Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 20-F

(Mark One)

OR

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022

OR

For the transition period from to .

OR

Date of event requiring this shell company report

Commission file number: 001-40010

w

Pharvaris N.V.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

The Netherlands

(Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

Emmy Noetherweg 2

2333 BK Leiden

The Netherlands

+31 (0)71 2036 410

(Address of principal executive offices)

Berndt Modig,

Chief Executive Officer

Tel: +31 (0)71 2036 410

Emmy Noetherweg 2, 2333 BK Leiden, The Netherlands

(Name, Telephone, E-mail and/or Facsimile number and Address of Company Contact Person)

Copies to:

Sophia Hudson, P.C.

Kirkland & Ellis LLP

601 Lexington Avenue

New York, NY 10022 Phone: (212) 446-4750

Fax: (212) 446-4900

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

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act:

None

Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the issuer’s classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report.

The number of outstanding common shares as of December 31, 2022 was 33,816,459.

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

If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Yes ☐ No ☒

Note – Checking the box above will not relieve any registrant required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 from their obligations under those Sections.

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, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). ☒ Yes ☐ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or an emerging growth company.

See definition of “large accelerated filer, “accelerated filer,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

If an emerging growth company that prepares its financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, 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 which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial statements included in this filing:

If “Other” has been checked in response to the previous question, indicate by check mark which financial statement item the registrant has elected to follow. ☐ Item 17 ☐ Item 18

If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☒

Table of Contents

Pharvaris N.V.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

i

Table of Contents

ii

Table of Contents

Unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise requires, all references in this Annual Report on Form 20-F, or this Annual Report, to “Pharvaris N.V.,” “Pharvaris,” the “Company,” “we,” “our,” “ours,” “us” or similar terms refer to Pharvaris N.V. and its subsidiaries.

Presentation of Financial and Other Information

We report under International Financial Reporting Standards, or IFRS, as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board, or the IASB. None of the consolidated financial statements in this Annual Report were prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States, or United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, or U.S. GAAP. We present our consolidated financial statements in euros and in accordance with IFRS, as issued by the IASB. We have made rounding adjustments to some of the figures included in this Annual Report. Accordingly, numerical figures shown as totals in some tables may not be an arithmetic aggregation of the figures that preceded them.

Unless otherwise indicated, all references in this Annual Report to “€,” “euro,” “EUR” or “cents” are to the currency introduced at the start of the third stage of the European Economic and Monetary Union pursuant to the treaty establishing the European Community, as amended. All references to “$,” “US$” or “U.S. dollars” are to the lawful currency of the United States.

In connection with our initial public offering in the first quarter of 2021, we converted the legal form of our company under Dutch law from a private company with limited liability (besloten vennootschap met beperkte aansprakelijkheid) to a public company with limited liability (naamloze vennootschap) and changed our name from Pharvaris B.V. to Pharvaris N.V.

Market and Industry Data

The information in this Annual Report that has been sourced from third parties has been accurately reproduced and, as far as we are aware and able to ascertain from the information published by that third-party, no facts have been omitted that would render the reproduced information inaccurate or misleading. Industry publications generally state that their information is obtained from sources they believe reliable but that the accuracy and completeness of such information is not guaranteed and that the projections they contain are based on a number of significant assumptions. We are not aware of any exhaustive industry or market reports that cover or address our specific markets.

Trademarks

All trademarks, trade names and service marks appearing in this Annual Report are the property of their respective owners. Solely for convenience, the trademarks and trade names in this Annual Report are referred to without the symbols ® and ™, but such references should not be construed as any indication that their respective owners will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, their rights thereto. We do not intend to use or display other companies’ trademarks or trade names to imply a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, any other companies.

iii

Table of Contents

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report contains certain statements that are or may be forward-looking statements with respect to us, our industry and our business that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. All statements other than statements of historical fact contained in this Annual Report, including statements regarding our future financial condition, results of operations and/or business achievements, including, without limitation, statements containing the words “believe,” “anticipate,” “expect,” “estimate,” “may,” “could,” “should,” “would,” “will,” “intend” and similar expressions are forward-looking statements. We have based these forward-looking statements largely on our current expectations and projections about future events and trends that we believe may affect our financial condition, results of operations, business strategy and financial needs. Such forward-looking statements involve unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause our actual results, financial condition, performance or achievements, or industry results, to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Factors that might cause such a difference include, but are not limited to:

1

Table of Contents

You should refer to the “ITEM 3. KEY INFORMATION—D. Risk factors.” section 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. As a result of these factors, we cannot assure you that the forward-looking statements in this Annual Report will prove to be accurate. Furthermore, if our forward-looking statements prove to be inaccurate, the inaccuracy may be material. In light of the significant uncertainties in these forward-looking statements, you should not regard these statements as a representation or warranty by us or any other person that we will achieve our objectives and plans in any specified time frame or at all. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and Section 27A of the Securities Act do not protect any forward-looking statements that we make in connection with this Annual Report.

In addition, statements that “we believe” and other similar statements reflect our belief and opinions on the relevant subject. These statements are based upon information available to us as of the date of this Annual Report, and while we believe such information forms a reasonable basis for such statements, such information may be limited or incomplete, and our statements should not be read to indicate that we have conducted an exhaustive inquiry into, or review of, all potentially available relevant information. These statements are inherently uncertain and investors are cautioned not to unduly rely upon these statements.

You should read this Annual Report and the documents that we reference in this Annual Report and have filed as exhibits to the Annual Report, completely and with the understanding that our actual future results may be materially different from what we expect. We qualify all of our forward-looking statements by these cautionary statements.

ENFORCEABILITY OF JUDGMENTS

We are organized and existing under the laws of the Netherlands and, as such, Dutch private international law governs the rights of our shareholders and the civil liability of our directors and executive officers are governed in certain respects by the laws of the Netherlands. The ability of our shareholders to bring an action against us or our directors and executive officers in certain countries other than the Netherlands may be limited under applicable law.

The majority of the members of the Board are resident of countries other than the United States. All or a substantial proportion of the assets of these individuals are located outside the United States. Our assets are predominantly located outside the United States. As a result, it may not be possible for shareholders to effect service of process within the United States upon us or our directors and executive officers or to enforce judgments against us or them in U.S. courts, including judgments predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the federal securities laws of the United States. In addition, it is not clear whether a Dutch court would impose civil liability on us or any of our directors and executive officers in an original action based solely upon the federal securities laws of the United States brought in a court of competent jurisdiction in the Netherlands.

There is currently no treaty in effect between the United States and the Netherlands providing for the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments, other than arbitration awards, in civil and commercial matters. It is noted that, as of the date of this annual report, the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements of June 30, 2005 has entered into force for the Netherlands, but has not entered into force for the United States. The Hague Convention of July 2, 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters has not entered into force for either the Netherlands or the United States. Accordingly, a judgment rendered by a court in the United States, whether or not predicated solely upon U.S. securities laws, would not automatically be recognized and enforced by the competent Dutch courts. However, if a person has obtained a judgment rendered by a court in the United States that is enforceable under the laws of the United States and files a claim with the competent Dutch court, the Dutch court will in principle give binding effect to that judgment if (i) the jurisdiction of the United States court was based on a ground of jurisdiction that is generally acceptable according to international standards, (ii) the judgment by the United States court was rendered in legal proceedings that comply with the Dutch standards of proper administration of justice including sufficient safeguards (behoorlijke rechtspleging), (iii) binding effect of such judgment is not contrary to Dutch public order (openbare orde) and (iv) the judgment by the United States court is not incompatible with a decision rendered between the same parties by a Dutch court, or with a previous decision rendered between the same parties by a foreign court in a dispute that concerns the same subject and is based on the same cause, provided that the previous decision qualifies for recognition in the Netherlands. However, even if such a United States judgment is given binding effect, a claim based on that judgment may still be rejected if that judgment is not or no longer formally enforceable.

Based on the foregoing, U.S. investors may not be able to enforce against us or our directors, representatives or certain experts named herein who are residents of the Netherlands or countries other than the United States any judgments obtained in U.S. courts in civil and commercial matters, including judgments under the U.S. federal securities laws.

2

Table of Contents

PART I

ITEM 1. IDENTITY OF DIRECTORS, SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND ADVISERS

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

ITEM 2. OFFER STATISTICS AND EXPECTED TIMETABLE

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

ITEM 3. KEY INFORMATION

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below and the other information in this Annual Report before making an investment in our ordinary shares. Our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially and adversely affected if any of these risks occurs, and as a result, the market price of our ordinary shares could decline and you could lose all or part of your investment. This Annual Report also contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. See “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.” Our actual results could differ materially and adversely from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors.

Summary Risk Factors

3

Table of Contents

4

Table of Contents

Risks Related to Our Financial Position

We have a limited operating history, have generated no revenues to date and have incurred significant losses since our inception. We expect to incur losses over the next several years, will not generate revenues until we are able to commercialize our products and may never achieve profitability, while our net losses are expected to fluctuate significantly.

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history upon which you can evaluate our business and prospects. Since inception, we have incurred significant operating losses and have generated no revenues as we focused on our discovery efforts and developing our product candidates. We expect that it will be several years, if ever, before we have a product candidate ready for commercialization. To date, we have financed our operations primarily through sales of equity. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for the foreseeable future. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if and as we:

To become and remain profitable, we must develop and eventually commercialize a product or products with significant market potential. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including completing clinical trials of our product candidates, obtaining marketing approval for these product candidates and manufacturing, commercializing and selling those products for which we may obtain marketing approval. We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, we may never generate revenues that are significant or large enough to achieve profitability. If we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to become and remain profitable would decrease the value of our business and could impair our ability to raise capital, maintain our discovery and nonclinical development efforts, expand our business or continue our operations and may require us to raise additional capital that may dilute the ownership interest of shareholders. A decline in the value of our business could also cause shareholders to lose all or part of their investment.

We will need substantial additional funding to continue our operations. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on acceptable terms, we may need to delay, reduce or terminate our product development programs and may be unable to continue as a going concern and could ultimately go into insolvency.

We expect our expenses to increase in parallel with our ongoing activities, particularly as we continue our discovery and nonclinical development to identify new clinical candidates and initiate clinical trials of, and seek marketing approval for, our product candidates. In addition, if we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product sales, marketing, manufacturing and distribution. Because the outcome of any clinical trial or preclinical study is highly uncertain, we cannot reasonably estimate the actual amounts necessary to successfully complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates. If we do not have sufficient cash and cash equivalents to fund the completion of the research, nonclinical studies and clinical development of our programs, we will be required to seek a significant amount of additional funds by raising additional equity, convertible financing or non-dilutive financing such as debt financing arrangements, strategic transactions or other means. We may also delay, reduce the scope of, eliminate or divest clinical programs, partner with others or divest one or more of our activities and consider other cost reduction initiatives, such as withholding initiation or expansion of clinical trials or research and slowing down patient recruitment of clinical trials. We may also be required to sell or license to others technologies or clinical product candidates or programs that we would prefer to develop and commercialize ourselves. In the event we are not able to generate sufficient funds from these measures, we may be unable to continue as a going concern, our business, financial condition and/or results of operations could be materially and adversely affected and we may ultimately go into insolvency.

5

Table of Contents

In addition, even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans, we may seek additional capital if market conditions are favorable or if we have specific strategic considerations. Our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including:

There can be no assurance that funding will be available in a timely manner, on favorable terms, or at all, or that such funds, if raised, would be sufficient to enable us to continue to implement our long-term business strategy. Also, general conditions in the global economy, including market volatility resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic or other factors, could adversely impact our ability to access capital as and when needed. If we are unable to obtain sufficient funding in a timely manner or on commercially acceptable terms, we may have to delay, reduce the scope of, eliminate or divest clinical programs, partner with others or divest one or more of our activities, and consider other cost reduction initiatives, such as downsizing our operations, withholding initiation or expansion of clinical trials or research, and slowing down patient recruitment of clinical trials. In the event we are not able to generate sufficient funds, we may be unable to continue as a going concern and our business, financial condition and/or results of operations could be materially and adversely affected and could reduce the price of our ordinary shares and we may ultimately go into insolvency. In addition, any perceived or actual inability by us to finance our clinical development program and other business activities, including as a result of required milestone and royalty payments to third parties, may cause the market price of our ordinary shares to decline.

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our existing shareholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to our product candidates or technologies.

We may seek additional funding through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations and/or licensing arrangements. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a holder of our ordinary shares. The incurrence of indebtedness and/or the issuance of certain equity securities could result in increased fixed payment obligations and could also result in certain additional restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt and/or issue additional equity, limitations on our ability to acquire or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. In addition, issuance of additional equity securities, or the possibility of such issuance, may cause the market price of our ordinary shares to decline. In the event that we enter into collaborations and/or licensing arrangements in order to raise capital, we may be required to accept unfavorable terms, including relinquishing or licensing to a third-party on unfavorable terms our rights to technologies or product candidates that we otherwise would seek to develop or commercialize ourselves or potentially reserve for future potential arrangements when we might be able to achieve more favorable terms. Additional funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to obtain funding on a timely basis, we may be required to significantly curtail one or more of programs or cease operations altogether.

Exchange rate fluctuations could negatively affect our financial condition.

Our consolidated financial statements are presented in euros. We mainly operate via our Dutch and Swiss entities, but we also conduct business in the United States and the United Kingdom. Therefore, we have expenses denominated in U.S. dollars, Swiss Francs and British pound sterling in connection with, among other things, our sponsored clinical trials, purchase of drug product for our clinical trials, process development and the prosecution and maintenance of our intellectual property portfolio. As a result, our business and share price may be affected by fluctuations between the euro and the U.S. dollar, the euro and the Swiss franc and the British pound sterling, which may have a significant impact on our reported results of operations and cash flows from period to period.

6

Table of Contents

We have identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. If we are unable to successfully remediate these material weaknesses and to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud, and as a result, shareholders could lose confidence in our financial and other public reporting, which would harm our business and the trading price of our ordinary shares.

Effective internal controls over financial reporting are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and, together with adequate disclosure controls and procedures, are designed to prevent fraud. Any failure to implement the required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires management of public companies to develop and implement internal control over financial reporting and to evaluate the effectiveness thereof. A material weakness is a deficiency or a combination of deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. In connection with the preparation of our consolidated financial statements as of and for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022, we identified material weaknesses in the design of our internal control over financial reporting across the principles for each component of the COSO framework at the entity level (i.e. control environment, risk assessment, monitoring, information & communication and control activities) and accordingly, across our business and IT processes. The material weaknesses that we identified related to:

Although several oversight and control activities are performed, not all activities are formalized and documented properly throughout the year. In addition, where control activities are dependent on information used in a control, we have not always performed or documented controls to determine the completeness and accuracy of such information. We also did not always have controls in place to monitor control activities and identify control deficiencies. To remediate the identified material weaknesses we have taken, and continue to take, various actions including, among other things: (i) hiring additional qualified accounting and financial reporting personnel, (ii) further developing and documenting our risk assessment matrix and scoping, to identify key processes and controls, (iii) further developing and implementing our formal policies, processes, and internal controls relating to our key processes, including financial reporting; and (iv) selecting a new accounting system that will be implemented in 2023 and that will improve the application controls over information technology and reduce the manual nature of execution of key controls throughout significant business processes. As we continue with the remediation of our material weaknesses, we may determine that additional or other measures may be necessary to address and remediate the material weaknesses, depending on the circumstances and the Company needs. We will not be able to fully remediate these material weaknesses until these steps have been completed and have been operating effectively for a sufficient period of time. We cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully remediate these material weaknesses or that other material weaknesses will not be discovered in the future. If we do not remediate these issues or if we fail to design and operate effective internal controls in the future, it could result in material misstatements in our financial statements and potentially require us to restate our financial statements which may result in the trading value of our ordinary shares being materially and adversely affected.

Our management is required to assess the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting on an annual basis pursuant to SOX 404(a). However, our independent registered public accounting firm was not required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and will not be so required for as long as we are an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act. We could be an “emerging growth company” until December 31, 2026 (the last day of our fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of our initial public offering in February 2021). The rules governing the standards that must be met for management to assess our internal control over financial reporting are complex and require significant documentation, testing and possible remediation. Our management may not be able to effectively and timely implement controls and procedures that adequately respond to the increased regulatory compliance and reporting requirements that are applicable to us as a U.S. public company and an assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting by an independent registered public accounting firm in accordance with the provisions of Section 404 could detect additional significant deficiencies or material weaknesses that our management’s assessment might not. Undetected material weaknesses in our internal controls could lead to financial statement restatements and require us to incur the expense of remediation. Investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, which could cause the market price of our ordinary shares to decline and also restrict our future access to the capital markets.

We could be also subject to sanctions or investigations by Nasdaq, the SEC or other regulatory authorities.

We operate in many jurisdictions with highly complex and varied tax regimes. Changes in tax rules, new or revised legislation or the outcome of tax assessments and audits could cause a material adverse effect on our results.

We operate in different jurisdictions with highly complex and varied tax regimes. Changes in tax rules, new or revised legislation or the outcome of tax assessments and audits could have a material adverse effect on our results.

We are subject to taxation in the Netherlands, Switzerland, the United States, and other jurisdictions. Our future effective income tax rate may be variable and depends on changes in the level of operating results within various local jurisdictions and changes in the applicable taxation rates of these jurisdictions. If legislators, tax authorities, or government agencies in the jurisdictions in which we operate were to change applicable tax laws and regulations (for example, as a result of the various global, regional and local initiatives to reform the

7

Table of Contents

international tax framework, such as the base erosion and profit shifting project undertaken by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development and G20 Inclusive Framework and the two-pillar solution to address the tax challenges arising from the digitalization of the economy) or successfully challenge the manner in which our income taxes are currently recognized or calculated or the transfer pricing policies employed by us (including policies set forth in any advance pricing agreements entered into with any taxing authorities), our income tax expense could increase, which would adversely impact our cash flow and profitability.

In addition, tax benefits or benefits from net operating losses accumulated in prior years in some jurisdictions may not be available in the future due to changes in the local jurisdictions or credits on net operating losses no longer available due to either full utilization or expiration of the statute of limitations in such jurisdictions. As a result, our future effective tax rate could increase and/or our benefits from carrying forward net operating losses could affect our deferred tax assets in certain countries in the coming years. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon, among other things, our ability to generate future taxable income that is sufficient to utilize in certain jurisdictions loss carry-forwards or tax credits before their expiration or our ability to implement prudent and feasible tax optimization strategies.

Furthermore, in many of the jurisdictions in which we operate, the tax laws and regulations are very complex and are open to different interpretations and application. The final determination of tax by means of an assessment or an audit could be materially different from our tax provisions and accruals and may negatively impact our financial results.

Risks Related to the Development and Clinical Testing of Our Product Candidates

We have experienced, and may continue to experience, setbacks in our clinical trials, including as a result of the recent clinical holds. Moreover, we have established proof-of-mechanism for deucrictibant and have designed and advanced our future clinical development program based on a clinical trial that assessed a surrogate endpoint, as well as modelling of our results from that trial with additional in vitro and in vivo data and comparisons to published results for other currently available products from different trials. We may not be able to replicate these results or analyses in future clinical trials that assess the endpoints required to obtain regulatory approval or we may have inconclusive or negative results. Any setbacks in our clinical development program could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Clinical trials are expensive and complex. Each trial can take many years to complete and have uncertain outcomes. Failure of a product can occur at any stage of the testing, including later phases of clinical trials despite having progressed through preclinical and nonclinical studies and early phase clinical trials, for a variety of reasons, such as changes in formulation of the product, differences in patient populations, changes in trial and manufacturing protocols and complexities of larger, multi-center trials, among others. The results from nonclinical studies or early phase clinical trials of a product candidate may not predict the results that will be obtained in later phase clinical trials of the product candidate. For example, we have established proof-of-mechanism for deucrictibant and have designed and advanced our future clinical development program based on a clinical trial that assessed a surrogate assessment, as well as modelling of our results from that trial with additional in vitro and in vivo data and comparisons to published results for other currently available products from different trials. We may not be able to replicate these results or analyses in future clinical trials that assess the endpoints required to obtain regulatory approval. We, the FDA or other applicable regulatory authorities may suspend or terminate clinical trials of a product candidate at any time for numerous reasons, including, but not limited to, a belief that subjects participating in such trials are being exposed to unacceptable health risks or adverse side effects, or other adverse experiences or findings. For instance, in August 2022, we announced that the FDA has placed clinical holds on our clinical trials of deucrictibant in the U.S. under two Investigational New Drug, or IND, applications for the treatment of HAE (on-demand and prophylactic) based on its review of nonclinical data. The clinical hold letters stated that the nonclinical observations were unlikely due to B2 receptor antagonism, the primary mechanism of action of our compound. However, the FDA requested that we conduct an additional long-term rodent toxicology study and update the investigator’s brochure. The protocol for this nonclinical study has been reviewed by the FDA and the study has commenced. The FDA also agreed to partially lift the hold on our on-demand IND to allow the two remaining U.S. participants in our RAPIDe-1 trial to complete treatment, but there can be no assurance that both clinical holds will be fully lifted.

Even if clinical trials are successful, before granting approval to any product candidate, regulatory authorities can request additional clinical trials, including with larger patient numbers, find deficiencies in the manufacturing processes or facilities upon which we rely and change their approval policies or regulations or their prior guidance to us during clinical development in a manner that renders our clinical data insufficient for approval. We have, and may continue to experience numerous setbacks during, or as a result of, the clinical trial process that could delay or prevent the commencement, conduct and completion of clinical trials or the commercialization of our current and any future programs, such as:

8

Table of Contents

Before commencing clinical trials, we are required to apply to country-level regulators before opening sites in their countries. If we are not able to timely receive their approval or enroll additional patients at sites in other countries, we may not be able to complete CHAPTER-1 on our anticipated timeline.

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

If we suffer any material delays, negative results or other setbacks in our clinical trials or nonclinical studies or if the clinical holds on our clinical trials of deucrictibant in the U.S. are not resolved or if any of our other clinical trials are put on clinical hold or terminated, we may incur increased costs or be unable to continue development of deucrictibant, including our product candidates PHVS416 and PHVS719, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We are heavily dependent on the success of our product candidates PHVS416 and PHVS719, which are in mid-stage development. We have released topline data from our RAPIDe-1 study demonstrating efficacy in our Phase 2 clinical trial for treatment of HAE attacks on demand using PHVS416, but have not completed our assessment of efficacy for prevention of HAE attacks using PHVS719. We cannot give any assurance that either product candidate, or any other compounds in development, will successfully complete clinical trials, receive regulatory approval, be commercialized, or be differentiated in the market. If we are unable to successfully commercialize our product candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects would be materially adversely affected.

We do not have any drugs that have received regulatory approval and may never be able to develop marketable products. We expect that a substantial portion of our efforts and expenses for the foreseeable future will be devoted to the clinical development of our product candidates, PHVS416 and PHVS719, and as a result, our business currently depends heavily on the successful development, regulatory approval and commercialization of these product candidates. To date we only have data from preclinical studies, Phase 1 clinical trials in healthy volunteers, and a Phase 2 trial of PHVS416. However, we have not conducted a head-to-head comparison of icatibant or any other drug candidate to deucrictibant in a clinical trial. We have compared the published data for icatibant to data from our Phase 1 clinical trial of deucrictibant and Phase 2 trial of PHVS416 (RAPIDe-1). Accordingly, the value of comparisons to icatibant in this Annual Report may be limited because they are not derived from a head-to-head trial and they are from trials that were conducted under different protocols at different sites and at different times. Without head-to-head data, we will be unable to make comparative claims for our product candidates, if approved. Future clinical trials may not confirm our analyses to date. The development of PHVS416 and PHVS719 has been and will continue to be a time-consuming and costly process and may leave us with insufficient resources to advance other programs and product candidates. We cannot be certain that any deucrictibant-containing product candidate, including PHVS416 and PHVS719, will receive regulatory approval or be successfully commercialized, even if we receive regulatory approval.

The research, testing, manufacturing, safety, efficacy, labeling, approval, sale, advertising promotion, commercialization and distribution of our product candidates are, and will remain, subject to comprehensive regulation by the FDA in the United States, the European Union and the EMA in Europe and regulatory authorities in other countries, with regulations differing from country to country. We will not be permitted to market our drug candidates in the United States or Europe until we receive approval of a New Drug Application, or NDA, from the FDA or a marketing authorization, or MA, from the European Commission (based on the positive opinion of the EMA), respectively. We have not submitted any marketing authorization applications for any of our product candidates. NDAs and MAs must include extensive nonclinical and clinical data and supporting information to establish the drug candidate’s safety and effectiveness for each desired indication. The nonclinical and clinical development of our product candidates is susceptible to the risk of failure inherent at any stage of drug development, including failure to demonstrate efficacy or safety; the occurrence of adverse events that are severe or medically or commercially unacceptable; our or our partners’ failure to comply with trial protocols, applicable regulatory requirements, and industry standards; or a determination by the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority that a product candidate may not continue

9

Table of Contents

development or be approved in accordance with our development plans or at all. We cannot guarantee that any nonclinical studies and clinical trials will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all, or that the results of such trials will be sufficient to support regulatory approval for our product candidates. Failure to obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates PHVS416 and PHVS719 or any other product candidate in the United States, Europe or other jurisdictions will prevent us from commercializing and marketing these products in such jurisdictions.

Even if we were to successfully obtain approval from the FDA, EMA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for our product candidates, any approval might contain significant limitations related to use restrictions for specified age groups, warnings, precautions or contraindications or may be subject to burdensome post-approval study or risk management requirements. We may also be limited in our ability to advertise, promote and/or market our product candidates in a way that successfully differentiates them in the market. For example, we may not be able to position our product as safer, more effective, more convenient or better for a patient’s quality of life. Furthermore, we will still need to develop a commercial infrastructure, or otherwise develop relationships with collaborators to commercialize, establish a viable pricing structure and obtain coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors, including government healthcare programs. If we, or our collaborators, are unable to successfully commercialize any product candidate, we may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to continue our business.

Our business and operations, including ongoing and planned clinical trials, may be adversely affected by a variety of events outside our control, including pandemics, epidemics or outbreaks of infectious diseases, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, and political instability, such as the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.

A wide variety of events beyond our control, including natural or man-made disasters, power shortages, fires, extreme weather conditions, pandemics, epidemics or outbreaks of infectious diseases, political instability or other events could disrupt our business or operations or those of our development partners, manufacturers, regulators or other third parties with whom we conduct business now or in the future. These events may cause businesses and government agencies to be shut down, supply chains to be interrupted, slowed, or rendered inoperable, and individuals to become ill, quarantined, or otherwise unable to work and/or travel due to health reasons or governmental restrictions. The ongoing spread of variants of the COVID-19 virus may continue to interrupt, or delay, our clinical trial activities, regulatory reviews, manufacturing activities and supply chain. The COVID-19 outbreak delayed, and may continue to delay, enrollment in our clinical trials due to prioritization of hospital resources towards the outbreak or other factors, and some patients may be unwilling to enroll in our trials or be unable to comply with clinical trial protocols if quarantines impede patient movement or interrupt healthcare services, which would delay our ability to conduct clinical trials or release clinical trial results and could delay our ability to obtain regulatory approvals and commercialize our product candidates. For example, in 2020, we experienced an approximate two-month delay in starting the enrollment of our now completed Phase 1 multiple ascending dose study of deucrictibant in healthy volunteers as a result of COVID-19. In addition, even with our distributed operations, employee vaccinations and our observation of social distancing measures, there remains the possibility that key personnel may become ill or are otherwise unable to work, which could affect our operations.

Furthermore, the spread of an infectious disease, such as COVID-19, may affect the operations of key governmental agencies, such as the FDA, which may delay the development of our product candidates, and may also result in the inability of our suppliers to deliver components or raw materials, and the inability of our CDMOs to provide supplies of our product candidates for our planned clinical trials, on a timely basis or at all. In addition, it may impact the ability of our CROs, including nonclinical CROs, to provide services to support our clinical program. Further, hospitals may reduce staffing and reduce or postpone certain treatments in response to the spread of an infectious disease. Such events may result in a period of business disruption, and in reduced operations, or doctors and medical providers may be unwilling to participate in our clinical trials, any of which could materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. The extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic impacts our business will depend on future developments, which are uncertain and cannot be predicted, including new information which may emerge concerning the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic and the actions to contain COVID-19 or treat its impact, including among other things, the effectiveness and outreach of COVID-19 vaccines. If we are unable to meet our milestones it might jeopardize our funding opportunities.

In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic caused, and is likely to result in further, significant disruptions and uncertainties in global financial markets, which may reduce our ability to access capital on favorable terms or at all. A recession, depression or other sustained adverse market event resulting from the spread of COVID-19 could also materially and adversely affect our business and the value of our ordinary shares. The ultimate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic or a similar health epidemic is uncertain and subject to change. To the extent the COVID-19 pandemic adversely affects our business and financial results, it may also have the effect of heightening many of the other risks described in this “Risk Factors” section, such as those relating to our clinical and nonclinical development operations, manufacturing activities, the supply chain for our ongoing and planned clinical trials and our ability and need to raise additional capital to support our operations.

Moreover, unforeseen global events, such as the armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine, could adversely impact our business and operations. The invasion of Ukraine and the retaliatory measures that have been taken, or could be taken in the future, by the United States, NATO, and other countries have created global security concerns that could result in a regional conflict and also adversely affect our ability to conduct ongoing and future clinical trials of our product candidates. For example, our RAPIDe-1 and CHAPTER-1 studies include a significant number of patients in Germany, Poland and Bulgaria. A further escalation of the conflict in Ukraine may potentially impact our ability to complete our ongoing and planned clinical trials in these countries on a timely basis, or at all. Clinical trials in these countries could be suspended or terminated, and we may be prevented from obtaining data on patients already enrolled at affected sites. Our ability to conduct clinical trials in these regions may also become restricted under applicable sanctions laws, which may require us to identify alternative trial sites. Any of the foregoing could impede the execution of our clinical development plans, which could materially harm our business.

10

Table of Contents

Disruptions at FDA, EMA and other government agencies caused by funding shortages or global health concerns such as COVID-19 could hinder their ability to hire, retain or deploy key leadership and other personnel, or otherwise prevent new or modified products from being developed, cleared or approved or commercialized in a timely manner or at all, which could negatively impact our business.

The ability of the FDA, EMA and other comparable government agencies to review and clear or approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect their ability to perform routine functions. Government funding of government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA, EMA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs or modifications to cleared or approved drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For instance, in response to COVID-19, on March 10, 2020, the FDA announced its intention to postpone most foreign inspections of manufacturing facilities and products. Even though the FDA has since resumed standard inspection operations of domestic facilities where feasible, any resurgence of the virus or emergence of new variants may lead to further inspectional delays. Foreign pre-approval and for-cause inspection assignments that are not deemed mission-critical remain temporarily postponed, while those deemed “mission-critical” are being considered for inspection on a case-by-case basis. Regulatory authorities outside the United States may adopt similar restrictions or other policy measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, regulatory agencies have generally reduced face-to-face interactions relative to the pre-pandemic situation which may impact our ability to reach consensus with regulators. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns continue to prevent the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We may not be able to design and develop an extended-release formulation.

Our current strategy includes developing an extended-release formulation for the deucrictibant prophylactic indication (PHVS719). To date, we have studied a prospective extended-release formulation only in a single clinical study in healthy volunteers. We are planning to conduct an open-label, multiple dose study to assess the PK and safety of the extended-release formulation. If we pursue this development strategy, we expect to file for and obtain patents covering the specific formulation developed, as well as its use for the treatment of HAE. There can, however, be no assurance that such an extended-release formulation will be successfully developed in a timely manner, that adequate patent protection can be obtained or that any such formulation would provide us with a commercial advantage. If we are unable to develop this extended-release formulation on our own, we may need to in-license patented technology to do so. Many third parties have patents covering technologies and manufacturing processes needed to develop and make extended-release formulations and there can be no assurance that we would be able to obtain rights to such patents on attractive financial terms, if at all.

If we experience delays or difficulties in the enrollment of patients in clinical trials, our receipt of necessary regulatory approvals could be delayed or prevented and expenses for development of our product candidates could increase.

We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials for our product candidates if we are unable to locate and enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in these trials to demonstrate safety and efficacy. We are currently conducting mid-stage clinical trials: we have completed a Phase 2 trial in the on-demand setting and have an ongoing Phase 2 trial in the prophylactic setting which we expect will provide critical data for dose selection for late phase clinical trials. We do not know whether planned or ongoing clinical trials will enroll subjects in a timely fashion, require redesign of essential trial elements or be completed on our projected schedule. In particular, because we are focused on patients with HAE, which is a rare disease, our ability to enroll eligible patients in trials may be limited or may result in slower enrollment than we anticipate. In addition, competitors have ongoing clinical trials for product candidates being studied for the same indications as our product candidates, and patients who would otherwise be eligible for our clinical trials may instead enroll in clinical trials of our competitors’ product candidates. Patient enrollment can also be affected by a number of other factors including:

11

Table of Contents

Our inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our clinical trials would result in significant delays, may result in increased development costs for our product candidates, and could also require us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether, any of which could cause a material adverse effect on our business, financial position and results of operations.

Clinical trials of our product candidates may not uncover all possible adverse effects that patients may experience.

Clinical trials are conducted in a limited sample of the patient population for the disease or condition under study; the actual patient population may have significantly more variability than the clinical trial subjects. In addition, clinical trials are, by design, limited with respect to the number of subjects, the duration of exposure to the product candidate, and by inclusion and exclusion criteria to a restricted composition of the overall patient population. As a result of such limitations, we cannot be sure that all side effects of our product candidates may be uncovered during our clinical trials or that a complete safety profile of our product candidates will be identified. Further, even larger clinical trials may not identify rare serious adverse effects or the duration of such studies may not be of sufficient length to identify when those events may occur. There have been other products that have been approved by the regulatory authorities but for which safety concerns have been uncovered following approval. Such safety concerns have led to labeling changes, the imposition of other regulatory requirements (e.g., Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy or REMs, or post-authorization safety studies, or PASS) or withdrawal of products from the market, and any of our product candidates may be subject to similar risks.

Although to date we have not seen evidence of significant safety concerns with our product candidates currently in clinical trials, patients treated with our products, if approved, may experience adverse reactions and it is possible that the FDA or other regulatory authorities may ask for additional safety data as a condition of, or in connection with, our efforts to obtain approval of our product candidates. If safety events occur or are identified after our product candidates reach the market, we may, or regulatory authorities may require us to amend the labeling of our products, institute a REMs or PASS, recall our products or even withdraw approval for our products.

Clinical development is a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier studies and trials as well as data from any interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials may not be predictive of future trial results. Clinical failure can occur at any stage of clinical development.

Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. Although product candidates may demonstrate promising results in early clinical (human) trials and nonclinical (animal) studies, they may not prove to be safe or effective in subsequent clinical trials. For example, the results of animal studies may not accurately predict human experience. Likewise, early clinical trials may not be predictive of eventual safety or effectiveness results in larger-scale pivotal clinical trials. In this Annual Report we discuss the potency of deucrictibant as shown in preclinical, Phase 1 clinical trials, and a single Phase 2 clinical trial (RAPIDe-1). Potency as used in this Annual Report refers to the amount of drug required to produce a pharmacological effect of given intensity and is not a measure of therapeutic efficacy. We have released topline data demonstrating efficacy and tolerability in a Phase 2 clinical trial for treatment of attacks in our RAPIDe-1 study but have not completed assessment of efficacy for prevention of attacks in our CHAPTER-1 study. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials, as well as data from interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials, may not be predictive of the results of ongoing or future clinical trials.

In addition, the studies and trials of other products with similar mechanisms of action to our product candidates may not be predictive of our clinical trial results. There can be significant variability in safety and/or efficacy results between different trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial protocols, differences in composition of the patient populations, adherence to the dosing regimen and other trial protocols and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. Product candidates in later phase clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through nonclinical studies and earlier clinical trials. In addition to the safety and efficacy trials of any product candidate, clinical trial failures may result from a multitude of factors including flaws in trial design, dose selection, placebo effect and patient enrollment criteria. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials, and it is possible that our product candidates will as well which may have an adverse effect on our business and the value of the ordinary shares.

We may not be able to conduct, or contract others to conduct, animal testing in the future, which could harm our research and development activities.

Certain laws and regulations relating to drug development require us to test our product candidates in pre- and nonclinical animals before initiating clinical trials involving humans. Pre- and nonclinical animal testing activities have been the subject of controversy and adverse publicity. Animal rights groups and other organizations and individuals have attempted to stop animal testing activities by pressing for legislation and regulation in these areas and by disrupting these activities through protests and other means. To the extent the activities of these groups are successful, our research and development activities may be interrupted or delayed. In addition, there is a constrained supply of some types of animals for research and nonclinical studies which has arisen as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic. This reduction in supply and the prioritization for COVID-19-related studies have severely restricted the availability of some types of animals for other pharmaceutical development programs and has the potential to significantly delay the nonclinical toxicology and developmental and reproductive toxicity studies.

12

Table of Contents

Risks Related to Regulatory Approval of Our Clinical Development Programs and Our Product Candidates

Clinical development is subject to extensive regulation, which can be costly and time-consuming to comply with, and we may not obtain approvals for performing clinical trials or for marketing any of our product candidates.

We are not permitted to conduct clinical trials with or market any product candidate until we obtain authorization from the appropriate regulatory authorities. We must obtain authorization for conducting clinical trials with any product candidate and for marketing any product candidate from the appropriate regulatory authority of each jurisdiction in which we wish to perform clinical trials with or market our product candidates.

Since the 1990s, many companies have tried but failed to discover oral B2 antagonists, as the bradykinin- B2-receptor proved to be a difficult target for the development of orally available antagonists. Current treatment guidelines also recommend against the use of the traditionally used oral HAE medications, such as antifibrinolytics (tranexamic acid or epsilon aminocaproic acid), due to limited efficacy. As our product candidates are based on novel technologies, it is difficult to predict the time or costs associated with the regulatory approval process or be certain of our ability to successfully commence, conduct, and complete clinical development, or obtain the necessary regulatory and reimbursement approvals required for the commercialization of our product candidates PHVS416 and PHVS719. As discussed under “—Risks Related to the Development and Clinical Testing of Our Product Candidates—We may experience setbacks in our clinical trials, including delays in commencing, conducting or completing our clinical trials, as well as inconclusive or negative results, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects,” we or our partners may experience any number of unfavorable outcomes during or as a result of nonclinical studies and clinical trials which could delay or prevent regulatory approval of our product candidates, or negatively impact our management’s credibility, our value and our operating results.

We may invest substantial time and resources in preclinical and nonclinical studies, clinical trials, manufacturing and the preparation and submission of various regulatory applications without any assurance that we will obtain regulatory approval or recoup our investment. The FDA and other regulatory authorities exercise substantial discretion with respect to the development and approval of drug product candidates. The number, size and design of nonclinical studies and clinical trials that will be required for regulatory approval will vary depending on the program, the primary indication and the specific regulations and guidance documents applicable to any particular program. The FDA and other regulatory authorities can delay, limit or deny (i) clinical trial development (e.g., placing a clinical trial under clinical hold) and (ii) approval of a program for many reasons, including:

Should any of these or other factors affecting our development programs or product candidates occur, regulatory approval of our product candidates could be denied, delayed or have conditions placed upon it. Failure to obtain regulatory approval in a timely manner, in a limited manner or at all would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects.

Additionally, effective as of January 31, 2020, the United Kingdom withdrew from the European Union, a process referred to as “Brexit”. As a result of Brexit, commercializing our product candidates in the United Kingdom would require us to obtain separate marketing approvals from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, or the MHRA, instead of single marketing approvals obtained from the European Commission which, in turn, are based on the positive opinion of the European Medicines Agency, or the EMA. With significant regulatory oversight shifted from the EMA to the MHRA, and the MHRA having limited capacities and resources, obtaining marketing approvals for our product candidates in the United Kingdom may take longer than it would take in the European Union. Any delay in obtaining, or an inability to obtain, any marketing approvals, as a result of Brexit or otherwise, would prevent us from commercializing our product candidates in the United Kingdom and restrict our ability to generate revenue and achieve and sustain profitability. If any of these outcomes occur, we may be forced to restrict or delay efforts to seek regulatory approval in the United Kingdom for any of our product candidates, which could significantly and materially harm our business.

There can be no assurance that we will be able to maintain orphan drug status.

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a product as an orphan drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the U.S., or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the U.S. where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the U.S. In the European Union, after a recommendation from the EMA’s Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products, the European Commission grants orphan drug designation to promote the development of products that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition either affecting not more than five in 10,000 persons in the European Union or when, without incentives, it is unlikely that marketing of the medicine would generate sufficient returns to justify the investment needed for its development. Orphan drug

13

Table of Contents

exclusivity confers market exclusivity, subject to certain limitations, upon the first product to receive marketing approval by the relevant regulatory authority for the jurisdiction and entails the right to market exclusively the product for the specified indication, during a maximum of ten years for the European Union and during a period of seven years in the United States. The period of exclusivity in the European Union may be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, the product no longer meets the criteria for orphan drug designation if, among other things, it is established that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify market exclusivity.

On March 18, 2022, the FDA granted orphan drug designation to PHA121 (deucrictibant), the active ingredient in our PHVS416 and PHVS719 product candidates for treatment of bradykinin-mediated angioedema. Even though we have obtained orphan drug exclusivity for deucrictibant in the U.S., an approval may be granted to other applicants of a similar product for the same indication if we are unable to supply sufficient quantities of the product, we consent to such an approval, or if the product of a second applicant is deemed to be clinically superior to our product. Changes to the current regulatory frameworks governing orphan drugs may also impact existing and future market exclusivities provided as a result of orphan drug designation. Even if we were to succeed in maintaining market exclusivity for products through orphan drug status, the orphan drug regulations would not preclude competitors from developing or marketing different products for the same indications to which our programs are directed, or from independently developing versions of our products for different indications. Further, we may lose orphan drug exclusivity if the FDA determines that the request for designation was materially defective. If we fail to obtain or maintain orphan exclusivity for deucrictibant or any future products, or if the commercial value of market exclusivity is diminished, our competitive position or financial and commercial prospects could be materially adversely affected.

If we fail to comply with ongoing regulatory obligations and restrictions following regulatory approval of any product candidate, regulatory authorities may take enforcement action against us, for example, any regulatory approval granted could be withdrawn or revoked and sale of any products could be suspended or financial penalties could be imposed.

If any of our product candidates are approved for commercialization by the FDA or another regulatory authority, we would be subject to extensive regulatory requirements over, among other things, product manufacturing, testing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, marketing, distribution, export, import, adverse event reporting and record keeping. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-commercialization information and reports, drug establishment registration and drug listing requirements, current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, relating to manufacturing, quality control, quality assurance and corresponding maintenance of records and documents. In addition, we would be subject to other requirements regarding the distribution of drug samples to physicians. We and our suppliers, CDMOs and contract testing laboratories would also be subject to inspection by the FDA or other regulatory authorities to determine compliance with these requirements. In addition, facilities in the European Union that manufacture any of our product candidates must be licensed by the relevant regulatory authorities. In the United States, there are also certain state requirements with respect to drug manufacturing and distribution with which we must comply.

The FDA, or other regulatory authorities, may also impose significant limitations on the use or marketing of our approved product candidates, which could reduce the potential market for any products. The FDA and other regulatory authorities closely regulate the post-approval advertising, promotion, and commercialization of drugs to ensure drugs are marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. The FDA imposes stringent restrictions on manufacturers’ communications regarding use of their products and if we promote our products beyond their approved indications or in other ways that violate FDA requirements, we may be subject to enforcement action for, among other things, off-label promotion. In the EU, promotion of prescription-only drugs to the general public as well as off-label promotion are strictly prohibited and can result in significant fines and reputational damage. For the United States, alleged, or potential violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act relating to the promotion of prescription drugs may lead to investigations alleging violations of federal and state health care fraud and abuse laws, as well as state consumer protection laws. Advertising, promotion, and marketing activities may also give rise to litigation by competitors.

The FDA, or other regulatory authorities, may also impose requirements for costly post-commercialization studies or clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of an approved drug. Previously unknown problems with the drug may result in restrictions on the commercialization of the product and could include withdrawal of the drug from the market.

In addition, as discussed under “—Risks Related to the Development and Clinical Testing of Our Product Candidates—We and our partners may be subject to new legislation, regulation, regulatory proposals and healthcare payor initiatives that may increase our costs of compliance and adversely affect our or our partners’ ability to market our products, obtain collaborators and raise capital,” new statutory requirements or additional regulations or initiatives may be enacted. 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, which would adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations. Failure to comply with the requirements of the FDA and other applicable regulatory authorities may also subject us to administrative or judicially imposed sanctions, including civil and criminal penalties, injunctions, product seizure or recall, import bans, restrictions on the conduct of our operations, total or partial suspension of production and refusal to approve a pending NDA, and financial penalties. If we are subject to any of these sanctions, our competitive position or financial and commercial prospects could be materially adversely affected.

We and our partners may be subject to new legislation, regulation, regulatory proposals and healthcare payor initiatives that may increase our costs of compliance and adversely affect our or our partners’ ability to market our products, obtain collaborators and raise capital.

In various jurisdictions, including the United States, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, subject us to more stringent drug labeling and post- commercialization testing or restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability, or the ability of our future collaborators, to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval.

14

Table of Contents

Among policy makers and payors, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and/or expanding access. In the United States, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over the manner in which drug manufacturers set prices for their marketed products. For instance, recently, President Biden signed into law the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, which included several measures intended to lower the cost of prescription drugs and limit out-of-pocket spending, including by requiring drug manufacturers to pay rebates to Medicare if they increase prices faster than inflation for drugs used by Medicare beneficiaries.

Further, in the United States, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, collectively, the ACA, enacted in 2010, has had a significant impact on the healthcare industry. The ACA increased federal oversight of private health insurance plans and included a number of provisions designed to reduce Medicare expenditures and the cost of health care generally, to reduce fraud and abuse, and to provide access to increased health coverage. Since its enactment there have been judicial, Presidential and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA, and we expect there will be additional challenges and amendments to the ACA. In addition, the Trump administration took several executive actions, including the issuance of a number of executive orders, that could impose significant burdens on, or otherwise materially delay, the FDA’s ability to engage in routine regulatory and oversight activities such as implementing statutes through rulemaking, issuance of guidance, and review and approval of marketing applications. An under-staffed FDA could result in delays in the FDA’s responsiveness or in its ability to review submissions or applications within the established Prescription Drug User Fee Act time frames, issue regulations or guidance, or implement or enforce regulatory requirements in a timely fashion or at all. While the Biden administration has proposed to repeal, or delayed implementation of, certain of the actions taken by the Trump administration, in the coming years, legislative and regulatory changes could be made to governmental health programs that could significantly impact pharmaceutical companies and the success of our product candidates. As such, we cannot predict what effect the ACA or other healthcare reform initiatives that may be adopted in the future will have on our business.

In some countries outside the United States, the proposed pricing for a treatment must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. In addition, in some markets, the pricing of prescription drugs is subject to government control and reimbursement which may in some cases be unavailable. The requirements governing drug pricing vary widely from country to country. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our product candidates that may be approved. Historically, pharmaceutical products launched in the European Union do not follow price structures of the United States and generally tend to have significantly lower prices.

We expect that market access constraints, pricing controls and discounting and other restrictions will become more acute as public and private payers continue to take aggressive steps to control their expenditures. These efforts and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product, and any reduction in reimbursement from any government program may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenues, attain profitability, or commercialize our product candidates, if approved.

We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action in the United States, the European Union or another jurisdiction, or the effect that any such future legislation or administrative action may have on our business.

Risks Related to Our Operations

Due to our limited resources and access to capital, we must prioritize development of certain programs and our decision to pursue these programs may prove to be unsuccessful as they may never receive regulatory approval or achieve profitability.

Because we have limited resources and access to capital to fund our operations, we must decide which product candidates to pursue and the amount of resources to allocate to each product candidate. As such, we are currently primarily focused on the development of PHVS416 and PHVS719. These, and future decisions concerning the allocation of capabilities, infrastructure, management and financial resources towards particular programs or therapeutic areas may not lead to the development of viable commercial products and may divert resources from better opportunities. Similarly, these and future decisions to delay or terminate product development programs could cause us to miss valuable opportunities. If we make incorrect determinations regarding the market potential of our product candidates or misread trends in the pharmaceutical industry, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

If we cannot manufacture our product candidates in sufficient amounts, with CDMOs or ourselves, at acceptable costs and on a timely basis, we may be unable to supply sufficient product candidates for nonclinical studies or clinical trials or to support commercialization of our product candidates, if approved.

We do not own or operate manufacturing facilities and have no plans to build our own clinical or commercial-scale manufacturing capabilities. We cannot ensure that our suppliers will remain in business, have sufficient capacity or supply to meet our needs, or that they will not be purchased by one of our competitors or another company that is not interested in continuing to work with us. If we cannot establish sufficient supply through alternative third-party CDMOs or in our own facilities should we develop these, our ability to conduct the planned and future clinical trials and our plans for commercialization would be materially adversely affected.

In addition, we currently rely on a small number of CDMOs for the production of certain of our product candidates and, as a result, face certain additional risks relating to our manufacturing operations. A single significant disruptive event at the manufacturing operations of one of our CDMOs can have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations. In addition,

15

Table of Contents

one of our CDMOs is located in the United Kingdom and we cannot rule out the possibility of delays in obtaining our product candidates as a result of changes in the governing regulatory framework, including import/export restrictions, due to Brexit. Business interruption insurance may not adequately compensate us for any losses that may occur and we would have to bear the additional cost of any disruption. For instance, if we were to experience an unexpected loss of supply, or if our CDMOs are unable to meet our demand for our product candidates or their services, we could experience delays in our research and development activities, planned clinical trials or commercialization of approved products. In the first quarter of 2021, we learned that one of our CDMOs discovered a packaging issue with certain batches of packaging of softgel capsules for our RAPIDe-1 trial. The issue was investigated and we commenced the RAPIDe-1 trial for on-demand treatment of HAE attacks in February 2021. Finding alternative CDMOs or suppliers of acceptable quality who can deliver appropriate volumes at acceptable cost may be challenging. Moreover, the long transition periods involved in the change of CDMOs and suppliers, if necessary, would significantly delay our clinical trials and the commercialization of our product candidates, if approved.

We will need to work with CDMOs that can meet all applicable FDA and other regulatory authority requirements on an ongoing basis. If the manufacturing process is changed during the course of product development, the FDA or other regulatory authorities could require us to repeat some or all previously conducted trials or conduct additional trials to obtain bridging data, which could delay or impede our ability to obtain marketing approval. If we or our CDMOs are unable to reliably produce and release our product candidates to specifications acceptable to the FDA or other regulatory authorities, we may not obtain or maintain the approvals we need to further develop, conduct clinical trials for, and commercialize such product candidates. Similarly, approval of our product candidates could be delayed or denied if the intended manufacturing site fails to pass the required preapproval inspection. Even if we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, there is no assurance that either we or our CDMOs will be able to manufacture the approved product 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 the product, or to meet potential future demand. Any of these challenges could delay completion of clinical trials, require clinical trials to obtain bridging data or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of our product candidates, impair commercialization efforts, increase our cost of goods, and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We expect that development of our own manufacturing facilities could provide us with enhanced control of material supply for our product candidates for the clinical trials and the commercial market. However, we have no experience as a company in developing and operating a manufacturing facility and may never be successful in developing our own manufacturing facility or capability should we decide to do so. In particular, if we do pursue the construction of our own manufacturing facilities, we may not complete construction in a timely manner, if at all. Such facilities would also need to be inspected and approved by the FDA and other regulatory agencies before these facilities can be used to manufacture our product candidates, which may subject us to unforeseen delays in our manufacturing efforts and additional regulatory inspections.

For all of the above reasons, our current and anticipated future dependence upon others for the manufacture of our product candidates or products may adversely affect our future profit margins and our ability to commercialize any products that receive marketing approval on a timely and competitive basis.

Manufacturing issues may arise that could increase product and regulatory approval costs or delay commercialization of our products.

As the manufacturing processes are scaled up they may reveal manufacturing challenges or previously unknown impurities that could require resolution in order to proceed with our planned clinical trials and obtain regulatory approval for the commercial marketing of our products. In the future, we may identify manufacturing issues or impurities that could result in delays in the clinical program and regulatory approval for our products, increases in our operating expenses, or failure to obtain or maintain approval for our products. Our reliance on third-party manufacturers entails risks, including the following:

Any of these events could lead to delays in any clinical trial we may undertake, failure to obtain regulatory approval or impact our ability to successfully commercialize any product candidates. Some of these events could be the basis for FDA or other regulatory authorities’ action, including injunction, recall, seizure, or total or partial suspension of production.

16

Table of Contents

Our third-party manufacturers or suppliers may use potent chemical agents and hazardous materials, and any claims relating to improper handling, storage or disposal of these materials could be time-consuming or costly.

Our third-party manufacturers or suppliers may use hazardous materials, including chemicals and biological agents and compounds that could be dangerous to human health and the safety of the environment. The operations of our third-party manufacturers and suppliers also produce hazardous waste products. Various laws and regulations govern the use, generation, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of these materials and wastes. Compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations may be expensive, and current or future environmental laws and regulations may impair our product development efforts. In addition, we cannot eliminate the risk of accidental injury or contamination from these materials or waste and we may be sued for any injury or contamination that results from our use or the use by third parties of these materials. In the event of contamination or injury, we could be held liable for damages or be penalized with fines in an amount exceeding our resources, and our clinical trials or regulatory approvals could be suspended.

In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, which have tended to become more stringent over time. These current or future laws and regulations may impair our research, development or production efforts. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions or liabilities, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our activities rely heavily on sensitive and personal materials and information, an area which is highly regulated by privacy laws. Our failure to comply with such laws or to adequately secure the information we hold could result in significant liability or reputational harm and, in turn, a material adverse effect on our client base, member base and revenue. Further, if we are unable to generate or maintain access to essential patient samples or data for our research and development and manufacturing activities for our programs, our business could be materially adversely affected.

As a result of our clinical development, we will have access to very sensitive data regarding the patients enrolled in our clinical trials, and our current and future product candidates will rely on the use of patient and donor data and material. This data will contain information that is personal in nature, and the maintenance of this data is subject to certain privacy-related laws, which impose administrative burdens, substantial costs and litigation risks upon us, such as the rules promulgated by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under the U.S.Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ("HIPAA"), and U.S. state privacy laws. These rules inter alia require that written authorizations from patients are obtained and that policies, procedures and reasonable and appropriate security measures are implemented that protect individually identifiable health and other information we receive and to ensure that such information is used only as authorized by the patient. If the patient fails to execute an authorization or the authorization fails to contain all required provisions, then we will not be allowed access to the patient’s information and our research efforts can be substantially delayed. Also, any violations of these rules by us could subject us to civil and criminal penalties and adverse publicity and could harm our ability to initiate and complete clinical trials.

In addition, there are significant international laws that protect data privacy which we must adhere to. For example, we are subject to the EU General Data Protection Regulation, or the GDPR (as implemented by countries in the EEA), which applies extra-territorially and imposes onerous requirements on controllers (e.g., sponsors) and processors (e.g., CROs, laboratories) of personal data, including, for example: (i) accountability and transparency requirements, and enhanced requirements for obtaining valid consent; (ii) obligations to consider data protection as any new products or services are developed and to limit the amount of personal data processed; (iii) obligations to comply with data protection rights of data subjects; and (iv) reporting of personal data breaches to the supervisory authority without undue delay (and no later than 72 hours). The GDPR also prohibits the international transfer of personal data from the EEA to countries outside of the EEA unless made to a country deemed to have adequate data privacy laws by the European Commission or where a data transfer mechanism has been put in place. Until recently, one such data transfer mechanism was the EU-US Privacy Shield. However, in July 2020 the Court of Justice of the European Union, or the CJEU, declared the Privacy Shield to be invalid. The CJEU upheld the validity of the standard contractual clauses, or SCCs, as a legal mechanism to transfer personal data but companies relying on SCCs will, subject to additional guidance from regulators in the EEA, need to evaluate and implement supplementary measures that provide privacy protections additional to those provided under SCCs. In turn, the findings of the CJEU will have significant implications for cross-border data flows. Further, the GDPR provides that countries in the EEA may establish their own laws and regulations further restricting the processing of certain personal data, including genetic data, biometric data, and health data.

We have relatively limited experience with the relevant privacy and security policies, practices and regulations, and cannot assure that our policies and practices will be sufficient to protect us from liability or adverse publicity relating to the privacy and security of personal data. Privacy laws, rules and regulations also evolve frequently and their scope may continually change, through new legislation, amendments to existing legislation and changes in enforcement, and may be inconsistent from one jurisdiction to another. The interpretation and application of consumer, health-related and data protection laws, especially with respect to genetic samples and data, in the United States, the European Union and elsewhere, are often uncertain, contradictory and in flux. As a result, implementation standards and enforcement practices are likely to remain uncertain for the foreseeable future, and we cannot determine the impact such future laws, regulations and standards may have on our business. We cannot provide assurance that current or future legislation will not prevent us from generating or maintaining personal data or that patients will consent to the use of their personal data (as necessary); either of these circumstances may prevent us from undertaking or publishing essential research and development, manufacturing and commercialization, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Complying with these various laws and regulations could cause us to incur substantial costs or require us to change our business practices, systems and compliance procedures in a manner adverse to our business. For example, failure to comply with the GDPR requirements could result in regulatory investigations, enforcement notices requiring us to stop or change the way we use personal data and/or fines of up to 20 million Euros or up to 4% of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher, as well as compensation claims for financial or non-financial loss by affected individuals, negative publicity, reputational harm and a potential loss of business and goodwill.

17

Table of Contents

These laws, rules and regulations evolve frequently and their scope may continually change, through new legislation, amendments to existing legislation and changes in enforcement, and may be inconsistent from one jurisdiction to another. The interpretation and application of consumer, health-related and data protection laws, especially with respect to genetic samples and data, in the United States, the European Union, or EU, and elsewhere, are often uncertain, contradictory and in flux. As a result, implementation standards and enforcement practices are likely to remain uncertain for the foreseeable future, and we cannot determine the impact such future laws, regulations and standards may have on our business. Our internal computer systems, or those used by our clinical investigators, contractors or consultants, may fail or suffer security breaches.

We are a party to certain agreements that contain liability or indemnification provisions under which we may claim damages from our counterparties and under which our counterparties may claim damages from us, including damages caused by product defects.

We are a party to certain agreements, including clinical trial agreements and licensing agreements that contain liability or indemnification provisions under which we or the counterparty may claim damages. In the event we need to claim damages from a counterparty, we may not receive payments covering our damages in full, either because the applicable provision is unenforceable for any reason or because the counterparty is unable to pay (due to insolvency or otherwise). Although in many cases we try to limit our liability, such limitations may not be enforceable in certain jurisdictions or effective in the event that we need to pay damages and we nevertheless could become liable to make substantial payments. If we must make substantial liability payments under an agreement, this could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Risks Related to the Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

If we are unable to commercialize our product candidates PHVS416 and PHVS719 or any other product candidates that we may pursue, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects would be materially adversely affected.

We do not expect to generate product revenues in the foreseeable future. If our product candidates PHVS416 and PHVS719 or any other program that we may pursue fails, we will have to develop, acquire, or license new programs. Our product candidates, as well as any other programs we may pursue, could be unsuccessful if they:

The results of the research and trials to date cannot provide assurance that acceptable efficacy or safety will be shown upon completion of ongoing or planned clinical trials. Also, the results obtained in our PHA-0221121- C001 and PHA-022121-C002 clinical trials may not be comparable to results that may be produced during the further development of our deucrictibant-containing product candidates. Many products that show promise in proof-of-concept, Phase 1 and/or Phase 2 trials fail in later clinical trials or in a commercial setting. If we are unable to make our product candidates commercially available, or we experience significant delays in doing so, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects would be materially adversely affected.

The market opportunities for our product candidates may be smaller than currently anticipated, lowering our potential revenue.

The market opportunities for our product candidates may be smaller than currently anticipated, lowering our potential revenue. We make projections of both the number of people who have HAE, as well as the number of individuals within our target patient population who have the desire to switch to an oral therapy and the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates. These projections are derived from scientific literature and patient foundations but are highly contingent on a number of variables that are difficult to predict and may prove to be too high, resulting in a smaller population of patients who are interested in, and could benefit from, our product candidates than we currently anticipate which would result in lower potential revenue.

Moreover, if we are successful in developing both PHVS416 and PHVS719, we cannot accurately predict the proportion of patients choosing prophylactic or on-demand only treatment regimens.

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

As with all pharmaceutical products, use of our product candidates could be associated with side effects or adverse events, which can vary in severity and frequency. Side effects or adverse events associated with the use of our product candidates may be observed at any time, including in clinical trials or once a product is commercialized, and any such side effects or adverse events may negatively affect our ability to obtain regulatory approval or market our product candidates. Side effects or adverse events associated with the use of our product candidates could result in a label change, require us to perform additional studies or halt development or sale of these product candidates or expose us to product liability lawsuits, which will harm our business. We may be required by regulatory agencies to conduct additional

18

Table of Contents

nonclinical studies or clinical trials regarding the safety of our product candidates, which we have not planned or anticipated. For instance, we are required to conduct a 26-week rodent toxicology study to resolve the clinical holds placed by the FDA on clinical trials of deucrictibant in the U.S. We cannot provide any assurance that we will resolve any issues related to any product-related side effects or adverse events to the satisfaction of the FDA or any regulatory agency in a timely manner or ever, which could harm our business, prospects and financial condition.

If we are successful in commercializing our product candidates, the FDA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities require that we analyze and report certain information about adverse events that our products may have caused or contributed to. The FDA and other foreign regulatory authorities impose strict requirements with respect to the analysis of such events and the manner and timing of our reporting the information to the regulatory authorities. We may fail to comply with the requirements for assessing and reporting adverse events and if we fail to comply with these obligations, the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities could take action including the issuance of warning letters or other regulatory correspondence, criminal prosecution, the imposition of civil sanctions, seizure of our products, or delay in approval or clearance of future products.

Even if any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, we may fail to achieve the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success.

Our product candidates may not be commercially successful. Even if any of our product candidates receive regulatory approval, they may not gain sufficient market acceptance among physicians, patients, healthcare payors or others in the medical community. The commercial success of any of our current or future product candidates will depend significantly on the broad adoption and use of the resulting product by physicians and patients for approved indications. The degree of market acceptance of any of our potential products as may receive marketing authorization will depend on a variety of factors, many of which are outside our control, including:

If any products that we may develop fail to achieve market acceptance, we may not be able to generate sufficient revenues. We may make substantial investments in clinical development, manufacturing, supply chain and commercialization without any assurance that we will be able to attain significant market share at a price that would enable us to recover our investments. If we are unable to do so, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects would be materially adversely affected.

We face substantial competition, which may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing competing products before or more successfully than we do.

The development and commercialization of new drug products is highly competitive. We face competition with respect to our current product candidates and will face competition with respect to any product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future, from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies worldwide. As discussed under “ITEM 4. INFORMATION ON THE COMPANY—B. Business overview—Competition,” there are several licensed therapies for HAE and we are aware of a number of HAE therapies in clinical development. Potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, seek patent protection and establish collaborative arrangements for research, development, manufacturing and commercialization.

Our 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. In addition, our ability to compete may be affected in many cases by insurers or other third-party payors seeking to encourage the use of generic products. Generic products are expected to become available over the coming years, potentially creating pricing pressure. If our product candidates achieve marketing approval, we expect that they will be priced at a significant premium over competitive generic products. This may make it difficult for us to achieve our business strategy of using our product candidates in combination with existing therapies or replacing existing therapies with our product candidates. Competition may further increase as a result of advances in the commercial applicability of technologies and greater availability of capital for investment in these industries.

19

Table of Contents

Many of the companies against which we are competing or we may compete in the future have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, nonclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller and other mid-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These third parties compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

We may encounter difficulties in managing our growth and expanding our operations successfully.

If we advance our product candidates through clinical trials and regulatory approvals, we will need to expand our development, manufacturing, regulatory, commercialization and supply chain capabilities or contract with third parties to provide these capabilities for us. Our ability to realize our commercialization strategy and manage any growth will require us to continue to recruit and train additional qualified personnel and make appropriate changes to our operational, financial and management controls. We may experience a delay in becoming aware of certain issues or information material to management decisions. The expansion of our operations, including potential expansion into global markets outside of the European Union and the United States, may lead to significant costs, new challenges and risks and may divert the attention of our management and our business development resources. Any inability to manage anticipated growth and expanding operations, including as a result of failing to realize our commercialization strategy for our product candidates PHVS416 and PHVS719, could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects.

Governments and/or pricing authorities, especially in the European Union, often impose strict price and access controls, which may adversely affect our future profitability.

In some markets, especially in the European Union, prescription drug pricing is subject to governmental/ pricing authority control which can vary by country and degree. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental/pricing authorities can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing approval for a product. If reimbursement of any future products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels or the pricing negotiation is considerably delayed, we may be unable to achieve or sustain profitability.

Drug pricing and other healthcare costs continue to be subject to intense political and societal pressures, which we anticipate will continue and escalate on a global basis. These pressures may result in harm to our business and reputation, cause the market price of our ordinary shares to decline or experience periods of volatility and adversely affect results of operations and our ability to raise funds.

The insurance coverage and reimbursement status of newly approved products is uncertain. Failure to obtain or maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for new or current products could limit our ability to market those products and decrease our ability to generate revenue.

The availability and extent of reimbursement by governmental and private payors is essential for most patients to be able to afford expensive treatments. Sales of our product candidates will depend substantially, both domestically and abroad, on the extent to which the costs of our product candidates will be paid by health maintenance, managed care, pharmacy benefit and similar healthcare management organizations, or reimbursed by government health administration authorities, private health coverage insurers and other third-party payors. If reimbursement is not available, or is available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates. Even if coverage is provided, the approved reimbursement amount may not be high enough to allow us to establish or maintain pricing sufficient to realize a sufficient return on our investment.

There is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement for new medicines are typically made by the CMS. CMS decides whether and to what extent a new medicine will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare. Private payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates. It is difficult to predict what CMS will decide with respect to reimbursement for fundamentally novel products such as ours, as there is no body of established practices and precedents for these new products.

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, Canada, and other countries has 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. In general, the prices of medicines under such systems are substantially lower than in the United States. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for medicines but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our product candidates. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our products may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenues 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 level of reimbursement for new products approved 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 any of our product candidates, due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes.

20

Table of Contents

The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products into the healthcare market.

In addition, many private payors contract with commercial vendors who sell software that provide guidelines that attempt to limit utilization of, and therefore reimbursement for, certain products deemed to provide limited benefit to existing alternatives. Such organizations may set guidelines that limit reimbursement or utilization of our products.

We may become exposed to costly and damaging liability claims, either when testing our product candidates in the clinic or after commercialization; and our product liability insurance may not cover all damages from such claims.

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 a breach of warranties. Physicians and patients may not comply with any warnings that identify known potential adverse effects and patients who should not use our products. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to stop development or, if approved, limit commercialization of our product candidates. Even successful defenses would require significant financial and management resources. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

Any product liability insurance coverage we obtain may not fully cover potential liabilities that we may incur. Our insurance policies have various exclusions, and we may be subject to a product liability claim for which we have no coverage. The cost of any product liability litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. 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 capital to pay such amounts.

We will also need to increase our insurance coverage if we commercialize any product that receives marketing approval. Insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive. If we are unable to maintain sufficient insurance coverage at an acceptable cost or to otherwise protect against potential product liability claims, it could prevent or inhibit the development and commercial production and sale of our product candidates, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

If we are unable to establish commercial capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market, sell and distribute our product candidates, we may be unable to generate any revenues if and when our product candidates are approved.

If any of our product candidates receive marketing approval, we intend to market, sell and distribute them using our own commercial infrastructure. However, we have no experience in commercialization, selling and distributing pharmaceutical products or establishing a commercial organization. We may enter into collaborations with other entities to utilize their mature sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, but we may be unable to enter into commercialization agreements on favorable terms, if at all. If our future collaborative partners do not commit sufficient resources to commercialize our product candidates, if approved, or if we are unable to develop the necessary commercialization capabilities on our own, we will be unable to generate sufficient product revenues to sustain our business. Further, we may not have sufficient control or oversight over our future collaborative partners to ensure they sell and market our product candidates in compliance with all applicable law. In building our commercial infrastructure or commercializing our product candidates, if approved, we will be competing with other well-funded companies that currently have or are building extensive commercial operations. Without an internal team or the support of a third-party to perform commercial functions, we may be unable to successfully commercialize our product candidates, if approved, and/or compete successfully against these companies.

Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties and Key Personnel

21

Table of Contents

If third parties on which we depend to conduct our clinical trials do not perform as contractually required, fail to satisfy regulatory or legal requirements or miss expected deadlines, our development program could be delayed with materially adverse effects on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We rely on CROs, independent clinical investigators, clinical data management organizations, consultants and other third-party firms to design, conduct, supervise and monitor clinical trials. We and these third parties are required to comply with extensive regulations, including good clinical practices, or GCP, which are enforced by the competent authorities of the member states of the European Economic Area, or EEA, the FDA and other comparable regulatory authorities; GCP are intended to ensure that the health, safety and rights of patients are protected in clinical development and clinical trials, and that trial data integrity is assured. In fact, as sponsor of the clinical trials, GCP compliance remains our responsibility. Regulatory authorities ensure compliance with these requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, clinical investigators and trial sites. Our reliance on third parties that we do not control does not relieve us of these responsibilities and requirements. If we or any of these third parties fail to comply with applicable requirements, clinical trials may be put on “clinical hold,” the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with such requirements. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with products that are cGMP produced. Failure to comply with these regulations may result in a clinical hold or require us to repeat nonclinical studies and clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.

Third-party staff are not our employees and, except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such third parties, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our ongoing clinical and nonclinical programs and meet their quality and other requirements. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines or if the quality or accuracy of the product or clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols, regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be put on hold, extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. As a result, our operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates in development would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed.

Because we have relied on third parties, our internal capacity to perform these functions is limited. Outsourcing these functions involves the risk that third parties may not perform to our standards, may not produce results in a timely manner or may fail to perform at all. In addition, the use of third-party service providers requires us to disclose our proprietary information to these parties, which could increase the risk that this information will be misappropriated. We currently have a small number of employees, which limits the internal resources we have available to identify and monitor our third-party providers. To the extent we are unable to identify and successfully manage the performance of third-party service providers in the future, our business may be adversely affected. Though we carefully manage the relationships with third parties, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter similar challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operation and prospects.

If we cannot contract with acceptable third parties on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, or if these third parties do not carry out their contractual duties, satisfy legal and regulatory requirements for the conduct of nonclinical studies or clinical trials or meet expected deadlines, our clinical development programs could be delayed and otherwise adversely affected. Any such event could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We are dependent on the services of our management and other clinical and scientific personnel, and if we are not able to retain these individuals or recruit additional management or clinical and scientific personnel, our business will suffer.

Our success depends in part on our continued ability to attract, retain and motivate highly qualified management, clinical and scientific personnel. We are highly dependent upon our senior management team as well as our senior scientists. The loss of services of any of these individuals could delay or prevent the successful development of our product candidates, initiation or completion of our planned clinical trials or the commercialization of our product candidates. Our industry has experienced a high rate of turnover of management, clinical and scientific personnel in recent years and despite our efforts to retain valuable employees, members of our management, scientific and development teams may terminate their employment with us. In addition, as we expand our operations, we may not be successful in maintaining our unique company culture and continuing to attract or retain qualified management and scientific and clinical personnel in the future due to the intense competition for qualified personnel among pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other businesses. Replacing executive officers and key employees may be difficult and may take an extended period of time because of the limited number of individuals in our industry with the breadth of skills and experience required to successfully develop, gain regulatory approval of and commercialize products. Competition to hire from this limited pool is intense, and we may be unable to hire, train, retain or motivate these key personnel on acceptable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for similar personnel. We also experience competition for the hiring of scientific and clinical personnel from universities and research institutions. If we do not have sufficient numbers of skilled employees to support our research, development, manufacturing, regulatory compliance or management functions, or if our employees lack the skills necessary for the development of our operations, we may need to retain consultants and advisers, if available on terms acceptable to us, if at all, who may have conflicts of interest or other commitments, such as consulting or advisory contracts with other organizations that may affect their ability to contribute to us. In addition, if we are not able to attract, integrate, retain and motivate sufficient scientific, technical and managerial personnel, we will be unable to advance our clinical programs or expand our business, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

22

Table of Contents

We are heavily dependent on third parties to perform critical activities related to the research, development and manufacturing of our product candidates. If these third parties fail or are unable to perform, our development programs and candidate products could be materially and adversely affected and our business and prospects will suffer.

We are heavily dependent on third parties to conduct certain key activities relating to the research, development and manufacturing of our product candidates. For example, we rely on third-party firms to conduct development, studies, and trials with respect to our candidate products and to manufacture and supply the material used in our studies and trials.

Our reliance on third parties may pose the following risks to us:

As a result, if any third parties upon which we are dependent fail or are unable to perform, our development programs and candidate products could be materially adversely affected.

We may be unable to enter into or maintain strategic alliances or collaborations which could affect our ability to commercialize our product candidates, if approved.

We may seek strategic alliances or collaborations to further the clinical development and commercialization of certain of our product candidates as they would likely require expensive and time-consuming clinical trials. In seeking strategic partners, we face significant competition from other companies as well as public and private research institutions. There can be no assurance that we will be able to enter into or maintain strategic alliances on terms favorable to us, or at all. Potential partners may require royalty or milestone payments, rights to current or after-developed intellectual property, exclusivity rights, limitations on liabilities, indemnities or other provisions that are adverse to us. Potential partners may fail to diligently fund, develop or commercialize our product candidates. Any of the foregoing may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If we fail to make required payments to AnalytiCon pursuant to the agreements pursuant to which we acquired certain of our core intellectual property or are otherwise in material breach of such agreements (and fail to cure such breaches within a specified time period), AnalytiCon may exercise remedies pursuant to such agreements that would materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Certain intellectual property that is core to our business has been invented by AnalytiCon and contractually assigned to us by AnalytiCon, with whom we continue to collaborate for the development of our product candidates. We owe AnalytiCon milestone payments contingent on our achievement of certain clinical development and regulatory events, as well as royalties and milestone payments based on sales of such product candidates. If we fail to make such payments to AnalytiCon or are otherwise in material breach of certain agreements that we entered into with AnalytiCon (and fail to cure such breaches within a specified time period), and AnalytiCon exercises contractual remedies available to it under such agreements, then we may be required to grant AnalytiCon an exclusive license to the intellectual property that it assigned to us for use in all applications, including HAE. In addition, we could be prevented from competing with AnalytiCon until five years after the commercial launch of any product candidates containing a compound from the OB2RA Class. If we failed to make such payments and AnalytiCon were to exercise such remedies, we would not be able to continue our current development program or commercialize our product candidates and our business and results of operations would be materially and adversely affected. For a description of our arrangement with AnalytiCon, please see “ITEM 4. INFORMATION ON THE COMPANY—B. Business overview—License Agreement.”

If we are unable to obtain and maintain patent or trade secret protection for any products or product candidates we develop and for our technology, or if the scope of the patent protection obtained is not sufficiently broad, our competitors could

23

Table of Contents

develop and commercialize products and technology similar or identical to ours, and our ability to successfully commercialize any product candidates or technology we may develop may be adversely affected.

Our commercial success depends in significant part on obtaining and maintaining current and future patent protection, trade secrets and confidential know-how for our technologies, product candidates, the methods used to manufacture those product candidates and the methods for treating patients using those product candidates. We may not be able to file, prosecute, maintain, enforce, or license all necessary or desirable patents and patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. Our failure to obtain, maintain or extend patent protection or to protect trade secrets or confidential know-how could materially adversely affect our ability to compete.

Obtaining and enforcing patents in the pharmaceutical industry involves both technological and legal complexity and is therefore costly, time consuming and subject to numerous risks and uncertainties. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited, to the following:

If we or any third parties that develop or create any intellectual property for us are unable to secure necessary assignments or rights, then our rights to such intellectual property, and ultimately our ability to protect our candidate products, may be adversely affected.

It is also possible that we fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output in time to obtain patent protection. In addition, we may not be aware of all third-party intellectual property rights potentially relating to our product candidates and technology. We cannot guarantee that any of our or our licensors’ patent searches or analyses, including but not limited to the identification of relevant patents, analysis of the scope of relevant patent claims or determination of 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 elsewhere that is relevant to or necessary for the development and commercialization of our product candidates in any jurisdiction. For example, publications of discoveries in the 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 be certain that we were the first to make the inventions claimed in any licensed patents or pending patent applications (or claimed in any patents that we may own in the future, if any), or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions.

The duration and scope of any patents we are issued in the future (if any) or the patent rights of our licensors or collaborators may not be sufficient to effectively protect our product candidates and business.

The patent position of biopharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions, and has been the subject of much litigation in recent years. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Even if our current or future patent applications are issued as patents, they may not be issued with the scope of claims sought by us, or the scope of claims we or our licensors are seeking may not be sufficiently broad to protect our product candidates or provide us with any competitive advantage. Any patents that we may own in the future (if any) may be challenged or circumvented by third parties or may be narrowed or invalidated as a result of challenges by third parties. Consequently, we do not know whether our product candidates will be protectable by valid and enforceable patents.

Moreover, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and its scope can be reinterpreted after issuance. Changes in or different interpretations of patent laws in the United States, Europe, and other jurisdictions may also permit others to use our discoveries or to develop and commercialize our technology and products without providing any compensation to us, or may limit the number of patents or claims we can obtain. The laws of some countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as U.S. and European laws and those countries may lack adequate rules and procedures for defending our intellectual property rights.

Our competitors and other third parties would be able to offer and sell products so long as they do not infringe any valid and enforceable patents or other proprietary rights that we or others, including our licensors, may have. The specific content of patents and patent applications that are necessary to support and interpret the scope of patent claims is highly uncertain due to the complex nature of the relevant legal, technical and factual issues. Such risks will increase if we or our licensors are not able to obtain additional patents

24

Table of Contents

protecting aspects of our product candidates and technology, such as product improvements, formulations, methods of production or novel uses of the relevant product candidates.

In addition, patents have a limited lifespan. For example, if renewal fees are paid timely, a European patent expires 20 years after its effective filing date. Similarly, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, a patent in the United States generally expires 20 years after its effective filing date. Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of any FDA marketing approval of any product candidates we may develop in the United States, any patents we are issued in the future (if any) may qualify for a limited patent term extension if certain criteria are met (e.g., in case of significant delays during patent prosecution or during FDA approval for bringing a drug covered by a patent to market) under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. Specifically, the Hatch Waxman Amendments permit a patent extension term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. A patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval, only one patent may be extended and only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it, or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. However, in such an event we may not be granted an extension because of, for example, failing to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, 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. In the European Union, an extension of the duration of protection for a pharmaceutical product on the basis of a supplementary protection certificate could be applied for after a valid market authorization is obtained and if the product is specifically covered by a basic patent in force. As a result, an additional term of protection could be obtained for the relevant product on top of the maximum lifespan of the patent. The term of the allowed extension varies, and in principle is at most five and a half years. Consequently, despite these general possibilities for obtaining a certain extension of the duration of protection based on a patent if certain criteria are met, the protection provided by a patent is limited in time.

Furthermore, 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. Even if additional patents covering our product candidates are obtained, the expiration of a patent may leave us more vulnerable to competition from biosimilar or generic alternatives, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially harmed. As a result, our intellectual property may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects.

Patents covering our technology and product candidates that may be issued (if any) could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court or an issuing body.

The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and any patents we may own in the future (if any) may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and elsewhere. Such challenges may result in loss of exclusivity or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable 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 product candidates.

To the extent that we obtain any patents in the future, our patent protection in respect of our product candidates and technologies may be limited or lost if patents that may be issued to us or patents we use under the terms of exclusive commercial licenses were to be declared invalid, rendered unenforceable or narrowed in scope as a result of any re-examination, post grant review, inter partes review, interference proceedings, derivation proceedings, equivalent proceedings in other jurisdictions or judicial action. If one of our licensing partners or we initiate legal proceedings against a third-party to enforce a patent covering one of our product candidates or technologies, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our product candidate is invalid or unenforceable. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness, lack of patentable subject matter, lack of written description or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld information material to patentability from the relevant issuing body, or made a misleading statement, during prosecution. A challenge to patents could result in a ruling adverse to us that could invalidate or render unenforceable such patents or substantially reduce the scope of protection afforded by them. A court may also determine, retrospectively, that despite the issuance of the patent by the relevant issuing body, the corresponding patent application did not meet the statutory requirements. If a competitor or other third parties were to successfully challenge our patents (to the extent any are obtained), and claims in these patents were consequently narrowed, rendered unenforceable or invalidated, our ability to protect the related product candidate or technology from competition could be compromised. Such proceedings could result in the revocation or cancellation of or amendment to such patents in such a way that they no longer cover our product candidates. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which the patent examiner and we or our licensing partners were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity or unenforceability, we could lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on one or more of our product candidates to the extent that any such patents are issued. Such a loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business.

We may not be able to protect or enforce our intellectual property rights in all jurisdictions.

Filing, prosecuting, and defending patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and the laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States or the European Union. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States, the European Union or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and may export otherwise infringing products and these products may compete with our product candidates in jurisdictions where we do not have any issued patents.

25

Table of Contents

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. Patent laws vary by jurisdiction, and, accordingly, the degree of protection afforded to the same technology, if any, may differ depending on the jurisdiction. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biopharmaceuticals, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of any patents we are issued in the future (if any) or commercialization of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce any patent rights we are issued in the future (if any) in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put such patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. In such an event, 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 and proprietary rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license. Our inability to protect or enforce our intellectual property rights throughout the world could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, many countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties and many countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patent. If we (to the extent we are issued any patents covering our product candidates) or any of our licensors is forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be impaired, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be adversely affected.

Changes in patent law could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our product candidates.

To the extent that we are issued patents covering our product candidates (if any), changes in either patent laws or interpretations of patent laws in the United States, the European Union, Canada or other jurisdictions may diminish the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our patent protection and could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents (to the extent any such patents are issued).

For example, patent reform legislation in the United States, including the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the America Invents Act, could increase those uncertainties and costs. The America Invents Act was signed into law on September 16, 2011, and many of the substantive changes became effective on March 16, 2013. The America Invents Act reforms United States patent law in part by changing the U.S. patent system from a “first to invent” system to a “first inventor to file” system in which, assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third-party was the first to invent the claimed invention. In addition, the America Invents Act expands the definition of prior art and develops a post-grant review system. This legislation changed United States patent law in a way that may weaken our ability to obtain patent protection in the United States for those applications filed after March 16, 2013.

Further, the America Invents Act created new procedures to challenge the validity of issued patents in the United States, including post grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings, which some third parties have been using to cause the cancellation of selected or all claims of issued patents. These adversarial actions at the USPTO review patent claims without the presumption of validity afforded to U.S. patents in lawsuits in U.S. federal courts, and use a lower burden of proof than used in litigation in U.S. federal courts. Therefore, it is generally considered easier for a competitor or third-party to have a U.S. patent invalidated in a USPTO post-grant review or inter partes review proceeding than invalidated in a litigation in a U.S. federal court. If any patents that we are issued in the future (if any) or our licensor’s patents are challenged by a third- party in such a USPTO proceeding, there is no guarantee that we or our licensors or collaborators will be successful in defending the patent, which would result in a loss of the challenged patent right to us.

In addition, the patent positions of companies in the development and commercialization of pharmaceuticals are particularly uncertain. Recent court rulings in cases such as Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., BRCA1- &BRCA2-Based Hereditary Cancer Test Patent Litigation, Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., Promega Corp. v. Life Technologies Corp. and Abbvie Deutschland GmbH v. Janssen Biotech, Inc. have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened 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 future actions by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. courts, and the USPTO and the relevant law-making bodies in other countries, 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 might obtain in the future. Any changes to patent law in the U.S. or other jurisdictions that impairs our ability to protect our deucrictibant and other product candidates that we may pursue could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Confidentiality agreements with employees and third parties may not prevent unauthorized disclosure of trade secrets and other proprietary information and may not provide an adequate remedy.

We consider proprietary trade secrets and confidential know-how and unpatented know-how to be important to our business. We rely on trade secrets and confidential know-how to protect our technology, especially where we do not believe that patent protection is appropriate or obtainable. However, trade secrets and confidential know-how are difficult to protect and some courts in the United States, the European Union and elsewhere are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. We seek to protect our proprietary trade secrets and confidential know-how, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with our current and former employees, consultants, contractors, outside scientific collaborators and other advisers. However, we cannot guarantee that we have entered into such agreements with each party that may have or has had access to our trade secrets or confidential know-how or that such agreements will fully protect our

26

Table of Contents

proprietary trade secrets and confidential know-how. Our current or former employees, consultants, contractors, outside scientific collaborators and other advisers may have access to and unintentionally or willfully disclose our confidential information, including to competitors. Our confidentiality agreements may be breached by such individuals and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. Enforcing a claim that a third-party obtained illegally and is using trade secrets and confidential know-how illegally is expensive and time consuming and the outcome is unpredictable. Failure to obtain or maintain trade secret and confidential know-how trade protection could adversely affect our competitive business position. Moreover, our competitors and other third parties may independently develop equivalent knowledge, methods and know-how and may even apply for patent protection in respect of the same. If successful in obtaining such patent protection, our competitors could limit how we use our trade secrets and confidential know-how, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

If we or our licensors infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate intellectual property rights of third parties, we may face increased costs or we may be unable to commercialize our product candidates.

Our commercial success depends upon our ability to develop, manufacture, market, sell and distribute our product candidates and use our proprietary technologies without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the proprietary rights and intellectual property of third parties. The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by extensive and complex litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights. There is a risk that third parties may allege that our employees, consultants, independent contractors or the licensors have wrongfully used or disclosed trade secrets and we infringed, are infringing, or will infringe the proprietary rights of third parties because patents and pending applications belonging to third parties exist in the European Union, the United States and elsewhere in the world in the areas in which our research is conducted. Because patent applications take several years to complete, there may be currently pending applications, unknown to us, which may later result in issued patents that cover the production, manufacture, commercialization or use of our product candidates and technology. In addition, the production, manufacture, commercialization or use of our product candidates may infringe existing patents of which we are not aware. Even if we believe such claims of infringement are without merit, a court of competent jurisdiction could hold that these third-party patents are valid, enforceable and infringed, which could materially and adversely affect our ability to commercialize our product candidates and technology. In order to successfully challenge the validity of any such U.S. patent in federal court, we would need to overcome a presumption of validity. As this burden is a high one requiring us to present clear and convincing evidence as to the invalidity of any such U.S. patent claim, there is no assurance that a court of competent jurisdiction would invalidate the claims of any such U.S. patent. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could be time-consuming and result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management.

If we are found to infringe a third-party’s valid and enforceable intellectual property rights, we could be required to:

Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We have received proprietary information and know-how from third parties. In addition, many of our employees were previously employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants, and advisors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or these individuals have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such individual’s current or former employer. We may be subject to ownership disputes in the future arising, for example, from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates. We may also be subject to claims that former employees, consultants, advisors or other third parties have an ownership interest in our patents or other intellectual property. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects, and be a distraction to our management and employees.

Intellectual property litigation or proceedings could cause us to spend substantial resources and distract our personnel from their normal responsibilities.

To the extent that we are issued any patents covering our product candidates, competitors may infringe such patents or the patents of our licensing partners. However, we may not have the resources to reliably detect infringements of intellectual property rights, and even if we detect an infringement, we may not be able to trace the source of the infringement, or uphold our rights. We may need to resort to litigation to enforce our intellectual property rights, including any patents issued to us (if any) or our licensors. If a competitor or other third-party files a patent application claiming technology also invented by us, in order to protect our rights, we may have to participate in an expensive and time-consuming opposition proceeding before the European Patent Office, the USPTO or patent authorities or courts in other

27

Table of Contents

jurisdictions, with an uncertain outcome and which may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, our success depends in part on avoiding the infringement of other parties’ patents and other intellectual property rights as well as avoiding the breach of any licenses relating to our technologies and products. In the United States, patent applications filed in recent years are confidential for 18 months, while older applications are not published until the patent issues. As a result, avoiding patent infringement may be difficult and we may inadvertently infringe third-party patents or proprietary rights. Countering infringement or unauthorized use claims or to defend against such claims and challenges can be expensive and time consuming. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our ordinary shares.

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. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, commercialization or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to adequately conduct such litigation or proceedings. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources and more mature and developed intellectual property portfolios. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace.

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

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other government fees on patents and/or applications will be due to be paid to various patent agencies over the lifetime of our licensed patents and/or applications and any patent rights we may own in the future. Patent agencies also require compliance with several procedural fee payments and other similar provisions during the patent application process. In many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. There are situations, however, in which non-compliance 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. In such an event, potential competitors might be able to enter the market and this circumstance could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We may not be successful in obtaining necessary rights to any product candidates we may develop through acquisitions and licenses.

Many pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, and academic institutions are competing with us and filing patent applications potentially relevant to our business. If patents issued to third parties contain valid claims that cover our product candidates or their manufacture or uses or assays relevant to our development plans, in order to avoid infringing these patents, we may be required or find it prudent to obtain licenses to these patents or to develop or obtain alternative technology. However, we may be unable to secure such licenses or otherwise acquire or license any compositions, methods of use, processes, or other intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as necessary for product candidates we may develop. The licensing or acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and several more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment or at all. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third- party intellectual property rights or maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to abandon development of the relevant program or product candidate.

In addition, if a patent is issued to a third-party that covers our product candidates or their manufacture or uses or assays related to our technology or product candidates and we cannot obtain a license to such patent, then we may not be in a position to commercialize such technology or product candidates unless we develop non-infringing alternative or successfully pursue litigation to have that patent invalidated or enter into a licensing arrangement with the patent holder. Any such litigation would be time consuming and costly, and the outcome would not be guaranteed. We cannot be certain that we would be able to enter into a licensing agreement with the patent holder on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. In either case, our business prospects could be materially adversely affected.

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

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 or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. For example:

28

Table of Contents

Should any of these events occur, they could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

Our relationships with health care professionals, institutional providers, principal investigators, consultants, customers and third-party payors are, and will continue to be, subject, directly and indirectly, to laws and regulations on health care fraud and abuse, false claims, commercialization expenditure tracking and disclosure, and health information privacy and security. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face penalties, including, without limitation, civil, criminal, and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from government-funded health care programs and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations.

Although we do not currently have any products on the market, our business operations and activities may be directly or indirectly subject to various laws and regulations on health care fraud and abuse, false claims, commercialization expenditure tracking and disclosure, and health information privacy and security. If we obtain approval for any of our product candidates from the FDA or comparable other regulatory authorities and begin commercializing those products in geographies for which they have been approved, our potential exposure under such laws will increase significantly, and our costs associated with compliance with such laws are also likely to increase. These laws may impact, among other things, our current activities with principal investigators and research subjects, as well as proposed and future sales, marketing and education programs.

The laws that may affect our ability to operate include, but are not limited to:

29

Table of Contents

The Affordable Care Act, among other things, amended the intent standard of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and criminal health care fraud statutes to a stricter standard such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of this statute or specific intent to violate it. In addition, the Affordable Care Act codified case law that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal False Claims Act.

Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements will comply with applicable health care laws may involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental and enforcement authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations, guidance or case law interpreting applicable fraud and abuse or other health care laws and regulations. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face penalties, including, without limitation, civil, criminal, and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from government funded health care programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, disgorgement, reputational harm, additional oversight and reporting obligations pursuant to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with applicable laws and regulations, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to market our products, if approved, and adversely impact our financial results. Although effective compliance programs can mitigate the risk of investigation and prosecution for violations of these laws and regulations, these risks cannot be entirely eliminated. Any action against us for an alleged or suspected violation could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and could divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business, even if our defense is successful. If any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found not to be in compliance with applicable laws, it may be costly to us in terms of money, time and resources, and they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government-funded healthcare programs.

In addition, the regulatory approval and commercialization of any of our product candidates outside the United States will also likely subject us to foreign equivalents of the health care laws mentioned above, among other foreign laws.

Rapid technological change could make our product candidates or technologies obsolete.

Pharmaceutical technologies and products are subject to rapid and significant technological change. We expect our competitors and physicians will develop new technologies, protocols and products that may render our product candidates and drug formulation technologies uncompetitive or obsolete. The products, protocols and technologies of our competitors and physicians may be more effective than the products, product candidates and drug formulation technologies developed by us. As a result, our product candidates may become obsolete before we recover expenses incurred in connection with their development or realize revenues from any commercialized product. We are aware of other pharmaceutical companies that are developing competing technologies, which could render our product candidates obsolete, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our business may become subject to economic, political, regulatory and other risks associated with international operations.

Our business is subject to risks associated with conducting business internationally. Many of our suppliers and collaborative and clinical trial relationships are located in different countries. Accordingly, our future results could be harmed by a variety of factors, including, but not limited to:

30

Table of Contents

If we do not achieve our projected development goals in the timeframes we announce and expect, the commercialization of our products may be delayed and, as a result, our stock price may decline.

From time to time, we estimate the timing of the anticipated accomplishment of various scientific, clinical, regulatory and other product development goals, which we sometimes refer to as milestones. These milestones may include the commencement or completion of scientific studies and clinical trials and the submission of regulatory filings. From time to time, we may publicly announce the expected timing of some of these milestones. All of these milestones are and will be based on numerous assumptions. The actual timing of these milestones can vary dramatically compared to our estimates, in some cases for reasons beyond our control. If we do not meet these milestones as publicly announced, or at all, the commercialization of our products may be delayed or never achieved and, as a result, our stock price may decline.

Risks Related to Legal Compliance Matters

Because we and our suppliers are subject to environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we may become exposed to enforcement, liability and substantial expenses in connection with environmental compliance or remediation activities which may adversely affect our business and financial condition.

Our operations, including our research, development, testing and manufacturing activities, are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, and possible permit obligations. These laws, regulations, including any permit obligations, govern, among other things, the controlled use, storage, handling, release and disposal of, and the maintenance of a registry for, hazardous materials and biological materials (goods and substances), chemicals, biological materials and biotechnology. Our operations produce hazardous waste products. We contract with licensed third parties for the disposal of these materials, substances and wastes. Apart from compliance with the applicable regulations, we may not be able to eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials completely. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from any use of hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil, administrative and/or criminal fines and penalties for failure to comply with all of these laws, regulations, and associated compliance activities.

The third parties with whom we contract to manufacture our product candidates are also subject to these and other environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. Liabilities they incur pursuant to these laws and regulations or any violations thereof could result in significant costs, significant administrative, civil and/or criminal fines, measurements and/or sanctions, or in certain circumstances, an interruption in operations, any of which could adversely impact our business and financial condition, especially if we are unable to find an alternate supplier in a timely manner.

Environmental, health and safety laws and regulations are becoming more stringent and enforcement is prioritized. We may be required to incur substantial expenses in connection with current and future environmental, health and/ or safety compliance, our duty of care in this regard, remediation obligations and/or measurement obligations, in which case, our production and development efforts may be interrupted or delayed and our financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

We, our employees, contractors, principal investigators, CROs, consultants, agents, vendors and collaboration partners may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We are exposed to the risk that we, our employees, contractors, principal investigators, CROs, consultants, agents, vendors and collaboration partners may engage in fraudulent conduct or other illegal activities. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and negligent conduct or unauthorized activities that violate, among other things: (i) the legal requirements or other requirements of the FDA and comparable authorities, including those laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to such authorities; (ii) manufacturing standards; (iii) data privacy, security, fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations; or (iv) laws

31

Table of Contents

that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate financial information and data. In particular, our business activities may be subject to the FCPA and anti-bribery or anti–corruption laws, regulations or rules in other relevant countries for our activities, including the U.K. Bribery Act. 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 business 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 (directly or indirectly) 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, but not limited to, the FCPA. Recently the SEC and Department of Justice have also increased their FCPA enforcement activities with respect to pharmaceutical companies.

Sales, commercialization and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are generally subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, bribery (e.g., kickbacks), self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Activities subject to these laws and regulations could also involve the improper use or misrepresentation of information obtained in the course of clinical trials or creating fraudulent data in our nonclinical studies or clinical trials, which could result in enforcement and/or sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation.

Further, we are subject to trade and economic sanctions and embargoes on certain countries, persons, groups, entities, projects and/or activities, and export control regulations, applicable in the United States and other relevant countries for our activities.

There is no certainty that all of our employees, agents, contractors, principal investigators, CROs, consultants, vendors or (other) collaborators, or those of our affiliates, will comply with all applicable laws and regulations, particularly given the high level of complexity of these laws. It is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by these parties 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, claims or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with such laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could result, among others, in significant administrative, civil and criminal fines, disgorgement, and other sanctions, remedial measures or consequences, such as the closing down of our facilities, exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs including Medicare and Medicaid, integrity and compliance oversight and reporting obligations, and prohibitions on the conduct of our business. Any such violations and consequences could materially damage our reputation, our brand, our international expansion efforts, our ability to attract and retain employees, and our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition.

Risks Related to Our Ordinary Shares and Our Status as a Public Company

An active trading market for our ordinary shares may not be sustainable. If an active trading market is not maintained, investors may not be able to resell their shares at or above the offering price and our ability to raise capital in the future may be impaired.

Although our ordinary shares are listed and being traded on Nasdaq, an active trading market for our shares may not be maintained. If an active market for our ordinary shares is not maintained, it may be difficult for you to sell shares you have purchased without depressing the market price for the shares or at all. An inactive trading market may also impair our ability to raise capital to continue to fund operations by selling shares and may impair our ability to acquire other companies or technologies by using our shares as consideration.

The ownership of our ordinary shares is concentrated and your interests may conflict with the interests of our significant shareholders.

As of March 10, 2023, our significant shareholders beneficially owned ordinary shares representing approximately 63.09% of our outstanding ordinary shares. For more information regarding our significant shareholders, please see “ITEM 7. MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS AND RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS—A. Major Shareholders.”

These significant shareholders have in the past often taken a similar position and exercised influence over matters requiring approval of our shareholders or our Board. They may act jointly or independently in the future and will continue to be able to exert significant influence over the outcome of matters requiring approval of our shareholders or our Board, including but not limited to the approval of significant transactions. Their interests may differ from the interests of other shareholders. Among other consequences, this concentration of ownership may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control and might therefore negatively affect the market price of our ordinary shares.

We do not currently intend to pay dividends on our securities and, consequently, your ability to achieve a return on your investment will depend on appreciation in the price of our ordinary shares. In addition, any distribution of dividends must be in accordance with the rules and restrictions applying under Dutch law.

We have not declared or paid any cash dividends on our ordinary shares since our incorporation and do not currently intend to pay cash dividends on our ordinary shares in the foreseeable future. We expect to retain all earnings, if any, generated by our operations for the development and growth of our business. Therefore, you are not likely to receive any dividends on your ordinary shares for the foreseeable future and the success of an investment in our ordinary shares will depend upon any future appreciation in our value. Consequently,

32

Table of Contents

investors may need to sell all or part of their holdings of ordinary shares after price appreciation, which may never occur, as the only way to realize any future gains on their investment. There is no guarantee that our ordinary shares will appreciate in value or even maintain the price at which our shareholders have purchased our ordinary shares. Investors seeking cash dividends should not purchase ordinary shares.

Under Dutch law, we may only pay dividends and other distributions from our reserves to the extent our shareholders’ equity (eigen vermogen) exceeds the sum of the paid-up and called-up share capital plus the reserves required to be maintained by Dutch law or our Articles of Association and (if it concerns a distribution of profits) after adoption of our statutory annual accounts by our general meeting from which it appears that such distribution is allowed. Subject to those restrictions, any future determination to pay dividends or other distribution from our reserves will be at the discretion of the Board and will depend upon a number of factors, including our results of operations, earnings, cash flow, financial condition, future prospects, contractual restrictions, capital investment requirements, restrictions imposed by applicable law and other factors considered relevant by the Board.

Under our Articles of Association, if any preferred shares are or have been outstanding, a dividend is first paid out of the profit, if available for distribution, to the holders or former holders, as applicable, of those preferred shares to the extent they are entitled to such distribution under our Articles of Association, which we refer to as our preferred dividend. Thereafter, our Board may decide that all or part of our remaining profits shown in our adopted statutory annual accounts will be added to our reserves. After such reservation of any such profits, any remaining profits will be at the disposal of the general meeting at the proposal of our Board for distribution on our ordinary shares, subject to the applicable restrictions of Dutch law. Our Board is permitted, subject to certain requirements, and applicable restrictions of Dutch law, to declare interim dividends without the approval of the general meeting. Dividends and other distributions shall be made payable no later than the date determined by the Board. Claims to dividends and other distributions not made within five years from the date that such dividends or distributions became payable will lapse and any such amounts will be considered to have been forfeited to us (verjaring).

In addition, exchange rate fluctuations may affect the amount of euros that we are able to distribute, and the amount in U.S. dollars that our shareholders receive upon the payment of cash dividends or other distributions we declare and pay in euros, if any. These factors could harm the value of our ordinary shares, and, in turn, the U.S. dollar proceeds that holders receive from the sale of our ordinary shares.

We have broad discretion in the use of our cash on hand and may invest or spend it in way with which you do not agree and in ways that may not yield a return on your investment.

As of December 31, 2022, we had €161.8 million in cash and cash equivalents. Our management has broad discretion in the use of such cash and could spend it in ways that do not improve our results of operations or enhance the value of our ordinary shares. You will not have the opportunity to influence our decisions on how to use our cash on hand. The failure by our management to apply these funds effectively could result in financial losses that could harm our business, cause the price of our ordinary shares to decline and delay the development of our product candidates. Pending its use, we may invest our cash on hand in a manner that does not produce income or that loses value.

A significant portion of our ordinary shares may be sold into the public market in the near future, which could cause the market price of our ordinary shares to drop significantly, even if our business is doing well.

The market price of our ordinary shares may decline as a result of sales of a large number of our ordinary shares in the market or the perception that these sales may occur. These sales, or the possibility that these sales may occur, also might make it more difficult for us to sell equity securities in the future at a time and at a price that we deem appropriate.

We had a total of 33,816,459 ordinary shares outstanding as of March 10, 2023. If our existing shareholders sell substantial amounts of ordinary shares in the public market, or the market perceives that such sales may occur, the market price of our ordinary shares and our ability to raise capital through an issue of equity securities in the future could be adversely affected.

We are not obligated to, and do not, comply with all best practice provisions of the Dutch Corporate Governance Code.

We are subject to the Dutch Corporate Governance Code, or the DCGC. The DCGC contains both principles and best practice provisions on corporate governance that regulate relations between the Board and the general meeting and matters in respect of financial reporting, auditors, disclosure, compliance and enforcement standards. The DCGC is based on a “comply or explain” principle. Accordingly, companies are required to disclose in their annual reports, filed in the Netherlands, whether they comply with the provisions of the DCGC. If they do not comply with those provisions (for example, because of a conflicting Nasdaq requirement), the company is required to give the reasons for such noncompliance. The DCGC applies to Dutch companies listed on a government-recognized stock exchange, whether in the Netherlands or elsewhere, including Nasdaq. We do not comply with all best practice provisions of the DCGC. This may affect your rights as a shareholder, and you may not have the same level of protection as a shareholder in a Dutch company that fully complies with the DCGC.

As a foreign private issuer, we are permitted to adopt certain home country practices in relation to corporate governance matters that differ significantly from Nasdaq corporate governance listing standards. These practices may afford less protection to shareholders than they would enjoy if we complied fully with Nasdaq corporate governance listing standards.

We are a “foreign private issuer,” as defined in the SEC’s rules and regulations. The Nasdaq Listing Rules include certain accommodations in the corporate governance requirements that allow foreign private issuers to follow “home country” corporate

33

Table of Contents

governance practices in lieu of the otherwise applicable corporate governance standards of Nasdaq. The application of such exceptions requires that we disclose the Nasdaq Listing Rules that we do not follow and describe the Dutch corporate governance standards, including those as per the DCGC that we do follow in lieu of the relevant Nasdaq corporate governance standard. We intend to continue to follow Dutch corporate governance practices in lieu of the corporate governance requirements of Nasdaq in certain respects.

In accordance with Dutch law and generally accepted business practices, our Articles of Association do not provide quorum requirements generally applicable to general meetings of shareholders. To this extent, our practice varies from the requirement of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5620I, which requires an issuer to provide in its bylaws for a generally applicable quorum, and that such quorum may not be less than one-third of the outstanding voting stock. Although we must provide shareholders with an agenda and other relevant documents for the general meeting of shareholders, Dutch law does not have a regulatory regime for the solicitation of proxies and the solicitation of proxies is not a generally accepted business practice in the Netherlands, thus our practice will vary from the requirement of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5620(b). As permitted by the listing requirements of Nasdaq, we have also opted out of the requirements of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5610, which requires an issuer to disclose within four business days any waiver of the code of conduct that has been granted to directors and officers. In addition, we have opted out of shareholder approval requirements, as included in the Nasdaq Listing Rules, for the issuance of securities in connection with certain events such as the acquisition of shares or assets of another company, the establishment of or amendments to equity-based compensation plans for employees, a change of control of us and certain private placements. To this extent, our practice varies from the requirements of Nasdaq Rule 5635, which generally requires an issuer to obtain shareholder approval for the issuance of securities in connection with such events. Accordingly, you may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of companies that are subject to these Nasdaq requirements.

We are a foreign private issuer and, as a result, we are not subject to U.S. proxy rules and are subject to Exchange Act reporting obligations that, to some extent, are more lenient and less frequent than those of a U.S. domestic public company.

We report under the Exchange Act as a non-U.S. company with foreign private issuer status. Because we qualify as a foreign private issuer under the Exchange Act, we are exempt from certain provisions of the Exchange Act that are applicable to U.S. domestic public companies, including (i) the sections of the Exchange Act regulating the solicitation of proxies, consents or authorizations in respect of a security registered under the Exchange Act, (ii) the sections of the Exchange Act requiring insiders to file public reports of their stock ownership and trading activities and liability for insiders who profit from trades made in a short period of time and (iii) the rules under the Exchange Act requiring the filing with the SEC of annual reports on Form 10-Q containing unaudited financial and other specified information, or current reports on Form 8-K, upon the occurrence of specified significant events. In addition, foreign private issuers are not required to file their annual report on Form 20-F until four months after the end of each fiscal year, while U.S. domestic issuers that are non-accelerated filers are required to file their annual report on Form 10-K within 90 days after the end of each fiscal year. Foreign private issuers are also exempt from the Regulation Fair Disclosure, aimed at preventing issuers from making selective disclosures of material information. As a result of the above, you may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of companies that are not foreign private issuers.

We may lose our foreign private issuer status in the future, which could result in significant additional cost and expense.

While we currently qualify as a foreign private issuer, the determination of foreign private issuer status is made annually on the last business day of an issuer’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter. In the future, we would lose our foreign private issuer status if we to fail to meet the requirements necessary to maintain our foreign private issuer status as of the relevant determination date. For example, if more than 50% of our securities are held by U.S. residents and more than 50% of either our directors or executive officers are residents or citizens of the United States, we could lose our foreign private issuer status.

The regulatory and compliance costs to us under U.S. securities laws as a U.S. domestic issuer may be significantly more than costs we incur as a foreign private issuer. If we are not a foreign private issuer, we will be required to file periodic reports and registration statements on U.S. domestic issuer forms with the SEC, which are more detailed and extensive in certain respects than the forms available to a foreign private issuer. We would be required under current SEC rules to prepare our financial statements in accordance with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, or U.S. GAAP, rather than IFRS, as issued by IASB. Such conversion of our financial statements to U.S. GAAP would involve significant time and cost, and we would still be required to prepare financial statements in accordance with IFRS as adopted by the European Union as required by Dutch law. In addition, we may lose our ability to rely upon exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements on United States stock exchanges that are available to foreign private issuers such as the ones described above and exemptions from procedural requirements related to the solicitation of proxies.

We are eligible to be treated as an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the JOBS Act, and we cannot be certain if the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies will make our ordinary shares less attractive to investors.

We are an emerging growth company, as defined in the JOBS Act. For as long as we continue to be an emerging growth company, we may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including an exemption from the auditor attestation requirement in the assessment of our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act; and to the extent that we no longer qualify as a foreign private issuer, (a) reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements, and (b) exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation, including golden parachute compensation. We cannot predict whether investors will find our ordinary shares less attractive if we rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our ordinary shares less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our ordinary shares and our share price may be reduced or more volatile.

34

Table of Contents

We may take advantage of these provisions until such time that we are no longer an emerging growth company. We would cease to be an emerging growth company on December 31, 2026 (the last day of our fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the date of the completion of our initial public offering in February 2021) or earlier if we have more than $1.24 billion in annual revenues, are deemed to be a “large accelerated filer” under the rules of the SEC, or issue more than $1.0 billion of nonconvertible debt over a three-year period. We may also choose to take advantage of some but not all of these reduced burdens. For example, Section 107 of the JOBS Act provides that an emerging growth company can use the extended transition period provided in Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, for complying with new or revised accounting standards. Given that we currently report and expect to continue to report under IFRS, as issued by the IASB, we have irrevocably elected not to avail ourselves of this extended transition period and, as a result, we will adopt new or revised accounting standards on the relevant dates on which adoption of such standards is required by the IASB. We have taken advantage of reduced reporting requirements in this Annual Report. Accordingly, the information contained herein may be different than the information you receive from other public companies in which you hold equity securities.

The rights of shareholders in companies subject to Dutch corporate law differ in material respects from the rights of shareholders of corporations incorporated in the United States.

Our corporate affairs are governed by our Articles of Association, our internal rules and policies and by Dutch law. The rights of shareholders and the responsibilities of members of our Board are in many ways different from the rights and obligations of shareholders and a board of directors in companies governed by the laws of United States jurisdictions. In particular, pursuant to Dutch law members of the Board are required to act in the interest of the company and the sustainable success of its business, with an aim to creating long-term value, taking into account the interests of its employees, clients, shareholders and other stakeholders of the company, in all cases with due observation of the principles of reasonableness and fairness. It is possible that some of these parties will have interests that are different from, or in addition to, your interests as a shareholder.

Dutch corporate law and our Articles of Association contain or may contain provisions that may discourage, delay or prevent a takeover attempt, which could adversely affect the price of our ordinary shares.

Under Dutch law, various protective measures are possible and permissible within the boundaries set by Dutch law and Dutch case law. In this respect, our general meeting has authorized our Board for a period of five years after our conversion into a Dutch public company with limited liability (naamloze vennootschap), to grant a call option to an independent foundation under Dutch law (if and when incorporated), or protective foundation, to acquire preferred shares pursuant to a call option agreement that may be entered into between us and such protective foundation.

This call option, if and when granted, shall be continuous in nature and can be exercised repeatedly on multiple occasions. If the protective foundation, if and when incorporated, would exercise such call option, if and when granted, a number of preferred shares up to 100% of our issued share capital held by others than the protective foundation, minus one share, will be issued to the protective foundation. These preferred shares would then be issued to the protective foundation under the obligation to pay up 25% of their nominal value upon issuance. In order for the protective foundation to finance the issue price in relation to the preferred shares, the protective foundation may enter into a finance arrangement with a bank or other financial institution.

As an alternative to securing this external financing, subject to applicable restrictions under Dutch law, the call option agreement, if and when entered into, will provide that the protective foundation may request us to provide, or cause our subsidiaries to provide, sufficient funding to the protective foundation to enable it to satisfy the payment obligation (or part thereof) in cash and/or to charge an amount equal to the payment obligation (or part thereof) against our profits and/or reserves in satisfaction of such payment obligation. The articles of association of the protective foundation, if and when incorporated, will provide that it will promote and protect the interests of the Company, the business connected with the Company and the Company’s stakeholders from time to time, and repressing possible influences which could threaten the strategy, continuity, independence and/or identity of the company or the business connected with it, to such an extent that this could be considered to be damaging to the aforementioned interests. These influences may include a third party acquiring a significant percentage of our ordinary shares, the announcement of an unsolicited public offer for our ordinary shares, shareholder activism, other concentration of control over our ordinary shares or any other form of undue pressure on us to alter our strategic policies. The protective foundation, if and when incorporated, shall be structured to operate independently of us.

The voting rights of our shares are based on nominal value and, as we expect our ordinary shares to trade substantially in excess of their nominal value, preferred shares issued at 25% of their nominal value can carry significant voting power for a substantially reduced price compared to the price of our ordinary shares and thus can be used as a defensive measure. These preferred shares, if and when issued, will have both a liquidation and dividend preference over our ordinary shares and will accrue a cash preferred dividend at a fixed rate calculated over the amount paid-up on those preferred shares pro rata tempore for the period during which they were outstanding. The protective foundation would be expected to require us to cancel its preferred shares, if and when issued to the protective foundation, once the perceived threat to the company and its stakeholders has been removed or sufficiently mitigated or neutralized. However, subject to the same limitations described above, the protective foundation would, in that case, continue to have the right to exercise the call option in the future in response to a new threat to the interests of us, our business and our stakeholders from time to time.

In this respect, certain provisions of our Articles of Association may make it more difficult for a third-party to acquire control of us or effect a change in the composition of our Board:

35

Table of Contents

In addition, Dutch law allows for staggered multi-year terms of our directors, as a result of which only part of our directors may be subject to appointment or re-appointment in any one year.

Furthermore, in accordance with the DCGC, shareholders who have the right to put an item on the agenda for our general meeting or to request the convening of a general meeting shall not exercise such rights until after they have consulted our Board. If exercising such rights may result in a change in our strategy (for example, through the dismissal of one or more of our directors), our Board must be given the opportunity to invoke a reasonable period of up to 180 days to respond to the shareholders’ intentions. If invoked, our Board must use such response period for further deliberation and constructive consultation, in any event with the shareholder(s) concerned and exploring alternatives. At the end of the response time, our Board shall report on this consultation and the exploration of alternatives to our general meeting. The response period may be invoked only once for any given general meeting and shall not apply (i) in respect of a matter for which either a response period or a statutory cooling-off period (as discussed below) has been previously invoked or (ii) in situations where a shareholder holds at least 75% of our issued capital as a consequence of a successful public bid.

Dutch cooling-off period in face of shareholder activism or hostile take-over.

Our Board can invoke a cooling-off period of up to 250 days when shareholders, using their right to have items added to the agenda for a general meeting or their right to request a general meeting, propose an agenda item for our general meeting to dismiss, suspend or appoint one or more directors (or to amend any provision in the Articles of Association dealing with those matters) or when a public offer for our company is made or announced without our support, provided, in each case, that our board of directors believes that such proposal or offer materially conflicts with the interests of our company and its business. During a cooling-off period, our general meeting cannot dismiss, suspend or appoint directors (or amend the provisions in the Articles of Association dealing with those matters) except at the proposal of our Board.

During a cooling-off period, our Board must gather all relevant information necessary for a careful decision-making process and at least consult with shareholders representing 3% or more of our issued share capital at the time the cooling-off period was invoked, as well as with our Dutch works council (if we or, under certain circumstances, any of our subsidiaries would have one). Formal statements expressed by these stakeholders during such consultations must be published on our website to the extent these stakeholders have approved that publication. Ultimately, one week following the last day of the cooling-off period, our Board must publish a report in respect of its policy and conduct of affairs during the cooling-off period on our website. This report must remain available for inspection by shareholders and others with meeting rights under Dutch law at our office and must be tabled for discussion at the next general meeting. Shareholders representing at least 3% of our issued share capital may request the Enterprise Chamber for early termination of the cooling-off period. The Enterprise Chamber must rule in favor of the request if the shareholders can demonstrate that:

• our Board, in light of the circumstances at hand when the cooling-off period was invoked, could not reasonably have concluded that the relevant proposal or hostile offer constituted a material conflict with the interests of our company and its business;

• our Board cannot reasonably believe that a continuation of the cooling-off period would contribute to careful policy-making; or

• other defensive measures, having the same purpose, nature and scope as the cooling-off period, have been activated during the cooling-off period and have not since been terminated or suspended within a reasonable period at the relevant shareholders’ request (i.e., no ‘stacking’ of defensive measures).

Shareholders may not be able to exercise preemptive rights and, as a result, may experience substantial dilution upon future issuances of ordinary shares.

In the event of an issuance of our ordinary shares, subject to certain exceptions, each shareholder will have a pro rata preemptive right in proportion to the aggregate nominal value of the ordinary shares held by such holder. These preemptive rights may be restricted or excluded by a resolution of the general meeting or by another corporate body designated by the general meeting. Our Board is authorized for a period of five years after our conversion into a Dutch public company with limited liability (naamloze vennootschap) to issue shares or grant rights to subscribe for shares up to our authorized share capital from time to time and to limit or exclude preemptive rights in connection therewith. This could cause existing shareholders to experience substantial dilution of their interest in us.

U.S. investors may have difficulty enforcing civil liabilities against our company and directors and senior management.

We are incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands and have our statutory seat (statutaire zetel) in Leiden, the Netherlands. Some of our assets are located outside the United States and most members of the Board and Senior Management reside outside of the United States. As a result, it may not be possible for investors to effect service of process within the United States upon such persons or to enforce against them or us the U.S. courts’ judgments predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the federal securities laws of the United States.

36

Table of Contents

Foreign courts may refuse to hear a United States securities law claim because foreign courts may not be the most appropriate forums in which to bring such a claim. Even if a foreign court agrees to hear a claim, it may determine that the law of the jurisdiction in which the foreign court resides, and not U.S. law, is applicable to the claim.

Further, if U.S. law is found to be applicable, the content of applicable U.S. law must be proved as a fact, which can be a time-consuming and costly process, and certain matters of procedure would still be governed by the law of the jurisdiction in which the foreign court resides.

There is currently no treaty in effect between the United States and the Netherlands providing for the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments, other than arbitration awards, in civil and commercial matters. It is noted that, as of the date of this annual report, the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements of June 30, 2005 has entered into force for the Netherlands, but has not entered into force for the United States. The Hague Convention of July 2, 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters has not entered into force for either the Netherlands or the United States. Accordingly, a judgment rendered by a court in the United States, whether or not predicated solely upon U.S. securities laws, would not automatically be recognized and enforced by the competent Dutch courts. However, if a person has obtained a judgment rendered by a court in the United States that is enforceable under the laws of the United States and files a claim with the competent Dutch court, the Dutch court will in principle give binding effect to that judgment if (i) the jurisdiction of the United States court was based on a ground of jurisdiction that is generally acceptable according to international standards, (ii) the judgment by the United States court was rendered in legal proceedings that comply with the Dutch standards of proper administration of justice including sufficient safeguards (behoorlijke rechtspleging), (iii) binding effect of such judgment is not contrary to Dutch public order (openbare orde) and (iv) the judgment by the United States court is not incompatible with a decision rendered between the same parties by a Dutch court, or with a previous decision rendered between the same parties by a foreign court in a dispute that concerns the same subject and is based on the same cause, provided that the previous decision qualifies for recognition in the Netherlands. However, even if such a United States judgment is given binding effect, a claim based on that judgment may still be rejected if that judgment is not or no longer formally enforceable.

Additionally, our Articles of Association provide that the U.S. federal district courts shall be the sole and exclusive forum for any claim asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act. This choice of forum provision may limit a shareholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees and may increase the costs associated with such lawsuits, which may discourage such lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and employees.

Based on the foregoing, U.S. investors may not be able to enforce against us or our directors, representatives or certain experts named herein who are residents of the Netherlands or countries other than the United States any judgments obtained in U.S. courts in civil and commercial matters, including judgments under the U.S. federal securities laws.

We may be a passive foreign investment company, or “PFIC,” which could result in adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences to U.S. investors.

Under the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, we will be a PFIC for any taxable year in which, after the application of certain look-through rules with respect to subsidiaries, either (i) 75% or more of our gross income consists of “passive income,” or (ii) 50% or more of the average quarterly value of our assets consists of assets that produce, or are held for the production of, “passive income.” Passive income generally includes dividends, interest, certain non-active rents and royalties, and capital gains. Based on the nature of our business, our financial statements, our expectations about the nature and amount of our income, and our assets and activities, we do not believe we were a PFIC in 2022 and we do not expect to be a PFIC for our current taxable year or in the foreseeable future. In addition, we may, directly or indirectly, hold equity interests in other PFICs. Whether we or any of our subsidiaries will be a PFIC in 2023 or any future year is a factual determination that must be made annually at the close of each taxable year, and, thus, is subject to significant uncertainty; because a determination of whether a company is a PFIC must be made annually after the end of each taxable year and will depend on the composition of our income and assets and the market value of our assets from time to time, we cannot assure you that we will not be a PFIC for the current or any future taxable year. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that we will not be a PFIC in 2023 or any future taxable year.

If we are a PFIC for any taxable year during which a U.S. Holder (as defined in “Material United States and Dutch Income Tax Considerations— Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations to U.S. Holders”) holds our ordinary shares, we generally would continue to be treated as a PFIC with respect to that U.S. investor for all succeeding years during which the U.S. Holder holds our ordinary shares even if we ceased to meet the threshold requirements for PFIC status, unless certain exceptions apply. Such a U.S. Holder may be subject to adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences, including (i) the treatment of all or a portion of any gain on disposition as ordinary income, (ii) the application of a deferred interest charge on such gain and the receipt of certain dividends and (iii) compliance with certain reporting requirements. There is no assurance that we will provide information that will enable investors to make a qualified electing fund election, also known as a QEF Election, which could mitigate the adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences should we be classified as a PFIC.

Dutch and European insolvency laws are substantially different from U.S. insolvency laws and may offer our shareholders less protection than they would have under U.S. insolvency laws.

We are subject to Dutch insolvency laws in the event any insolvency proceedings are initiated against us, including, among other laws and regulations, Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of May 20, 2015 on insolvency proceedings. Should a court in another Member State of the European Union determine that our center of main interests, or COMI, is situated in that Member State, the courts in that Member State will in principle have jurisdiction over the insolvency proceedings initiated against us and the

37

Table of Contents

insolvency laws of that Member State will in principle apply to us, in accordance with and subject to such the aforementioned Regulation and the rules promulgated thereunder. Insolvency laws in the Netherlands or the relevant other Member State of the European Union, as applicable, may offer our shareholders less protection than they would have under U.S. insolvency laws and make it more difficult for our shareholders to recover the amount they could expect to recover in a liquidation under U.S. insolvency laws.

General Risk Factors

Our internal computer systems, or those used by our clinical investigators, contractors or consultants, may fail or suffer security breaches.

Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems and those of our contractors and consultants are vulnerable to damage from cyber-attacks or intrusions, including by computer hackers, foreign governments, foreign companies or competitors, or may be breached by employee error, malfeasance or other disruption. A breakdown, invasion, corruption, destruction or interruption of critical information technology systems could negatively impact operations. If our systems or those of our contractors or consultants are damaged, fail to function properly or otherwise become unavailable, we may incur substantial costs to repair or replace them, and we may experience loss of critical data and interruptions or delays in our ability to perform critical functions, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could be subject to significant fines, penalties or other liabilities and the development and commercialization of our product candidates could be delayed, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. Some of the federal, state and foreign government requirements also include obligations of companies to notify regulators and/or individuals of security breaches involving personally identifiable information, which could result from breaches experienced by us or by our vendors, contractors, or organizations with which we have formed strategic relationships. Even though we may have contractual protections with such vendors, contractors, or other organizations, notifications and follow-up actions related to a security breach could impact our reputation and cause us to incur significant costs. Any failure to prevent or mitigate security breaches or improper access to, use, disclosure or other misappropriation of our data or consumers’ personal data could result in significant liability under state (e.g., state breach notification and privacy laws), federal (e.g., the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH Act)) and international laws (e.g., the GDPR). For example, a breach impacting personal data which is subject to the GDPR could result in fines of up to 20 million Euros or up to 4% of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher, as well as compensation claims for financial or non-financial loss by affected individuals. To the extent that any disruption or security breach resulted in a loss of or damage to our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and the further development of our product candidates could be delayed. For example, the loss of or damage to clinical trial data, such as from completed or ongoing clinical trials, for any of our product candidates would likely result in delays in our marketing approval efforts and significantly increased costs in an effort to recover or reproduce the data.

We may engage in strategic transactions that could impact our liquidity, increase our expenses and present significant distractions to our management.

We may consider strategic transactions, such as acquisitions of companies, asset purchases and out-licensing or in-licensing of intellectual property, products or technologies. Any future transactions could increase our near and long-term expenditures, result in potentially dilutive issuances of our equity securities, including our ordinary shares, or the incurrence of debt, contingent liabilities, amortization expenses or acquired in process research and development expenses, any of which could affect our financial condition, liquidity and results of operations. Additional potential transactions that we may consider in the future include a variety of business arrangements, including spin-offs, strategic partnerships, joint ventures, restructurings, divestitures, business combinations and investments. These transactions may never be successful and may require significant time and attention of management. In addition, the integration of any business that we may acquire in the future may disrupt our existing business and may be a complex, risky and costly endeavor for which we may never realize the anticipated benefits. Accordingly, although there can be no assurance that we will undertake or successfully complete any transactions of the nature described above, any transactions that we do complete could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

The trading price of our ordinary shares has been, and may in the future be, highly volatile, which could result in substantial losses for holders of our ordinary shares.

Our share price has been highly volatile. In addition, because of our relatively small public float our ordinary shares may be less liquid than the ordinary shares of companies with broader public ownership and trading of a relatively small volume of our ordinary shares may have a greater impact on the market price for our ordinary shares than would be the case if our public float were larger. The market price of our ordinary shares may fluctuate significantly in response to numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control, including, but not limited to:

38

Table of Contents

In addition, the stock market in general has experienced substantial price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of particular companies affected. These broad market and industry factors may materially harm the market price of our ordinary shares, regardless of our operating performance. As we operate in a single industry, we are especially vulnerable to these factors to the extent that they affect our industry or our product candidates, or to a lesser extent our markets. In the past, securities class action litigation has often been initiated against companies and their management following periods of volatility in their stock price. This type of litigation could result in substantial costs and divert our management’s attention and resources and could also require us to make substantial payments to satisfy judgments or to settle litigation.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, the price of our ordinary shares and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our ordinary shares depends in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. If no or few securities or industry analysts cover us, the trading price for our ordinary shares would likely be negatively impacted. If one or more of the analysts who covers us downgrades our ordinary shares or publishes incorrect or unfavorable research about our business, the price of our ordinary shares would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases coverage of us or fails to publish reports on us regularly, or downgrades our ordinary shares, demand for our ordinary shares could decrease, which could cause the price of our ordinary shares or trading volume to decline.

The requirements of being a public company may strain our resources, divert management’s attention and affect our ability to attract and retain qualified board members.

As a public company, we are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and any rules promulgated thereunder, as well as the rules of Nasdaq. The requirements of these rules and regulations increase our legal and financial compliance costs, make some activities more difficult, time-consuming or costly and increase demand on our systems and resources. Particularly after we are no longer an “emerging growth company” or cease to qualify as a foreign private issuer, we expect to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls for financial reporting. In order to maintain and, if required, improve our disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting to meet this standard, significant resources and management oversight are required. We may need to hire additional accounting, finance and other personnel in connection with our continued efforts to comply with these requirements, and our management and other personnel will continue to devote a substantial amount of time towards maintaining compliance with these requirements. These rules and regulations can also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified independent members of our board of directors. Additionally, these rules and regulations make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance. We may be required to accept reduced coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain coverage. The increased costs of compliance with public company reporting requirements and our potential failure to satisfy these requirements can have a material adverse effect on our operations, business, financial condition or results of operations.

If our estimates or judgments relating to our critical accounting policies are based on assumptions that change or prove to be incorrect, our operating results could fall below the expectations of securities analysts and investors, resulting in a decline in the market price of our ordinary shares.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with IFRS requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in our financial statements and accompanying notes. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets, liabilities, equity and expenses that are not readily apparent from other sources. It is possible that interpretation, industry practice and guidance may evolve over time. If our assumptions change or if actual circumstances differ from our assumptions, our operating results may be adversely affected and could fall below the expectations of securities analysts and investors, resulting in a decline in the market price of our ordinary shares.

39

Table of Contents

Our disclosure controls and procedures may not prevent or detect all errors or acts of fraud.

We designed our disclosure controls and procedures to provide reasonable assurance that information we must disclose in reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to management, and recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. We believe that any disclosure controls and procedures, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people or by an unauthorized override of the controls. Accordingly, because of the inherent limitations in our control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.

40

Table of Contents

ITEM 4. INFORMATION ON THE COMPANY

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on the development and commercialization of innovative therapies for rare diseases with significant unmet need, initially focused on angioedema and other bradykinin-mediated diseases. Our first molecule, deucrictibant (PHA121, PHA-022121), is a novel, small-molecule bradykinin B2-receptor antagonist for the treatment of hereditary angioedema, or HAE. Bradykinin-B2-receptor inhibition is a clinically validated mechanism for the treatment of HAE, as demonstrated by icatibant, which is a bradykinin B2-receptor antagonist approved in Europe in 2008 and in the United States in 2011 (as FIRAZYR). We designed deucrictibant to improve upon the therapeutic profile of existing therapies and, through oral delivery, to provide patients with quality of life and convenience that is superior to current standard-of-care HAE treatments, which are injectables. We believe deucrictibant has the potential to provide a safe, effective and convenient option for both acute and prophylactic treatments of HAE, in the form of our PHVS416 on-demand rapid exposure product candidate, and for prophylaxis of HAE, in the form of our PHVS719 small daily dose extended-release product candidate. We believe that our product candidates may address a broader range of angioedema attacks than other available treatments since deucrictibant blocks the actual signal that leads to angioedema (the interaction of bradykinin, or BK, with the bradykinin B2 receptor), rather than an upstream signal. By blocking the action of bradykinin, we can prevent its aberrant signaling regardless of the pathway that generates it. In our completed Phase 1 trials to date, we have observed that deucrictibant was orally bioavailable and well tolerated at all doses studied, with approximately dose-proportional exposure. We also have successfully demonstrated proof-of-mechanism through a clinical pharmacodynamics, or PD, assessment with the bradykinin challenge, which had been utilized as a validated surrogate assessment for dose selection in the icatibant development program.

We have demonstrated clinical efficacy and tolerability in a Phase 2 study (RAPIDe-1) treating attacks of HAE. The data allowed us to compare the projected therapeutic performance of deucrictibant with that of icatibant. However, we have not conducted a head-to-head comparison of icatibant to deucrictibant in a clinical study. We plan to efficiently progress deucrictibant through clinical development for on-demand and prophylactic use with our on-demand product candidate, PHVS416, and prophylactic extended-release product candidate, PHVS719, respectively. We commenced our RAPIDe-1 Phase 2 clinical trial of PHVS416 in February 2021 and reported topline Phase 2 data for the acute treatment of patients with HAE attacks in December 2022. We also commenced the CHAPTER-1 Phase 2 clinical trial for prophylaxis in 2021 using twice-daily dosing of the PHVS416 softgel capsules. Our primary objective with this trial is to assess the efficacy and safety profile of PHVS416 dose regimens for prophylactic treatments in HAE patients. We expect to have Phase 2 data from CHAPTER-1 in the second half of 2023. In February 2022, we reported Phase 1 clinical data with PHVS719 demonstrating pharmacokinetics of the extended-release formulation and the potential for once-daily dosing. Our agent for service of process in the United States is Dr. Morgan Conn, who is registered in PO Box 121, Buckingham PA 18912, USA.

Our legal and commercial name is Pharvaris N.V. In connection with our initial public offering in the first quarter of 2021, we converted the legal form of our company under Dutch law from a private company with limited liability (besloten vennootschap met beperkte aansprakelijkheid) to a public company with limited liability (naamloze vennootschap) and changed our name from Pharvaris B.V. to Pharvaris N.V. Pharvaris B.V. was founded in 2015 in Leiden, The Netherlands. Our principal executive offices are located in Emmy Noetherweg 2, 2333 BK Leiden, The Netherlands, telephone: +31 (0)71 2036 410.

Our principal expenditures since inception have been our research and development expenses, as more fully described elsewhere in this Annual Report. To date, we have relied solely on the issuance of equity securities to finance our operations and internal growth. For more information, please see “ITEM 5. OPERATING AND FINANCIAL REVIEW AND PROSPECTS—B. Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

The SEC maintains an Internet website that contains reports and other information about issuers, like us, that file electronically with the SEC. The address of that website is www.sec.gov. Our website can be found at www.pharvaris.com. The information on our website is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report, and you should not consider information contained on our website to be a part of this Annual Report.

Overview

Deucrictibant (PHA121, PHA-022121) is a novel, highly potent inhibitor and selective small molecule bradykinin B2-receptor antagonist and, to our knowledge, the only orally available bradykinin B2-receptor antagonist currently in development. Deucrictibant has been observed to be a potent inhibitor in vitro as assessed using human recombinant bradykinin B2 receptors (150 pM);ex vivo as studied against endogenous bradykinin B2 receptors in a human umbilical vein model (350 pM); and in vivo in the human bradykinin-challenge model (170 pM). Potency as used in this Annual Report refers to the amount of drug required to produce a pharmacological effect of given intensity and is not a measure of therapeutic efficacy. We have released topline data demonstrating efficacy and tolerability in a Phase 2 clinical trial for treatment of attacks in our RAPIDe-1 study but have not completed assessment of efficacy for prevention of attacks in our CHAPTER-1 study. PHA121 demonstrated 5000-fold selectivity for the bradykinin B2 receptor when compared to approximately 170 other molecular targets, including the bradykinin B1 receptor. We designed deucrictibant as a new chemotype with properties compatible with oral delivery. We are developing deucrictibant for the on-demand indication as PHVS416, which is delivered in a softgel capsule designed to rapidly treat symptoms with a single dose. We are also developing deucrictibant for the prophylactic indication as PHVS719, which is a small daily dose tablet with an extended-release formulation designed for the patient to maintain therapeutic levels for at least 24 hours and to achieve a steady-state plasma concentration within 72 hours.

41

Table of Contents

In our Phase 1 clinical trials to-date, we have observed rapid exposure and predictable linear pharmacokinetics, or PK, with and without food. In addition, we observed deucrictibant to be a potent antagonist of the bradykinin B2 receptor, in vitro and in vivo with healthy volunteers. In our models based on PK data from our Phase 1 clinical trial of deucrictibant and published data for icatibant, both in the BK challenge assessment, deucrictibant was shown to be consistently 25-fold more potent at inhibiting the effects of administered bradykinin than icatibant on a molar basis. We have not conducted a head-to-head comparison of icatibant to deucrictibant in a clinical trial but have compared the published data for icatibant to data from our Phase 1 and Phase 2 clinical trials of deucrictibant. While we believe this comparison to icatibant to be useful and appropriate, the value of this and other comparisons to icatibant in this Annual Report may be limited because they are not derived from a head-to-head trial and they are from trials that were conducted under different protocols at different sites and at different times. Without head-to-head data, we will be unable to make comparative claims for our product candidates, if approved.

In our Phase 2 placebo-controlled trial evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of PHVS416 for on-demand treatment of attacks in patients with HAE type 1 and 2 (RAPIDe-1), a statistically significant and clinical meaningful reduction of the patient-reported symptoms of HAE was observed for the attacks treated with all doses of PHVS416 (10, 20, 30 mg) compared to placebo-treated attacks. The study’s primary endpoint—symptom relief at four hours after treatment with study drug—as well as all key secondary efficacy endpoints were met. Consistently with its pharmacokinetic profile, PHVS416 demonstrated rapid onset of action, symptom relief, and resolution of the manifestations of HAE attacks as well as sustained clinical effects, with consistent findings across outcome measures. In addition, PHVS416 substantially reduced the use of rescue medication compared to the placebo. PHVS416 was generally well tolerated at all dose levels with three treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) reported for one PHVS416 30-mg-treated attack (2.8%) and one TRAE reported for one placebo-treated attack (1.9%); there were no treatment-related serious adverse events (SAEs), no treatment-related adverse events (AEs) of severe severity, and no AEs leading to treatment discontinuation. We believe these positive Phase 2 data support further development of PHVS416 as a potential oral on-demand therapy for HAE attacks.

HAE is a rare and potentially life-threatening genetic condition with symptoms that include episodes of debilitating and often painful swelling in the hands, feet, face (lips and tongue), gastrointestinal tract, urogenital region, or airways. Attacks are unpredictable in frequency, location, timing, and severity, with multiple types of triggers. According to scientific publications, patients experience a median of 14 attacks per year, and half of patients experience a potentially life-threatening airway attack at least once in their lifetime. Airway attacks are particularly dangerous and can lead to asphyxiation. If left untreated, attacks can last multiple days and are commonly painful, leading to multiple sick days and even hospitalization. According to HAE International, as of October 2014, HAE affected from 1:50,000 to 1:10,000 individuals globally, or at least 6,600 patients in the U.S. and at least 8,900 patients in the EU.

Global sales of treatments for HAE in 2022 are estimated at approximately $2.7 billion based on publicly available information and, according to public research reports, are forecast to grow at an approximately 9% compound annual growth rate to $4.3 billion through 2027. Current approved products treat acute HAE attacks in an on-demand setting or seek to prevent or reduce future HAE attacks in a prophylactic setting. Each of these products generally works in one of the following ways: inhibiting the bradykinin B2 receptor, replacing the deficiency in C1-INH activity, or inhibiting plasma kallikrein. Currently most standard-of-care therapies are administered by injection, which patients can find challenging despite their efficacy because these therapies often result in painful injection-site reactions (leading some patients to delay treatment and risk attacks), are time consuming to receive (as some need to be administered in a clinic), and are difficult to carry and/or store. We believe HAE patients need alternatives that better meet their objectives for ease of disease treatment, disease control, and improved quality of life. We anticipate that there will be strong interest in safe and effective, orally delivered, small-molecule treatments that can match or improve upon the efficacy profile of existing therapies.

Based on results observed from our four completed clinical trials to-date, we believe our product candidates that contain deucrictibant will demonstrate advantages and differentiation relative to currently approved HAE therapies and other oral therapies in clinical development. Deucrictibant’s bradykinin- B2-receptor-inhibition mechanism has a well-established clinical therapeutic profile in a currently approved product in the rapid treatment of acute HAE attacks. We have observed greater potency for deucrictibant compared to icatibant using a surrogate endpoint in the bradykinin challenge study, potentially resulting in both a smaller therapeutic dose and a longer duration of effect. We evaluated the PD and PK of deucrictibant in a bradykinin-challenge model in healthy subjects. The bradykinin challenge was validated as a surrogate assessment for dose selection in the original development program for icatibant, as reviewed by the FDA and the EMA. The clinical dose of icatibant established with the bradykinin challenge has demonstrated successful treatment of HAE attacks in multiple randomized clinical trials and over 10 years of clinical experience. We conducted a proof-of-concept clinical trial testing the effects of BK in healthy volunteers in our bradykinin-challenge trial, where we evaluated the effect of deucrictibant on cardiovascular parameters affected by bradykinin such as blood pressure, heart rate and cardiac output in healthy volunteers. We observed that deucrictibant was more potent in blocking the effects of BK in humans than icatibant, when comparing the deucrictibant results of the trial to published data on icatibant. The data from this trial allowed us to generate a PK/PD correlation model. Based on this model and published data on icatibant, we predict the duration of effect for a single oral dose of 12 mg deucrictibant to exceed that of 30 mg of icatibant and a single oral dose of 22 mg deucrictibant will cover the same duration of effect as two icatibant injections of 30 mg administered six hours apart. Furthermore, analysis based on the results from this trial suggest that therapeutic doses of deucrictibant may be at least 10-fold smaller than the doses required for oral kallikrein inhibitors in development. In addition, we believe that the observed PK profile of our compound demonstrates the potential of PHVS719 as a prophylactic treatment of HAE by achieving steady-state plasma concentrations within 72 hours. The BK-challenge data was generated in a Phase 1 clinical trial. The topline data from our deucrictibant Phase 2 RAPIDe-1 trial treating HAE attacks were consistent with the predictions of the BK challenge in both onset of symptom relief and duration of effect (use of rescue medication). However, we have not conducted a head-to-head comparison of icatibant to deucrictibant in a clinical trial but have compared the published data for icatibant to data from our Phase 1 clinical trial of deucrictibant. Potency as used in this Annual Report refers to the amount of drug required to produce a pharmacological effect of given intensity and is not a measure of therapeutic efficacy.

In August 2022, the FDA placed a hold on the clinical trials of deucrictibant in the U.S. based on its review of nonclinical data. The FDA requested that Pharvaris conduct an additional long-term rodent toxicology study and update the Investigator’s Brochure. Pharvaris

42

Table of Contents

participated in a Type A meeting with the FDA to discuss paths to address the on-demand and prophylactic holds. A protocol for a 26-week rodent toxicology study has been aligned with the FDA and the study has initiated. We expect to submit results for this study to the FDA by the end of 2023.

The FDA also agreed to partially lift the clinical hold on on-demand to allow two remaining U.S. participants in RAPIDe-1 to complete treatment of a final HAE attack per protocol. All other clinical studies of deucrictibant are currently on hold in the U.S.

Outside the U.S., the regulatory status remains unchanged for the CHAPTER-1 study and other studies, including an open-label, long-term extension study (RAPIDe-2). Pharvaris notified country-specific regulatory authorities in Canada, Europe, Israel, and the UK of the U.S. clinical holds. All active sites outside of the U.S. continue to recruit participants in the CHAPTER-1 clinical study.

Additional trials may be required by the FDA, EMA or other regulators even with positive data from RAPIDe-1. We are also planning to conduct a registration-directed trial in the on-demand setting and a registration-directed trial with patients who will be randomized to receive PHVS719 or placebo to assess safety and efficacy in HAE patients. In addition, we also plan to run an open-label extension study in the prophylactic setting with both rollover and non-rollover subjects to collect longer duration safety data.

Differentiation of deucrictibant

We believe that deucrictibant, as the molecule underlying both PHVS416 and PHVS719, has the potential to be highly differentiated for both the on-demand and prophylactic settings with the key benefits below:

PHVS416. We believe that PHVS416, an on-demand, rapid exposure softgel capsule, has the potential to be highly differentiated for patients suffering from acute HAE attacks with the following benefits:

PHVS719. We believe that PHVS719, a prophylactic extended-release tablet designed to be taken in small, daily doses, has the potential to be highly differentiated for HAE patients with the following benefits:

In addition to the differentiation of our individual products, having on-demand and prophylactic products with the same active ingredient enables patients to maintain a trusted active medicine when they change their dosing regimen and delivery mechanism moving from on-demand to prophylactic treatment (or back). This may be particularly valued by children or adolescents who typically get treated

43

Table of Contents

on-demand only and graduate to prophylaxis as attack frequency increases (commonly after puberty). To our knowledge, we are the only company that will offer this option to patients.

We plan to develop separate products for on-demand and prophylactic use, PHVS416 and PHVS719 respectively, with both products utilizing the same active ingredient, deucrictibant. PHVS416 will be a softgel capsule, and PHVS719 will be an extended-release tablet. We reported topline data from our RAPIDe-1 Phase 2 clinical trial of PHVS416 in December 2022. We also commenced a Phase 2 clinical trial for prophylaxis in 2021 using twice-daily dosing of the PHVS416 softgel capsules (CHAPTER-1). Our primary objective with this trial is to assess the effectiveness and safety profile for prophylaxis with bradykinin- B2-receptor-antagonism in HAE patients. We also reported data from a Phase 1 clinical trial with PHVS719 in 2022 showing once-daily pharmacokinetics and tolerability of the extended-release formulation.

Expansion of the Portfolio

Our goal is to expand our portfolio with additional programs addressing other BK-mediated diseases, building on our strategic strength and expertise in the bradykinin-B2-receptor pathway. Our approach is to identify additional disease areas and indications with strong scientific rationale, high unmet medical need, a defined target population and significant differentiation potential. We are actively pursuing new synthesis, medicinal chemistry, and lead optimization to identify additional and/or follow-on product candidates. In collaboration and discussion with key opinion leaders, we are considering exploratory proof-of-concept studies to validate the potential of bradykinin-B2-receptor antagonism in new indications such as cardiovascular, allergy and immunology, neurological disease and others.

Our Strengths

Our company is built upon the following strengths:

Our Strategy

Our strategy is to develop and commercialize therapies that are superior to currently available treatment options and improve patient quality of life and convenience. Our initial approach for HAE and potential expansions into other BK-mediated angioedema and diseases is based upon extensive patient, physician, and payer research to identify the key needs in the market. According to our analysis, oral therapy remains the highest unmet need for both on-demand and prophylactic use in HAE. Importantly, our research shows that patients are not

44

Table of Contents

willing to accept significantly reduced efficacy or safety with a switch to oral therapy. A therapy for HAE, whether for on-demand or prophylaxis, needs to offer strong efficacy, high tolerability & safety, and convenient administration. Our intention with PHVS416 and PHVS719 is to develop products for the on-demand and prophylactic setting that can meet all of these needs. We are not aware of any other therapies on the market or in development that are able to provide such a comprehensive value proposition across the spectrum for HAE.

The key elements of our strategy include:

Hereditary Angioedema

Disease Overview

HAE is a rare and potentially life-threatening genetic condition. HAE is an autosomal dominant disease, meaning that a defect in only one copy of the gene leads to symptoms and that it occurs at similar rates in both males and females. It is mainly caused by one or more mutations (inherited or spontaneous) in the SERPING1 gene, which codes for the C1-esterase inhibitor protein C1-INH. Deficiency or malfunction of C1-INH leads to uncontrolled synthesis and activity of plasma kallikrein and unconstrained BK production. Excessive BK production is recognized to be the key mediator of symptoms in patients with HAE and manifests as edema attacks, most commonly in the limbs, face (lips and tongue), intestinal tract, urogenital region and airways. HAE patients with a deficiency in C1-INH activity are classified as Type 1 or Type 2. Type 1 is the most common form and results in low levels of circulating C1-INH, and Type 2 results in production of a low function protein. An additional form of HAE, called normal C1-INH HAE, can occur in patients with normal levels of C1-INH for a variety of reasons including mutations in genes for Factor XIIa, plasminogen, angiopoietin-1 or kininogen-1. Moreover, bradykinin-induced acute attacks of angioedema can occur idiopathically in individuals for which a hereditary cause has not yet been identified. Excessive amounts of BK can also be caused by increased circulation of estrogens, reduced C1-INH levels due to underlying diseases, reduced elimination of BK, or through use of medications such as angiotensin-converting enzyme, or ACE, inhibitors and tissue plasminogen activator, or tPA.

Excessive BK generation and increased risks for edema attacks in HAE may occur during conditions associated with inflammation, infections, ischemia and allergic reactions. Attacks often lead to discomfort, pain and nausea but can become life-threatening in the case of airway obstruction, with a 30% risk of asphyxiation if the attack remains untreated. The number and severity of attacks vary highly between patients, and the most severely affected patients can experience attacks every few days. Attacks can occur spontaneously although they often are associated with anxiety, stress, minor trauma, surgery, or illnesses. Commonly, patients are alerted to an impending attack by prodromal symptoms which include rash, fatigue, and muscle aches. The severity of attacks is unpredictable and not related to their underlying frequency. Airway swelling is particularly dangerous and can lead to death by asphyxiation. Although rare, at least half of HAE patients have experienced a life-threatening airway swelling attack and airway attacks remain a major cause of mortality in HAE patients. Swelling typically develops over 24 hours and resolves within five days without treatment. Symptoms typically present in young children and may take 5-10 years or until early adolescence or young adulthood to be diagnosed. HAE affects 1:50,000 to 1:10,000 individuals globally, or at least 6,600 patients in the U.S. and at least 8,900 patients in the EU.

As a result of the lifelong nature of HAE and the challenges related to the use of many of the injected therapies, patient surveys consistently indicate an overwhelming desire for an oral therapy. We believe that a safe and effective oral agent has the potential to transform treatment for this disease. We also believe that opportunities exist for both acute and prophylactic treatments, and we intend to develop drug candidates for both on-demand and prophylactic use with the goal of providing patients with a set of oral options to prevent and treat their disease.

45

Table of Contents

Current Treatments and Their Limitations

There are currently two treatment approaches to the management of HAE: acute (on-demand) treatment of attacks and prevention of attacks with short- or long-term prophylactic therapy.

To our knowledge, one other angioedema-specific oral medication for on-demand use is in clinical development, a kallikrein inhibitor, sebetralstat, developed by Kalvista and currently in phase 3.

We believe that the properties and mechanism of deucrictibant enable us to develop oral product candidates that will be generally more convenient for patients to take, without sacrificing efficacy for treatment or prevention of angioedema attacks. For example, the known oral kallikrein inhibitor tested in on-demand settings to date have utilized doses that are more than twenty-fold higher than the efficacious dose we observed for PHVS416 in the RAPIDe-1 study and have not yet demonstrated efficacy matching the approved injectable products. In the prophylactic setting, oral kallikrein inhibitors have not yet demonstrated efficacy similar to the approved injectable products and have used or are projected to use doses much higher than we project for PHVS719.

Related indications to BK

In addition to Type 1 or Type 2 HAE, bradykinin is also an important mediator for other types of non-histaminergic angioedema, such as: hereditary angioedema with normal C1-INH and acquired angioedema (AAE) due to C1-INH deficiency. Unlike HAE Types 1 and 2, for other BK-mediated angioedema, an unclear pathophysiology and lack of consistent diagnostic criteria have limited the opportunity for the clinical investigation and new treatment development. Consequently, there are still no treatments approved for hereditary angioedema patients with normal C1-INH or AAE due to C1-INH deficiency, who are unresponsive to conventional antihistamine/glucocorticoid treatment and have a high unmet medical need for effective modern therapies. Recently the clinical research for non-histaminergic angioedema has made significant progress. Similar to Type 1 or 2 HAE, the kinin pathway potentially plays a critical role in the underlying pathophysiology of non-histaminergic angioedema, for example, bradykinin has been shown to be elevated in plasma from non-histaminergic angioedema patients during acute attacks and several clinical reports indicate that icatibant has successfully treated acute attacks in either hereditary angioedema patients with normal C1-INH or AAE due to C1-INH deficiency patients. All these provide strong rationales to expand the development PHVS416 and PHVS719 to these types of BK-mediated angioedema and address the high unmet medical need.

To our knowledge, one kallikrein inhibitor (lanadelumab-flyo, injected subcutaneously) is in development for hereditary angioedema with normal C1-INH, currently in Phase 3 for prophylaxis.

Deucrictibant

Overview

Since the 1990s, many companies have tried but failed to discover oral bradykinin-B2-receptor antagonists, as the bradykinin B2 receptor has proved to be a difficult target for the development of orally available antagonists. Historically, compounds targeting the bradykinin B2 receptor with adequate potency have had physicochemical properties inconsistent with oral bioavailability. The bradykinin B2 receptor is a G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) that binds to the peptide bradykinin in an elongated fashion. It has been challenging to identify a small molecule that can bind in this pocket potently enough to compete with bradykinin while still being small enough with appropriate properties to demonstrate oral bioavailability. Starting with modeled structures of the bradykinin-binding pocket of the bradykinin B2 receptor, we designed and synthesized a novel lead series (a set of molecules with the potential to be further optimized). Through our lead optimization program, we synthesized over 600 compounds to select a small molecule that is designed to fit in the bradykinin- binding pocket at the bradykinin B2 receptor, preventing or halting its signaling activity, while also possessing desirable physicochemical properties and other profiling characteristics.

46

Table of Contents

Bradykinin is the principal mediator of the signs and symptoms that represent acute HAE and other bradykinin-mediated angioedema attacks, acting as a potent and selective agonist of the bradykinin B2 receptor.

In HAE and other bradykinin-mediated angioedema, contact activation triggers increased activity of plasma kallikrein, resulting in excessive breakdown of high-molecular-weight kininogen (HMWK) and increased production of cleaved HMWK (cHMWK) and bradykinin.

Excessive bradykinin generation, as in HAE, promotes vascular permeability by activating the bradykinin B2 receptor, leading to plasma extravasation and subcutaneous or submucosal tissue swelling typical of an angioedema attack.

As the figure below illustrates, treatment with deucrictibant, an orally bioavailable low-molecular weight, potent, competitive and selective antagonist of the human bradykinin B2 receptor, is intended to block and prevent activation of the bradykinin B2 receptor by elevated bradykinin levels and prevent or halt the angioedema process, with reduced or resolved swelling as a consequence. Deucrictibant therefore has the therapeutic potential for both acute on-demand treatment and long-term prevention of attacks in patients with bradykinin- mediated angioedema.

Deucrictibant combines the preclinical selectivity of bradykinin-B2-receptor antagonism with oral bioavailability and extended exposure upon a single dose. Deucrictibant is being developed to become the first effective orally administered antagonist of BK activity with therapeutic potential for both acute on-demand treatment and long- term prevention of attacks in patients with HAE and other BK-mediated angioedema.

Deucrictibant is an orally bioavailable competitive antagonist of the bradykinin B2 receptor with high affinity and high antagonist potency. Deucrictibant has been observed to be a potent inhibitor in vitro as assessed using human recombinant bradykinin B2 receptors (150 pM); ex vivo as studied against endogenous bradykinin B2 receptors in a human umbilical vein model (350 pM); and in vivo in the human bradykinin-challenge model (170 pM).

Deucrictibant demonstrated 5000-fold selectivity for the bradykinin B2 receptor when compared to approximately 170 other molecular targets, including the bradykinin B1 receptor. As shown in the graphs below depicting mean arterial blood pressure (MABP) in a bradykinin challenge study in monkeys (back-translated from human), deucrictibant showed clear dose-dependent activity. While differences between human and monkey PK prevent direct extrapolation to human dose, deucrictibant demonstrated longer duration and faster onset of activity than injected icatibant in the same study. However, we have not conducted a head-to-head comparison of icatibant to deucrictibant in a clinical trial but have compared the published data for icatibant to data from our Phase 1 clinical trial of deucrictibant. While we believe this comparison to icatibant to be useful and appropriate, the value of this and other comparisons to icatibant in this Annual Report may be limited because they are not derived from a head-to-head trial and they are from trials that were conducted under different protocols at different sites and at different times. Without head-to-head data, we will be unable to make comparative claims for our product candidates, if approved.

BK-Challenge in Pre-Clinical Animal Model

47

Table of Contents

In a published study conducted by the Company, a dose of 0.6mg/kg sc icatibant was used in monkeys, as PK data indicated that this dose would provide an exposure (Cmax 1,044 ng/mL, AUC 2,155 ng*h/mL) similar to the exposures seen in humans at a therapeutic dose of 30 mg sc (Cmax 979 ng/mL, AUC 2,191 ng*h/mL). The dose was found to effectively antagonize the BK challenge in monkeys up to six hours after dosing, similar to its duration of action in humans. The maximal effect of icatibant in this model was reached at the second measure time point, two hours after dosing. The vehicle in the icatibant study was saline.

Deucrictibant inhibited the BK-induced changes in MABP at all doses tested (0.1, 0.3, 1, 3 and 10 mg/kg given orally). The data show an early onset of activity, as the efficacy was already maximal at the first time point measured, one hour after oral dosing. This is a faster onset of action as compared to icatibant (0.6 mg/kg sc), which was maximally active on the BK-induced changes in MABP at two hours after dosing.

Nonclinical Safety

The conducted nonclinical package for deucrictibant includes secondary pharmacodynamics, safety pharmacology, genotoxicity, reproductive and developmental studies and general toxicity studies up to 6 months in rats and up to 9 months in monkeys. Deucrictibant did not demonstrate any in vitro or in vivo genotoxicity nor in vitro phototoxic potential. No findings considered relevant to humans were observed in GLP (Good Laboratory Practices)-compliant general toxicity studies in rats up to 3-months duration and in cynomolgus monkeys up to 9-months duration at doses up to the maximum tolerated in each species. Deucrictibant has not demonstrated any adverse effects on embryo-fetal survival and development in the humanized bradykinin-B2-receptor transgenic rat or in the rabbit. Furthermore, male and female fertility studies showed no adverse effects of deucrictibant on gonadal function, mating behavior, and reproductive performance.

Findings were observed in the repeat-dose rat data package that were considered not to be related to bradykinin-B2-receptor antagonism. Based on review of these nonclinical findings, the FDA put a clinical hold on trials of deucrictibant in the U.S. Pharvaris aligned with the FDA on the protocol and has initiated a 6-month rat exploratory study to further investigate the findings and address the clinical holds.

48

Table of Contents

Clinical Trial Program

PHA121-C001 (SAD and BK challenge / SAD-POM)

Deucrictibant-C001 was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single ascending dose and proof-of-mechanism study to examine the safety, tolerability, PK and PD of orally administered deucrictibant in healthy subjects. A total of 52 subjects received single ascending oral doses of deucrictibant up to 22 mg. The 16 remaining subjects received placebo. No adverse event, or AE, was reported as serious, no premature withdrawals due to AEs occurred and no severe AEs were reported. In addition, no clinically relevant fluctuations of blood pressure and no orthostatic hypotension linked to deucrictibant groups occurred. The overall incidence of AEs was similar between the placebo and deucrictibant. Treatment-related AEs were reported for three subjects who received deucrictibant (12 or 22 mg), all within the gastrointestinal system and of mild severity: upper abdominal pain, vomiting, and nausea. There were no apparent trends or dose-related changes in hematology, clinical chemistry, vital signs, or ECG.

49

Table of Contents

Pharmacokinetics Analysis

Dose proportional PK was observed after single oral administration under fasting condition of deucrictibant in the dose range of 1 mg to 22 mg for Cmax, AUClast and AUCinf. Median tmax in the dose range of 1 mg to 22 mg was between 0.50 hour and 1.00 hour, with comparable ranges of individual values (ranging between 0.25 hour and 1.02 hours). Less than 1% of the dose was excreted unchanged in urine within 72 hours after administration.

In this study, a high-calorie, high-fat (HCHF) meal reduced peak exposure and slightly increased overall exposure of deucrictibant: after a 22 mg dose, the mean Cmax of deucrictibant was lower (~32%) while AUCinf was higher (~ 42%) when deucrictibant was administered after a high calorie, high-fat breakfast (fed conditions) compared to administration under fasted conditions. While the median Tmax of deucrictibant was delayed by approximately two hours after administration under fed conditions, the plasma concentration for deucrictibant still reached the projected therapeutic levels (EC85, as determined in the bradykinin challenge described below) within 15 minutes. As shown in the table, the concentration of deucrictibant twelve hours post-dosing at 12 mg or 22 mg remained above projected therapeutic levels under both fed and fasted conditions.

Bradykinin Challenge Study

In addition, we also evaluated the PD of deucrictibant in a bradykinin challenge model, which was designed to demonstrate deucrictibant-mediated inhibition of the drop in blood pressure and increase in heart rate resulting from injection of a bradykinin bolus in healthy subjects. The bradykinin challenge is administered at specific intervals after the deucrictibant or placebo dose, and the inhibition of bradykinin-induced hemodynamic effects is a validated surrogate assessment that was used to select the dose in the original development program for icatibant, as reviewed by FDA and EMA. The clinical dose of icatibant established with the bradykinin challenge has demonstrated successful resolution of HAE attacks in randomized clinical trials and over 10 years of data post- approval.

In the bradykinin challenge, we assessed the inhibition of bradykinin effects at single doses of 12 and 22 mg deucrictibant. Bradykinin was injected intravenously before deucrictibant to calibrate each subject’s response, and then at 1, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours after dosing with deucrictibant. We monitored cardiovascular responses at each time point (see figure above). At the same time, blood samples were drawn for PK assessment. Bradykinin injection induced a short-term change in mean arterial blood pressure, or MABP, heart rate, or HR, and cardiac output. In the presence of deucrictibant, this cardiovascular response was dampened to an extent depending on the concentration of deucrictibant.

We conducted a PK/PD analysis using the same approach as used by FDA in their evaluation of icatibant. The composite EC50 and EC85 values estimated from the combination of each PD response associated with the BK challenge are provided in the table below. Deucrictibant demonstrated higher PD potency based on plasma concentrations (roughly four-fold) than icatibant relative to published data for icatibant. Adjusting for the differences between molecular weight and plasma protein binding, we found that deucrictibant is 24-fold more potent (170 pM) in the bradykinin challenge than icatibant (4.1 nM) on a molecule-by-molecule basis, consistent with our preclinical in vitro measurements.

EC50: concentration at which compound induces a response half of its maximum possible response; EC85: concentration at which a compound induces 85% of its maximum response.

The data also allowed us to compare the projected therapeutic performance of deucrictibant with that of the icatibant study. However, we have not conducted a head-to-head comparison of icatibant to deucrictibant in a clinical trial but have compared the published data for icatibant to data from our Phase 1 and Phase 2 clinical trial of deucrictibant. While we believe this comparison to icatibant to be useful and appropriate, the value of this and other comparisons to icatibant in this Annual Report may be limited because they are not derived from a head-to-head trial and they are from trials that were conducted under different protocols at different sites and at different times. Without

50

Table of Contents

head-to-head data, we will be unable to make comparative claims for our product candidates, if approved. Clinical trials have shown for icatibant that the therapeutic response to an acute HAE attack wanes approximately 6 hours after dosing, coinciding with the drop in icatibant concentration below therapeutic levels due to the short half-life (1.4 hours) of the drug. More precisely, it was shown that icatibant plasma concentrations with a 75% probability to be above EC50 and a 50% probability to be above EC85 correlate with therapeutic efficacy.

Applying these criteria as exposure targets for deucrictibant leads us to project that due to deucrictibant’s longer half-life, we believe deucrictibant will stay above these therapeutic targets for much longer than icatibant. The 12 mg dose of deucrictibant showed rapid absorption and then stayed above EC50 for 10-12 hours and above the EC85 for 7 hours, suggesting that this dose may be at least as effective as a 30 mg s.c. injection of icatibant. A 30 mg s.c. icatibant dose has been documented to effectively treat 93% of acute HAE attacks (Icatibant Outcome Survey, or IOS, study reference).

The table below compares 30 mg of icatibant to 12 mg and 22 mg of deucrictibant based on BK-challenge modeling and simulation.

The chart below shows the simulation of PK and PD resulting from single (left) or double (right) doses of icatibant as compared to single doses of deucrictibant at 12 mg (left) or 22 mg (right), using a non-linear mixed-effect model built from published data of icatibant and our bradykinin challenge study. As shown in the bottom row, the modeled PD effect of deucrictibant surpasses that of icatibant at less than half the dose, and equals two 30 mg injections of icatibant with a single oral dose of 22 mg. As demonstrated in a post-commercialization observational study (IOS study reference), a single dose of icatibant was shown to treat 93% of attacks and two doses treated 99% of over 5,000 attacks in the 10 years survey.

In conclusion, deucrictibant was well tolerated when administered orally at the doses tested without any dose- limiting toxicity. Deucrictibant was rapidly absorbed in either fasting or fed conditions and showed dose proportional PK for deucrictibant. The BK challenge demonstrated that deucrictibant potently blocks the effects of bradykinin-induced hemodynamic changes and provided the robust rationale for dose selection in future on-demand and prophylactic HAE trials.

PHA121-C002 (SAD extension)

PHA121-C002 was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single ascending dose extension trial designed to examine the safety, tolerability, and PK of single ascending oral doses of 22, 33, and 50 mg of deucrictibant after a standard caloric meal and 40 mg in fasting conditions. A total of 32 subjects received either deucrictibant, with respect to 24 subjects, or placebo, with respect to 8 subjects.

The trial results showed that deucrictibant was well tolerated at doses up to 40 mg under fasting and 50 mg under fed conditions. There were no SAEs reported. Treatment-related AEs that were reported as possibly related to deucrictibant were mild nausea (22 mg) (one subject), mild headache (50 mg) (one subject), and moderate headache associated with vomiting (50 mg) (one subject). There were no clinically significant changes in vital signs, laboratory or ECG parameters.

Over the investigated dose range from 22 to 50 mg (factor 2.27 increase) after a standardized breakfast, deucrictibant showed dose-proportional PK with a 2.4-fold increase for mean Cmax and AUC0-24h. Administration of deucrictibant after a standardized breakfast

51

Table of Contents

resulted in 40-50% decrease in Cmax without a change in AUCinf as compared to administration under fasting conditions. As a result, C12h and C24h plasma concentration for deucrictibant were higher under fed conditions. These observations support the potential use of this formulation for initial studies in a prophylactic setting by dosing with food.