​

​

​

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024

OR

For The Transition Period From        To        

Commission file number: 001-40886

COGNITION THERAPEUTICS, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

​

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (412) 481-2210

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 Section 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 (§232.0405 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. ☐

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant's executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐

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 Registrant’s Common Stock held by non-affiliates, as of June 30, 2024, the last business day of the Registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was approximately $56,312,451. Shares of Common Stock held by each executive officer and director and by each stockholder affiliated with a director or an executive officer have been excluded from this calculation because such persons may be deemed to be affiliates. This determination of affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes.

The number of outstanding shares of the Registrant’s Common Stock as of March 17, 2025, was 61,972,946.

Documents Incorporated by Reference

Portions of the Registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement relating to the 2025 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated herein by reference in Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K to the extent stated herein. The proxy statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days of the registrant’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2024.

​

​

​

​

TABLE OF CONTENTS

​

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K, or Annual Report, contains forward-looking statements concerning our business, operations and financial performance, as well as our plans, objectives and expectations for our business operations and financial performance and condition. All statements other than statements of historical or current facts included in this Annual Report are forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “aim,” “anticipate,” “assume,” “believe,” “contemplate,” “continue,” “could,” “design,” “due,” “estimate,” “expect,” “goal,” “intend,” “may,” “objective,” “plan,” “positioned,” “potential,” “predict,” “seek,” “should,” “target,” “will,” “would” and other similar expressions that are predictions of or indicate future events and future trends, or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. In addition, statements including “we believe” or similar phrases reflect our beliefs and opinions on the relevant subject. All forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by these, forward-looking statements and therefore, you should not unduly rely on such statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to:

We have based these forward-looking statements largely on our current expectations, estimates, forecasts, and projections about future events and financial trends that we believe may affect our financial condition, results of operations, business strategy, and financial needs. In light of the significant uncertainties in these forward-looking statements, you should not rely upon forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. Although we believe that we have a reasonable basis for each forward-looking statement contained in this Annual Report, we cannot guarantee that the future results, levels of activity, performance, or events and circumstances reflected in the forward-looking statements will be achieved or occur at all. You should refer to the section titled “Risk Factors” set forth in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report for a discussion of important factors that may cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by our forward-looking statements. Furthermore, if our forward-looking statements prove to be inaccurate, the inaccuracy may be material. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

​

SUMMARY OF RISK FACTORS

The risk factors summarized below could materially harm our business, operating results and/or financial condition, impair our future prospects, and/or cause the price of our common stock to decline. These are not all the risks we face, and other factors not presently known to us or that we currently believe are immaterial may also affect our business if they occur. Additional detail about these risks is included in Part I, Item 1A “Risk Factors.”

Material risks that may affect our business, operating results and financial condition include, but are not necessarily limited to, those relating to:

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Capital Needs; Discovery, Development and Regulatory Approval of Our Product Candidates; and Business and Industry

​

​

​ Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

​

​

Risks Related to Commercialization, Manufacturing and Reliance on Third Parties

​

Risks Relating to Government Regulation

​

Risks Relating to Our Common Stock

​

​

PART I

Item 1. Business

Overview

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company engaged in the discovery and development of innovative, small molecule therapeutics targeting age-related degenerative diseases and disorders of the central nervous system, or CNS, and retina. Currently available therapies for these diseases are limited, with many diseases having no approved therapies or treatments. Our goal is to develop disease-modifying treatments for patients with these degenerative disorders.

Our lead product candidate, zervimesine, also known as CT1812, is an orally delivered, small molecule designed to protect neuronal synapses by preventing the binding of oligomers of pathogenic proteins including β-amyloid, or Aβ and ɑ-synuclein. These and similar protein oligomers have been linked to the progression of degenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease, or AD, and dementia with Lewy bodies, or DLB.

The United States Adopted Name (USAN) Council adopted zervimesine as the USAN for CT1812 in December 2024.

The company’s initial focus has been on the development of zervimesine for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. We believe our evidence demonstrates that zervimesine displaces Aβ oligomers from their neuronal receptors. Based on this mechanism, we believe zervimesine has the potential to slow the loss of synapses and cognitive decline observed in AD. The direct healthcare costs to care for patients with AD and other dementias in the United States is estimated to exceed $350 billion. Approximately 7 million people in the United States have been diagnosed with AD, and the World Health Organization estimates that AD affects as many as 35 million people globally.

Enrollment has concluded in the company’s Phase 2 COG0201 (SHINE) study of zervimesine in mild-to-moderate AD. Top-line results were reported in 2024. Enrollment is ongoing in the COG0203 (START) Phase 2 study of zervimesine in patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and early-stage AD. We are conducting the START clinical trial in collaboration with the Alzheimer’s Clinical Trial Consortium, or ACTC, an NIA-funded clinical trials network designed to accelerate studies for therapeutics for AD and related dementias. Both studies are supported by grant awards totaling $110 million from the National Institute of Aging, or NIA, a division of the National Institutes of Health, or NIH.

In addition, company research produced evidence that zervimesine prevents the binding of ɑ-synuclein to neurons, rescuing cellular function that is compromised in DLB. Based on this information, we conducted the Phase 2 COG1201 (SHIMMER) clinical trial in 130 adults with mild-to-moderate DLB, which concluded in 2024. Top-line results were presented in December 2024 and later at the International Lewy Body Dementia Conference (ILBDC) in January 2025. The trial was funded by a grant of approximately $30 million from the NIA.

Our clinical trials have been funded by approximately $171 million in cumulative grants awarded primarily by the NIA. As of October 15, 2024, approximately 477 subjects have received zervimesine in our clinical trials, including people with AD, DLB and dry AMD. Zervimesine has continued to be generally well tolerated and has been granted Fast Track designation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, for AD.

Recent Developments

In 2024, we reported top-line results from both the Phase 2 COG0201 (SHINE) clinical trial, which evaluated zervimesine in 153 adults with mild-to-moderate (MMSE 18-26) AD, and the Phase 2 COG1201 (SHIMMER) clinical trial in 130 adults with mild-to-moderate DLB.

Top-line SHINE results were presented in July 2024 at the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference (AAIC) and additional data from a biomarker-defined population of AD patients from the SHINE study were presented in October 2024 at the Clinical Trials on Alzheimer’s Disease (CTAD) conference. Top-line results were presented during an investor webinar in December 2024.

Top-line SHIMMER results were presented at the International Lewy Body Dementia Conference (ILBDC) in January 2025.

We initiated the Phase 2 COG2201 (MAGNIFY) clinical study of zervimesine in 2023 based on evidence that zervimesine may be effective in the treatment of GA secondary to dry AMD. Based on the favorable results from our dementia programs and the need to preserve capital, we made the strategic decision in January 2025 to focus our resources on the development of zervimesine in AD and DLB. As a result, in February 2025 we voluntarily concluded the MAGNIFY clinical study and began investigator site wind-down procedures. The conclusion of the study was not the result of any safety concerns. At the time of the study conclusion, 100 participants had been enrolled in the trial. Results are being compiled by the contract research organization (CRO) following participant completion of final clinic visits. We intend to conduct an analysis of the changes in GA lesion size as well as safety and tolerability, which will be reported in the second quarter of 2025. We continue to believe that zervimesine has the potential to alter the biological processes that contribute to dry AMD.

Our Strategy

Our objectives are to develop and advance our portfolio, beginning with our lead product candidate, zervimesine. We want to leverage our understanding of zeryimesine’s mechanism and its ability to regulate pathways and biological processes. The key elements of our strategy include:

Zervimesine for the Treatment of Dementias: AD and DLB

Neurodegenerative diseases including AD and DLB are defined by progressive degeneration of nerve cells, or neurons, which often leads to neuronal death, causing dementia, a progressive decline in memory, language, problem-solving and other cognitive functions, results in decreased quality of life and shorter life span. Two of the most common causes of dementia are AD and DLB.

Zervimesine is designed to stop the binding of Aβ and ɑ-synuclein oligomers to neuronal synapses, thereby protecting neurons from the toxic effects of these pathogenic protein species. We believe that zervimesine represents a functionally distinct and promising approach to synaptoprotective therapeutics where neurons remain viable and functional.

Alzheimer’s Disease (AD)

Zervimesine was designed to selectively target and displace Aβ oligomers bound to neuronal receptors at synapses, a new and differentiated mechanism of action. In our preclinical studies, zervimesine has demonstrated the potential to protect synapses, facilitate their restoration and improve cognitive performance.

Overview of the Disease

AD is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by cognitive dysfunction, memory loss, dementia and the impairment of daily living activities, along with numerous behavioral and neuropsychiatric symptoms. In the advanced stages of the disease, an AD patient is unable to recognize faces, use or understand language and displays a lack of awareness for their surroundings. Continued functional decline ultimately results in the patient’s death.

Due to the size of the affected population, we believe that AD is one of the most significant unmet medical needs of our time. Nearly seven million Americans are living with AD and disease prevalence is expected to more than double by 2050. The direct healthcare costs to care for patients with AD and other dementias in the United States is currently estimated to exceed $350 billion and projected to increase to $1 trillion by 2050. Absent the development of meaningful intervention in the course of the disease, the number of people diagnosed with, and dying from, AD is anticipated to escalate appreciably as lifespans lengthen, since prevalence increases significantly with age. The Centers for Disease Control listed AD as the sixth leading cause of death among all adults and the fifth leading cause for those aged 65 or older. The disease is equally devastating worldwide, with the World Health Organization estimating that AD affects as many as 35 million people globally.

Currently Approved AD Therapeutics

Only two FDA-approved disease-modifying therapeutic options for AD are currently available in the United States: Eisai’s Leqembi (lecanemab), which received complete approval in July 2023; and Eli Lilly’s Kisunla (donanemab), which was approved in July 2024. Both are approved for the treatment of people with MCI or mild Alzheimer’s disease (MMSE between 22 and 30). Biogen’s Aduhelm (aducanumab) was approved in July 2021 but was discontinued in January 2024. Leqembi and Kisunla are monoclonal antibodies administered via infusion designed to slow the progression of cognitive decline by reducing Aβ plaques and protofibrils. They represent approaches that are distinct from our small molecule approach of blocking the binding of Aβ oligomers to synapses.

Other therapies approved for AD are indicated to treat the symptoms of AD: acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, or AChEIs, antipsychotics, glutamatergic modulators and an orexin receptor antagonist. AChEIs are designed to slow the degradation of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine, helping to preserve neuronal communication and function temporarily. Glutamatergic modulators are designed to block sustained, low-level activation of the N-methyl-D-aspartate, or NMDA, receptor without inhibiting the normal function of the receptor in memory and cognition. Namenda (memantine), an NMDA receptor antagonist was approved in the United States in 2003. These therapeutic products do not modify or alter the progression of the underlying disease and provide only modest efficacy in treating the symptoms.

Current Status of AD Therapeutic Approaches

Numerous therapeutic approaches have been evaluated to remedy the causes of AD. Those focused on reducing the aberrant production or removal of intraneuronal neurofibrillary tangles of tau protein have yielded limited clinical benefit. Development initiatives intended to inhibit hyperphosphorylation of the tau protein and related kinase activity, enhance microtubule stability or block tau aggregation have largely been discontinued due to toxicity or a lack of efficacy. Microglial activation and its role in AD-induced neuroinflammation has emerged as another potential target for therapeutic development as has the proper functioning of processes dictating synaptic plasticity, believed to be of central importance to neuronal activity and continued viability. These efforts have also not yielded meaningful clinical advances.

Among the more prevalent and targeted mechanisms implicated in AD is the accumulation of Aβ aggregates in the neuronal synapse where disease progression leads to synaptic dysfunction and dysregulation. The accompanying deterioration in neuronal activity ultimately results in neuronal death. As a result, the reduction in the levels of Aβ aggregates at the synapse has been a prominent objective of a significant number of therapeutic candidates, including active and passive immunotherapies, designed specifically to target Aβ aggregates. As exemplified by Leqembi’s clinical results, we believe that preferentially targeting Aβ protofibrils/oligomers has the potential to prevent synaptotoxicity. Several therapeutics in this class have recently been approved by the FDA, including Aduhelm, Leqembi and Kisunla, which are monoclonal antibodies designed to reduce Aβ plaques and protofibrils, approaches that are distinct from but potentially complementary to our small molecule approach of blocking Aβ oligomer binding.

Emerging Role of Biomarkers in AD

Biomarkers have become increasingly important in the development of treatments for neurodegenerative diseases for a number of reasons, including monitoring drug activity in patients, assessing changes in disease pathology during treatment and identifying responder populations for clinical trials. Given that biomarker-enabled therapeutics have a higher rate of success at gaining product approval, we elected to employ biomarkers in our programs to mitigate clinical development risk. To that end, in addition to a number of cognitive tests, our clinical trials use a variety of biomarkers to measure target and/or pathway engagement and assess changes in disease progression.

For example, in AD, tangles of Aβ and phosphorylated tau (p-tau) build up in the brain and can be visualized through a positron emission tomography, or PET scan. Recently, tests have been developed that can detect levels of p‐tau in blood plasma. Increasing levels of p-tau, whether visualized with PET or measured in blood plasma, indicates increasing disease burden. Data generated by pharmaceutical companies indicates that individuals with lower AD pathology at baseline, as reflected by lower levels of p‑tau, have greater response to amyloid-based therapies.

Other potentially useful biomarkers include neurofilament light chain, which can indicate dysfunction in membrane trafficking and autophagy processes. Quantitative EEG and PET imaging agents as well as vMRI may also have utility in several neurodegenerative disorders to measure synaptic function, synaptic density and brain atrophy, respectively.

The Role of Aβ Oligomers on Synapses and the Downstream Impact to Brain Function and AD

Synapses are specialized points of contact between neurons, where electrical signaling and communication takes place. It is well established that synapses are routinely sprouted and resorbed as part of the normal process of learning and memory. Each neuron is covered with an estimated 10,000 synapses and these synapses participate in a complex electrical circuit with other neurons. Neurons do not divide or reproduce as part of normal physiological function.

Scientific evidence has demonstrated that Aβ oligomers, formed over time through the buildup of Aβ and its aggregates, bind to specific parts of the synaptic structure and interfere with the normal process of memory formation. This ligand-like activity confers to Aβ oligomers potent synaptotoxic activity. In response, the neuron dismantles and resorbs the synaptic structure to prevent its abnormal function from interfering with what remains of the normal circuit behavior. If a large enough number of synapses are lost, the neuron dies.

Synaptic loss, however, is not necessarily permanent and synapses can be regained or sprout again once the oligomers are removed. We have observed this process in our research involving preclinical AD models. This observation leads us to believe that displacement of synaptotoxic Aβ oligomers may enable synapses to recover and potentially slow cognitive decline. We are further encouraged by the numerous precedents which exist that demonstrate the therapeutic utility of blocking ligand-receptor interactions in the brain with small molecule drugs capable of crossing the blood-brain barrier.

Zervimesine’s Mechanism of Action Prevents Binding of Aβ Oligomers

Our proprietary zervimesine product candidate employs a novel and fundamentally different mechanism compared to other approved or experimental treatments, which facilitates removal of neurotoxic Aβ oligomers through alteration of S2R activity. Experimental evidence suggests that Aβ oligomers likely occupy binding sites contiguous to the S2R complex. The preferential binding of zervimesine to the S2R complex produces changes that alter the binding affinity of Aβ oligomers to their targets. Zervimesine binding to the S2R complex is hypothesized to modulate the conformation of the S2R complex, which in turn allosterically alters the oligomer receptors causing displacement of Aβ oligomers from the neurons and neuronal synapse. Displaced Aβ oligomers are less able to rebind as long as threshold concentrations of zervimesine are present and are rapidly removed from the synapse. Based on our preclinical studies, we believe that zervimesine not only prevents binding of Aβ oligomers, displacing them from neuronal synapses, but also slows Aβ oligomer-induced loss of synapses and restores synaptic activity, which may reverse downstream synaptotoxic effects.

Zervimesine Clinical Results in AD

We have completed multiple clinical trial evaluations of zervimesine, in both healthy volunteers and patients with mild-to-moderate AD, and have one clinical trial ongoing (START) in patients with MCI or early AD. The clinical trials we have conducted to date have enabled us to evaluate the safety profile of zervimesine; validate its mechanism through proof-of-concept trials; assess clinical efficacy signals; and identify predictive biomarkers of treatment response. The following is the status of our completed and ongoing clinical trials.

Overview of our Completed and Ongoing Clinical Studies of Zervimesine for AD

COG0201 — Phase 2 (SHINE) Clinical Trial

Our COG0201 SHINE study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2 clinical trial designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of zervimesine. A total of 153 adults with mild-to-moderate AD were enrolled and divided into two zervimesine dose groups (100 mg or 300 mg) and one placebo group, dosed daily for six months. Endpoints included safety and biomarker evidence of disease modification as well as cognitive function, as measured by ADAS-Cog 11. ADAS-Cog 11 is a globally recognized cognitive scale that is used to assess cognition in patients with AD. Top-line results were reported in July 2024 with additional data reported in October 2024.

A prespecified analysis conducted on SHINE results identified plasma p-tau217 as a biomarker that may predict an optimal therapeutic response in patients with mild-to-moderate AD. Participants treated with zervimesine (pooled 100 mg and 300 mg) who had baseline levels of plasma p-tau217 below the median of 1.0 pg/mL experienced a 95% reduction of cognitive decline at week 26 as measured by ADAS-Cog 11 relative to placebo-treated participants. We believe P-tau217 is an important biomarker that has shown the ability to distinguish Alzheimer’s disease from other neurodegenerative disorders with a high degree of accuracy compared to other available biomarkers.

In the overall modified intent-to-treat, or mITT, population in SHINE, participants treated with once-daily oral zervimesine experienced less cognitive decline than those treated with placebo. As measured with ADAS-Cog 11, zervimesine-treated participants (pooled 100 mg and 300 mg) experienced a mean 38% slowing of decline at six months versus baseline compared to placebo-treated, but did not achieve statistical significance. There were consistent trends favoring zervimesine in other cognitive measures: ADAS-Cog 13, cognitive composite, MMSE; as well as in functional measures of activities of daily living (ADCS-ADL) and of clinical global impression of change (ADCS-CGIC). No discontinuations due to AEs occurred in the 100 mg zervimesine group. At the 300 mg dose, ten participants (nine at scheduled visits and one at an unscheduled visit) experienced treatment-emergent liver enzyme test (“LFT”) increases (greater than 3xULN) that subsided after cessation of drug without evidence of serious liver injury. There were no LFT elevations observed in the 100 mg dose.

​

​

​

Proteomic measurements were also performed on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma from these patients, from which we have comprehensive datasets of whole proteome changes observed in AD patients given zervimesine versus placebo for six months. From this, we identified product candidate pharmacodynamic biomarkers that could reflect processes of target engagement, pathway engagement and/or early disease modification.

COG0203 — Phase 2 START Clinical Trial

Our COG0203 study, referred to as START, is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2 clinical trial that is currently enrolling 540 patients with early-stage AD and using the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale Sum of Boxes; or CDR-SB to show a change in the rate of cognitive and functional decline. We are recruiting patients with MCI due to AD or mild AD who have elevated levels of Aβ as determined by PET imaging or as measured in CSF. The trial is being conducted in collaboration with ACTC and will utilize approximately 50-60 sites including research sites associated with the consortium, as well as other qualified sites that are not part of the consortium. Patients will be randomized to receive zervimesine or placebo for 18 months. In addition to a battery of cognitive and functional measures, we intend to use a variety of biomarkers to measure target engagement and assess changes in neurodegeneration and disease progression. We have been awarded a grant of approximately $81 million from the NIA to fund this trial.

Completed Proof-of-Concept Clinical Trials for the Mechanism of Zervimesine

COG0202 — Phase 2 SEQUEL Clinical Trial

Our COG0202 SEQUEL study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2 clinical trial of 16 patients with mild-to-moderate AD to evaluate the potential efficacy of zervimesine in restoring synaptic function in patients through quantitative EEG (qEEG) measurement, as reflected by relative theta power. The trial is a two-arm crossover trial, in which half of the participants received 300 mg of zervimesine daily for 29 days. After a 14-day wash out period, these participants received placebo for an additional 29 days. The other half of the participants received placebo daily for 29 days. After a 14-day wash out period, these participants received zervimesine treatment for an additional 29 days. CSF and qEEG evaluations were taken periodically throughout the duration of the trial. We completed enrollment in the first quarter of 2023 and presented results in October 2023. Results showed that zervimesine-treated participants exhibited a significant change in relative theta in the central region of the brain and consistent trends of improvement across all prespecified EEG parameters, reflecting improved synaptic function after just a matter of weeks.

COG0105 — Phase 1 SPARC Clinical Trial

The COG0105 SPARC study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 1 clinical trial of 23 patients with mild-to-moderate AD. The primary objectives of the study were to evaluate zervimesine for safety and tolerability. The secondary objectives were to evaluate potential effects of zervimesine on biologically relevant endpoints using various imaging modalities, including PET imaging and volumetric MRI (vMRI) as well as CSF biomarkers, and cognitive and clinical endpoints.

Participants were randomized to receive treatment with 100 mg or 300 mg of zervimesine or placebo once daily for 24 weeks. A preliminary analysis has been made of safety, clinical laboratory measurements, PET imaging, functional MRI and vMRI, CSF biomarkers and clinical outcomes in patients treated with zervimesine compared to those in patients receiving placebo.

Seventeen patients completed the study protocol, eleven in the zervimesine arm (six in the 100 mg cohort; five in the 300 mg cohort) and six in the placebo arm. Zervimesine was well tolerated with similar adverse event rates across treatment arms. Most adverse events were mild or moderate in severity with no deaths and no treatment-related SAEs reported. We observed mild and transient elevations of liver enzymes without any other indications of liver injury in two patients in the 300 mg group. The patients were discontinued from the study and the liver enzyme levels returned to normal.

Top-line results from the analyses of secondary endpoints demonstrated that after 24-weeks of treatment, there were no significant treatment differences on the ADAS-Cog 11 change from baseline. In addition, there were no significant treatment differences on SV2A signal change compared to baseline. However, vMRI showed a trend (p=0.0641) towards a significant reduction in the loss of composite brain volume in zervimesine-treated patients (pooled) compared to placebo. A significant (p<0.05) reduction in loss of brain volume was also observed in three brain regions (hippocampus, prefrontal cortex and pericentral cortex) in treated patients (pooled) compared to placebo, as shown in the table below.

LS Mean Change from Baseline in vMRI (composite) over Time by Treatment

​

COG0104 — Phase 1 SNAP Clinical Trial

Our COG0104 SNAP study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 1 clinical trial that enrolled three patients with mild-to-moderate AD to measure the effects of zervimesine on displacement of Aβ oligomers. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive a single dose of zervimesine (n=2) or placebo (n=1). Patients enrolled in the trial had an indwelling catheter placed in the lumbar CSF space. CSF samples were collected hourly over a 28-hour period. Five CSF samples were collected before and 24 samples collected after administration of a single 560 mg oral dose of zervimesine or placebo. CSF samples from each trial participant were analyzed to measure the concentration of Aβ oligomers over the trial period.

Results of this clinical trial revealed an increase in Aβ oligomer levels in the CSF over the 24-hour period following treatment with zervimesine, but not in the patient administered placebo. These findings were measured using two independent methods, microimmunoelectrodes and western blots. This effect of zervimesine was specific to Aβ oligomers, as no zervimesine-related increase in Aβ 1-40 or 1-42 monomer was observed. We believe that these results corroborate our mechanism of action previously demonstrated in preclinical studies, providing the first evidence that our preclinical studies translate to patients with AD.

First evidence of target engagement in humans, which mirrors that found preclinically; and we believe this reinforces that our mechanism of action extends to patients with AD

​

​

COG0102 — Phase 1 Clinical Trial

Our COG0102 study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 1 clinical trial of 19 patients with mild-to-moderate AD. Participants were administered one of three oral doses of zervimesine, either 90 mg, 280 mg or 560 mg, once daily for 28 days. The primary endpoint of the trial was safety with a secondary objective of establishing the pharmacokinetic, or PK, profile of zervimesine. Also included as exploratory endpoints were measurement of zervimesine in CSF, and protein expression changes in CSF and plasma.

Zervimesine was well tolerated in the COG0102 study. All AEs were mild or moderate. Some of the participants in the highest dose group experienced lymphocytopenia or elevated liver enzymes. These laboratory abnormalities resolved in most patients with continued dosing of zervimesine. One trial participant was discontinued from zervimesine prior to study completion because of elevated liver enzymes with subsequent resolution of this abnormality. Lymphocytopenia or elevated liver enzymes were not observed in either the 90 mg or 280 mg dosing cohorts. There were no SAEs.

Our Phase 1 Safety Trials with Zervimesine

In addition to Phase 1 clinical trials conducted in our targeted patient population, we also conducted a series of Phase 1 clinical trials in healthy volunteers to evaluate the safety profile of zervimesine; as well as numerous preclinical in vitro and in vivo studies to assess its neuroprotective function as well as determine potential drug-food or drug-drug interactions. These trials and their results, which are summarized below, indicated that zervimesine was generally well tolerated.

COG0101 — First in Human Phase 1 Clinical Trial

Our COG0101 study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled ascending dose Phase 1 multi-cohort clinical trial of 93 healthy volunteers to assess the safety and potential drug-food interactions of zervimesine. The trial was conducted in two segments.

The first segment was structured as an ascending single dose trial, in which participants received one dose of zervimesine with increasing doses given to each of six cohorts. In this segment of the trial, eight participants were enrolled per dosing cohort with six participants receiving zervimesine and two receiving placebo. The doses evaluated were 10 mg, 30 mg, 90 mg, 180 mg, 450 mg and 1,120 mg. A seventh cohort of six patients received a single 90 mg dose after receiving a standardized meal. All doses were administered as scheduled.

The second segment was configured as a multiple ascending dose trial, that enrolled 39 healthy volunteers, divided in three cohorts of ten participants, with one additional cohort consisting of nine healthy elderly volunteers. Each participant in this segment of the trial received a single dose of zervimesine each day for 14 days. The doses evaluated in this second segment were 280 mg, 560 mg and 840 mg.

Zervimesine CSF concentrations correlated to a >80% S2R predicted receptor occupancy in brain

​

Following completion of each trial cohort, bioanalytical evaluation of plasma zervimesine PK was conducted.

This trial demonstrated that administration of zervimesine in single doses of up to 1,120 mg, administered once, as well as up to 840 mg of zervimesine dosed for 14 consecutive days was well tolerated. Significantly, zervimesine concentrations detected in the CSF correlated to an estimated receptor occupancy in the brain of greater than 80%. There was one SAE in the multiple-dose portion of the study that was deemed unrelated to study drug. There were no SAEs related to the product candidate or TEAEs leading to withdrawal from the study.

COG0103 — Phase 1 Clinical Trial

Our COG0103 study was a Phase 1 clinical trial of 15 healthy volunteers designed to evaluate the potential effects of zervimesine on select CYP isoenzymes: CYP2C19, CYP2C9, CYP2D6 and CYP3A4/5. This was accomplished by assessing its effects on substrates of these isoenzymes: 20 mg omeprazole, 500 mg tolbutamide, 50 mg dextromethorphan and 4 mg midazolam. The 15 healthy volunteers who participated in the trial received the substrates of these isoenzymes two days prior to the initial dose of zervimesine and PK assessments were performed. A dose of 560 mg of zervimesine was administered to each of the trial participants for the following six consecutive days. The Day 6 dose of zervimesine was administered concomitantly with the four-substrate cocktail and PK assessments were repeated.

A weak drug interaction was observed between zervimesine and midazolam and dextromethorphan. A lack of any clinically meaningful interaction was observed with coadministration of omeprazole or tolbutamide. Based on the small magnitude of change in PK parameters of the probe drugs observed in this study for the isoenzymes CYP2D6 and CYP3A4, clinically meaningful interactions are unlikely.

In all blinded and unblinded clinical trials, several patients experienced asymptomatic, reversible elevations in serum liver chemistries prompting harmonization of monitoring, increasing frequency where appropriate, across our clinical trials.

Preclinical Results

Prior to entering clinical trials, the therapeutic potential of zervimesine was observed in numerous preclinical studies. As is demonstrated in the images below, the addition of Aβ oligomers to neuronal cell cultures resulted in synaptotoxicity as illustrated by the reduced expression of synaptic markers neurogranin, synaptotagmin and SV2A. The lack of immunoreactivity of these three synaptic proteins can be seen in the middle column of the image below. However, the presence of zervimesine blocked the Aβ oligomer-induced loss of synapses, as reflected by the presence of synaptic protein expression displayed in the right-hand column below.

Zervimesine prevented Aβ oligomer-mediated synaptic damage

​

Results showed that zervimesine also slowed the loss of synapses that is triggered by Aβ oligomers. A higher resolution image of the cell culture exposed to Aβ oligomer is shown below, before the addition of zervimesine, which is presented on the left, and after the addition of zervimesine, which is presented on the right. Aβ oligomers shown in red bind to synaptic receptors and reduces the number of synapses shown in green. The addition of zervimesine displaces Aβ oligomer binding and appears to block the effects induced by the Aβ oligomers, with the synapse numbers remaining at levels similar to normal.

Zervimesine slowed loss of synapse numbers in the presence of Aβ oligomers

​

The protective benefits of zervimesine observed in these in vitro assays are supported by functional in vivo assessments of zervimesine. In one such preclinical study, the memory of mice was tested based on the subject’s ability to recall fear-inducing triggers and its performance in a maze. The mice exhibiting symptoms of AD, depicted by the red bars in the image below, performed significantly worse in both the fear and maze tests when compared to normal, non-transgenic mice, represented by the blue bars. However, after administration of zervimesine, the AD mice, represented by the solid green bars, were seen to perform at a level similar to that achieved by normal mice. We believe these results are illustrative of zervimesine’s ability to restore synaptic proteins and numbers to normal levels and with it, the animal’s functional capabilities.

Zervimesine restored functional capabilities in a mouse model of AD

​

Dementia with Lewy Bodies (DLB)

Substantial cellular and clinical biomarker evidence demonstrate that zervimesine may have a beneficial impact on the pathways impaired in synucleinopathies, namely the localization of α-synuclein aggregates in Lewy bodies, which is a chief hallmark of DLB, Parkinson’s disease (PD) and other synucleinopathies. More recently, human genetic evidence has linked SNCA, the gene encoding α-synuclein, to the pathology of synucleinopathies.

We have conducted preclinical studies of compounds in our library, including zervimesine, to explore their potential to rescue the biological processes that are impaired in synucleinopathies. We are currently developing zervimesine for the treatment of DLB.

An Overview of DLB

DLB is the second most common cause of dementia. The abnormal accumulation of the protein α-synuclein into fibrils, the primary component of the Lewy bodies within brain neurons, is characteristic of DLB. Increasing evidence suggests that α-synuclein oligomers disrupt key cellular processes including autophagy and elicit neuronal dysfunction and loss of synapses.

DLB is challenging to diagnose and identify as it shares many Alzheimer’s disease symptoms. DLB is referred to as a “whole-body” disease, as it disrupts biological processes affecting autonomic, digestive, cognitive, and motor systems. Varied initial symptoms may include day-to-day fluctuations in alertness level, hallucinations, delusions, movement disorders and REM sleep disorder (acting out dreams while sleeping).

In the United States, an estimated 1.4 million are diagnosed with DLB. According to the Lewy Body Dementia Association, the direct healthcare costs for patients with DLB are estimated to be approximately $31 billion per year.

Limitations of Current Treatments

Most approved therapeutic products treat the symptoms of the diseases and modulate dopamine. While some existing products provide meaningful symptomatic relief, they have significant side effect risks, fail to address the progression of the disease, and over time gradually lose their effectiveness in treating the symptoms of the disease. There are no currently approved disease-modifying therapeutics for DLB.

Rationale for Zervimesine in the Treatment of DLB

The protein α-synuclein is primarily found in neural tissue that plays a role in neurotransmission. In DLB, α-synuclein builds up in brain cells and forms oligomers that saturably bind to neurons where they impair critical cellular processes, causing synaptic dysfunction. Our decision to pursue the treatment of synucleinopathies with zervimesine is based on internal and third-party data, indicating that zervimesine can prevent binding synuclein oligomers and that the S2R components PGRMC1 and TMEM97 regulate cell pathways known to be impaired in synucleinopathies, such as autophagy, vesicle trafficking and lipid synthesis; α-synuclein oligomers bind directly to PGRMC1; and synucleinopathies share certain mechanistic similarities with AD, including pathologies related to aberrant oligomeric protein formations.

As summarized below, we believe our preclinical studies provide compelling evidence supporting the use of zervimesine as a potential therapeutic to treat DLB.

As with oligomers of the Aβ protein in AD, oligomers of α-synuclein are highly toxic when bound to brains cells and internalized. This binding causes cellular stress, including three major pathway disruptions: upregulation of the autophagy receptor LAMP2A, dysregulation of lipid metabolism and a reduction in membrane trafficking. The S2R complex components, PGRMC1 and TMEM97, directly regulate these processes and activities which are compromised by the binding and internalization of α-synuclein oligomers.

Compounds that block α-synuclein binding and/or internalization are therefore expected to be disease-modifying.

Preclinical Study Support for Clinical Trials

The results of in vitro studies suggest that S2R modulator, such as zervimesine, may have disease-modifying effect on the synucleinopathies by reversing pathway disruption and dysregulation caused by α-synuclein oligomers. In work funded by grants from the Michael J. Fox Foundation, α-synuclein oligomers were found to bind to brain cells in culture and are internalized as indicated by the red dots in the image to the left below. With the addition of zervimesine, the binding and thus internalization of the α-synuclein oligomers is inhibited as indicated in the image to the right below.

Zervimesine blocked the binding and internalization of α-synuclein oligomers in the neuronal synapses

​

The potential for S2R modulators like zervimesine to reverse the deleterious cellular effects of α-synuclein oligomers is also reflected in the in vitro analysis of LAMP2A expression presented below. LAMP2A is a critical component of chaperone-mediated autophagy, one of several processes that eliminate damaged cellular proteins. Its expression, noted in orange, is upregulated in the presence of the toxic α-synuclein oligomer, likely a compensatory mechanism in response to the cellular insult. S2R modulators, which block membrane trafficking deficits caused by α-synuclein oligomers, are observed to inhibit the upregulation of LAMP2A, as evidenced by the dark and light gray in the below chart. As these antagonists are selective for the S2R complex, their ability to reverse the effects of α-synuclein on LAMP2A expression provides compelling evidence of the S2R complex’s importance in the regulation of this autophagy pathway.

In vitro analysis further illustrates α-synuclein oligomers’ dose-dependent inhibition of membrane trafficking. Importantly, oligomer-related inhibition was noted to be four-fold higher than that observed with high concentrations of monomeric α-synuclein, illustrative of the significantly greater toxicity of α-synuclein oligomers. The addition of zervimesine was observed to reverse the membrane trafficking deficit related to the presence of α-synuclein oligomer, while having no effect on membrane activity when dosed in its absence.

S2R antagonists reversed the effects of α-synuclein oligomers on LAMP2A expression and trafficking

​

COG1201 — Phase 2 SHIMMER Clinical Trial

We completed the double-blind, randomized Phase 2 COG1201 (SHIMMER) clinical trial of zervimesine in adults with mild-to-moderate DLB. We enrolled 130 participants who were randomized evenly to one of three dose groups: two treated with once-daily oral zervimesine (100 mg or 300 mg) and one treated with placebo. To be eligible, participants were between 50 and 80 years of age, received a diagnosis of probable DLB, and had a mini-mental state exam, or MMSE, score of between 18 and 27. Clinical endpoints of the trial included safety and tolerability, neuropsychiatric, functional, cognitive and physical activity measurements. PK and pharmacodynamic biomarker analyses were also conducted.

​

The study met its primary endpoint of safety and tolerability. Zervimesine-treated DLB patients scored an average of 86% better than placebo-treated patients on the neuropsychiatric inventory (NPI) A-L at the end of the study. This tool describes the frequency and severity of 12 behavioral symptoms including hallucinations, delusions and anxiety.  Compared to placebo-treated participants, those treated with zervimesine performed an average of 52% better on the ADCS-ADL scale, a measure of activities of daily living; an average of 91% better on the CAF, a measure of cognitive fluctuations; an average of 62% better on the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part III, a measure of motor function such as gait, balance, and tremor.

​

Other Initiatives

Zervimesine and other chemical structures in our pipeline originate from a screening technique developed by Cognition’s founding scientists. This screening technique relies on the use of mature primary neuronal cultures designed to replicate the mature brain and its intricate connections and patterns of electrical signaling.  provides us with information-rich measurements more indicative of normal brain function and predicative of functional benefit.

Cognition has generated proprietary small molecule libraries derived from natural chemical scaffolds through a proprietary process which we refer to as conditioned extraction. Conditioned extraction was pioneered by a cofounder and allows us to eliminate undesirable properties of well characterized, biologically active compounds sourced from natural products, while retaining their biological activity. The resulting molecular configurations are then subjected to proprietary functional in vitro screening using the mature primary neuronal cultures.

The candidate library produced through this process is predisposed to compounds with attractive drug-like properties such as low molecular weight, low number of reactive hydrogen bonds, lipophilicity and relatively neutral chemistry properties. These characteristics reduce the reactivity of the molecules and related toxicities, while also enhancing their ability to cross the blood-brain and blood-retina barriers, which we believe will reduce development risk. We also believe this platform provides us with differentiated libraries which may lead to development candidates beyond zervimesine.

Geographic Atrophy (GA) Secondary to Dry Age-Related Macular Degeneration (Dry AMD)

We believe that several lines of evidence suggest that zervimesine may be effective in the treatment of GA secondary to dry AMD. Human genetics points to TMEM97 as a promising therapeutic target for GA secondary to dry AMD, as indicated via several large-scale, independent genome-wide association, or GWA, studies. In addition, unbiased pathway analysis of AD patient proteomic data obtained during our clinical trials provides independent evidence of a relationship between the S2R complex and GA secondary to dry AMD.

Early proof-of-concept studies with zervimesine indicate a role of S2R modulators in rescuing key aspects of dry AMD including maintaining homeostatic functions of retinal pigment epithelial cells (RPEs), ameliorating lysosomal dysfunction and preventing RPE cell death. PK assessment indicates that we can achieve therapeutic levels (>80% receptor occupancy) of zervimesine in retinal tissue through oral administration.

In 2023 we initiated the Phase 2 COG2201 MAGNIFY study of zervimesine in adults with geographic atrophy secondary to dry AMD. In December 2024 MAGNIFY passed a masked futility analysis conducted by the contract research organization, or CRO, which provided evidence that zervimesine treated patients were experiencing a slower lesion growth rate than those on placebo. However, in January 2025, we made the strategic decision to focus our resources on our promising dementia programs in AD and DLB. Therefore, we voluntarily discontinued the MAGNIFY clinical study. The discontinuation was not the result of any safety concerns. At the time of the discontinuation, 100 participants had been enrolled. Results are being compiled by the contract research organization (CRO) following participant completion of final clinic visits. We will conduct an analysis of the changes in GA lesion size as well as safety and tolerability, which will be reported at a later date. We continue to believe that zervimesine has the potential to alter the biological processes that contribute to dry AMD.

Proposed Synucleinopathies Clinical Program

Subject to additional funding, we may plan to study several next-generation S2R modulators derived from chemically distinct series to measure their ability to rescue cell death in synucleinopathies such as PD and DLB. We may also study α-synuclein pathology and motor deficits in two mechanistically distinct in vivo models of synucleinopathies. In parallel, these studies will elucidate the mechanism of action by which S2R modulators are efficacious in PD and DLB and provide essential data to support potential biomarker nomination for PD and DLB.

Additional Product Candidates

Many degenerative disorders are likely to involve a dysfunctional cellular damage response mechanism and significant evidence is emerging which highlights the importance of the S2R complex and its components in regulating this response. The complex likely contains a number of relevant binding sites that may allow for multiple disease intervention approaches, making it an attractive therapeutic target. Accordingly, we have engaged in a number of earlier-stage discovery programs which are built upon our identification of five structurally distinct chemical series. From these series we have multiple leads which will be optimized from each of our lead series. Each of these leads has demonstrated favorable potency with variable selectivity in early preclinical testing and each of the molecular series possesses distinct bioavailability and PK properties, including differences in half-life and blood-brain and blood-retina permeability.

Our Team and Collaborators

We have assembled a management team with extensive experience with CNS and degenerative diseases, significant expertise in the drug discovery, clinical development, general management and business development. Collectively, our management team has a track record of managing drug development programs that have received regulatory approval and been successfully commercialized.

In addition, our management team has built companies that have initiated innovative technologies and investigational new drug programs. We augment the strengths of our management team with an experienced board of directors and scientific and medical advisory boards. We believe our team, with its deep scientific and drug development background, positions us to become a leader in the development of therapies for age-related degenerative diseases and disorders.

Since our inception, we have collaborated and worked closely with key healthcare organizations and thought leading institutions in the field of degenerative diseases to develop and advance our therapeutic candidates. To date, we have been awarded approximately $171 million in cumulative grants awarded primarily from the NIA to support our clinical trials.

Grant Funding

Historically, we have sought grant funding to strategically advance our programs. To date, we have secured non-dilutive funds from the NIA, the Michael J. Fox Foundation and other groups to pursue our commonly aligned interests of developing therapeutics for neurodegenerative disorders. The company has been awarded $171 million in cumulative grants for the advancement of our pipeline programs. As of December 31, 2024, we had approximately $50 million available from NIA funds for applicable expenses to be incurred in the future.

​

​

Each of the grants awarded to us relates to agreed-upon direct and indirect costs for specific studies or clinical trials, which may include personnel and consulting costs, costs paid to CROs, research institutions and/or consortiums involved in the grant, as well as facilities and administrative costs. These grants are cost plus fixed fee arrangements in which we are reimbursed for our eligible direct and indirect costs over time, up to the maximum amount of each specific grant award. Only costs that are allowable under the grant award, certain government regulations and the NIH’s supplemental policy and procedure manual may be claimed for reimbursement, and the reimbursements are subject to routine audits from governmental agencies from time to time. While these NIA grants do not contain claw back provisions, the NIA or other government agency may review our performance, cost structures and compliance with applicable laws, regulations, policies and standards and the terms and conditions of the applicable NIA grant. If any of our expenditures are found to be unallowable or allocated improperly or if we have otherwise violated terms of such NIA grant, the expenditures may not be reimbursed and/or we may be required to repay funds already disbursed. To date, we have not been found to have breached the terms of any NIA grant.

Intellectual Property

We seek to protect and enhance our proprietary technology, inventions, and improvements that are commercially important to the development of our business by seeking, maintaining, and defending patent rights, in the United States and internationally, whether developed internally or licensed from third parties. We will also seek to rely on regulatory protection afforded through inclusion in expedited development and review, data exclusivity, market exclusivity and patent term extensions where available.

Company Owned Intellectual Property

As of March 1, 2025, our intellectual property portfolio contained ten issued U.S. patents, forty five issued foreign patents as well as five pending U.S. provisional applications, three pending U.S. patent applications, one pending Patent Cooperation Treaty applications and forty five foreign pending patent applications directed to the composition of matter of, pharmaceutical compositions of, methods of use of, and methods for selecting subsets of patients for treatment with our chemical structures, including our lead zervimesine. Our current issued patents relating to zervimesine are projected to begin to expire no earlier than 2035, with the composition of matter patent covering zervimesine set to naturally expire in 2035, subject to adjustment or extension of patent term available in a particular jurisdiction. We will likely be awarded Patent Term Extension, or PTE, when zervimesine is approved as a New Chemical Entity, or NCE, that will extend the term of the zervimesine composition of matter patent by up to five years, and we anticipate pursuing additional patents to further protect zervimesine and to further extend the patent term associated with zervimesine. We expect to file additional patent applications in support of current and new product candidates as well as new platform and core technologies.

We are the exclusive owner of eight patent families that include several granted U.S. patents and pending U.S. patent applications, as well as granted patents and pending patent applications in numerous foreign jurisdictions, relating to compositions of matter and pharmaceutical compositions of zervimesine, analogs of zervimesine, and the use of zervimesine for the treatment in certain diseases, disorders and conditions including AD, GA secondary to dry AMD, DLB, PD, and other synucleinopathies.

The first of these patent families is directed to compositions of matter of zervimesine, pharmaceutical compositions of zervimesine, methods of using zervimesine for inhibiting amyloid beta effects on a neuronal cell, and methods of using zervimesine to treat AD, and we are the exclusive owner of this patent family in the United States and certain foreign jurisdictions, including Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, the European Union, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Russia, and South Africa. As of March 1, 2025, this patent family includes granted patents claiming composition of matter of zervimesine, pharmaceutical compositions of zervimesine, methods of using zervimesine for inhibiting amyloid beta effects on a neuronal cell, and methods of using zervimesine to treat AD in the United States (three patents), Australia, Brazil, China, the European Union, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, Mexico, South Korea, Russia and South Africa. This patent family also includes a pending U.S. patent application and pending application in the European Union. This patent family has a natural expiration date in 2035 subject to any adjustment or extension of patent term that may be available in in a particular jurisdiction such as PTE following approval of the New Drug Application, or NDA, in the United States or extension of patent term via a Supplementary Protection Certificate, or SPC, following EMEA marketing authorization. Upon approval of the NDA for zervimesine in the United States, the patents in this family claiming compositions of matter of zervimesine, pharmaceutical compositions of zervimesine, and methods of using zervimesine for inhibiting amyloid beta effects on a neuronal cell, and methods of using zervimesine to treat AD will be eligible to be listed in the FDA’s publication “Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,” or the Orange Book. These patents complement the regulatory exclusivity by providing the basis for an additional waiting period prior to the FDA’s   approval of an abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA, or 505(b)(2) applicant. If  an ANDA or 505(b)(2) applicant were to file its application referencing the NDA for zervimesine before expiration of our composition of matter, pharmaceutical composition, and method of use patents and the applicant asserted that our patents identified on the Orange Book to be invalid or not be infringed, it may be subject to additional waiting periods prior to the FDA’s approval (including a statutory 30-month stay if we sue for infringement, or a shorter period if the patent expires or there are certain settlements or judicial decisions in the patent litigation, starting at the end of the five-year NCE regulatory exclusivity period).

In addition to patent exclusivity, under the provisions of the Hatch-Waxman Act, upon any approval in the United States, we believe that zervimesine will be eligible for five-year NCE regulatory exclusivity, during which time no 505(b)(2) NDA or ANDA can be approved that contains the same active moiety as the chemical entity in the zervimesine NDA. When approved in Europe, zervimesine will also be eligible for 10 years of data and market exclusivity which is extendible for an additional year upon market authorization for one or more new indications during the first eight years of the data and market exclusivity period.

We also own seven families of pending patent applications directed to methods for selecting subsets of patients with AD for treatment with zervimesine, methods of modulating amyloid beta monomer and oligomer levels using zervimesine, methods of treating GA secondary to dry AMD with zervimesine and methods of treating various neurologic diseases including PD, DLB and other synucleinopathies with zervimesine, as well as a pending provisional application directed to treating certain subsets of AD patients with zervimesine and treating Niemann-Pick disease. Any of these applications, if issued, will have a natural expiration between 2038 and 2044, subject to any adjustment or extension of patent term that may be available such as PTE following NDA approval in the United States as well as any term limitations based upon earlier expiring patents.

Additional Product Candidates

We are the exclusive owner of four patent families that include several pending U.S. patent applications, as well as pending patent applications in numerous foreign jurisdictions directed to additional product candidates. These patent families have expirations no earlier than 2038 subject to any adjustment or extension of patent term that may be available such as PTE following NDA approval in the United States as well as any term limitations based upon earlier expiring patents.

Manufacturing Strategy

We oversee and manage third party contract manufacturing organizations to support development and manufacture of product candidates for our clinical trials, and, if we receive marketing approval, we will rely on such manufacturers to meet commercial demand. We expect this strategy will enable us to maintain a more efficient infrastructure, avoiding dependence on our own manufacturing facility and equipment, while simultaneously enabling us to focus our expertise on the clinical development and future commercialization of our products. Currently, we rely on and have agreements with a single third-party contract manufacturer to supply the zervimesine drug substance and with a single third-party contract manufacturer to manufacture clinical trial supplies of zervimesine. We expect to enter into commercial supply agreements with such manufacturers prior to any potential approval of zervimesine. We continue to develop the commercial route for zervimesine drug substance and to meet all requirements for our planned clinical trials. The current drug substance manufacturer is able to support all of our needs for the planned clinical studies and commercial supplies.

Zervimesine drug product is manufactured via conventional pharmaceutical processing procedures, employing commercially-available excipients and packaging materials. The procedure and equipment employed for manufacture and analysis are consistent with standard pharmaceutical production, and are transferable to a range of manufacturing facilities, if needed. We will transition from our current drug product manufacturer to a larger third-party manufacturer for our late-stage clinical and commercial supply.

Commercialization Strategy

We currently have no marketing, sales or distribution capabilities. In order to commercialize any products that are approved for commercial sale, we must either develop a sales and marketing infrastructure or collaborate with third parties that have sales and marketing experience.

We may seek third-party support from established pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for those products that would benefit from the promotional support of a large sales and marketing force. In these cases, we might seek to promote our products in collaboration with marketing partners or rely on relationships with one or more companies with large established sales forces and distribution systems.

We may elect to establish our own sales force to market and sell a product for which we obtain regulatory approval if we expect that the geographic market for a product we develop on our own is limited or that the prescriptions for the product will be written principally by a relatively small number of physicians. If we decide to market and sell any products ourselves, we do not expect to establish direct sales capability until shortly before the products are approved for commercial sale.

Competition

We face substantial competition from multiple sources, including large and specialty biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, academic research institutions and governmental agencies and public and private research institutions. Our competitors compete with us on the level of the technologies employed, or on the level of development of product candidates. In addition, many small biotechnology companies have formed collaborations with large, established companies to (i) obtain support for their research, development and commercialization of products or (ii) combine several treatment approaches to develop longer lasting or more efficacious treatments that may potentially directly compete with our current or future product candidates. We anticipate that we will continue to face increasing competition as new therapies and combinations thereof, technologies, and data emerge.

In addition to the current standard of care treatments for patients with neurodegenerative diseases, numerous commercial and academic preclinical studies and clinical trials are being undertaken by a large number of parties to assess technologies and product candidates in the CNS field.

Many of our competitors, either alone or in combination with their respective strategic partners, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, the regulatory approval process, and marketing than we do. Mergers and acquisition activity in the biopharmaceutical sector is likely to result in greater resource concentration among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through sizeable collaborative arrangements with established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retain 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 one or more of our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, better tolerated, or of greater convenience or economic benefit than our proposed product offering. Currently available therapies for these diseases are limited, with two approved disease-modifying treatments each for Alzheimer’s disease but no approved treatments for dementia with Lewy bodies. However, our competitors also may be in a position to obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly, resulting in a stronger or dominant market position before we are able to enter the market. The key competitive factors affecting the success of all of our programs are likely to be product safety, efficacy, convenience and treatment cost.

Employees and Human Capital Resources

As of March 1, 2025, we had 28 employees, 25 of whom were full-time and 20 of whom were engaged in research and development activities. Seven of our employees hold Ph.D. or M.D. degrees. None of our employees are represented by a labor union. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

We are dedicated to conducting business with the highest standards of corporate responsibility. Our goal is to build a culture of talented and passionate people striving to positively impact patients, our communities, and broader society. Our human capital resource priorities include attracting, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing and integrating our existing and new employees. We promote values such as purpose, drive, transparency, and fairness in our workplace.  

The principal purposes of our equity and cash incentive plans are to attract, retain and reward personnel through the granting of stock-based and cash-based compensation awards, in order to increase stockholder value and the success of our company by motivating such individuals to perform to the best of their abilities and achieve our objectives. During 2024, the Company took proactive steps to enhance and improve our policies related to employee welfare and engagement.

Government Regulation

Government authorities in the United States, at the federal, state, and local level, and other countries extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, nonclinical and clinical testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, marketing, and export and import of products such as those we are developing. Generally, before a new drug can be marketed, considerable data must be generated, which demonstrate the drug’s quality, safety, and efficacy. Such data must then be organized into a format specific for each regulatory authority, submitted for review and approved by the regulatory authority.

U.S. Drug Development Process

In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, and its implementing regulations. 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. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, the approval process or after approval may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial sanctions. These sanctions could include the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, a clinical hold, warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement, or civil or criminal penalties. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect on us.

The process required by the FDA before a drug may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

Prior to beginning the first clinical trial with a product candidate in the United States, 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, PK, 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 or drug candidate. 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.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with GCPs, 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 clinical 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, or DSMB, which may review data and endpoints at designated check points, make recommendations and/or 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 registration of ongoing clinical studies and posting of clinical study results to public registries.

Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap or be combined:

Phase One:   The product candidate is initially introduced into a limited number of healthy human subjects or patients with the target disease or condition. These studies are designed to test the safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism, and distribution of the investigational product in humans, the side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, to gain early evidence on effectiveness. In the case of some product candidates for severe or life-threatening diseases, especially when the product candidate may be too inherently toxic to ethically administer to healthy volunteers, the initial human testing;

Phase Two:   The product candidate is administered to a limited patient population with the target disease or condition to evaluate the preliminary efficacy, optimal dosages, and dosing schedule and to identify possible adverse side effects and safety risks. Multiple Phase 2 clinical trials may be conducted to obtain information prior to beginning Phase 3 trials;

Phase Three:   The product candidate is administered to an expanded patient population to further evaluate dosage, to provide statistically significant evidence of clinical efficacy and to further test for safety, generally at multiple geographically dispersed clinical trial sites. These clinical trials are intended to establish the overall risk relative to potential benefit and generate the data used by FDA and other regulatory agencies to evaluate suitability for marketing authorization.

Post-approval clinical trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 studies, may be conducted after initial marketing approval. These clinical trials are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication. In certain instances, the FDA may mandate the performance of Phase 4 clinical trials as a condition of approval of an NDA.

Sponsor may voluntarily pause or stop a clinical trial, or the FDA may place a trial on full or partial clinical hold at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or concerns related to chemistry, manufacturing and controls. A clinical hold is an order issued by the FDA to delay or suspend an investigation. Following the issuance of a clinical hold or a partial clinical hold, a clinical trial may only proceed after FDA has notified the sponsor that any deficiencies have been corrected and FDA is authorizing the trial to proceed. In addition, an IRB representing each institution participating in the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial before it commences at that institution, and the IRB must conduct continuing review and reapprove the study at least annually. The IRB must review and approve, among other things, the study protocol and informed consent information to be provided to study subjects. An IRB must operate in compliance with FDA regulations. An IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution, or an institution it represents, if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the product candidate has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients. Finally, some clinical trials are overseen by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board or committee. Depending on its charter, this group may determine whether a clinical trial may move   forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the clinical trial.

During the development of a new drug, sponsors are given opportunities to meet with the FDA at certain points. These points may be prior to submission of an IND, at the end of Phase 2, and before an NDA is submitted. Meetings at other times may be requested by the sponsor. These meetings can provide an opportunity for the sponsor to share information about the data gathered to date, for the FDA to provide advice, and for the sponsor and the FDA to reach alignment on plans for the next phase of development. Sponsors typically use the meetings at the end of the Phase 2 clinical trials to discuss Phase 2 clinical results and present plans for the pivotal Phase 3 clinical trials that they believe will support approval of the new drug.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the drug candidate and finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, the manufacturer must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality, and purity of the final drug. In addition, 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.

While the IND is active and before approval, progress reports summarizing the results of the clinical trials and nonclinical studies performed since the last progress report must be submitted at least annually to the FDA, and written IND safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and investigators for serious and unexpected suspected adverse events, findings from other studies suggesting a significant risk to humans exposed to the same or similar drugs, findings from animal or in vitro testing suggesting a significant risk to humans, and any clinically important increased incidence of a serious suspected adverse reaction compared to that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure.

NDA Review and Approval Process

Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, the results of product development nonclinical and clinical trials, along with descriptions of the manufacturing process, analytical tests conducted on the chemistry of the drug, proposed labeling and other relevant information are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA requesting approval to market the product candidate. The submission of an NDA is subject to the payment of substantial user fees; a waiver of such fees may be obtained under certain limited circumstances. Additionally, no user fees are assessed on NDAs for product candidates designated as orphan drugs, unless the product also includes a non-orphan indication.

The FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe and effective for its intended use and whether its manufacturing is cGMP-compliant to assure and preserve the product’s identity, strength, quality, and purity. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, guidelines that are currently in effect, the FDA has a goal of ten months from the date of “filing” of a standard NDA for a new molecular entity to review and act on the submission. This review typically takes 12 months from the date the NDA is submitted to FDA because the FDA has approximately two months to make a “filing” decision after the application is submitted.

The FDA conducts a preliminary review of all NDAs within the first 60 days after submission, before accepting them for filing, to determine whether they are sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. The FDA may request additional information rather than accept an NDA for filing. In this event, the NDA must be resubmitted with the additional information. The resubmitted application is also subject to review before the FDA accepts it for filing.

The FDA may refer an application for a novel drug to an advisory committee. An advisory committee is a panel of independent experts, including clinicians and other scientific experts, that reviews, evaluates and provides a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions.

Before approving an NDA, 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 and is adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving an NDA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCPs. 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.

After the FDA evaluates an NDA, it will issue an approval letter or a Complete Response Letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with prescribing information for specific indications. A Complete Response Letter indicates that the review cycle of the application is complete, and the application will not be approved in its present form. A Complete Response Letter usually describes the specific deficiencies in the NDA identified by the FDA and may require additional clinical data, such as an additional pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial or other significant and time-consuming requirements related to clinical trials, nonclinical studies, or manufacturing. If a Complete Response Letter is issued, the sponsor must resubmit the NDA, addressing all of the deficiencies identified in the letter, or withdraw the application. Even if such data and information are submitted, the FDA may decide that the NDA does not satisfy the criteria for approval.

If regulatory approval of a product is granted, such approval will be granted for particular indications and may entail limitations on the indicated uses for which such product may be marketed. For example, the FDA may approve the NDA with a REMS to ensure the benefits of the product outweigh its risks. A REMS is a safety strategy to manage a known or potential serious risk associated with and approved drug and to enable patients to have continued access to such drug by managing their safe use. It could include medication guides, physician communication plans, or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries, and other risk minimization tools. The FDA also may offer conditional approval subject to, 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 requirements is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the marketplace. The FDA may also require one or more Phase 4 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 impact the timeline for regulatory approval or otherwise impact ongoing development programs.

Changes to some of the conditions established in an approved application, including changes in indications, labeling, or manufacturing processes or facilities, require submission to and FDA approval of a new NDA or NDA supplement before the change can be implemented. An NDA supplement for a new indication typically requires clinical data similar to that in the original application, and the FDA uses the same procedures and actions in reviewing NDA supplements as it does in reviewing NDAs. As with new NDAs, the review process is often significantly extended by the FDA requests for additional information or clarification.

Expedited Development and Review Programs

The FDA has a Fast Track designation program that is intended to expedite or facilitate the process for reviewing new drug candidates that meet certain criteria. Specifically, new drug candidates are eligible for Fast Track designation if they are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the disease or condition. Fast Track designation applies to the combination of the drug candidate and the specific indication for which it is being studied. The sponsor of a fast track designated product has opportunities for more frequent interactions with the applicable FDA review team during product development. With regard to a fast track designated product, the FDA may also consider for review sections of the NDA on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the NDA, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the NDA and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the NDA.

Any drug candidate submitted to the FDA for approval, including a drug candidate with a Fast Track designation, may also be eligible for other types of FDA programs intended to expedite development and review, such as priority review and accelerated approval. A drug candidate is eligible for priority review if it has the potential to provide safe and effective therapy where no satisfactory alternative therapy exists or a significant improvement in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of a disease compared to marketed products. The FDA will attempt to direct additional resources to the evaluation of an application for a new drug candidate designated for priority review in an effort to facilitate the review. The FDA endeavors to review applications with priority review designations within six months of the filing date as compared to ten months for review of new molecular entity NDAs under its current PDUFA review goals.

In addition, a drug candidate may be eligible for accelerated approval. Drug candidates intended to treat serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions may be eligible for accelerated approval upon a determination that the drug candidate has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, 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. As a condition of accelerated approval, the FDA generally requires that the sponsor perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing confirmatory clinical trials which must be conducted with due diligence to verify and describe the predicted clinical benefit. Under the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act of 2022, or FDORA, the FDA may require, as appropriate, that such confirmatory trials be underway prior to approval or within a specific time period after the date accelerated approval is granted. Under FDORA, the FDA has increased authority for expedited procedures to withdraw approval of a drug or indication approved under accelerated approval if, for example, the sponsor fails to conduct the required confirmatory trials or if such studies fail to verify the predicted clinical benefit.  In addition, the FDA currently requires, unless otherwise informed by the agency, pre-approval of promotional materials as a condition for accelerated approval, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product.

The Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act established a category of drugs referred to as “breakthrough therapies” that may be eligible to receive Breakthrough Therapy designation. A sponsor may seek FDA designation of a product candidate as a “Breakthrough Therapy” if the drug candidate is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other products, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug candidate may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. The designation includes all of the fast track program features, as well as more intensive FDA interaction and guidance. The Breakthrough Therapy designation is a distinct status from both accelerated approval and priority review, which can also be granted to the same drug if relevant criteria are met. If a drug candidate is designated as Breakthrough Therapy, the FDA will work to expedite the development and review of such drug candidate.

Fast Track designation, priority review, accelerated approval, and Breakthrough Therapy designation do not change the standards for approval, but may expedite the development, review or approval process. Even if a drug candidate qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the drug candidate no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened. We may explore some of these opportunities for our drug candidates as appropriate.

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, product sampling and 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 are continuing, annual program fees for any marketed products. Drug 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 our third-party manufacturers. 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.

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:

Under PREA, an NDA must contain data to assess the safety and efficacy of the applicant product for indications in applicable pediatric populations. It must also contain information to support dose administration for pediatric populations where the drug may be utilized. FDA has the ability to grant complete waivers, partial waivers, or deferrals for compliance with PREA. PREA requirements may be waived for applications for approval of drug candidates intended to treat, mitigate, prevent, diagnose or cure diseases and other conditions that do not occur in pediatric populations. Generally, PREA does not apply for drug candidates which have obtained an orphan designation, unless otherwise regulated by the FDA. Despite this, separate PREA compliance or waivers may still be required for each product indication. Although noncompliance with PREA will generally not be considered for withdrawal of an approval it may be considered by the FDA as the sole basis for enforcement action such as injunction or seizure as non-compliance and may render the drug misbranded.

The FDA closely regulates the marketing, labeling, advertising, and promotion of drug products. A company can make only those claims relating to safety and efficacy 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. Physicians may prescribe, in their independent professional medical judgment, 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. 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. The federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion of off-label use and has enjoined companies from engaging in off-label promotion. The FDA and other regulatory agencies have also required that companies enter into consent decrees or permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed. However, companies may share truthful and not misleading information that is otherwise consistent with a product’s FDA-approved labelling.

From time to time, legislation is drafted, introduced, passed in Congress and signed into law that could significantly change the statutory provisions governing the approval, manufacturing, and marketing of products regulated by the FDA. In addition to new legislation, FDA regulations, guidance, and policies are often revised or reinterpreted by the agency in ways that may significantly affect the manner in which pharmaceutical products are regulated and marketed.

Patent Term Restoration and Marketing Exclusivity

Market exclusivity provisions authorized under the FDCA can delay the submission and approval of certain marketing applications for products containing the same active ingredient. The FDCA provides a five- year period of non-patent marketing exclusivity within the United States to the first applicant to obtain approval of an NDA for an NCE. A drug is an NCE if the FDA has not previously approved any other new drug containing the same active moiety, which is the molecule or ion responsible for the action of the drug substance. The FDCA also permits patent term restoration of up to five years as compensation for a patent term lost during product development and FDA regulatory review process to the first applicant to obtain approval of an NDA for an NCE in the United States. Patent-term restoration, however, cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date. During the NCE exclusivity period, the FDA may not approve or even accept for review an ANDA or an NDA submitted under Section 505(b)(2), or a (505(b)(2) NDA), submitted by another company for another  drug based on the same active moiety, regardless of whether the drug is intended for the same indication as the original innovative drug or for another indication, where the applicant does not own or have a legal right of reference to all the data required for approval. However, an application may be submitted after four years if it contains a certification of patent invalidity or non-infringement to one of the patents listed in the Orange Book, with the FDA by the innovator NDA holder. Upon approval of an NDA, each of the patents listed in the application for the drug is then published in the Orange Book. These products may be cited by potential competitors in support of approval of an ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA. Any competitor who files an ANDA seeking approval of a generic equivalent version of a drug listed in the Orange Book or a 505(b)(2) NDA referencing a drug listed in the Orange Book must make patent certifications to the FDA that (1) no patent information on the drug or method of use that is the subject of the application has been submitted to the FDA; (2) the patent has expired; (3) the date on which the patent has expired and approval will not be sought until after the patent expiration; or (4) the patent is invalid or will not be infringed upon by the manufacture, use, or sale of the drug product for which the application is submitted. Generally, the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA cannot be approved until all listed patents have expired, except where the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA applicant challenges a listed patent through the last type of certification, also known as a paragraph IV certification. If the applicant does not challenge the listed patents or indicates that it is not seeking approval of a patented method of use, the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA application will not be approved until all of the listed patents claiming the referenced product have expired. If the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA applicant has provided a paragraph IV certification the applicant must send notice of the paragraph IV certification to the NDA and patent holders once the application has been accepted for filing by the FDA. The NDA and patent holders may then initiate a patent infringement lawsuit in response to the notice of the paragraph IV certification. If the paragraph IV certification is challenged by an NDA holder or the patent owner(s) asserts a patent challenge to the paragraph IV certification, the FDA may not approve that application until the earlier of 30 months from the receipt of the notice of the paragraph IV certification, the expiration of the patent, when the infringement case concerning each such patent was favorably decided in the applicant’s favor or settled, or such shorter or longer period as may be ordered by a court. This prohibition is generally referred to as the 30-month stay. In instances where an ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA applicant files a paragraph IV certification, the NDA holder or patent owner(s) regularly take action to trigger the 30-month stay, recognizing that the related patent litigation may take many months or years to resolve. Thus, approval of an ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA could be delayed for a significant period of time depending on the patent certification the applicant makes and the reference drug sponsor’s decision to initiate patent litigation. If the drug has NCE exclusivity and the ANDA is submitted four years after approval, the 30-month stay is extended so that it expires 7 1∕2 years after approval of the innovator drug, unless the patent expires or there is a decision in the infringement case that is favorable to the ANDA applicant before then.

The FDCA alternatively provides three years of marketing exclusivity for an NDA, or supplement to an existing NDA if new clinical investigations, other than bioavailability studies, that were conducted or sponsored by the applicant are deemed by the FDA to be essential to the approval of the application, for example new indications, dosages, or strengths of an existing drug. This three-year exclusivity covers only the modification for which the drug received approval on the basis of the new clinical investigations and does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs or 505(b)(2) NDAs for drugs containing the active agent for the original indication or condition of use. Five-year and three-year exclusivity will not delay the submission or approval of a full NDA. However, an applicant submitting a full NDA would be required to conduct or obtain a right of reference to any nonclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials necessary to demonstrate safety and effectiveness.

Pediatric exclusivity is another type of marketing exclusivity available in the United States. Pediatric exclusivity provides for an additional six months of marketing exclusivity attached to another period of exclusivity if a sponsor conducts clinical trials in children in response to a written request from the FDA. The issuance of a written request does not require the sponsor to undertake the described clinical trials. The indications the Company is currently pursuing for its product candidates will not be eligible for pediatric exclusivity because they are age-related degenerative diseases and disorders that do not occur in the pediatric population. In addition, orphan drug exclusivity, as described above, may offer a seven-year period of marketing exclusivity, except in certain circumstances.

Other Healthcare Laws

Our activities are subject to various federal and state fraud and abuse laws, including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal civil False Claims Act, and laws and regulations pertaining to limitations on and reporting of healthcare provider payments (physician sunshine laws). These laws and regulations are interpreted and enforced by various federal, state and local authorities including CMS, the Office of Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Department of Justice, individual U.S. Attorney offices within the Department of Justice, and state and local governments. These laws include:

Violations of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, may subject us to significant civil, criminal and administrative sanctions including penalties, damages, fines, imprisonment, and exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and/or adverse publicity. Moreover, government entities and private litigants have asserted claims under state consumer protection statutes against pharmaceutical companies for alleged false or misleading statements in connection with the marketing, promotion and/or sale of pharmaceutical products.

Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or the FCPA, generally prohibits offering, promising, giving, or authorizing others to give anything of value, either directly or indirectly, to a non-U.S. government official in order to influence official action, or otherwise obtain or retain business. The FCPA also requires public companies to make and keep books and records that accurately and fairly reflect the transactions of the corporation and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls. Our industry is heavily regulated and therefore involves significant interaction with public officials, including officials of non-U.S. governments. Additionally, in many other countries, the health care providers who prescribe pharmaceuticals are employed by their government, and the purchasers of pharmaceuticals are government entities; therefore, our dealings with these prescribers and purchasers are subject to regulation under the FCPA. Recently, the SEC and Department of Justice have increased their FCPA enforcement activities with respect to pharmaceutical companies. Violations could result in fines, criminal sanctions against us, our officers, or our employees, the closing down of our facilities, requirements to obtain export licenses, cessation of business activities in sanctioned countries, implementation of compliance programs, and prohibitions on the conduct of our business. Enforcement actions may be brought by the Department of Justice or the SEC, and recent enacted legislation has expanded the SEC’s power to seek disgorgement in all FCPA cases filed in federal court and extended the statute of limitations in SEC enforcement actions in intent-based claims such as those under the FCPA from five years to ten years.

Coverage and Reimbursement

Sales of any pharmaceutical product depend, in part, on the extent to which such product will be covered by third-party payors, such as federal, state, and foreign government healthcare programs, commercial insurance, and managed healthcare organizations, and the level of reimbursement for such product by third-party payors. Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any newly approved product. Decisions regarding the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided are made on a plan-by-plan basis. One third-party payor’s decision to cover a particular product does not ensure that other payors will also provide coverage for the product. As a result, the coverage determination process can require manufacturers to provide scientific details, information on cost-effectiveness, and clinical support for the use of a product to each payor separately. This can be a time-consuming process, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance.

In addition, third-party payors are increasingly reducing reimbursements for pharmaceutical products and related services. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged, examining the medical necessity and reviewing the cost effectiveness of pharmaceutical products, in addition to questioning their safety and efficacy. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could further limit sales of any product. Decreases in third-party reimbursement for any product or a decision by a third-party payor not    to cover a product could reduce physician usage and patient demand for the product.

The U.S. government and state legislatures have continued implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on coverage and reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, for example, contains substantial drug pricing reforms, including the establishment of a drug price negotiation program within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that would require manufacturers to charge a negotiated “maximum fair price” for certain selected drugs or pay an excise tax for noncompliance, the establishment of rebate payment requirements on manufacturers of certain drugs payable under Medicare Parts B and D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation, and requires manufacturers to provide discounts on Part D drugs. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 also caps Medicare beneficiaries’ annual out-of-pocket drug expenses. Substantial penalties can be assessed for noncompliance with the drug pricing provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Additional drug pricing proposals could appear in future federal legislation.

At the state level, there are also new laws and ongoing ballot initiatives that create additional pressure on drug pricing and may affect how pharmaceutical products are covered and reimbursed. A number of states have adopted or are considering various pricing actions, such as those requiring pharmaceutical manufacturers to publicly report proprietary pricing information, limit price increases or to place a maximum price ceiling or cap on certain products. Existing and proposed state pricing laws have added complexity to the pricing of pharmaceutical drug products.

In international markets, reimbursement and healthcare payment systems vary significantly by country, and many countries have instituted price ceilings on specific products and therapies. For example, the European Union provides options for its member states to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. A member state may approve a specific price for the medicinal product or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. Pharmaceutical products may face competition from lower-priced products in foreign countries that have placed price controls on pharmaceutical products and may also compete with imported foreign products. Furthermore, there is no assurance that a product will be considered medically reasonable and necessary for a specific indication, that it will be considered cost-effective by third-party payors, that an adequate level of reimbursement will be established even if coverage is available, or that the third-party payors’ reimbursement policies will not adversely affect the ability for manufacturers to sell products profitably.

Healthcare Reform

The United States and many foreign jurisdictions have enacted or proposed legislative and regulatory changes affecting the healthcare system, including implementing cost-containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription products. In recent years, Congress has considered reductions in Medicare reimbursement levels for products administered by physicians. CMS, the agency that administers the Medicare and Medicaid programs, also has authority to revise reimbursement rates and to implement coverage restrictions for some products. Cost reduction initiatives and changes in coverage implemented through legislation or regulation could decrease utilization of and reimbursement for any approved products. While Medicare regulations apply only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payers often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates. Therefore, any reduction in reimbursement that results from federal legislation or regulation may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payers.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act, or collectively the Affordable Care Act substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly impacts the pharmaceutical industry. The Affordable Care Act is intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against healthcare fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers, and impose additional health policy reforms. Among other things, the Affordable Care Act expanded manufacturers’ rebate liability under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program by increasing the minimum Medicaid rebate for both branded and generic products, expanded the 340B program, and revised the definition of average manufacturer price, or AMP, which could increase the amount of Medicaid rebates manufacturers are required to pay to states. The legislation also extended Medicaid rebates, previously due only on fee-for-service Medicaid utilization, to include the utilization of Medicaid managed care organizations as well and created an alternative rebate formula for certain new formulations of certain existing products that is intended to increase the amount of rebates due on those products. There have been significant ongoing efforts to modify or eliminate the Affordable Care Act. The Tax Act, enacted on December 22, 2017, repealed the shared responsibility payment for individuals who fail to maintain minimum essential coverage under section 5000A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, commonly referred to as the individual mandate.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the passage of the Affordable Care Act. The Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress that include aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to healthcare providers of up to 2.0% per fiscal year, which remain in effect through 2031. The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 eliminated the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, previously set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, effective January 1, 2024. These laws and regulations may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding and otherwise affect the prices we may obtain for any of our product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval or the frequency with which any such product candidate is prescribed or used.

The Affordable Care Act has also been subject to challenges in the courts.  In the most recent challenge, in June 2021, the Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the law as they had not alleged personal injury traceable to the allegedly unlawful conduct. As a result, the Supreme Court did not rule on the constitutionality of the ACA or any of its provisions.

Further changes to and under the Affordable Care Act remain possible but it is unknown what form any such changes or any law proposed to replace or revise the Affordable Care Act would take, and how or whether it may affect our business in the future. We expect that changes to the Affordable Care Act, the Medicare and Medicaid programs and changes stemming from other healthcare reform measures, especially with regard to healthcare access, financing or other legislation in individual states, could have a material adverse effect on the healthcare industry.

At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

We expect that additional federal, state and foreign healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in limited coverage and reimbursement and reduced demand for our products, once approved, or additional pricing pressures.

Legal Proceedings

We are not currently a party to any material legal proceedings. From time to time, we may become involved in other litigation or legal proceedings relating to claims arising from the ordinary course of business.

Corporate Information

We were incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware on August 21, 2007. Our principal corporate office is located at 2500 Westchester Avenue Purchase, NY 10577, and our telephone number is (412) 481-2210. Our website address is www.cogrx.com. Our website and the information contained on, or that can be accessed through, the website will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference in, and are not considered part of, this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

​

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 the other information in this Annual Report, including our consolidated financial statements and the related notes and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” before deciding whether to invest in our common stock. We have listed below (not necessarily in order of importance or probability of occurrence) what we believe to be the most significant risk factors applicable to us. The occurrence of any of the events or developments described below could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In such an event, the market price of our common stock could decline and you may lose all or part of your investment. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also impair our business operations. Some of the statements in the following risk factors constitute forward-looking statements.  Please see the section titled “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Capital Needs

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with no products approved for commercial sale and have incurred significant losses since our inception in 2007. We expect to incur significant losses over the foreseeable future and may never achieve or maintain profitability.

​

Since our inception, we have incurred significant net losses, and we expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating losses for the foreseeable future. Our net losses were $34.0 million and $25.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. As of December 31, 2024, we had an accumulated deficit of $175.2 million.

​

We have devoted substantially all of our financial resources and efforts to the development of our product candidates, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating losses over the next several years. We expect that it could be several years, if ever, before we have a commercialized product. Our net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially for the foreseeable future as we:

​

​

To become and remain profitable, we must succeed in developing and eventually commercializing product candidates that generate significant revenue. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including completing preclinical testing and clinical trials of our product candidates, obtaining regulatory approval, and manufacturing, marketing and selling any product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval, as well as discovering and developing additional product candidates. We are only in the preliminary stages of most of these activities. We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, may never generate any revenue or revenue that is significant enough to achieve profitability. Even if we achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis.

Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with therapeutic development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses or when, or if, we will be able to achieve profitability. If we are required by the FDA to perform studies in addition to those we currently anticipate, or if there are any delays in completing our clinical trials or the development of our candidates or any future therapeutic candidates, our expenses could increase beyond our current expectations and revenue could be further delayed.

Even if we or any future collaborators do generate sales, we may never achieve, sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to sustain profitability would depress the market price of our stock and could impair our ability to raise capital, expand our business, diversify our therapeutic offerings or continue our operations. If we continue to suffer losses, investors may not receive any return on their investment and may lose their entire investment.

Our failure to become and remain profitable would depress the value of our company and could impair our ability to raise capital, expand our business, maintain our development efforts, obtain product approvals, diversify our offerings or continue our operations. A decline in the value of our company could also cause you to lose all or part of your investment.

There is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

Our management has concluded that, based on our current operating plan, there is substantial doubt as to whether we can continue as a going concern for the twelve months following the issuance of this Annual Report. To date, we have not generated any revenues from product sales and have incurred significant operating losses in each year since our inception and we anticipate that losses may continue for the next several years or until such time as we can generate substantial revenues and achieve profitability. As of December 31, 2024, we had $25.0 million in cash and cash equivalents and have not generated positive cash flows from operations. Based on our current business plans, we believe that our existing cash and cash equivalents, income from non-dilutive grants, will be sufficient for us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditures into the fourth quarter of 2025, which assumes no usage from the remaining ATM Facility (defined below) nor the equity line of credit with Lincoln Park Capital Fund, LLC, or Lincoln Park. Our ability to continue as a going concern is dependent upon raising capital to maintain current operations and continue research and development efforts. We plan to raise additional capital to fund our operations through public or private equity offerings, debt financings, and/or potential collaborations and license arrangement or other sources. There is no assurance, however, that any additional financing or any revenue-generating collaboration will be available when needed or that we will be able to obtain financing or enter into a collaboration on terms acceptable to us or at all. If such additional capital is not available on satisfactory terms, or is not available in sufficient amounts, or if we are unable to enter into a collaboration, we may be required to delay, limit or eliminate the development of zervimesine and our ability to achieve our business objectives, our competitiveness, and our business, financial condition and results of operations will be materially adversely affected.

If we fail to comply or regain compliance with the continued listing standards of the Nasdaq Capital Market, or Nasdaq, we may be delisted and the price of our common stock, or ability to access the capital markets and our financial condition could be negatively impacted.

Our common stock is currently listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, which has minimum requirements that a company must meet in order to remain listed. These requirements include maintaining a minimum closing bid price of $1.00 per share, which closing bid cannot fall below $1.00 per share for a period of more than 30 consecutive trading days. On September 12, 2024, we received a deficiency letter from the Staff of the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC notifying us that, for the last 30 consecutive business days, the closing bid price for our common stock has been below the minimum $1.00 per share required for continued listing on The Nasdaq Global Market pursuant to Rule 5450(a)(1). In accordance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5810(c)(3)(A), we were given 180 calendar days, or until March 11, 2025, to regain compliance with Rule 5450(a)(1).

We did not come into compliance by March 11, 2025. On March 12, 2025, we received approval from the Listing Qualifications Department of Nasdaq Stock Market LLC to transfer the listing of our stock to the Nasdaq Capital Market. Following the transfer of the listing, we have been granted an additional 180 calendar day period to regain compliance with Nasdaq's $1.00 minimum bid price requirement. The additional 180-day grace period will end on September 8, 2025.

If we do not regain compliance within the allotted compliance period(s), including any extensions that may be granted by Nasdaq, Nasdaq will provide notice that our common stock will be subject to delisting. At that time, we may appeal the Nasdaq staff's determination to a Hearings Panel.

We intend to actively monitor the closing bid price for our common stock and will consider available options to resolve the deficiency and regain compliance with Rule 5450(a)(1), including effecting a reverse stock split. However, there can be no assurance that the Company will regain compliance with the minimum bid price requirement. If Nasdaq delists our securities from trading on its exchange for failure to meet the listing standards, we and our stockholders could face negative consequences including the reduction of liquidity and market price of our common stock, our ability to obtain sufficient additional capital to fund our operations, and our ability to operate as a going concern would be substantially impaired.

We have completed, Phase 2 clinical trials, but have no history of commercializing products, which may make it difficult for an investor to evaluate the success of our business to date and to assess our future viability.

We commenced operations in 2007, and our operations to date have been largely focused on developing our clinical and preclinical product candidates and our NICE screening platform. We have limited experience conducting and completing clinical trials and not yet demonstrated our ability to successfully complete pivotal clinical trials, obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture a product on a commercial scale, or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful commercialization. Consequently, any predictions you make about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history or a history of successfully developing and commercializing products.

We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other known or unknown factors in achieving our business objectives. We may also need to transition from a company with a research focus to a company capable of supporting commercial activities. Our inability to adequately address these risks and difficulties or successfully make such a transition could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We will need substantial additional capital to meet our financial obligations in the future and to pursue our business objectives. If we are unable to raise capital when needed, we could be forced to curtail our planned operations and the pursuit of our growth strategy.

Our operations have required substantial amounts of capital since inception, and we expect our expenses to increase significantly in the foreseeable future. Identifying potential product candidates and conducting preclinical testing and clinical trials is a time-consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete, and we may never generate the necessary data or results required to obtain regulatory approval and achieve product sales. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating losses over the next several years as we complete our ongoing clinical trials of our product candidates, initiate future clinical trials of our product candidates, seek marketing approval for zervimesine for the treatment of age-related degenerative diseases and disorders of the CNS and retina, such as AD, PD and DLB, and advance any of our other product candidates we may develop or otherwise acquire. In addition, our product candidates, if approved, may not achieve commercial success. Our revenue, if any, will be derived from sales of products that we do not expect to be commercially available for the foreseeable future, if at all. If we obtain marketing approval for zervimesine or any other product candidates that we develop or otherwise acquire, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product sales, marketing, distribution and manufacturing. We also expect an increase in our expenses associated with creating additional infrastructure to support operations as a public company.

As of December 31, 2024, we had $25.0 million in cash and cash equivalents and have not generated positive cash flows from operations. Based on our current business plans, we believe that our existing cash and cash equivalents, income from our non-dilutive grants, will be sufficient for us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditures requirements into the fourth quarter of 2025. We have based these estimates on assumptions that may prove to be incorrect or require adjustment as a result of business decisions, and we could utilize our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including, but not limited to:

​

We believe our existing cash and cash equivalents and income from our non-dilutive grants will not be sufficient to fund any of our product candidates through regulatory approval, and we will need to raise substantial additional capital to complete the development and commercialization of zervimesine and our product candidates. If we receive regulatory approval for any of these product candidates, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product manufacturing, sales, marketing and distribution, depending on where we choose to commercialize. In addition to our existing cash and cash equivalents and income from our non-dilutive grans, in March 2023, we entered into a Purchase Agreement with Lincoln Park, providing for the sale of up to $35 million worth of shares of our common stock. In addition, in December 2022, we entered into a sales agreement with Cantor Fitzgerald & Co. and B. Riley Securities, Inc., or the Sales Agents, providing for the offering, issuance and sale by us of up to $40 million of our common stock from time to time in “at-the-market” offerings, or the ATM Facility, subject to the limitations of General Instruction I.B.6 of Form S-3. There can be no assurance that we will be able to sell all of the shares under the equity line with Lincoln Park or the ATM Facility. Amounts available under the equity line with Lincoln Park have a strong and direct correlation to the Company’s publicly traded price per share and volumes. There can be no assurances of our traded price per share and volumes being at sufficient levels to provide adequate funding from the equity line with Lincoln Park or the ATM Facility. Additional funds may not be available on a timely basis, on favorable terms, or at all, and such funds, if raised, may not be sufficient to enable us to continue to implement our long-term business strategy. Further, our ability to raise additional capital may be adversely impacted by recent volatility in the equity markets in the United States and worldwide. If we are unable to raise sufficient additional capital, we could be forced to curtail our planned operations and the pursuit of our growth strategy.

The economic environment may make it difficult to raise capital on acceptable terms or at all.

Our ability to raise additional funds when needed and on acceptable terms or at all will depend on financial, economic and market conditions and other factors, over which we may have no or limited control. For example, the continued challenging capital markets environment, lower prices for many securities and concerns about potential recessionary factors may affect our ability to raise additional funding through sales of our securities or issuance of indebtedness, which may harm our liquidity, force us to delay, limit or terminate certain or all of our product discovery, therapeutic development, research operations or commercialization planning efforts or cause us to grant rights to develop and market products or therapeutic candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves. If adequate funds are not available on commercially acceptable terms when needed, we may be forced to delay, reduce or terminate the development or commercialization of all or part of our research programs or our product candidates or any future therapeutic candidate, or we may be unable to take advantage of future business opportunities. Market volatility, liquidity constraints, failures and instability in United States and international financial banking systems, geopolitical tensions resulting from the ongoing conflicts between Ukraine and Russia and in the Middle East, heightened or fluctuating inflation and interest rates and the related impact on U.S. and global economies or other economic or other factors could also adversely impact our ability to access capital as and when needed or increase our costs in order to raise capital.

We cannot guarantee that future financing will be available in sufficient amounts, or on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. Current capital market conditions, including the impact of inflation, have increased borrowing rates and can be expected to significantly increase our cost of capital as compared to prior periods. Moreover, the terms of any financing may adversely affect the holdings or the rights of our stockholders, the issuance of additional securities, whether equity or debt, by us, or the possibility of such issuance, may cause the market price of our stock to decline. The incurrence of indebtedness could result in increased fixed payment obligations and we may be required to agree to certain restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt, limitations on our ability to acquire, sell or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. We could also be required to seek funds through arrangements with collaborators or others at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable and we may be required to relinquish rights to our product candidates or any future therapeutics candidates or otherwise agree to terms unfavorable to us, any of which may have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and prospects.

To date, we have partially relied on non-dilutive grants to cover certain of our capital requirements for our clinical trials, and we may fail to continue to receive non-dilutive funding.

To date, we have partially relied on the availability of NIA Grants. Although we have applied for and currently anticipate receiving additional NIA Grants, we cannot be certain that our grant applications will be successful, that additional NIA Grants will be made available to support our clinical trials or that we will continue to satisfy the award criteria of prior NIA Grants that have already been awarded to us. If we fail to continue to receive NIA Grants, or fail to adhere to the terms of those grant agreements, our ability to continue our clinical programs for zervimesine may be impaired and delayed, and we may otherwise need to seek additional financing through dilutive methods, such as through equity or debt financings. Such dilutive financings could have an adverse effect on the price of our common stock.

In addition, government funding is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Under the Trump administration, the U.S. National Institutes of Health, or NIH, announced on February 7, 2025, a policy significantly reducing research grants by limiting payments for indirect costs. Indirect costs represented more than 25% of total grant dollars awarded by the NIH in 2023. While, as of the date of this filing, the order has been temporarily stayed, there can be no assurance that it will not take effect or that other adverse actions will not be taken.

We could be subject to audit and repayment of our non-dilutive NIA Grants.

In addition, in connection with the NIA Grants, we may be subject to routine audits by certain government agencies. As part of an audit, these agencies may review our performance, cost structures and compliance with applicable laws, regulations, policies and standards and the terms and conditions of the applicable NIA Grant. If any of our expenditures are found to be unallowable or allocated improperly or if we have otherwise violated terms of such NIA Grant, the expenditures may not be reimbursed and/or we may be required to repay funds already disbursed. Any audit by the NIA could require significant financial and management resources and may result in a material adjustment to our results of operations and financial condition and harm our ability to operate in accordance with our business plan. Additionally, negative results in any of our ongoing and planned clinical trials of zervimesine that are funded with NIA Grants may result in our failure to receive additional NIA Grants to fund future clinical trials.

Due to the significant resources required for the development of our product candidates, we must prioritize development of certain product candidates and/or certain disease indications. We may expend our limited resources on candidates or indications that do not yield a successful product and fail to capitalize on product candidates or indications that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

We are currently focused on developing product candidates to address age-related degenerative diseases and disorders of the CNS and retina. We seek to maintain a process of prioritization and resource allocation among our programs to maintain a balance between aggressively advancing our lead product candidate, zervimesine, in identified indications and exploring additional indications or mechanisms as well as developing future product candidates. However, due to the significant resources required for the development of our product candidates, we must focus on specific diseases and disease pathways and decide which product candidates to pursue from time to time and the amount of time and resources to allocate to each such product candidate.

Our decisions concerning the allocation of research, development, collaboration, management and financial resources toward particular product candidates or therapeutic areas may not lead to the development of any viable commercial product and may divert resources away from better opportunities. Similarly, any decision to delay, terminate or collaborate with third parties with respect to certain programs may subsequently also prove to be suboptimal and could cause us to miss valuable opportunities. If we make incorrect determinations regarding the viability or market potential of any of our programs or product candidates or misread trends in the market of age-related degenerative diseases and disorders of the CNS and retina or pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical or biotechnology industry, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected. As a result, we may fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities, be required to forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or other diseases and disease pathways that may later prove to have greater commercial potential than those we choose to pursue, or relinquish valuable rights to such product candidates through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been advantageous for us to invest additional resources to retain development and commercialization rights.

Our operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes our future operating results difficult to predict and could cause our operating results to fall below expectations.

Our quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes it difficult for us to predict our future operating results. These fluctuations may occur due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control and may be difficult to predict, including:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

The cumulative effects of these factors could result in large fluctuations and unpredictability in our quarterly and annual operating results. As a result, comparing our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. Investors should not rely on our past results as an indication of our future performance.

​

This variability and unpredictability could also result in our failing to meet the expectations of industry or financial analysts or investors for any period. If our revenue or operating results fall below the expectations of analysts or investors or below any forecasts we may provide to the market, or if any forecasts we provide to the market are below the expectations of analysts or investors, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Such a stock price decline could occur even when we have met any previously publicly stated revenue or earnings guidance we may provide.

​

Risks Related to Discovery, Development and Regulatory Approval of Our Product Candidates

Our business is heavily dependent on the successful development, regulatory approval and commercialization of zervimesine and any future product candidates that we may develop or acquire.

We currently have no products approved for sale, and our lead product candidate is in early stages of clinical development. The success of our business, including our ability to finance our company and generate revenue in the future, will primarily depend on the successful development, regulatory approval and commercialization of our product candidates and, in particular, the advancement of zervimesine, currently our only clinical-stage product candidate. However, given our stage of development, it may be many years, if we succeed at all, before we have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of a product candidate sufficient to warrant approval for commercialization. We cannot be certain that our product candidates will receive regulatory approval or be successfully commercialized even if we receive regulatory approval.

​

The clinical and commercial success of zervimesine and any future product candidates that we may develop or acquire will depend on a number of factors, including the following:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

In addition, the FDA or other regulatory agencies may not agree with our clinical development plan and require that we conduct additional clinical trials to support our regulatory submissions. We have not yet conducted an end of Phase 2 meeting with the FDA to discuss the registration pathway for zervimesine, and our current clinical development plans for zervimesine in mild-to-moderate AD may change as a result of future interactions with the FDA. For example, the FDA may not accept the results of the ongoing zervimesine clinical trials and may require that we conduct additional trials, including more than one pivotal trial, in order to gain approval in AD. Furthermore, any approval of zervimesine for AD may be limited to zervimesine in combination with the existing standard of care.

​

These factors, many of which are beyond our control, could cause us to experience significant delays or an inability to obtain regulatory approvals or commercialize our product candidates. Even if regulatory approvals are obtained, we may never be able to successfully commercialize any of our product candidates. Accordingly, we cannot provide assurances that we will be able to generate sufficient revenue through the sale of our product candidates or any future product candidates to continue our business or achieve profitability.

​

We may not successfully expand our pipeline of product candidates, including by pursuing additional indications for zervimesine or by in-licensing or acquiring additional product candidates for other diseases.

A key element of our strategy is to build and expand our pipeline of product candidates, including by developing zervimesine for the treatment of age-related degenerative diseases and disorders of the CNS beyond indications in AD, and by identifying other product candidates from libraries created using our NICE platform as well as new molecule and screening strategies. In addition, we may in-license or acquire additional product candidates for other diseases. We may not be able to identify or develop additional product candidates that are safe, tolerable and effective. Even if we are successful in continuing to build our pipeline, the potential product candidates that we identify, in-license or acquire may not be suitable for clinical development. For example, our research methodology may be unsuccessful in identifying potential drug candidates or those we identify may be shown to have harmful side effects or other characteristics that make them unmarketable or unlikely to receive regulatory approval. We have devoted significant resources to discovery efforts through our proprietary NICE platform, and we cannot guarantee that we will be successful in identifying additional potential drug candidates, or that we will be able to successfully identify and in-license new and valuable product candidates from other parties.

Research and development of pharmaceuticals is inherently risky. We cannot give any assurance that any of our product candidates will receive regulatory approval.

We are at an early stage of clinical development of our only clinical stage product candidate, zervimesine. Our future success is dependent on our ability to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for and then successfully commercialize our product candidates, and we may fail to do so for many reasons, including the following:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

If any of these events occur, we may be forced to abandon our development efforts for a product candidate or candidates, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and could potentially cause us to cease operations. Failure of a product candidate may occur at any stage of preclinical or clinical development, and we may never succeed in developing marketable products or generating product revenue.

​

We may not be successful in our efforts to further develop our current and future product candidates. Each of our product candidates will require significant clinical development, management of preclinical, clinical and manufacturing activities, regulatory approval, adequate manufacturing supply, a commercial organization and significant marketing efforts before we generate any revenue from product sales, if at all. Any clinical studies that we may conduct may not be acceptable to the FDA or other regulatory authorities or demonstrate the efficacy and safety necessary to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates. If the results of our ongoing or future clinical studies are inconclusive with respect to the efficacy of our product candidates, if we do not meet the clinical endpoints with statistical significance or if there are safety concerns or adverse events associated with our product candidates, we may be prevented or delayed in obtaining marketing approval for our product candidates.

​

In addition, to obtain regulatory approval in countries outside the United States, we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of such other countries regarding safety, efficacy, chemistry, manufacturing and controls, clinical trials, commercial sales, pricing and distribution of our product candidates. We may also rely on collaborators or partners to conduct the required activities to support an application for regulatory approval and to seek approval for one or more of our product candidates. We cannot be sure that any such collaborators or partners will conduct these activities successfully or do so within the timeframe we desire. Even if we or any future collaborators or partners are successful in obtaining approval in one jurisdiction, we cannot ensure that we will obtain approval in any other jurisdictions. If we are unable to obtain approval for our product candidates in multiple jurisdictions, our revenue and results of operations could be negatively affected.

​

We may encounter substantial delays in our preclinical studies and clinical trials or may not be able to conduct or complete our preclinical studies or clinical trials on the timelines we expect, if at all.

Clinical trials are expensive and can take many years to complete, and the outcome is inherently uncertain. We cannot guarantee that any clinical trials will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage and our future clinical trials may not be successful. Clinical trials can be delayed or terminated for a variety of reasons, including delays or failures related to:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

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

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

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, we may:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

If we encounter difficulties enrolling patients in our clinical trials, our clinical development activities could be delayed or otherwise adversely affected.

We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials on a timely basis or at all for any product candidates we identify or develop if we are unable to locate and enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in the trials as required by applicable regulations or as needed to provide appropriate statistical power for a given trial. The timely completion of clinical trials in accordance with their protocols depends on, among other things, our ability to enroll a sufficient number of patients who remain in the study until its conclusion. The enrollment of patients depends on many factors, including:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

In addition, our clinical trials may compete with other clinical trials for product candidates that are in the same therapeutic areas as our product candidates, and this competition will reduce the number and types of patients available to us, because some patients who might have opted to enroll in our trials may instead opt to enroll in a trial being conducted by one of our competitors. Delays in patient enrollment may result in increased costs or may affect the timing or outcome of the planned clinical trials, which could prevent completion of these trials and adversely affect our ability to advance the development of our product candidates.

Our product candidates may cause undesirable and unforeseen side effects or have other properties that could halt their clinical development, delay or prevent their regulatory approval, limit their commercial potential or result in significant negative consequences.

Adverse events or other undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates or related to procedures conducted as part of the clinical trials could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Results of our planned clinical trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects or unexpected characteristics. If unacceptable side effects arise in the development of our product candidates, we, the FDA, the IRBs at the institutions in which our studies are conducted or the data safety monitoring board, or DSMB could suspend or terminate our clinical trials or the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease clinical trials or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. Treatment-related side effects may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff. We expect to have to train medical personnel using our product candidates to understand the side effect profiles for our clinical trials and upon any commercialization of any of our product candidates. Inadequate training in recognizing or managing the potential side effects of our product candidates could result in patient injury or death. Any of these occurrences may materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

​

In addition, early clinical trials may only include a limited number of subjects and limited duration of exposure to our product candidates. In particular, we are pursuing a new approach to inhibiting the synaptic binding and signaling of soluble Aβ oligomers through the use of small molecule receptor antagonists, like zervimesine. As a result, our product candidates may cause unforeseen safety events when evaluated in larger patient populations. Further, clinical trials may not be sufficient to determine the effect and safety consequences of taking our product candidates over a multi-year period.

​

If any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, and we or others later identify undesirable and unforeseen side effects caused by such product, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including but not limited to:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular product candidate, if approved, and result in the loss of significant revenues to us, which would materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Preclinical and clinical development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and the results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials are not necessarily predictive of future results. We have not tested any of our product candidates in pivotal clinical trials and our product candidates may not have favorable results in future clinical trials.

Preclinical and clinical development is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. We cannot guarantee that any preclinical studies or clinical trials will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all, and failure can occur at any time during the preclinical study or clinical trial process. Despite promising preclinical or clinical results, any product candidate can unexpectedly fail at any stage of preclinical or clinical development. The historical failure rate for product candidates in our industry is high.

​

The results from preclinical studies or clinical trials of a product candidate may not predict the results of later clinical trials of the product candidate, and interim, top-line, or preliminary results of a clinical trial are not necessarily indicative of final results. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy characteristics despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. In particular, while we have conducted certain Phase 2 clinical trials of zervimesine targeting mild-to-moderate AD and DLB, we do not know whether zervimesine will perform in future clinical trials as it has performed in these prior trials. The positive results we have observed for zervimesine in past clinical trials may not be predictive of our ongoing and future clinical trials in humans. It is not uncommon to observe results in clinical trials that are unexpected based on preclinical studies and early clinical trials, and many product candidates fail in clinical trials despite very promising early results. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data may be susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses. In addition, changes to the design of our current or future clinical trials may be necessary if there are new developments in the field of Alzheimer’s research. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical, pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in clinical development even after achieving promising results in earlier studies.

​

Additionally, some of our past clinical trials have utilized an “open-label” trial design. An “open-label” clinical trial is one where both the patient and investigator know whether the patient is receiving the investigational product candidate or either an existing approved drug or placebo. Most typically, open-label clinical trials test only the investigational product candidate and sometimes may do so at different dose levels. Open-label clinical trials are subject to various limitations that may exaggerate any therapeutic effect as patients in open-label clinical trials are aware when they are receiving treatment. Open-label clinical trials may be subject to a “patient bias” where patients perceive their symptoms to have improved merely due to their awareness of receiving an experimental treatment. In addition, open-label clinical trials may be subject to an “investigator bias” where those assessing and reviewing the physiological outcomes of the clinical trials are aware of which patients have received treatment and may interpret the information of the treated group more favorably given this knowledge. The results from an open-label trial may not be predictive of future clinical trial results with any of our product candidates when studied in a controlled environment with a placebo or active control.

​

For all of the foregoing reasons, we cannot be certain that any of our ongoing and planned preclinical studies or clinical trials will be successful or acceptable to the FDA or other regulatory authorities.

​

Interim “top-line” and preliminary data from studies or trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data.

From time to time, we may publish interim “top-line” or preliminary data from preclinical studies or clinical trials. Interim data are subject to the risk that one or more of the outcomes may materially change as more data become available. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data when we publish such data. As a result, the top-line results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Preliminary or “top-line” data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, interim and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Additionally, interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Adverse differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

​

Further, others, including regulatory agencies, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate or product and our company in general. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is the material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure. Any information we determine not to disclose may ultimately be deemed significant by you or others with respect to future decisions, conclusions, views, activities or otherwise regarding a particular product candidate or our business. If the top-line data that we report differ from final results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, product candidates may be harmed, which could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

​

We have initially concentrated our research and development efforts on the treatment of AD and DLB, diseases that have seen limited success in drug development.

Efforts by biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical companies in treating AD and DLB have seen limited success in drug development. Only two disease-modifying therapeutic options have been approved by the FDA for AD, and none have been approved for DLB. Specifically, Biogen’s Aduhelm received accelerated approval on June 7, 2021 (and was later discontinued in January 2024) and the FDA granted accelerated approval to Eisai’s Leqembi on January 6, 2023. Leqembi is monoclonal antibodies administered via infusion reported to reduce Aβ plaques and protofibrils. We cannot be certain that our oral, small-molecule approach will lead to the development of approvable or marketable products. With the exception of Leqembi, the only currently marketed drug approved by the FDA to treat patients with AD address the symptoms of the disease. As a result, the FDA has a limited set of products to rely on in evaluating zervimesine. This could result in a longer than expected regulatory review process, increased expected development costs or the delay or prevention of commercialization of zervimesine for the treatment of AD or DLB.

​

We have never conducted pivotal clinical trials, and we may be unable to do so for any product candidates we may develop.

We will need to successfully initiate and complete pivotal clinical trials in order to obtain the approval of the FDA, the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, or other regulatory agencies to market zervimesine or any future product candidate. Carrying out pivotal clinical trials is a complicated process that requires significant financial resources. As an organization, we have not previously initiated nor conducted any later stage or pivotal clinical trials. In order to do so, we will need to expand our clinical development and regulatory capabilities, and we may be unable to recruit and train qualified personnel. We also expect to continue to rely on third parties to conduct our pivotal clinical trials. Consequently, we may be unable to successfully and efficiently execute and complete necessary clinical trials in a way that leads to NDA submission and approval of zervimesine or future product candidates. We may require more time and incur greater costs than our competitors and may not succeed in obtaining regulatory approvals of product candidates that we develop. Failure to commence or complete, or delays in, our planned clinical trials, could prevent us from or delay us in commercializing our product candidates, if approved.

A Breakthrough Therapy designation by the FDA, even if granted for any of our product candidates, may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process, and it does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval.

We may seek a “Breakthrough Therapy” designation for our product candidates if the clinical data support such a designation for one or more product candidates. A Breakthrough Therapy is defined as a drug or biologic that 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 drug, in our case, may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For product candidates that have been designated as breakthrough therapies, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens.

​

Designation as a Breakthrough Therapy is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe one of our product candidates meets the criteria for designation as a Breakthrough Therapy, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. In any event, the receipt of a Breakthrough Therapy designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to drugs considered for approval under non-expedited FDA review procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one or more of our product candidates qualify as breakthrough therapies, the FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened.

​

A Fast Track designation by the FDA, even if granted for any of our product candidates, may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process, and does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval.

The FDA granted zervimesine Fast Track designation in October 2017 for the treatment of mild-to- moderate AD, and, in the future, we may seek Fast Track designation for other of our product candidates. If a drug is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and the drug demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for this condition, the drug sponsor may apply for Fast Track designation. The FDA has broad discretion whether or not to grant this designation. Even if we believe a particular product candidate is eligible for this designation, we cannot assure you that the FDA would decide to grant it. Fast Track designation may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional FDA procedures. The FDA may withdraw Fast Track designation if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program. Many small molecule product candidates that have received Fast Track designation have failed to obtain marketing approval.

Changes in funding for, or disruptions to the operations of the FDA and other government agencies could hinder their ability to hire, retain or deploy key leadership and other personnel, or otherwise prevent new or modified products from being developed, approved or commercialized in a timely manner or at all, which could negatively impact our business.

Currently, federal agencies in the U.S. are operating under a continuing resolution that is set to expire on September 30, 2025. Without appropriation of additional funding to federal agencies, our business operations related to our product development activities for the U.S. market could be impacted. The ability of the FDA to review and/or approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, the FDA’s ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the FDA have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

​

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. A prolonged government shutdown significant leadership, personnel, and/or policy changes, or other substantial modification in agency activities (including due to global health concerns or geopolitical factors) could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, government funding of other agencies on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities and clinical trials, is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at agencies that fund our research and development activities and our clinical trials, or changes to such agencies’ budgets, may negatively impact our operations and ongoing clinical trials and may limit our ability to seek additional funding in the future. Future shutdowns or other disruptions could also affect other government agencies such as the SEC, which may also impact our business by delaying review of our public filings, to the extent such review is necessary, and our ability to access the public markets.

​

We have conducted, and in the future plan to conduct, clinical trials for product candidates outside the United States, and the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not accept data from such trials.

We have conducted clinical trials of our product candidates outside the United States, and plan to continue to do so in the future. For example, we initially conducted our Phase 1b SNAP clinical trial of zervimesine in collaboration with the Karolinska Institute in Sweden. In addition, the Phase 1 single and multiple ascending dose studies of zervimesine in healthy volunteers (COG0101) as well as the first-in-patient study (COG0102) were conducted in Australia. We opened additional clinical trial site in the Netherlands, Czech Republic and Spain for our SHINE study. The acceptance of study data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States or another jurisdiction by the FDA, any comparable foreign regulatory authority may be subject to certain conditions or may not be accepted at all. In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the basis for marketing approval in the United States, the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless:

​

​

​

​

​

Many foreign regulatory authorities have similar requirements. In addition, foreign trials are subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States or the applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay aspects of our business plan, and which may result in product candidates that we may develop not receiving approval or clearance for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.

If we are not successful in identifying, developing and commercializing additional product candidates, our ability to expand our business and achieve our strategic objectives would be impaired.

Although a substantial amount of our effort will focus on the continued development and potential approval of our current product candidates, a key element of our strategy is to identify, develop and commercialize a portfolio of products that help restore normal cellular damage responses in age-related degenerative diseases and disorders of the CNS and retina. A component of our strategy is to evaluate our product candidates in multiple indications based, in part, on our evaluation of certain biomarkers in a disease area. For example, we intend to evaluate zervimesine and other product candidates discovered through our NICE platform in other diseases beyond indications in AD, such as synucleinopathies, including PD and DLB. However, we may find that while we have seen promising results in one neurodegenerative disease, that effect is not replicated across other indications with promising similarities. Even if we successfully identify additional product candidates, we may still fail to yield additional product candidates for development and commercialization for many reasons, including the following:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

We therefore cannot provide any assurance that we will be able to successfully identify or acquire additional product candidates, advance any of these additional product candidates through the development process, successfully commercialize any such additional product candidates, if approved, or assemble sufficient resources to identify, acquire, develop or, if approved, commercialize additional product candidates. If we are unable to successfully identify, acquire, develop and commercialize additional product candidates, our commercial opportunities may be limited.

Even if the product candidates that we develop receive regulatory approval in the United States or another jurisdiction, they may never receive approval in other jurisdictions, which would limit market opportunities for our product candidates and adversely affect our business.

Approval of a product candidate in the United States by the FDA or by the requisite regulatory agencies in any other jurisdiction does not ensure approval of such product candidate by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions. The approval process varies among countries and may limit our or any future collaborators’ ability to develop, manufacture, promote and sell product candidates internationally. Failure to obtain marketing approval in international jurisdictions would prevent the product candidates from being marketed outside of the jurisdictions in which regulatory approvals have been received. In order to market and sell product candidates in the European Union, or EU, and many other jurisdictions, we and any future collaborators must obtain separate marketing approvals and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements. The approval procedure varies among countries and may involve additional preclinical studies or clinical trials both before and after approval. In many countries, any product candidate for human use must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that country. In some cases, the intended price for such product is also subject to approval. Further, while regulatory approval of a product candidate in one country does not ensure approval in any other country, a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory approval process in others. If we or any future collaborators fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets or to obtain all required marketing approvals, the target market for a particular potential product will be reduced, which would limit our ability to realize the full market potential for the product and adversely affect our business.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

We are heavily dependent on the success of zervimesine, our lead product candidate, which is still under clinical development, and if zervimesine does not receive regulatory approval or is not successfully commercialized, our business may be harmed.

The success of our business, including our ability to finance our company and generate revenue in the future, will primarily depend on the successful development, regulatory approval and commercialization of zervimesine, currently our only clinical-stage product candidate. To date, we have invested a significant portion of our efforts and financial resources in the development of zervimesine for the treatment of AD and DLB. Our future success is substantially dependent on our ability to successfully complete clinical development for, obtain regulatory approval for and successfully commercialize zervimesine, which may never occur. We expect that a substantial portion of our efforts and expenditures over the next few years will be devoted to zervimesine, which will require additional clinical development, management of clinical and manufacturing activities, regulatory approval in multiple jurisdictions, obtaining manufacturing supply, building of a commercial organization, substantial investment and significant marketing efforts before we can generate any revenues from any commercial sales. We cannot be certain that we will be able to successfully complete any of these activities.

​

Furthermore, while inhibition of Aβ oligomers has been validated as a therapeutic approach, the use of small molecule receptor antagonists, such as zervimesine, to inhibit the synaptic binding and signaling of soluble Aβ oligomers is an innovative therapeutic approach, which exposes us to certain risks. For example, we may discover unforeseen safety events or that zervimesine does not possess certain properties required for therapeutic effectiveness. Even if found to be effective in one type of disease, zervimesine, or the associated therapeutic approach, may not be effective in other diseases. In addition, given our therapeutic approach, designing preclinical studies and clinical trials to demonstrate its effect is complex and exposes us to risks.

​

The research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, approval, sale, marketing and distribution of drug products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and comparable regulatory authorities in other countries. We are not permitted to market zervimesine in the United States until we receive approval of an NDA from the FDA, or in any foreign countries until we receive the requisite approval from such countries. We have not submitted an NDA to the FDA or comparable applications to other regulatory authorities for zervimesine and may not be in a position to do so for several years, if ever. If we are unable to obtain the necessary regulatory approvals for zervimesine, we will not be able to commercialize zervimesine in AD, PD and DLB or other age-related degenerative diseases and disorders of the CNS and retina, and our financial position will be materially adversely affected and we may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to continue our business.

​

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

As of March 1, 2025, we had 25 full-time and 3 part-time employees. We will need to continue to expand our managerial, operational, finance and other resources in order to manage our operations and clinical trials, continue our development activities and commercialize zervimesine, our lead product candidate, or any future product candidates. Our management and personnel, systems and facilities currently in place may not be adequate to support this future growth and we expect will lead to increasing costs. Our need to effectively execute our growth strategy requires that we:

​

​

​

​

​

​

Our future financial performance and our ability to develop, manufacture and commercialize zervimesine and our product candidates, if approved, will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth, and our management may also have to divert financial and other resources, and a disproportionate amount of its attention away from day-to-day activities in order to devote a substantial amount of time, to managing these growth activities.

​

If we are not able to effectively expand our organization by hiring new employees and expanding our groups of consultants and contractors, we may not be able to successfully implement the tasks necessary to further develop and commercialize zervimesine, if approved, and our product candidates and, accordingly, may not achieve our research, development and commercialization goals.

​

If we fail to attract and retain senior management and key scientific personnel, our business may be materially and adversely affected.

Our success depends in part on our continued ability to attract, retain and motivate highly qualified management and clinical and scientific personnel. We are highly dependent upon members of our senior management, particularly our President and Chief Executive Officer, Lisa Ricciardi, as well as our senior scientists and other members of our management team. The loss of services of any of these individuals could delay or prevent the successful development of our product pipeline, initiation or completion of our planned clinical trials or the commercialization of our product candidates or any future product candidates.

​

Competition for qualified personnel in the biopharmaceutical field is intense due to the limited number of individuals who possess the skills and experience required by our industry. We will need to hire additional personnel as we expand our clinical development and if we initiate commercial activities. We may not be able to attract and retain quality personnel on acceptable terms, or at all. The expansion of our operations may lead to significant costs and may divert our management and business development resources. Any inability to manage growth or raise funds to support our growth could delay the execution of our business plans or disrupt our operations. In addition, to the extent we hire personnel from competitors, we may be subject to allegations that they have been improperly solicited or that they have divulged proprietary or other confidential information, or that their former employers own their research output.

​

If product liability lawsuits are brought against us, we may incur substantial liabilities and may be required to limit commercialization of our current or future product candidates.

We face an inherent risk of product liability as a result of the clinical testing of our product candidates and will face an even greater risk if we commercialize any products. For example, we may be sued if any product we develop allegedly causes 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 breach of warranty. 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 product candidates. Even a successful defense would require significant financial and management resources. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

If we are unable to obtain and maintain sufficient product liability insurance at an acceptable cost and scope of coverage to protect against potential product liability claims, the commercialization of our current or any future product candidates we develop could be inhibited or prevented. We currently carry product liability insurance covering our clinical trials. Although we maintain such insurance, any claim that may be brought against us could result in a court judgment or settlement in an amount that is not covered, in whole or in part, by our insurance or that is in excess of the limits of our insurance coverage. Our insurance policies also have various exclusions and deductibles, and we may be subject to a product liability claim for which we have no coverage. We will have to pay any amounts awarded by a court or negotiated in a settlement that exceed our coverage limitations or that are not covered by our insurance, and we may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient funds to pay such amounts. Moreover, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses. If and when we obtain approval for marketing any of our product candidates, we intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of such product candidate; however, we may be unable to obtain this liability insurance on commercially reasonable terms or at all.

We may explore strategic collaborations that may never materialize or may fail.

We may attempt to broaden the global reach of our platform by selectively collaborating with leading therapeutic companies and other organizations. As a result, we may periodically explore a variety of possible additional strategic collaborations in an effort to gain access to additional product candidates or resources. At the current time, we cannot predict what form such a strategic collaboration might take. In the event we do form such collaborations, we intend to retain significant economic and commercial rights to our programs in key geographic areas that are core to our long-term strategy. We are likely to face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic collaborators, and strategic collaborations can be complicated and time consuming to negotiate and document. We may not be able to negotiate strategic collaborations on acceptable terms, or at all. We are unable to predict when, if ever, we will enter into any additional strategic collaborations because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with establishing them.

We may seek to grow our business through acquisitions of complementary businesses, and the failure to manage acquisitions, or the failure to integrate them with our existing business, could harm our financial condition and operating results.

From time to time, we may consider opportunities to acquire other companies, products or technologies that may enhance our manufacturing capabilities, expand the breadth of our markets or customer base, or advance our business strategies. Potential acquisitions involve numerous risks, including: problems assimilating the acquired service offerings, products or technologies; issues maintaining uniform standards, procedures, quality control and policies; unanticipated costs associated with acquisitions; diversion of management’s attention from our existing business; risks associated with entering new markets in which we have limited or no experience; increased legal and accounting costs relating to the acquisitions or compliance with regulatory matters; and unanticipated or undisclosed liabilities of any target.

​

We have no current commitments with respect to any acquisition. We do not know if we will be able to identify acquisitions we deem suitable, whether we will be able to successfully complete any such acquisitions on favorable terms or at all, or whether we will be able to successfully integrate any acquired service offerings, products or technologies. Our potential inability to integrate any business, products or technologies effectively may adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

​

Significant disruptions of information technology systems and infrastructure, data breaches and other cybersecurity incidents could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We collect and maintain information in digital and other forms that is necessary to conduct our business, and we are increasingly dependent on information technology systems and infrastructure to operate our business. In the ordinary course of our business, we collect, store and transmit large amounts of confidential information, including intellectual property, proprietary business information and personal information. It is critical that we do so in a secure manner to maintain the privacy, security, confidentiality and integrity of such confidential information. We have established physical, electronic and organizational measures designed to safeguard and secure our systems and infrastructure to prevent a data compromise, and rely on commercially available systems, software, tools and monitoring to provide security for our information technology systems and infrastructure and the processing, transmission and storage of digital information. We have also outsourced elements of our information technology infrastructure, and as a result a number of third-party vendors may have access to our confidential information. Our internal information technology systems and infrastructure, and those of any future collaborators and our contractors, consultants, vendors and other  third parties on which we rely, are vulnerable to damage, disruption, security compromise or incident, or other unauthorized access or use resulting from computer viruses, malware, natural disasters, terrorism, war, telecommunication and electrical failures, cyber-attacks or cyber-intrusions, malicious internet-based activity, online and offline fraud, phishing attacks and other social engineering schemes, denial or degradation of service attacks, ransomware, hacking, wrongful conduct by insider employees or vendors, data breaches, and other similar activities. Such threats are prevalent and continue to rise, are increasingly difficult to detect, and come from a variety of sources.

​

The risk of a security compromise, incident, breach or disruption, particularly through cyber-attacks or cyber intrusion, including by computer hackers, foreign governments and cyber terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. The prevalent use of mobile devices that access confidential information also increases the risk of lost or stolen devices, security incidents and data breaches, which could lead to the loss of confidential information, including intellectual property, proprietary business information and personal information. Like other companies in our industry, we, and our third party vendors, have experienced and will continue to experience threats and cybersecurity incidents relating to our information technology systems and infrastructure. Further, and due to our reliance on internet technology and based on the number of our employees who work on a hybrid basis, at home and in the office, there may be increased opportunities for bad actors to exploit security vulnerabilities. The costs to us to investigate, mitigate and remediate security incidents, compromises, data breaches, disruptions, network security problems, bugs, viruses, worms, malicious software programs and security vulnerabilities could be significant. Additionally, our contracts may not contain limitations of liability, and even where they do, there can be no assurance that limitations of liability in our contracts are sufficient to protect us from liabilities, damages, or claims related to our privacy and data security obligations. Further, although we maintain cyber liability insurance, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities related to any experienced cybersecurity incident or breach.

​

We have in the past experienced threats related to our data and systems, including phishing attacks, and we will in the future experience such threats and cybersecurity incidents. While we have implemented security measures designed to protect our data security and information technology systems and infrastructure, our efforts to address these problems may not be successful, and these problems could result in unexpected interruptions, delays, cessation of service, negative publicity and other harm to our business and our competitive position. If such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our product development programs. For example, the loss or misappropriation of clinical trial data from completed or ongoing or planned clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. Any security compromise affecting us, our partners or our industry, whether real or perceived, could harm our reputation, erode confidence in the effectiveness of our security measures and lead to regulatory scrutiny.

​

Moreover, if a computer security compromise or breach affects our systems or infrastructure or results in the unauthorized access to or unauthorized use, disclosure, release or other processing of personal information or clinical trial data, it may be necessary to notify affected individuals, governmental authorities, regulatory agencies, the media and other parties pursuant to privacy and security laws, and our reputation could be materially damaged.  We would also be exposed to a risk of loss, governmental investigations or enforcement, litigation, fines, penalties, and other potential legal and financial exposure and liability, which could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

​

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

We are subject to or affected by federal, state and foreign data protection laws and regulations that address privacy and data security. In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including the U.S. federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009 and its implementing regulations, or HITECH, state data breach notification laws, state health information privacy laws and federal and state consumer protection laws, including Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, which govern the collection, use, disclosure and protection of health-related and other personal information, may apply to our operations and the operations of any future collaborators. In addition, we may obtain health information from third parties, including research institutions from which we obtain clinical trial data, that are subject to privacy and security requirements under HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, and other privacy and data security laws. Depending on the facts and circumstances, we could be subject to significant administrative, civil and criminal penalties if we obtain, use or disclose individually identifiable health information maintained by a HIPAA-covered entity in a manner that is not authorized or permitted by HIPAA. Further, various states have implemented similar privacy laws and regulations.

For example, California also recently enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, or CCPA. The CCPA gives California residents expanded rights to access and delete their personal information, opt out of certain personal information sharing and receive detailed information about how their personal information is used. The CCPA also provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for data breaches that is expected to increase data breach litigation. The CCPA went into effect on January 1, 2020 and grants the California Attorney General the power to bring enforcement actions for violations beginning July 1, 2020. The CCPA has been amended from time to time, and it remains unclear what, if any, further modifications will be made to this legislation or how it will be interpreted. As currently written, the CCPA may impact our business activities and as a result may increase our compliance costs and potential liability. Many similar privacy laws have been proposed at the federal level and in other states.

​

Foreign data protection laws, including Regulation 2016/679, known as the General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, may also apply to health-related and other personal information data subjects in the European Union or the United Kingdom. The GDPR went into effect on May 25, 2018. Companies that must comply with the GDPR face increased compliance obligations and risk, including robust regulatory enforcement of data protection requirements as well as potential fines for noncompliance of up to €20 million or 4% of annual global revenue of the noncompliance company, whichever is greater. The GDPR imposes numerous requirements for the collection, use, storage and disclosure of personal information of European Union or United Kingdom data subjects, including requirements relating to providing notice to and obtaining consent from data subjects, personal data breach notification, cross-border transfers of personal information, and honoring and providing for the rights of European Union or United Kingdom individuals in relation to their personal information, including the right to access, correct and delete their data.

​

Compliance with U.S. and foreign data protection laws and regulations could require us to take on more onerous obligations in our contracts, require us to engage in costly compliance exercises, restrict our ability to collect, use and disclose data, or in some cases, impact our or our partners’ or suppliers’ ability to operate in certain jurisdictions. Failure to comply with U.S. and foreign data protection laws and regulations could result in government investigations and/or enforcement actions, fines, civil or criminal penalties, private litigation or adverse publicity and could negatively affect our operating results and business.

​

Moreover, clinical trial subjects about whom we or any of our potential collaborators obtain information, as well as the providers who share this information with us, may contractually limit our ability to use and disclose the information. Claims that we have violated individuals’ privacy rights, failed to comply with data protection laws or breached our contractual obligations, even if we are not found liable, could be expensive and time consuming to defend and could result in adverse publicity that could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

​

Our employees and independent contractors, including principal investigators, consultants, any future commercial collaborators, service providers and other vendors, may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements, which could have an adverse effect on our results of operations.

We are exposed to the risk that our employees and independent contractors, including principal investigators, consultants, any future commercial collaborators, service providers and other vendors may engage in misconduct or other illegal activity. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct or other unauthorized activities that violate the laws and regulations of the FDA and other similar regulatory bodies, including those laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to such regulatory bodies; manufacturing standards; U.S. federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse, data privacy laws and other similar non-U.S. laws; or laws that require the true, complete and accurate reporting of financial information or data. Activities subject to these laws also involve the improper use or misrepresentation of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, the creation of fraudulent data in our preclinical studies or clinical trials, or illegal misappropriation of product, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. It is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by employees and other third parties, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with such laws or regulations. In addition, we are subject to the risk that a person or government could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business and financial results, including, without limitation, the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, monetary fines, disgorgements, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other U.S. healthcare programs, other sanctions, imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings and curtailment of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

Environmental, social and governance matters may impact our business and reputation.

In addition to the changing rules and regulations related to environmental, social and governance, or ESG, matters imposed by governmental and self-regulatory organizations, a variety of third-party organizations, institutional investors and customers evaluate the performance of companies on ESG topics, and the results of these assessments are widely publicized. These changing rules, regulations and stakeholder expectations have resulted in, and are likely to continue to result in, increased general and administrative expenses and increased management time and attention spent complying with or meeting such regulations and expectations. Reduced access to or increased cost of capital may occur as financial institutions and investors increase expectations related to ESG matters.

Developing and acting on initiatives within the scope of ESG, and collecting, measuring and reporting ESG-related information and metrics can be costly, difficult and time consuming and is subject to evolving reporting standards. We may also communicate certain initiatives and goals, regarding environmental matters, social investments and other ESG-related matters, in our SEC filings or in other public disclosures. These initiatives and goals within the scope of ESG could be difficult and expensive to implement, the technologies needed to implement them may not be cost effective and may not advance at a sufficient pace, and we could be criticized for the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of the disclosure. Furthermore, statements about our ESG-related initiatives and goals, and progress against those goals, may be based on standards for measuring progress that are still developing, internal controls and processes that continue to evolve and assumptions that are subject to change in the future. In addition, we could be criticized for the scope or nature of such initiatives or goals, or for any revisions to these goals. If our ESG-related data, processes and reporting are incomplete or inaccurate, or if we fail to achieve progress with respect to our goals, including our previously announced commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, within the scope of ESG on a timely basis, or at all, our reputation, business, financial performance and growth could be adversely affected. In addition, in recent years “anti-ESG” sentiment has gained momentum across the U.S., with several states and Congress having proposed or enacted “anti-ESG” policies, legislation, or initiatives or issued related legal opinions. Such anti-ESG policies, legislation, initiatives, litigation, legal opinions, and scrutiny could result in the Company facing additional compliance obligations, becoming the subject of investigations and enforcement actions, or sustaining reputational harm.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If we are unable to obtain and maintain patent protection for our technology and product candidates including our lead product candidate, zervimesine, or if the scope of the patent protection obtained is not sufficiently broad, we may not be able to compete effectively in our markets.

We rely, and will continue to rely, upon a combination of patents, trademarks, trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements with employees, consultants, collaborators, advisors and other third parties to protect the intellectual property related to our current and future drug development programs and product candidates. Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection in the United States and other countries with respect to our technology and product candidates. We seek to protect our proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and abroad related to our current and future drug development programs and product candidates, successfully defend our intellectual property rights against third-party challenges and successfully enforce our intellectual property rights to prevent third-party infringement. The patent prosecution process is expensive and time-consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner.

​

It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. We may choose not to seek patent protection for certain innovations or products and may choose not to pursue patent protection in certain jurisdictions, and under the laws of certain jurisdictions, patents or other intellectual property rights may be unavailable or limited in scope and, in any event, any patent protection we obtain may be limited. As a result, some of our product candidates are not, and in the future may not be, protected by patents. We generally apply for patents in those countries where we intend to make, have made, use, offer for sale, or sell products and where we assess the risk of infringement to justify the cost of seeking patent protection. However, we do not seek protection in all countries where we intend to sell products and we may not accurately predict all the countries where patent protection would ultimately be desirable. If we fail to timely file a patent application in any such country, we may be precluded from doing so at a later date. The patent applications that we own may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover any of our product candidates in the United States or in other foreign countries. We may also inadvertently make statements to regulatory agencies during the regulatory approval process that may be inconsistent with positions that have been taken during prosecution of our patents, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, and vice versa that may affect the regulatory approval process.

​

The patents and patent applications that we own may fail to result in issued patents with claims that protect any of our product candidates in the United States or in other foreign countries. We cannot guarantee any current or future patents will provide us with any meaningful protection or competitive advantage. There is no assurance that all of the potentially relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications has been found, which can prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application, or be used to invalidate a patent. The examination process may require us to narrow our claims, which may limit the scope of patent protection that we may obtain. Even if patents do successfully issue based on our patent applications, and even if such patents cover our product candidates, uses of our product candidates, or other aspects related to our product candidates, third parties may challenge their validity, enforceability or scope, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, any of which could limit our ability to prevent competitors and other third parties from developing and marketing similar products or limit the length of terms of patent protection we may have for our products and technologies. Other companies may also design around technologies we have patented or developed. Any successful opposition to these patents or any other patents owned by us in the future could deprive us of rights necessary for the successful commercialization of any of our product candidates, if approved. Further, if we encounter delays in regulatory approvals, the period of time during which we could market a product candidate under patent protection could be reduced. If any of our patents are challenged, invalidated, circumvented by third parties or otherwise limited or expire prior to the commercialization of our products, and if we do not own or have exclusive rights to other enforceable patents protecting our products or other technologies, competitors and other third parties could market products and use processes that are substantially similar to, or superior to, ours and our business would suffer.

​

If the patent applications we hold with respect to our development programs and product candidates fail to issue, if their breadth or strength of protection is threatened, or if they fail to provide meaningful exclusivity for any of our product candidates, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to develop product candidates, and threaten our ability to commercialize, future products. Our pending applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issues from such applications. Any such outcome could harm our business.

​

The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions, and has in recent years been the subject of much litigation. The standards that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, and its foreign counterparts use to grant patents are not always applied predictably or uniformly. In addition, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States, and many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending such rights in foreign jurisdictions. For example, European patent law restricts the patentability of methods of treatment of the human body more than U.S. law does. Publications of discoveries in scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, or in some cases not at all. Therefore, we cannot know with certainty whether we were the first to make the inventions claimed in our owned patents or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued which protect our technology or product candidates, in whole or in part, or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and products. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our patents or narrow the scope of our patent protection.

​

Patent reform legislation in the United States, including the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, could increase those uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents. The Leahy-Smith Act was signed into law on September 16, 2011 and includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art and provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents. These include allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. After March 15, 2013, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that the other statutory requirements are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third party was the first to invent the claimed invention. The Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications, our ability to obtain future patents, and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

​

Moreover, we may be subject to a third-party pre-issuance submission of prior art to the USPTO or become involved in opposition, derivation, reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review or interference proceedings challenging our owned patent rights. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope of, or invalidate, our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize our technology or products and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future product candidates.

​

The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and our patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. Such challenges may result in loss of exclusivity or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology and products. Moreover, patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years after it is filed. Various extensions may be available; however, the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Without patent protection for our current or future product candidates, we may be open to competition from generic versions of such products. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. As a result, our patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

​

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

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on our product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. The requirements for patentability may differ in certain countries, particularly developing countries, and the breadth of patent claims allowed can be inconsistent. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and may also export infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

​

We do not have patent rights in certain foreign countries in which a market may exist. Moreover, in foreign jurisdictions where we do have patent rights, proceedings to enforce such rights could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, and our patent applications at risk of not issuing. Additionally, such proceedings could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Thus, we may not be able to stop a competitor from marketing and selling in foreign countries products and services that are the same as or similar to our products and services, and our competitive position in the international market would be harmed.

​

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets, and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions, whether or not successful, could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop.

​

Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on our product candidates including our lead product candidate, zervimesine, for an adequate amount of time.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date. Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. In the United States, a patent’s term may be lengthened by patent term adjustment, which compensates a patentee for administrative delays by the USPTO in examining and granting a patent, or may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over an earlier filed patent. Even if patents covering our product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition from competitive products, including generics or biosimilars.

​

Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours. We expect to seek extensions of patent terms in the United States and, if available, in other countries where we are prosecuting patents.

​

Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of FDA marketing approval of our drug candidates, one or more of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension, or PTE, under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, or the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent restoration term of up to five years beyond the normal expiration of the patent as compensation for patent term lost during development and the FDA regulatory review process, which is limited to the approved indication (and potentially additional indications approved during the period of extension) covered by the patent. This extension is limited to only one patent that covers the approved product, the approved use of the product, or a method of manufacturing the product. However, the applicable authorities, including the FDA and the USPTO in the United States, and any equivalent regulatory authority in other countries, may not agree with our assessment of whether such extensions are available, and may refuse to grant extensions to our patents, or may grant more limited extensions than we request. We may not be granted an extension because of, for example, failing to apply within applicable deadlines, failing to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise failing to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the applicable time-period or the scope of patent protection afforded could be less than we request. Even if we are able to obtain an extension, the patent term may still expire before or shortly after we receive FDA marketing approval.

​

If we are unable to extend the expiration date of our existing patents or obtain new patents with longer expiry dates, our competitors may be able to take advantage of our investment in development and clinical trials by referencing our clinical and preclinical data to obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration and launch their product earlier than might otherwise be the case.

​

If we do not obtain protection under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments by obtaining data exclusivity, our business may be harmed.

Our commercial success will largely depend on our ability to obtain market exclusivity in the United States and other countries with respect to our drug candidates and their target indications. Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of FDA marketing approval of our drug candidates, certain of our product candidates may be eligible for marketing exclusivity. The Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, provides a five-year period of non-patent marketing exclusivity within the United States to the first applicant to obtain approval of an NDA for an NCE. A drug is an NCE if the FDA has not previously approved any other new drug containing the same active moiety, which is the molecule or ion responsible for the action of the drug substance. If market exclusivity is granted for an NCE, during the exclusivity period, the FDA may not accept for review or approve an abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA, or a 505(b)(2) NDA submitted by another company for another version of such drug where the applicant does not own or have a legal right of reference to all the data required for approval. However, an application may be submitted after four years if it contains a certification of patent invalidity or non-infringement to one of the patents listed in the Orange Book, with the FDA by the innovator NDA holder. The FDCA also provides three years of marketing exclusivity for an NDA, or supplement to an existing NDA if new clinical investigations, other than bioavailability studies, that were conducted or sponsored by the applicant are deemed by the FDA to be essential to the approval of the application, for example new indications, dosages, dosage forms or strengths of an existing drug. This three-year exclusivity covers only the conditions associated with the new clinical investigations and prohibits the FDA from approving an ANDA or a 505(b)(2) NDA submitted by another company with overlapping conditions associated with the new clinical investigations for the three-year period. Clinical investigation exclusivity does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs for drugs containing the original active agent. Five-year and three-year exclusivity will not delay the submission or approval of an NDA for the same drug. However, an applicant submitting an NDA would be required to conduct or obtain a right of reference to all of the preclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials necessary to demonstrate safety and effectiveness.

​

If we are unable to obtain such marketing exclusivity for our product candidates, our competitors may be able to take advantage of our investment in development and clinical trials by referencing our clinical and preclinical data to obtain approval of competing products and launch their product earlier than might otherwise be the case.

​

The validity, scope and enforceability of any patents listed in the Orange Book that cover our product candidates including our lead product candidate zervimesine can be challenged by third parties.

If one of our product candidates is approved by the FDA, one or more third parties may challenge the current patents, or patents that may issue in the future, within our portfolio which could result in the invalidation of, or render unenforceable, some or all of the relevant patent claims or a finding of non- infringement. For example, if a third party files an application under Section 505(b)(2) or an ANDA for a generic drug containing any of our product candidates, and relies in whole or in part on studies conducted by or for us, the third party will be required to certify to the FDA that either: (1) there is no patent information listed in the Orange Book with respect to our NDA for the applicable approved drug candidate; (2) the patents listed in the Orange Book have expired; (3) the listed patents have not expired, but will expire on a particular date and approval is sought after patent expiration; or (4) the listed patents are invalid or will not be infringed by the manufacture, use or sale of the third party’s generic drug. A certification that the new drug will not infringe the Orange Book-listed patents for the applicable approved drug candidate, or that such patents are invalid, is called a paragraph IV certification. If the third party submits a paragraph IV certification to the FDA, a notice of the paragraph IV certification must also be sent to us once the third party’s ANDA is accepted for filing by the FDA. We may then initiate a lawsuit to defend the patents identified in the notice. The filing of a patent infringement lawsuit within 45 days of receipt of the notice automatically prevents the FDA from approving the third party’s ANDA until the earliest of 30 months or the date on which the patent expires, the lawsuit is settled, or the court reaches a decision in the infringement lawsuit in favor of the third party. If we do not file a patent infringement lawsuit within the required 45-day period, the third party’s ANDA will not be subject to the 30-month stay of FDA approval.

​

Moreover, a third party may challenge the current patents, or patents that may issue in the future, within our portfolio which could result in the invalidation of some or all of the patents that might otherwise be eligible for listing in the Orange Book for one of our products. If a third party successfully challenges all of the patents that might otherwise be eligible for listing in the Orange Book for one of our products, we will not be entitled to the 30-month stay of FDA approval upon the filing of an ANDA for a generic drug containing any of our product candidates, and relies in whole or in part on studies conducted by or for us.

​

Litigation or other proceedings to enforce or defend intellectual property rights are often very complex in nature, may be very expensive and time-consuming, may divert our management’s attention from our core business, and may result in unfavorable results that could limit our ability to prevent third parties from competing with our drug candidates.

​

Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for noncompliance with these requirements.

Periodic maintenance fees on any issued patent are due to be paid to the USPTO and other foreign patent agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patent. The USPTO and various foreign national or international patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Noncompliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of patent rights include, but are not limited to, failure to timely file national and regional stage patent applications based on our international patent application, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. If we fail to maintain the patents and patent applications covering any of   our product candidates, our competitors might be able to enter the market earlier than anticipated, which would harm our business.

We may need to license intellectual property from third parties, and such licenses may not be available or may not be available on commercially reasonable terms.

The issuance of a patent does not give us the right to practice the patented invention. A third party may hold intellectual property, including patent rights, that are important or necessary to the development of our product candidates. Third parties may also have blocking patents that could prevent us from marketing our products or practicing our own patented technology. It may be necessary for us to use the patented or proprietary technology of third parties to commercialize our drug candidates, in which case we would be required to obtain a license from these third parties on commercially reasonable terms. Such a license may not be available, or it may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, in which case our business would be harmed.

​

The risks described elsewhere pertaining to our intellectual property rights also apply to any intellectual property rights that we may in-license, and any failure by us or our potential licensors to obtain, maintain, defend and enforce these rights could harm our business. In some cases we may not have control over the prosecution, maintenance or enforcement of the patents that we may license, and may not have sufficient ability to provide input into the patent prosecution, maintenance and defense process with respect to such patents, and our potential licensors may fail to take the steps that we believe are necessary or desirable in order to obtain, maintain, defend and enforce the licensed patents.

​

Third-party claims or litigation alleging infringement of patents or other proprietary rights, or seeking to invalidate patents or other proprietary rights, may delay or prevent the development and commercialization of any of our product candidates including our lead product candidate, zervimesine.

Our commercial success depends in part on our avoiding infringement and other violations of the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. However, while certain research, development and commercialization activities may be protected by the safe harbor provision of the Hatch Waxman Act, other activities may subject to claims that we infringe or otherwise violate patents or other intellectual property rights owned or controlled by third parties. There is a substantial amount of litigation, both within and outside the United States, involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, including patent infringement lawsuits, interferences, derivation and administrative law proceedings, inter partes review and post-grant review before the USPTO, as well as oppositions and similar processes in foreign jurisdictions. Numerous United States and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we and our collaborators are developing product candidates. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, and as we gain greater visibility and market exposure as a public company, the risk increases that our product candidates or other business activities may be subject to claims of infringement of the patent and other proprietary rights of third parties. Third parties may assert that we are infringing their patents or employing their proprietary technology without authorization.

​

There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of our product candidates. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications that may later result in issued patents that our product candidates may infringe. In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies infringes upon these patents. If any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover the manufacturing process of any of our product candidates, any molecules formed during the manufacturing process or any final product itself, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize such product candidate unless we obtained a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire. Similarly, if any third-party patent was to be held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover aspects of our formulations, processes for manufacture or methods of use, including combination therapy, the holders of any such patent may be able to block our ability to develop and commercialize the applicable product candidate unless we obtained a license or until such patent expires. In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. In addition, we may be subject to claims that we are infringing other intellectual property rights, such as trademarks or copyrights, or misappropriating the trade secrets of others, and to the extent that our employees, consultants or contractors use intellectual property or proprietary information owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the rights in related or resulting know-how and inventions.

​

Parties making claims against us may obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful infringement or other intellectual property claim against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties or redesign our affected products, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. We cannot predict whether any such license would be available at all or whether it would be available on commercially reasonable terms. Furthermore, even in the absence of litigation, we may need to obtain licenses from third parties to advance our research or allow commercialization of our product candidates, and we have done so from time to time. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we would be unable to further develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates, which could harm our business significantly. Claims that we have misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business.

​

Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex intellectual property litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. In addition, intellectual property litigation, regardless of its outcome, may cause negative publicity, adversely impact prospective customers, cause product shipment delays, or prohibit us from manufacturing, marketing or otherwise commercializing our products, services and technology. Any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could adversely impact our ability to raise additional funds or otherwise harm our business, results of operation, financial condition or cash flows.

​

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments, which could adversely impact the price of our common shares. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could adversely impact the price of our common shares. The occurrence of any of these events may harm our business, results of operation, financial condition or cash flows.

​

We cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents do not exist which might be enforced against our drugs or product candidates, resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our sales, or, with respect to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties or other forms of compensation to third parties.

​

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

We cannot guarantee that any of our patent searches or analyses, including the identification of relevant patents, the scope of patent claims or the expiration of relevant patents, are complete or thorough, nor can we be certain that we have identified each and every third-party patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is or may be relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of our product candidates in any jurisdiction. Patent applications in the United States and elsewhere are not published until approximately 18 months after the earliest filing for which priority is claimed, with such earliest filing date being commonly referred to as the priority date. In addition, U.S. patent applications filed before November 29, 2000 and certain U.S. patent applications filed after that date that will not be filed outside   the United States remain confidential until patents issue. Therefore, patent applications covering our products could have been filed by others without our knowledge. Additionally, pending patent applications that have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover our product candidates or the use of our products.

​

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

​

If we fail to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents, we may be subject to infringement claims. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to successfully settle or otherwise resolve such infringement claims. If we fail in any such dispute, in addition to being forced to pay damages, we may be temporarily or permanently prohibited from commercializing any of our products that are held to be infringing. We might, if possible, also be forced to redesign products or services so that we no longer infringe the third-party intellectual property rights. Any of these events, even if we were ultimately to prevail, could require us to divert substantial financial and management resources that we would otherwise be able to devote to our business.

​

We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or our other intellectual property rights, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

Competitors may infringe or otherwise violate our patents or our other intellectual property rights. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file legal claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours is not valid or is unenforceable, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in question. As a result, we cannot predict with certainty how much protection, if any, will be given to our patents if we attempt to enforce them and they are challenged in court. Further, even if we prevail against an infringer in U.S. district court, there is always the risk that the infringer will file an appeal and the district court judgment will be overturned at the appeals court and/or that an adverse decision will be issued by the appeals court relating to the validity or enforceability of our patents. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing. The initiation of a claim against a third party may also cause the third party to bring counter claims against us such as claims asserting that our patents are invalid or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness, non-enablement or lack of written description or statutory subject matter. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant material information from the USPTO, or made a materially misleading statement, during prosecution. Third parties may also raise similar validity claims before the USPTO in post-grant proceedings such as ex parte reexaminations, inter partes review, or post- grant review, or oppositions or similar proceedings outside the United States, in parallel with litigation or even outside the context of litigation. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. We cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of any future patent protection on our current or future product candidates.

​

We may not be able to detect or prevent misappropriation of our intellectual property rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the United States. Our business could be harmed if in litigation the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms. Any litigation or other proceedings to enforce our intellectual property rights may fail, and even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees.

​

Even if we establish infringement, the court may decide not to grant an injunction against further infringing activity and instead award only monetary damages, which may or may not be an adequate remedy. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could harm the price of our common shares.

​

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

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

Changes in U.S. patent law or the patent law of other countries or jurisdictions could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protects our product including our lead product candidate, zervimesine.

The United States has recently enacted and implemented wide-ranging patent reform legislation. In addition, patent reform legislation may pass in the future that could lead to additional uncertainties and increased costs surrounding the prosecution, enforcement and defense of our patents and pending patent applications. The United States Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain   patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on actions by the United States Congress, the federal courts and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce patents that we own or that we might obtain in the future. Similarly, changes in patent law and regulations in other countries or jurisdictions or changes in the governmental bodies that enforce them or changes in how the relevant governmental authority enforces patent laws or regulations may weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce patents that we own or that we may obtain in the future. We cannot predict future changes in the interpretation of patent laws or changes to patent laws that might be enacted into law by United States and foreign legislative bodies. Those changes may materially affect our patents or patent applications and our ability to obtain additional patent protection in the future. The United States federal government retains certain rights in inventions produced with its financial assistance under the Bayh-Dole Act. The federal government retains a “nonexclusive, nontransferable, irrevocable, paid-up license” for its own benefit. The Bayh-Dole Act also provides federal agencies with “march-in rights.” March-in rights allow the government, in specified circumstances, to require the contractor or successors in title to the patent to grant a “nonexclusive, partially exclusive, or exclusive license” to a “responsible applicant or applicants.” If the patent owner refuses to do so, the government may grant the license itself.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world, which could impair our business.

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents covering any of our product candidates throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we may obtain patent protection, but where patent enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products in jurisdictions where we do not have any issued patents and any future patent claims or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from so competing. We do not have patent rights in certain foreign countries in which a market may exist. Moreover, many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of some countries do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. Additionally, such proceedings could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Thus, we may not be able to stop a competitor from marketing and selling in foreign countries products and services that are the same as or similar to our products and services, and our competitive position in the international market would be harmed.

​

Many countries, including European Union countries, India, Japan and China, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled under specified circumstances to grant licenses to third parties. In those countries, we may have limited remedies if patents are infringed or if we are compelled to grant a license to a third party, which could materially diminish the value of those patents. This could limit our potential revenue opportunities. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop.

​

Our reliance on third parties requires us to share our trade secrets, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secrets will be misappropriated or disclosed.

Because we expect to rely on third parties to manufacture our product candidates and expect to continue to collaborate with third parties on the development of our product candidates, we must, at times, share trade secrets with them. We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our advisors, employees, third-party contractors and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, including our trade secrets. Despite the contractual provisions employed when working with third parties, the need to share trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by our competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others, or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Any disclosure, either intentional or unintentional, by our employees, the employees of third parties with whom we share our facilities or third-party consultants and vendors that we engage to perform research, clinical trials or manufacturing activities, or misappropriation by third parties (such as through a cybersecurity breach) of our trade secrets or proprietary information could enable competitors to duplicate or surpass our technological achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market. Further, adequate remedies may not exist in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how and trade secrets, a competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair our competitive position and may harm our business and results of operations.

​

In addition, these agreements typically restrict the ability of our advisors, employees, third-party contractors and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our trade secrets, although our agreements may contain certain limited publication rights. Policing unauthorized use of our intellectual property is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and we may be unable to determine the extent of any unauthorized use. Moreover, enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, our competitors may discover our trade secrets, either through breach of our agreements with third parties, independent development or publication of information by any of our third-party collaborators. A competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets would impair our competitive position and have an adverse impact on our business.

​

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

We do and may employ individuals who were previously employed at universities or other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, competitors or potential competitors. Although we seek to protect our ownership of intellectual property rights by ensuring that our agreements with our employees, collaborators and other third parties with whom we do business include provisions requiring such parties to assign rights in inventions to us and to not use the confidential information of their former employer, we may be subject to claims that we or our employees, consultants or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed confidential information of our employees’ former employers or other third parties. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. There is no guarantee of success in defending these claims, and if we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. Such intellectual property rights could be awarded to a third party, and we could be required to obtain a license from such third party to commercialize our technology or product candidates. Such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we are successful, litigation could result in substantial cost and be a distraction to our management and other employees. Moreover, any such litigation or the threat thereof may harm our reputation, our ability to form strategic alliances or sublicense our rights to collaborators, engage with scientific advisors or hire employees or consultants, each of which would harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.

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

We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our patents, trade secrets, or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. For example, we may have inventorship disputes arise from conflicting obligations of employees, consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or our ownership of our patents, trade secrets or other intellectual property. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, intellectual property that is important to our product candidates. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees. Any of the foregoing could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

​

In addition, while it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who in fact develops intellectual property that we regard as our own. Our and their assignment agreements may not be self-executing or may be breached, and we may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property.

​

If we fail in prosecuting or defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. Even if we are successful in prosecuting or defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management.

​

Intellectual property litigation could cause us to spend substantial resources and distract our personnel from their normal responsibilities, and have a harmful effect on the success of our business.

Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur significant expenses, and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments, and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could adversely impact the price of our common shares. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources. Accordingly, despite our efforts, we may not be able to prevent third parties from infringing upon or misappropriating our intellectual property. In addition, the uncertainties associated with litigation could compromise our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our clinical trials and internal research programs. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could compromise our ability to compete in the marketplace, including compromising our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our clinical trials, continue our research programs, license necessary technology from third parties, or enter into development collaborations that would help us commercialize our product candidates, if approved.

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed.

In addition to seeking patents for our product candidates, we also rely on trade secrets, including unpatented know-how, technology and other proprietary information, to maintain our competitive position. We seek to protect our trade secrets, in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to them, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties. We also enter into confidentiality and invention or patent assignment agreements with our employees and consultants. Despite these efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Monitoring unauthorized uses and disclosures of our intellectual property is difficult, and we do not know whether the steps we have taken to protect our intellectual property will be effective. In addition, we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for any such breaches. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to prevent them, or those to whom they communicate it, from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position would be harmed.

Any trademarks we have obtained or may obtain may be infringed or successfully challenged, resulting in harm to our business.

We expect to rely on trademarks as one means to distinguish any of our drug candidates that are approved for marketing from the products of our competitors. Once we select new trademarks and apply to register them, our trademark applications may not be approved. Third parties may oppose or attempt to cancel our trademark applications or trademarks, or otherwise challenge our use of the trademarks. In the event that our trademarks are successfully challenged, we could be forced to rebrand our drugs, which could result in loss of brand recognition and could require us to devote resources to advertising and marketing new brands. Our competitors may infringe our trademarks and we may not have adequate resources to enforce our trademarks. If we attempt to enforce our trademarks and assert trademark infringement claims, a court may determine that the marks we have asserted are invalid or unenforceable, or that the party against whom we have asserted trademark infringement has superior rights to the marks in question. In this case, we could ultimately be forced to cease use of such trademarks.

Our intellectual property agreements with third parties may be subject to disagreements over contract interpretation, which could narrow the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology.

Certain provisions in our intellectual property agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could affect the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or affect financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. For example, the NIA has provided grants to fund certain of our preclinical activities and clinical trials. If the United States or another jurisdiction decides that the NIA grant bestows rights to our patent applications, that could affect our ability to obtain valid and enforceable patent claims protecting our rights as they relate to our lead product candidate, zervimesine, our other product candidates and our NICE platform. As a consequence of these and other factors, our patent applications may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover our product candidates in the United States or in other countries. Such a loss of patent protection could harm our business.

Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats to our competitive advantage.

Once granted, patents may remain open to invalidity challenges including opposition, interference, re- examination, post-grant review, inter partes review, nullification or derivation action in court or before patent offices or similar proceedings for a given period after allowance or grant, during which time third parties can raise objections against such grant. In the course of such proceedings, which may continue for a protracted period of time, the patent owner may be compelled to limit the scope of the allowed or granted claims thus attacked, or may lose the allowed or granted claims altogether.

​

In addition, the degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations, and may not adequately protect our business, provide a barrier to entry against our competitors or potential competitors, or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. Moreover, if a third party has intellectual property rights that cover the practice of our technology, we may not be able to fully exercise or extract value from our intellectual property rights. The following examples are illustrative:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Should any of these events occur, they could significantly harm our business and results of operations.

Risks Related to Commercialization, Manufacturing and Reliance on Third Parties

Even if our current or future product candidates obtain regulatory approval, they may fail to achieve the broad degree of adoption and use by physicians, patients, hospitals, healthcare payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success.

Even if one or more of our product candidates receive FDA or other regulatory approvals, they may nonetheless fail to gain sufficient market acceptance by physicians, patients, healthcare payors and others in the medical community. Most of our product candidates target mechanisms for which there are limited or no currently approved products, which may result in slower adoption by physicians, patients and payors. If our product candidates do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant product revenue and we may not become profitable. The degree of market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

We cannot assure you that our current or future product candidates, if approved, will achieve broad market acceptance among physicians, patients, healthcare payors and others in the medical community. Even if we receive regulatory approval to market any of our product candidates, we cannot assure you that any such product candidate will be more effective than other commercially available alternatives or successfully commercialized. Any approval we may obtain could be for indications or patient populations that are not as broad as intended or desired or may require labeling that includes significant use or distribution restrictions or safety warnings. We may also be required to perform additional or unanticipated clinical trials to obtain approval or be subject to additional post-marketing testing requirements to maintain approval. In addition, regulatory authorities may withdraw their approval of a product or impose restrictions on its distribution, such as in the form of a REMS. Any failure by our product candidates that obtain regulatory approval to achieve market acceptance or commercial success would adversely affect our reputation, ability to raise additional capital, financial condition, results of operations and business prospects.

The market opportunities for zervimesine, if approved, may be smaller than we anticipate.

We expect to initially seek approval for zervimesine for AD, PD and DLB and other age-related degenerative diseases and disorders of the CNS and retina. Our estimates of market potential have been derived from a variety of sources, including scientific literature, patient foundations and market research and may prove to be incorrect. Even if we obtain significant market share for zervimesine after FDA approval, the potential target populations may be too small to consistently generate revenue, and we may never achieve profitability without obtaining marketing approval for additional indications.

We rely on third-party suppliers to manufacture our product candidates, and we intend to rely on third parties to produce commercial supplies of any approved product. The loss of these suppliers, or their failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements or to provide us with sufficient quantities at acceptable quality levels or prices, or at all, would materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We do not currently have, nor do we plan to build or acquire the infrastructure or internal capability to manufacture supplies of our product candidates or the materials necessary to produce our product candidates for use in conducting our preclinical studies or clinical trials, and we lack the internal resources and the capability to manufacture any of our product candidates on a preclinical, clinical or commercial scale. The facilities used by our contract manufacturers to manufacture our product candidates are subject to various regulatory requirements and may be subject to the inspection of the FDA or other regulatory authorities. We do not control the manufacturing processes of, and are completely dependent on, our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with the regulatory requirements, known as cGMPs. If our contract manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA or comparable regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions, we may not be able to rely on their manufacturing facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates. In addition, we have limited control over the ability of our contract manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority finds these facilities inadequate for the manufacture of our product candidates or if such facilities are subject to enforcement action in the future or are otherwise inadequate, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which we may not be able to do on reasonable terms, if at all, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product candidates. In some cases, the technical skills required to manufacture our product candidates may be unique or proprietary to the original manufacturer and we may have difficulty, or there may be contractual restrictions prohibiting us from, transferring such skills to a back-up or alternate supplier, or we may be unable to transfer such skills at all. In addition, if we are required to change CMOs for any reason, we will be required to verify that the new manufacturer maintains facilities and procedures that comply with quality standards and with all applicable regulations. The delays associated with the verification of a new manufacturer could negatively affect our ability to develop product candidates in a timely manner or within budget. In addition, changes in manufacturers often involve changes in manufacturing procedures and processes, which could require that we conduct bridging studies between our prior clinical supply used in our clinical trials and that of any new manufacturer. We may be unsuccessful in demonstrating the comparability of clinical supplies which could require the conduct of additional clinical trials.

​

We currently rely on third parties at key stages in our supply chain. For instance, the supply chains for our lead product candidate involves several manufacturers that specialize in specific operations of the manufacturing process, specifically, raw materials manufacturing, drug substance manufacturing and drug product manufacturing. As a result, the supply chain for the manufacturing of our product candidates is complicated, but not atypical, and we expect the logistical challenges associated with our supply chain to grow more complex as our product candidates are further developed.

​

We do not have complete control over the process or timing of the acquisition or manufacture of materials by our manufacturers. We generally do not begin preclinical studies or clinical trials unless we believe we have access to a sufficient supply of a product candidate to complete such study. In addition, any significant delay in, or quality control problems with respect to, the supply of a product candidate, or the raw material components thereof, for an ongoing study could considerably delay completion of our preclinical or clinical trials, product testing and potential regulatory approval of our product candidates.

​

We have not yet engaged any manufacturers for the commercial supply of our product candidates. Although we intend to enter into such agreements prior to commercial launch of any of our product candidates, if approved, we may be unable to enter into any such agreement or do so on commercially reasonable terms, which could have a material adverse impact upon our business. Moreover, if there is a disruption to one or more of our third-party manufacturers’ or suppliers’ relevant operations, or if we are unable to enter into arrangements for the commercial supply of our product candidates, if approved, we will have no other means of producing our product candidates until they restore the affected facilities or we or they procure alternative manufacturing facilities or sources of supply. Our ability to progress our preclinical and clinical programs could be materially and adversely impacted if any of the third-party suppliers upon which we rely were to experience a significant business challenge, disruption or failure due to issues such as financial difficulties or bankruptcy, issues relating to other customers such as regulatory or quality compliance issues, or other financial, legal, regulatory or reputational issues. Additionally, any damage to or destruction of our third-party manufacturers’ or suppliers’ facilities or equipment may significantly impair our ability to manufacture our product candidates on a timely basis.

​

In addition, to manufacture our product candidates in the quantities we believe would be required to meet anticipated market demand, our third-party manufacturers would likely need to increase manufacturing capacity and we may need to secure alternative sources of commercial supply, which could involve significant challenges and may require additional regulatory approvals. In addition, the development of commercial- scale manufacturing capabilities may require us and our third-party manufacturers to invest substantial additional funds and hire and retain the technical personnel who have the necessary manufacturing experience. Neither we nor our third-party manufacturers may successfully complete any required increase to existing manufacturing capacity in a timely manner, or at all. If our manufacturers or we are unable to purchase the raw materials necessary for the manufacture of our product candidates on acceptable terms, at sufficient quality levels or in adequate quantities, if at all, the commercial launch of our product candidates, if approved, would be delayed or there would be a shortage in supply, which would impair our ability to generate revenues from the sale of such product candidates, if approved.

​

Our product candidates have never been manufactured on a commercial scale, and there are risks associated with scaling up manufacturing to commercial scale. In particular, we will need to develop a larger scale manufacturing process that is more efficient and cost-effective to commercialize our potential products, which may not be successful.

Our product candidates have never been manufactured on a commercial scale, and there are risks associated with scaling up manufacturing to commercial scale including, among others, cost overruns, potential problems with process scale-up, process reproducibility, stability issues, lot consistency and timely availability of raw materials. There is no assurance that our third-party manufacturers will be successful in establishing a larger-scale commercial manufacturing process for our product candidates which achieves our objectives for manufacturing capacity and cost of goods. In addition, there is no assurance that our third-party manufacturers will be able to manufacture our product candidates to specifications acceptable to the FDA or other regulatory authorities, to produce it in sufficient quantities to meet the requirements for the potential launch of such products or to meet potential future demand. Our failure to properly or adequately scale up manufacturing for commercial scale would adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We rely on third parties in the conduct of all of our clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements or meet expected deadlines, we may be unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates.

We currently do not have the ability to independently conduct clinical trials that comply with the regulatory requirements known as good laboratory practice, or GLP, requirements or GCP requirements, respectively. The FDA and regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions require us to comply with GCP requirements for conducting, monitoring, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials, in order to ensure that the data and results are scientifically credible and accurate and that the trial subjects are adequately informed of the potential risks of participating in clinical trials. We rely on medical institutions, clinical investigators, contract laboratories and other third parties, such as CROs, to conduct GLP-compliant preclinical studies and GCP-compliant clinical trials on our product candidates properly and on time. While we have agreements governing their activities, we control only certain aspects of their activities and have limited influence over their actual performance. The third parties with whom we contract for execution of our GLP-compliant preclinical studies and our GCP-compliant clinical trials play a significant role in the conduct of these studies and the subsequent collection and analysis of data. These third parties are not our employees and, except for restrictions imposed by our contracts with such third parties, we have limited ability to control the amount or timing of resources that they devote to our programs. Although we rely on these third parties to conduct our GLP-compliant preclinical studies and GCP-compliant clinical trials, we remain responsible for ensuring that each of our preclinical studies and clinical trials is conducted in accordance with its investigational plan and protocol and applicable laws and regulations, and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities.

​

Many of the third parties with whom we contract may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting preclinical studies, clinical trials or other drug development activities that could harm our competitive position. If the third parties conducting our preclinical studies or our clinical trials do not adequately perform their contractual duties or obligations, experience significant business challenges, disruptions or failures, do not meet expected deadlines, terminate their agreements with us or need to be replaced, or if the quality or accuracy of the data they obtain is compromised due to their failure to adhere to our protocols or to GLPs or GCPs, or for any other reason, we may need to enter into new arrangements with alternative third parties. This could be difficult, costly or impossible, and our preclinical studies or clinical trials may need to be extended, delayed, terminated or repeated. As a result we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval in a timely fashion, or at all, for   the applicable product candidate, our business, financial results and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase, and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed.

​

We face significant competition in an environment of rapid technological and scientific change, and there is a possibility that our competitors may achieve regulatory approval before us or develop therapies that are safer, more advanced or more effective than ours, which may negatively impact our ability to successfully market or commercialize any product candidates we may develop and ultimately harm our financial condition.

The development and commercialization of new drug products is highly competitive. Moreover, the neurodegenerative field is characterized by strong and increasing competition, and a strong emphasis on intellectual property. We may face competition with respect to any of our product candidates that we seek to develop or commercialize in the future from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, and biotechnology companies worldwide. Potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies, and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, seek patent protection, and establish collaborative arrangements for research, development, manufacturing, and commercialization.

​

There are a number of large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that are currently pursuing the development of product candidates for the treatment of the diseases and disorders for which we have research programs, including AD, PD and DLB. Companies developing therapeutics for similar indications include large companies with significant financial resources, such as AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Celgene (as acquired by Bristol Myers Squibb), Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi and Takeda. In addition to competition from other companies targeting neurodegenerative indications, any products we may develop may also face competition from other types of therapies.

​

Many of our current or potential competitors, either alone or with their strategic partners, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, and marketing approved products than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. 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 age-related degenerative diseases and disorders, which could give such products significant regulatory and market timing advantages over any of our product candidates. Our competitors also may obtain FDA, EMA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours and may obtain orphan product exclusivity from the FDA for indications our product candidates are targeting, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. Additionally, products or technologies developed by our competitors may render our potential product candidates uneconomical or obsolete, and we may not be successful in marketing any product candidates we may develop against competitors.

​

In addition, we could face litigation or other proceedings with respect to the scope, ownership, validity and/or enforceability of our patents relating to our competitors’ products and our competitors may allege that our products infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate their intellectual property. The availability of our competitors’ products could limit the demand, and the price we are able to charge, for any products that we may develop and commercialize. See “Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property.” The successful commercialization of our product candidates will depend in part on the extent to which governmental authorities and health insurers establish adequate coverage, reimbursement levels and pricing policies. Failure to obtain or maintain coverage and adequate reimbursement for our product candidates, if approved, could limit our ability to market those products and decrease our ability to generate revenue.

​

The successful commercialization of our product candidates, if approved, will depend in part on the extent to which governmental authorities and health insurers establish adequate coverage, reimbursement levels and pricing policies. Failure to obtain or maintain coverage and adequate reimbursement for our product candidates, if approved, could limit our ability to market those drugs and decrease our ability to generate revenue.

The availability and adequacy of coverage and reimbursement by governmental healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, private health insurers and other third-party payors are essential for most patients to be able to afford prescription medications such as our product candidates, if approved. Our ability to achieve acceptable levels of coverage and reimbursement for products by governmental authorities, private health insurers and other organizations will have an effect on our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, if approved. Even if we obtain coverage for our product candidates, if approved, by a third-party payor, the resulting reimbursement payment rates may not be adequate or may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. We cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement in the United States, the European Union or elsewhere will be available for our product candidates, if approved, or any product that we may develop, and any reimbursement that may become available may be decreased or eliminated in the future.

​

Third-party payors increasingly are challenging prices charged for biopharmaceutical products and services, and many third-party payors may refuse to provide coverage and reimbursement for particular drugs or biologics when an equivalent generic drug, biosimilar or a less expensive therapy is available. It is possible that a third-party payor may consider our product candidates as substitutable and only offer to reimburse patients for the cost of the less expensive product. Even if we show improved efficacy or improved convenience of administration with our product candidates, pricing of existing third-party therapeutics may limit the amounts we will be able to charge for our product candidates. These payors may deny or revoke the reimbursement status of a given product or establish prices for new or existing marketed products at levels that are too low to enable us to realize an appropriate return on our investment in our product candidates. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates, if approved, and may not be able to obtain a satisfactory financial return on our investment in the development of product candidates.

​

There is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly-approved products. In the United States, third-party payors, and governmental healthcare plans, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs and biologics will be covered. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models in the United States for how private payors and other governmental payors develop their coverage and reimbursement policies for drugs and biologics. Some third-party payors may require pre-approval of coverage for new or innovative devices or drug therapies before they will reimburse healthcare providers who use such therapies. We cannot predict at this time what third-party payors will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates.

​

No uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors in the United States. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for products can differ significantly from payor to payor. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our product candidates to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance. Furthermore, rules and regulations regarding reimbursement change frequently, in some cases on short notice, and we believe that changes in these rules and regulations are likely.

​

Outside the United States, international operations are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost-containment initiatives in Europe and other foreign jurisdictions have and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of our product candidates. In many countries, the prices of medical products are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for medical products, but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amounts that we are able to charge for our product candidates. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our product candidates may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially- reasonable revenue and profits.

​

Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payors in the United States and abroad    to cap or reduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and the level of reimbursement for newly approved products, and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our product candidates. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of our product candidates due to the trend toward managed health care, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs and biologics and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products.

​

We currently have no sales organization. If we are unable to establish sales capabilities on our own or through third parties, we may not be able to market and sell our product candidates, if approved, effectively in the United States and foreign jurisdictions or generate product revenue.

We currently do not have a marketing or sales organization. In order to commercialize our product candidates, if approved, in the United States and foreign jurisdictions, we must build our marketing, sales, distribution, managerial and other non-technical capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services, and we may not be successful in doing so. If any of our product candidates receive regulatory approval, we expect to establish a sales organization with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize each such product candidate, which will be expensive and time consuming. We have no prior experience in the marketing, sale and distribution of biopharmaceutical products, and there are significant risks involved in building and managing a sales organization, including our ability to hire, retain and incentivize qualified individuals, generate sufficient sales leads, provide adequate training to sales and marketing personnel and effectively manage a geographically dispersed sales and marketing team. Any failure or delay in the development of our internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact the commercialization of these products. We may choose to collaborate with third parties that have direct sales forces and established distribution systems, either to augment our own sales force and distribution systems or in lieu of our own sales force and distribution systems. If we are unable to enter into such arrangements on acceptable terms or at all, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates. If we are not successful in commercializing our product candidates or any future product candidates, either on our own or through arrangements with one or more third parties, we may not be able to generate any future product revenue and we would incur significant additional losses.

Risks Related to Government Regulation

Even if we obtain regulatory approval for a product candidate, our products will remain subject to regulatory scrutiny.

If our product candidates are approved, they will be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements for manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, record-keeping, conduct of post-marketing studies and submission of safety, efficacy and other post-market information, including both federal and state requirements in the United States and requirements of comparable foreign regulatory authorities.

​

Manufacturers and manufacturers’ facilities are required to comply with extensive FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authority requirements, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to cGMP regulations. As such, we and our contract manufacturers will be subject to continual review and inspections to assess compliance with cGMPs and adherence to commitments made in any approved marketing application. Accordingly, we and others with whom we work must continue to expend time, money and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production and quality control.

​

We will have to comply with requirements concerning advertising and promotion for any future products. Promotional communications with respect to prescription drugs and biologics are subject to a variety of legal and regulatory restrictions and must be consistent with the information in the product’s approved label. We may not promote products for indications or uses for which they do not have approval. The holder of an approved application must submit new or supplemental applications and obtain approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling or manufacturing process. We could also be asked to conduct post-marketing clinical trials to verify the safety and efficacy of our products in general or in specific patient subsets. An unsuccessful post-marketing study or failure to complete such a study could result in the withdrawal of marketing approval.

​

If a regulatory agency discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, or disagrees with the promotion, marketing or labeling of a product, such regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product or us, including requiring withdrawal of the product from the market. If we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory agency or enforcement authority may, among other things:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response, and could generate negative publicity. Any failure to comply with ongoing regulatory requirements may significantly and adversely affect our ability to commercialize and generate revenue from any future products. If regulatory sanctions are applied or if regulatory approval is withdrawn, the value of our company and our operating results will be adversely affected.

Healthcare legislation, including potentially unfavorable pricing regulations or other healthcare reform initiatives, may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval of and commercialize our product candidates.

The United States and many foreign jurisdictions have enacted or proposed legislative and regulatory changes affecting the healthcare system, including implementing cost-containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription products. In recent years, Congress has considered reductions in Medicare reimbursement levels for products administered by physicians. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, the agency that administers the Medicare and Medicaid programs, also has authority to revise reimbursement rates and to implement coverage restrictions for some products. Cost reduction initiatives and changes in coverage implemented through legislation or regulation could decrease utilization of and reimbursement for any approved products. While Medicare regulations apply only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payers often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates. Therefore, any reduction in reimbursement that results from federal legislation or regulation may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payers.

​

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act, or collectively the Affordable Care Act substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly impacts the pharmaceutical industry. The Affordable Care Act is intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against healthcare fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers, and impose additional health policy reforms. Among other things, the Affordable Care Act expanded manufacturers’ rebate liability under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program by increasing the minimum Medicaid rebate for both branded and generic products, expanded the 340B program, and revised the definition of average manufacturer price, or AMP, which could increase the amount of Medicaid rebates manufacturers are required to pay to states. The legislation also extended Medicaid rebates, previously due only on fee-for-service Medicaid utilization, to include the utilization of Medicaid managed care organizations as well and created an alternative rebate formula for certain new formulations of certain existing products that is intended to increase the amount of rebates due on those products. There have been significant ongoing efforts to modify or eliminate the Affordable Care Act. For example, the Tax Act, enacted on December 22, 2017, repealed the shared responsibility payment for individuals who fail to maintain minimum essential coverage under section 5000A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code or the individual mandate.

​

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the passage of the Affordable Care Act. The Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress that include aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to healthcare providers of up to 2.0% per fiscal year, which remain went into through 2031.  The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, beginning January 1, 2024. These laws and regulations may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding and otherwise affect the prices we may obtain for any of our product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval or the frequency with which any such product candidate is prescribed or used.

​

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 contains substantial drug pricing reforms, including the establishment of a drug price negotiation program within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that would require manufacturers to charge a negotiated “maximum fair price” for certain selected drugs or pay an excise tax for noncompliance, the establishment of rebate payment requirements on manufacturers of certain drugs payable under Medicare Parts B and D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation, and requires manufacturers to provide discounts on Part D drugs. Substantial penalties can be assessed for noncompliance with the drug pricing provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 could have the effect of reducing the prices we can charge and reimbursement we receive for our products, if approved, thereby reducing our profitability, and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. The effect of Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 on our business and the pharmaceutical industry in general is not yet known.

​

The Affordable Care Act, or ACA, has also been subject to challenges in the courts. In the most recent such challenge in June, 2021, the Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the law as they had not alleged personal injury traceable to the allegedly unlawful conduct. As a result, the Supreme Court did not rule on the constitutionality of the ACA or any of its provisions.

​

Further changes to and under the Affordable Care Act remain possible but it is unknown what form any such changes or any law proposed to replace or revise the Affordable Care Act would take, and how or whether it may affect our business in the future. We expect that changes to the Affordable Care Act, the Medicare and Medicaid programs and changes stemming from other healthcare reform measures, especially with regard to healthcare access, financing or other legislation in individual states, could have a material adverse effect on the healthcare industry.

​

At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

​

We expect that additional federal, state and foreign healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in limited coverage and reimbursement and reduced demand for our products, once approved, or additional pricing pressures.

​

If we develop a small molecule product candidate that obtains regulatory approval, additional competitors could enter the market with generic versions of such drugs, which may result in a material decline in sales of affected products.

Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, a pharmaceutical manufacturer may file an ANDA seeking approval of a generic version of an approved, small molecule innovator product. Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, a manufacturer may also submit an NDA, under section 505(b)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act that references the FDA’s prior approval of the small molecule innovator product. A 505(b)(2) NDA product may be for a new or improved version of the original innovator product. The Hatch-Waxman Act also provides for certain periods of regulatory exclusivity, which preclude FDA approval (or in some circumstances, FDA filing and review) of an ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA. In addition to the benefits of regulatory exclusivity, an innovator NDA holder may have patents claiming the active ingredient, product formulation or an approved use of the drug, which would be listed with the product in the Orange Book. If there are patents listed in the Orange Book for a product, a generic or 505(b)(2) applicant that seeks to market its product before expiration of the patents must include in their applications a paragraph IV certification, challenging the validity or enforceability of, or claiming non-infringement of, the listed patent or patents.  Notice of the certification must be given to the patent owner and NDA holder and if, within 45 days of receiving notice, either the patent owner or NDA holder sues for patent infringement, approval of the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA is stayed for up to 30 months.

​

Accordingly, if we choose to develop a small molecule product candidate, and the product is approved, competitors could file ANDAs for generic versions of our small molecule drug products or 505(b)(2) NDAs that reference our small molecule drug products. If there are patents listed for our small molecule drug products in the Orange Book, those ANDAs and 505(b)(2) NDAs would be required to include a certification as to each listed patent indicating whether the ANDA applicant does or does not intend to challenge the patent. We cannot predict which, if any, patents in our current portfolio or patents we may obtain in the future will be eligible for listing in the Orange Book, how any generic competitor would address such patents, whether we would sue on any such patents, or the outcome of any such suit.

​

We may not be successful in securing or maintaining proprietary patent protection for products and technologies we develop or license. Moreover, if any of our owned or in-licensed patents that are listed in the Orange Book are successfully challenged by way of a paragraph IV certification and subsequent litigation, the affected product could immediately face generic competition and its sales would likely decline rapidly and materially.

​

Our business operations and current and future relationships with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors, patient organizations and customers will be subject to applicable healthcare regulatory laws, which could expose us to penalties.

Our activities are subject to various federal and state fraud and abuse laws, including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal civil False Claims Act, and laws and regulations pertaining to limitations on and reporting of healthcare provider payments (physician sunshine laws). These laws and regulations are interpreted and enforced by various federal, state and local authorities including CMS, the Office of Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Department of Justice, individual U.S. Attorney offices within the Department of Justice, and state and local governments. These laws include:

​

​

Violations of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, may subject us to significant civil, criminal and administrative sanctions including penalties, damages, fines, imprisonment, and exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and/or adverse publicity. Moreover, government entities and private litigants have asserted claims under state consumer protection statutes against pharmaceutical companies for alleged false or misleading statements in connection with the marketing, promotion and/or sale of pharmaceutical products. Further, defending against any such actions can be costly and time-consuming and may require significant personnel resources. Even if we are successful in defending against any such actions that may be brought against us, our business may be impaired.

Changes in tax laws and regulations may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

New income, sales, use or other tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be enacted at any time, which could affect the tax treatment of any of our future domestic and foreign earnings. Any new taxes could adversely affect our domestic and international business operations, and our business and financial performance. Further, existing tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be interpreted, changed, modified or applied adversely to us. In addition, it is unclear how these U.S. federal income tax changes will affect state and local taxation. Generally, future changes in applicable U.S. tax laws and regulations, or their interpretation and application could have an adverse effect on our business, financial conditions and results of operations. We are unable to predict whether such changes will occur and, if so, the ultimate impact on our business.

We are subject to U.S. and certain foreign export and import controls, sanctions, embargoes, anti-corruption laws, and anti-money laundering laws and regulations. Compliance with these legal standards could impair our ability to compete in domestic and international markets. We can face criminal liability and other serious consequences for violations, which can harm our business.

We are subject to export control and import laws and regulations, including the U.S. Export Administration Regulations, U.S. Customs regulations, various economic and trade sanctions regulations administered by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Controls, the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, or FCPA, the U.S. domestic bribery statute contained in 18 U.S.C. § 201, the U.S. Travel Act, the USA PATRIOT Act, and other state and national anti-bribery and anti-  money laundering laws in the countries in which we conduct activities. Anti-corruption laws are interpreted broadly and prohibit companies and their employees, agents, contractors and other collaborators from authorizing, promising, offering or providing, directly or indirectly, improper payments or anything else of value to recipients in the public or private sector. We may engage third parties to sell our products outside the United States, to conduct clinical trials and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, patent registrations and other regulatory approvals. We have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or government-affiliated hospitals, universities and other organizations. We can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of our employees, agents, contractors and other collaborators, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have actual knowledge of such activities. Any violations of the laws and regulations described above may result in substantial civil and criminal fines and penalties, imprisonment, the loss of export or import privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm and other consequences.

Existing regulatory policies may change, and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates.

In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Chevron doctrine, which gives deference to regulatory agencies’ statutory interpretations in litigation against federal government agencies, such as the FDA, where the law is ambiguous. This decision may result in more lawsuits against the FDA to challenge longstanding decisions and policies of the FDA, which could undermine the FDA’s authority, lead to uncertainties in the industry, and disrupt the FDA’s normal operations, any of which could delay the FDA’s review of our regulatory submissions. We cannot predict the full impact of this decision, future judicial challenges brought against the FDA, or the nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained, and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

The U.S. Congress, the Trump administration, or any new administration may make substantial changes to fiscal, tax, and other federal policies that may adversely affect our business.

In 2017, the U.S. Congress and the Trump administration made substantial changes to U.S. policies, which included comprehensive corporate and individual tax reform. In addition, the Trump administration called for significant changes to U.S. trade, healthcare, immigration and government regulatory policy. With the transition to the Biden administration in early 2021, changes to U. S. policy occurred and since the start of the Trump Administration in 2025, U.S. policy changes have been implemented at a rapid pace and additional changes are likely. Changes to U.S. policy implemented by the U.S. Congress, the Trump administration or any new administration have impacted and may in the future impact, among other things, the U.S. and global economy, international trade relations, unemployment, immigration, healthcare, taxation, the U.S. regulatory environment, inflation and other areas. Although we cannot predict the impact, if any, of these changes to our business, they could adversely affect our business. Until we know what policy changes are made, whether those policy changes are challenged and subsequently upheld by the court system and how those changes impact our business and the business of our competitors over the long term, we will not know if, overall, we will benefit from them or be negatively affected by them.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

Our stock price may be volatile, and you may not be able to resell shares of our common stock at or above the price you paid.

The trading price of our common stock could be highly volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which are beyond our control. Our common stock began trading on the Nasdaq Global Market on October 8, 2021 and was transferred to a listing on Nasdaq Capital Market on March 14, 2025; since its initial listing, our stock has traded at prices as low as $0.34 per share and as high as $13.80 per share through March 13, 2025. In particular, the trading prices for biopharmaceutical companies have been highly volatile as a result of supply chain disruptions and the COVID-19 pandemic. These factors include those discussed in this “Risk Factors” section and others such as:

​

​

In addition, the stock markets in general, and the markets for biopharmaceutical stocks in particular, have experienced extreme volatility that may have been unrelated to the operating performance of the issuer. These broad market fluctuations may adversely affect the trading price or liquidity of our common stock.

We are an “emerging growth company” and a “smaller reporting company” and, as a result of the reduced disclosure and governance requirements applicable to emerging growth companies and smaller reporting companies, our common stock may be less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the JOBS Act, and we intend to take advantage of some of the exemptions from reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including:

​

​

​

​

​

​

We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we will rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be more volatile. We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions until we are no longer an emerging growth company. We will remain an emerging growth company until the earlier of (1) the last day of the fiscal year (a) following the fifth anniversary of the closing of our IPO, (b) in which we have total annual gross revenue of at least $1.235 billion, or (c) in which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of our common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the prior June 30th, and (2) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period.

​

Under Section 107(b) of the JOBS Act, emerging growth companies can delay adopting new or revised accounting standards until such time as those standards apply to private companies. Even after we no longer qualify as an emerging growth company, we may, under certain circumstances, still qualify as a “smaller reporting company,” which would allow us to take advantage of many of the same exemptions from disclosure requirements, including reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements.

​

If we sell shares of our common stock in future financings, stockholders may experience dilution and, as a result, our stock price may decline.

Because we expect our expenses to increase significantly in the foreseeable future and because, based on our current business plans, we believe that our cash, cash equivalents and income from our non-dilutive grants will be sufficient for us to fund our operating and capital expenditures into the fourth quarter of 2025. As a result, we may from time to time issue additional shares of common stock or other securities to raise capital. These issuances may be at a discount from the current trading price of our common stock. Our stockholders would experience dilution upon the purchase of any shares of our common stock sold at such discount. In addition, as opportunities present themselves, we may enter into financing or similar arrangements in the future, including the issuance of debt securities, preferred stock or common stock. If we issue common stock or securities convertible into common stock, our common stockholders will experience additional dilution and, as a result, our stock price may decline.

Concentration of ownership of our common stock among our existing executive officers, directors and principal stockholders may prevent new investors from influencing significant corporate decisions.

As of March 17, 2025, our executive officers, directors and current beneficial owners of 5% or more of our common stock and their respective affiliates beneficially owned approximately 15% of our outstanding common stock. As a result, these persons, acting together, would be able to significantly influence all matters requiring stockholder approval, including the election and removal of directors, any merger, consolidation, sale of all or substantially all of our assets, or other significant corporate transactions.

​

Some of these persons or entities may have interests different than yours. For example, because many of these stockholders purchased their shares at prices substantially below the current market price of our common stock and have held their shares for a longer period, they may be more interested in selling our company to an acquirer than other investors, or they may want us to pursue strategies that deviate from the interests of other stockholders.

​

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could cause our stock price to fall.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market or the perception that these sales might occur, could depress the market price of our common stock and could impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities. We are unable to predict the effect that sales may have on the prevailing market price of our common stock. Sales of significant number of shares of our common stock may make it more difficult for us to sell equity or equity-related securities in the future at a time and price that we deem reasonable or appropriate, and make it more difficult for you to sell shares of our common stock.

​

We have also registered or intend to register all shares of our common stock subject to options or other equity awards issued or reserved for future issuance under our equity incentive plans. As a result, these shares will be available for sale in the public market subject to vesting arrangements and exercise of options, and restrictions under applicable securities laws. In addition, our directors, executive officers and certain affiliates may in the future establish programmed selling plans under Rule 10b5-1 of the Exchange Act for the purpose of effecting sales of our common stock. If any of these events cause a large number of our shares to be sold in the public market, the sales could reduce the trading price of our common stock and impede our ability to raise future capital.

​

In December 2022, we filed a registration statement on Form S-3 relating to the registration of our common stock, preferred stock, debt securities, warrants, units and subscription rights or any combination thereof. Concurrently with the filing of such registration statement, we entered into the ATM Facility, which provides for the offering, issuance and sale by us of up shares of our common stock from time to time for aggregate gross proceeds of up to $40 million in sales deemed to be “at-the-market” as defined by the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. For the year ended December 31, 2024, we sold 19,913,189 shares of our common stock pursuant to the ATM for gross proceeds of approximately $12.8 million, subject to the limitations of General Instruction I.B.6 of Form S-3. For the period ended December 31, 2024, the Company did not sell any shares of common stock to Lincoln Park pursuant to the equity line financing arrangement. As of December 31, 2024, $34.8 million was available to draw pursuant to the Purchase Agreement. Any additional sale or issuance of securities pursuant to this registration statement or otherwise may result in dilution to our stockholders and may cause the market price of our stock to decline. Furthermore, new investors purchasing securities that we may issue and sell in the future could obtain rights superior to the rights of our existing stockholders.

​

We are also authorized to grant stock options and other equity-based awards to our employees, directors and consultants pursuant to our 2021 Equity Incentive Plan. The number of shares available for future grant under the 2021 will automatically increase each year by up to 5% of all shares of our capital stock outstanding as of December 31 of the prior calendar year, subject to the ability of our board of directors or compensation committee to take action to reduce the size of the increase in any given year. Currently, we plan to register any increase in the number of shares available for issuance under the 2021 Plan promptly following the effectiveness of any such increase. If our board of directors elects to increase the number of shares available for future grant under the 2021 Plan, our stockholders may experience additional dilution, and our stock price may fall.

​

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

As of December 31, 2024, we had federal net operating loss, or NOL, carryforwards of approximately $38.1 million and state NOL carryforwards of approximately $12.6 million available to offset future taxable income. Of the federal NOL carryforwards, $11.5 million begin to expire in 2035, and $26.6 million can be carried forward indefinitely. State NOL carryforwards will begin to expire in 2028. As of December 31, 2024, we also had $3.8 million of federal research and development tax credit carryforwards available to reduce future income taxes. The federal research and development tax credits will begin to expire in 2029, if not utilized. Utilization of NOL carryforwards and credits may be subject to an annual limitation due to the “ownership change” provisions under Sections 382 and 383 of the Code. An “ownership change” is generally defined as a cumulative change in the ownership interest of significant stockholders over a rolling three-year period in excess of 50 percentage points. Similar provisions under state tax law may also apply. If finalized, Treasury Regulations currently proposed under Section 382 of the Code may further limit our ability to utilize our pre-change NOLs or credits if we undergo a future ownership change. We may experience an ownership change in the future as a result of subsequent shifts in our stock ownership, some of which may be outside of our control. Such ownership changes could result in the expiration of our NOL carryforwards and other tax attributes before they can be utilized and, if we are profitable, our future cash flows could be adversely affected due to our increased tax liability. In 2023, we completed an analysis covering the periods from inception through December 31, 2022 to determine whether there may have been a Section 382 ownership change. This analysis showed an ownership change occurred in January 2009 and the Section 382 limitation would result in $0.6 million of federal net operating loss carryforwards expiring unutilized. We updated the analysis through December 31, 2024 and determined that it is more-likely-than-not that our existing net operating loss and research and development tax credit carryforwards could be utilized to offset current and future taxable income or tax, respectively.

​

Additionally, under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or the TCJA, NOL carryforwards arising in tax years beginning after December 31, 2017 are limited to 80% of taxable income, and may be carried forward indefinitely and are prohibited from being carried back. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or the CARES Act, allowed federal NOL carryforwards arising in tax years beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2021 to be carried back to each of the five tax years preceding the tax year of such loss and temporarily suspends the 80% limitation mentioned above for this period. The changes in the carryforward and carryback periods as well as the limitation on use of NOL carryforwards may significantly impact our ability to use NOL carryforwards, particularly for tax years beginning after December 31, 2024, as well as the timing of any such use, and could adversely affect our results of operations.

​

Provisions in our charter documents and under Delaware law could discourage a takeover that stockholders may consider favorable and may lead to entrenchment of management.

Our third amended and restated certificate of incorporation and second amended and restated bylaws each contain provisions that could delay or prevent changes in control or changes in our management without the consent of our board of directors. These provisions include the following:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

We are also subject to the anti-takeover provisions contained in Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, or the DGCL. Under Section 203, a corporation may not, in general, engage in a business combination with any holder of 15% or more of its capital stock unless the holder has held the stock for three years or, among other exceptions, the board of directors has approved the transaction.

Our third amended and restated certificate of incorporation and second amended and restated bylaws provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the exclusive forum for certain disputes between us and our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees.

Our third amended and restated certificate of incorporation and second amended and restated bylaws provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (or, in the event that the Court of Chancery does not have jurisdiction, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware or other state courts of the State of Delaware) is the exclusive forum for any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, any action asserting a claim of breach of fiduciary duty, any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to the DGCL, our third amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our second amended and restated bylaws, or any action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine; provided that, the exclusive forum provision will not apply to suits brought to enforce any liability or duty created by the Exchange Act, or any other claim for which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction; and provided further that, if and only if the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware dismisses any such action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, such action may be brought in another state or federal court sitting in the State of Delaware.

​

Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act or the rules and regulations thereunder. Our third amended and restated certificate of incorporation and second amended and restated bylaws, however, provide that the federal district courts of the United States of America will be the exclusive forum for the resolution of any complaint asserting a cause of action against us or any of our directors, officers, employees or agents and arising under the Securities Act. The Supreme Court of Delaware has held that this type of exclusive federal forum provision is enforceable. There may be uncertainty, however, as to whether courts of other jurisdictions would enforce this provision, if applicable.

​

These choice of forum provisions may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or any of our directors, officers, other employees or stockholders, which may discourage lawsuits with respect to such claims, although our stockholders will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. Furthermore, the enforceability of similar choice of forum provisions in other companies’ certificates of incorporation has been challenged in legal proceedings, and it is possible that a court could find these types of provisions to be inapplicable or unenforceable. While the Delaware courts have determined that such choice of forum provisions are facially valid, a stockholder may nevertheless seek to bring a claim in a venue other than those designated in the exclusive forum provisions, and there can be no assurance that such provisions will be enforced by a court in those other jurisdictions. If a court were to find the choice of forum provision contained in our third amended and restated certificate of incorporation and second amended and restated bylaws to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect our business and financial condition.

​

We do not currently intend to pay dividends on our common stock, and, consequently, your ability to achieve a return on your investment will depend on appreciation in the price of our common stock.

We do not currently intend to pay any cash dividends on our common stock for the foreseeable future. We currently intend to invest our future earnings, if any, to fund our growth. Therefore, you are not likely to receive any dividends on your common stock for the foreseeable future. Since we do not intend to pay dividends, your ability to receive a return on your investment will depend on any future appreciation in the market value of our common stock. There is no guarantee that our common stock will appreciate or even maintain the price at which our holders have purchased it.

General Risk Factors

Unfavorable global economic or political conditions has in the past and could in the future adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Our business is susceptible to general conditions in the global economy and in the global financial markets. A severe or prolonged economic downturn, including rises in interest rates, liquidity constraints, failures and instability in the United States and international financial banking systems, inflation, recession or depression, or political disruption has and could result in a variety of risks to our business, including weakened demand for our product candidates or any future product candidates, if approved, and our ability to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. A weak or declining economy or political disruption could also strain our manufacturers or suppliers, possibly resulting in supply disruption, or cause our customers to delay making payments for our potential products. Key national economies, including the United States, have been affected from time to time by economic downturns or recessions, supply chain constraints, heightened and fluctuating inflation and interest rates, restricted credit, poor liquidity, reduced corporate profitability, volatility in credit, equity and foreign exchange markets, bankruptcies and overall uncertainty with respect to the economy. In particular, in relation to uncertainty around inflation and the U.S. Federal Reserve’s measures to slow inflation, the stock market has been exceptionally volatile.  In addition, U.S. debt ceiling and budget deficit concerns have increased the possibility of additional credit-rating downgrades and economic slowdowns, or a recession in the United States. The impact of this or any further downgrades to the U.S. government’s sovereign credit rating or its perceived creditworthiness could adversely affect the U.S. and global financial markets and economic conditions. Any of the foregoing could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects, and we cannot anticipate all of the ways in which the political or economic climate and financial market conditions could adversely impact our business.

Further, the impacts of political unrest, including as a result geopolitical tension, such as a deterioration in the relationship between the United States and China or the conflicts between Russia and Ukraine and in the Middle East, including any additional sanctions, export controls or other restrictive actions that may be imposed by the United States and/or other countries against governmental or other entities in, for example, Russia, also has in the past and could in the future lead to disruption, instability and volatility in the global markets, which may have an adverse impact on our business or ability to access the capital markets. Additionally, significant political, trade, or regulatory developments, such as those stemming from the change in U.S. federal administration, are difficult to predict and may have a material adverse effect on us.  Similarly, changes in U.S. federal policy that affect the geopolitical landscape could give rise to circumstances outside our control that could have negative impacts on our business operations. Political developments impacting government spending and international trade, including changes in trade agreements, potential government shutdowns and trade disputes and tariffs, including tariffs that have been or may in the future be imposed by the United States or other countries and future legislation or actions taken by the United States or other countries that restrict trade, and protectionist or retaliatory measures taken by the United States or other countries, may negatively impact markets and cause weaker macroeconomic conditions.

Adverse developments affecting the financial services industry, including events or concerns involving liquidity, defaults or non-performance by financial institutions or transactional counterparties, could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Events involving limited liquidity, defaults, non-performance or other adverse developments that affect financial institutions, transactional counterparties or other companies in the financial services industry or the financial services industry generally, or concerns or rumors about any events of these kinds or other similar risks, have in the past and may in the future lead to market-wide liquidity problems.  In March 2023, Silicon Valley Bank (“SVB”) was closed by the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, which appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) as receiver.  Similarly, in March 2023, Signature Bank and Silvergate Capital Corp. were each swept into receivership. Since then, additional financial institutions have experienced similar failures and have been placed into receivership. Although we assess our banking and customer relationships as we believe necessary or appropriate, our access to funding sources and other credit arrangements in amounts adequate to finance or capitalize our current and projected future business operations could be significantly impaired by factors that affect us, the financial services industry or economy in general.  These factors could include, among others, events such as liquidity constraints or failures, the ability to perform obligations under various types of financial, credit or liquidity agreements or arrangements, disruptions or instability in the financial services industry or financial markets, or concerns or negative expectations about the prospects for companies in the financial services industry.  

​

In addition, investor concerns regarding the U.S. or international financial systems could result in less favorable commercial financing terms, including higher interest rates or costs and tighter financial and operating covenants, or systemic limitations on access to credit and liquidity sources, thereby making it more difficult for us to acquire financing on acceptable terms or at all.  Any decline in available funding or access to our cash and liquidity resources could, among other risks, adversely impact our ability to meet our operating expenses, financial obligations or fulfill our other obligations, result in breaches of our contractual obligations or result in violations of federal or state wage and hour laws.  Any of these impacts, or any other impacts resulting from the factors described above or other related or similar factors not described above, could have material adverse impacts on our liquidity and our business, financial condition or results of operations.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports about our business, or if they issue an adverse or misleading opinion regarding our stock, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common stock may be influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts publish about us or our business. If any of the analysts who cover us issue an adverse or misleading opinion regarding us, our business model, our intellectual property or our stock performance, or if our clinical trials and operating results fail to meet the expectations of analysts, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage of us or fail to publish reports on us regularly, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.

We may be subject to securities litigation, which is expensive and could divert our management’s attention.

In the past, companies that have experienced volatility in the market price of their securities have been subject to securities class action litigation. We may be the target of this type of litigation in the future. Regardless of the merits or the ultimate results of such litigation, securities litigation brought against us could result in substantial costs and divert our management’s attention from other business concerns.

We have incurred, and will continue to incur, significant costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management will devote substantial time to new compliance initiatives. We may fail to comply with the rules that apply to public companies, including Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or Section 404, which could result in sanctions or other penalties that could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We have incurred, and will continue to incur, significant legal, accounting and other expenses as a public company, including costs resulting from public company reporting obligations under the Exchange Act and regulations regarding corporate governance practices. The listing requirements of the Nasdaq Capital Market and the rules of the SEC require that we satisfy certain corporate governance requirements relating to director independence, filing annual and interim reports, stockholder meetings, approvals and voting, soliciting proxies, conflicts of interest and a code of conduct. Our management and other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of time to ensure that we comply with all of these requirements. Moreover, the reporting requirements, rules and regulations will increase our legal and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time-consuming and costly. Any changes we make to comply with these obligations may not be sufficient to allow us to satisfy our obligations as a public company on a timely basis, or at all. These reporting requirements, rules and regulations, coupled with the increase in potential litigation exposure associated with being a public company, could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors or board committees or to serve as executive officers, or to obtain certain types of insurance, including directors’ and officers’ insurance, on acceptable terms.

​

We are subject to Section 404 and the related rules of the SEC, which generally require our management and independent registered public accounting firm to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. Section 404 requires an annual management assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. However, for so long as we remain an emerging growth company as defined in the JOBS Act, we intend to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including, but not limited to, not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404. Once we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer or an accelerated filer, we will be required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting.

​

During the course of our review and testing, we may identify deficiencies and be unable to remediate them before we must provide the required reports. Furthermore, if we identify any material weaknesses, we may not detect errors on a timely basis and our financial statements may be materially misstated. We or our independent registered public accounting firm may not be able to conclude on an ongoing basis that we have effective internal control over financial reporting, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects, cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information and cause the trading price of our stock to fall. In addition, as a public company we are required to file accurate and timely quarterly and annual reports with the SEC under the Exchange Act. In order to report our results of operations and financial statements on an accurate and timely basis, we will depend in part on CROs and other third parties to provide timely and accurate notice of their costs to us. Any failure to report our financial results on an accurate and timely basis could result in sanctions, lawsuits, delisting of our shares from the Nasdaq Capital Market or other adverse consequences that would materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

​

We have incurred, and will continue to incur, increased costs and demands upon management as a result of being a public company.

As a public company listed in the United States, we incur significant additional legal, accounting and other costs. These additional costs could negatively affect our financial results. In addition, changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance and public disclosure, including regulations implemented by the SEC and The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, may increase legal and financial compliance costs and make some activities more time-consuming. These laws, regulations and standards are subject to varying interpretations and, as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. We intend to invest resources to comply with evolving laws, regulations and standards, and this investment may result in increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management’s time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities. If notwithstanding our efforts to comply with new laws, regulations and standards, we fail to comply, regulatory authorities may initiate legal proceedings against us and our business may be harmed.

​

Failure to comply with these rules might also make it more difficult for us to obtain some types of insurance, including director and officer liability insurance, and we might be forced to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. The impact of these events could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, on committees of our board of directors or as members of senior management.

​

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

​

Item 1C. Cybersecurity

Cyber Risk Management and Strategy

Cognition Therapeutics, Inc. has implemented and maintains an enterprise risk management program that includes processes designed to identify, assess, and mitigate cybersecurity risks. These processes include the deployment of third-party security solutions and tools designed to monitor, identify, and address cybersecurity risks. We engage a third-party information technology advisor to support our cyber risk management efforts and, periodically, we engage additional third-party consultants for penetration testing and threat simulation exercises. We also maintain processes to assess and review the cybersecurity practices of third-party vendors and service providers prior to onboarding, including through review of System and Organization Controls (SOC) reports provided by potential vendors and inclusion of security requirements in contracts, as appropriate. Employees are required to complete an annual cybersecurity awareness training program designed to raise awareness of cybersecurity threats across functions, as well as to encourage consideration of cybersecurity risks across our Company.

As part of our cybersecurity risk management, we have adopted an incident response plan that has been designed to identify and manage significant events that may impact our information technology infrastructure, including those arising from or related to cybersecurity threats. We recently tested our incident response plan using a tabletop exercise with the goal of improving our processes and preparedness.

We, like other companies in our industry, face a number of risks from cybersecurity threats in connection with our business. Although such risks have not materially affected, and we do not believe they are reasonably likely to materially affect us, including our business strategy, results of operations or financial condition, to date, we have, from time to time, experienced threats related to our data and systems, including phishing attacks. For more information about risks from cybersecurity threats, see the risk factor entitled “Significant disruptions of information technology systems and infrastructure, breaches of data security and other incidents could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition” included in Item 1A “Risk Factors.”

Governance Related to Cybersecurity Risks

Our cyber risk management program and related operations and processes are managed by the Chief Financial Officer in consultation with other members of the finance team of the company, who collectively have expertise and experience in accounting, financial reporting and auditing, and law and compliance, including as it relates to the assessment of the adequacy of cybersecurity processes.

The Corporate Controller reports to and meets with the Chief Financial Officer periodically to discuss and review risk management processes related to cybersecurity and potential cybersecurity risks, with input from the Company’s third-party information technology advisor as appropriate. The Chief Financial Officer reports on a quarterly basis to the audit committee, which oversees cybersecurity risks pursuant to the audit committee charter. The audit committee is responsible for discussing cybersecurity-related risks with management, including the steps management has taken to monitor and control such risks, including our risk assessment and risk management policies.

The Chief Financial Officer and the audit committee periodically report on cybersecurity risk management to the board of directors. The board of directors, as a whole and through its committees, has responsibility for the oversight of risk management. In its risk oversight role, the board of directors has the responsibility to confirm that the risk management processes designed and implemented by management are appropriate and functioning as designed.

Item 2. Properties

Our principal executive offices are located in Purchase, New York where we currently occupy 2,864 square feet of office space under a lease that expires in May of 2029. We lease approximately 6,686 square feet of laboratory and office space located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania under leases that expire in June of 2026. We believe that our current facilities are adequate to meet our ongoing needs, and that, if we require additional space, we will be able to obtain additional facilities on commercially reasonable terms.

​

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

We are not aware of any pending legal actions that would, if determined aversely to us, have a material adverse effect on our business and operations.

​

We may, from time to time, become involved in disputes and proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. In addition, as a public company, we are also potentially susceptible to litigation, such as claims asserting violations of securities laws. Any such claims, with or without merit, if not resolved, could be time-consuming and result in costly litigation. There can be no assurance that an adverse result in any future proceeding would not have a potentially material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

​

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

​

PART II

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

Market Information

​

Our common stock began trading on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “CGTX” on October 8, 2021 until March 13, 2025. Effective March 14, 2025, our common stock began trading on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “CGTX”. Prior to October 8, 2021, there was no public market for our common stock.

​

Holders

​

As of March 17, 2025, there were approximately 61,972,946 shares of our common stock outstanding held by approximately 280 holders of record. The actual number of holders of our common stock is greater than this number of record holders, and includes stockholders who are beneficial owners, but whose shares are held in street name by brokers or held by other nominees. This number of holders of record also does not include stockholders whose shares may be held in trust by other entities.

​

Dividend Policy

​

We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our common stock, and we do not currently intend to pay any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. We currently intend to retain all available funds and any future earnings to support operations and to finance the growth and development of our business. Any future determination to pay dividends will be made at the discretion of our board of directors subject to applicable laws and will depend upon, among other factors, our results of operations, financial condition, contractual restrictions and capital requirements. Our future ability to pay cash dividends on our common stock may be limited by any future debt instruments or preferred securities.

​

Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans

Information about our equity compensation plans is incorporated herein by reference to Item 12, Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters, of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

​

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

​

There were no unregistered sales of our equity securities during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024.

​

Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer or Affiliated Purchaser

​

We did not purchase any of our registered equity securities during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024.

​

​

Item 6. [Reserved].

​

​

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the related notes to those statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. In addition to historical financial information, the following discussion and analysis contains forward-looking statements that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Some of the numbers included herein have been rounded for the convenience of presentation. Our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of many factors, including those discussed under Item 1A, Risk factors, in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Overview

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company engaged in the discovery and development of innovative, small molecule therapeutics targeting age-related degenerative diseases and disorders of the central nervous system (“CNS”) and retina. Currently available therapies for these diseases are limited, with few Alzheimer’s disease (“AD”) treatments, two approved treatments for geographic atrophy (“GA”) secondary to dry age-related macular degeneration (“dAMD”) and no approved treatments for dementia with Lewy bodies. Our goal is to develop disease-modifying treatments for participants with these degenerative disorders.

Since our inception in 2007, we have incurred significant operating losses and devoted substantially all of our time and resources to developing our lead product candidate, zervimesine, building our intellectual property portfolio, raising capital and recruiting management and technical staff to support these operations. As of December 31, 2024, we had an accumulated deficit of $175.2 million. We incurred net losses of $34.0 million and $25.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively.

To date, we have funded our operations primarily with proceeds from grants awarded by the National Institute of Aging (the “NIA”), a division of the National Institutes of Health (the “NIH”), and proceeds from our initial public offering (the “IPO”), completed in October 2021, proceeds from our follow-on public offerings, sales of our common stock through our ATM (as defined below), sales of our convertible promissory notes, convertible preferred stock, simple agreements for future equity (“SAFE”) and stock option exercises. Since our inception, we have raised approximately $138.0 million in net proceeds from sales of our equity securities, convertible notes, SAFE, stock option exercises, IPO, follow-on public offerings, ATM, and equity line financing with Lincoln Park. As of December 31, 2024, we had cash and cash equivalents of $25.0 million. As of December 31, 2024, we had approximately $50.0 million available from obligated NIA funds for applicable expenses to be incurred in the future.

On December 23, 2022, we entered into a sales agreement with Cantor Fitzgerald & Co. and B. Riley Securities, Inc., or the Sales Agents, providing for the offering, issuance and sale by us of up to $40 million of our common stock from time to time in “at-the-market” offerings (the “ATM”). For the period ended December 31, 2024, we sold 19,913,189 shares of our common stock pursuant to the ATM for gross proceeds of approximately $12.8 million. As of December 31, 2024, we have approximately $21.9 million remaining in gross proceeds available for future issuances of common stock under the ATM.

On March 10, 2023, we entered into a purchase agreement with Lincoln Park Capital Fund, LLC (“Lincoln Park”) for an equity line financing (the “Lincoln Park Purchase Agreement”). The Lincoln Park Purchase Agreement provides that, subject to the terms and conditions set forth therein, we have the right, but not the obligation, to direct Lincoln Park to purchase up to $35.0 million of shares of common stock at our sole discretion, over a 36-month period commencing on March 10, 2023. We filed a prospectus supplement to our registration statement on Form S-3 (File No. 333-268992) covering the resale of shares of common stock that are issued under the Lincoln Park Purchase Agreement. During the year end December 31, 2024, we did not sell any shares of common stock to Lincoln Park. As of December 31, 2024, $34.8 million was available to draw pursuant to the Lincoln Park Purchase Agreement.

On March 14, 2024, we completed our follow-on public offering, pursuant to which we issued and sold 6,571,428 shares of our common stock at a public offering price of $1.75 per share. On March 28, 2024, the underwriters exercised their option to purchase 985,714 shares of our common stock at a public offering price of $1.75 per share. In connection with the follow-on public offering, we received net proceeds of approximately $11.9 million, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and other offering related expenses.

We expect to continue to incur significant and increasing expenses and net losses for the foreseeable future, as we advance our current and future product candidates through preclinical and clinical development, manufacture drug product and drug supply, seek regulatory approval for our current and future product candidates, maintain and expand our intellectual property portfolio, hire additional research and development and business personnel and operate as a public company. We will not generate revenue from product sales unless and until we successfully complete clinical development and obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates. In addition, if we obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates and do not enter into a third-party commercialization partnership, we expect to incur significant expenses related to developing our commercialization capability to support product sales, marketing, manufacturing and distribution activities.

As a result, we will need substantial additional funding to support our continuing operations and pursue our growth strategy. Until we can generate significant revenue from product sales, if ever, we expect to finance our operations through a combination of public or private equity offerings, debt financings or other sources, such as potential collaboration agreements and strategic alliances, licensing or similar arrangements with third parties. To the extent available, we expect to continue our pursuit of non-dilutive research contributions, or grants, including additional NIA grant funding. However, we may fail to receive additional NIA grants, or we may be unable to raise additional funds or enter into such other agreements or arrangements when needed on acceptable terms, or at all. Our failure to obtain additional NIA grants or raise capital or enter into such agreements as and when needed could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with product development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses or when, or if, we will be able to achieve profitability. Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. If we fail to become profitable or are unable to sustain profitability on a continuing basis, then we may be unable to raise capital, maintain our research and development efforts, expand our business or continue our operations at planned levels, and as a result we may be forced to substantially reduce or terminate our operations.

We do not own or operate manufacturing facilities. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of zervimesine for preclinical studies and clinical trials, as well as for commercial manufacture if zervimesine obtains marketing approval. We also rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties to manufacture, package, label, store, and distribute zervimesine, if marketing approval is obtained. We believe that this strategy allows us to maintain a more efficient infrastructure by eliminating the need for us to invest in our own manufacturing facilities, equipment, and personnel while also enabling us to focus our expertise and resources on the development of zervimesine.

Components of Our Results of Operations

Operating Expenses

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses consist primarily of direct and indirect costs incurred for our research activities, including development of our drug discovery efforts and the development of our product candidates. Direct costs include laboratory materials and supplies, contracted research and manufacturing, clinical trial costs, consulting fees, and other expenses incurred to sustain our research and development program. Indirect costs include personnel-related expenses, consisting of employee salaries, related benefits, and stock-based compensation expense for employees engaged in research and development activities, facilities, and other expenses consisting of direct and allocated expenses for rent and depreciation, and lab consumables.

We expense research and development costs as incurred. Non-refundable advance payments for goods and services that will be used over time for research and development are capitalized and recognized as goods are delivered or as the related services are performed. In-licensing fees and other costs to acquire technologies used in research and development that have not yet received regulatory approval and that are not expected to have an alternative future use are expensed when incurred. We track direct costs by stage of program, clinical or preclinical. However, we do not track indirect costs on a program specific basis because these costs are deployed across multiple programs and, as such, are not separately classified.

We cannot reasonably determine the nature, timing, and estimated costs of the efforts that will be necessary to complete the development of, and obtain regulatory approval for, any of our product candidates. Product candidates in later stages of development generally have higher development costs than those in earlier stages. We expect that our research and development expenses will increase substantially for the foreseeable future as we continue to invest in research and development activities related to developing our product candidates, as our product candidates advance into later stages of development, as we begin to conduct larger clinical trials, as we seek regulatory approvals for any product candidates that successfully complete clinical trials, as we expand our product pipeline, as we maintain, expand, protect and enforce our intellectual property portfolio, and as we incur expenses associated with hiring additional personnel to support our research and development efforts.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses consist primarily of personnel-related costs, including employee salaries, related benefits, and stock-based compensation expense for our employees in the executive, finance and accounting, and other administrative functions. General and administrative expenses also include third-party costs such as legal costs, insurance costs, accounting, auditing and tax related fees, consulting fees and facilities and other expenses not otherwise included as research and development expenses. We expense general and administrative costs as incurred.

We expect that our general and administrative expenses will increase for the foreseeable future as we increase our headcount to support our continued research activities and development of our programs.

Other Income (Expense)

Grant Income

Grant income relates to the grants awarded from governmental bodies that are conditional cost reimbursement grants and are recognized as grant income as allowable costs are incurred and the right to payment is realized. The grants awarded relate to agreed upon direct and indirect costs for specific studies or clinical trials, which may include personnel and consulting costs, costs paid to contract research organizations (“CROs”), research institutions and /or consortiums involved in the grant, as well as facilities and administrative costs. These grants are cost plus fixed fee arrangements in which we are reimbursed for eligible direct and indirect costs over time, up to the maximum amount of each specific grant award. Only costs that are allowable under the grant award, certain government regulations and the NIH’s supplemental policy and procedure manual may be claimed for reimbursement, and the reimbursements are subject to routine audits from governmental agencies from time to time. As of December 31, 2024, the Company has been awarded grants with project periods that extend through May 31, 2027, subject to extension. Our clinical trials have been funded by approximately $171.0 million in cumulative grants awarded primarily by the NIA, which includes an approximately $81.0 million grant from the NIA to fund our Phase 2 (COG0203-START) study of zervimesine in participants with early-stage AD, an approximately $30.5 million grant from the NIA to fund our Phase 2 (COG0201-SHINE) study of zervimesine in participants with mild-to-moderate AD, and an approximately $29.5 million grant from the NIA to fund our Phase 2 (COG1201-SHIMMER) study of zervimesine in participants with dementia with Lewy bodies.

Other Income, Net

Other income, net consists primarily of interest income from money market funds, offset partially by other fees such as costs incurred to establish financing opportunities.

Interest Expense

Interest expense for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023 consisted of interest expense related to the insurance premium financing arrangement with a lender.

Results of Operations

Comparison of the Years Ended December 31, 2024 and 2023

The following table summarizes our results of operations (in thousands):

​

​

Research and Development Expenses

The following table summarizes our research and development expenses (in thousands):

​

​

Research and development expenses were $41.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, compared to $37.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The increase of $4.5 million was primarily due to the following:

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses were $12.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, compared to $13.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The decrease of $1.2 million was primarily due to:

Other Income (Expense)

Grant Income

Grant income was $19.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, compared to $24.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The change in grant income is correlated with the decrease in eligible reimbursable costs related to clinical trials incurred during 2024 as compared to 2023.

Other Income, Net

Other income, net was $0.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, compared to $0.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The change in other income, net was driven primarily by interest earned on money market funds.

Interest Expense

Interest expense was less than $0.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, compared to interest expense of less than $0.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. Interest expense was not significant in either period.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Sources of Liquidity

To date, we have funded our operations primarily with proceeds from grants awarded by the NIA, and proceeds from the sales of our convertible promissory notes, convertible preferred stock, SAFE, stock option exercises, follow-on equity offerings, sales under our ATM and equity line financing, and our IPO. Since our inception, we have been awarded grant awards primarily from the NIA in the aggregate amount of approximately $171.0 million and have raised approximately $138.0 million in net proceeds from sales of our equity securities, convertible notes and SAFE, stock option exercises, our ATM, our equity line financing with Lincoln Park, our IPO and our follow-on public offerings. The net proceeds from our IPO, which closed on October 13, 2021, were approximately $44.2 million, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and other offering related expenses payable by us. On November 15, 2022, we closed our follow-on public offering, selling 5,000,000 shares of our common stock at a public offering price of $1.20 per share. The net proceeds were approximately $5.2 million, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and other offering related expenses payable by us. On December 23, 2022, we entered into a sales agreement with the Sales Agents, providing for the offering, issuance and sale by us of up to $40.0 million of our common stock from time to time in ATM offerings. As of December 31, 2024, we sold 22,772,263 shares of common stock under the ATM for gross proceeds of approximately $18.1 million. As of December 31, 2024, there was $21.9 million of common stock remaining available for sale under the ATM. In addition, in March 2023, we entered into the Lincoln Park Purchase Agreement with Lincoln Park Capital Fund, LLC, or Lincoln Park, giving the Company the right, but not the obligation to sell to Lincoln Park up to $35.0 million worth of shares of our common stock. As of December 31, 2024, we sold 125,000 shares of common stock to Lincoln Park for proceeds of $0.2 million, as part of the equity line financing arrangement. As of December 31, 2024, $34.8 million was available to draw pursuant to the Lincoln Park Purchase Agreement. On March 14, 2024, we closed a follow-on public offering of 6,571,428 shares of our common stock at a public offering price of $1.75 per share. As part of the follow-on offering, the underwriters exercised their option to purchase 985,714 shares of our common stock on March 28, 2024, at a public offering price of $1.75 per share. The net proceeds were approximately $11.9 million, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and other offering related expenses payable by us.

​

As of December 31, 2024, we had $25.0 million in cash and cash equivalents and have not generated positive cash flows from operations. Based on our current business plans, we believe that our existing cash and cash equivalents, income from non-dilutive grants, and net proceeds from our March 2024 follow-on public offering will be sufficient for us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditures requirements into the fourth quarter of 2025, which assumes no usage from the remaining ATM nor the Lincoln Park Purchase Agreement. We have based these estimates on assumptions that may prove to be incorrect or require adjustment as a result of business decisions, and we could utilize our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect.

​

Future Funding Requirements

We expect to continue to incur significant and increasing expenses and net losses for the foreseeable future, as we advance our current and future product candidates through preclinical and clinical development, manufacture drug product and drug supply, seek regulatory approval for our current and future product candidates, maintain and expand our intellectual property portfolio, hire additional research and development and business personnel, and operate as a public company. We anticipate that we will need to raise additional funding in the future to fund our operations, including the commercialization of any approved product candidates. We are subject to the risks typically related to the development of new products, and we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays, and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our business.

Our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including, but not limited to:

Until such time as we can generate significant revenue from product sales, we expect to finance our operations through a combination of public or private equity offerings, debt financings or other sources, such as potential collaboration agreements and strategic alliances, licensing or similar arrangements with third parties. To the extent available, we expect to continue our pursuit of non-dilutive research contributions, or grants, including additional NIA grant funding. However, we may fail to receive additional NIA grants, or we may be unable to raise additional funds or enter into such other agreements or arrangements when needed on acceptable terms, or at all. Our failure to obtain additional NIA grants or raise capital or enter into such agreements as and when needed could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

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 or could be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of our common stockholders. Debt financing and preferred equity 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 funds through collaborations, licenses and other similar arrangements with third parties, 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 and/or may reduce the value of our common stock. Adequate funding may not be available when needed or on terms acceptable to us, or at all. Our ability to raise additional funds may be adversely impacted by potential worsening global economic conditions and the recent disruptions to, and volatility in, the credit and financial markets in the United States and worldwide resulting from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic or other diseases, the ongoing global and regional conflicts, inflation, liquidity constraints, failures and instability in U.S. and international financial banking systems, and otherwise. If we fail to obtain necessary capital when needed on acceptable terms, or at all, it could force us to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development programs, commercialization efforts or other operations. Insufficient liquidity may also require us to relinquish rights to product candidates at an earlier stage of development or on less favorable terms than we would otherwise choose. We cannot assure you that we will ever be profitable or generate positive cash flows from operating activities.

Cash Flows

The following table summarizes our cash flows for the periods indicated (in thousands):

​

​

Cash used in operating activities

Net cash used in operating activities for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023 was $28.5 million and $16.0 million, respectively. The change in cash used in operating activities of $12.5 million was primarily driven by an increase in net loss of $8.2 million from a reduction in grant income, combined with increased research and development expenses during the year ended December 31, 2024. Additionally, decreases in operating assets and liabilities of $3.5 million driven primarily by a decrease in grant receivables, and decreases in non-cash adjustments of $0.7 million from decreased equity-based compensation expense drove increased cash used in operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2024.

Cash used in investing activities

During the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, we used less than $0.1 million and $0.1 million of cash, respectively, for investing activities related to purchases of property and equipment.

Cash provided by financing activities

Net cash provided by financing activities was $23.6 million and $4.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. The change in net cash provided by financing activities is primarily related to net proceeds from the issuance of common stock in our follow-on offering in March 2024 and under the ATM program.

Contractual Obligations

The following table summarizes our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2024 (in thousands):

​

​

In October 2023, we entered into an insurance premium financing arrangement with a lender whereby we financed $0.7 million of certain premiums at a 8.65% annual interest rate. Payments of less than $0.1 million are due monthly from November 2023 through October 2024. As of December 31, 2024, there was no outstanding balance on the loan.

In October 2024, we entered into an insurance premium financing arrangement with a lender whereby we financed $0.4 million of certain premiums at a 8.65% annual interest rate. Payments of less than $0.1 million are due monthly from November 2024 through July 2025. As of December 31, 2024, the outstanding principal of the loan was $0.3 million.

We have entered into operating leases for office and laboratory facilities under non-cancelable agreements that run through May 31, 2029. The amounts reflected in the table above consist of the future minimum lease payments under the non-cancelable lease arrangements.

On August 31, 2022, we entered into an agreement to lease 2,980 square feet of office space in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The lease has a term of 45 months and commenced on October 1, 2022. The annual base rent under the lease is less than $0.1 million throughout the term of the lease. Total payments due over the term of the lease are $0.2 million. Additionally, on August 31, 2022, we modified one of our existing lease agreements with the landlord for approximately 3,706 square feet of lab space at the same location to extend the lease term termination date from June 30, 2023 until June 30, 2026.

On July 1, 2021, we entered into an agreement to lease 2,864 square feet of office space in Purchase, New York. The lease has a term of 89 months and commenced on December 9, 2021. The annual base rent under the lease is less than $0.1 million for the first lease year and is subject to annual increases of between 1.82% and 2.04%. We provided a security deposit in the form of a Letter of Credit in the amount of less than $0.1 million pursuant to the terms of the lease.

We enter into contracts in the normal course of business with CROs and other vendors to assist in the performance of our research and development and other services and products for operating purposes. These contracts typically do not contain minimum purchase commitments and generally provide for termination on notice, and therefore are cancelable contracts and not included in the table of contractual obligations.

Critical Accounting Policies and Use of Estimates

We believe that the accounting policies discussed below are critical to understanding our historical and future performance, as these policies relate to the more significant areas involving management’s judgments and estimates.

Research and Development Costs, Accrued Research and Development Costs and Related Prepaid Expenses

Research and development costs are expensed as incurred. Research and development expenses include, among other costs, personnel costs, including salaries, stock-based compensation, and benefits for employees, third-party license fees and other operational costs related to our research and development activities, including allocated facility-related expenses and external costs of outside vendors, and other direct and indirect costs. Non-refundable advance payments for research and development costs are deferred and expensed as the related goods are delivered or services are performed. The estimated costs of research and development expenses incurred, but not yet invoiced, are recorded in accrued expenses on our consolidated balance sheet. If the actual timing of the performance of services or the level of effort varies from the original estimates, we will adjust the accrual accordingly. Payments made to CROs, contract manufacturing organizations and other companies under these arrangements in advance of the performance of the related services are recorded as prepaid expenses.

Equity-Based Compensation

We maintain an equity-based compensation plan as a long-term incentive for employees, non-employee directors and consultants. The plan allows for the issuance of incentive stock options, non-qualified stock options, restricted stock units, and other forms of equity awards.

We recognize equity-based compensation expense for stock options subject to time-based vesting on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period and account for forfeitures as they occur. To the extent any stock option grants are made subject to the achievement of a performance condition, management evaluates when the achievement of any such performance-based milestone is probable based on the relative satisfaction of the performance conditions as of the reporting date. Our stock-based compensation costs are based upon the grant date fair value of options estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model.

The Black-Scholes option pricing model utilizes inputs which are highly subjective assumptions and generally require significant judgment. These assumptions include:

See Note 9 to our audited financial statements for more information concerning certain of the specific assumptions we used in applying the Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the estimated fair value of our stock options. Certain of such assumptions involve inherent uncertainties and the application of significant judgment.

As of December 31, 2024, the total unrecognized compensation expense related to unvested time-based vesting awards was $2.1 million, which is expected to be recognized over weighted-average remaining vesting period of approximately 1.9 years. As of December 31, 2024, the total unrecognized compensation expense related to unvested performance-based vesting awards was $0.5 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average remaining vesting period of approximately 0.8 years.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

For a description of recent accounting pronouncements, see Note 2 of the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2024 included elsewhere in this Annual Report.

Emerging Growth Company Status

We are an emerging growth company, as defined in the JOBS Act. Under the JOBS Act, emerging growth companies can delay adopting new or revised accounting standards issued subsequent to the enactment of the JOBS Act until such time as those standards apply to private companies. We elected to use this extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards that have different effective dates for public and private companies until the earlier of the date that we (1) are no longer an emerging growth company or (2) affirmatively and irrevocably opt out of the extended transition period provided in the JOBS Act. As a result, our financial statements may not be comparable to companies that comply with the new or revised accounting pronouncements as of public company effective dates.

We will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest to occur of: (1) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have at least $1.235 billion in annual revenue; (2) the last day of the fiscal year in which we are deemed to be a “large accelerated filer,” as defined in Rule 12b-2 under the Exchange Act, which would occur if the market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates exceeded $700.0 million as of the last business day of the second fiscal quarter of such year; (3) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt securities during the prior three-year period; and (4) the last day of the fiscal year ending after the fifth anniversary of our IPO.

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

As a “smaller reporting company,” as that term is defined in Rule 229.10(f)(1), we are not required to provide the information required by this Item.

​

​

​

​

​

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

​

Index to Consolidated Financial Statements

As of and for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023

​

​

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and the Board of Directors of Cognition Therapeutics, Inc.

Opinion on the Financial Statements

​

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Cognition Therapeutics, Inc. and subsidiary (the Company) as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of two years in the period ended December 31, 2024, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “consolidated financial statements”). In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company at December 31, 2024 and 2023, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2024, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

​

The Company's Ability to Continue as a Going Concern

​

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 1 to the financial statements, the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations and has stated that substantial doubt exists about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Management's evaluation of the events and conditions and management’s plans regarding these matters are also described in Note 1. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

​

Basis for Opinion

​

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

​

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

​

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

​

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2020.

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

March 20, 2025

​

​

COGNITION THERAPEUTICS, INC.

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)

​

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

​

COGNITION THERAPEUTICS, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE LOSS

(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)

​

​

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

​

​

​

COGNITION THERAPEUTICS, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

(in thousands, except share amounts)

​