laws similar to the foregoing.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, the knowing and willing, direct or indirect offer, receipt, solicitation or payment of remuneration in exchange for or to induce the referral of patients, including the purchase, order or lease of any good, facility, item or service that would be paid for in whole or part by Medicare, Medicaid or other federal health care programs. Remuneration has been broadly defined to include anything of value, including cash, improper discounts, and free or reduced price items and services. The federal Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, formulary managers, and beneficiaries on the other. Although there are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution, the exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly. Practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchases or recommendations may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. Failure to meet all of the requirements of a particular applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the conduct per se illegal under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute. Instead, the legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all its facts and circumstances. Several courts have interpreted the statute’s intent requirement to mean that if any one purpose of an arrangement involving remuneration is to induce referrals of federal healthcare covered business, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute has been violated. The government has enforced the federal Anti-Kickback Statute to reach large settlements with healthcare companies based on sham research or consulting and other financial arrangements with physicians. Further, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it to have committed a violation. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act. Many states have similar laws that apply to their state health care programs, as well as private payors.

Federal false claims and false statement laws, including the federal civil False Claims Act, or FCA, imposes liability on persons or entities that, among other things, knowingly present or cause to be presented claims that are false or fraudulent or not provided as claimed for payment or approval by a federal health care program. The FCA has been used to prosecute persons or entities that “cause” the submission of claims for payment that are inaccurate or fraudulent, by, for example, providing inaccurate billing or coding information to customers, promoting a product off-label, submitting claims for services not provided as claimed, or submitting claims for services that were provided but not medically necessary. Actions under the FCA may be brought by the Attorney General, or as a qui tam action by a private individual, in the name of the government. Violations of the FCA can result in significant monetary penalties and treble damages. The federal government is using the FCA, and the accompanying threat of significant liability, in its investigation and prosecution of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies throughout the country, for example, in connection with the promotion of products for unapproved uses and other illegal sales and marketing practices. The government has obtained multi-million and multi-billion dollar settlements under the FCA in addition to individual criminal convictions under applicable criminal statutes. In addition, certain companies that were found to be in violation of the FCA have been forced to implement extensive corrective action plans and have often become subject to consent decrees or corporate integrity agreements, restricting the manner in which they conduct their business.

The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, created additional federal criminal statutes that prohibit, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors; knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services; and willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense. Like the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the Affordable Care Act amended the intent standard for certain healthcare fraud statutes under HIPAA such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation.

Given the significant size of actual and potential settlements, it is expected that the government will continue to devote substantial resources to investigating healthcare providers’ and manufacturers’ compliance with applicable fraud and abuse laws. In addition, many states have similar fraud and abuse statutes or regulations that may be broader in scope and may apply regardless of payor, in addition to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs. Additionally, to the extent that our products, once commercialized, are sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws.

33

In addition, there has been a recent trend of increased federal and state regulation of payments made to physicians and other healthcare providers. The Physician Payment Sunshine Act, or the Sunshine Act, enacted as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively, the Affordable Care Act, among other things, imposed new reporting requirements on 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 specific exceptions, for payments and other transfers of value made by them to physicians and teaching hospitals, as defined by law, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. Effective January 1, 2022, these annual reporting obligations will extend to include payments and transfers of value made during the previous year to certain non-physician covered recipients, such as physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, certified registered nurse anesthetists, anesthesiologist assistants, and certified nurse-midwives. Covered manufacturers are required to collect and report detailed payment data and submit legal attestation to the accuracy of such data to the government each year. Failure to submit required information may result in civil monetary penalties of up to an aggregate of $176,495 per year (or up to an aggregate of $1,176,638 per year for “knowing failures”), subject to adjustment for inflation, for all payments, transfers of value or ownership or investment interests that are not timely, accurately and completely reported in an annual submission. Additionally, entities that do not comply with mandatory reporting requirements may be subject to a corporate integrity agreement. Non-compliance under the Sunshine Act may increase government scrutiny and increase liability under other healthcare laws. Certain states also mandate implementation of commercial compliance programs, impose restrictions on covered manufacturers’ marketing practices and/or require the tracking and reporting of gifts, compensation and other remuneration to physicians and other healthcare professionals.

We may also be subject to data privacy and security regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, imposes specified requirements on certain health care providers, plans and clearinghouses (collectively, “covered entities”) and their “business associates,” relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s security standards directly applicable to “business associates,” defined as independent contractors or agents of covered entities that create, receive, maintain or transmit protected health information in connection with providing a service for or on behalf of a covered entity. HITECH also increased the civil and criminal penalties that may be imposed against covered entities, business associates and possibly other persons, and gave state attorneys general new authority 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, certain states have their own laws that govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other and/or HIPAA in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts.

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of such laws or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including, without limitation, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs, imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, and diminished profits and future earnings, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our financial results.

In addition to the foregoing health care laws, we are also subject to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or FCPA, and similar worldwide anti-bribery laws, which generally prohibit companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to government officials or private-sector recipients for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. We also maintain an anti-corruption policy which mandates compliance with the FCPA and similar anti-bribery laws applicable to our business throughout the world. However, we cannot assure you that such a policy, or procedures implemented to enforce such a policy, will protect us from intentional, reckless or negligent acts committed by our employees, distributors, partners, collaborators or agents. Violations of these laws, or allegations of such violations, could result in fines, penalties or prosecution and have a negative impact on our business, results of operations and reputation.

Coverage and Reimbursement

Sales of pharmaceutical products depend significantly on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement are provided by third-party payors. Third-party payors include state and federal government health care programs, managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations. Although we currently believe that third-party payors will provide coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates, if approved, we cannot be certain of this. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price, examining the cost-effectiveness, and reducing reimbursement for medical products and services. In addition, significant uncertainty exists as to the reimbursement status of newly approved healthcare products. The U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have continued implementing cost containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on coverage and reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. Adoption of price controls and cost containment measures and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures could further limit our net revenue and results. We may need to conduct expensive clinical studies to demonstrate the comparative cost-effectiveness of our products. The product candidates that we develop may not be considered cost-effective and thus may not be covered or

34

sufficiently reimbursed. It is time consuming and expensive for us to seek coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors, as each payor will make its own determination as to whether to cover a product and at what level of reimbursement. Thus, one payor’s decision to provide coverage and adequate reimbursement for a product does not assure that another payor will provide coverage or that the reimbursement levels will be adequate. Moreover, a payor’s decision to provide coverage for a drug product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Reimbursement may not be available or sufficient to allow us to sell our products on a competitive and profitable basis.

Healthcare Reform

The U.S. and some foreign jurisdictions are considering or have enacted a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that could affect our ability to sell our products profitably. Among policy makers and payors in the U.S. and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and/or expanding access. In the U.S., the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives.

By way of example, in March 2010, the Affordable Care Act was signed into 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 the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms. Among the provisions of the Affordable Care Act of importance to our potential drug candidates are:

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. These changes include, among others, the Budget Control Act of 2011, which mandates aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year effective April 1, 2013, and, will remain in effect through 2030, with the exception of a temporary suspension implemented under various COVID‑19 relief legislation from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021, unless additional Congressional action is taken. The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which could have a material adverse effect on customers for our product candidates, if approved, and, accordingly, our financial operations.

35

We expect that the Affordable Care Act, as well as other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and lower reimbursement and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government-funded programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our drugs. Furthermore, the current presidential administration and Congress may continue to attempt broad sweeping changes to the current health care laws. We face uncertainties that might result from modifications or repeal of any of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act, including as a result of current and future executive orders and legislative actions. The impact of those changes on us and potential effect on the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries as a whole is currently unknown. However, any changes to the Affordable Care Act are likely to have an impact on our results of operations and may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. We cannot predict what other healthcare programs and regulations will ultimately be implemented at the federal or state level or the effect any future legislation or regulation in the U.S. may have on our business.

Foreign Regulation

In addition to regulations in the U.S., we will be subject to a variety of foreign regulations governing clinical trials and commercial sales and distribution of our products to the extent we choose to develop or sell any products outside of the U.S. The approval process varies from country to country and the time may be longer or shorter than that required to obtain FDA approval. The requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary greatly from country to country.

Employees

As of December 31, 2020, we had 171 employees. Among our employees, 23% are focused on research and development, 8% on clinical development and regulatory, 51% on manufacturing and quality, and 18% on general and administrative functions. Personnel of related companies who provide corporate, general and administrative, manufacturing strategy, research and development, regulatory and clinical trial strategy and other administrative support services under our shared services agreement with NantWorks are not included in this number. For additional information, see Note 10, Related Party Agreements, of the “Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report. We believe our ability to successfully achieve our vision depends on how effectively we manage our growth. Our leadership is focused on continuing to implement and improve our management systems, recruit and train new employees and cultivate and retain our existing team members. Our employees are a highly unique group of individuals across our drug discovery, preclinical development, clinical operations, regulatory affairs, manufacturing and quality, and executive leadership teams with deep experience in biotech across a breadth of novel scientific areas. We offer competitive compensation and benefits to all employees, as well as a host of other programs that enhance employee well-being in and outside of the workplace. We believe we have a positive relationship with our employees, and none of our employees are represented by a labor union or covered by collective bargaining agreements.

Corporate Information

We were incorporated on October 7, 2002 in the state of Illinois under the name ZelleRx Corporation. On January 22, 2010, we changed our name to Conkwest, Inc. In March 2014, we formed Conkwest, Inc., our wholly owned subsidiary in the state of Delaware, or Conkwest Delaware, for the purposes of changing the state of our incorporation to the state of Delaware. In March 2014, we merged with and into Conkwest Delaware, with Conkwest Delaware surviving the merger. On July 10, 2015, we changed our name to NantKwest, Inc. Our website address is www.nantkwest.com. The contents of our website are not incorporated by reference into this Form 10‑K. We provide free of charge through a link on our website access to our Annual Reports on Form 10‑K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10‑Q and Current Reports on Form 8‑K, as well as amendments to those reports, as soon as reasonably practical after the reports are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the Securities and Exchange Commission.

36

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks described below, as well as other information included in this Annual Report on Form 10‑K, or Annual Report, including our financial statements and the related notes, and the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” any of which may be relevant to decisions regarding an investment in or ownership of our stock. The occurrence of any of these risks could have a significant adverse effect on our reputation, business, financial condition, results of operations, growth and ability to accomplish our strategic objectives. We have organized the description of these risks into groupings in an effort to enhance readability, but many of the risks interrelate or could be grouped or ordered in other ways, so no special significance should be attributed to the groupings or order below.

Risk Factor Summary

Risks Related to Our Financial Condition and Capital Requirements:

Risks Relating to Our Business and Industry:

37

Risks Relating to Government Regulation:

Risks Relating to Our Intellectual Property:

Risks Relating to our Proposed Merger with ImmunityBio

Risks Relating to Our Common Stock:

38

Risks Related to Our Financial Condition and Capital Requirements

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history and have incurred significant losses since our inception, and we anticipate that we will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, which makes it difficult to assess our future viability.

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history upon which our business can be evaluated. To date, we have generated minimal revenue related to the non-clinical use of our cell lines and intellectual property, and we have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales. We have incurred operating losses on an annual basis since our formation and we may never become profitable. As of December 31, 2020, we had an accumulated deficit of $754.6 million. We incurred net losses of $92.4 million, $65.8 million, and $96.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively. Our losses have resulted principally from costs incurred in ongoing preclinical studies, clinical trials and operations, as well as other research and development expenses, and general and administrative expenses.

A critical aspect of our strategy is to invest significantly in expanding our haNK, taNK, t‑haNK, MSC and ceNK platforms and the development of our product candidates. We expect to incur significant expenses as we continue to expand our business, including in connection with conducting research and development across multiple therapeutic areas, participating in clinical trial activities, continuing to acquire or in-license technologies, maintaining, protecting and expanding our intellectual property, seeking regulatory approvals and, upon successful receipt of U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, approval, commercializing our products. We will also incur costs as we hire additional personnel and increase our manufacturing capabilities, including the lease or purchase of a facility for the manufacturing of our product candidates for our ongoing and any future clinical trials and, upon receipt of any FDA approval, for our initial commercialization activities. Moreover, we do not expect to have any significant product sales or revenue for at least the next several years. These losses have had and, as our operating losses continue to increase significantly in the future due to these expenditures, will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with our product development efforts, we are unable to predict when we may become profitable, if at all. Additionally, our net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter, and as a result, a period-to-period comparison of our results of operations may not be meaningful. For example, we expect our operating expenses to continue to increase in the year ended December 31, 2021, due to increased research and development expenses including personnel related costs and capital and facility operating expenditures in continued efforts for our Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration with ImmunityBio. Additionally, we also expect to incur increased costs associated with our proposed merger with ImmunityBio. Even if we do become profitable, we may not be able to sustain or increase our profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. In addition, we expect increased expenses in future quarters as a result of the Joint COVID-19 Collaboration.

We do not have any therapeutic products that are approved for commercial sale. Our ability to generate revenue from product sales and achieve and maintain profitability depends significantly on our success in a number of factors.

We currently do not have any therapeutic products that are approved for commercial sale. We have not received, and do not expect to receive for at least the next several years, if at all, any revenues from the commercialization of our product candidates if approved. To obtain revenue from sales of our product candidates that are significant or large enough to achieve profitability, we must succeed, either alone or with third or related parties, in developing, obtaining regulatory approval for, manufacturing and marketing therapies with commercial potential. Our ability to generate revenue and achieve and maintain profitability depends significantly on our success in many areas, including:

39

Even if one or more of our product candidates is eventually approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate and we may not generate significant revenue from sales of such products, resulting in limited or no profitability in the future. Our prior losses and expected future losses have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital for the foreseeable future. Any failure to become and remain profitable may adversely affect the market price of our common stock, our ability to raise additional capital and our future viability.

We will need to obtain substantial additional financing to complete the development and any commercialization of our product candidates, and a failure to obtain this necessary capital when needed on acceptable terms, or at all, could force us to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our commercialization efforts, product development or other operations.

Since our inception, we have used substantial amounts of cash to fund our operations and expect our expenses to increase substantially in the foreseeable future. Developing our product candidates and conducting clinical trials for the treatment of cancer, virally infectious diseases, and other diseases requires substantial amounts of capital. We will also require a significant additional amount of capital to commercialize any approved products.

As of December 31, 2020, we had cash and cash equivalents of $11.4 million and marketable debt securities of $54.8 million. We are using and expect to continue to use our existing cash and cash equivalents and marketable debt securities to fund expenses in connection with our ongoing and any future clinical trials, our manufacturing facilities and processes and the hiring of additional personnel, and for other research and development activities, working capital and general corporate purposes, including our previously announced share repurchase program. As a result of continuing anticipated operating cash outflows, we believe that substantial doubt exists regarding our ability to continue as a going concern without additional funding or financial support. However, we believe our existing cash, cash equivalents, and investments in marketable debt securities, and our ability to borrow from affiliated entities, will be sufficient to fund operations through at least the next 12 months following the issuance date of the financial statements based primarily upon our Executive Chairman’s intent and ability to support our operations with additional funds, including loans from affiliated entities, as required, which we believe alleviates such doubt. Our estimate as to how long we expect our existing cash and cash equivalents to be available to fund our operations is based on assumptions that may be proved inaccurate, and we could deplete our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect. In addition, changing circumstances, including the completion of the proposed merger with ImmunityBio, may cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, and we may need to spend more money than currently expected because of circumstances beyond our control. We may require additional capital for the further development and any commercialization of our product candidates and may need to raise additional funds sooner than we anticipate if we choose to expand more rapidly.

Our future capital requirements may depend on, and could increase significantly as a result of, many factors, including:

40

To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, the ownership interest of our stockholders will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect our common stockholders’ rights. Debt financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends. If we raise additional funds through collaborations, strategic alliances or licensing arrangements with pharmaceutical partners, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams, research programs or product candidates, or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. Additional capital may not be available when we need it, on terms that are acceptable to us or at all. If we are unable to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market any approved products that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves, or be unable to continue or expand our operations or otherwise capitalize on our business opportunities, as desired, which could materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and cause the price of our common stock to decline.

We expect our business to be adversely affected by outbreaks of epidemic, pandemic or contagious diseases, including the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.

Outbreaks of epidemic, pandemic or contagious diseases, such as the coronavirus pandemic, may significantly disrupt our operations and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the outbreak of COVID‑19 a global pandemic as the novel coronavirus continued to spread throughout the world. The spread of this pandemic has caused significant volatility and uncertainty in the U.S. and international markets and has resulted in increased risks to our operations. We are monitoring a number of risks related to this pandemic, including the following:

41

The foregoing and other risks may have an adverse effect on our overall business, financial condition and results of operations. Additionally, the ongoing COVID‑19 pandemic may also affect our operating and financial results in a manner that is not presently known to us or that we currently have not considered as significant risks to our operations. This pandemic may also amplify many of the other risks described throughout the “Risk Factors” section of this Annual Report. Any resulting financial impact cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. The extent to which the COVID‑19 pandemic impacts our business and results will depend on future developments, which are uncertain and cannot be predicted with confidence, including the duration and scope of the outbreak, any potential future waves of the pandemic, new information which may emerge concerning the severity of COVID‑19 and the ongoing and future actions to contain it or treat its impact, among others.

We may use our financial and human resources to pursue a particular type of treatment, or treatment for a particular type of cancer, and fail to capitalize on programs or treatment of other types of cancer that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

Because we have limited resources, we must choose to pursue and fund the development of specific types of treatment, or treatment for a specific type of cancer or viral infectious diseases, and may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other programs, investigational medicines, or treatment for other types of cancer or viral infectious diseases, which could later prove to have greater commercial potential. Moreover, given the rapidly evolving competitive landscape and the time it takes to advance a product through clinical development, an incorrect decision to pursue a particular type of treatment or cancer may have a material adverse effect on our results of operation and negatively impact our future clinical strategies. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs for investigational medicines or clinical trials may not yield any commercially viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate and anticipate the commercial potential or target market for a particular type of treatment or cancer or viral infectious disease, we may choose to spend our limited resources on a particular treatment, or treatment for a particular type of cancer or viral infectious disease, and then later learn that another type of treatment or cancer that we previously decided not to pursue would have been more advantageous.

We invest our cash on hand in various financial instruments which are subject to risks that could adversely affect our business, results of operations, liquidity and financial condition.

We invest our cash in a variety of financial instruments, principally commercial paper, corporate debt securities and foreign government bonds. All of these investments are subject to credit, liquidity, market and interest rate risk. Such risks, including the failure or severe financial distress of the financial institutions that hold our cash, cash equivalents and investments, may result in a loss of liquidity, impairment to our investments, realization of substantial future losses, or a complete loss of the investments in the long-term, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, liquidity and financial condition. In order to manage the risk to our investments, we maintain an investment policy that, among other things, limits the amount that we may invest in any one issue or any single issuer and requires us to only invest in high credit quality securities to preserve liquidity.

42

Risks Relating to Our Business and Industry

The foundation of our business is based upon the success of our aNK cells as a technology platform. Our aNK platform and product candidates derived thereof, including genetically modified haNK, taNK, t‑haNK, ceNK and MSC product candidates, will require significant additional clinical testing before we can potentially seek regulatory approval and launch commercial sales.

Our business and future success depend on our ability to utilize our aNK cells as a technology platform, and to obtain regulatory approval for one or more product candidates derived from it, and then successfully commercialize our product candidates addressing numerous therapeutic areas. Our aNK platform and our haNK, taNK, t‑haNK, ceNK and MSC product candidates are in varying stages of development and may never become commercialized. All of our product candidates developed from our technology platform will require additional clinical and non-clinical development, regulatory review and approval in multiple jurisdictions, substantial investment, access to sufficient commercial manufacturing capacity and significant marketing efforts before they can be successfully commercialized. Because all of our product candidates are based on the same core aNK technology, if any of our product candidates encounter safety or efficacy problems, developmental delays or regulatory issues or other problems, these could impact the development plans for our other product candidates.

Utilizing haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells represents a novel approach to immunotherapy, including cancer treatment, and we must overcome significant challenges in order to successfully develop, commercialize and manufacture our product candidates.

We have concentrated our research and development efforts on utilizing aNK cells as an immunotherapy platform and genetically modified aNK cells as product candidates based on this platform. We believe that our product candidates represent a novel approach to immunotherapy, including cancer treatment. Advancing this novel immunotherapy creates significant challenges for us, including:

We must be able to overcome these challenges in order for us to successfully develop, commercialize and manufacture our product candidates utilizing haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells.

Even if we successfully develop and commercialize our haNK product candidate for Merkel cell carcinoma, we may not be successful in developing and commercializing our other product candidates, and our commercial opportunities may be limited.

We believe that our ability to realize the full value of our aNK platform will depend on our ability to successfully develop and commercialize haNK and our other product candidates in a wider range of indications. We are simultaneously pursuing preclinical and clinical development of a number of product candidates spanning several types of cancers. For example, we are devoting substantial resources toward the development of haNK and t‑haNK product candidates as combination therapies with commercially approved monoclonal antibodies and late-stage product candidates for solid tumors such as breast, pancreatic, lung, head and neck and hematologic malignancies such as diffuse large B‑cell lymphoma, or DLBCL, and serious viral diseases such as COVID‑19.

Even if we are successful in continuing to build our pipeline of product candidates based on our technology platform, obtaining regulatory approvals and commercializing any approved product candidates will require substantial additional funding beyond our existing cash and cash equivalents and marketable debt securities, and are prone to numerous risks of failure. Investment in biopharmaceutical product development involves significant risks that any product candidate will fail to demonstrate adequate efficacy or an acceptable safety profile to the satisfaction of regulatory authorities, gain regulatory approval or become commercially viable. We cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully advance any product candidates through the development process. Our research programs may initially show promise in identifying product candidates, but ultimately fail to yield product candidates for clinical development or commercialization for many reasons, including the following:

43

If any of these events occur, we may be forced to abandon our development efforts for a product candidate or the entire platform, or we may not be able to identify, discover, develop or commercialize additional product candidates, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and could potentially cause us to cease operations.

We may not be able to file INDs to commence additional clinical trials on the timelines we expect, and even if we are able to, the FDA may not permit us to proceed in a timely manner, or at all.

Prior to commencing clinical trials in the U.S. for any of our product candidates, we may be required to have an allowed IND for each product candidate. As of the date of this filing, we have numerous INDs for clinical trials that have been authorized in the U.S. We are required to file additional INDs prior to initiating our planned clinical trials. Submission of an IND may not result in the FDA allowing further clinical trials to begin and, once begun, issues may arise that will require us to suspend or terminate such clinical trials. Additionally, even if relevant regulatory authorities agree with the design and implementation of the clinical trials set forth in an IND or clinical trial application, these regulatory authorities may change their requirements in the future. The fact that we are pursuing novel technologies may also exacerbate these risks with respect to our product candidates, and as a result, we may not meet our anticipated clinical development timelines.

Our plans to support the Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration by moving some of our current manufacturing facilities or repurposing personnel may cause delays in our oncology trials.

We have prepared one of our GMP manufacturing facilities previously used to manufacture product for our oncology trials to manufacture and produce a COVID‑19 vaccine candidate and we are in the process of readying a new, well-equipped location to manufacture and produce clinical products for our oncology trials. We cannot assure you that we will be able to achieve GMP qualifications for this new manufacturing facility, or the extent of costs or delays in timing to do so.

Failure to achieve GMP status could adversely impact our ability to successfully develop our oncology product candidates. In addition, we have repurposed some of our manufacturing facility in Culver City, California, and personnel to support the Joint COVD‑19 Collaboration Agreement. While we believe we have sufficient product in our inventory to not incur any disruptions in our current or planned oncology trials, we cannot be certain that we will not experience any unforeseen circumstances that may cause delays in our ability to manufacture sufficient product for our current or planned trials. If this occurs, such trials could be significantly delayed which would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our efforts regarding the Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration may be difficult to integrate into our current operations and will require additional personnel who will require training which may cause some of our employees to reallocate their time from our current operations or manufacturing duties which could in turn cause delays in clinical supply of our products or trials.

After signing the binding term sheet regarding the Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration in May 2020, we have made significant investments related to the development and manufacture of our COVID‑19 product candidates. We have repurposed some of our personnel to support our QUILT‑COVID‑19‑MSC program and have repurposed some of our personnel overseeing quality of our oncology products to support the Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration. We also plan to hire additional staff to support the Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration, which will increase our expenses. Although we do not believe the Joint COVID‑19 collaboration will have a material impact on our current oncology trials in the near term, if our current personnel fail to remain focused on our oncology drug candidates, or new personnel that we plan to hire to support the Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration require extensive training, our current oncology operations may be adversely impacted.

44

We face significant competition in the biopharmaceutical industry, and many of our competitors have substantially greater experience and resources than we have.

Even if our aNK platform products prove successful, we might not be able to remain competitive because of the rapid pace of technological development in the biopharmaceutical field. Our haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK product candidates compete with other cell and molecule-based immunotherapy approaches using or targeting natural killer cells, NKT cells, T‑cells, and dendritic cells.

Competitors focused on CAR‑T related treatment approaches include AbbVie Inc., Atara Biotherapeutics, Inc., Precigen Corporation, Inc., Allogene Therapeutics, Inc., Bristol‑Myers Squibb Company, Beijing Immunochina Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd., Cellular Biomedicine Group, Inc., iCell Gene Therapeutics LLC, JW Therapeutics Co., Ltd., Amgen, Inc., Leucid Bio Ltd., Bellicum Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Medisix Therapeutics Pte Ltd., Bluebird Bio, Inc., Mesoblast Ltd., Calibr/Scripps Research, Mustang Bio, Inc., Carina Biotech, Inc., CARsgen Therapeutics, CRISPR Therapeutics, Inc., GEMoaB Monoclonals GmbH, Nanjing Legend Biotechnology Co., Ltd, Cartherics Pty Ltd, Novartis AG, Pfizer, Inc., Cellectis SA, Poseida Therapeutics, Inc., Prepromene Bio, Inc., Celularity, Inc., Servier Laboratories, Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc., Celyad SA, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, Fortress Biotech, Inc., TC BioPharm Ltd., Tessa Therapeutics Pte Ltd, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Tmunity Therapeutics, Inc., Transposagen Biopharmaceuticals, Inc., Humanigen, Inc., Immune Therapeutics, Inc., and Xyphos, Inc./Astellas.

Competitor companies focused on other T‑cell based approaches include Adaptimmune Ltd., Adicet Bio, Inc., Autolus Therapeutics, plc, Cell Medica Limited, Eureka Therapeutics, Inc., Formula Pharmaceuticals, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline plc., Green Cross LabCell Corp., Immatics Biotechnologies GmbH, Immunocore Limited, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc., Kiadis Pharma Netherlands B.V., Lion TCR Pte Ltd., MolMed, S.p.A., Precision Biosciences, Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Noile‑Immune Biotech, Inc., Anixa Biosciences, Inc., Beam Therapeutics Inc., BioNTech SE, Cartesian Therapeutics, Inc., Marker Therapeutics, Inc., Refuge Biotechnologies, Inc., Repertoire Immune Medicines, Inc., Sensei Biotherapeutics, Inc., Senti Biosciences, Inc., TCR² Therapeutics Inc., TScan Therapeutics, Inc., and Takara Bio, Inc.

Competitor companies focused on dendritic cell based approaches include Argos Therapeutics, Inc., Biovest International, Inc., ImmunoCellular Therapeutics, Ltd., Merck & Co, Inc./Immune Design, Inc., Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Precigen Corporation, Inc., Medigene AG, and Northwest Biotherapeutics, Inc.

Competitor companies focused on natural killer cell based approaches include Acepodia, Inc., Carabou Biosciences, Inc., Catamaran Bio Inc., Celularity, Inc., Century Therapeutics, Inc., Cytovia Therapeutics, Inc., Glycostem Therapeutics BV, Kiadis Pharma Netherlands B.V./CytoSen Therapeutics, Inc., Dragonfly Therapeutics, Inc., Editas Medicine, Inc., EMERcell, Exacis Biotherapeutics, Inc., Fate Therapeutics, Inc., Gamida Cell, Ltd., INmune Bio Inc., Nkarta Therapeutics, Inc., Onkimmune Ltd., Oncternal Therapeutics, Inc., NKMax America, Artiva Biotherapeutics/Merck, HebeCell Corp., Vycellix, Inc., oNKo‑innate Pty Ltd., ONK Therapeutics Limited, Sanofi, S.A., Shoreline Biosciences, Inc., Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, XNK Therapeutics AB, Zelluna Immunotherapy AS, and Ziopharm Oncology, Inc.

Competitor companies focused on large molecule immunotherapy approaches, including those overlapping the natural killer cell space, include Cytomx Therapeutics, Inc., Compass Therapeutics, Inc., Innate Pharma SA, Nektar Therapeutics, Inc., and Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc.

Other potential immunotherapy competitors include Affimed GmbH, AgenTus Therapeutics, Inc., Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Codiak Biosciences, Glycostem Therapeutics BV, Kuur Therapeutics Limited, Triumvira Immunologics, Incysus Therapeutics, Inc., GammaDelta Therapeutics Ltd., Lyell Immunopharma, Inc., and GT Biopharma, Inc.

There are currently four approved T‑cell based treatments that are marketed by Novartis AG, Gilead Sciences/Kite Pharma (two therapeutics), and the Bristol‑Myers Squibb Company. There is currently one approved dendritic cell-based cancer vaccine marketed by Dendron Pharmaceuticals, LLC for the treatment of metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer.

Competitor companies focused on COVID‑19 cell therapy currently include AstraZeneca plc, Athersys, Inc./Healios K.K., Capricor Therapeutics, Inc., CAR‑T (Shanghai) Biotechnology, Cellavita Pesquisa Científica Ltda, Cellenkos, Inc., Cellular Biomedicine Group, Inc., Celularity, Inc., Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc., Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chongqing Sidemu Biotechnology Technology/ImmunCyte Life Sciences, Inc., Enlivex Therapeutics Ltd, Green Cross LabCell Corp., Hope Biosciences, Johnson & Johnson, Mesoblast Limited, Moderna, Inc., NovaVax, Inc., Orbsen Therapeutics Limited, Pfizer, Inc./BioNTech SE, Pluristem Therapeutics, Inc., Rigshospitalet, Tianhe Stem Cell Biotechnologies Inc., University of Minnesota/Fate Therapeutics, Inc., and Xinjiang Medical University.

45

In addition, a very large number of companies, government agencies and academic centers around the world are developing COVID‑19 vaccines, and many of these entities are in more advanced stages of development than ImmunityBio, including some that have started Phase II and/or III clinical trials or already have emergency regulatory approval in some regions. Even if ImmunityBio’s COVID‑19 vaccine candidate is ultimately approved for marketing, the value of our profit-sharing opportunity would be adversely impacted if other COVID‑19 vaccines are approved earlier or show better efficacy or safety than ImmunityBio’s COVID‑19 vaccine candidate.

Many of our current or potential competitors have greater financial and other resources, larger research and development staffs, and more experienced capabilities in researching, developing and testing products than we do. Many of these companies also have more experience in conducting clinical trials, obtaining FDA and other regulatory approvals, and manufacturing, marketing and distributing therapeutic products. Smaller or clinical-stage companies like us may successfully compete by establishing collaborative relationships with larger pharmaceutical companies or academic institutions. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient, or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Furthermore, currently approved products could be discovered to have application for treatment of cancer and other diseases, which could give such products significant regulatory and market timing advantages over any of our product candidates. In addition, large pharmaceutical companies or other companies with greater resources or experience than us may choose to forgo therapy opportunities that would have otherwise been complementary to our product development and collaboration plans. Our competitors may succeed in developing, obtaining patent protection for, or commercializing their products more rapidly than us, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. A competing company developing or acquiring rights to a more effective therapeutic product for the same diseases targeted by us, or one that offers significantly lower costs of treatment could render our products noncompetitive or obsolete. We may not be successful in marketing against competitors any product candidates we may develop.

Our business plan involves the creation of a complex integrated ecosystem capable of addressing a wide range of indications. As a result, our future success depends on our ability to prioritize among many different opportunities.

We do not have sufficient resources to pursue development of all or even a substantial portion of the potential opportunities that we believe will be afforded to us by our planned integrated ecosystem. Because we have limited resources and access to capital to fund our operations, our management must make significant prioritization decisions as to which product candidates to pursue and how much of our resources to allocate to each. Our management has broad discretion to suspend, scale down, or discontinue any or all of these development efforts, or to initiate new programs to treat other diseases. If we select and commit resources to opportunities that we are unable to successfully develop, or we forego more promising opportunities, our business, financial condition and results of operations will be adversely affected.

We plan to develop our product candidates and potentially other programs in combination with other commercially available therapies or therapies we, or an affiliate of ours, have in development, which exposes us to additional risks. We do not know whether our attempts to use our product candidates in combination will be safe or effective.

We intend to develop cryopreserved PD‑L1.t‑haNK, haNK, and potentially other programs in combination with one or more currently approved cancer therapies or therapies in development. For Merkel cell carcinoma, we plan to evaluate haNK in combination with N‑803 and avelumab. For pancreatic cancer, TNBC, and breast cancer indications, we plan to evaluate PD‑L1.t‑haNK in combination with N‑803 and aldoxorubicin. For NSCLC indications, we plan to evaluate PD‑L1.t‑haNK in combination with N‑803 and a checkpoint inhibitor.

Patients may not be able to tolerate any of our other product candidates in combination with any other therapies or dosing of our product candidates in combination with other therapies may have serious or unexpected adverse events. Furthermore, we will be required to show with substantial evidence that the combination of drugs when used together are more effective than each of the individual drugs used separately. We can provide no assurance that we can establish that any of our product candidates, when used in combination with other drugs, will be more effective than each individual drug when used alone.

We may also evaluate our product candidates in combination with one or more other cancer therapies that have not yet been approved for marketing by the FDA, the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. We will not be able to market and sell any product candidate in combination with any such unapproved cancer therapies that do not ultimately obtain marketing approval.

46

If the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities do not approve or revoke their approval of these other therapies, or if safety, efficacy, purity, potency, commercial adoption, manufacturing or supply issues arise with the therapies we choose to evaluate in combination with any of our product candidates, we may be unable to obtain approval of or successfully market any one or all of the product candidates we develop.

Additionally, if the third-party providers of therapies or therapies in development used in combination with our product candidates are unable to produce sufficient quantities for clinical trials or for commercialization of our product candidates, or if the cost of combination therapies are prohibitive, our development and commercialization efforts would be impaired, which would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. If clinical trial collaboration and supply agreement terminates or if we cannot negotiate favorable terms for combination therapies, our combination therapy development plans could be delayed or terminated, and the cost to us to conduct such trials may significantly increase.

Clinical development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future clinical trial results. We may encounter substantial delays in clinical trials, or may not be able to conduct or complete clinical trials on the expected timelines, if at all. If our preclinical studies and clinical trials are not sufficient to support regulatory approval of any of our product candidates, we may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development of such product candidate.

It is impossible to predict when or if any of our product candidates and therapies will prove safe, effective, or potent in humans or will receive regulatory approval. Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of any product candidate, we must complete extensive preclinical studies and clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, efficacy or potency of our product candidates in humans. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing. The outcome of early clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later clinical trials, and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of their product candidates. Our pre-clinical studies and future clinical trials may not be successful.

We cannot be certain that our planned clinical trials will be sufficient to support regulatory approval of our product candidates. Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Human clinical trials are expensive and difficult to design and implement, in part because they are subject to rigorous regulatory requirements. Failure or delay can occur at any time during the clinical trial process.

We may experience delays in obtaining the FDA’s authorization to initiate clinical trials under future INDs, completing ongoing preclinical and clinical studies of our other future product candidates, and initiating our planned preclinical studies and clinical trials. Additionally, we cannot be certain that preclinical studies or clinical trials for our product candidates will begin on time, not require redesign, enroll an adequate number of research subjects or patients on time, or be completed on schedule, if at all. Clinical trials can be delayed or terminated for a variety of reasons, including delays or failures related to:

47

We may experience numerous adverse or unforeseen events during, or as a result of, preclinical studies and clinical trials that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize our product candidates, including:

We or our investigators might have to suspend or terminate clinical trials of our product candidates for various reasons, including:

We have commenced studies that may provide the basis for regulatory approval, but we have not sought or obtained FDA input on the trial design, number of patients that will be enrolled in the studies, or statistical analysis plan. FDA may not accept the data generated from these studies and my reject any regulatory applications we submit with this data. If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our product candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate, if we are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates or other testing, if the results of these trials or tests are not positive or are only moderately positive or if there are safety concerns, our business and results of operations may be adversely affected and we may incur significant additional costs. We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the IRBs of the institutions in which such clinical trials are being conducted, by the Data Safety Monitoring Board, if any, for such clinical trial or by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Such authorities may suspend or terminate a clinical trial due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical trial protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from the product candidates, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial.

If we experience delays in the completion, or termination, of any preclinical study or clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates may be harmed, and our ability to generate revenues from any of these product candidates will be delayed or not realized at all. In addition, any delays in completing our preclinical studies or clinical trials may increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may significantly harm our business, financial condition and prospects. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates. If one or more of our product candidates generally prove to be ineffective, unsafe or commercially unviable, our entire pipeline and platform would have little, if any, value, which would have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

48

Clinical drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, results of earlier studies and clinical trials may not be predictive of future clinical trial results, we may not be able to rely on the aNK and haNK phase I and II clinical trials data for our other product candidates, and our clinical trials may fail to adequately demonstrate substantial evidence of safety and efficacy of our product candidates. The results of our clinical trials may not satisfy the requirements of the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of such product candidate.

Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. A failure of one or more of our clinical trials can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. There is a high failure rate for product candidates proceeding through clinical trials, and product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the required safety and efficacy despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier clinical trials, and we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. Even if our clinical trials are completed, the results may not be sufficient to support obtaining regulatory approval for our product candidates. In addition, our strategy and anticipated timelines are predicated upon our ability to utilize the phase I and II clinical trial data for aNK, haNK, and t‑haNK observed to date to support our planned clinical trials for all of our product candidates, including our haNK and t‑haNK product candidates. To date, we have several INDs for our haNK and t‑haNK product candidates, and we cannot offer assurances that the FDA will allow us to utilize the phase I and II aNK and haNK data to support other planned clinical trials or allow our anticipated INDs for (i) planned phase I or phase Ib/IIa clinical trials for our other product candidates, (ii) planned phase IIb/III clinical trials for our haNK and t‑haNK product candidates as potential combination therapies, or (iii) any other planned clinical trials, including registration studies.

We have in the past experienced delays in our ongoing clinical trials and we may experience additional delays in the future. We do not know whether future clinical trials, if any, will begin on time, need to be redesigned, enroll an adequate number of patients on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. Clinical trials can be delayed, suspended or terminated by us, regulatory authorities, clinical trial investigators, and ethics committees for a variety of reasons, including failure to:

Patient enrollment is a significant factor in the timing of clinical trials and is affected by many factors, including the size and nature of the patient population, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the eligibility criteria for the clinical trial, the design of the clinical trial, competing clinical trials and clinicians’ and patients’ or caregivers’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the drug candidate being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new drugs or treatments that may be approved for the indications we are investigating.

49

We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the data safety monitoring board for such clinical trial or by the FDA or any other regulatory authority, or if the IRBs of the institutions in which such clinical trials are being conducted suspend or terminate the participation of their clinical investigators and sites subject to their review. Such authorities may suspend or terminate a clinical trial due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements, including Good Clinical Practices, or GCPs, or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or clinical trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a product candidate, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial.

In addition, even if such clinical trials are successfully completed, we cannot guarantee that the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities will interpret the results as we do, and more trials could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval. To the extent that the results of the trials are not satisfactory to the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities for support of a marketing application, we may be required to expend significant resources, which may not be available to us, to conduct additional trials in support of potential approval of our product candidates. Even if regulatory approval is secured for any of our product candidates, the terms of such approval may limit the scope and use of our product candidate, which may also limit its commercial potential.

If we experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical trial of our product candidates for any reason, the commercial prospects of our product candidates may be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenues from any of these product candidates will be delayed. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may significantly harm our business, financial condition and prospects. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.

We use Immuno-Oncology Clinic, Inc., a related party, in some of our clinical trials which may expose us to significant regulatory risks. If our data for this site is not sufficiently robust or if there are any data integrity issues, we may be required to repeat such studies or required to contract with other clinical trial sites, and our clinical development plans will be significantly delayed, and we will incur additional costs.

Many of our Phase I and II clinical trials for our haNK, PD‑L1.t‑haNK and other t‑haNK products have been conducted by Immuno-Oncology Clinic, Inc., which is a related party. Relying on a related party clinical site to develop data that is used as the basis to support regulatory approval can expose us to significant regulatory risks. For example, a study used to support regulatory approval that is conducted at a related party site can be rejected by the FDA if there are data integrity issues, or if there are significant good clinical practice violations at the site. If any data integrity, or regulatory non-compliance issues occur during the study, we may not be able to use the data for our regulatory approval. Furthermore, if the operations of the clinical site is disrupted or if the site experiences disruptions in its clinical supplies or resources, such as potential disruptions due to COVID‑19, then we may be required to suspend or terminate the study at this site, and we may need to contract with other clinical sites for the study, which will delay our clinical development and regulatory approval for the product candidate. Failure of this site to comply with the regulations or to recruit a sufficient number of patients may require us to delay submission for regulatory approval or repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. Moreover, our business may be implicated if the site violates federal or state fraud and abuse or false claims laws and regulations or healthcare privacy and security laws.

Results for any patient who receives compassionate use access to our product candidates should not be viewed as representative of how the product candidate will perform in a well-controlled clinical trial, and cannot be used to establish safety or efficacy for regulatory approval.

We often receive requests for compassionate use access to our investigational drugs by patients that do not meet the entry criteria for enrollment into our clinical studies. Generally, patients requesting compassionate use have no other treatment alternatives for life threatening conditions. We evaluate each compassionate use request on an individual basis, and in some cases grant access to our investigational products outside of our sponsored clinical studies, and where a physician certifies the patient they are treating is critically ill and does not meet the entry criteria for one of our open clinical trials. Individual patient results from compassionate use access may not be used to support submission of a regulatory application, nor support approval of a product candidate. Although one patient with pancreatic cancer who was provided compassionate use access to our product candidates has experienced a six month complete remission after being treated, such results should not be considered to be indicative of results from any on-going or future well-controlled clinical trial. Before we can seek regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, we must demonstrate in well-controlled clinical trials statistically significant evidence that the product candidate is both safe and effective for the indication we are seeking approval. The results of our compassionate use program may not be used to establish safety or efficacy or regulatory approval.

50

We may be unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates. The denial or delay of any such approval would delay commercialization and have a material adverse effect on our potential to generate revenue, our business and our results of operations.

The research, development, testing, manufacturing, labeling, packaging, approval, promotion, advertising, storage, recordkeeping, marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, and export and import of biopharmaceutical products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA, and by foreign regulatory authorities in other countries. These regulations differ from country to country. To gain approval to market our product candidates, we must provide regulatory authorities with substantial evidence of safety, purity and potency of the product for each indication we seek to commercialize. We have not yet obtained regulatory approval to market any of our product candidates in the U.S. or any other country. Our business depends upon obtaining these regulatory approvals.

The FDA can delay, limit or deny approval of our product candidates for many reasons, including:

Even if we eventually successfully complete clinical testing and receive approval of any regulatory filing for our product candidates, the FDA may only grant approval contingent on the performance of costly additional post-approval clinical trials. The FDA may also approve our product candidates for a more limited indication or a narrower patient population than we originally requested, and the FDA may not approve the labeling that we believe is necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of our product candidates. To the extent we seek regulatory approval in foreign countries, we may face challenges similar to those described above with regulatory authorities in applicable jurisdictions. Any delay in obtaining, or our inability to obtain, applicable regulatory approval for any of our product candidates would delay or prevent commercialization of our product candidates and would materially adversely impact our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Use of our product candidates could be associated with side effects or adverse events.

As with most biopharmaceutical products, use of our product candidates could be associated with side effects or adverse events, which can vary in severity and frequency. Side effects or adverse events associated with the use of our product candidates may be observed at any time, including in clinical trials or once a product is commercialized, and any such side effects or adverse events may negatively affect our ability to obtain regulatory approval or market our product candidates. Side effects such as toxicity or other safety issues associated with the use of our product candidates could require us to perform additional studies or halt development or sale of these product candidates or expose us to product liability lawsuits, which will harm our business. We may be required by regulatory agencies to conduct additional preclinical or clinical trials regarding the safety and efficacy of our product candidates, which we have not planned or anticipated. We cannot provide any assurance that we will resolve any issues related to any product-related adverse events to the satisfaction of the FDA or any regulatory agency in a timely manner or ever, which could harm our business, prospects and financial condition.

51

If we are successful in commercializing our product candidates, the FDA and other foreign regulatory agency regulations will require that we report certain information about adverse medical events if those products may have caused or contributed to those adverse events. The timing of our obligation to report would be triggered by the date we become aware of the adverse event, as well as the nature of the event. We may inadvertently fail to report adverse events we become aware of within the prescribed timeframe. We may also fail to appreciate that we have become aware of a reportable adverse event, especially if it is not reported to us as an adverse event or if it is an adverse event that is unexpected or removed in time from the use of our products. If we fail to comply with our reporting obligations, the FDA or other foreign regulatory agencies could take action including criminal prosecution, the imposition of civil monetary penalties, seizure of our products, or delay in approval or clearance of future products.

The clinical and commercial utility of our aNK, haNK, t‑haNK, ceNK and MSC platforms are uncertain and may never be realized.

Our NK platforms are in the early stages of development. The company currently has multiple ongoing clinical trials to evaluate cryopreserved haNK and t‑haNK cells in company sponsored clinical trials. Success in early clinical trials does not ensure that large-scale clinical trials will be successful nor does it predict final results. In addition, we will not be able to treat patients if we cannot manufacture a sufficient quantity of NK cells that meet our minimum specifications. In addition, our haNK product candidate has only been tested in a small number of patients. Results from these clinical trials may not necessarily be indicative of the safety and tolerability or efficacy of our products as we expand into larger clinical trials.

We may not ultimately be able to provide the FDA with substantial clinical evidence to support a claim of safety, purity and potency sufficient to enable the FDA to approve aNK platform product candidates for any indication. This may be because later clinical trials fail to reproduce favorable data obtained in earlier clinical trials, because the FDA disagrees with how we interpret the data from these clinical trials, or because the FDA does not accept these therapeutic effects as valid endpoints in pivotal clinical trials necessary for market approval. We will also need to demonstrate that aNK platform product candidates are safe. We do not have data on possible harmful long-term effects of aNK platform product candidates and do not expect to have this data in the near future. As a result, our ability to generate clinical safety and effectiveness data sufficient to support submission of a marketing application or commercialization of our aNK platform therapy is uncertain and is subject to significant risk.

We have limited experience as a company conducting clinical trials and have relied and will rely on third parties and related parties to conduct many of our preclinical studies and clinical trials. Any failure by a third party, related party, or by us to conduct the clinical trials according to Good Clinical Practices and in a timely manner may delay or prevent our ability to seek or obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates.

To date, the only company sponsored studies to engage in patient enrollment have been for the following cancer indications: Merkel cell, pancreatic, triple negative breast, squamous head and neck, non-small cell lung, triple negative breast, colorectal, B‑cell lymphoma, and advanced solid tumors, as well as COVID‑19 infection. Our relative lack of experience conducting clinical trials may contribute to our planned clinical trials not beginning or completing on time, if at all. In addition, we have entered into an agreement with the Clinic, a related party, to continue to conduct and oversee certain of our clinical trials. Large-scale clinical trials will require significant additional resources and reliance on Contract Research Organizations, or CROs, clinical investigators, or consultants. Consequently, our reliance on outside parties may introduce delays beyond our control. Our CROs, the Clinic, and other third parties must communicate and coordinate with one another in order for our trials to be successful. Additionally, our CROs, the Clinic, and other third parties may also have relationships with other commercial entities, some of which may compete with us. If our CROs, the Clinic, or other third parties conducting our clinical trials do not perform their contractual duties or regulatory obligations, experience work stoppages, do not meet expected deadlines, terminate their agreements with us or need to be replaced, or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical trial protocols, GCPs, or other regulatory requirements or for any other reason, we may need to conduct additional clinical trials or enter into new arrangements with alternative CROs, clinical investigators or other third parties. We may be unable to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs on commercially reasonable terms, or at all.

We, the Clinic, and the third parties upon which we rely are required to comply with GCPs. GCPs are regulations and guidelines enforced by regulatory authorities around the world, through periodic inspections, for products in clinical development. If we or these third parties fail to comply with applicable GCP regulations, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and have to be repeated, and our submission of marketing applications may be delayed or the regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We are subject to the risk that, upon inspection, a regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials fail to comply or failed to comply with applicable GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with material produced under GMP and Good Tissue Practice, or GTP, regulations, which are enforced by regulatory authorities. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. Moreover, our business may be significantly impacted if our CROs, the Clinic, clinical investigators or other third parties violate federal or state healthcare fraud and abuse or false claims laws and regulations or healthcare privacy and security laws.

52

We also anticipate that part of our strategy for pursuing the wide range of indications potentially addressed by our aNK, haNK, taNK, t‑haNK, ceNK and MSC platforms will involve further investigator-initiated clinical trials. While these trials generally provide us with valuable clinical data that can inform our future development strategy in a cost-efficient manner, we generally have less control over not only the conduct but also the design of these clinical trials. Third-party investigators may design clinical trials involving our product candidates with clinical endpoints that are more difficult to achieve or in other ways that increase the risk of negative clinical trial results compared to clinical trials we may design on our own. Negative results in investigator-initiated clinical trials, regardless of how the clinical trial was designed or conducted, could have a material adverse effect on our prospects and the perception of our product candidates.

Moreover, principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and receive compensation in connection with such services. In addition, some of our trials are being run by the Clinic, which is controlled by one of our employees. Under certain circumstances, the company may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA. The FDA may conclude that a financial relationship between the company, the Clinic and/or a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the study. The FDA may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA and may ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of one or more of our product candidates.

We and ImmunityBio may not be successful in jointly developing and obtaining regulatory approval for any collaborative COVID‑19 product candidates.

The risks described in this section regarding the development and regulatory approval of our product candidates in oncology are also applicable to the product candidates that we and ImmunityBio intend to jointly develop under the Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration, including ImmunityBio’s COVID‑19 vaccine candidate. In particular, while the second generation adenovirus used in ImmunityBio’s COVID‑19 vaccine candidate is being tested in Phase I trials for SARS‑CoV‑2 and has been generally well-tolerated in those studies to date, the COVID‑19 vaccine candidate uses a different construct directed towards the SARS‑CoV‑2 virus. This vaccine candidate has not previously been tested in humans and very limited preclinical data has been generated to date. In addition, the biology of the SARS‑CoV‑2 virus and pathology of COVID‑19 disease are not fully understood and new information is constantly emerging. Thus, there remains substantial uncertainty about how ImmunityBio’s COVID‑19 vaccine candidate will perform in clinical trials, the timelines to complete development of the vaccine candidate and whether the FDA or other regulatory agencies will approve the vaccine candidate for registrational studies or subsequent marketing. If we and ImmunityBio are unable to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for, manufacture at scale and commercialize product candidates for COVID‑19, or if the Joint COVID‑19 Collaboration is terminated, we may not be able to realize any share of net sales of resulting products or recoup the substantial investments we expect to make in our joint development efforts.

We are heavily dependent on our senior management, particularly Mr. Richard Adcock, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong and Dr. Barry Simon, and a loss of a member of our senior management team in the future, even if only temporary, could harm our business.

If we lose members of our senior management for a short or an extended time, we may not be able to find appropriate replacements on a timely basis, and our business could be adversely affected. Our existing operations and continued future development depend to a significant extent upon the performance and active participation of certain key individuals, including Mr. Adcock, our CEO, Dr. Soon-Shiong, our Executive Chairman and our principal stockholder, and Dr. Simon, our President and Chief Administrative Officer. The risks related to our dependence upon Dr. Soon-Shiong are particularly acute given his ownership percentage, the commercial and other relationships that we have with entities affiliated with him, his role in our company and reputation. We may also be dependent on additional funding from Dr. Soon‑Shiong and his affiliates, which may not be available when needed. If we were to lose Mr. Adcock, Dr. Soon-Shiong or Dr. Simon for a short or an extended time, for any reason, including the contraction of COVID‑19, we may not be able to find appropriate replacements on a timely basis and our financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

Competition for qualified personnel in the biotechnology and pharmaceuticals industry is intense due to the limited number of individuals who possess the skills and experience required. To induce valuable employees to remain at our company, in addition to salary and cash incentives, we have provided stock options and restricted stock units that vest over time. The value to employees of stock options and restricted stock units that vest over time may be significantly affected by movements in our stock price that are beyond our control, and may at any time be insufficient to counteract more lucrative offers from other companies. Despite our efforts to retain valuable employees, members of our management, scientific and development teams may terminate their employment with us on short notice. We face significant competition for employees, particularly scientific personnel, from other biopharmaceutical companies, which include both publicly traded and privately held companies, and we may not be able to hire new employees quickly enough to meet our needs. Although we have employment agreements with our key employees, these employment agreements provide for at-will employment, which means that any of our employees could leave our employment at any time, with or without notice. Except with respect to Dr. Simon, we do not maintain “key man” insurance policies on the lives of these individuals or the lives of any of our other employees. We may not be able to attract and retain quality personnel on acceptable terms, or at all, which may cause our business and operating results to suffer.

53

Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, our Executive Chairman and principal stockholder, has significant interests in other companies which may conflict with our interests.

Our Executive Chairman and principal stockholder, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, is the founder of NantWorks. The various NantWorks companies are currently exploring opportunities in the immunotherapy, infectious disease and inflammatory disease fields. In particular, we have agreements with a number of related parties that provide services, technology and equipment for use in our efforts to develop our product pipeline. Dr. Soon-Shiong holds a controlling interest, either directly or indirectly, in these entities. Consequently, Dr. Soon-Shiong’s interests may not be aligned with our other stockholders and he may from time to time be incentivized to take certain actions that benefit his other interests and that our other stockholders do not view as being in their interest as investors in our company. In addition, other companies affiliated with Dr. Soon-Shiong may compete with us for business opportunities or, in the future, develop products that are competitive with ours (including products in other therapeutic fields which we may target in the future). Moreover, even if they do not directly relate to us, actions taken by Dr. Soon-Shiong and the companies with which he is involved could impact us.

We may also pursue supply arrangements for various investigational agents controlled by affiliates to be used in our clinical trials. If Dr. Soon-Shiong was to cease his affiliation with us, ImmunityBio, or with NantWorks, these entities may be unwilling to continue these relationships with us on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, and as a result may impede our ability to control the supply chain for our combination therapies. These supply and collaboration agreements do not typically specify how sales will be apportioned between the parties upon successful commercialization of the product. As a result, we cannot guarantee that we will receive a percentage of the revenue that is at least proportional to the costs that we will incur in commercializing the product candidate.

Furthermore, in November 2015, we entered into a Shared Services Agreement with NantWorks, pursuant to which NantWorks and/or any of its affiliates provides corporate, general and administrative, manufacturing strategy, research and development, regulatory and clinical trial strategy, and other support services to us and our subsidiaries. If Dr. Soon-Shiong was to cease his affiliation with us or with NantWorks, we may be unable to establish or maintain this relationship with NantWorks on a commercially reasonable basis, if at all. As a result, we could experience a lack of business continuity due to loss of historical and institutional knowledge and a lack of familiarity of new employees and/or new service providers with business processes, operating requirements, policies and procedures, and we may incur additional costs as new employees and/or service providers gain necessary experience, particularly in connection with issues or concerns we may have as a public company. In addition, the loss of the services of NantWorks might significantly delay or prevent the development of our products or achievement of other business objectives by diverting management’s attention to transition matters and identification of suitable replacements, if any, and could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

We will need to grow the size and capabilities of our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth.

To effect our business plan, we will need to add other management, administrative, regulatory, manufacturing and scientific staff. As of December 31, 2020, we had 171 employees. We will need to attract, retain and motivate a significant number of new additional managerial, operational, sales, marketing, financial, and other personnel, as well as highly skilled scientific and medical personnel, and to expand our capabilities to successfully pursue our research, development, manufacturing and commercialization efforts and secure collaborations to market and distribute our products. This growth may strain our existing managerial, operational, financial and other resources. We also intend to add personnel in our research and development and manufacturing departments as we expand our clinical trial and research capabilities. Moreover, we may need to hire additional accounting and other personnel and augment our infrastructure as a result of operating as a public company. Any inability to attract and retain qualified employees to enable our planned growth and establish additional capabilities or our failure to manage our growth effectively could delay or curtail our product development and commercialization efforts and harm our business.

We have limited manufacturing experience and may not be able to manufacture our haNK, taNK, t‑haNK or ceNK cells on a large scale or in a cost-effective manner.

haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells have been grown in various quantities in closed cell culture systems and intermediate to larger-scale bioreactors. With all manufacturing efforts being conducted in-house, we will need to develop the ability to grow haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells on a large-scale basis in a cost efficient manner. While we have made great strides with our haNK and t‑haNK production, including a validated cryopreserved form of the product, we have not demonstrated the ability to manufacture these cells beyond quantities sufficient for our clinical programs. We have not demonstrated the ability to manufacture our taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells beyond quantities sufficient for research and development and limited clinical activities. We have also experienced increases in manufacturing costs and sporadic decreases in manufacturing yield of haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells. In addition, we have no experience manufacturing our NK cells specifically at the capacity that will be necessary to support commercial sales. The novel nature of our technology also increases the complexity and risk in the manufacturing process. In addition, we may encounter difficulties in obtaining the approvals for, and designing, constructing, validating and operating, any new

54

manufacturing facility. We may also be unable to hire the qualified personnel that we will require to accommodate the expansion of our operations and manufacturing capabilities. If we relocate our manufacturing activities to a new facility during or after a pivotal clinical trial, we may be unable to obtain regulatory approval unless and until we demonstrate to the FDA’s satisfaction the similarity of our haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells manufactured in the new facility to our cells manufactured in prior facilities. If we cannot adequately demonstrate similarity to the FDA, we could be required to repeat clinical trials, which would be expensive, and would substantially delay regulatory approval.

Because our product candidates are cell-based, their manufacture is complicated. In addition, we rely on certain third party suppliers for manufacturing supplies such as X‑VIVO 10 media to grow and produce our cells. Reliance on such third-party suppliers exposes us to supply interruptions and shortages that could have an adverse effect on our ability to produce product. Moreover, our present production process may not meet our initial expectations as to reproducibility, yield, purity or other measurements of performance. Any supply interruption from third parties and entities that are affiliated with Dr. Soon‑Shiong and/or NantWorks could materially harm our ability to manufacture our product candidates until a new source of supply, if any, could be identified and qualified. We may be unable to find a sufficient alternative supply channel in a reasonable time or on commercially reasonable terms. In addition, we may have to customize a bioreactor system to our manufacturing process. Because our manufacturing process is unproven, we may never successfully commercialize our products. In addition, because the clinical trials were conducted using a system that will not be sufficient for commercial quantities, we may have to show comparability of the different versions of systems we have used. For these and other reasons, we may not be able to manufacture haNK, taNK, t‑haNK, ceNK and MSC cells on a large scale or in a cost-effective manner.

aNK platform cells have been produced at academic institutions associated with our other clinical trial sites. In the past, the lack of production of aNK platform cells has caused delays in the commencement of our clinical trials. We have been establishing NK cell production capacity to meet anticipated demand for our planned clinical trials but may not be able to successfully build out our capacity to meet our current and anticipated future needs. Any damage to or destruction of our facility and equipment, prolonged power outage, contamination or shut down by the FDA or other regulatory authority could significantly impair or curtail our ability to produce haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells.

We are dependent on third parties to store our aNK, haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells, and any damage or loss to our master cell bank would cause delays in replacement, and our business could suffer.

The aNK cells of our master and working cell banks are stored in freezers at a third party biorepository and also stored in our freezers at one of our production facilities. If these cells are damaged at these facilities, including by the loss or malfunction of these freezers or back-up power systems, as well as by damage from fire, loss of power, or other natural disasters, we would need to establish replacement master and working cell banks, which would impact clinical supply and delay our patients’ treatments. If we are unable to establish replacement cell banks, we could incur significant additional expenses and liability to patients whose treatment is delayed, and our business could suffer.

If we or any of our third party manufacturers that we may use do not maintain high standards of manufacturing, our ability to develop and commercialize haNK, taNK, t‑haNK or ceNK cells could be delayed or curtailed.

We and any third parties that we may use in the future to manufacture our products must continuously adhere to cGMP regulations rigorously enforced by the FDA through its facilities inspection program. If our facilities or the facilities of third parties who we may use in the future to produce our products do not pass a pre-approval inspection, the FDA will not grant market approval for haNK, taNK, t‑haNK or ceNK cells. In complying with cGMP, we and any third-party manufacturers must expend significant time, money and effort in production, record keeping and quality control to assure that each component of our haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cell therapies meets applicable specifications and other requirements. We or any of these third-party manufacturers may also be subject to comparable or more stringent regulations of foreign regulatory authorities. If we or any of our third-party manufacturers fail to comply with these requirements, we may be subject to regulatory action, which could delay or curtail our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval of, and commercialize haNK, taNK, t‑haNK or ceNK cells. If our component part manufacturers and suppliers fail to provide components of sufficient quality to meet our required specifications, our clinical trials or commercialization of haNK, taNK, t‑haNK or ceNK cells could be delayed or halted, and we could face product liability claims.

55

If we or any of our third-party manufacturers that we may engage use hazardous and biological materials in a manner that causes injury or violates applicable law, we may be liable for damages.

Our research and development activities involve the controlled use of potentially hazardous substances, including chemical and biological materials, by us and any third-party manufacturers that we may use in the future. We and any of our third party manufacturers that we may engage are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations in the U.S. governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of medical and hazardous materials. Although we believe that our procedures for using, storing and disposing of these materials comply with legally prescribed standards, we cannot completely eliminate the risk of contamination or injury resulting from medical or hazardous materials. As a result of any such contamination or injury, we may incur liability or local, city, state or federal authorities may curtail the use of these materials and interrupt our business operations. In the event of an accident, we could be held liable for damages or penalized with fines, and the liability could exceed our resources. We do not have any insurance for liabilities arising from medical or hazardous materials. Compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations is expensive, and current or future environmental regulations may impair our research, development and production efforts, which could harm our business, prospects, financial condition or results of operations.

We have not yet developed a validated methodology for freezing and thawing large quantities of taNK and t‑haNK cells, which we believe will be required for the storage and distribution of our taNK and t‑haNK product candidates.

We have not demonstrated that taNK and t‑haNK cells can be frozen and thawed in large quantities without damage, in a cost-efficient manner and without degradation over time. We may encounter difficulties not only in developing freezing and thawing methodologies, but also in obtaining the necessary regulatory approvals for using such methodologies in treatment. If we cannot adequately demonstrate similarity of our frozen product to the unfrozen form to the satisfaction of the FDA, we could face substantial delays in our regulatory approvals. If we are unable to freeze taNK and t‑haNK cells for shipping purposes, our ability to promote adoption and standardization of our products, as well as achieve economies of scale by centralizing our production facility, will be limited. Even if we are able to successfully freeze and thaw taNK and t‑haNK cells in large quantities, we will still need to develop a cost-effective and reliable distribution and logistics network, which we may be unable to accomplish. For these and other reasons, we may not be able to commercialize haNK, taNK or t‑haNK cells on a large scale or in a cost-effective manner.

We rely on third party healthcare professionals to administer haNK, taNK, t‑haNK or ceNK cells to patients, and our business could be harmed if these third parties administer these cells incorrectly.

We rely on the expertise of physicians, nurses and other associated medical personnel to administer haNK, t‑haNK, MSC or ceNK cells to clinical trial patients. If these medical personnel are not properly trained to administer, or do not properly administer, haNK, taNK, t‑haNK, MSC or ceNK cells, the therapeutic effect of haNK, taNK, t‑haNK, MSC or ceNK cells may be diminished or the patient may suffer injury.

In addition, if we achieve the ability to freeze and thaw our haNK, t‑haNK, MSC and ceNK cells, third party medical personnel will have to be trained on proper methodology for thawing haNK, t‑haNK, MSC and ceNK cells received from us. If this thawing is not performed correctly, the cells may become damaged and/or the patient may suffer injury. While we intend to provide training materials and other resources to these third-party medical personnel, the thawing of haNK, t‑haNK, MSC or ceNK cells will occur outside our supervision and may not be administered properly. If, due to a third-party error, people believe that haNK, t‑haNK, MSC or ceNK cells are ineffective or harmful, the desire to use haNK, t‑haNK, MSC or ceNK cells may decline, which would negatively impact our business, reputation and prospects. We may also face significant liability even though we may not be responsible for the actions of these third parties.

Even if any of our product candidates receive regulatory approvals, they may fail to achieve the broad degree of market acceptance and use necessary for commercial success.

Any potential future commercial success of any of our product candidates will depend, among other things, on its acceptance by physicians, patients, healthcare payors, and other members of the medical community as a therapeutic and cost-effective alternative to commercially available products. Because only a few cell-based therapy products have been commercialized, we do not know to what extent cell-based immunotherapy products will be accepted as therapeutic alternatives. If we fail to gain market acceptance, we may not be able to earn sufficient revenues to continue our business. Market acceptance of, and demand for, any product that we may develop, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on many factors, including:

56

If haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells are approved for use, but fail to achieve the broad degree of market acceptance necessary for commercial success, our operating results and financial condition will be adversely affected. In addition, even if haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells gain acceptance, the markets for treatment of patients with our target indications may not be as significant as we estimate.

Even if we are able to commercialize any product candidates, such products may become subject to unfavorable pricing regulations, third-party reimbursement practices or healthcare reform initiatives, which would harm our business.

The regulations that govern marketing approvals, pricing and reimbursement for new drugs vary widely from country to country. Some countries require approval of the sale price of a drug before it can be marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or product licensing approval is granted. In some foreign markets, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. As a result, we might obtain marketing approval for a product in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations that delay the commercial launch of the product and negatively impact the revenue we are able to generate from the sale of the product in that country. Adverse pricing limitations may hinder our ability to recoup our investment in one or more product candidates, even if any product candidates we may develop obtain marketing approval.

Our ability to successfully commercialize any products that we may develop also will depend in part on the extent to which reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers and other organizations. Government authorities and third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which medications they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. A primary trend in the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere is cost containment. Government authorities and third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. Reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval. Government authorities also impose mandatory discounts for certain patient groups and may seek to increase such discounts at any time. Future regulation may negatively impact the price of our products, if approved. It may be difficult to promptly obtain coverage and profitable payment rates from both the government-funded and private payors for any of our approved product candidates, and this may have a material adverse effect on our operating results, our ability to raise capital and our overall financial condition.

There are risks inherent in our business that may subject us to potential product liability suits and other claims, which may require us to engage in expensive and time-consuming litigation or pay substantial damages and may harm our reputation and reduce the demand for our product.

Our business exposes us to product liability risks, which are inherent in the testing, manufacturing, marketing and sale of biopharmaceutical products. We will face an even greater risk of product liability if we commercialize haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells. For example, we may be sued if any product we develop allegedly causes or is perceived to cause injury or is found to be otherwise unsuitable during product testing, manufacturing, marketing or sale. Any such product liability claims may include allegations of defects in manufacturing, defects in design, a failure to warn of dangers inherent in the product, negligence, strict liability and a breach of warranties. Claims could also be asserted under state consumer protection acts. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to limit commercialization of our products. Even a successful defense would require significant financial and management resources.

Certain aspects of how haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells are processed and administered may increase our exposure to liability. Medical personnel administer haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells to patients intravenously in an outpatient procedure. This procedure poses risks to the patient similar to those occurring with infusions of other cell products, such as T‑cells and stem cells, including blood clots, infection and mild to severe allergic reactions. Additionally, haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells or components of our haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cell therapy may cause unforeseen harmful side effects. For example, a patient receiving haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells could have a severe allergic reaction or could develop an autoimmune condition to materials infused with the haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells.

57

In addition, we have not conducted studies on the long-term effects associated with the media that we use to grow our haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells. Similarly, we expect to use media in freezing our haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells for shipment. These media could contain substances that have proved harmful if used in certain quantities. As we continue to develop our haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cell therapy, we may encounter harmful side effects that we did not previously observe in our prior studies and clinical trials. Additionally, the discovery of unforeseen side effects of haNK, taNK, t‑haNK and ceNK cells could also lead to lawsuits against us.

Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability or other claims may, among other things, result in: