Risk Factors Dashboard

Once a year, publicly traded companies issue a comprehensive report of their business, called a 10-K. A component mandated in the 10-K is the ‘Risk Factors’ section, where companies disclose any major potential risks that they may face. This dashboard highlights all major changes and additions in new 10K reports, allowing investors to quickly identify new potential risks and opportunities.

Risk Factors - CELU

-New additions in green
-Changes in blue
-Hover to see similar sentence in last filing

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

You should carefully consider the following risk factors, as well as the other information in this annual report on Form 10-K, and in our other public filings. The occurrence of any of these risks could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or growth prospects or cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements we have made in this report and those we may make from time to time. You should consider all of the risk factors described in our public filings when evaluating our business.

Risks Related to Business and Industry

We have incurred net losses in every period since our inception, have no cellular therapeutics approved for commercial sale and anticipate that we will incur substantial net losses in the future.

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company, have no cellular therapeutics approved for commercial sale, have not generated any revenue from cellular therapeutic sales to date, and will continue to incur research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. Investment in biopharmaceutical product development is highly speculative because it entails substantial upfront expenditure and significant risk that any potential therapeutic candidate will fail to demonstrate adequate efficacy or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval and become commercially viable. Investment in biopharmaceutical product development is highly speculative because it entails substantial upfront capital expenditures and significant risk that any potential therapeutic candidate will fail to demonstrate adequate efficacy or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval and become commercially viable. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred net losses in each period since our inception. We reported a net loss of $196.3 million and net income of $14.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. We reported net losses of $100.1 million and $208.2 million the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively. We had an accumulated deficit of $841.8 million at December 31, 2023 and $0.2 million of cash and cash equivalents at such date.

Even after significant reductions in headcount in 2023, our strategic review to refocus our pipeline, and capital raises in the first quarter of 2024, we have approximately $0.6 million of unrestricted cash and cash equivalents and expect to incur significant expenditures for the foreseeable future, and we expect these expenditures to increase as we continue production of our commercial products that have seen strong demand. We will continue to incur research and development and other expenditures to develop and market therapeutic candidates. We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our business. The size of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of future growth of our expenses and our ability to generate revenue from our current and future biomaterial products. Our prior losses and expected future losses have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital.

Our historical operating results indicate substantial doubt exists related to our ability to continue as a going concern.

We have incurred net losses and used significant cash in operating activities since inception, have no cellular therapeutic candidates approved for commercial sale and we anticipate that we will incur substantial net losses in the future. We have an accumulated deficit of $841.8 million and have cash and cash equivalents of $0.2 million as of December 31, 2023, and as of the date of this annual report on Form 10-K, had approximately $0.6 million of unrestricted cash and cash equivalents available to fund our operations and no available additional sources of outside capital to sustain our operations for a period of 12 months beyond the issuance date. Accordingly, there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern, which may affect our ability to obtain future financing and may require us to further curtail our operations. For additional details, see the discussion under “Overview—Going Concern” in Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” We will need to raise additional capital to support our operations. We will need to raise additional capital to implement our plans. This additional funding may not be available on acceptable terms or at all. Failure to obtain this necessary capital or address our liquidity needs may force us to delay, limit or terminate our operations, make further reductions in our workforce, discontinue our commercialization efforts for our biomaterials products as well as other clinical trial programs, liquidate all or a portion of our assets or pursue other strategic alternatives, and/or seek protection under the provisions of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.

We will need substantial additional financing to develop our therapeutics and implement our operating plans. If we fail to obtain additional financing, we may be unable to complete the development and commercialization of our therapeutic candidates.

We will need substantial additional financing to develop our therapeutics and implement our operating plans. Further, if approved, we will require significant additional amounts in order to launch and commercialize our therapeutic candidates.

As of December 31, 2023, we had $0.2 million in cash and cash equivalents. We will need to raise additional capital to implement our plans. Further, changing circumstances may cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, and we may need to spend more money than currently expected because of circumstances beyond our control. We may also need to raise a large amount of capital sooner than currently anticipated if we choose to expand more rapidly than our present plans. In any event, we will require additional capital for the further development and commercialization of our therapeutic candidates, including funding our internal manufacturing capabilities and growth of our degenerative disease business.

30


We cannot be certain that additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, or at all. We have no committed source of additional capital and if we are unable to raise additional capital in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, we may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development or commercialization of our therapeutic candidates or other research and development initiatives. We could be required to seek collaborators for our therapeutic candidates at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable or on terms that are less favorable than might otherwise be available or relinquish or license on unfavorable terms our rights to our therapeutic candidates in markets where we otherwise would seek to pursue development or commercialization ourself. Any of the above events could significantly harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations and cause the price of our securities to decline.

We must prioritize development of certain product candidates at the expense of other product candidates given our limited resources. We may choose to expend our limited resources on product candidates that do not yield a successful product and fail to capitalize on product candidates that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success..

Due to the significant resources required for the development of our product candidates, we must focus on specific treatment pathways and decide which product candidates to pursue and the amount of resources to allocate to each such product candidate. For example, in the fourth quarter 2023 following a strategic review, we refocused our cellular therapeutics pipeline to continue developing T-Cell and NK cell products at the IND-enabling study stage to target oncology, autoimmune and aging related disease indications. Our decisions concerning the allocation of research, development, collaboration, management and financial resources toward particular product candidates areas may not lead to the development of any viable product and may divert resources away from better opportunities. Similarly, any decision to delay, terminate or collaborate with third parties in respect of 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 misinterpret trends in the pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical or biotechnology industry, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected. If unacceptable toxicities arise in the development of our therapeutic candidates, we could suspend or terminate our trials or the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease clinical trials or deny approval of our therapeutic candidates for any or all targeted indications. 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 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. An unfavorable outcome could leave our technology or therapeutic candidates without patent protection, allow third parties to commercialize our technology or therapeutic candidates and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or could require us or our licensors to cease using the related technology or to obtain license rights from the prevailing party in order to be able to manufacture or commercialize our therapeutic candidates without infringing third-party patent rights.

Our placental-derived cellular therapy candidates represent a novel approach to cancer, infectious and degenerative disease treatments that creates significant challenges.

We are developing a pipeline of allogeneic cellular therapeutic candidates that are derived from healthy, full-term, human donor placentas, and in certain cases, are genetically modified. Allogeneic cells are intended to be “off-the-shelf” for use in any patient. Advancing these novel therapeutic candidates creates significant challenges, including:

manufacturing cellular therapeutic candidates to our and regulatory specifications and in a timely manner to support our clinical trials, and, if approved, commercialization;
biosourcing placentas and other materials and supplies for the manufacture of our therapeutic candidates;
any variability in placental-derived cells, or a higher-rejection rate, which could ultimately affect our ability to produce therapeutics in a reliable and consistent manner and treat certain patients;
educating medical personnel regarding the potential advantages and potential disadvantages such as the side effect profile of our therapeutics, if approved, such as the potential adverse side effects related to GvHD, cytokine release syndrome, or CRS, neurotoxicity, prolonged cytopenia and neutropenic sepsis;
using medicines to manage adverse side effects of our therapeutic candidates that may not adequately control the side effects and/or may have a detrimental impact on the efficacy of the treatment;
obtaining regulatory approval, as the FDA, and other regulatory authorities have limited experience with development of allogeneic cell therapies for cancer, infectious and degenerative diseases; and
establishing sales and marketing capabilities for our therapeutic portfolio upon obtaining any regulatory approval to gain market acceptance of a novel therapy.

The gene-editing technology we use is relatively new, and if we are unable to use this technology in our intended therapeutic candidates, our revenue opportunities will be materially limited.

We use gene editing techniques to modify certain of the placental-derived cell types. We use these technologies to either reduce the risk of toxicity or improve the potential for efficacy. These technologies are relatively new, and may not be shown to be effective at achieving the expected effect in clinical studies, or may be associated with safety issues, either in our clinical development programs or

31


those of others using these novel technologies. Any issues with the novel gene editing technologies, even if not experienced by us, could negatively affect our development programs. Genetic modifications may create unintended changes to the DNA of the edited cell, such as a non-target site gene-editing, a large deletion, or a DNA translocation, any of which could lead to unwanted side-effects. For instance, the genetic modifications may create unintended changes to the DNA such as a non-target site gene-editing, a large deletion, or a DNA translocation, any of which could lead to unwanted side-effects. The gene-editing of our therapeutic candidates may also not be successful in limiting the risk of GvHD or thrombosis or in increasing affinity.

Some competitors in the allogeneic cell therapy space and more broadly in the gene therapy space have had clinical trials put on hold by the FDA. Based on findings in those clinical trials, the FDA may request additional testing, request different types of testing or even substantially revise the methodology used to evaluate clinical trials for other companies pursuing similar therapeutic avenues. We cannot control the actions of our competitors, cannot influence the results of their clinical trials and cannot know how FDA may react to a specific fact pattern arising in another clinical trial. Additional testing, different types of testing or a revised regulatory approach may delay our future clinical trials, increase costs in our future trials or otherwise preclude our trial from being given permission to proceed absent substantial time, effort and resources on our part. Additional testing, different types of testing or a revised regulatory approach may delay our clinical trials, increase costs in our trials or otherwise preclude our trial from being given permission to proceed absent substantial time, effort and resources on our part. For example, in the first quarter of 2022, we submitted an IND to investigate CYCART-19 for treatment of B-cell malignancies and in late May 2022, received formal written communication from FDA requesting additional information before we could proceed with the planned Phase 1/2 clinical trial. After assessing the status of the IND to determine an optimal path forward for the CYCART-19 program, we elected to terminate development of CYCART-19 for B-cell malignancies during the third quarter of 2023.

The gene-editing industry is rapidly developing, and our competitors may introduce new technologies that render the technologies that we employ for our therapeutic candidates obsolete or less attractive. New technology could emerge at any point in the development cycle of our therapeutic candidates. As competitors use or develop new technologies, any failures of such technology could adversely impact our programs. We also may be placed at a competitive disadvantage, and competitive pressures may force us to implement new technologies at a substantial cost. In addition, our competitors may have greater financial, technical and personnel resources that allow them to enjoy technological advantages and may in the future allow them to implement new technologies before we can. We cannot be certain that we will be able to implement technologies on a timely basis or at an acceptable cost. If we are unable to maintain technological advancements consistent with industry standards, our operations and financial condition may be adversely affected. If we are unable to maintain technological advancements consistent with industry standards, its operations and financial condition may be adversely affected.

We will rely on licensed gene editing technology for future cell therapy product candidates.

We are dependent on patents, know-how and proprietary technology, both our own and licensed from others.

While certain of these technologies are available from multiple commercial vendors, were any of these vendors to refuse to supply us, it could negatively impact our development of our modified NK cells and MLASCs, which depend on genetic modification to achieve the intended clinical benefits. Moreover, some gene editing technology that is currently available without license, could become patented or proprietary to a third party. If we are unable to obtain a license on commercially reasonable terms when needed, we could be forced to redesign our cellular therapeutics and or stop development. Any of these occurrences could have a material adverse effect on our business prospects.

Disputes may also arise between us and our current and future licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including those related to:

the scope of rights granted under the license agreement and other interpretation-related issues;
whether and the extent to which our technology and processes infringe on intellectual property of the licensor that is not subject to the licensing agreement;
our right to sublicense patent and other rights to third parties under collaborative development relationships;
our diligence obligations with respect to the use of the licensed technology in relation to our development and commercialization of our therapeutic candidates, and what activities satisfy those diligence obligations; and
the ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by our licensors and us and our partners.

If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed, or may license in the future, prevent or impair our ability to maintain our licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected therapeutic candidates.

We are generally also subject to all of the same risks with respect to protection of intellectual property that our licenses, as it is for intellectual property that we own, which are described below. If we or our current and future licensors fail to adequately protect this intellectual property, our ability to commercialize products could suffer.

32


Our therapeutic candidates are based on novel technologies, which makes it difficult to predict the time and cost of therapeutic candidate development and obtaining regulatory approval.

We have concentrated our research, development and manufacturing efforts on our placental-derived allogeneic T cell, NK cell and MLASC therapeutic candidates. We have developed our Celularity IMPACT platform, which covers biosourcing through manufacturing of cryopacked cells, and continues to invest in optimizing and improving our technologies. There can be no assurance that any development problems we experience in the future will not cause significant delays or unanticipated costs, or that such development problems can be overcome. We may also experience delays in scaling our manufacturing process when appropriate for commercialization, which may prevent us from completing future clinical studies or commercializing our therapeutics on a timely or profitable basis, if at all. We may also experience delays in scaling its manufacturing process when appropriate for commercialization, which may prevent us 42 from completing our clinical studies or commercializing our therapeutics on a timely or profitable basis, if at all. Finding a suitable dose for our cell therapeutic candidates may delay our anticipated clinical development timelines. In addition, our expectations with regard to our scalability and costs of manufacturing may vary significantly as we develop our therapeutic candidates and understands these critical factors.

The clinical study requirements of the FDA, European Medicines Agency, and other regulatory agencies and the criteria these regulators use to determine the safety and efficacy of a therapeutic candidate are determined according to the type, complexity, novelty and intended use and market of the potential therapeutics. The regulatory approval process for novel therapeutics candidates such as ours can be more complex and consequently more expensive and take longer than for other, better known or extensively studied pharmaceutical or other therapeutic candidates. In addition, under guidelines issued by the NIH, gene therapy clinical trials are also subject to review and oversight by an IBC, a local institutional committee that reviews and oversees research utilizing recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecules at that institution. Before a clinical trial can begin at any institution, that institution’s IRB, and its IBC assesses the safety of the research and identifies any potential risk to public health or the environment. While the NIH guidelines are not mandatory unless the research in question is being conducted at or sponsored by institutions receiving NIH funding of recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecule research, many companies and other institutions not otherwise subject to the NIH guidelines voluntarily follow them.

While we expect reduced variability in our allogeneic cell therapeutic candidates compared to autologous products, we do not have significant clinical data supporting any benefit of lower variability and the use of healthy donor full-term placentas, and related screening requirements, may create separate variability challenges. More generally, approvals by any regulatory agency may not be indicative of what any other regulatory agency may require for approval or what such regulatory agencies may require for approval in connection with new therapeutic candidates. Moreover, our therapeutic candidates may not perform successfully in clinical trials or may be associated with adverse events that distinguish them from the autologous therapies that have previously been approved. For instance, allogeneic T cell therapeutic candidates may result in GvHD not experienced with autologous T cell products. Even if we collect promising initial clinical data of our therapeutic candidates, longer-term data may reveal new adverse events or responses that are not durable. Unexpected clinical outcomes would significantly impact our business.

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

Undesirable or unacceptable side effects caused by our therapeutic candidates 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 other comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Results of our clinical trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects or unexpected characteristics. Approved autologous cell therapies and those under development have shown frequent rates of CRS and neurotoxicity, and adverse events have resulted in the death of patients. Our potential future therapeutic candidates may undergo genetic engineering. As these are novel technologies, errors may occur or may not present until used in humans in the clinic, and could cause adverse events. While we believe that placental-derived cells have an inherent safety profile that may limit adverse events, there can be no assurance that this is the case as these are novel therapeutics. While we believe that placental-derived cells, including our use of NK cells and ASCs, have an inherent safety profile that may limit adverse events, there can be no assurance that this is the case as these are novel therapeutics.

As we continue to evolve our placental-derived therapeutic programs, we may need to halt or modify development of certain candidates as a result of adverse events. For example, in designing APPL-001, we made certain modifications and adjustments, including a genetic modification due to an increased risk of thrombosis observed in a Phase 1 clinical trial of a legacy placental-derived MLASC done at Celgene Cellular Therapeutics.

In any of our ongoing or planned clinical trials, patients may experience severe adverse events related to our allogeneic cell therapeutic candidates, some of which may result in death. If unacceptable toxicities arise in the development of our therapeutic candidates, we could suspend or terminate our trials or the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease clinical trials or deny approval of our therapeutic candidates for any or all targeted indications. The data safety monitoring board may also suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk, including risks inferred from other unrelated immunotherapy trials. Treatment-related side effects could

33


also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled subjects to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. In addition, these side effects may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff, as toxicities resulting from cell therapy are not normally encountered in the general patient population and by medical personnel. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Our clinical trials may fail to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of any of our therapeutic candidates, which would prevent or delay regulatory approval and commercialization.

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of our cell therapeutic candidates, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive preclinical testing and clinical trials that our therapeutic candidates are both safe and effective for use in each target indication. Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and our outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our therapeutic candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials, including in any post-approval studies.

There is typically an extremely high rate of attrition from the failure of therapeutic candidates proceeding through clinical trials. Therapeutic candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy profile despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy, insufficient durability of efficacy or unacceptable safety issues, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. Most therapeutic candidates that commence clinical trials are never approved as therapeutics.

In addition, for ongoing and any future trials that may be completed, we cannot guarantee that the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities will interpret the results as we do, including, for example, any re-analysis of legacy data that we perform, and more trials could be required before we submit our therapeutic candidates for approval. To the extent that the results of the trials are not satisfactory to the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities for support of a marketing application, approval of our therapeutic candidates may be significantly delayed, or we may be required to expend significant additional resources, which may not be available to us, to conduct additional trials in support of potential approval of our therapeutic candidates.

Initial, interim and preliminary data from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient 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 initial, interim or preliminary data from our clinical studies. 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. Preliminary data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data previously published. As a result, initial, interim and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Adverse differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects.

We may not be able to submit INDs to commence additional clinical trials on the timelines we expect, and even if we are able to, the FDA may not permit such trials to proceed.

We plan to submit INDs for additional therapeutic candidates in the future. We cannot be certain that submission of an IND or IND amendment will result in the FDA allowing testing and clinical trials to begin, or that, once begun, issues will not arise that suspend or terminate such clinical trials. The manufacturing of allogeneic cell therapies remains an emerging and evolving field. Accordingly, we expect chemistry, manufacturing and control related topics, including product specification, will be a focus of IND reviews, which may delay the clearance of INDs. Additionally, even if the FDA permits the initiation of the clinical trials set forth in an IND or clinical trial application, we cannot guarantee that the FDA will not change our requirements in the future. Additionally, even if FDA permits the initiation of the clinical trials set forth in an IND or clinical trial application, we cannot guarantee that FDA will not change our requirements in the future.

We may encounter substantial delays in our clinical trials or may not be able to conduct our trials on the timelines we expect.

Clinical testing is expensive, time consuming and subject to uncertainty. We cannot guarantee that any clinical studies will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. Even if our trials begin as planned, issues may arise that could cause us or relevant regulatory authorities to suspend or terminate such clinical trials. A failure of one or more clinical studies can occur at any stage of testing, and our future clinical studies may not be successful. Events that may prevent successful or timely completion of clinical development include:

inability to generate sufficient preclinical, toxicology or other in vivo or in vitro data to support the initiation of clinical studies;

34


delays in sufficiently developing, characterizing or controlling a manufacturing process suitable for clinical trials;
difficulty sourcing healthy full-term donor placentas of sufficient quality and in sufficient quantity to meet our development needs;
delays in developing suitable assays for screening patients for eligibility for trials with respect to certain therapeutic candidates;
delays in reaching a consensus with regulatory agencies on study design;
delays in reaching agreement on acceptable terms with prospective contract research organizations, or CROs, and clinical study sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and clinical study sites;
delays in obtaining required IRB approval at each clinical study site;
imposition of a temporary or permanent clinical hold by regulatory agencies for a number of reasons;
delays in patient recruitment, difficulty collaborating with patient groups and investigators, or other issues involving patients, such as completing participation or return for post-treatment follow-up, or dropping-out;
failure by our CROs, other third parties or us to adhere to clinical study requirements;
failure to perform in accordance with the FDA’s GCP requirements or applicable regulatory guidelines in other countries;
issues with manufacturing of cellular therapeutics, including delays in manufacturing, testing, releasing, validating sufficient stable quantities of our therapeutic candidates for use in clinical studies or the inability to do any of the foregoing;
occurrence of adverse events associated with the therapeutic candidate that are viewed to outweigh its potential benefits;
changes in regulatory requirements and guidance that require amending or submitting new clinical protocols;
changes in the standard of care on which a clinical development plan was based, which may require new or additional trials;
the cost of clinical studies of our therapeutic candidates being greater than we anticipate;
negative or inconclusive results from clinical studies, which may result in us deciding, or regulators requiring us, to conduct additional clinical studies or abandon development programs; and
delays or failure to secure supply agreements with suitable raw material suppliers, or any failures by suppliers to meet its quantity or quality requirements for necessary raw materials.

Future pandemics may increase the risk of certain of the events described above and delay our development timelines. For example, in early 2020 and again in mid-2021, we experienced delays in enrolling our Phase 1 clinical trial of CYNK-001 for AML as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, in early 2020 and again in mid 2021, we experienced delays in enrolling its Phase 1 clinical trial of CYNK-001 for AML as a result of the pandemic. Any inability to successfully complete preclinical and clinical development could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to generate revenue. In addition, if we make manufacturing or formulation changes to our therapeutic candidates, we may be required to, or we may elect to conduct additional studies to bridge our modified candidates to earlier versions or may need to conduct additional studies on newly discovered candidates. Clinical study delays could also shorten any periods during which our therapeutics have patent protection and may allow our competitors to bring cell therapies to market before we do, which could impair our ability to successfully commercialize our therapeutic candidates and may harm our business and results of operations.