NASDAQ: CLNN

Our development and clinical efforts are dedicated to revolutionizing the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases to restore and protect neuronal health and function. Our nanotherapeutics target cellular energy impairments that are common to many diseases and we are currently focused on addressing the high unmet medical needs in central nervous system disorders including amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (“ALS”), multiple sclerosis (“MS”), and Parkinson’s disease (“PD”).

Our Approach

Our approach to drug development is innovation focused and scientifically driven.

●

Innovation focused. A significant number of diseases with a high impact on human health have proven to be exceptionally challenging for traditional small molecule or biologic drug development approaches. Our approach involves the innovation of highly catalytically-active therapeutic nanocrystals with novel mechanisms of action that result from proprietary advances in nanotechnology, plasma and quantum physics, biochemistry, and materials science. We believe that this platform affords us the ability to make new drug modalities targeting a wide range of diseases that have eluded intervention using traditional approaches.

●

Scientifically driven. Clear scientific rationale and sound experimental design drive our discoveries, from basic science to clinical trials. We believe we have established ourselves as an industry leader in the development of therapeutic catalytic nanocrystals. We have deep knowledge of the chemical properties, safety profiles, and catalytic abilities of transitional metal nanocrystals and have a proven ability to produce concentrated, stable, highly active, clean-surfaced nanocrystal suspensions using efficient, scalable processes. In so doing, we are establishing new classes of nanotherapeutics with the potential to address some of the most serious diseases affecting human health.

Our Team and Strategy

Our management team is key to the successful execution of our strategic plan and fulfillment of our business model. Our team brings extensive expertise and industry experience to their roles. The members of our executive team have established track records in scientific innovation, early and late-stage pharmaceutical development, commercialization, marketing, licensing, financing, and the generation and protection of intellectual property.

Our innovation of CSN therapeutics places us at the forefront of novel drug development for a host of high impact, high unmet need human diseases. As we lead the development of CSN therapeutics, our business strategy can be encapsulated by the following:

●

First mover advantage. We believe our proprietary knowledge of the processes needed to manufacture clean-surfaced, highly faceted, catalytically-active nanocrystals, and of the resulting toxicological and physicochemical properties associated with these nanocrystals, places us in a leadership position in the innovation and development of new therapeutic candidates for diseases that have proven to be extremely difficult to target using traditional methods.

4

Table of Contents

●

Wide range of applicability. Energy metabolism is a fundamental mechanism in all living cells, and CSN therapeutics that improve cellular energetic production and utilization have the potential to be applied to many different disease states and cell types. An advantage of this approach is that we believe a single drug candidate can be developed to target several energy metabolism and redox pathways in both glial and neuronal cells at once, which has been supported by our nonclinical pharmacological studies and clinical trials of our lead asset, CNM-Au8®, a catalytically-active gold nanocrystal suspension. We continue to explore ways in which the unique mechanisms of action of CSN therapeutics can be applied across different diseases.

●

Flexibility and tunability. Catalytic activities are determined by the shape, faceting, size, and chemical composition of nanocrystals. Our CSN platform has demonstrated flexibility in its ability to make, for instance, both pure gold and gold-platinum nanocrystals of consistent and reproducible shapes and sizes, in addition to making solutions of ionic zinc and silver. Because of the ease with which new single elemental and composite nanocrystals can be made of varying shapes and sizes using our proprietary techniques, we plan to continue developing a wide range of CSN therapeutics to generate a deep pipeline of drug candidates to treat a host of different diseases.

Our Clinical Pipeline

Our CSN therapeutic candidates aim to address high unmet medical needs in central nervous system disorders, including:

(1)

amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, the most prevalent adult-onset, progressive, and fatal neurodegenerative disorder of the neuromuscular system which causes the progressive degeneration of motor neurons in the spinal cord and the brain;

(2)

multiple sclerosis, the most common inflammatory and degenerative demyelinating disease and the leading cause of non-traumatic disability in young adults, which causes the immune-mediated damage or destruction of the brain, optic nerves, and spinal cord through autoimmune attacks on the myelin sheath; and

(3)

Parkinson’s disease, a chronic, progressive neurodegenerative disorder that causes the progressive loss of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra area of the midbrain, leading to resting tremor, bradykinesia, limb rigidity, and gait and balance problems as well as cognitive loss and behavioral changes.

Our lead drug asset, CNM-Au8, is a highly concentrated aqueous suspension of catalytically-active, clean-surfaced, faceted gold nanocrystals for the treatment of ALS, MS, and PD. CNM-Au8’s mechanism of action targets mitochondrial dysfunction by catalyzing the production of NAD+. NAD+ is the oxidized form of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (“NAD”), the key metabolite that drives energy production in the form of adenosine triphosphate (“ATP”) in all living cells. In addition to improving the availability of NAD+, CNM-Au8 catalysis has been shown to alleviate oxidative stress and reduce the accumulation of misfolded proteins in multiple neurodegenerative disease models. We believe CNM-Au8 is the only drug candidate in development with these unique catalytic mechanisms using gold nanocrystals. We have completed a robust portfolio of clinical programs for CNM-Au8, including placebo-controlled trials, open-label extensions (“OLEs”), long-term extensions (“LTEs”), and expanded access programs (“EAPs”), with several programs still ongoing.

●

Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: Our completed clinical programs in ALS include: (i) the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, a Phase 2 clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of CNM-Au8 in patients with ALS, and an associated OLE, and (ii) RESCUE-ALS, a Phase 2 proof-of-concept clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of CNM-Au8 in patients with early symptomatic ALS. We are still actively supporting: (i) a long-term OLE for RESCUE-ALS, (ii) a compassionate-use EAP (“EAP01”) launched in partnership with the Sean M. Healey & AMG Center (“Healey Center”) for ALS at Massachusetts General Hospital, (iii) a second EAP (“EAP02”) launched in partnership with Massachusetts General Hospital that includes centers across the United States (“U.S.”), and (iv) an EAP (the “ACT-EAP”) funded by a four-year grant from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (“NINDS”), a division of the National Institutes of Health (“NIH”), that is being conducted in collaboration with New York University (“NYU”) and Synapticure, a neurology specialty telehealth clinic.

●

Multiple Sclerosis: Our completed clinical programs in MS include: (i) the first dosing cohort (“Cohort 1”) and second dosing cohort (“Cohort 2”) of REPAIR-MS, an open-label, investigator blinded Phase 2 clinical trial that demonstrated target engagement of CNM-Au8 on the brain’s energy metabolites, (ii) VISIONARY-MS, a Phase 2 clinical trial for the treatment of visual pathway deficits in chronic optic neuropathy to assess the efficacy, safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of CNM-Au8 for remyelination in stable relapsing MS, and (iii) an open-label LTE of VISIONARY-MS for participants in Australia with follow-up through 144 weeks from randomization. We are still actively supporting an EAP for MS participants that commenced in September 2024 (the “MS EAP”).

●

Parkinson’s Disease: We have completed one clinical program, REPAIR-PD, an open-label, investigator blinded Phase 2 clinical trial that demonstrated target engagement of CNM-Au8 on the brain’s energy metabolites.

5

Table of Contents

In over 1,100 participant-years of exposure and long-term treatment duration over 6 years, no significant safety concerns or safety trends have been identified relating to CNM-Au8, including (i) no serious adverse events (“SAEs”) across all clinical programs, (ii) no temporal association of increasing treatment emergent adverse event (“TEAE”) or SAE incidence based on exposure duration, and (iii) no-observed-adverse-effect level (“NOAEL”) findings across all toxicology studies up to the maximum feasible dose. TEAEs have been predominantly assessed as transient and mild-to-moderate in severity.

The chart below reflects the respective stages of our clinical programs.

Other Therapeutic Assets

In addition to the development of catalytically-active, faceted, clean-surfaced nanocrystals, we have used our electro-crystal-chemistry platform to produce ionic solutions of various transition elements including silver, zinc, and others—elements that have proven historical utility in the treatment of disease—and we have the following drug assets in early stages of development.

●

CNM-ZnAg, a broad-spectrum antiviral and antibacterial agent comprised of zinc (Zn2+) and silver (Ag+) ions in an aqueous solution. The combination of Zn2+ and Ag+ ions leads to enhanced bioavailability of the ions and, potentially, synergistic immune system effects. CNM-ZnAg has applications for the treatment of infectious disease and to provide immune support for symptom resolution.

●

CNM-AgZn17, a broad-based antiviral and antibacterial agent comprised of Zn2+ and Ag+ ions in a gel polymer formulation for topical application to the skin. CNM-AgZn17 has applications for (i) the treatment of infectious diseases, with in vitro assays demonstrating that CNM-AgZn17 has broad-based antiviral and antibacterial properties, and (ii) wound and burn healing, with CNM-AgZn17-treated animal models showing enhanced healing benefits and decreased scar formation following burns.

6

Table of Contents

Dietary Supplements

Our patented electrochemistry manufacturing platform further enables us to develop very low concentration dietary supplements to advance the health and well-being of broad populations. These dietary supplements can vary greatly and include nanocrystals of varying composition, shapes and sizes, as well as ionic solutions with diverse metallic constituents.

Dietary supplements are marketed and distributed through our wholly-owned subsidiary, dOrbital, Inc. (“dOrbital”), or through an exclusive license with 4Life Research LLC (“4Life”), an international supplier of health supplements, who is also a stockholder, debt holder, and a related party. These include:

●

rMetx™ (ZnAg Immune Boost) by dOrbital is an aqueous zinc-silver ion dietary (mineral) supplement made using our electrochemistry manufacturing platform with bioactive immune-supporting properties. rMetx is sold through dOrbital and a substantially similar product, under the trade name Zinc Factor™, is sold by 4Life under a supply agreement.

●

KHC46 (Gold Factor™) by 4Life is an aqueous gold dietary (mineral) supplement of very low-concentration gold nanoparticles produced using our electrochemistry manufacturing platform. KHC46 has different production methods and uses different devices compared to our lead drug candidate, CNM-Au8, which results in different physiochemical properties. KHC46 is licensed exclusively to 4Life for worldwide marketing and distribution.

Our CSN Therapeutics Platform

By uniting concepts from electrochemistry, nanotechnology, plasma and quantum physics, materials science, and biochemistry, we have created and refined a proprietary electrocrystallization method that results in single component or multiple component nanocrystals of the transition elements that are clean-surfaced, highly faceted, and biologically catalytically active (see Figure 1 for example nanocrystals). We are also able to produce ionic solutions of various transition elements utilizing our electrochemistry manufacturing platform. CSN therapeutic nanocrystals can be concentrated as aqueous suspensions for oral administration or gel polymers for topical application.

Once inside the body, CSN therapeutic nanocrystals pass into the bloodstream and accumulate in organs such as the liver, kidneys, and spleen, with lower amounts crossing the blood-brain barrier and reaching the brain, spinal cord, and cerebrospinal fluid. Nanocrystals cross cellular membranes and enter cells where they act as potent catalysts that can drive, support, and maintain beneficial metabolic and energetic cellular reactions within diseased, stressed, and damaged cells. CSN therapeutics remain active within the body for days before they are eliminated via the hepatobiliary-fecal system as well as via the urinary system.

We believe these catalytic, nanocrystal-based CSN therapeutics represent a novel approach to drug development, substantially different from the standard paradigm of small molecule drugs and biologics. Unlike traditional pharmacological approaches, which are limited to single targets or specific signaling pathways, our platform has produced metallic nanocrystals that are beneficial through multi-modal activities in multiple cell types across multiple diseases. By utilizing cellular catalysts to support energetic reactions within cells, we believe this technology represents a revolutionary advance in the treatment of the underlying pathophysiology of neurodegeneration and related diseases associated with energetic failure.

Figure 1. Representative CSN Therapeutic Nanocrystals

Figure 1. Representative transmission electron micrographs of the commonly observed crystalline shapes of gold nanocrystals (CNM-Au8) resulting from our CSN therapeutic platform. Insets are wireframes illustrating each classic shape: A, pentagonal bipyramid; B, tetrahedron; and C, hexagonal bipyramid. These nanocrystals are 10-13 nm in diameter.

7

Table of Contents

Catalytically-Active Nanocrystals

Catalysts lower the activation energy of chemical reactions to enable the rate of reactions to accelerate without the catalyst being consumed; therefore the equilibrium of the substrates and products does not change and both forward and reverse reactions can be catalyzed until homeostasis has been achieved. To our knowledge, we believe we are the only company currently developing catalytically-active nanocrystals to directly modulate biological systems as therapeutic drug candidates. Prior to our invention of the CSN therapeutic platform, the methods employed to produce stable nanoparticles required the use of organic solvents or capping agents that would contaminate the surfaces of nanoparticles and were considerably difficult to remove. Multiple conflicting reports exist in scientific literature regarding the toxicity of these nanoparticles, ranging from reportedly non-toxic to highly toxic to living organisms. We believe this lack of consistency may have been due to the varying degrees to which different nanoparticle preparations were contaminated with organic reagents, leading to observed toxic effects. Our electro-crystal-chemistry platform does not involve the use of any organic solvents or reduction chemicals, and therefore we have observed that our nanocrystals possess both substantially higher catalytic activity as well as lower toxicity in living organisms than those reported for nanoparticles produced using other methods.

Unlike enzymes, which are protein catalysts that have active site binding pockets where catalytic activity takes place, the catalytic activities of transition metal nanocrystals occur on their surfaces—the facets and vertices of the nanocrystal—where exceptionally efficient electron transfer from and to the nanocrystal takes place. For this reason, unmodified, clean surfaces free of contaminating chemicals are extremely important for catalytic activity. Metal nanocrystals have been shown to have a variety of different catalytic activities, from superoxide dismutase, peroxidase, and catalase-like activities for reducing reactive oxygen species (“ROS”), to reactions involving the oxidation of glucose, ascorbic acid, or the energetic metabolite NAD+. Figure 2 shows an illustration of catalysis, with a single gold nanocrystal converting molecules of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide hydride (“NADH”) in the background into NAD+ in the foreground.

Gold nanocrystals have been described as electron reservoirs because their surfaces can both readily accept and donate thousands of electrons per second in order to catalyze biochemical reactions, allowing them to accelerate reaction rates to extraordinarily high levels. For example, the conversion of NADH to NAD+ is usually very slow at room temperature, but upon addition of our gold nanocrystal suspension, CNM-Au8, we have observed the very rapid conversion of NADH into NAD+. Importantly, the NAD reaction drives ATP production in both the mitochondrion as well as in the cytoplasm through glycolysis. ATP is the universal currency of energy in all living things; without the ability to convert NADH to NAD+ and vice versa, cells would be quickly depleted of ATP energy stores and die. CSN therapeutics capture the natural catalytic activities of faceted, clean-surfaced nanocrystals to produce metabolites of high energetic or protective value to the cell.

Figure 2. Catalytically-Active Nanocrystal Mechanism Representation

Figure 2. Illustration of catalytic activity (Not to scale). A pentagonal bipyramidal gold nanocrystal is shown with its electron cloud to represent the ability of the nanocrystal to rapidly exchange electrons with substrates interacting with its surface. In the background, NADH molecules drawn as dark chemical ball-and-stick figures are catalytically converted into NAD+ in the foreground as bright pink ball-and-stick figures. A pink and blue mitochondrion on the left can use available NAD for the generation of ATP (illustrated by Ella Maru).

8

Table of Contents

Our Focus on Central Nervous System Disorders

Over the past several decades, traditional small molecule and biologic drug development approaches have suffered serious setbacks in attempts to address nervous system disorders. A likely contributor to these setbacks is the multifactorial mechanisms underlying nervous system disorders themselves, which are sufficiently complex they may not be amenable to “one drug–one target” disease modification. In the face of these failures, we believe our new paradigm of nanocrystal drug development, producing novel drugs with unique catalytic, multi-modal mechanisms of action, is advantageous.

Multiple lines of evidence point to energetic failure as a key contributor to neurodegenerative disease. Neurons and their associated support cells, in particular oligodendrocytes (“OLs”), are amongst the highest energy-consuming cells in the body: the brain represents only two percent of human body weight, yet it consumes over twenty percent of the body’s metabolic energy. As humans age, the ability of cells to convert food into energy in the form of ATP becomes less efficient. Eventually, the nervous system’s demand for ATP exceeds the cells’ ability to supply it, and consequently, neurons begin to fail and die. Genetic and environmental factors determine which neuronal types are most susceptible to energetic failure in individuals. In ALS, mitochondrial dysfunction is considered a hallmark of both sporadic and familial ALS, and several genetic causal variants of ALS have been linked to dysregulated neuronal energy metabolism. In MS, the cells capable of remyelinating damaged axons have been shown to be under metabolic stress, rendering them incapable of undergoing the energetically demanding process of repairing damaged myelin. In PD, dopaminergic and other neuronal cell types manifest mitochondrial failure, leading to impaired energy production. Pathophysiology supports the need for increased energy production and utilization to protect neuronal health and slow neurodegenerative disease progression.

We believe the innovation of CSN therapeutics positions us to address the most significant challenge posed by multiple central nervous system diseases, because faceted, clean-surfaced nanocrystals with catalytic, multi-modal mechanisms can potentially address the complex failures that occur in multiple levels of the central nervous system and within multiple cell types. Importantly, these mechanisms enhance mitochondrial function and produce several useful energetic metabolites while reducing the presence of harmful metabolites, while simultaneously and independently reducing oxidative stress and stimulating cellular protein homeostasis. Each nanocrystal is capable of exchanging thousands of electrons per second, potentially addressing deficits in diseased cells in a manner that does not further deplete the cells of their internal energy stores. We believe our studies, discussed below, show that CSN therapeutics support central nervous system cells with the basic building blocks of energy required for normal function, thereby replenishing cellular energetic deficiencies.

CNM-Au8 and Restoration of Energetic Metabolism in ALS, MS, and PD

CNM-Au8 is a concentrated, orally-delivered suspension of pure gold nanocrystals in pharmaceutical grade water buffered with sodium bicarbonate. A single 60 mL dose at 30 mg contains over 100 trillion nanocrystals. The median feret diameter of CNM-Au8 nanocrystals is approximately 13 nm with each nanocrystal consisting of an estimated average of 70,000 gold atoms.

Mechanism of Action

CNM-Au8’s mechanism of action targets mitochondrial dysfunction by catalyzing the production of NAD+, a key metabolite that drives energy in the form of ATP production. The catalytic activity of CNM-Au8 has also been shown to have potent anti-oxidant effects. In this manner, treatment with CNM-Au8 is hypothesized to help neurons circumvent programmed cell death pathways that are triggered by energetic deficits, oxidative stress, and accumulation of misfolded proteins common to neurodegenerative diseases. CNM-Au8 is therefore hypothesized to act as a neuroprotective and remyelinating therapy in neurodegenerative disease states by: (1) driving, supporting, and maintaining beneficial metabolic and energetic cellular reactions within diseased, stressed, and/or damaged cells, (2) directly catalyzing the reduction of harmful ROS, and (3) promoting protein homeostasis via activation of the heat shock factor-1 pathway, a pathway important for reducing cytotoxicity caused by misfolded and denatured proteins, which are known to occur ubiquitously in neurodegenerative diseases. This unique mechanism of action is summarized in Figure 3.

9

Table of Contents

Figure 3. Catalytic Biological Mechanism of Action

Figure 3. CNM-Au8 mediated catalysis increases intracellular NAD+ and ATP production and decreases oxidative stress. These catalytic activities enhance mitochondrial function and lead to a cascade of enhanced disease responses in neurons, OLs, and astrocytes—cell types that are extremely vulnerable to energetic deficiencies. CNM-Au8 is thereby expected to mediate remyelination and neuroprotective effects in neurodegenerative diseases such as ALS, MS, and PD.

One of the key metabolites catalyzed by CNM-Au8 is the oxidized form of NAD, NAD+. NAD+ and its reduced partner, NADH, are vital for driving cellular energy reactions that generate ATP in living cells (Figure 4A). Brain imaging studies have shown the ratio of NAD+ to NADH typically decreases with aging. Lowered NAD+ levels in both the blood and brain have been associated with neurological diseases such as schizophrenia, MS, PD, and Huntington’s disease. Boosting NAD+ activity in neurodegenerative disease preclinical models has consistently demonstrated beneficial anti-aging and neuroprotective effects. CNM-Au8 exhibits higher catalytic activity for directly oxidizing NADH into NAD+ than any other commercially available gold nanoparticle we have tested (Figure 4C, 4D). We have shown that treating cultured nervous system cells with CNM-Au8 increases their cellular pools of NAD+ and ATP, demonstrating that CNM-Au8 increases the energetic capacity of central nervous system cells (Figure 4E, 4F). This optimization of ATP (Figure 4F) allows OLs to increase myelin production, as well as help numerous other types of central nervous system cells resist environmental and disease-related stressors that would otherwise cause them to die.

Figure 4. NAD Oxidation and Biological Effects on ATP and NAD+ (Panel A–C)

Figure 4. Energetic catalysis by CNM-Au8. Panel A, The NAD+-NADH reduction-oxidation couple plays a key role in both ATP-generating reactions, glycolysis and mitochondrial electron transport chain oxidative phosphorylation. Panel B, Ultraviolet-visible light spectroscopy was used to show the catalytic activity of CNM-Au8 with time. As the reaction progresses, NADH is consumed, as demonstrated by the decrease in the NADH absorbance peak at 340 nm, while NAD+ is generated, as shown by the corresponding increase in the NAD+ absorbance peak at 260 nm. Panel C, the rate of decay of the NADH absorbance peak is greater for CNM-Au8 than it is for citrate-reduced gold, nanoparticles of 10 nm (orange) and 30 nm (red) diameters (purchased from the National Institute of Standards and Technology), indicating that CNM-Au8 has a catalytic rate at least three-fold higher than National Institute of Standards and Technology comparators under the same reaction conditions.

10

Table of Contents

Figure 4. NAD Oxidation and Biological Effects on ATP and NAD+ (Panel D–F)

Figure 4. Panel D, Catalytic rate of CNM-Au8 is demonstrably superior to several commercially available gold nanoparticles. Sigma Aldrich provides reactant-free, “citrate reduced” gold nanoparticles, in which extra procedures are used to clean the surfaces of reactants. “Citrate” gold nanoparticles may still have residual reactants present in the suspensions. Panel E, Cellular NAD+ levels increase in response to CNM-Au8 treatment in primary rodent neuron-glial co-cultures. Panel F, Cellular ATP levels increase in primary rodent OL cultures in response to CNM-Au8 treatment. Panel E-F, quantities shown are group means +/− standard error of the mean (“SEM”). One-way analysis of variance (“ANOVA”), corrected for multiple comparisons, was used to compare the mean of each treatment group to the mean of the vehicle control; a statistically significant difference between treatment and vehicle is denoted by asterisks: *p<0.05; **p<0.01. P-values represent the probability of obtaining test results at least as extreme as the results observed in the assay, under the general assumption of no difference between the groups (null hypothesis). Smaller p-values indicate a greater statistical significance of the observation and a lower likelihood of the null hypothesis.

A significant stressor shared by many neurodegenerative diseases is the accumulation of harmful ROS within neurons as their energetic demands begin to exceed their ability to produce enough ATP to carry out normal functions. Chronic oxidative stress, caused by accumulation of ROS, can overwhelm the mitochondrial systems that normally tightly regulate ROS levels. Accumulation of excess ROS damages cell membranes, allows calcium ion imbalances, and eventually leads to cell death. In addition to boosting NAD+ levels inside nervous system cells, CNM-Au8 directly acts to reduce ROS by directly catalyzing their reduction (Figure 5). CNM-Au8 possesses anti-oxidative catalytic activity and has been demonstrated to directly reduce oxygen radicals in a superoxide dismutase-like manner, as well as convert hydrogen peroxide (“H2O2”) into water and oxygen in a catalase-like manner (Figure 5A, 5B). Anti-oxidative activity for CNM-Au8 has been demonstrated in primary mouse OL cultures, in which basal levels of ROS were reduced with treatment (Figure 5C). In a PD in vitro model, ROS generated by treating primary rodent dopaminergic cells with the neurotoxin 1-methyl-4-phenylpyridinium (“MPP”) was lowered in response to CNM-Au8 treatment in the presence of MPP (Figure 5D).

Previous drug development efforts for neurodegenerative diseases have included numerous antioxidants, all of which failed to show disease-modifying effects. We believe CNM-Au8 remains in a different class from standard antioxidants because, to our knowledge, no other antioxidant demonstrates catalytic ability to increase energetic metabolites NAD+ and ATP, while independently catalytically decreasing ROS.

11

Table of Contents

Figure 5. Reduction of Reactive Oxygen Species

Figure 5. CNM-Au8 is a catalytically-active antioxidant. Panel A, SOD-like activity of CNM-Au8 on superoxide radicals was measured using a colorimetric SOD assay kit (Cayman Chemical). Panel B, Decay of the absorbance peak of H2O2 as the dismutation of H2O2 takes place in the presence of CNM-Au8 (green) or comparator AuNPs of similar diameter (red) or no gold (black). Panel C-D, Neurotoxin (MPP+) induced mitochondrial stress and death of dopaminergic neurons in primary E15 rat co-cultures is prevented by CNM-Au8 (green), as determined by TH+ cell number (not shown), reduction of ROS as measured by the fraction of dopaminergic (“TH”) cells fluorescing with CELLROX Green signal, a marker of cytosolic oxidizing environment (C), and increased mitochondrial membrane potential (Mitotracker Red CMXRos) (D). Panel C-D, quantities shown are group means +/− SEM. One-way ANOVA, corrected for multiple comparisons was used to compare the mean of each treatment group of MPP with CNM-Au8 treatment to the mean of the MPP (4μM) alone treatment group; a statistically significant difference between each CNM-Au8 treatment group and MPP alone is denoted by asterisks: *p<0.05; **p<0.01, ***p<0.001; ****p<0.0001. P-values represent the probability of obtaining test results at least as extreme as the results observed in the assay, under the general assumption of no difference between the groups (null hypothesis). Smaller p-values indicate a greater statistical significance of the observation and a lower likelihood of the null hypothesis. Untreated “Control” group is included to demonstrate the significant effect of MPP treatment to increase levels of ROS in TH neurons in Panel C and reduce mitochondrial membrane potential in Panel D, which was not included in the ANOVA analysis.

12

Table of Contents

Previous drug development efforts in the neurodegenerative disease space have targeted misfolded protein aggregates as toxic drivers of disease; for example, TAR DNA binding protein 43 (“TDP-43”) in ALS, alpha-synuclein in PD, and amyloid beta in Alzheimer’s disease. An important component of the mechanism of action of CNM-Au8 is its ability to dose-dependently reduce aggregated TDP-43 and alpha-synuclein in cellular models of ALS and PD, respectively (Figure 6). We believe this activity is, at least in part, attributable to the robust induction of twenty gene transcripts of the heat shock factor-1 pathway, which we observed in OLs in response to CNM-Au8 treatment (Robinson, et al. “Nanocatalytic activity of clean-surfaced, faceted nanocrystalline gold enhances remyelination in animal models of multiple sclerosis.” Scientific Reports, 10, 1936 (2020)) as well as due to an indirect cellular response to NAD upregulation, which has been shown to activate autophagic and proteostatic responses.

Figure 6. Reduction in Misfolded Protein Aggregates

Figure 6. Dose-dependent reduction of three different types of protein aggregates in dopaminergic and spinal motor neurons that are typically found in PD (left panel), sporadic and familial ALS cases (middle panel), and familial superoxide dismutase 1 (“SOD1”) ALS cases (right panel). In each of these assays, there was a concomitant dose-dependent increase in neuron survival and preservation of neurite network with CNM-Au8 treatment. These results demonstrate that CNM-Au8 reduces the quantity of toxic protein aggregates in in vitro models representing different neurodegenerative diseases. Group means plotted +/- SEM. * p<0.05; ** p<0.01; *** p<0.001; **** p<0.0001; treatment vs. vehicle, one-way ANOVA corrected for multiple comparisons.

In summary, CNM-Au8 exhibits a novel mechanism of action via its catalytic activities, involving:

(1)

enhancement of energetic metabolism via increased production of NAD+ and ATP;

(2)

reduction of oxidative stress; and

(3)

enhancement of proteostatic, autophagic responses that reduce accumulation of toxic protein aggregates that are hallmarks of neurodegenerative diseases.

CNM-Au8 Penetration of Cell Membranes and of the Blood-Brain Barrier

CNM-Au8 can penetrate cell membranes and cross the blood-brain barrier. In vitro studies (Figure 7) clearly demonstrate that CNM-Au8 penetrates cell membranes and accumulates within the cytoplasm of cells in culture. Similar cytoplasmic accumulation of CNM-Au8 was observed using hyperspectral darkfield spectroscopy (not shown).

13

Table of Contents

Figure 7. CNM-Au8 Cell Membrane Penetration

Figure 7. Addition of CNM-Au8 to culture media results in cellular uptake of gold nanocrystals. NIH 3T3 fibroblasts were treated with 48h vehicle or 30 μg/mL CNM-Au8 and imaged using compound light microscopy. Lower magnification images (40x) are on the left; high magnification images on the right (100x).

To investigate blood-brain barrier penetrance of CNM-Au8, inductively coupled mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) was used for ultrasensitive gold quantitation. CNM-Au8 (0.35 mg/kg, 3.5 mg/kg, and 10 mg/kg) or vehicle was administered by gavage daily over nine months to canines using a standard chronic toxicology protocol (n=20 per group). Overall, there was significant elevation of detectable gold levels in tissues and organs compared to vehicle treated animals quantitated by ICP-MS. Organs with the highest accumulations of gold were, respectively, liver, kidneys, and spleen. Minute levels of gold were also detected in the brain and spinal cord of animals; however, levels did not exceed the limit of quantitation (LOQ) as defined by International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC). Therefore, we determined the fraction of animals in each treatment group with gold levels exceeding the limit of detection (LOD). Figure 8 shows that there is a higher fraction of animals with gold levels exceeding the LOD in groups that were orally administered with CNM-Au8 as compared to those given vehicle (placebo). In similar studies, minipigs and rodents administered with CNM-Au8 also showed levels of gold in the brain and spinal cord exceeding the LOD more frequently than in placebo groups. CNM-Au8 is therefore a blood-brain barrier penetrant, albeit at low levels. Notably, significant catalysis of bioenergetic reactions do not require large numbers of the effector catalysts, since the catalyst is not consumed by the reaction it catalyzes. Indeed, preclinical efficacy studies with CNM-Au8 consistently indicated that sufficient quantities of CNM-Au8 are accessible to appropriate neuronal types to bring about the functional, behavioral, and survival effects seen in the in vivo studies. Importantly, blood-brain barrier penetration in humans was demonstrated in the REPAIR-MS and REPAIR-PD studies, as discussed below.

Figure 8. Spinal Cord and Brain Au Quantitation at End of Study

Figure 8. ICP-MS quantitation of gold accumulation in the brain and spinal cords of canines that were orally administered CNM-Au8 more frequently exceeded the LOD than in placebo controls. Canines were administered CNM-Au8 or placebo for nine months and then sacrificed for toxicology and pharmacokinetics analyses.

14

Table of Contents

A mechanism by which CNM-Au8 can penetrate the blood-brain barrier emerged from a study in which we fully characterized the proteins from human blood plasma that form the protein corona of the gold nanocrystals of CNM-Au8. Once swallowed, the gold nanocrystals of CNM-Au8 pass through the gastrointestinal tract and enter the body’s circulatory system, where they interact with, and become coated by, blood proteins and other biomolecules, forming the ‘protein/biomolecular corona.’ Using liquid chromatography-mass spectroscopy, specific apolipoproteins were identified to be in high abundance in the corona. These proteins were apolipoproteins A-I, A-II, C-II, C-III, and E. These apolipoproteins are known to bind to specific receptors on the blood-brain barrier and promote the transport of substances across the blood-brain barrier. (Ashkarran, et al. “Protein Corona Composition of Gold Nanocatalysts.” ACS Pharmacology and Translational Science, 7 (4), 1169-1177 (2024)).

Safety and Tolerability of CNM-Au8

Standard ICH M3(R2) toxicology studies were conducted on CNM-Au8 in four animal species that yielded no toxicity findings, resulting in NOAEL findings up to maximum feasible dosing levels. In 2016, we completed a Phase 1 first-in-human trial to demonstrate that CNM-Au8 was safe for further clinical development and to assess the pharmacokinetic profile at different dosing concentrations. This trial was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, escalating single- and multiple-dose trial to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of CNM-Au8 in healthy human volunteers. The trial had two phases: a single-ascending dose (“SAD”) phase, where 40 subjects were randomized to CNM-Au8 (n=30) or placebo (n=10) at a 3:1 ratio in single dose escalating cohorts who received CNM-Au8 at 15 mg, 30 mg, 60 mg, or 90 mg, with follow-up duration for each subject of 17 days; followed by a multiple-ascending dose (“MAD”) phase, where 46 subjects were randomized to CNM-Au8 (n=35) or placebo (n=11) in multiple dose cohorts who received CNM-Au8 at 15 mg, 30 mg, 60 mg, and 90 mg, with the duration of treatment at 21 days and follow-up for each subject at up to 50 days.

Pharmacokinetics analyses from the MAD phase showed that at the end of 21 days, the maximum concentration of gold in blood was determined to be 1.53 ng/mL, 1.98 ng/mL, 2.35 ng/mL, and 3.33 ng/mL for each group dosed with 15, 30, 60, or 90 mg, respectively. Pharmacokinetics analyses of the Phase 1 results demonstrated that CNM-Au8 has a half-life of 14 to 21 days. The end-of-trial drug exposure levels in humans either matched or exceeded the equivalent exposure that demonstrated neuroprotection and remyelination efficacy in animal models.

Safety assessments revealed no significant findings. All doses used in the trial were determined to be well-tolerated based on the frequency of reported TEAEs. TEAEs occurred more frequently on placebo (86%) than in the CNM-Au8 dosing groups in both the SAD and MAD phases combined (75%). No subjects discontinued the trial due to TEAEs and no SAEs were reported across any treatment group. The most frequently reported TEAEs were almost entirely of Grade 1 (mild) severity and transient. The most frequently reported TEAEs consisted of headaches, somnolence, fatigue, abdominal pain, diarrhea, nausea, and dizziness. We have continued to accumulate human safety exposure in our Phase 2 clinical trials, OLEs, LTEs, and EAPs. To date, we have collected over 1,100 participant-years of human safety study data on exposure to CNM-Au8, including safety data on consecutive long-term CNM-Au8 treatment for over 6 years, and have not observed concerning or dose-limiting safety signals.

Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis

ALS Market Opportunity

ALS is the most prevalent adult-onset, progressive, and fatal neurodegenerative disorder of the neuromuscular system, affecting approximately 30,000 patients in the U.S. and over 200,000 patients worldwide, with an average life expectancy of only three to five years after initial diagnosis. ALS involves the progressive degeneration of motor neurons in the spinal cord and the brain, which are responsible for controlling voluntary muscle movement. This progressive loss of motor neurons leads to muscle weakness, loss of muscle mass, inability to control movement, and paralysis. Disease onset for the majority of individuals with ALS occurs between the age of 40 and 60. While overall the incidence of ALS is more common in men, after the age of 65 the difference in incidence between males and females decreases. We estimate the global ALS market value will be greater than $1.5 billion by 2032.

15

Table of Contents

ALS Current Therapies and Limitations

Current ALS treatment therapies are largely palliative and aim to provide temporary relief of symptoms without treating underlying disease progression, such as non-invasive ventilation to treat the loss of respiratory function. Despite the great need for an effective disease-modifying therapy (“DMT”) and significant research efforts by the pharmaceutical industry to meet this need, there have been limited clinical successes and no curative therapies approved to date. Three therapeutic agents have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) and are actively available for the treatment of ALS: riluzole, an anti-glutamatergic agent; edaravone, a free-radical scavenger; and tofersen, an antisense oligonucleotide treatment of SOD1-ALS. However, these treatments are acknowledged to have limited disease-modifying effects and do not substantially halt or reverse the progressive nature of the disease: Riluzole extends participant lifespans by an average of only two to three months; edaravone slows the decline of the ALS Functional Rating Scale Revised (“ALSFRS-R”) score, a clinical measure of functional decline, in only a small subset of participants at an early stage of disease; and tofersen slows decline of certain clinical outcomes in ALS cases caused by mutations of the SOD1 gene, which represents only a small fraction of all ALS cases. One additional therapeutic, sodium phenylbutyrate and taurursodiol, was approved by the FDA but subsequently withdrawn from the market following negative results from a confirmatory Phase 3 trial. An urgent unmet need clearly exists for the development of safe and effective treatments, including DMTs, for ALS.

Potential Advantages of CNM-Au8 for ALS

We believe CNM-Au8 has the potential to be a first-in-class disease modifying nanotherapeutic for ALS. In a human induced pluripotent stem cell (“iPSC”) model of ALS, CNM-Au8 demonstrated clearly superior human motor neuron protection compared to riluzole. Furthermore, oral delivery of CNM-Au8 to ALS model mice extended the median lifespan of these animals by over three times the lifespan extension attributed to edaravone or riluzole treatment reported in the literature. While the mechanism of action of edaravone shares one similar component with CNM-Au8, namely, reduction of oxidative stress, we believe the important difference in activity lies in CNM-Au8’s demonstrated potential to enhance energetic activity in diseased neurons as well as to significantly reduce oxidative stress. Furthermore, we believe the complex nature of many neurodegenerative diseases, including ALS, necessitates therapeutics with multimodal activity that can act to enhance the energetic profile of multiple central nervous system cell types; for this, CNM-Au8 may be uniquely suited to address the therapeutic challenges posed by such complicated and devastating diseases.

Summary of Nonclinical Pharmacology Neuroprotection Studies for ALS

Motor neurons progressively degenerate during the course of ALS. To demonstrate neuroprotection of motor neurons by CNM-Au8, in vitro neuroprotection assays were used. Rat motor neurons were challenged with glutamate to induce excitotoxicity, or with amyloid beta 1-42 peptide (“Aβ”), which is toxic to motor neurons. In Alzheimer’s disease, Aβ aggregates participate in the formation of amyloid plaques. CNM-Au8 treatment of motor neurons challenged with glutamate or with Aβ increased numbers of surviving motor neurons and preserved neurite networks in a dose-dependent manner.

Brain accumulation of aggregated, misfolded proteins that display neurotoxic properties is a hallmark of many neurodegenerative diseases, including ALS. In over 90% of ALS cases, accumulation of aggregated, mis-localized, cytoplasmic TDP-43 in motor neurons have been shown to disrupt the cellular functions of motor neurons. In neuron-glial co-culture assays, application of glutamate or Aβ to rat motor neurons causes TDP-43 aggregates to accumulate in the cytoplasm of motor neurons. Treatment of the glutamate- or Aβ-challenged motor neurons with CNM-Au8 significantly reduced the accumulation of TDP-43 aggregates in a dose-dependent manner.

In addition to animal models, iPSCs have emerged as a new technique for neurodegenerative disease modeling using human-derived cells. iPSCs can be generated from human skin or blood samples and then differentiated in vitro into astrocytes and motor neurons. Using this technique, ALS patient-derived astrocytes were shown to be toxic to normal healthy human motor neurons. Introduction of CNM-Au8 to these toxic ALS patient astrocyte-motor neuron co-cultures resulted in a significant, dose-dependent rescue of human motor neurons and preservation of motor neuron neurite networks. Collectively, these results indicated that CNM-Au8 exerts motor neuron protection effects in several different models, including in response to excitotoxic stress, Aβ toxicity, and toxic astrocytes.

To investigate the efficacy of CNM-Au8 in an in vivo model of ALS, two studies were conducted in separate transgenic (SOD1G93A) mouse strains that model the human SOD1 familial form of ALS. In a study using rapidly progressing SOD1G93A animals, CNM-Au8 treated animals showed significant reduction of brainstem atrophy and brainstem vacuolization normally seen in untreated SOD1G93A mice. In the study using slower-progressing SOD1G93A animals, CNM-Au8 treated animals showed significant treatment effects in a number of behavioral and functional tests, including overall clinical score, weights hold, static rod orientation time, and average wheel-running velocity. Median survival of CNM-Au8 treated animals significantly exceeded vehicle-treated controls by 23 days (approximately 20% of the animal’s expected life-span).

16

Table of Contents

Clinical Development of CNM-Au8 as a Disease-Modifying Therapeutic for ALS

Based on safety findings in our Phase 1 clinical trial of CNM-Au8 and our robust preclinical data, we completed two Phase 2 clinical trials in ALS, RESCUE-ALS and the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial. Additionally, we are still actively supporting: (i) a long-term OLE for RESCUE-ALS, (ii) EAP01 and EAP02, launched in partnership with Massachusetts General Hospital, and (iii) the ACT-EAP, conducted in collaboration with NYU and Synapticure and funded by a four-year grant from the NIH.

We have had several interactions with the FDA since the fourth quarter of 2023, and in late 2024 the FDA recommended three potential paths that could be leveraged to increase the persuasiveness of the Phase 2 clinical data, including the use of biomarker and survival data from our OLEs (see “—Regulatory Pathway and Phase 3” below). We submitted the results of our analyses to the FDA and have been granted a Type C in-person meeting in the first quarter of 2026 to discuss the results and confirm the ability of the Company to file an NDA for ALS under an accelerated approval pathway, with the meeting minutes expected early in the second quarter of 2026. We plan to submit an NDA under an accelerated approval pathway by the end of June 2026, with a planned Phase 3 RESTORE-ALS trial commencing in the second half of 2026, contingent on funding, and serving as the post-approval confirmatory study.

Orphan Drug Status for ALS

The FDA granted orphan drug designation to CNM-Au8 for the treatment of ALS in May 2019. Following FDA orphan drug designation, sponsors may qualify for seven-year FDA-administered Orphan Drug Exclusivity, partial tax credits for research and development expenses, potential research and development grants, waived FDA fees, and protocol assistance from the FDA.

RESCUE-ALS and Open Label Extension

RESCUE-ALS was a Phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of CNM-Au8 in early ALS patients. The trial was conducted over 36 weeks with 45 enrolled participants. The trial randomized participants 1:1 to treatment with CNM-Au8 at 30 mg daily or matching placebo on top of standard of care (riluzole). The primary endpoint was the percent change of the sum of Motor Unit Number Index (“MUNIX”) from baseline to week 36. MUNIX is a neurophysiological biomarker that estimates the number of functioning lower motor neurons serving selected muscles. Secondary endpoints were the change in forced vital capacity (“FVC”) and the absolute change in MUNIX values to week 36. Exploratory endpoints included ALSFRS-R 6-point decline, ALS Specific Quality of Life (“ALSSQOL-SF”), and additional clinical and neurophysiology endpoints. Results were presented in November 2021 and published in June 2023 (Vucic, et al. “Efficacy and safety of CNM-Au8 in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (RESCUE-ALS study): a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial and open label extension.” eClinical Medicine, 60, 102036 (2023)). While the trial did not meet the primary or secondary endpoints, an efficacy signal was observed for MUNIX at week 12 (p=0.057). Furthermore, in a pre-specified analysis in the subset of patients with limb onset ALS, CNM-Au8 demonstrated a significant treatment effect in MUNIX at week 12 (p=0.0385) and a trend for improvement at week 36 (p=0.0741). Limb onset ALS accounts for approximately 70% of the ALS population. Clinically relevant exploratory endpoints through week 36 demonstrated significant benefits with CNM-Au8 treatment, including slowing ALS disease progression (p=0.0125), decreasing the proportion of participants with an ALSFRS-R 6-point decline (p=0.035), and improving quality of life as measured by ALSSQOL-SF (p=0.018). In addition, CNM-Au8 treated participants consistently showed directional benefits (i.e., less decline) across measures of respiratory function and motor function, albeit non-significantly. CNM-Au8 was well-tolerated through 36 weeks of oral daily dosing and no SAEs related to CNM-Au8 treatment were reported. TEAEs were predominantly mild-to-moderate in severity. The most frequently reported adverse events associated with CNM-Au8 treatment included aspiration pneumonia (n=3) and transient gastrointestinal distress (n=2).

In August 2023, we announced the 24-month data cut of the RESCUE-ALS long-term OLE, representing a 24-month minimum follow-up for OLE participants from the last-patient, last-visit of the 36-week double-blind treatment period. Results of the study demonstrated a clear and consistent survival benefit associated with CNM-Au8 treatment based on several analyses:

●

Cross-over adjusted median difference in survival was 19.3 months (CNM-Au8 median survival of 34.2 months, placebo-adjusted median survival of 14.9 months) using a rank-preserving structural failure time model (“RPSFTM”) analysis, a well-recognized statistical method that utilized the observed survival benefit associated with active treatment of all trial participants to estimate the lack of survival benefit in the ex-placebo participants had they not switched to CNM-Au8 during the OLE. This method provides a comparison of CNM-Au8 treatment versus placebo across the entire study period.

●

Using RPSFTM, there was a 75% decreased risk of long-term all-cause mortality in participants originally randomized to treatment with CNM-Au8 compared to those originally randomized to placebo (hazard ratio (“HR”): 0.252, 95% CI: 0.106 to 0.597; bootstrap log-rank p<0.001).

17

Table of Contents

●

Unadjusted median survival, which was not adjusted for the benefit received in ex-placebo participants, was 10.1 months (CNM-Au8 median survival of 34.2 months; placebo median survival of 24.1 months).

●

Unadjusted decreased risk of long-term all-cause mortality, which was not adjusted for the benefit received in ex-placebo participants, was 46% (HR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.25 to 1.1, log-rank p=0.09).

●

Using propensity score matching, there was a 70% decreased risk of long-term mortality (Cox adjusted HR: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.79; p=0.03) in participants originally randomized to CNM-Au8 treatment compared to matched untreated participants derived from the PRO-ACT database, which contains approximately 12,000 ALS patient records from multiple completed clinical trials.

●

A 52% decreased risk of ALS clinical worsening events (the first occurrence of death, tracheostomy, assisted ventilation, or feeding tube placement) in the participants originally randomized to CNM-Au8 treatment versus original placebo (HR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.23 to 1.0, log-rank p=0.049).

CNM-Au8 was well tolerated without long term safety concerns or SAEs assessed as related to CNM-Au8 treatment; adverse events observed with CNM-Au8 were characterized as transient and predominantly mild-to-moderate in severity.

HEALEY ALS Platform Trial and Open Label Extension

In September 2019, the Healey Center at Massachusetts General Hospital selected CNM-Au8 for inclusion as one of the first three drugs in the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial. The HEALEY ALS Platform Trial is the first platform trial for ALS and is intended to accelerate the development of ALS therapies by simultaneously testing multiple therapeutics under a master protocol, in order to reduce costs, decrease trial time, and increase patient participation. A network of over 50 expert ALS clinics across the U.S. from the Northeast ALS Consortium serve as the clinical trial sites. Substantial financial support from philanthropic donors and the Healey Center support the operational costs of the platform trial. We contributed a direct fee to the Healey Center toward the clinical conduct of the trial and there were no additional licensing fees or milestone requirements. The Investigational New Drug (“IND”) application is held by Massachusetts General Hospital. We own all CNM-Au8 data; placebo data is shared across all treatment regimens within the trial.

The CNM-Au8 regimen (Regimen C) was a Phase 2, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled registrational trial to assess the safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of CNM-Au8 in treating ALS. Participants were randomized 3:1 between active treatment and placebo with active treatment equally distributed between low dose (CNM-Au8 30 mg) and high dose (CNM-Au8 60 mg) (i.e., randomized 1.5 : 1.5 : 1, CNM-Au8 30 mg : CNM-Au8 60 mg : placebo). The primary endpoint was rate of change in ALSFRS-R from baseline to week 24 adjusted for mortality, with secondary endpoints of: (i) combined assessment of function and survival (“CAFS”), a combined joint-rank score based on survival and change in ALSFRS-R from baseline to week 24, (ii) changes in slow vital capacity (“SVC”), and (iii) survival (time to death or death equivalent). Exploratory endpoints included time to clinical worsening events, voice pathology measurements, and biofluid-based pharmacodynamic and metabolic markers.

In October 2022, we announced topline results for CNM-Au8: the primary endpoint of rate of change in ALSFRS-R adjusted for mortality was not statistically significant at 24 weeks (2% slowing, 95% CI: -20% to +19%). Secondary endpoints of CAFS and SVC were also not met at 24 weeks across the combined 30 mg and 60 mg doses. The prespecified exploratory analyses of the secondary survival endpoint demonstrated a >90% reduction in risk of death alone or in risk of death/permanently assisted ventilation (“PAV”) at 24 weeks, when adjusted for baseline imbalances in risk (p=0.028 to p=0.075, unadjusted for multiple comparisons) with the 30 mg dose. These survival results were statistically consistent for the 30 mg dose between the regimen-only and full analysis sets, which included shared placebo from other regimens participating in the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial (Regimens A, B, and D), and is also consistent with the results from our Phase 2 RESCUE-ALS trial. CNM-Au8 was well-tolerated and no drug-related SAEs or significant safety findings were reported. Based on these findings, we selected CNM-Au8 30 mg for continued development in ALS.

In March 2023, we announced exploratory results for time to clinical worsening events based on prespecified risk-adjusted Cox proportional hazard analyses. Treatment with the CNM-Au8 30 mg dose was associated with a 74% decreased risk of the composite of time to clinical worsening events (p=0.035), which included the first instance of death, tracheostomy, initiation of PAV (>22 hours per day of non-invasive ventilatory support), or placement of a feeding tube. CNM-Au8 treatment was also associated with statistically significant and directional trends across all prespecified time to clinical worsening event analyses (not adjusted for multiple comparisons), including (i) 98% decreased risk of death or PAV (p=0.028), (ii) 95% decreased risk of death (p=0.053), (iii) 74% decreased risk of feeding tube placement (p=0.035), (iv) 63% decreased risk of assisted ventilation (p=0.058), (v) 84% decreased risk of ALS-related hospitalization (p=0.107), and (vi) 69% decreased risk of all-cause hospitalization (p=0.065). Supportive sensitivity analyses incorporating baseline neurofilament light chain (“NfL”) levels were similarly robust and resulted in increased effect sizes and smaller nominal p-values in the same “within regimen” analyses.

18

Table of Contents

In June 2023, we announced a statistically significant reduction of plasma NfL across all CNM-Au8 participants compared to placebo (CNM-Au8 or placebo, n=161). NfL is a key blood-based biomarker of neurodegeneration and was used as a surrogate biomarker to support the FDA approval of tofersen, a therapeutic for SOD1-ALS. NfL is released from neurons following axonal injury, especially in people living with ALS, and higher levels of NfL have been found to predict more rapid decline in clinical function and increased mortality risk. The results are based on an analysis of the plasma NfL biomarker as the least-square (“LS”) mean change of the natural logarithm (“Ln”) of the plasma NfL values with the standard error (“SE”) for the 24-week difference: CNM-Au8 = -0.024 (SE: 0.024); placebo = +0.076 (SE: 0.042); CNM-Au8 versus placebo difference = -0.100 (SE: 0.048), p=0.040. Additional sensitivity analyses showed consistent reduction in plasma NfL levels versus placebo in specific populations generally considered at greater risk of ALS disease progression, including:

●

Faster progressors (baseline pre-treatment ALSFRS-R slope >0.45 points/month (post hoc, n=107) with the NfL difference of LS means on a Ln scale (SE) = -0.144 (0.058), p=0.014.

●

Definite or probable ALS diagnosis per El Escorial criteria (post hoc, n=125) with the NfL difference of LS means on a Ln scale (SE) = -0.124 (0.054), p=0.023.

●

Higher mortality risk (baseline plasma NfL > median, post hoc, n=79) with the NfL difference of LS means on a Ln scale (SE) = -0.150 (0.068), p=0.031.

In September 2023, we announced long-term survival data from the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial OLE for patients treated with CNM-Au8 30 mg for up to 133 weeks (n=59). These post hoc results showed a statistically significant 49% decreased risk of death for the covariate risk-adjusted analyses compared to matched placebo patients through long-term follow-up from the largest U.S. clinical database of previous ALS trials, PRO-ACT (covariate adjusted HR: 0.510, 95% CI: 0.263 to 0.987, p=0.046). In a pooled analysis of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial and RESCUE-ALS, participants originally randomized to CNM-Au8 30 mg (n=82) demonstrated a statistically significant 59% decreased risk of death compared to PRO-ACT matched placebo patients through long-term follow-up (covariate adjusted HR: 0.406, 95% CI: 0.220 to 0.749, p=0.004).

In December 2023, we announced a statistically significant reduction of plasma NfL levels from baseline to 76 weeks in OLE patients originally randomized to CNM-Au8 30 mg compared to patients treated with placebo for 24 weeks prior to crossing over to CNM-Au8 treatment in the OLE. CNM-Au8 30 mg treatment reduced plasma NfL levels compared to baseline using a mixed model with repeat measures (“MMRM”), LS means on a Ln scale for the 76-week change from baseline: CNM-Au8 = -0.075 (SE: 0.053); placebo = +0.098 (SE: 0.056); CNM-Au8 30 mg versus original placebo difference = -0.173 (SE: 0.076), p=0.023. Combined analyses of both CNM-Au8 doses (30 mg and 60 mg) also demonstrated nominally significant reductions in plasma NfL, CNM-Au8 versus placebo difference = -0.144 (SE: 0.066), p=0.029. Long-term survival analyses were performed under the prespecified RPSFTM to account for the effects of CNM-Au8 in participants randomized to placebo who crossed-over to treatment with CNM-Au8. Under an assumption of a constant common treatment effect from CNM-Au8, treatment with CNM-Au8 demonstrated a 60% decreased risk of long-term all-cause mortality in participants originally randomized to treatment with CNM-Au8 compared to those originally randomized to placebo (Cox HR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.85; p=0.017).

In June 2024, we announced new long-term CNM-Au8 treatment results for survival and NfL levels from the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial OLE. The new analysis incorporated up to 42 months (3.5 years) of survival follow-up and 76 weeks of long-term NfL biomarker results, including an NfL responder subset (the “CNM-Au8 NfL Responders”) from the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial who had consistent and sustained NfL reductions, comprising nearly half of all CNM-Au8 patients. All participants treated with CNM-Au8 30 mg, including ex-placebo participants who transitioned to CNM-Au8 in the OLE with complete baseline co-variates were included in the survival analysis:

●

Improved Survival Compared to Matched PRO-ACT Controls—Survival analyses of participants originally randomized to CNM-Au8 30 mg treatment (n=59) and ex-placebo to CNM-Au8 (n=11) compared to propensity-matched PRO-ACT controls up to 3.5 years post-baseline showed:

○

Approximately 60% decreased risk of death in CNM-Au8 30 mg treated patients compared to matched PRO-ACT controls; covariate-adjusted HR: 0.431 (95% CI: 0.276 to 0.672), p=0.0002.

●

Reduced NfL Biomarker Levels in CNM-Au8 NfL Responders—CNM-Au8 NfL Responder Subset: The CNM-Au8 NfL Responder analysis was completed to identify NfL decreases in participants who showed consistent NfL declines (n=55). CNM-Au8 NfL Responders were defined as participants who had all post-baseline measures with an NfL decrease or repeated declines of at least 10 pg/mL following the start of CNM-Au8 treatment. The analysis showed:

○

CNM-Au8 NfL Responders demonstrated an average NfL reduction of 28%, indicating a neuroprotective effect; geometric mean ratio (“GMR”) at week 76 change vs. baseline: 0.72, (95% CI: 0.67 to 0.79), p<0.0001.

19

Table of Contents

○

Long-term treatment with CNM-Au8 30 mg resulted in continued significant decline of plasma NfL levels. The NfL results are based on earlier announced analyses of plasma NfL collected from participants (n=99) in the OLE who were treated with CNM-Au8 30 mg through week 76 compared to participants treated with placebo for 24 weeks prior to crossing over to active treatment for up to 52 weeks. The GMR vs. placebo at week 76 was 0.841, 95% CI: 0.73 to 0.98, p=0.023.

In August 2024, we announced new post-hoc combined analyses from the independent HEALEY ALS Platform Trial and RESCUE-ALS trials: CNM-Au8 NfL Responders demonstrated a 28% mean reduction in NfL levels compared to baseline, while NfL levels continued to increase in CNM-Au8 NfL non-responders (all doses; GMR difference at week 76 post-baseline: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.50 to 0.64, p<0.00001). The analyses of the CNM-Au8 NfL Responders demonstrated efficacy in all-cause mortality, function, and CAFS as follows:

●

All-cause mortality:

○

Improved survival of CNM-Au8 NfL Responders compared to propensity matched controls from the PRO-ACT database: HR: 0.504, 95% Wald CI: 0.28 to 0.904, covariate adjusted, p=0.022.

○

Improved survival of CNM-Au8 NfL Responders compared to CNM-Au8 NfL non-responders: HR: 0.350, 95% CI: 0.188 to 0.649, covariate adjusted, p=0.0009.

●

ALS Functional Improvement:

○

Significantly less decline in ALSFRS-R total score of CNM-Au8 NfL Responders compared to CNM-Au8 NfL non-responders: p<0.01 at the week 64, 76, 88, and 100 visits post-randomization (MMRM was used to compare LS mean change from baseline).

○

Significantly less decline in the respiratory subdomain score of the ALSFRS-R of CNM-Au8 NfL Responders compared to CNM-Au8 NfL non-responders: p<0.01 at the week 64, 76, 88, and 100 visits post-randomization (MMRM was used to compare LS mean change from baseline).

●

Improvements in CAFS:

○

CNM-Au8 NfL Responders demonstrated improvements compared to CNM-Au8 NfL non-responders starting at week 48 (p<0.10) and all later timepoints with significance reached at weeks 88 and later (p<0.05).

Independent of NfL responder status, long-term treatment with CNM-Au8 30 mg was associated with improved survival in participants from RESCUE-ALS and HEALEY ALS Platform Trial using updated long-term follow-up of survival status compared to propensity matched controls from the clinical trial data registry PRO-ACT, the ALS/MND Natural History Consortium (“NHC”), and the Australian MiNDAUS registry. Matching methods and covariates were prespecified and conducted by an independent statistician:

●

57% decreased risk of all-cause mortality in HEALEY ALS Platform Trial vs. PRO-ACT propensity matched controls: (HR: 0.431, 95% CI: 0.276 to 0.672; covariate adjusted, p=0.0002).

●

48% decreased risk of all-cause mortality in HEALEY ALS Platform Trial vs. ALS NHC propensity matched controls: (HR: 0.519, 95% CI: 0.347 to 0.776; covariate adjusted, p=0.0014).

●

70% decreased risk of all-cause mortality in RESCUE-ALS vs. PRO-ACT propensity matched controls: (HR: 0.311, 95% CI: 0.142 to 0.682; covariate adjusted, p=0.0035).

●

51% decreased risk of all-cause mortality in RESCUE-ALS vs. MiNDAUS propensity matched controls: (HR: 0.487, 95% CI: 0.287 to 0.824; covariate adjusted, p=0.0074).

Further, CNM-Au8 mechanism of action responders (defined as those who had consistent and sustained NAD+ and GSH/GGSG glutathione improvements) demonstrated concordance with CNM-Au8 NfL Responders. The connection between CNM-Au8 mechanism responders and CNM-Au8 NfL Responders links the mechanism of action to NfL declines. Biomarkers of oxidative stress, including the GSH/GGSG ratio, demonstrated consistent improvement following CNM-Au8 treatment with increased activity associated with the duration of treatment. These data are consistent with CNM-Au8’s mechanism of action of neuronal metabolic support and decreased oxidative stress. The results are also highly concordant with the data from our preclinical model studies that demonstrated improved neuronal integrity and survival and decreased release of NfL from damaged motor neurons axons with CNM-Au8 treatment.

20

Table of Contents

In November 2024, we announced new prespecified and post hoc analyses from the OLE that included:

●

78% risk reduction in time to death (improved survival) during the OLE to month 12 from the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial (CNM-Au8 30 mg vs. original placebo randomization; covariate adjusted Cox HR: 0.224, 95% CI: 0.053 to 0.949, p=0.042).

●

Evidence linking baseline NfL burden with a CNM-Au8 survival benefit (post hoc) included:

○

83% risk reduction of time to death or PAV observed in CNM-Au8 participants with the highest baseline upper NfL tertile from the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial through month 12 (CNM-Au8 30 mg vs. original placebo randomization; covariate adjusted Cox HR: 0.174, 95% CI: 0.036 to 0.830, p=0.0283).

○

84% risk reduction of time to death or PAV seen in CNM-Au8 participants with baseline NfL ≥ median from the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial through month 12 (CNM-Au8 30 mg vs. original placebo randomization; covariate adjusted Cox HR: 0.155, 95% CI: 0.035 to 0.693, p=0.0147).

●

Evidence linking NfL decline with a CNM-Au8 survival benefit (post hoc) included:

○

57% of CNM-Au8 30 mg treated participants demonstrated NfL decline at week 24 (the end of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial double-blind period).

○

91% risk reduction in time to death or PAV observed in participants with any level of NfL decline (or missing NfL data) at week 24 in the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial with follow-up through month 12; (CNM-Au8 30 mg vs. original placebo randomization; covariate adjusted Cox HR: 0.0925, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.382, p=0.001).

●

Long-term survival analyses of CNM-Au8 treatment effect from real-world EAPs showed a 31% risk reduction in CNM-Au8 participants who were unable to enter other ALS clinical trials due to advanced disease severity, when compared to propensity matched controls pooled from three different natural history and clinical trial datasets (covariate adjusted Cox HR: 0.689, 95% CI: 0.529 to 0.898, p=0.0059).

In March 2025, we announced evidence from a cross-regimen, post hoc analysis comparing survival in participants who received CNM-Au8 30 mg (Regimen C) to those of Regimen A in the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial. Regimen A provided a large concurrent control group versus CNM-Au8 treatment using the same randomization criteria established within the HEALEY master protocol. Long-term survival status, determined through public records and site reporting, was evaluated over a follow-up period of up to 48 months. 78% of participants across both groups received standard ALS background therapy (riluzole, edaravone, or both) at baseline. Overall survival improvement (all-cause mortality) was observed across the full analysis set as follows:

●

Median Survival—CNM-Au8 30 mg group (Regimen C, n=59) achieved 951 days versus 753 days in the Regimen A comparator group (n=162), a gain of 198 days (6.5 months).

●

Restricted Mean Survival Time (“RMST”) Benefit—covariate-adjusted RMST improvement of 124 days (4.1 months) was observed (95% CI: 3 to 245 days, p=0.045). RMST is a metric that estimates the average time a group survives relative to a comparator. The estimate incorporated the prespecified covariates for survival analyses from the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial (i.e., months from symptom onset, pre-treatment ALSFRS-R slope, age, background riluzole treatment, background edaravone treatment).

●

Sensitivity analyses, which included additional covariate models such as baseline serum NfL levels, use of ALS background therapy, and the TRICALS risk score, confirmed the robustness and statistical significance of the findings.

An enhanced benefit in moderate to severe ALS was observed including:

●

In participants with baseline serum NfL > 33 pg/mL and TRICALS risk score range between –6.5 and –2.5 (i.e., filtering slow progressors where there was an imbalance between groups), median survival improved from 589 days (Regimen A, n=120) to 951 days (CNM-Au8 30 mg, n=51), representing an 11.9 month gain.

●

Mortality risk in this group decreased by 44% (Cox HR: 0.556, 95% CI: 0.367 to 0.842, p=0.006) with an RMST improvement of 197 days (6.5 month gain; 95% CI: 65 to 329 days, p=0.004), when using the prespecified covariates for survival analyses from the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial.

21

Table of Contents

The strongest survival benefit was observed in a participant subset who met the planned Phase 3 RESTORE-ALS trial enrollment criteria:

●

Among participants who met the core RESTORE-ALS trial criteria (e.g., baseline serum NfL > 33 pg/mL, TRICALS risk score range between –6.5 and –2.5, baseline slow vital capacity > 60%, and symptom onset < 36 months), median survival improved from 628 days (Regimen A, n=94) to 1079 days (CNM-Au8 30 mg, n=40), an increase of 451 days (14.8 months).

●

This subset experienced a 49% reduction in mortality risk (Cox HR: 0.514, 95% CI: 0.319 to 0.830, p=0.006) and an RMST improvement of 215 days (7.1 months; 95% CI: 70 to 360 days, p=0.004), when using the planned covariates for the RESTORE-ALS trial.

In December 2025, we announced the results of several biomarker analyses recommended by the FDA to be performed across the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, OLE, and the ACT-EAP. The framework for the analyses was established following the review of our statistical analysis plan by the FDA in the second quarter of 2025.

●

Statistically significant decrease in NfL levels compared to matched ALS controls across the full analysis set (all evaluable matched participants) in the ACT-EAP. The week 36 area under curve (“AUC”) difference (SEM) of NfL (Ln(pg/mL)*week) was: –0.0899 (0.0430), p=0.0373, equivalent to a GMR difference of 0.914, 95% CI: 0.840 – 0.995. The effect size was similar to the NfL decline observed in the original double-blind phase of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial: HEALEY week 24 AUC GMR of 0.901, 95% CI: 0.845 – 0.959, p=0.0013 compared to the ACT-EAP week 24 AUC GMR of 0.911, 95% CI: 0.836 – 0.993, p=0.0339. Multiple pre-specified supportive analyses in the ACT-EAP across the full analysis set at week 24 and week 48 confirmed the robustness of the findings (p<0.05). Pre-specified subgroups showed significant effects in participants including those with an age younger than the median, on background riluzole treatment, and in participants with bulbar onset (p<0.05). In the primary analysis population in non-bulbar onset participants (i.e., predominantly limb onset), the week 36 AUC NfL change was not significant (p=0.2085).

●

Additional disease-relevant biomarker effects on glial fibrillary acidic protein (“GFAP”) were identified with statistically significant declines observed during the double-blind period in the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial (p<0.05) and were highly correlated with NfL change. GFAP is a structural protein in astrocytes. GFAP increase in ALS is a marker of harmful reactive astrogliosis, astrocytic injury, and degenerative processes that contribute to motor neuron loss. High GFAP levels are associated with a statistically significant increase in mortality risk in ALS patients. In comparison, placebo participants demonstrated increases across both NfL and GFAP biomarkers during the 24-week double-blind period. Consistent with these findings, in the matched ACT-EAP population, the magnitude and timing of NfL and GFAP reduction were closely correlated (Pearson’s r>0.85, p<0.0001) demonstrating concordant effects for NfL and GFAP in the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial and ACT-EAP participants.

●

Among placebo-treated participants who transitioned to CNM-Au8 in the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial OLE, NfL trajectories generally showed decline or stabilization compared to increases observed during the double-blind period. With only relatively few ex-placebo participants (n=31), these analyses had limited power, but the relative decline compared to the double-blind period showed comparable GMR differences (OLE week 28 GMR: 0.885, 95% CI: 0.737 – 1.063, p=0.185). These findings are consistent with the NfL effects previously published for CNM-Au8 vs. placebo during the 24-week double-blind period (week 24 GMR difference: 0.905, 95% CI: 0.822 – 0.996, p=0.040).

●

NfL and GFAP biomarker decline is associated with improved survival. Among participants treated in the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial with CNM-Au8 30 mg, participants with the greatest declines across both NfL and GFAP biomarkers during the double-blind period had the largest long-term overall survival improvement relative to all participants treated with CNM-Au8 30 mg (NfL and GFAP average AUC decline < 25th percentile): Cox HR: 0.191, 95% CI: 0.047 – 0.782, p=0.0210, an 80% reduction in the risk of death compared to Regimen A concurrent controls.

Additionally, in December 2025, we announced the results of long-term survival benefit analyses (April 2025 data cut) in participants originally randomized to CNM-Au8 30 mg in the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial compared to concurrently randomized controls from Regimen A of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial. These analyses act as supportive evidence for the clinical meaningfulness of observed NfL or other disease-specific biomarker changes. The analyses were conducted at intervals of one year (pre-specified OLE timepoint) and beyond using the pre-specified covariate model across two populations: the full analysis set (“FAS”), including all available participant data; and a risk-based balanced population, the comparable risk set (“CRS”), filtered for disease severity by NfL levels (Ln(NfL) ≥ 3.5 and TRICALS risk score) due to imbalances with significantly more low-progression risk patients present in the Regimen A group. CNM-Au8 30 mg treatment demonstrated statistically significant improved survival across both the FAS and CRS populations based on Cox proportional hazard model and RMST analyses:

●

FAS population—1-year Cox proportional hazard ratio: 0.2723, 95% CI: 0.0961 – 0.7719, p=0.0144, a 73% reduction in risk of death.

22

Table of Contents

●

CRS population—1-year Cox proportional hazard ratio: 0.229, 95% CI: 0.07 – 0.752, p=0.0151, a 77% reduction in risk of death.

Even the small cohort of placebo-to-CNM-Au8 switchers (n=31, starting treatment approximately 6 months later in disease progression) showed a significant RMST benefit of +30.7 days at 1 year following treatment initiation (95% CI: 7.52 – 53.85, p=0.0094).

In January 2026, we announced exploratory findings identifying Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein 7 (“IGFBP7”) as an additional pharmacodynamic biomarker of treatment response to CNM-Au8 30 mg from the double-blind period of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial. IGFBP7 decline was strongly associated with improved survival with responders, defined as a cumulative AUC IGFBP7 reduction during the 24-week double-blind period, demonstrating 78% mortality risk reduction compared to concurrently randomized controls (n=38 of 56 evaluable; HR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.07–0.71, p=0.012; 3 events in 38 responders vs 28% mortality in controls). IGFBP7 also showed strong, statistically significant correlations with concurrent declines in other disease-relevant biomarkers, including those associated with vascular integrity, synaptic function, protein clearance, and axonal integrity (AUC Week 0-24 change; r=0.50–0.78; all p<0.001). This correlation pattern supports a hypothesized mechanistic pathway linking CNM-Au8's mechanism of action to IGFBP7-mediated neuroprotection:

●

CNM-Au8 catalyzes NAD+ regeneration → Improved cellular (neuronal) bioenergetics.

●

Reduced cellular stress → Decreased IGFBP7 secretion → Enhanced free IGF-1 bioavailability.

●

Downstream neuroprotection → Synaptic stabilization and reduced neuronal stress.

These observations align with independent genetic evidence that found a variant (rs4242007) associated with decreased IGFBP7 expression was significantly more common in patients with documented ALS reversals compared to typically progressive ALS (Crayle, et al. “Genetic Associations With an Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Reversal Phenotype.” Neurology, 103(4), e209696 (2024)). Together, these data suggest that lower IGFBP7, whether achieved genetically or pharmacologically, may help protect against ALS progression. These findings are exploratory and hypothesis-generating and require prospective confirmation.

No significant safety concerns or safety trends have been identified and so SAEs related to CNM-Au8 treatment have been identified by any investigator to date.

Expanded Access Programs

An EAP is a pathway for patients with serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions to gain access to an investigational medical product (drug, biologic, or medical device) for treatment outside of clinical trials. To qualify for an EAP within the U.S., the following should apply: (i) a patient has a serious disease or condition, or whose life is immediately threatened by their disease or condition, (ii) there is no comparable or satisfactory alternative therapy to diagnose, monitor, or treat the disease or condition, (iii) patient enrollment in a clinical trial is not possible, (iv) potential patient benefit justifies the potential risks of treatment, and (v) providing the investigational medical product will not interfere with investigational trials that could support a medical product’s development or marketing approval for the treatment indication.

Massachusetts General Hospital

Based on interest in the potential of CNM-Au8 to delay disease progression in ALS patients, clinical experts at Massachusetts General Hospital requested to use CNM-Au8 in two EAPs. These EAPs are conducted under study protocols filed with the FDA and commenced in September 2019 (EAP01) and September 2021 (EAP02), with a subsequent expansion of EAP02 to over 200 participants based on numerous requests from clinical trial sites. The EAPs collect safety and pharmacokinetic data in ALS patients not otherwise eligible for clinical trials due to standard inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the long-term safety data may be used to support a New Drug Application (“NDA”) submission in the future. As of February 25, 2026, 91 participants had been enrolled in EAP01 with long-term exposure up to 335 weeks. Currently, 29 participants are active under the protocol. As of February 25, 2026, 220 participants had been enrolled in EAP02 with long-term exposure up to 228 weeks. Currently, 95 participants are active under the protocol. In February 2024, we announced results from two independent analyses of the pooled EAP01 and EAP02 data for CNM-Au8 30 mg compared to two independent datasets derived from PRO-ACT and the NHC. The EAP dataset as of the date of the analyses was comprised of 256 participants with ALS, of which 220 EAP participants had all baseline values available for matching. These participants were propensity matched on the basis of similar baseline characteristics with non-CNM-Au8 treated controls from each control dataset. The results in the EAP participants versus the matched controls demonstrated a significant survival benefit:

●

CNM-Au8 EAP vs. PRO-ACT matched controls—a 68% decreased risk of all-cause mortality with CNM-Au8 treatment (baseline risk-adjusted HR: 0.320, 95% CI: 0.178 to 0.575, p=0.0001).

23

Table of Contents

●

CNM-Au8 EAP vs. NHC matched controls—a 57% decreased risk of all-cause mortality with CNM-Au8 treatment (baseline risk-adjusted HR: 0.433, 95% CI: 0.282 to 0.663, p=0.0001).

Analyses of the full dataset of 256 participants compared to the 220 matched controls also showed statistically significant survival benefits with log-rank p-values of p<0.0001 and p=0.006 for the PRO-ACT and NHC matched controls, respectively.

National Institutes of Health

In October 2023, we were awarded a four-year grant to support the ACT-EAP for CNM-Au8 treatment of ALS, in collaboration with NYU as prime awardee (formerly Columbia University), and Synapticure, a neurology specialty health clinic. The NIH Grant was awarded by NINDS, a division of NIH, under the Accelerating Access to Critical Therapies for ALS Act, which was signed into law in December 2021 with a call for increased public support of public-private partnerships that will innovate the development of, and increase access to, potential new treatments for ALS. The NIH Grant totaled $45.1 million and subawards to us may total up to $30.9 million in aggregate and may extend to August 31, 2027. These subawards are awarded annually and subaward funds are paid to us as reimbursement for cash spent to support the ACT-EAP. The first subaward was granted in April 2024 for $7.3 million for the period from September 25, 2023 to August 31, 2024, the second subaward was granted in January 2025 for $8.0 million for the period from September 1, 2024 to August 31, 2025, and the third subaward was granted in March 2026 for $8.0 million the period from September 1, 2025 to August 31, 2026. As of February 25, 2026, 183 participants had been enrolled in the ACT-EAP with long-term exposure up to 85 weeks. Currently, 122 participants are active under the protocol. In December 2025, we announced the results of analyses of NfL change across the ACT-EAP and HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, see “—HEALEY ALS Platform Trial and Open Label Extension” above.

Regulatory Pathway and Phase 3

We met with the FDA in the fourth quarter of 2023 and presented initial clinical and NfL biomarker results from our completed Phase 2 trials, evidence of long-term survival data from these trials, and our supportive safety data. The FDA determined the initial findings on biomarker NfL reduction from the Phase 2 trials were insufficient to support accelerated approval at that time and we began preparing supplemental data to address the FDA’s questions. We submitted a briefing book to the FDA in advance of a Type C interaction in the third quarter of 2024, which contained additional post-hoc analyses of NfL biomarker results, a more matured set of survival and functional benefit data, and additional evidence of CNM-Au8’s potential mechanism of action. Following the briefing book submission, the FDA Division of Neurology 1 (“DN1”) communicated that our briefing book was not supportive of an NDA submission under the accelerated approval pathway. However, within days following this communication, we were granted an in-person meeting with the FDA’s Director of the Office on New Drugs, the Director of the Office of Neuroscience, and the DN1 review team, as well as recognized key opinion leaders in ALS, biostatistics, and biomarkers, to re-evaluate our submission under the accelerated approval pathway. This in-person meeting occurred in November 2024 and we presented additional analyses from the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, including further survival data from the OLE and analyses linking NfL biomarker results with survival and functional benefit data.

Following the November 2024 meeting, DN1 provided written guidance on meeting the regulatory standard for substantial evidence of effectiveness supporting accelerated approval. The FDA recommended three potential paths that could be leveraged to increase the persuasiveness of our data, including the effect of CNM-Au8 on NfL decline and its relationship to clinical benefit (i.e., effects on survival): (i) NfL change in the ACT-EAP, (ii) evaluation of additional disease-relevant biomarkers, and (iii) evaluation of NfL trajectory in placebo participants in the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial who later transitioned to CNM-Au8 in the OLE. We proposed our statistical analysis plan for assessing NfL change in a Type C meeting with the FDA held in the second quarter of 2025, with constructive feedback provided by the FDA which established an agreed upon framework for the analyses. We announced the results in December 2025, see “—HEALEY ALS Platform Trial and Open Label Extension” above.

The FDA has granted us a Type C in-person meeting, which we expect to be held in the first quarter of 2026, to discuss the statistically significant reductions in NfL and GFAP, the strong associations of biomarker improvements with longer survival in participants treated with CNM-Au8, and to confirm the ability of the Company to file an NDA for ALS under an accelerated approval pathway, with the meeting minutes expected early in the second quarter of 2026. We plan to submit an NDA under an accelerated approval pathway by the end of June 2026, with the planned Phase 3 RESTORE-ALS trial commencing in the second half of 2026, contingent on funding, and serving as the post-approval confirmatory study. RESTORE-ALS is designed to investigate the effects of CNM-Au8 on improved survival (primary endpoint) and delayed time to ALS clinical worsening events (secondary efficacy endpoint).

24

Table of Contents

Multiple Sclerosis

MS Market Opportunity

MS is an inflammatory and degenerative disorder of the central nervous system, affecting approximately 800,000 patients in the U.S. and an estimated 2.2 million people worldwide. MS involves the immune-mediated damage or destruction of the brain, optic nerves, and spinal cord through autoimmune attacks on the myelin sheath, the protective cover wrapping the axons of neurons. When myelin is damaged or destroyed, called demyelination, neurons are damaged and can ultimately die, leading to motor function issues, cognitive disability, visual impairment, and other neurological symptoms. Disease onset is typically between the age of 20 to 40, with women affected approximately three times as often as men, except in the less common, primary-progressive form of MS, where there is no gender preponderance. MS is the leading cause of non-traumatic disability in young adults and is the most common inflammatory demyelinating disease, with a prevalence that varies considerably, from high levels in North America and Europe to low rates in Eastern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. We estimate the global market value to be worth approximately $23 billion.

Despite currently available DMTs, approximately 26% of people with MS have developed a non-active, progressive form of the disease for which there are limited approved, effective therapies, leading to significant loss of quality of life. The diagnosis of MS typically requires a combination of clinical tests that varies for each patient and may include magnetic resonance imaging (“MRI”), blood tests, evoked potential tests, lumbar puncture, and optical coherence tomography (“OCT”), a technology for examining the effects of MS on the health of nerve cells and axons in the retina. Ongoing improvements in diagnostic technologies may increase the number of patients diagnosed with MS.

MS Current Therapies and Limitations

Currently approved DMTs for MS either treat the symptoms caused by MS or reduce the degree of autoimmune-mediated inflammation. Nearly all DMTs are approved for the treatment of relapsing forms of MS (“RMS”) and generally act via immunosuppression or immunomodulation to minimize autoimmune-mediated attacks on myelin. Immunomodulatory DMTs reduce the risk of having an inflammatory attack, referred to as a “relapse,” and can slow the development of disability in patients having attacks (i.e., “active” patients). These DMTs may possibly diminish the risk of conversion of RMS to secondary progressive MS. Newer DMTs have been shown to substantially reduce autoimmune-mediated attacks and to delay the progression of the disease in active patients; however, there are no approved drugs that reduce the ongoing loss of function and disease progression in non-active MS patients (i.e., those no longer having attacks). No approved DMTs have been shown to clinically improve remyelination of damaged and demyelinated axons in MS lesions.

Currently available DMTs for MS include: Injectable medications, Avonex (interferon beta-1a), Betaseron (interferon beta-1b), Extavia (interferon beta-1b), Copaxone (glatiramer acetate), Plegridy (peginterferon beta-1a), Rebif (interferon beta-1a), Glatiramer acetate generic equivalent (Glatiramer Acetate Injection), and Glatopa (glatiramer acetate); Oral medications, Aubagio (teriflunomide), Gilenya (fingolimod), Tecfidera (dimethyl fumarate), Mavenclad (cladribine), and Mayzent (siponimod); Infusion medications, Lemtrada (alemtuzumab), Novantrone (mitoxantrone), Ocrevus (ocrelizumab), and Tysabri (natalizumab). Advances in MS treatment with new B-cell depleting therapies, including ocrelizumab, have largely ameliorated inflammatory disease activity as measured by the reduction in risk of relapse occurrence and the lack of occurrence of new gadolinium enhancing (inflammatory) lesions, as detected by MRI. However, despite the stabilization of MS disease activity in active MS patients using these DMTs, significant improvement in overall function has not been shown, and the efficacy and safety of approved DMTs are generally inversely correlated, with potential side effects ranging from mild to serious and which may lead to reduced patient adherence. Given these factors, we believe there is an increasing demand for better treatment strategies.

Potential Advantages of CNM-Au8 for MS

We believe CNM-Au8 has the potential to be a first-in-class remyelinating and neuroprotective disease-modifying nanotherapeutic for MS. CNM-Au8 supports neurologic functions by enhancing energetic activities in neurons and OLs that have been attacked by MS. Unlike current immunomodulating DMTs, CNM-Au8 is believed to directly support neuroprotection and remyelination by improving cellular energy metabolism, reducing harmful ROS, and inducing protective heat shock protein mechanisms. CNM-Au8 is administered orally, penetrates the blood-brain barrier, and to date has a favorable safety, tolerability, and toxicology profile. Used alternately or in conjunction with standard immunomodulatory DMTs, CNM-Au8 treatment may improve patients’ quality of life and potentially reverse disease progression, even in patients whose inflammatory attacks are well-controlled.

25

Table of Contents

Summary of Nonclinical Pharmacology Myelination Studies for MS

Myelination is a complex process resulting in the wrapping of axons by OL membranes containing specialized proteins and lipids. The resulting myelin sheath provides metabolic support to the axon and facilitates axonal electrical conduction, which in turn allows for central nervous system processing of motor, sensory, and higher order cognitive functions. During active myelination, OLs synthesize on the order of 100,000 proteins per minute and several thousand new lipid molecules per second, reflecting the significant energetic investment needed for biomass generation and making this cell type among the most energetically demanding in the body. In MS, myelin is destroyed by autoimmune-mediated inflammatory attacks, and neurons whose axons were once protected and supported by myelin become damaged and can ultimately die. OL precursor cells are known to be present near MS lesions and can play a role in remyelination, but studies have shown that these cells are energetically compromised and remyelination is suboptimal in most central nervous system lesions.

Energetic deficits have been noted in the brains of patients living with MS using 31phosphorus magnetic resonance spectroscopy (“31P-MRS”). In autopsied brains from MS patients, OL precursor cells near MS lesions displayed impaired mitochondrial complex activity and other energetic deficits. These energetic deficits play key roles in MS disease progression. CNM-Au8 is uniquely designed to directly address these core pathophysiological mechanisms.

We investigated the ability of CNM-Au8 to address OL energetic deficits, induce remyelination, and restore functional activities and motor behaviors in a comprehensive remyelination preclinical program involving multiple in vitro and in vivo assays to determine CNM-Au8 efficacy. The peer-reviewed results were published in February 2020 (Robinson et al. (2020)). The studies were fully funded by us and were the result of collaborations among academic researchers from Northwestern University, George Washington University, and various other academic consultants and our employees. In Robinson et al. (2020), in vitro experiments on primary OL precursor cells demonstrated robust induction of myelin production by CNM-Au8. RNASeq analyses of CNM-Au8 treated OL precursor cells demonstrated that multiple transcripts for known myelination genes are upregulated, and that glycolytic activity and ATP production are also increased. Several in vivo experiments were also conducted to demonstrate that orally delivered CNM-Au8 results in increased remyelination in the brains and spinal cords of animals treated with cuprizone or lysolecithin, two agents that are known to strip neurons of myelin via different mechanisms.

Both orally delivered cuprizone or stereotactically injected lysolecithin are commonly used techniques to cause demyelination of the corpus callosum or spinal cord, respectively. Cuprizone is a copper chelating agent that specifically causes mature OL death within multiple brain regions, including the corpus callosum. Maximal demyelination due to cuprizone feeding typically occurs within five weeks, which can be visually monitored and quantified using transmission electron microscopy. Lysolecithin injection results in the rapid degradation of myelin within a localized area of the spinal cord, observable using Luxol Fast Blue or toluidine staining for myelin with light microscopy, or also with transmission electron microscopy of the lesion, within a day of injury, allowing for the observation of remyelination within the induced lesion within the following weeks. Remyelination of the corpus callosum or spinal cord using either technique requires the migration of surviving OL precursor cells to the sites of demyelination, differentiation of these cells into mature myelinating OLs, and rapid generation of specialized proteins and lipids for formation of new myelin membrane wraps around axons in this energetically demanding process (Robinson et al. 2020).

26

Table of Contents

In Robinson et al. (2020), multiple independent in vivo remyelination assays, using either cuprizone or lysolecithin as demyelination agents, were performed to demonstrate the remyelinating ability of CNM-Au8. For example, CNM-Au8 was provided either prophylactically, at the same time as the start of cuprizone feeding, or only after two weeks of cuprizone feeding, therapeutically, in order to allow demyelination to start to take place prior to administration of CNM-Au8. In both contexts, CNM-Au8 demonstrated greater recovery of myelin in affected brain areas than vehicle-treated controls. Furthermore, animals that were provided with CNM-Au8 only after full demyelination had occurred (five complete weeks of cuprizone treatment) displayed evidence of higher levels of mature myelin marker expression in their brains than vehicle controls, indicating that CNM-Au8 was not blocking the action of cuprizone but rather inducing recovery by stimulating the differentiation of OLs. Similar results were confirmed by the lysolecithin experiments, which indicated that myelin destroyed by a completely different mechanism could be recovered with the daily oral administration of CNM-Au8 for one or two weeks after focal demyelination by lysolecithin. Treatment with CNM-Au8 significantly improved not only the quantifiable detection of myelinated axons in the brains of experimental animals, but also mouse behaviors and functional movements in the open field test and kinematic assays. For example, quantitation of the number of myelinated versus unmyelinated axons in 587 transmission electron microscope images, averaging 84 images per treatment group (with 15 mice per treatment group, 7 treatment groups total), demonstrated a statistically significant recovery of remyelinated axons in therapeutically treated animals who were dosed with CNM-Au8 by gavage compared to vehicle treated, cuprizone-fed controls (p<0.0001 using one-way ANOVA corrected for multiple comparisons). In independent demyelination model studies using lysolecithin, lesioned animals treated with CNM-Au8 exhibited a 43% mean increase in myelinated axons within lesions post-LPC injection compared to vehicle controls (p=0.15, unpaired t-test comparing CNM-Au8 treated rats to vehicle treated controls). Finally, in a cuprizone-mediated demyelination model study of both gross and fine motor behaviors, the group of animals receiving therapeutically delivered CNM-Au8 displayed detectable improvements in behaviors in both open field and fine motor kinetics assessments. Principal component analysis of gait metrics showed no statistical difference (p=0.47) between CNM-Au8 treated, cuprizone-fed animals compared to the sham treated group, whereas there was a detectable difference in vehicle-treated, cuprizone-fed animals and sham controls (p=0.032; two-way ANOVA) by the end of study at week 6. Figure 9 shows examples of the observed induction of myelination by CNM-Au8 from selected in vitro and in vivo experiments reported in Robinson et al (2020).

Figure 9. Remyelination Summary

Figure 9. A summary of myelinating activities of CNM-Au8. Top row: Left: illustration of the demyelination (red) of a neuron’s axon (yellow) that occurs in MS; Right: Illustration of restored myelination along the axon (blue) provided by the OL (blue cell). Middle row: isolated primary mouse OL precursors treated with vehicle control (left), 3 μg/mL CNM-Au8 (center), or positive control and myelin-inducing agent tri-iodothyronine (right). Cells are fixed and stained for Myelin Basic Protein (“MBP”), a marker of mature myelin in red, and the nuclear stain DAPI in blue, to reveal the presence of all OL precursor cells in the field of view. Many more cells expressing MBP are seen in the CNM-Au8 treated cells compared to vehicle-treated cells. Bottom row: transmission electron images of slices of corpus callosum of mice treated with, left to right: no cuprizone, cuprizone for five weeks, CNM-Au8 for five weeks, or cuprizone for five weeks and CNM-Au8 for the last three of the five weeks. Myelin can be seen as dark rings in each micrograph. Cuprizone treatment destroys myelin, while CNM-Au8 treatment alone does not change myelin. CNM-Au8 treatment of cuprizone-treated animals results in the recovery of myelin in the brains of these animals.

27

Table of Contents

Clinical Development of CNM-Au8 as a Disease-Modifying Therapeutic for MS

Based on safety findings in our Phase 1 clinical trial of CNM-Au8 and our robust preclinical remyelination data, we completed two Phase 2 clinical trials in MS, VISIONARY-MS and REPAIR-MS (including Cohort 1 for relapsing MS and Cohort 2 for progressive MS). Additionally, we commenced enrollment in the MS EAP in September 2024. As of February 25, 2026, 15 participants had been enrolled and remain active under the protocol with long-term exposure up to 77 weeks.

We met with the FDA in a Type B end of Phase 2 meeting during the third quarter of 2025 to review results from the Phase 2 VISIONARY-MS trial and discuss a planned Phase 3 study focusing on cognition improvement as an adjunct to standard-of-care MS therapies, addressing a critical unmet medical need for people struggling with MS. The FDA aligned with Clene acknowledging the limitations of the Expanded Disability Status Scale (“EDSS”) and expressed openness to considering other potential primary endpoints, including cognition, to evaluate broader treatment effects. We plan to work closely with regulatory health authorities from the FDA, European Medicines Agency (“EMA”) and other international regulatory bodies, MS experts, and patient representatives to determine the proper path to advance CNM-Au8 into Phase 3 and potential future approval.

REPAIR-MS

REPAIR-MS was a Phase 2, single-center, active-only, sequential group study to demonstrate central nervous system target engagement by examining the brain metabolic effects, safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of orally-delivered CNM-Au8 in patients who have been diagnosed with MS in vivo within 15 years of screening. These energetic metabolites were measured non-invasively and semi-quantitatively by utilizing 31P-MRS imaging with a 7 Tesla (“7T”) MRI scanner. A full volume head coil was used to collect whole brain spectral waveforms in ~600 voxels with a spatial resolution of 2 cm3 for the following metabolites: NAD pool (both NAD+ and NADH together), α-ATP, ß-ATP, γ-ATP, phosphocreatine, extracellular and cellular inorganic phosphate, uridine diphosphate glucose, phosphocholine, phosphoethanolamine, glycerophosphocholine, and glycerophosphoethanolamine. A partial volume head coil was used in the same patient cohort to measure occipito-parietal levels of individual NAD+ and NADH phosphorous metabolites to determine the ratio of NAD+/NADH.

REPAIR-MS was conducted at the University of Texas Southwestern, a center with specialized capabilities for conducting and analyzing 7T 31P-MRS imaging studies, and was conducted in conjunction with our REPAIR-PD trial (discussed below), with pre-specified integrated analyses of both REPAIR-MS Cohort 1 and REPAIR-PD trials performed. REPAIR-MS was approved for clinical conduct by the FDA and commenced in January 2020, and we subsequently enrolled 13 RMS participants in Cohort 1 and 15 non-active progressive MS participants in Cohort 2 with exposure to CNM-Au8 up to 18 weeks.

Results for Cohort 1 were presented in August 2021 and subsequently published in the Journal of Nanobiotechnology (Ren, et al. “Evidence of brain target engagement in Parkinson’s disease and multiple sclerosis by the investigational nanomedicine, CNM-Au8, in the REPAIR phase 2 clinical trials.” Journal of Nanobiotechnology 21, 478 (2023)). The pre-specified integrated analyses of REPAIR-MS Cohort 1 and REPAIR-PD demonstrated a statistically significant increase in the primary endpoint, the mean change in the brain NAD+/NADH ratio, of 0.589 units (+10.4%) following 12 weeks of treatment with CNM-Au8 (p=0.037, paired t-test). Key secondary endpoints for the integrated analyses, mean change from baseline in the NAD+ and NADH fractions of the total NAD pool, were concordant with the primary endpoint, demonstrating the NAD+ fraction increased and the NADH fraction decreased (p=0.0264, paired t-test).

The independent results for REPAIR-MS Cohort 1 also demonstrated consistent trends toward improvement in the primary and secondary endpoints, although neither REPAIR-PD nor REPAIR-MS Cohort 1 independently reached a level of statistical significance: the mean change in the brain NAD+/NADH ratio was 0.830 units (+14.3%) following 12 weeks of treatment with CNM-Au8 (p=0.145, paired t-test), and the secondary endpoint of mean change from baseline in the NAD+ fraction of the total NAD pool increased and the NADH fraction decreased (p=0.1157, paired t-test). Analyses of pre-specified exploratory endpoints demonstrated that homeostatic equilibrium was achieved across essential energetic metabolites, including ATP, cellular phosphorus (“Pi(in)”), phosphocholine, and phosphorylation potential index (“ß-ATP/ADP*Pi(in)”). For these metabolites and indices, the percent change from baseline to the week 12 end-of-treatment was significantly inversely correlated with baseline levels, such that participants with relatively lower baseline levels demonstrated increases, and subjects with relatively higher baseline levels demonstrated a re-balancing effect with levels decreased to the baseline population mean. This relationship was observed both on an integrated basis across the two trials and independently in both REPAIR-PD and REPAIR-MS Cohort 1. No SAEs were reported, TEAEs were rated as mild and transient, and no participants experienced clinically significant laboratory abnormalities. The results of REPAIR-MS Cohort 1 and REPAIR-PD robustly demonstrate target engagement in the brains of MS and PD patients and provide the first clinical evidence demonstrating the catalytic effects of CNM-Au8 on brain energetic metabolites.

28

Table of Contents

Combined results for REPAIR-MS Cohort 1 and Cohort 2 were announced in September 2025. Participants analyzed for the primary efficacy outcome, mean change in the brain NAD+/NADH ratio (all evaluable with post-baseline scans at the week 12 visit), included REPAIR-MS Cohort 1 (relapsing MS, n=11), REPAIR-MS Cohort 2 (non-active progressive MS, n=15), and REPAIR-PD (n=13) in prespecified analyses across the overall population (total n=39). Key findings included:

●

The mean NAD+/NADH ratio in the brain was significantly increased following 12 weeks of treatment with CNM-Au8 in the full REPAIR population (+0.449 units, 95% CI: 0.093 to 0.805, p=0.0148; percent change: 8.65%, 95% CI: 2.6% to 14.7%, p=0.0006).

●

The change in REPAIR-MS participants alone demonstrated consistent increases in the NAD+/NADH ratio to week 12 (+0.480 units, 95% CI: -0.018 to 0.979, p=0.058; percent change: +9.49%, 95% CI: 1.14% to 17.85%, p=0.0275), a measure of how efficiently the brain makes energy.

●

Secondary endpoints: the change in the percent fraction of brain NAD+ and NADH similarly demonstrated statistically significant increases in NAD+ and decreases in NADH for both the full REPAIR population (p=0.0058) and REPAIR-MS (p=0.0232), respectively.

Striking relationships between MS disease activity and brain energy metabolic indices were present at the pre-treatment baseline visit.

●

The EDSS, a global measure of MS disease severity, was significantly associated with the baseline deficits in the NAD+/NADH ratio (Pearson Correlation: ρ=-0.429, p=0.0127).

●

Baseline measures of working memory and cognitive processing speed, measured by the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (“SDMT”), were significantly associated with average brain ATP levels (peak signal area average for α-ATP, β-ATP, γ-ATP; Pearson Correlation: ρ=0.542, p=0.0009).

●

Baseline measures of upper extremity function, measured by the 9-Hole Peg Test (“9HPT”) time (total time across hands), was also significantly associated with average brain ATP levels (peak signal area average for α-ATP, β-ATP, γ-ATP; Pearson Correlation: ρ=-0.513, p=0.0032).

Collectively, these data reinforce the insight that bioenergetic failure in the brain is a key contributor to neurodegeneration and disease progression in MS. By improving brain energy metabolism, CNM-Au8 may help slow progression of disability.

VISIONARY-MS

VISIONARY-MS was a Phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the efficacy and safety of two doses of CNM-Au8 as a remyelinating and neuroprotective treatment in patients with stable RMS with chronic visual impairment. The trial was launched in December 2018 but ended prematurely in July 2022 due to operational challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Enrollment was limited to 73 out of 150 planned participants and some participants did not complete 48 weeks of treatment, but nearly all participants completed at least 24 weeks of treatment and double-blind, placebo-controlled data was generated for most patients in the trial through week 48, improving the trial’s ability to assess the long-term effects of CNM-Au8 on clinical endpoints. The Australian Therapeutics Goods Administration (“TGA”), Health Canada, and the FDA all approved conduct of the trial.

Participants were randomized to low-dose CNM-Au8 (15 mg/day), high-dose CNM-Au8 (30 mg/day), or matching placebo, and concomitant immunomodulatory MS DMTs were allowed for all participants. The primary endpoint was improvement in low contrast letter acuity (“LCLA”) from baseline to week 48 and secondary endpoints included the modified MS Functional Composite sub-scales (“(m)MSFC”), which included SDMT (cognition), 9HPT (upper extremity function), and Timed 25-foot Walk (“T25FWT,” gait) in the population as a whole, and time to first repeated clinical improvement to week 48. Exploratory endpoints included OCT, multi-focal visual evoked potential (“mf-VEP”) amplitude & latency, full field-VEP amplitude & latency, MRI endpoints, visual function (high contrast) and Quality of Life/EDSS.

Many people with MS have deficits in low contrast visual acuity, the ability to discern images on a similarly colored background at low contrast. The contrast threshold is the minimum amount of contrast necessary for an individual to discern an object from its background, and for people with MS the contrast threshold has been found to be higher than that of healthy individuals, even when visual acuity (measured at high contrast) is equal between the two groups. The LCLA tests low-contrast vision using an eye chart with gray letters presented on a low-contrast background at a specified distance that may be particularly affected by damage to specific inter-neural connections in an individual’s complex visual pathway.

29

Table of Contents

We announced results from VISIONARY-MS in August 2022. Due to the trial’s limited enrollment, the threshold for significance was pre-specified at p=0.10 prior to database lock and submitted to the FDA as part of the statistical analysis plan. The primary analysis was conducted in a modified intent to treat (“mITT”) population that censored invalid data. The mITT population excluded data from a single site (n=9) with LCLA testing issues and the timed 25-foot walk data from one subject with a change in mobility assist device at a different site. The ITT results, which included the non-valid data, were directionally consistent with the mITT results, although the ITT results were not significant. The mITT population from baseline to week 48 demonstrated clinically-relevant, exposure-related mean standardized improvements in the primary endpoint, LCLA in the clinically affected eye (LS mean difference, 3.13; 95% CI: -0.08 to 6.33, p=0.056), as well in the secondary endpoints of (m)MSFC, including (m)MSFC mean standardized change (LS mean difference, 0.28; 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.51, p=0.0197) and the (m)MSFC average rank score (LS mean difference, 12.94; 95% CI: 3.46 to 22.42, p=0.0083), and time to first repeated clinical improvement to week 48 (45% versus 29%, log-rank p=0.3991).

The analyses of (m)MSFC sub-scales (LCLA, SDMT, 9HPT, and T25FW) were conducted by comparing changes in (m)MSFC scores over the trial treatment period to the baseline values of trial participants with mild disease, as defined by Baseline EDSS scores of 1.5 or less. The baseline scores for these participants were chosen as a comparator because they demonstrated less neurological impairment than those of the overall trial population, providing a more stringent comparator group to evaluate change over time in the total trial population. Changes in the four (m)MSFC sub-scales were compared to baseline scores of this comparator group with mild disease from baseline to week 48. These comparisons were performed every 12 weeks (at weeks 12, 24, 36, and 48). At each visit, the overall trial population (randomized 2:1 active CNM-Au8 to placebo) showed notable, exposure-related improvements in mean overall (m)MSFC scores and key (m)MSFC sub-scales compared to the comparator group (mixed-effects model; p<0.0001 versus baseline).

Consistent improvements favoring CNM-Au8 were observed across multiple paraclinical biomarker exploratory endpoints, including mf-VEP amplitude and latency, OCT, and MRI endpoints, including magnetization transfer ratio (“MTR”) and diffusion tensor imaging (“DTI”) metrics. Placebo treated patients, in contrast, generally worsened as expected across these measures during the 48-week period. Exploratory mf-VEP endpoints in the VEP least effected eye, defined as the eye with the shortest latency at baseline, provided evidence of improved information transmission in the visual system (from the eye to the visual cortex) supported by statistically significant increases in amplitude. Exploratory mf-VEP results included all participants with recorded VEP data (n=64) and demonstrated:

●

mf-VEP amplitude percent change in the least affected eye at baseline (week 48 LS mean difference, 9.7%, 95% CI: 3.1% to 16.3%, p=0.0047).

●

mf-VEP amplitude percent change in the most affected eye at baseline (week 48 LS mean difference, 6.1%, 95% CI: -0.6% to 12.7%, p=0.0730).

●

mf-VEP amplitude percent change across both eyes (week 48 LS mean difference, 7.9%, 95% CI: 1.4% to 14.4%, p=0.0184).

The increased mf-VEP amplitude signal suggests previously impaired neurons subsequently increase information transmission following CNM-Au8 treatment, supporting improved axonal integrity. The MRI endpoint results provided further evidence of brain neuronal structural integrity, axonal integrity and white matter integrity, which is associated with decreased cognitive functional decline in MS patients. The MRI endpoints included all participants with advanced MRI data collection (n=68) and demonstrated:

●

Fractional anisotropy change within the whole brain (cerebrum) (week 48 LS mean difference, 0.0029, 95% CI: 0.0048 to 0.0054, p=0.0199).

●

Fractional anisotropy change within total cerebral white matter (week 48 LS mean difference, 0.0026, 95% CI: -0.0003 to 0.0055, p=0.0805).

●

Fractional anisotropy change within total cerebral normal appearing white matter (week 48 LS mean difference, 0.0025, 95% CI: -0.00034 to 0.0054, p=0.0823).

30

Table of Contents

We believe these results support CNM-Au8’s potential to drive meaningful neurological improvements in MS patients. Further, we believe these results are notable given the expected long-term decline in LCLA, SDMT, 9HPT, and T25FW among MS patients reported from data sets including from the MS Outcome Assessments Consortium (“MSOAC”) (Goldman, et al. “Evaluation of multiple sclerosis disability outcome measures using pooled clinical trial data.” Neurology, 93(21), e1921-e1931 (2019)). MSOAC includes prospectively acquired RMS patient-level data from fourteen separate MS clinical trials, including over 12,776 participants, combined into a single database and followed for up to 24 months. When LCLA, SDMT, 9HPT, and T25FW were analyzed as a multidimensional measure rather than individually, progression on any one performance measure was more sensitive than the commonly used MS EDSS and demonstrated long-term declines in RMS patients. The increasing mean improvements observed across the entire trial population (CNM-Au8 and placebo) may suggest a positive clinical effect for CNM-Au8 when contrasted with the anticipated decline reported in publications from the MSOAC data.

CNM-Au8 was well-tolerated with most adverse events characterized as transient and mild to moderate in severity. No SAEs related to the investigational product (CNM-Au8 or placebo) were reported. The most frequently reported adverse events included upper respiratory infection, headache, back pain, and sore throat.

VISIONARY-MS—Long-Term Extension

Following the 48-week double-blind period, VISIONARY-MS participants could continue for up to an additional 96 weeks in the LTE. Of the 73 double-blind participants, 69 were eligible for the LTE and 80% enrolled (n=55), with 87% of participants randomized to CNM-Au8 in the double-blind period choosing to enroll in the LTE (n=41; n=35 for the mITT) and 63% of participants randomized to placebo in the double-blind period choosing to enroll in the LTE (n=11). We announced the following results in January 2024 from the LTE for the mITT population:

●

LCLA change at week 144 across both eyes versus the original randomization baseline of participants assigned to CNM-Au8 (LS mean difference (SE): +8.70 letters (1.88), 95% CI: 5.0 to 12.4, p<0.0001).

●

LCLA at week 144 versus the end of the double-blind period (LS mean difference (SE): +4.0 letters (1.67), 95% CI: 0.72 to 7.30, p=0.017).

●

SDMT change at week 144 versus the original randomization baseline of participants assigned to CNM-Au8 (LS mean difference (SE): +8.03 (1.52), 95% CI: 5.01 to 11.0, p<0.0001).

●

SDMT at week 144 versus the end of the double-blind period (LS mean difference (SE): +3.11 (1.3), 95% CI: 0.55 to 5.68, p=0.018).

Low contrast vision demonstrated sustained improvement by up to 38 letters across both eyes in individual participants, which represents visual gains of multiple rows of letters on a grayed-out MS eye chart, and cognitive improvement, particularly working memory and information processing speed, was improved by up to 35 points in individual participants, where a three-point change in cognitive processing speed has been deemed notable in other MS studies. Additionally, improvements demonstrated during the 48-week double-blind period were maintained in the LTE for T25FWT and 9HPT. Placebo participants who transitioned to CNM-Au8 during the LTE showed significant improvements versus original baseline in LCLA and SDMT that were generally consistent with the increases observed in participants originally randomized to CNM-Au8.

In April 2025, we announced further evidence of remyelination and neuronal repair from analyses of the LTE. The post hoc analyses identify consistent anatomical and physiologic effects within the same trial participants resulting in cognition and vision improvement for people living with MS. The analyses highlight significant and clinically meaningful improvements in cognition and visual function, supported by corresponding objective biomarkers, including advanced MRI DTI and mf-VEP assessments. Key findings included:

●

MRI DTI metrics (axial diffusivity (“AD”) and MTR—structural markers associated with neuronal repair and remyelination) confirmed improvements in the brain’s neuronal structure consistent with remyelination and repair among MS participants receiving CNM-Au8.

●

mf-VEP metrics (VEP latency and amplitude—functional markers associated with remyelination and neuronal repair) confirmed improvements in the visual system and related to cognitive function among MS participants receiving CNM-Au8.

31

Table of Contents

Both the LCLA vision—a visual measure associated with vision-specific quality of life and overall MS disability—and SDMT—a benchmark for working memory and cognitive processing speed in MS—improved in CNM-Au8 participants, results that have not been previously documented in MS clinical trials of other repair candidate drugs. Importantly, these clinical improvements correlated with objective biomarker measurements including:

●

96% of participants who were LCLA responders, showing visual improvement, also demonstrated improvement in MRI DTI metrics (AD and/or MTR), evidencing repair and remyelination.

●

91% of LCLA visual responders exhibited mf-VEP improvements in latency (conduction velocity) and/or amplitude (signal strength).

○

VEP provides an objective measure of visual circuit pathway, further supporting functional recovery linked to repair and remyelination.

●

98% of SDMT responders with improved cognition had corresponding improvements in MRI DTI metrics AD and/or MTR, substantiating that the cognitive enhancement was associated with repair and remyelination.

These results were also consistent with previous neuronal and clinical improvement observed in the double-blind period of VISIONARY-MS, while also reinforcing the long-term benefits of the novel therapeutic mechanism of CNM-Au8.

Parkinson’s Disease

PD Market Opportunity

PD is a chronic, progressive neurodegenerative disorder affecting more than an estimated 10 million people worldwide as of 2025. PD involves the progressive loss of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra area of the midbrain. The degeneration of dopaminergic neurons leads to resting tremor, bradykinesia, limb rigidity, and gait and balance problems as well as cognitive loss and behavioral changes due to more generalized neuronal loss. Aging is the most significant risk factor for developing PD, with genetic and environmental factors also contributing to the development of the disease. Approximately 1 in 100 individuals over the age of 60 is affected by PD. We estimate the global market value will be worth approximately $8 billion by 2033.

PD Current Therapies and Limitations

Currently approved therapies for PD are limited to symptomatic treatment, such as dopamine agonists, COMT and MAO-B inhibitors, and deep brain stimulation. The inexorable, progressive loss of dopaminergic innervation leads to gradually worsening symptoms with “on” (dyskinesia) and “off” (rigidity) symptoms that become increasingly difficult to manage. In addition, long-term use of levodopa, a commonly-prescribed dopamine precursor used to treat PD symptoms, often results in dyskinesia that in itself becomes disabling. Despite an enormous effort during recent decades, no disease-modifying or neuroprotective therapeutic is available. A therapeutic that alters or slows clinical disease progression by preventing the destruction of dopaminergic neurons would improve the healthspan and lifespan of PD patients and address a very significant unmet need.

Potential Advantages of CNM-Au8 for PD

We believe CNM-Au8 has the potential to be a first-in-class disease modifying nanotherapeutic drug for PD. Neuronal energetic failure underlies PD, as evidenced by the observed impaired mitochondrial and lysosomal functioning, neuronal sensitivity to glutamate toxicity, accumulation of oxidative stress, autophagic failure in clearing misfolded proteins, and loss of synapse integrity associated with the disease. While current therapies for PD are designed to stimulate surviving dopaminergic neurons in order to elicit partial functional effects, none of them prevent the inexorable degeneration of dopaminergic neurons to change the course of disease progression. Our nonclinical studies demonstrate that CNM-Au8 is robustly neuroprotective of dopaminergic neurons across a variety of disease-relevant insults created using a variety of toxins and stressors. In addition, CNM-Au8 may have a tolerability profile superior to existing approved products and commonly used drugs for PD, such as levodopa and carbidopa, which result in risk of dyskinesia after long-term use.

32

Table of Contents

Summary of Nonclinical Pharmacology and General Neuroprotection Studies for PD

Excitotoxic injury, oxidative stress, and the accumulation of misfolded alpha-synuclein are hallmarks of the failing energetic pathways associated with PD. In order to determine whether CNM-Au8 could act as a neuroprotective agent for PD, we conducted a series of in vitro and in vivo studies designed to test efficacy of CNM-Au8 in protecting various neuronal cell types from a variety of PD relevant disease-related stressors. First, primary rat dopaminergic cells were challenged in vitro with 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tatrahydropyridine, (“MPTP,” which is metabolized to its active form, MPP+) or alternatively with 6-hydroxydopamine (“6-OHDA”), which are both toxins specific to dopaminergic neurons. Treatment of primary neuronal-glial cocultures with CNM-Au8 increased the numbers of surviving dopaminergic neurons in response to either toxin in a dose-dependent manner, as well as affected overall improvement in neuronal health by a variety of metrics, including preservation of neurite network, reduction in oxidative stress, increased mitochondrial membrane potential, and reduction in alpha-synuclein aggregates. The activity of CNM-Au8 was then tested in the standard 6-OHDA-unilateral lesion model of PD. Lesioned rats, and a sham control group, were orally administered vehicle or CNM-Au8 for 4 weeks (2 weeks post-lesion) or 6 weeks (one day post lesion) following the establishment of a lesion in the striatum. Significant functional improvements due to CNM-Au8 treatment were demonstrated in both the behavioral apomorphine-induced rotation and cylinder paw placement tests. In addition, larger numbers of surviving dopaminergic neurons were detected in the striatum of CNM-Au8 treated lesioned animals compared to vehicle controls. These studies independently demonstrated that CNM-Au8 treatment has robust neuroprotective properties in preclinical models of PD.

Additionally, in September 2025, we announced preclinical data showing that CNM-Au8 improved key measures of cellular health in a novel dopaminergic neuron model of PD. The study used skin cells from 8 sporadic PD (“sPD”) patients, 14 familial PD (“fPD”) patients—13 with LRRK2 gene mutations and 1 with a PARK gene mutation—and 13 healthy individuals. The skin cells were directly converted into dopaminergic neurons, the brain cells essential for movement and the most vulnerable to degeneration in PD. This innovative method retains age-related characteristics from PD patient donors, enabling researchers to study disease processes as they occur in aged disease-relevant neurons. Key findings included:

●

Improved mitochondrial health in familial PD—CNM-Au8 increased mitochondrial health (membrane potential) and mitochondrial volume, while reducing harmful ROS in fPD neurons.

●

Reduced inflammation in sporadic PD—CNM-Au8 lowered levels of senescence-related inflammatory proteins, including CD40 and CXCL10, in sPD neurons, helping to reduce neuroinflammation that exacerbates PD progression.

●

Restored cellular metabolism—CNM-Au8 dose-dependently increased the NAD+/NADH ratio, a measure of cellular energy metabolism. Further, CNM-Au8 corrected the intracellular levels of 36% of metabolites in fPD neurons and 17% in sPD neurons, particularly in the tricarboxylic acid cycle for energy production and in nucleotide metabolism (e.g., xanthine, inosine) demonstrated by semi-targeted metabolomic analyses.

●

Normalized dysregulated gene expression—CNM-Au8 treatment of PD neurons resulted in a reversal of the global disease-associated gene expression profiles in both sPD and fPD dopaminergic neurons, normalizing the expression of the majority of all top up- and down-regulated PD differentially expressed gene transcripts to near-control levels.

●

Favorable safety profile—CNM-Au8 did not demonstrate evidence of toxicity toward the PD dopaminergic cells at all tested doses, a finding consistent with the clinical observation that CNM-Au8 treatment in humans in ALS and MS has not demonstrated significant safety concerns.

Clinical Development of CNM-Au8 as a Disease-Modifying Therapeutic for PD

REPAIR-PD

REPAIR-PD is a Phase 2, single-center, active-only, sequential group study to demonstrate central nervous system target engagement by examining the brain metabolic effects, safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of orally-delivered CNM-Au8 in patients who have been diagnosed with PD in vivo within three years of screening. These energetic metabolites are measured non-invasively and semi-quantitatively by utilizing 31P-MRS imaging with a 7T MRI scanner. A full volume head coil was used to collect whole brain spectral waveforms in ~600 voxels with a spatial resolution of 2 cm3 for the following metabolites: NAD pool (both NAD+ and NADH together), α-ATP, ß-ATP, γ-ATP, phosphocreatine, extracellular and cellular inorganic phosphate, uridine diphosphate glucose, phosphocholine, phosphoethanolamine, glycerophosphocholine, and glycerophosphoethanolamine. A partial volume head coil was used in the same patient cohort to measure occipito-parietal levels of individual NAD+ and NADH phosphorous metabolites to determine the ratio of NAD+/NADH.

33

Table of Contents

REPAIR-PD was conducted at the University of Texas Southwestern, a center with specialized capabilities for conducting and analyzing 7T 31P-MRS imaging studies, and was conducted in conjunction with the REPAIR-MS trial (discussed above), with pre-specified integrated analyses of both trials performed. REPAIR-PD was approved for clinical conduct by the FDA and commenced in December 2019, and we subsequently enrolled 13 participants in the first dosing cohort with exposure to CNM-Au8 up to 21 weeks. A planned second cohort was not enrolled due to institutional limitations.

Results were published in an integrated analysis with REPAIR-MS Cohort 1 (Ren et al. (2023)). For a discussion of these results, see “Multiple Sclerosis—REPAIR-MS” above. The independent results for REPAIR-PD demonstrated consistent trends toward improvement in the primary and secondary endpoints, although neither REPAIR-PD nor REPAIR-MS independently reached a level of statistical significance: the mean change in the brain NAD+/NADH ratio was 0.386 units (+6.8%) following 12 weeks of treatment with CNM-Au8 (p=0.1077, paired t-test), and the secondary endpoint of mean change from baseline in the NAD+ fraction of the total NAD pool increased (p=0.1336, paired t-test) and NADH fraction of the total NAD pool decreased (p=0.1336, paired t-test). The results of REPAIR-PD and REPAIR-MS robustly demonstrate target engagement in the brains of PD and MS patients and provide the first clinical evidence demonstrating the catalytic effects of CNM-Au8 on brain energetic metabolites.

Additional CSN Therapeutics in the Pipeline

Utilizing our CSN therapeutic platform, we have developed two other drug candidates, based on the transition elements silver and zinc, that are at various IND-enabling stages of research: (i) CNM-ZnAg, an orally-delivered agent for antiviral and antibacterial applications, and (ii) CNM-AgZn17, a topically delivered agent for antiviral, antibacterial, and wound healing applications.

CNM-ZnAg, a Broad Spectrum Antiviral and Antibacterial Agent

CNM-ZnAg was developed for use as an orally-deliverable, broad-spectrum antiviral and antibacterial agent. It is formulated as an ionic solution of zinc (Zn+2) and silver (Ag+) with a limited presence (<1%) of silver Ag0 nanoparticles, all generated using our CSN platform in a manner that does not involve traditional inorganic synthesis methods to generate zinc and silver compounds. Our premise for integrating a zinc-silver ionic solution was based on the recognized historical activity of both Zn and Ag (as independent entities) for antimicrobial and antiviral disease treatment. Initial development studies both internally and at third-party laboratories revealed that when Zn2+ and Ag+ are administered together, they exhibit synergistic antiviral and antibacterial properties that are not observed when Zn2+ or Ag+, or Ag0 nanoparticles are administered singly.

In the human body, zinc is an essential structural component of the ~700 zinc finger transcription factors and is a catalytic component of approximately 2,000 enzymes, encompassing all known enzyme classes. Most significantly, zinc is essential for the proper function of the immune system and is specifically involved in multiple steps in the antiviral response. Zinc has demonstrated direct antiviral properties and stimulates both innate and acquired antiviral responses. Therefore, zinc-based treatments are hypothesized to support systemic immunity while also acting to specifically inhibit viral replication, viral protein processing, and/or viral-infection-related symptoms.

Silver has long been studied for its anti-infective activity – its microbial-treatment properties have been documented for centuries and it has been the most extensively studied metal for the purpose of fighting infections and preventing food spoilage. Prophylaxis of silver nitrate against gonococcal ophthalmia neonatorum with silver ions was considered the standard of care in many countries until the end of the twentieth century, prior to the advent of antibiotics. Independent research had demonstrated silver nanoparticles have been shown to be active against several types of viruses including human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B virus, herpes simplex virus, respiratory syncytial virus, and mpox virus. Silver nanoparticles and silver ions reduce viral infectivity when added concomitantly with the virus inocula, possibly by blocking interaction of the virus with the host cell.

A standard toxicology program based on ICH M3(R2) guidelines was completed for CNM-ZnAg. The toxicity of CNM-ZnAg was evaluated at high concentrations up to the maximum feasible dose administered via oral gavage up to four times daily for 28 days in rats and 7 days in canines. Across all studies, there were no deaths, no test-article-related clinical observations, and no effects on body weight, food consumption, hematology endpoints, clinical pathology findings, blood coagulation times, urinalysis, or urine chemistry. Standard in vivo genotoxicity studies in rodents, including a 2-day COMET assay and a 28-day evaluation of micronucleated reticulocytes, revealed no test-article effects on genotoxicity. A seven-day human tolerability study of CNM-ZnAg was previously conducted by an antecedent company to determine the safety and tolerability in 40 healthy human volunteers. No self-reported adverse events occurred and there were no safety findings associated with administration of CNM-ZnAg. Laboratory assessments indicated no significant changes from baseline in body weight, blood pressure, heart rate, liver enzymes (AST/ALT), blood glucose, or blood lipids (total cholesterol, LDL/HDL, triglycerides).

34

Table of Contents

Clinical Development of CNM-ZnAg as a Therapeutic for COVID-19

Because of exigent worldwide need, we rapidly developed CNM-ZnAg as a candidate for treatment of COVID-19 using the dietary supplement formulation of CNM-ZnAg that we produce on a limited basis to support immune health. Preliminary uncontrolled observational case series yielded results suggesting oral administration of CNM-ZnAg to individuals with PCR-confirmed, COVID-19 infections may improve subject well-being and limit disease duration. Given this potential, together with no identified safety signals from our toxicology studies, we initiated a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial to determine the efficacy and safety of CNM-ZnAg for symptomatic improvement of COVID-19. This clinical trial was conducted in Brazil and fully enrolled with 288 participants. Substantially all participants were previously vaccinated. The trial evaluated two different doses of CNM-ZnAg that were combined for analyses versus placebo. Results were announced in December 2022 and no clinical benefit was observed versus placebo in the primary endpoint (time to substantial alleviation of COVID-19 symptoms through 28 days) and we ceased further development of CNM-ZnAg for the treatment of COVID-19. CNM-ZnAg was safe and well-tolerated and no safety signals were identified.

CNM-AgZn17 for Wound-Healing and Burn Treatment

CNM-AgZn17 was developed as an ionic solution of silver and zinc in a polymer gel formulation for topical application to the skin. We have demonstrated in in vitro assays that CNM-AgZn17 has broad-based antiviral and antibacterial activity against common and antibiotic resistant pathogens such as Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. We have also shown enhanced wound healing benefits in animal models of diabetic wound healing and decreased scar formation following burns. We are planning to complete a standard toxicology program in animals to demonstrate safety in order to advance to first-in-human dosing studies. We have progressed to GLP dermal toxicity studies for topical applications. Subject to regulatory filings of these toxicology findings and other results, and subject to capital availability, we anticipate filing an IND with the FDA and subsequently plan to initiate a standard Phase 1 dermal first-in-human safety study with CNM-AgZn17 with single-ascending dose and multiple-ascending dose cohorts. The goal of this study will be to demonstrate safety sufficient to advance to Phase 2 clinical programs with CNM-AgZn17. Given the multiple preclinical benefits demonstrated to date with CNM-AgZn17, we envision a clinical program focused on healing burn and/or surgical wounds.

Research and Development

Overview

We are deeply invested in our research and development program. Our research and development activities are essential to attaining and sustaining the position as a recognized global leader in the development of CSN therapeutics. Our research and development plan is to continue the innovation of novel catalytically-active nanocrystals and ionic suspensions of metallic transition elements with recognized medicinal value and underexplored, or as yet undiscovered, physicochemical and catalytic properties. We developed all the technologies that are critical to our research and development processes in-house and guard those technologies with appropriate intellectual property protections. We conduct our research activities through both an internal research and development team and by engaging external clinical research collaborations to support our research and development activities.

Internal Research and Development

Our internal research and development activities are executed by a group of experienced in-house research scientists, materials scientists, engineers, molecular biologists, medical doctors, clinical trial operational specialists, and a management team with deep expertise in the biopharmaceutical industry. Our internal research and development team has a full range of capabilities ranging from drug discovery to preclinical development to the design and implementation of clinical trials. We believe our in-house research and development team is experienced, qualified, and will enable us to achieve our long-term goal of developing and commercializing innovative CSN therapeutics for patients worldwide. Our in-house research and development team operates functionally through four sub-teams: (1) research engineering, (2) biological science discovery, (3) nonclinical development, and (4) clinical development, who work collaboratively to ensure the success of our research and development efforts.

Research Engineering. Our research engineering team is responsible for the development and optimization of new CSN therapeutic candidates along with developing the technical processes and infrastructure to ensure reproducible chemistry, manufacturing, and controls (“CMC”) batch production of our CSN therapeutic candidates. Members of our research engineering team have PhDs and/or master’s degrees in chemistry, materials science and engineering, electrical engineering, and solid-state physics. Our research engineering team leader has a degree in electrical engineering and has been instrumental in the design of our electro-crystal-chemistry platform including the various continuous flow apparatuses (“troughs”) used to produce our CSN therapeutics.

35

Table of Contents

Biological Science Discovery. Our biological science discovery team is responsible for the initial characterization of CSN therapeutic candidates, conducting biological assays, assessing the activity and toxicity of drug candidates through in vitro and in vivo assays, and assessing CSN therapeutic candidates once the initial development has been completed by our research engineering team. Our biological science discovery team collaborates with our research engineering team to refine our CSN therapeutic candidate selection characteristics to optimize their biological effects. Our biological science discovery team is led by an experienced research scientist who is a medical doctor and has a PhD in molecular science.

Nonclinical Development. Our nonclinical development team is responsible for developing a complete and sufficient dataset of nonclinical animal pharmacology, toxicology, and safety studies to support regulatory filings with human research ethics committees (“HRECs”) and government regulatory authorities, in order to obtain approval for use in human studies. Our nonclinical development team collaborates with our biological science discovery and clinical development teams to translate our findings into animals and prepare for eventual studies in patients. Our nonclinical development team also leads our external collaboration research activities with universities and academic experts.

Clinical Development. Our clinical development team designs, implements, and oversees the operational conduct of our clinical trials after our CSN therapeutic candidates have demonstrated sufficient safety and toxicology results to advance to human studies. Our clinical development team is led by our Head of Medical, who is a board-certified neurologist and is also a professor of neurology in the Department of Neurology at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, where he also serves as a director for several neuroscience-related initiatives and research centers.

External Research and Development

In line with industry practice, we also outsource certain research and development to key academic partners, nonclinical research organizations, and third-party CROs. We have collaborated with experts at key academic universities with myelination and neuroprotection expertise who have conducted animal experiments to demonstrate the effects of CNM-Au8 treatment on remyelination and neuroprotection in animals and in cell-based in vitro assays. To support our research efforts, we have partnered with academic experts at Johns Hopkins University for ALS, the University of Cambridge for myelination-related experiments, Northwestern University for myelination-related experiments, George Washington University for myelination-related experiments, and the University of Edinburgh for myelination-related research. In general, we outsource the majority of toxicology, pharmacology, and toxicokinetic studies to expert nonclinical CROs.

To provide maximum flexibility and efficiency to operations, we engage industry-leading CROs to manage, conduct and support our clinical trials and to supplement our internal research and development capabilities. We apply a rigorous process to selecting CROs to conduct our research studies; selection is based on the quality, reputation, and research experience in the field of central nervous system disorders. In addition to the scope, depth, quality of service, and product offerings of CROs, for clinical trial management, we place emphasis on the ability of CROs to facilitate optimal site selection, to recruit patients in a timely manner, and to conduct complex clinical trials efficiently. Our CROs are widely recognized within their functional areas of research.

We enter into separate agreements with CROs and our external partners for each clinical trial or nonclinical research project. All CROs and other external research collaborators were all independent third parties. Principal terms of the service agreements with our key CROs and external partners are summarized as follows:

●

Services. The CRO, nonclinical research organization, or academic site implements and manages the study in accordance with the protocol designed by us as specified in the service agreement.

●

Term. The CRO, nonclinical research organization, or academic site is required to support the clinical trial or nonclinical studies within the prescribed time limit until the end of the clinical trial.

●

Payments. We are required to make payments to our partners in accordance with the payment schedule agreed by the parties.

●

Intellectual property rights. We own intellectual property rights arising from the research activities related to our background intellectual property.

●

Risk allocation. Each party indemnifies the other party for losses caused by its fault or gross negligence. We indemnify the CRO and external partners for theoretical risks related to CNM-Au8.

36

Table of Contents

We monitor and evaluate our CROs and external research partners with various activities including site visits, ongoing project team reviews, and/or assessments by third-party assessors. We strive to achieve clinical trial excellence by maintaining strong quality control measures. We perform core functions such as clinical development strategy formulation and protocol design in-house, and exercise control and oversight over key functions of clinical trial management. We conduct regular site visits to oversee site initiation, patient recruitment, and data quality monitoring. We also engage third-party consultants to perform clinical trial audits. Data quality is further assessed by in-house data review, including medical review, document review, and monitoring report review. We will not work with a vendor who does not have processes established surrounding data privacy and safeguards to ensure compliance through the clinical trial. We have maintained a stable relationship with our CROs and other external research partners.

Clinical Trial Management

To support our clinical trials, our internal clinical development team designs, implements, collects and analyzes data for our clinical trials. When additional services are required to support a clinical trial, we conduct a feasibility and qualification assessment for potential vendors and CROs. These vendors are vetted through review of their current operational structure and established procedures, knowledge and experience about the study, indication, or population, and past feedback from participating clinical sites. Our internal clinical development team supervises CROs on key clinical activities, such as patient eligibility review, medical data review, and SAE review, to ensure that the performance of CROs complies with our protocols and applicable laws and to protect the integrity and authenticity of the data from our clinical trials. Our internal clinical development team holds meetings with CROs to evaluate the CRO’s performance by following up on clinical progress and resolving potential issues and risks.

Financial Grants

We have been awarded grants from various organizations, including the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, FightMND, a not-for-profit registered charity in Australia, the Michael J. Fox Foundation, and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, a division of the National Institutes of Health. The grants include the following terms:

●

National Multiple Sclerosis Society.

○

We received a grant of $0.4 million in September 2019 for biomarker analyses related to our VISIONARY-MS clinical trial. Funding was based upon the achievement of certain analytical milestones. In the event we commercialize CNM-Au8 for the treatment of MS, we would be required to repay between 50% and 450% of grant funds based upon certain sales milestones. We will own all intellectual property rights arising from grant-related activities.

○

We received a grant of $0.7 million in May 2023 to fund Cohort 2 of our REPAIR-MS clinical trial. Funding is based upon the achievement of certain clinical milestones. In the event we commercialize CNM-Au8 for the treatment of MS, we would be required to repay between 50% and 450% of grant funds based upon certain sales milestones. We will own all intellectual property rights arising from grant-related activities.

●

FightMND. We received a grant of AUD1.4 million in August 2019 for our RESCUE-ALS clinical trial. Funding was based upon the achievement of certain patient enrollment targets. In the event that certain intellectual property is created during RESCUE-ALS and subsequently commercialized in Australia, we would be required to repay, at the sole discretion of FightMND, 10% of future net sales proceeds up to 500% of the original grant amount. We will own all intellectual property rights from grant related activities.

●

The Michael J. Fox Foundation. We received a grant of $0.5 million in January 2021 for preclinical iPSC and animal model studies to assess CNM-Au8 for the treatment of PD. Funding was based upon the achievement of certain analytical milestones. We will own all intellectual property rights from grant related activities.

●

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke / National Institutes of Health. A grant of $45.1 million was awarded to us, in collaboration with NYU (formerly Columbia) and Synapticure, in October 2023 to support the ACT-EAP for CNM-Au8 treatment of ALS. The grant was awarded under the Accelerating Access to Critical Therapies for ALS Act. Subawards to us may total up to $30.9 million in aggregate and may extend to August 31, 2027. These subawards are awarded annually and subaward funds are paid to us as reimbursement for cash spent to support the ACT-EAP.

We also received indirect financial support for the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, administered by Massachusetts General Hospital, which conducted an ALS platform trial of CNM-Au8 alongside multiple other drug candidates, at significantly lower costs than we would have otherwise incurred if we had conducted a comparably designed clinical trial at reasonable market rates.

37

Table of Contents

Manufacturing

We manufacture CSN therapeutics at our 32,600 square foot production facility in North East, Maryland (the “North East Facility”), based on novel manufacturing processes and devices that were entirely invented by us. The North East Facility is compliant with rigorous international Good Manufacturing Processes (“GMP”), and we operate an ISO8-level clean room that contains the specialized electro-crystal-chemistry devices, or continuous flow trough apparatuses, that we invented and patented to produce our CSN therapeutics from highly pure raw materials. We produce a gold nanocrystal suspension, the active pharmaceutical ingredient for CNM-Au8, on an ongoing basis. We believe our current production capabilities are sufficient to meet our needs for both research and development and to supply our ongoing and planned clinical trials and EAPs, and we believe our processes can be scaled to achieve early commercially viable quantities.

Additionally, we currently lease a 74,210 square foot production facility in Elkton, Maryland (the “Elkton Facility”), a few miles from our North East Facility. Contingent upon successful future commercialization and funding, we plan to develop the Elkton Facility to support our unique manufacturing needs and to enable us to materially increase our manufacturing capacity post-commercialization, if achieved. We have significant experience in scaling our production processes and capabilities as demand has fluctuated to supply the needs of our clinical programs, and we believe our technical expertise and capabilities will be sufficient to expand capacity to support contemplated growth and potential commercialization. We believe our current production environment has established us as the leading world-class manufacturer of CSN therapeutics, and following any future expansion, our facilities, equipment, and processes will continue to comply with international practices and support our long-term strategic plans, taking into consideration quality, costs, manageability, expandability, and controls. We have invested considerable time and substantial resources to fine-tune our production and delivery processes to enable consistent, reliable, and affordable production of our primary drug candidates; and to perfect our handling and storage systems in order to maintain stability and efficacy of our nanocrystal suspensions.

License Arrangements

In August 2018, we entered into an exclusive supply agreement (the “Supply Agreement”) and license agreement (the “License Agreement”) in conjunction with 4Life’s investment in the Series C preferred stock and warrants of our predecessor. In April 2024, we entered into an amendment to the Supply Agreement and License Agreement (the “Amended 4Life Agreements”). The Amended 4Life Agreements contain the following terms:

●

Supply Agreement. We granted 4Life, or its affiliates and mutually-agreed upon manufacturing vendors (the “Buyer Purchasing Parties”) an exclusive right to purchase certain of our dietary supplement and non-pharmaceutical products (the “Licensed Products”), and we shall exclusively sell the Licensed Products to the Buyer Purchasing Parties. The purchase price of Licensed Products shall be equal to our cost plus 20%. 4Life must sell certain amounts of Licensed Products for the calendar years beginning in 2024 and extending through 2033 (the “Minimum Sales Commitment”), with Minimum Sales Commitments for years subsequent to 2033, if applicable, to be negotiated between the Company and 4Life. We may permanently convert 4Life’s exclusive rights to purchase Licensed Products to non-exclusive rights if: (i) 4Life fails to achieve the Minimum Sales Commitment for any two consecutive years, and (ii) 4Life fails to pay additional royalty fees to maintain exclusivity (as set forth under “License Agreement” below) (the “Exclusivity Provision”).

●

License Agreement. We granted 4Life an exclusive, royalty-bearing license to use, sell, and commercialize the Licensed Products. On a quarterly basis, 4Life shall pay us a royalty rate of 3% of incremental sales of Licensed Products, which is equal to the lesser of (a) the increase in net sales for the quarter over a base period quarter as determined in the License Agreement, or (b) net sales. If 4Life fails to meet the Exclusivity Provision, 4Life may continue to maintain exclusivity by paying us the difference between (a) the royalty fee that would otherwise have been earned by us if 4Life had met the Minimum Sales Commitment and (b) actual royalties paid to us. However, notwithstanding any other provisions of the License Agreement, on or after January 1, 2027, we shall be permitted to sell Licensed Products through third party retail outlets or via our own websites. The term of the License Agreement will continue until December 31, 2033, unless earlier terminated pursuant to the License Agreement or Supply Agreement. The Amended 4Life Agreements are renewable for additional five-year terms upon mutual agreement of the parties.

We currently provide (i) an aqueous zinc-silver ion dietary (mineral) supplement on a non-exclusive basis to 4Life that is sold under the trade name Zinc Factor™, and (ii) an aqueous gold dietary (mineral) supplement of very low-concentration gold nanoparticles on an exclusive basis to 4Life that is sold under the tradename Gold Factor™ and is subject to royalties.

To date, we have not licensed our electro-crystal-chemistry platform, CSN therapeutics, or drug candidates to any other parties.

38

Table of Contents

Sources and Availability of Raw Materials

Certain critical raw materials are available from a limited number of suppliers in the market. See Item 1A—Risk Factors “—Our business depends on the use of raw materials, and a decrease in the supply or an increase in the cost of these raw materials or any quality issues in such raw materials could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects” for further information.

Competition

While the treatment for central nervous system diseases is quite competitive and subject to frequent changes, there are currently no existing FDA-approved therapies that have mechanisms supporting remyelination and neuroprotection in patients. We believe that CNM-Au8’s core effects of remyelination and neuroprotection provide us a globally unique first-mover advantage for the treatment of central nervous system diseases. Together with our expanded intellectual property portfolio, we believe it would be challenging for any potential competitors entering into the market of remyelination and neuroprotection focused therapeutics to replicate our efforts without violating our intellectual property protections.

Intellectual Property

We are the sole inventors of our manufacturing processes, devices, and drugs. These inventions are protected through extensive global patents, institutional expertise and experience, and specialized technical knowledge, which enables us to maintain our leading position in the development of CSN® therapeutics for high-medical need diseases. As of December 31, 2025, we have over 160 issued patents worldwide with approximately 5 patents pending worldwide. We have worldwide rights to protect and thus commercialize our CSN therapeutics and believe that our issued, and pending patents, provide sufficient protection to secure the future commercial potential of our CSN therapeutics. To date, we have not been involved in any proceedings in respect of, and we have not received notice of any claims of infringement of, any intellectual property rights that may be threatened or pending, in which we may be a claimant or a respondent.

We have filed and obtained patents in the United States (U.S.), Australia (AU), Brazil (BR), Canada (CA), China (CN), Egypt (EG), Indonesia (ID), Israel (IL), India (IN), Japan (JP), Korea (KR), Mexico (MX), New Zealand (NZ), Philippines (PH), Russia (RU), Seychelles (SC), Singapore (SG), the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and the European Patent Office (EP) including Belgium (BE), Switzerland (CH), Germany (DE), Denmark (DK), Spain (ES), Finland (FI), France (FR), Great Britain (GB), Hungary (HU), Ireland (IE), Iceland (IS), Italy (IT), Netherlands (NL), Norway (NO), Poland (PL), Portugal (PT), Sweden (SE), Slovenia (SI), and Turkey (TR), with multiple fundamental patent families protecting our CSN therapeutics. The following table lists the material granted patent families in connection with our CSN therapeutics.

Description

Jurisdiction

Application Date (U.S.)

Grant Date (U.S.)

Continuous methods for treating liquids and manufacturing certain constituents (e.g., nanoparticles) in liquids, apparatuses and nanoparticles and nanoparticle/liquid solution(s) resulting therefrom (these patents relate to CNM-Au8 and ZnAg)

Issued: U.S. (5), AU (3), BE, CA (2), CH, CN, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, GB, HU, ID, IE, IL, IN, IT, JP (2), KR, MX, NL, NO, PH, PL, PT, SE, SI, TR

Pending: EP

July 11, 2007

December 31, 2013

August 29, 2017

October 9, 2018

May 11, 2021

Expiration dates for these patents will occur in 2028 in the applicable foreign jurisdictions and in 2030 in the U.S.*

Continuous methods for treating liquids and manufacturing certain constituents (e.g., nanoparticles) in liquids, apparatuses and nanoparticles and nanoparticle/ liquid solution(s) therefrom

Issued: U.S. (3)

January 14, 2009

September 24, 2013

July 12, 2016

October 15, 2019

Expiration dates for these patents will occur in 2030 in the U.S.

39

Table of Contents

Description

Jurisdiction

Application Date (U.S.)

Grant Date (U.S.)

Continuous, semi-continuous and batch methods for treating liquids and manufacturing certain constituents (e.g., nanoparticles) in liquids, apparatuses and nanoparticles and nanoparticle/liquid solution(s) and colloids resulting therefrom (these patents relate to CNM-Au8 and ZnAg)

Issued: U.S. (3), AU, CA, CH, CN, DE, DK, FI, FR, GB, IE, IL, IN, IS, JP, KR, NL, NO, SE

Pending: EP

January 15, 2009

June 30, 2015

July 31, 2018

May 18, 2021

Expiration dates for these patents will occur in 2030 in the U.S. and the applicable foreign jurisdictions*

Novel gold-based nanocrystals for medical treatments and electrochemical manufacturing processes therefor (these patents relate to CNM-Au8)

Issued: U.S. (3), AU (6), BR, CA, CH, CN, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, GB, ID, IE, IL, IN, IT, JP (4), KR (3), MX (2), NL, NO, PH (2), RU, SE, SG (3), UAE

Pending: U.S. (2), MX

July 8, 2009

March 28, 2017

October 22, 2019

April 20, 2021

Expiration dates for these patents will occur in 2030 in the U.S. and the applicable foreign jurisdictions*

Novel gold-platinum based bi-metallic nanocrystal suspensions, electrochemical manufacturing processes therefor and uses for the same (these patents do not relate to any specifically named product candidates herein)

Issued: U.S., AU, CA, CH, CN, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, GB, ID, IE, IL, IN, IT, JP, KR (2), MX, NL, NO, NZ, PH, RU, SE, SG, UAE

March 30, 2011

July 12, 2016

Expiration dates for these patents will occur in 2030 in the U.S. and in 2032 in the applicable foreign jurisdictions*

Methods and treatment for certain demyelination and dysmyelination-based disorders and/or promoting remyelination (these patents relate to CNM-Au8)

Issued: AU, BE, BR, CA, CH, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, GB, HU, ID, IE, IL, IT, JP, KR, MX, NL, NO, NZ (2), PH, PT, RU, SE, SG (2), SI, TR

NA

NA

Expiration dates for these patents will occur in 2033 in the U.S. and the applicable foreign jurisdictions*

*

Expiration dates do not include possible patent extensions for certain countries.

In addition to filings for U.S. and foreign patents, we will continue to protect and maintain our proprietary position by the use of trademarks, trade secrets, copyright protection, and continued technological innovation. For example, years of intensive research and development were invested in fine-tuning our production and delivery processes to the point where we expect to be able to consistently, reliably, and affordably produce our drug candidates, including our lead asset, CNM-Au8, to meet large scale needs. We believe that any attempts to reverse engineer or otherwise replicate our discoveries would be extraordinarily challenging for potential competitors without violating our intellectual property protections. We are also focused on building a robust and relevant trade secret portfolio, primarily related to the liquid handling and processing of our products from start to finish. We continue to explore additional ways to expand our trade secret portfolio in various aspects of the design, production, control and manufacture of our products.

Government Regulation

The FDA and other regulatory authorities at federal, state, and local levels, as well as in foreign countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, import, export, safety, effectiveness, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, record keeping, approval, advertising, promotion, marketing, post-approval monitoring, and post-approval reporting of drugs such as those we are developing. We, along with third-party contractors, are required to comply with the various preclinical, clinical, and commercial approval requirements of the governing regulatory agencies of the countries in which we wish to conduct studies or seek approval or licensure of CNM-Au8 or any future drug candidate.

FDA Drug Approval Process

In the U.S., the FDA regulates drugs under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and implementing regulations and guidance. The process required by the FDA before drug candidates may be marketed in the U.S. generally involves the following:

●

completion of preclinical laboratory tests and animal studies performed in accordance with the FDA’s current Good Laboratory Practices regulations;

40

Table of Contents

●

submission to the FDA of an IND application, which must become effective before clinical trials may begin and must be updated annually or when significant changes are made;

●

approval by an independent review board whose role is to review the research before the trial commences and continuously throughout the trial to assure the protection of the rights and welfare of the human subjects. These boards are often called “institutional review boards” (“IRBs”);

●

performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials to establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed drug candidate for its intended purpose;

●

preparation of and submission to the FDA of an NDA after completion of all pivotal clinical trials that includes substantial evidence of safety and efficacy from results of nonclinical testing and clinical trials;

●

a determination by the FDA within 60 days of its receipt of an NDA to file the application for review;

●

satisfactory completion of an FDA pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities at which the proposed product is produced to assess compliance with GMP and to assure that the facilities, methods, and controls are adequate to preserve the drug candidate’s continued safety, purity and potency, and of selected clinical investigation sites to assess compliance with Good Clinical Practices (“GCP”);

●

satisfactory completion of an FDA Advisory Committee review, if applicable; and

●

FDA review and approval of the NDA to permit commercial marketing of the product for particular indications for use in the U.S.

Preclinical and Clinical Development

Prior to beginning the first clinical trial with a drug candidate in the U.S., we must submit an IND application to the FDA. An IND application is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational new drug product to humans. The central focus of an IND submission is the general investigational plan and the protocol(s) for clinical trials. The IND also includes results of animal and in vitro studies assessing the toxicology, pharmacokinetics, pharmacology, and pharmacodynamic characteristics of the drug candidate; CMC information; and any available human data or literature to support the use of the investigational product. An IND must become effective before human clinical trials may begin. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA, within the 30-day time period, raises safety concerns or other questions about the proposed clinical trial. In such a case, the IND may be placed on clinical hold until the IND sponsor and the FDA resolve the outstanding concerns or questions. Submission of an IND therefore may or may not result in FDA authorization to begin a clinical trial.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with GCP and regulations governing the protection of human research subjects, including the requirement that all research subjects provide voluntary informed consent for their participation in any clinical trial. Clinical trials are conducted under clinical trial protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety, and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. A separate submission to the existing IND must be made for each successive clinical trial conducted during product development and for any subsequent protocol amendments. For new indications, a separate new IND may be required. An IRB must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial and its informed consent form before the clinical trial begins and must monitor the trial until completed. Often each institution or clinical site has its own IRB. The IRB is responsible for ensuring that human subjects’ rights and privacy are maintained. Regulatory authorities, the IRB, or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or that the trial is unlikely to meet its stated objectives. Some studies also include oversight by a Data and Safety Monitoring Board (“DSMB”), an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical trial sponsor, which provides authorization for whether or not a clinical trial may move forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the trial. The DSMB may halt the clinical trial if it determines that there is an unacceptable safety risk for subjects or other grounds, such as no demonstration of efficacy. Ongoing clinical trials and clinical trial results are required to be reported to public registries. For purposes of NDA approval, human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases (which may overlap or be combined):

●

Phase 1. The investigational product is initially introduced into a small number of healthy human subjects or patients with the target disease or condition. These studies are generally designed to test the safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism, distribution, and elimination of the investigational product in humans, the side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, to gain early evidence on effectiveness.

41

Table of Contents

●

Phase 2. The investigational product is administered to a larger, but still limited patient population with a specified disease or condition to evaluate the preliminary efficacy (usually based on a biomarker of disease), optimal dosages, and to identify possible adverse side effects and safety risks. Multiple Phase 2 clinical trials may be conducted to obtain information prior to beginning larger, confirmatory Phase 3 clinical trials.

●

Phase 3. The investigational product is administered to an expanded patient population to provide statistically significant evidence of relevant clinical efficacy and to further test for safety, and potentially further evaluate different dosages, generally at multiple geographically dispersed clinical trial sites. These clinical trials are intended to establish the overall risk/benefit ratio of the investigational product and to provide an adequate basis for product approval by health authorities.

In some cases, the FDA may require, or companies may voluntarily pursue, additional clinical trials after a product is approved to gain more information about the product. These studies, termed Phase 4 studies, may be implemented as a condition of approval of the NDA. Concurrent with clinical trials, companies may complete additional animal studies and develop additional information about the biological characteristics of the drug candidate, and must finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with current GMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the drug candidate and, among other things, must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the drug candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

Drug companies such as us are subject to legal requirements restricting, or imposing penalties for, the employment or use of individuals who have been debarred or excluded under various laws, including the provisions of 21 U.S.C. Section 335a, 335b, or 335c, 42 U.S.C. Section 1320a-7, in connection with, among other things, making materially false or fraudulent statements to FDA or other governmental entity in connection with federal health care programs (as defined at 42 U.S.C. Section 1320a-7b(f)); the offering or making of any prohibited payment, gratuity or other thing of value to personnel of the FDA, any other governmental entity, or any person in a position to generate referrals of federal health care program business; or other acts, statements, or omissions subject to FDA’s policy titled “Fraud, Untrue Statements of Material Facts, Bribery, and Illegal Gratuities” set forth in 56 Fed. Reg. 46191 (September 10, 1991) or as prohibited under the Social Security Act. Employment of such individuals, or the occurrence of such violations in the development and regulatory application process may prevent or delay any approval of an NDA.

NDA Submission, Review and Approval

Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, the results of nonclinical studies and clinical trials are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. The NDA must include all relevant data available from pertinent preclinical studies and clinical trials, including negative or ambiguous results as well as positive findings, together with detailed information relating to the product’s CMC, and proposed labeling, among other things. The submission of an NDA requires payment of a substantial application user fee to FDA (unless a waiver or exemption applies).

Once an NDA has been submitted, the FDA’s goal is to review standard applications within ten months after it accepts the application for filing (a 60-day process), or, if the application qualifies for priority review, six months after the FDA accepts the application for filing. In both standard and priority reviews, the review process can be significantly extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe and effective and the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packaged, or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety and efficacy. The FDA may convene an advisory committee to provide clinical insight on application review questions. Before approving an NDA, the FDA will typically inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with GMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving an NDA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCPs. If the FDA determines that the application, manufacturing processes, or manufacturing facilities are not acceptable, it will outline the deficiencies in the submission and often will request additional testing or information. Notwithstanding the submission of any requested additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval.

42

Table of Contents

After the FDA evaluates an NDA and conducts inspections of manufacturing facilities where the investigational product and/or its drug substance will be produced, the FDA may issue an approval letter or a Complete Response Letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A Complete Response Letter will describe all the deficiencies that the FDA has identified in the NDA, except that, where the FDA determines that the data supporting the application are inadequate to support approval, the FDA may issue the Complete Response Letter without first conducting required inspections, testing submitted product lots, and/or reviewing proposed labeling. In issuing the Complete Response Letter, the FDA may recommend actions that the applicant might undertake to resolve any findings and place the NDA in condition for approval, including requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA may delay or refuse approval of an NDA if applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied, require additional testing or information and/or require post-market testing and surveillance to monitor safety or efficacy of a product.

If regulatory approval of a product is granted, such approval will be granted for particular indications and may entail limitations on the indicated uses for which such product may be marketed. For example, the FDA may approve the NDA with a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (“REMS”), to ensure the benefits of the product outweigh its risks. A REMS is a safety strategy to manage a known or potential serious risk associated with a product and to enable patients to have continued access to such medicines by managing their safe use, and could include medication guides, physician communication plans, or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. The FDA also may condition approval on, among other things, changes to proposed labeling or the development of adequate controls and specifications. Once approved, the FDA may withdraw the product approval if compliance with pre- and post-market requirements is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the marketplace. The FDA may require one or more Phase 4 post-market studies and surveillance to further assess and monitor the product’s safety and effectiveness after commercialization, and may limit further marketing of the product based on the results of these post-market studies.

Expedited Development and Review Programs

A marketing application for a drug candidate submitted to the FDA for approval may be eligible for FDA programs intended to expedite the FDA review and approval process, such as priority review, fast track designation, breakthrough therapy, accelerated approval, and the Commissioner’s National Priority Voucher program.

A product is eligible for priority review if it has the potential to provide safe and effective therapy where no satisfactory alternative therapy exists or to provide a significant improvement in the treatment, diagnosis or prevention of a serious disease or condition compared to marketed products. A priority review designation means the FDA’s goal is to take action on the marketing application within six months of the 60-day filing date (compared with ten months under standard review). The FDA encourages sponsors to request priority review with the original NDA.

To be eligible for a fast track designation, the FDA must determine, based on the request of a sponsor, that a product is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrates the potential to address an unmet medical need by providing a therapy where none exists or a therapy that may be potentially superior to existing therapy based on efficacy or safety factors. The FDA encourages sponsors to submit for fast track designation no later than the pre-NDA meeting. Fast track designation provides opportunities for more-frequent interactions with the FDA review team to expedite development and review of the product. The FDA may also review sections of the NDA for a fast track product on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor and FDA agree on a schedule for the submission of the application sections, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the NDA. The review clock does not begin until the final section of the NDA is submitted.

In addition, under the provisions of the FDA Safety and Innovation Act enacted in July 2012, a sponsor can request designation of a drug candidate as a “breakthrough therapy.” A breakthrough therapy is defined as a drug that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. Drugs designated as breakthrough therapies are also eligible for accelerated approval. The FDA must take certain actions, such as holding timely meetings and providing advice, intended to expedite the development and review of an application for approval of a breakthrough therapy. The FDA encourages sponsors to submit for breakthrough therapy designation no later than the end-of-phase-2 meetings.

43

Table of Contents

Additionally, products studied for their safety and effectiveness in treating serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions may receive accelerated approval upon a determination that the product has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity, or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. As a condition of accelerated approval, the FDA will generally require the sponsor to perform adequate and well-controlled post-market clinical trials to verify and describe the anticipated effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. As a condition for accelerated approval, the FDA also currently requires pre-approval of promotional materials, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of a product.

A new program launched by the FDA in June 2025, the Commissioner’s National Priority Voucher program, shortens the review process from 10-12 months to 1-2 months from the time of a sponsor’s final NDA submission for products that meet four criteria outlined by the FDA: (1) addressing a health crisis in the U.S.; (2) delivering more innovative cures for the American people; (3) addressing unmet public health needs; and (4) increasing domestic drug manufacturing as a national security issue. To qualify for a voucher, FDA requires sponsors to submit the CMC portion of the NDA and the draft labeling at least 60 days before submitting the final NDA submission. The review process is expedited by convening experts from FDA offices who pre-review the submission and convene for a 1-day “tumor board style” meeting. Sponsors granted a voucher under this program may also be granted accelerated approval if a product also meets the standards for accelerated approval. The program has not been authorized by statute and has received scrutiny from Democratic members of Congress.

Even if a product qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review and approval will not be shortened. Furthermore, priority review, fast track designation, breakthrough therapy designation, accelerated approval, and the Commissioner’s National Priority Voucher program do not change the standards for approval but may expedite the development or approval process.

Orphan Drug Designation

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the U.S., or more than 200,000 individuals in the U.S. for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available in the U.S. a drug for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales in the U.S. for that drug. Orphan designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. After the FDA grants orphan designation, the generic identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. The orphan drug designation in and of itself does not convey any advantage in, or automatically shorten the duration of, the regulatory review or approval process. However, a drug granted orphan status allows the sponsor to receive tax credits and a user fee waiver.

If a product that has orphan designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a full NDA, to market the same product for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent FDA from approving a different drug for the same disease or condition, or the same drug for a different disease or condition. A designated orphan product may not receive orphan exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan designation. In addition, exclusive marketing rights in the U.S. may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.

44

Table of Contents

Post-Approval Requirements

Any products manufactured or distributed by us pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA and certain state agencies, including, among other things, requirements relating to quality control and quality assurance, record-keeping, reporting of adverse events, periodic reporting, product sampling, distribution, and advertising and promotion of the product. After approval, most changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications or other labeling claims, are subject to FDA review and approval. Under continuing user fee requirements, the FDA assesses an annual program fee for each product identified in an approved NDA. Manufacturers and their subcontractors may be required to obtain state licenses or permits and are required to register their establishments and list the drugs they manufacture with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with licensure requirements and GMPs, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements upon us. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated, and depending on the significance of the change, may require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from GMPs and impose reporting requirements upon us and any third-party manufacturers or packagers that it may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain compliance with GMP, state licensure obligations, and other aspects of regulatory compliance.

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

●

restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of a product, mandated modification of promotional materials or issuance of corrective information, issuance by FDA or other regulatory authorities of safety alerts, Dear Healthcare Provider letters, press releases or other communications containing warnings or other safety information about the product, or complete withdrawal of the product from the market or product recalls;

●

fines, warning or untitled letters or holds on post-approval clinical trials;

●

refusal of the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications, or suspension or revocation of existing product approvals;

●

product seizure or detention, or refusal of the FDA to permit the import or export of products; or

●

injunctions, consent decrees or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

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

45

Table of Contents

Other U.S. Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements

In the U.S., our current and future operations are subject to regulation by various federal, state and local authorities in addition to the FDA, including but not limited to, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”), which is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), as well as other divisions of HHS (such as the Office of Inspector General, Office for Civil Rights and the Health Resources and Service Administration), the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and individual U.S. Attorney offices within the DOJ, and state and local governments and regulatory agencies. For example, our clinical research, sales, marketing and scientific/educational grant programs have to comply with the anti-fraud and abuse provisions of the Social Security Act (such as the Anti-Kickback Statute), the False Claims Act, federal health care anti-fraud provisions, the privacy and security provisions of regulations implementing the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”), the Drug Supply Chain Security Act (“DSCSA”), and similar state laws, each as amended, as applicable. Our business operations and current and future arrangements with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors, patients, and customers may be subject to healthcare laws, regulations and enforcement by the federal government and by authorities in the states and foreign jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. Such laws govern, without limitation, state and federal kickback prohibitions, fraud and abuse, patient brokering, false claims, privacy and security, price reporting, drug manufacturing and distribution, physician sunshine laws, and participation in federal health care programs (as defined at 42 U.S.C. Section 1320a-7b(f)). Some of our pre-commercial activities are subject to some of these laws.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, any person or entity, from knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving any remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase, lease or order of any item or service reimbursable, in whole or in part, under Medicare, Medicaid, or other federal healthcare programs. The term remuneration has been interpreted broadly to include anything of value. The Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply, without limitation, to arrangements between therapeutic product manufacturers and prescribers, purchasers, and formulary managers. A number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors exist to protect certain activities from prosecution. Exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly and practices involving remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchasing, or recommending may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. Failure to strictly meet all the requirements of a particular applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the activity per se illegal under the Anti-Kickback Statute. Instead, the legality of the activity will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all of its facts and circumstances. Our practices may not in all cases meet all the criteria for protection under a statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor.

Additionally, the intent standard under the Anti-Kickback Statute was amended by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively, the “Affordable Care Act”), providing that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. Violations of the Anti-Kickback Statute can result in significant civil and criminal fines and penalties, imprisonment, and exclusion from federal healthcare programs. In addition, 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 (discussed below). In addition, many states have similar state-level anti-kickback statutes, some of which are broader than the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and apply regardless of payor.

The federal false claims and civil monetary penalty laws, including the False Claims Act that imposes significant penalties and can be enforced by private citizens through civil qui tam actions, prohibit any person or entity from, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment to, or approval by, the federal government, including federal healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid; knowingly making, using, or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim to the federal government; or knowingly making a false statement to improperly avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government. A claim includes “any request or demand” for money or property presented to the U.S. government. For instance, historically, pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. Other companies have been prosecuted for causing false claims to be submitted because of the companies’ marketing of the product for unapproved, off-label, and thus generally non-reimbursable, uses. Penalties for federal civil False Claims Act violations may include up to three times the actual damages sustained by the government, plus significant mandatory civil penalties, and exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs.

46

Table of Contents

Other federal criminal anti-fraud statutes prohibit, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud or to obtain, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises, any money or property owned by, or under the control or custody of, any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense, and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up by trick, scheme or device, a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. Like the Anti-Kickback Statute, the intent standard for certain federal healthcare fraud statutes does not require actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation.

We may be subject to data privacy and security regulations by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH”), and its implementing regulations, imposes requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of certain individually identifiable health information. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s privacy and security standards directly applicable to business associates, which are independent contractors or agents of covered entities that create, receive, maintain, or transmit protected health information in connection with providing a service on behalf of, to or for a covered entity as well as their covered subcontractors. HITECH also created four new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce HIPAA and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, many state laws govern the privacy and security of health information in specified circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways, are often not pre-empted by HIPAA, and may have a more prohibitive effect than HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.

Additionally, the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, and its implementing regulations, require that certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biological and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) report annually to CMS information related to certain payments or other transfers of value made or distributed to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors) and teaching hospitals, or to entities or individuals at the request of, or designated on behalf of, the physicians and teaching hospitals and to report annually certain ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. Failure to report accurately could result in penalties. Beginning in 2022, applicable manufacturers were required to start reporting such information regarding its payments and other transfers of value to physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, anesthesiologist assistants, certified registered nurse anesthetists and certified nurse midwives during the previous year.

Many states have similar statutes or regulations to the above federal law that may be broader in scope and may apply regardless of payor. We may also be subject to state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government, and/or state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers, drug pricing or marketing expenditures. These laws may differ from each other in significant ways, further complicating compliance efforts. Additionally, to the extent that we have business operations in foreign countries or sell any of our products in foreign countries and jurisdictions, including Canada or the E.U., we may be subject to additional regulation.

We may someday develop products that, once approved, may be administered by a physician. Under currently applicable U.S. law, certain products not usually self-administered (including injectable drugs) may be eligible for coverage under Medicare through Medicare Part B. Medicare Part B is part of original Medicare, the federal healthcare program that provides healthcare benefits to the aged and categorically-eligible, and covers outpatient services and supplies, including certain biopharmaceutical products that are medically necessary to treat a beneficiary’s health condition.

Someday, we may also participate in other government healthcare programs, including the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and the 340B Drug Pricing Program, which impose additional regulatory obligations. The Medicaid Drug Rebate Program requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to enter into and have in effect a national rebate agreement with the Secretary of HHS as a condition for states to receive federal matching funds for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs furnished to Medicaid patients. Under the 340B Drug Pricing Program, a manufacturer must extend discounts to entities that participate in the program.

In addition, pharmaceutical manufacturers with drugs that are reimbursable by federal health care programs must calculate and report certain price reporting metrics to the government, such as average sales price under Medicare Part B and best price under Medicaid. Penalties may apply in some cases when such metrics are not submitted accurately and timely. Further, these prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the U.S. It is difficult to predict how Medicare coverage and reimbursement policies will be applied to our products in the future and coverage and reimbursement under different federal healthcare programs are not always consistent. Medicare reimbursement rates may also reflect budgetary constraints placed on the Medicare program.

47

Table of Contents

In order to distribute products commercially, we must comply with state laws that require the licensure of manufacturers and wholesale distributors of drug products in a state, including, in certain states, manufacturers and distributors who ship products into the state even if such manufacturers or distributors have no place of business within the state. The federal government as well as some states also impose requirements on manufacturers and distributors to maintain records regarding the history of products in the chain of distribution. Federal law requires manufacturers to provide product tracing information to subsequent supply chain partners. The DSCSA governs the system of tracing certain prescription drugs as they are distributed in the U.S. A goal of the DSCSA is to protect consumers from drugs that may be counterfeit, contaminated, stolen, or adulterated. The law requires manufacturers to, prior to or at the time of each transfer of ownership of a drug, provide the subsequent owner with transaction history, transaction information, and a transaction statement. In the event of a recall or an inquiry regarding a potentially illegitimate product, manufacturers must be able to provide information regarding the transaction history and transaction information of their products. Violations of the DSCSA may result in fines or imprisonment. In addition, many states regulate manufacturers and distributors and enforce recordkeeping and licensure requirements.

Several states have enacted legislation requiring pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to establish marketing compliance programs, file periodic reports with the state, make periodic public disclosures on sales, marketing, pricing, clinical trials and other activities, and/or register their sales representatives, as well as to prohibit pharmacies and other healthcare entities from providing certain physician prescribing data to pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for use in sales and marketing, and to prohibit certain other sales and marketing practices. All our activities are potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws.

Ensuring business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations is a costly endeavor. Violation of the federal and state healthcare laws described above or any other current or future governmental regulations that apply or may apply to us, include without limitation, the following penalties: civil, criminal and/or administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, injunctions, private “qui tam” actions brought by individual whistleblowers in the name of the government, refusal to allow us to enter into government contracts, licensure revocation, suspension, or other discipline, contractual damages, reputational harm, administrative burdens, diminished profits and future earnings, additional reporting obligations and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement

Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any drug candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval. In the U.S. and in foreign markets, sales of any products for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale will depend, in part, on the extent to which third-party payors provide coverage and establish adequate reimbursement levels for such products. In the U.S., third-party payors include federal and state healthcare programs, private managed care providers, health insurers and other organizations. Adequate coverage and reimbursement from governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid in the U.S., and commercial payors are critical to new product acceptance.

Our ability to commercialize any products successfully also will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from third-party payors, which decide which therapeutics they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. Coverage and reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including the third-party payor’s determination that use of a therapeutic is:

●

a covered benefit under its health plan;

●

safe, effective and medically necessary;

●

appropriate for the specific patient;

●

cost-effective; and

●

neither experimental nor investigational.

We cannot be sure that coverage or reimbursement will be available for any product that we commercialize and, if coverage and reimbursement are available, what the level of reimbursement will be. Coverage may also be more limited than the purposes for which the product is approved by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product for which we obtain regulatory approval.

48

Table of Contents

Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price, negotiating discounts and rebates, examining the medical necessity, imposing hurdles to coverage such as prior authorizations, and reviewing the cost-effectiveness of medical products, therapies and services, in addition to questioning their safety and efficacy. Obtaining reimbursement for our products may be particularly difficult because of the higher prices often associated with branded drugs and drugs administered under the supervision of a physician. We may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of our products, in addition to the costs required to obtain FDA approvals. Our drug candidates may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective by payors. Obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval of a product from a government or other third-party payor is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us to provide to each payor supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data for the use of our product on a payor-by-payor basis, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained. A payor’s decision to provide coverage for a product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Further, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage for the product. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on its investment in product development. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any drug candidate that we successfully develop.

Different pricing and reimbursement schemes exist in other countries. For example, in the E.U., governments influence the price of biopharmaceutical products through their pricing and reimbursement rules and control of national health care systems that fund a large part of the cost of those products to consumers. Some jurisdictions operate positive and negative list systems under which products may only be marketed once a reimbursement price has been agreed. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval, some of these countries may require the completion of clinical trials that compare the cost effectiveness of a particular drug candidate to currently available therapies. Other member states allow companies to establish their own prices for medicines, but monitor and control company profits. The downward pressure on health care costs has become intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. In addition, in some countries, cross-border imports from low-priced markets exert a commercial pressure on pricing within a country.

The marketability of any drug candidates for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale may suffer if the government and third-party payors fail to provide adequate coverage and reimbursement. In addition, political and economic pressures as well as legislative changes in the U.S. have increased, and we expect will continue to increase, the pressure on drug pricing. The downward pressure on the rise in healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription medicines, medical devices and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become very intense. Coverage policies and third-party reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products for which we receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.

Healthcare Reform

In the U.S. and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and continue to be, several legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of drug candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities, and affect the ability to profitably sell drug candidates for which marketing approval is obtained. Among policy makers and payors in the U.S. and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and/or expanding access. In the U.S., the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives.

Further legislation or regulation could be passed that could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations. Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. For example, in August 2011, President Obama signed into law the Budget Control Act of 2011, which, among other things, included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect beginning on April 1, 2013 and will stay in effect through 2032 unless additional Congressional action is taken, with COVID-19 relief legislation suspending the 2% Medicare sequester from May 1, 2020 through December 31, 2021. In January 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. Additionally, on March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, beginning January 1, 2024.

49

Table of Contents

Additionally, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the U.S. with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed federal legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. Congress has indicated that it will continue to seek new legislative and/or administrative measures to control drug costs. Additionally, in an executive order, the Biden administration expressed its intent to pursue certain policy initiatives to reduce drug prices. In response to Biden’s executive order, on September 9, 2021, HHS released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug pricing reform and sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue as well as potential administrative actions HHS can take to advance these principles. In addition, Congress is considering drug pricing as part of the budget reconciliation process. Individual states in the U.S. have also become increasingly active in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control biopharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

On August 7, 2022, the U.S. Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which delayed the implementation of the changes to the Medicare Part D drug rebate program and stayed the elimination of safe harbor protection for rebates under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute until January 2032.

Additionally, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 may impact existing Medicare programs that cover prescription drugs. In addition to other relevant provisions, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 allows the Medicare program to directly negotiate the price of certain high-expenditure prescription drugs covered under Medicare Parts B and D, starting in the year 2028 and 2026, respectively, by setting certain “maximum fair prices.” Moreover, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 requires manufacturers to pay rebates to the U.S. federal government if prices of certain drugs covered under the Medicare program rise faster than the rate of inflation.

The second Trump administration has launched multiple initiatives aimed at lowering the cost of prescription drugs, including the Global Benchmark for Efficient Drug Pricing Model, that would require drug manufacturers to issue rebates to the Medicare Part B program when U.S. prices exceed those offered to comparable countries. A similar program, Guarding U.S. Medicare Against Rising Drug Costs Model, would create the same rebate obligation for Medicare Part D. Another initiative, TrumpRX, aims to use the direct-to-consumer model to lower prescription drug costs by working with drug manufacturers to provide drugs directly from the government to consumers.

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, prohibits any U.S. individual or business from paying, offering, or authorizing payment or offering of anything of value, directly or indirectly, to any foreign official, political party or candidate for the purpose of influencing any act or decision of the foreign entity in order to assist the individual or business in obtaining or retaining business. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act also obligates companies whose securities are listed in the U.S. to comply with accounting provisions requiring us to maintain books and records that accurately and fairly reflect all transactions of the corporation, including international subsidiaries, and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls for international operations.

Smaller Reporting Company Status

We are a “smaller reporting company” because the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates was less than $250 million as of June 30, 2025. We may continue to be a smaller reporting company in any given year if either (i) the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates is less than $250 million as of June 30 in the most recently completed fiscal year or (ii) our annual revenue is less than $100 million during the most recently completed fiscal year and the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates is less than $700 million as of June 30 in the most recently completed fiscal year. As a smaller reporting company, we are eligible for and may take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements applicable to other public companies for as long as we continue to be a smaller reporting company, including (i) the choice of presenting only the two most recent fiscal years of audited financial statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K, (ii) the exemption from the auditor attestation requirements with respect to internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and (iii) reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements.

50

Table of Contents

Other Regulations

In addition to the foregoing, state and federal laws regarding environmental protection and hazardous substances, including the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the Toxic Substances Control Act, affect our business. These and other laws govern our use, handling and disposal of various biological and chemical substances used in, and wastes generated by, our operations. If our operations result in contamination of the environment or expose individuals to hazardous substances, we could be liable for damages and governmental fines. We believe that we are in material compliance with applicable environmental laws and that continued compliance therewith will not have a material adverse effect on our business. We cannot predict, however, how changes in these laws may affect our future operations. We are also subject to numerous federal, state and local laws relating to such matters as safe working conditions, manufacturing practices, and fire hazard control. We may incur significant costs to comply with such laws and regulations now or in the future.

Employees and Human Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2025, we had a total of 79 employees, 76 of which were full-time and 3 were part-time, primarily located in Utah and Maryland. The table below sets forth our employees by role:

Department

Count of Employees

Percent of Total

Manufacturing

16

21
%

Clinical

7

9
%

Quality Control & Bioanalytics

11

14
%

Microbiology Lab

7

9
%

Research and Development

13

16
%

Senior Management

6

8
%

Quality Assurance

7

9
%

Finance

4

5
%

Human Resources & Operations

5

6
%

Information Technology

1

1
%

Regulatory

1

1
%

Medical Affairs

1

1
%

Total

79

100
%

None of our employees are represented by a labor union or are covered by a collective bargaining agreement, and we believe that we have good relations with our employees.

Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing, and integrating our existing and additional employees. The principal purposes of our equity incentive plans are to attract, retain, and motivate selected employees, consultants, and directors through the granting of equity compensation awards and cash-based performance bonus awards.

Corporate Information

The mailing address for our principal executive office is 6550 South Millrock Drive, Suite G50, Salt Lake City, Utah 84121, and our telephone number is (801) 676-9695. Our website address is https://clene.com. The information contained in or accessible from any website referred to in this Form 10-K is not incorporated into this Annual Report, and you should not consider it part of this Annual Report. We have included our website address in this Annual Report solely as an inactive textual reference.

51

Table of Contents