NASDAQ: INO

This Annual Report includes trademarks and registered trademarks of INOVIO Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Products or service names of other companies mentioned in this Annual Report may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. References herein to “we,” “our,” “us,” “INOVIO” or the “Company” refer to INOVIO Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries. References herein to “DNA medicines” refers to our product candidates in development for diseases associated with human papillomavirus (HPV), cancer, and infectious diseases.

Summary Risk Factors

Our business is subject to a number of risks, including risks that may prevent us from achieving our business objectives or may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and prospects. These risks are discussed more fully in Part I, Item 1A., Risk Factors herein. These risk factors include, but are not limited to, the following:

•In December 2025, the FDA accepted INOVIO’s BLA for INO-3107 for review under the accelerated approval program as a potential treatment for adults with RRP. As part of the submission, INOVIO requested a priority review, which is typically 6 months, but the FDA granted a standard 10-month review with a Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) target date set for October 30, 2026. In the file acceptance letter the FDA noted as a potential review issue its preliminary conclusion that the company had not provided adequate information to justify eligibility for the accelerated approval pathway. In January 2026, INOVIO requested a meeting with the FDA to discuss maintaining eligibility for review under the accelerated approval program. The FDA has agreed to meet and requested that INOVIO complete an assessment aid. We submitted the assessment aid in February 2026 and are waiting to receive a meeting date. INOVIO continues to believe that INO-3107 fulfills the criteria for accelerated approval, meeting a significant unmet need and providing a meaningful therapeutic benefit over existing treatments, however the FDA may not agree with INOVIO’s position and may decide INO-3107 is not eligible for review under the accelerated approval program.

•Our product candidates are drug-device combination products comprising an electroporation device for delivery of a biologic, and additional time may be required to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates because of the complexity involved with developing and manufacturing a drug-device combination product. If the FDA and comparable regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions do not provide marketing authorization for our CELLECTRA delivery devices, then we will not be able to bring to market our DNA medicines that rely on delivery by such devices.

•We do not currently have sufficient working capital to fund our planned operations for the next twelve months and substantial doubt exists as to our ability to continue as a going concern.

•We will need substantial additional capital to develop our DNA medicines and proprietary device technology, which may prove difficult or costly to obtain.

•We have incurred significant losses in recent years, expect to incur significant net losses in the foreseeable future and may never become profitable.

2

•We face intense and increasing competition and steps taken by our competitors, such as the traditional approval of PAPZIMEOS for the treatment of RRP or the introduction of other new, disruptive technology, may impede our ability to develop and commercialize our DNA medicines

•We currently have a small commercial organization and no in-house sales team. If we are unable to establish marketing and sales capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our products, if approved, we may not be able to generate product revenues.

•If products for which we receive regulatory approval do not achieve broad market acceptance, the revenues that we generate from their sales will be limited.

•We are subject to uncertainty relating to coverage and reimbursement policies which, if not favorable to our DNA medicine candidates, could hinder or prevent our products' commercial success.

•We have limited sources of revenue and our success is dependent on our ability to develop our DNA medicines and proprietary device technology.

•DNA medicines are a novel approach to treating and preventing disease, and our CELLECTRA delivery devices are a novel approach to administering medicines. Negative perception of the efficacy, safety, or tolerability of any investigational medicines we develop or our devices could adversely affect our ability to conduct our business, advance our investigational medicines, or obtain regulatory approvals.

•If we and the contract manufacturers upon whom we rely fail to produce our proprietary devices and DNA medicine candidates in the volumes that we require on a timely basis, or at all, or if these contractors fail to comply with their obligations to us or with stringent regulations, we may face delays in the development and commercialization of our proprietary devices and DNA medicine candidates.

•If we lose or are unable to secure collaborators or partners, or if our collaborators or partners do not apply adequate resources to their relationships with us, our product development and potential for profitability will suffer.

•We have agreements with government agencies that are subject to termination and uncertain future funding. Termination or cessation of funding could have a negative impact on our ability to develop some of the product candidates in our pipeline and/or require us to seek alternative funding sources to advance those candidates.

•We are currently subject to litigation and may become subject to additional litigation, which could harm our business, financial condition and reputation.

•We have entered into collaborations with Chinese companies and may rely on clinical materials manufactured in China for our development efforts. Uncertainties regarding the interpretation and enforcement of Chinese laws, rules and regulations, a trade war, political unrest or unstable economic conditions in China could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

•It is difficult and costly to generate and protect our intellectual property and our proprietary technologies, and we may not be able to ensure their protection.

•If we are sued for infringing intellectual property rights of third parties, it will be costly and time-consuming, and an unfavorable outcome in that litigation would have a material adverse effect on our business.

•We are subject to stringent and evolving U.S. and foreign laws, regulations, and rules, contractual obligations, industry standards, policies and other obligations related to data privacy and security. Our actual or perceived failure to comply with such obligations could lead to regulatory investigations or actions; litigation (including class claims) and mass arbitration demands; fines and penalties; disruptions of our business operations; reputational harm; loss of revenue or profits; and other adverse business consequences.

Company Overview

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on developing and commercializing DNA medicines to help treat and protect people from HPV-associated diseases, cancer and infectious diseases. Our platform harnesses the power of in vivo protein production, featuring optimized design and delivery of DNA medicines that teach the body to manufacture its own disease-fighting tools.

We use proprietary technology to design DNA plasmids, which are small circular DNA molecules that work like software the body’s cells can download to produce specific proteins to target and fight disease. Our proprietary investigational CELLECTRA® devices are designed to deliver the plasmids into the body’s cells for optimal effect, without the use of chemical adjuvants, lipid nanoparticles or viral vectors.

3

Our lead candidate is INO-3107 for the treatment of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis, or RRP, a chronic, rare and debilitating disease characterized by the growth of small tumors, or papillomas, in the respiratory tract primarily caused by HPV-6 and/or HPV-11 genotypes. Although mostly benign, these papillomas can cause severe, sometimes life-threatening airway obstruction and respiratory complications. The standard of care for RRP is repeated invasive surgery.

INO-3107 is an investigational DNA medicine designed to elicit an antigen-specific T cell response against both HPV-6 and HPV-11 proteins. These targeted T cells seek out and kill HPV-6 and HPV-11 infected cells, with the aim of potentially preventing or slowing the growth of new papillomas and reducing the need for surgery. We believe it has the potential to become the preferred treatment of both patients and their healthcare providers based on clinical results and tolerability data to date, and the simplicity of its patient-centric treatment regimen.

In 2023, we received feedback from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that the data from our completed trial of INO-3107 could be used to support the submission of a Biologic License Application, or BLA, for review under the FDA’s accelerated approval program. Utilizing our breakthrough therapy designation, we requested rolling submission of our BLA in July 2025 and reported in November 2025 that we had completed the BLA submission.

In August 2025, PAPZIMEOS, a gorilla adenoviral vector-based immunotherapy, was approved for the treatment of adults with RRP. PAPZIMEOS is administered as adjuvant treatment following surgical debulking. Unlike INO-3107, PAPZIMEOS requires additional surgery prior to the third and fourth doses if visible papilloma are present to maintain minimal residual disease as part of the treatment regimen.

In December 2025, the FDA accepted INOVIO’s BLA for INO-3107 for review under the accelerated approval program as a potential treatment for adults with RRP. As part of the submission, INOVIO requested a priority review, which is typically 6 months, but the FDA granted a standard 10-month review with a Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) target date set for October 30, 2026. In the file acceptance letter the FDA noted as a potential review issue its preliminary conclusion that the company had not provided adequate information to justify eligibility for the accelerated approval pathway. In January 2026, INOVIO requested a meeting with the FDA to discuss maintaining eligibility for review under the accelerated approval program. The FDA has agreed to meet and requested that INOVIO complete an assessment aid. We submitted the assessment aid in February 2026 and are waiting to receive a meeting date. INOVIO continues to believe that INO-3107 fulfills the criteria for accelerated approval, meeting a significant unmet need and providing a meaningful therapeutic benefit over existing treatments.

In 2025 we presented key data regarding the development of INO-3107 at several scientific conferences. Highlights from the data include:

•81% (26/32) of patients experienced a reduction of one or more surgeries at Year 1 post-treatment

•By the end of Year 2, 91% (21/23) of evaluable patients continued to experience a reduction of one or more surgeries. Only two patients had not yet responded to treatment with INO-3107

•50% (14/28) required no surgery during Year 2 (complete response, CR), an increase from 28% (9/32) in Year 1 post-treatment

•INO-3107 demonstrated continued clinical benefit, with a persistent decline in the mean number of surgeries through Year 2 post-therapy: A 78% reduction in mean annual surgeries was seen at Year 2 compared to the 1 year pre-treatment period (0.9, n=28 vs 4.1, n=32)

•Clinical response was not dependent upon HPV viral loads, molecular subtype or other elements of the papilloma microenvironment

Other products in our development pipeline include INO-3112, a DNA immunotherapy candidate targeting HPV-16/-18 combined with a DNA plasmid encoding for human IL-12 as an immune activator, for the treatment of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, or OPSCC, a type of head and neck cancer commonly known as throat cancer. In January 2024, we entered into a clinical collaboration and supply agreement with Coherus BioSciences, Inc., or Coherus, to evaluate the combination of INO-3112 and LOQTORZI (toripalimab-tpzi) in a clinical trial for patients with locoregionally advanced, high-risk, HPV-16/-18 positive OPSCC. Under the terms of the supply agreement, Coherus will provide LOQTORZI for a planned Phase 3 clinical trial. We have also gained alignment with FDA on the design of the planned Phase 3 trial in the United States and received initial feedback from European regulatory authorities on the proposed design of the trial in Europe.

We are also developing mid-stage candidate INO-5401 in combination with INO-9012 as a potentially powerful cancer immunotherapy in combination with checkpoint inhibitors. INO-5401 plus INO-9012 has been previously investigated as a potential therapeutic treatment targeting a number of cancers, including glioblastoma (GBM), one of the most complex, deadly, and treatment-resistant cancers, and cancers exhibiting BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. INO-5401 encodes for INOVIO’s SynCon® antigens for hTERT, WT1, and PSMA, which are antigens. The National Cancer Institute has highlighted as important targets and designated as high priorities for cancer immunotherapy development. These three antigens have been reported to be over-expressed and often mutated in a variety of human cancers, including GBM. INO-9012 encodes for IL-12, which is a T cell immune activator.

4

Other pipeline candidates include those targeting HPV-related anal dysplasia; cancers in people with certain gene mutations; and a potential vaccine booster to protect against the Ebola virus. We are also working to identify partnership opportunities for our DNA-Encoded Protein (DPROT) and DNA-Encoded Monoclonal Antibody (DMAb) preclinical stage candidates and technology. We were previously conducting clinical trials of a DNA immunotherapy candidate for the treatment of HPV-related cervical high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, or HSIL, but announced in 2023 that we were ceasing development for this indication in the United States. However, our collaborator ApolloBio Corporation continues to conduct a Phase 3 clinical trial of this candidate in China and plans to seek regulatory approval for, and potentially commercialize, the candidate in that jurisdiction.

Our partners and collaborators during 2025 included ApolloBio Corporation, AstraZeneca, Coherus Biosciences, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), HIV Vaccines Trial Network, Kaneka Eurogentec, National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), Plumbline Life Sciences, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Richter BioLogics, the University of Pennsylvania and The Wistar Institute.

All of our DNA medicine candidates are in the research and development phase. We have not generated any revenues from the sale of any products, and we do not expect to generate any material revenues unless and until we obtain marketing approval for and successfully commercialize INO-3107 and our other product candidates. We earn revenue from license fees and milestone revenue and collaborative research and development agreements and contracts. Our DNA medicine candidates will require significant additional research and development efforts, including extensive preclinical and clinical testing. All DNA medicine candidates that we advance to clinical testing will require regulatory approval prior to commercial use and will require significant funding for commercialization. We may not be successful in our research and development efforts, and we may never generate sufficient product revenue to be profitable.

Characteristics of DNA Medicines

DNA medicines are optimized DNA plasmids containing a gene encoding for a protein that is expressed once these plasmids are delivered into cells. We can design our plasmids to teach the body’s cells to produce a wide range of proteins, including antigens to elicit a specific immune response, therapeutic or prophylactic monoclonal antibodies or therapeutic proteins to replace defective or missing proteins in the body. These DNA medicines can generate antigen-targeted humoral and cellular immune responses based on the indication, including antigen-specific cytotoxic, or killer, T cell responses that are important for fighting cancer and viral infections. Some of the key characteristics of our DNA medicines include:

a.T Cell Responses: DNA medicines have demonstrated the ability to generate high levels of T cell (CD4+, CD8+, and memory) response along with antibody responses. CD8+ T cell responses are thought to play an important role in clearing tumors or virally infected cells.

b.Safety and Tolerability: DNA medicines have been well tolerated by clinical trial participants when evaluated against multiple disease targets. Our DNA medicines have been administered over 19,000 times across nearly 6,000 participants to date.

c.Ability to Re-dose: DNA medicines have been used in clinical trials to boost or sustain immune response via repeat administration.

d.Versatility: Our DNA medicines technology can be utilized to produce in vivo proteins or antigens key to treating or preventing various human diseases, such as cancer, viral infections or protein deficiencies.

e.Stability of Product: DNA medicines do not require to be kept frozen for storage or shipping. 

f.Design and Manufacture: DNA medicines can be rapidly designed and scaled, with ease of manufacturing providing a potential cost advantage.

g.Delivery Mechanism: Our proprietary delivery devices use electroporation to increase cellular uptake and overcome the barrier posed by cell membranes that can hinder the entry of large molecules, such as DNA plasmids.

Overview of Our DNA Medicines Platform

Our DNA medicines platform consists of DNA plasmids and our CELLECTRA devices, which are used to deliver the DNA plasmids into the cell. These two components combine to create a versatile platform that has the potential to target multiple diseases and conditions.

DNA Plasmid Design Technology

Our precisely designed DNA plasmids are circular double-stranded DNA constructs that have been optimized, using our proprietary technology and algorithms, to express a protein. Our plasmids can be designed to enable the body’s cells to produce a wide range of proteins, including antigens to elicit a specific immune response, monoclonal antibodies to fight a specific pathogen, or therapeutic proteins to replace defective or missing proteins in the body. In the area of HPV-related diseases, for

5

example, the expressed proteins are viral antigens that elicit antigen-specific T cell responses to fight HPV. We start by identifying one or more viral antigens that we believe are the best targets for directing the immune system toward HPV and then apply our design process, which analyzes the genetic make-up of the selected antigens from multiple strains of the virus.

For each antigen, we create a new genetic sequence that represents a nucleotide consensus sequence of the targeted antigen. In doing so, we believe we can create a differentiated sequence to help the immune system better recognize the target antigen and potentially variations of the target antigen. We have generated immune responses, including CD4+, CD8+, and memory T cells, with our DNA medicines against various tumor-associated antigens, as well as against different strains of certain infectious diseases in human clinical trials. Because the engineered genetic sequences are substantially similar to the original sequences, without matching them exactly, we believe they are patentable.

Once a sequence is designed and optimized with our proprietary gene optimization algorithm, which we refer to as GOAL, the sequence is synthesized and inserted into a circular DNA plasmid with its own promoter. Promoters serve a vital role in promoting the expression of the protein once the DNA medicine has entered the cell. Using our technology, the DNA plasmids have been optimized to enable high expression in human cells. We believe these design capabilities allow us to better target appropriate immune system mechanisms and produce a higher level of protein expression compared to traditional approaches, potentially enhancing the overall ability to induce the desired immune response.

The plasmids are then manufactured in a bacterial fermentation process using scalable manufacturing technology. We have recently developed a high-yield manufacturing process which we anticipate using to manufacture our DNA medicines. The manufactured DNA medicines do not require ultracold or frozen storage or thawing prior to injection and are refrigerator stable at 2 to 8 degrees Celsius, which are key factors for both distribution and administration.

CELLECTRA® Delivery Technology

DNA medicines need a pathway into the cell to work effectively. To help DNA plasmids, which are relatively large molecules to pass through the cell membrane, we use our proprietary CELLECTRA delivery technology. After injecting the DNA medicine either intramuscularly (IM) or intradermally (ID), CELLECTRA devices use electroporation (EP), or brief electrical pulses, to reversibly open small pores in the cell membrane, allowing DNA plasmids to enter. Through this process, the cellular uptake of the DNA plasmids can be substantially increased compared to the in vivo injection of DNA plasmids alone. This improved cellular uptake has enabled the immune responses and efficacy results observed in our clinical trials to date.

Our CELLECTRA device portfolio currently consists of two models (CELLECTRA 5PSP AND CELLECTRA 3PSP) designed for late-stage clinical use and potentially for eventual commercial use, and one device (CELLECTRA 2000) that we primarily utilize in earlier-stage clinical trials. These devices have been designed to optimize delivery of our DNA medicine candidates depending on the target disease. Our CELLECTRA 5PSP model provides intramuscular EP and is designed to be used with candidates addressing cancers and HPV-related pre-cancers. It uses a prefilled drug cartridge and delivers both the DNA medicine and the EP to the patient. CELLECTRA 5PSP was used in our Phase 3 trials (REVEAL1/REVEAL2) for cervical HSIL and will be used in our planned confirmatory trial for INO-3107, our DNA immunotherapy candidate for RRP. Our CELLECTRA 3PSP model was developed for intradermal EP delivery with support from the U.S. Department of Defense, the Center for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The small, handheld design is intended for mass administration and commercial use and will mainly be used with DNA medicine candidates addressing infectious disease. CELLECTRA 3PSP only delivers EP after a separate DNA medicine injection into the skin. In this case, the EP is delivered around the intradermal injection site.

CELLECTRA devices are validated and manufactured under Current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP). We have used CELLECTRA devices in global human clinical trials. We have CE-marked the CELLECTRA 5PSP model in the EU, which allows us to commercialize the device in the EU and other geographies that recognize CE-marking.

This graphic provides an overview of our DNA medicine platform:

6

DNA Medicines and HPV-related Diseases

There are more than 200 known types of HPV. It is believed that nearly all humans will become infected with at least some type of HPV during their lifetime, but most people are able to eliminate the virus before it causes disease. Certain types of HPV are known for being more difficult to clear and have a greater likelihood of leading to disease. For example, low-risk of malignancy types HPV-6 and HPV-11 may lead to benign growths (either warts or papillomas) that can develop into conditions such as RRP, while high-risk of malignancy types HPV-16 and HPV-18 may lead to cell changes and lesions, also known as precancerous dysplasia, that can become malignant and lead to cervical cancer. HPV causes nearly all cervical cancers and many cancers of the vagina, vulva, penis, anus, rectum, and oropharynx.

While there are currently vaccines available to prevent HPV infection, challenges with acceptance, accessibility, and patient compliance have resulted in many vaccine-eligible people remaining unvaccinated and at risk. It is estimated that even in the United States, only 50-60% of the eligible population has been vaccinated against HPV. In addition, current preventive HPV vaccines cannot treat or protect those already infected with the same HPV genotypes. As a result, there is still an urgent need for the development of HPV therapies that can treat existing infections and prevent the development of HPV-related diseases. The current standard of care for many HPV-related diseases, including RRP and many cancers, is surgery. These surgeries can be invasive and may be needed repeatedly because the underlying HPV infection is not eliminated by surgical intervention. In addition to surgery, other options are being explored to treat HPV-related diseases, including the usage of immune checkpoint inhibitors and other immunotherapies.

Our DNA Medicines in Development

The chart below provides an overview of our DNA medicines pipeline. We have focused our efforts and resources on those product candidates that we believe have the greatest potential to reach the market. The programs identified in the chart are described in more detail in the following pages.

7

(DMAb = DNA-encoded monoclonal antibody; DPROT = DNA-encoded protein technology; DLNP = DNA-launched nanoparticle)

INO-3107 for HPV-related RRP

RRP is a life-long, rare disease characterized by the growth of small tumors, or papillomas, in the respiratory tract primarily caused by HPV-6 and/or HPV-11 genotypes. Although mostly benign, these papillomas can cause severe, sometimes life-threatening airway obstruction and respiratory complications. A distinguishing aspect of RRP is the tendency for the papillomas to recur after surgical procedures to remove them because the underlying HPV infection remains. If RRP develops in the lungs, affected individuals can potentially experience recurrent pneumonia, chronic lung disease, also known as bronchiectasis, and, ultimately, progressive pulmonary failure. In approximately 2% of cases, RRP can develop into squamous cell carcinoma. Additional symptoms of RRP can include a hoarse voice, difficulty sleeping and swallowing, and chronic coughing. RRP symptoms are usually more severe in children than in adults. The most widely cited U.S. epidemiology data, published in 1995, estimated that there were approximately 14,000 active cases for both adults and juveniles, and about 1.8 new cases per 100,000 adults each year. The standard of care for RRP is repeated surgery. PAPZIMEOS, a gorilla adenoviral vector-based immunotherapy, was approved for the treatment of adults with RRP in August 2025. PAPZIMEOS requires additional surgery prior to the third and fourth doses if visible papilloma are present to maintain minimal residual disease as part of the treatment regimen.

We are developing our lead product candidate, INO-3107, for the treatment of HPV-6 and HPV-11-associated RRP. INO-3107 is an immunotherapy composed of two plasmids, one encoding for HPV-6 and HPV-11 E6 and E7 antigens, and one encoding for human interleukin-12 (IL-12). We believe INO-3107 has the potential to become the preferred treatment of both patients and their healthcare providers based on clinical results and tolerability data to date, and the simplicity of its patient-centric treatment regimen, which does not require additional surgery during the treatment window to maintain minimal residual disease.

In November 2025, we announced that we had submitted our BLA for INO-3107 as a treatment for adults with RRP under the FDA’s accelerated approval program. The FDA had previously indicated that the data from our completed Phase 1/2 trial of INO-3107 could be used to support the submission of a BLA for review under their accelerated approval program. In December 2025, the FDA accepted INOVIO’s BLA for INO-3107 for review under the accelerated approval program as a potential treatment for adults with RRP. As part of the submission, INOVIO requested a priority review, which is typically 6 months, but the FDA granted a standard 10-month review with a Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) target date set for October 30, 2026. In the file acceptance letter the FDA noted as a potential review issue its preliminary conclusion that the company had not provided adequate information to justify eligibility for the accelerated approval pathway. In January 2026, INOVIO requested a meeting with the FDA to discuss maintaining eligibility for review under the accelerated approval program. The FDA has agreed to meet and requested that INOVIO complete an assessment aid. We submitted the assessment aid in February 2026 and

8

are waiting to receive a meeting date. INOVIO continues to believe that INO-3107 fulfills the criteria for accelerated approval, meeting a significant unmet need and providing a meaningful therapeutic benefit over existing treatments.

In February 2025, the full safety and efficacy results from an open-label, multi-center, Phase 1/2 trial ( RRP-001) were published in the scientific journal Nature Communications after having been presented in October 2024 at the International Society of Vaccines Congress.

The RRP-001 trial evaluated the reduction in the number of surgical interventions in the year following initial administration of INO-3107 compared to the year prior to treatment. For this trial, adult patients first underwent surgical removal of their papillomas and then received four doses of INO-3107, once every three weeks. The primary endpoint of this trial was safety and tolerability. At the outset of the study (Day 0), patients could have RRP tissue surgically removed, but any surgery performed after Day 0 during the dosing window was counted against the efficacy endpoint.

In the trial, 81.3% (26/32) of patients had a decrease in number of surgical interventions in the year after INO-3107 administration compared to the prior year, including 28.1% (9/32) that required no surgical intervention during or after the dosing window. Patients in the trial had a median of 4 surgeries (overall range of 2-8) in the year prior to dosing. After dosing, there was a statistically significant median decrease of 3 surgical interventions (95% confidence interval: -3 to -2). Treatment with INO-3107 generated a strong cellular immune response in the trial, inducing activated CD4 T cells and activated CD8 T cells with lytic potential. T-cell responses were also observed at Week 52, indicating a persistent cellular memory response. INO-3107 was well tolerated by participants in the trial, resulting in mostly low-grade (Grade 1) treatment-emergent adverse effects such as injection site pain and fatigue.

The February 2025 Nature Communications publication also included immunology data from the RRP-001 trial, which had previously been presented at the 2024 American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Special Conference: Tumor Immunology and the Immunotherapy and the International Papillomavirus Conference. These data support the mechanism of action of INO-3107 and demonstrated the ability of INO-3107 to induce antigen-specific T cell responses against HPV-6 and HPV-11 and drive recruitment of those T cells into airway tissues and papilloma of RRP patients, resulting in the slowing or elimination of papilloma regrowth. The immunology data showed that INO-3107 induced significant clonal T cell expansion in the blood, including antigen-specific killer T cells and T cell infiltration into airway tissue, which was positively associated with clinical response. The immunology data was consistent with the clinical effect observed in the RRP-001 trial, which showed an elimination or reduction in the incidence of papilloma in the airway of RRP patients. In the immunological assessment, the T cell infiltration observed in airway tissues of clinical responders was predominantly comprised of a T cell population detectable only after administration of INO-3107.

In August 2025, data from a retrospective trial (RRP-002) were published in The Laryngoscope showing that patients exhibited extended durability of clinical response and further reduction in surgical burden when evaluated two and three years after initial dosing. RRP-002 included 28 of the 32 participants from the RRP-001 trial. In RRP-002 half of the patients treated with INO-3107 achieved a complete response (CR) and required no surgery when evaluated at the end of year two and into year three post initial treatment, increasing from the initial CR rate of 28% at the end of the first year. Patients experiencing a 50-100% reduction in surgeries (ORR) increased from 72% at the end of the initial 12-month Phase 1/2 trial (Year 1) to 86% at the end of the second 12-month period (Year 2). The mean number of surgeries was reduced from 4.1 in the pre-treatment period (the 52 weeks prior to beginning treatment with INO-3107) to 1.7 for Year 1 to 0.9 for Year 2. Partial data into the third 12-month period (Year 3 - median follow up 2.8 years following initial treatment) continued the trend of improvement and a reduced number of surgeries. INO-3107 was also well tolerated, with no serious adverse events or long-term safety concerns identified

The FDA granted INO-3107 Orphan Drug Designation (ODD) in July 2020 and Breakthrough Therapy Designation in 2023. The European Commission has also granted INO-3107 Orphan Drug Designation. In 2024, INO-3107, was designated an innovative medicine as part of the U.K.'s Innovative Licensing and Access Pathway (ILAP). In 2024, the European Medicines Agency's Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT) certified the quality and non-clinical data for INO-3107, confirming that the chemistry, manufacturing and controls (CMC) data and nonclinical results available to date comply with the scientific and technical standards that would be used for evaluating a European Marketing Authorization application.

INO-3112 for the Treatment of HPV-related Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma, or OPSCC

INO-3112 is a DNA immunotherapy consisting of two plasmids targeting HPV-16 and HPV-18 E6 and E7 antigens combined with a DNA plasmid encoding for the human IL-12 cytokine used as an immune activator. Results from a Phase 1/2a trial of INO-3112 alone in 22 HPV-positive head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients, published in Clinical Cancer Research in 2019, included the observation of T cell responses and infiltration of CD8+ T cells into the head and neck tumors. In early 2023, updated results were published in Clinical Cancer Research from a Phase 1b/2a trial of INO-3112 in combination with AstraZeneca’s PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitor, durvalumab, showing an ORR of 27.6% with 4 complete responses and 4 partial responses in the overall group of 29 evaluable patients and increased presence of peripheral HPV-specific T cells and tumoral CD8+ T cells. Further, the efficacy of the combination of INO-3112 with durvalumab resulted in a

9

median overall survival, or OS, of more than 29 months. This is an improvement over historical data for immune-checkpoint blockade therapy alone, or in combination with other HPV therapeutic vaccines and almost three times the historical overall survival period for monotherapy durvalumab in a similar patient population. Objective responses, including complete responses, occurred independently of PD-L1 expression, which contrasts with historical data for durvalumab.

In January 2024, we announced a clinical collaboration and supply agreement with Coherus to evaluate the combination of INO-3112 and LOQTORZI™ as a potential treatment for patients with locoregionally advanced, high-risk, HPV-16/-18 positive OPSCC. Under the terms of the supply agreement, Coherus will provide LOQTORZI for a planned Phase 3 clinical trial to be conducted by us. We have submitted our Phase 3 trial design to the FDA and European regulators and gained alignment with FDA on the proposed trial design. We have also received initial feedback from European regulatory authorities on the proposed design of the trial.

VGX-3100 for the Treatment of HPV-related Cervical HSIL

In 2023, we announced the discontinuance of our U.S. development program of VGX-3100 for the treatment of HPV-related cervical HSIL. This decision followed final analysis of the data from our second Phase 3 trial of VGX-3100. In this trial, statistical significance was not achieved in the investigational biomarker-selected population for the endpoint of lesion regression and viral clearance. However, statistical significance was achieved in the all-participants population for the endpoint of lesion regression and viral clearance.

An ad hoc integrated efficacy analysis of the results for the two completed Phase 3 trials of VGX-3100 showed statistical significance in the biomarker-selected and all-participants populations for lesion regression and viral clearance.

In addition, in both Phase 3 trials, administration of VGX-3100 by the CELLECTRA 5PSP device was well tolerated and there were no treatment-related serious adverse events, with most adverse events considered to be mild to moderate.

The combined data set from the two Phase 3 trials will be used as supportive data in any future regulatory interactions involving VGX-3100. Our collaborator ApolloBio Corporation is conducting a Phase 3 clinical trial of VGX-3100 for cervical HSIL in China and plans to seek regulatory approval for and potentially commercialize the candidate in that jurisdiction. See “Collaborations and Alliances” below.

VGX-3100 for the Treatment of Anal or Perianal HSIL

HPV-16 and HPV-18 infections can cause precancerous lesions of the anus (anal HSIL). Left untreated, anal HSIL may progress to cancer. Spontaneous regression of anal HSIL is observed in approximately 20% of patients. Persistent infection with one or more high-risk HPV genotypes is responsible for a large portion of anal cancer. In the United States, about 55% to 80% of anal HSIL cases are associated with HPV-16/-18, and worldwide about 80% of anal HSIL cases are associated with HPV-16/18. In the United States, over 90% of anal cancer is attributable to HPV, and about 87% of those HPV anal cancers are attributable to HPV-16/-18 specifically.

There are no validated screening tests or a general consensus for screening recommendations for anal HSIL. Treatment usually consists of repeated ablation, most commonly radiofrequency ablation (RFA), resections or laser therapy. However, recurrence rates are high, up to 49% one year after treatment, as ablation does not clear the underlying HPV infection, resulting in an unmet medical need.

We conducted a Phase 2 clinical trial (HPV-203) to evaluate VGX-3100 in participants who were HIV-negative with histologically confirmed anal or perianal HSIL, or anal intraepithelial neoplasia (AIN), associated with HPV-16 and/or HPV-18. This open-label trial enrolled 24 participants who received three doses of VGX-3100 delivered by our CELLECTRA 5PSP device. The primary endpoint of the trial was histologic clearance of the high-grade lesions and virologic clearance of the HPV-16/18 virus in anal/perianal tissue samples. In 2020, we announced Phase 2 results from this trial. One-half of the 22 participants treated with VGX-3100 showed resolution of HPV-16/18-associated anal HSIL at six months following the start of treatment. Administration of VGX-3100 by our CELLECTRA-5PSP device was also well tolerated in the trial.

A separate Phase 2 trial of VGX-3100 is currently being sponsored by the AIDS Malignancy Consortium. The trial is evaluating VGX-3100 in participants with histologically confirmed anal or perianal HSIL associated with HPV-16 and/or HPV-18 who are HIV-positive. This open-label single-arm trial has enrolled approximately 90 participants who will receive up to four doses of VGX-3100 delivered by CELLECTRA 5PSP. The primary endpoint of the trial is histological regression of high-grade anal lesions to low-grade SIL or normal histology.

INO-5401 for the Treatment of Glioblastoma Multiforme (GBM)

Glioblastoma multiforme, or GBM, is the most common aggressive type of brain cancer. In the United States, the median age at diagnosis is 65 years, and the incidence rate increases thereafter. Prognosis is extremely poor, and a limited number of new therapies have been approved over the last 10 years; average survival for U.S. patients has been reported to be as low as 8 months with a five-year overall survival (OS) rate of less than 10%. The overall incidence of GBM varies worldwide but is

10

highest in North America, Australia and Northern and Western Europe. In the United States, the average age-adjusted incidence rate of GBM is 3.19 cases per 100,000 persons.

Our DNA immunotherapy candidate INO-5401 consists of three DNA plasmids encoding for three tumor-associated antigens: Synthetic Consensus (SynCon) human Telomerase Reverse Transcriptase (hTERT), SynCon Wilms Tumor gene-1 (WT1) and SynCon Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen (PSMA).

We have conducted a Phase 1/2 immuno-oncology trial of INO-5401 and INO-9012 (a DNA plasmid encoding for the human IL-12 cytokine) in 52 participants with newly diagnosed GBM, in combination with cemiplimab (Libtayo®), a PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor developed by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability, and the trial also evaluated immunogenicity as well as efficacy based on OS rates.

We presented the OS data at the 2022 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Median OS in patients with an unmethylated MGMT promoter (Cohort A) was 17.9 months, which compared favorably to historical durations between 14.6 and 16 months. Median OS in patients with an MGMT methylated promoter (Cohort B) was 32.5 months, which also compared favorably to historical durations between 23.2 and 25 months. Overall, co-administration of INO-5401 with INO-9012 and with Libtayo and RT/TMZ (radiation and temozolomide) was well tolerated. Treatment was also observed to be immunogenic, eliciting antigen-specific T cells that may infiltrate GBM tumors. As of the end of 2025 GBM patients in the trial remained on drug treatment.

Building on this data, in March 2026 we announced a clinical trial collaboration and supply agreement with Akeso, Inc. (9926.HK) to evaluate INO-5412 (INO-5401 and INO-9012 combined into a single vial) in combination with cadonilimab, Akeso’s first- in-class PD-1/CTLA-4 bispecific antibody, in GBM. This combination therapy was selected for study as a part of the INdividualized Screening trial of Innovative Glioblastoma Therapy (INSIGhT), an innovative Phase 2 adaptive platform trial sponsored by the Dana Farber Cancer Institute that was designed to quickly and efficiently find new treatments for GBM. The novel combination of INO-5412 with cadonilimab to treat GBM could potentially benefit patients by providing additional checkpoint inhibition through CTLA-4 binding.

INO-5401 for the Prevention of Cancer for People with BRCA1/2 Mutation

We are collaborating with researchers at the University of Pennsylvania to conduct a Phase 1b investigator-sponsored trial to evaluate the tolerability and immunogenicity of INO-5401 alone or in combination with INO-9012, in each case delivered with our CELLECTRA device, for adult cancer and non-cancer patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. All humans have BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, but some people are born with an error, or mutation, in one of these genes. People with a gene mutation in either BRCA1 or BRCA2 are at a heightened risk for certain cancers, including breast, ovarian, prostate, and pancreatic cancers. These gene mutations can be passed on to children by either men or women. This trial is ongoing.

Infectious Disease Product Candidates

INO-4800 for COVID-19

Phase 2/3 Clinical Trial – SOLIDARITY TRIAL VACCINES (STV)

INO-4800 is one of two initial COVID-19 vaccine candidates included in the World Health Organization (WHO) sponsored Solidarity Trial Vaccines, or STV, which is designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vaccine candidates selected by an independent vaccine prioritization advisory group composed of leading scientists and experts. The conduct of the STV is wholly under the WHO’s control and any announcement regarding that trial will be made by the WHO.

COVID-19 DNA-encoded Monoclonal Antibodies (DMAb®)

Using our GOAL technology, we are able to create precisely designed DNA plasmids encoding for specific monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). The plasmids are delivered directly into cells of the body using our CELLECTRA delivery system, enabling the body to manufacture in vivo its own DNA encoded mAbs (DMAbs), as opposed to conventional injections of ex vivo produced recombinant mAbs. We believe this approach provides potentially significant advantages in terms of design simplicity, rapidity of execution, lower production costs and sustained, long term mAb production within the body. We expect to design DMAb product candidates for new disease targets that may not be currently addressable with conventional recombinant mAbs and also targets of existing, commercially available mAb products.

In 2020, we, along with a team of scientists from The Wistar Institute, AstraZeneca, the University of Pennsylvania, and Indiana University received a $37.6 million grant from the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), a research and development agency of the DoD and the JPEO-CBRND, to use our DMAb technology to develop anti-SARS-CoV-2-specific DMAbs that function as both a therapeutic and potentially preventive treatment for COVID-19.

In 2022, Wistar announced the dosing of the first participant in a Phase 1, open-label, single-center, dose escalation trial to evaluate the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetic profile of the mAb product candidates encoded on our DNA plasmids,

11

administered intramuscularly followed immediately by electroporation using our CELLECTRA 2000 device in a 1- dose (Day 0), 2-dose (Days 0 and 3) and 4-dose regimen (Days 0, 3, 28 and 31) in healthy adults (NCT05293249).

In September of 2025, results from the clinical study were published in Nature Medicine. In the trial, all participants (39/39) maintained biologically relevant levels of DMAbs through week 72 follow up, confirming the durability of in vivo antibody production, and the expressed DMAbs remained functional, successfully binding to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein and neutralizing the SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus target in all tested participants, confirming functional activity. Importantly, no participant developed anti-drug antibodies (ADA) across ~1,000 blood samples. ADA is a common challenge observed in other gene-based delivery platforms, such as adeno-associated virus (AAV) mediated antibody expression. Additionally, the administration of our DMAb DNA Medicines were well tolerated, with the most common side effects being mild, temporary injection site reactions, such as pain and redness. Investigators are continuing pharmacokinetic analyses of clinical samples from the trial for additional insights about the duration of the DMAb expression within the body.

INO-4201 for Ebola Virus Disease

The Ebola virus (EBOV) causes one of the most virulent viral diseases, with case fatality rates averaging approximately 50% but approaching up to 90% in past outbreaks in areas with no or under-developed health care. EBOV can spread through human-to-human transmission by direct contact with the blood, secretions, organs or bodily fluids of an infected individual and with surfaces or materials that contain the contaminated fluids of an infected person, such as bedding and clothing. It is capable of causing death within 2 to 21 days of exposure. In 2019, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) conditionally approved the preventative vaccine ERVEBO®, the World Health Organization pre-qualified that vaccine for use in high-risk countries and the FDA approved the vaccine for use in the United States. However, ERVEBO has not been approved for repeat dosing and there are currently no approved booster vaccines available in the United States.

In 2021, we announced complete enrollment of a 46-participant Phase 1b trial (NCT04906629) in which our DNA medicine candidate INO-4201 was assessed as a heterologous booster in healthy volunteers previously vaccinated with ERVEBO. In 2023, we announced results from the Phase 1b trial. INO-4201 was well tolerated and boosted humoral responses in all 36 participants treated in the trial. In 2024 we announced new antibody response data from the Phase 1b trial. Utilizing the FANG assay, which allows us to more accurately benchmark our data against the primary vaccines on the market, we observed that INO-4201 elicited strong antibody responses, comparable to the ERVEBO primary series vaccination. We and our collaborators published the data from this Phase 1b trial in the peer-reviewed scientific Clinical Microbiology and Infection journal (in press).

In 2024, we also submitted a proposed Phase 2 trial design to the FDA. We have been advised that the FDA is in alignment with our proposal to use a non-human primate (NHP) challenge study to immunobridge to the Phase 2 clinical study. Results from these two studies would subsequently inform the design of a potential Phase 3 study.

INO-6160 for HIV

We are developing our DNA medicine candidate INO-6160 as a prophylactic vaccine against human immunodeficiency virus, or HIV. INO-6160 is composed of one plasmid encoding for an HIV trimer and one encoding for the human IL-12 cytokine. The tolerability and immunogenicity of INO-6160 has been evaluated in a Phase 1 trial that was externally sponsored and funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, or NIAID. The trial was a randomized, 20-participant, open-label Phase 1 trial.

DNA-Launched Nanoparticles (DLNPs)

We and our collaborators at the Wistar Institute are applying our experience in DNA vaccine development toward the development of the next generation of DNA medicine technology, by investigating DNA-launched nanoparticles, or DLNPs, initially targeting infectious diseases vaccines. INO-6172, our first DLNP to enter clinical trials, is in a Phase 1 trial sponsored and funded by NIAID. INO-6172 contains two plasmids, one encoding for the DLNP and one encoding for human IL-12. The trial is a randomized, 45-participant, open-label Phase 1 trial evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of INO-6172 in adults without HIV. The follow up period of the trial is completed with analysis ongoing. Additional preclinical work with the DLNP technology is progressing at the Wistar Institute for other HIV DNA vaccine candidates.

DNA Encoded Protein Technology (DPROT)

Our DNA-encoded protein technology, or DPROT platform is a new approach to therapeutic protein replacement that aims to address some of the shortcomings of conventional therapeutic protein replacement that uses either repeated recombinant protein injections, infusions or viral based gene therapy. Similar to our DMAb technology, DPROT targets long-term protein expression within the body with the ability to re-dose due to the lack of anti-vector immunity. Research is currently in the preclinical stage for various targets. In November 2025 we presented promising preclinical data on DPROTs candidates targeting hemophilia A at the World Federation of Hemophilia Global Forum, demonstrating the technology’s potential to address the shortcomings of conventional therapeutic protein replacement treatments, including AAV-based gene therapy approaches.

Collaboration and Alliances

12

In addition to our current collaboration with ApolloBio Corporation described below, our other partners and collaborators in 2025 include AstraZeneca, Coherus Biosciences, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), HIV Vaccines Trial Network, Kaneka Eurogentec, National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), Plumbline Life Sciences (PLS), Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Richter BioLogics, the University of Pennsylvania, , and The Wistar Institute. In 2017, we entered into an Amended and Restated License and Collaboration Agreement (the "ApolloBio Agreement"), with ApolloBio Corporation ("ApolloBio"), which was amended in June 2023. Under the terms of the ApolloBio Agreement, we granted to ApolloBio the exclusive right to develop and commercialize VGX-3100, our DNA immunotherapy product candidate designed to treat pre-cancers caused by HPV, within the agreed upon territories.

We are entitled to receive up to an aggregate of $20.0 million, less required income, withholding or other taxes, upon the achievement of specified milestones related to the regulatory approval of VGX-3100 in accordance with the ApolloBio Agreement. In the event that VGX-3100 is approved for marketing, we will be entitled to receive royalty payments based on a tiered percentage of annual net sales, with such percentage being in the low- to mid-teens, subject to reduction in the event of generic competition in a particular territory. ApolloBio’s obligation to pay royalties will continue for 10 years after the first commercial sale in a particular territory or, if later, until the expiration of the last-to-expire patent covering the licensed products in the specified territory.

ApolloBio dosed its first participant in a separate Phase 3 trial in China (HPV-303CHN) in 2021. In 2025 they completed enrollment and dosing for their Phase 3 trial in China. The trial remains ongoing as of the date of this report. ApolloBio is responsible for all communications about the result of this trial.

Competition

As we develop and seek to ultimately commercialize our product candidates, we face and will continue to encounter competition with an array of existing or development-stage drug and immunotherapy approaches targeting diseases we are pursuing. We are aware of various established enterprises, including major bio-pharmaceutical companies, broadly engaged in immunotherapy/vaccine research and development. These include AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BioNTech, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals (part of J&J), Merck, Moderna, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi-Aventis. There are also various development-stage biotechnology companies involved in different immunotherapy and vaccine technologies, including but not limited to Agenus, AIVITA, Barinthus Biotherapeutics (formerly Vaccitech), BL Corp, BlueSphere Bio, Dynavax, Entos Pharma, Flow Pharma, Frantz Viral Therapeutics, Immunocore, Immunome, Imunon, ImVax, Iovance, Genexine, Mimivax, Nektar, Northwest Therapeutics, Novavax, Nykode, Precigen, and PapiVax. If these companies are successful in developing their technologies, it could materially and adversely affect our business and our future growth prospects.

Merck and GlaxoSmithKline have commercialized preventive vaccines against HPV to protect against cervical cancer. Some companies are also seeking to treat early HPV infections. For RRP, Precigen received an unexpected traditional approval for PAPZIMEOS in August 2025 and launched the product commercially in the U.S. later in the year. As a result, we may be at a potential competitive disadvantage in this indication, if approved, as INO-3107 would be a second entrant. Other companies have started to explore RRP as a disease target, including Nykode, Merck and Cytovation. For head and neck cancers, AstraZeneca is developing a bispecific antibody targeting PD-1 and TIGIT for locoregionally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, while the National Cancer Institute is conducting a Phase 3 study with the immunotherapy nivolumab (Bristol-Myers Squibb’s Opdivo) in HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer. MimiVax is developing an immunotherapy for GBM and there is an ongoing Phase 2b trial in newly diagnosed disease. Other companies are pursuing different approaches to pre-cancers and cancers we are targeting.

We also compete more specifically with companies seeking to utilize antigen-encoding DNA delivered with electroporation or other delivery technologies such as viral vectors or lipid delivery to induce in vivo generated antigen production and immune responses to prevent or treat various diseases. These competitive technologies have shown promise, but they each also have their own unique obstacles to overcome.

Viral Vector-based Vaccine Delivery

This technology utilizes a virus as a carrier, or vector, to deliver genetic material into target cells. The method is efficient for delivering DNA encoding immunotherapy antigens and has the advantage of mimicking real viral infection so that the recipient will mount a broad immune response against the immunotherapy. A potential limitation of the technology stems from problems with unwanted immune responses against components of the viral vector itself, making it difficult for some patients to mount an initial immune response and diminished efficacy upon repeated administration to boost or maintain immune responses. PAPZIMEOS is based on a Gorilla adenoviral-vector.

Lipid Nanoparticle DNA/RNA Delivery

A number of lipid formulations have been developed that increase the effect of DNA/RNA immunotherapies, most notably with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. These work by either increasing uptake of the DNA/RNA into cells and/or by acting as an adjuvant, alerting the immune system.

DNA Immunotherapy Delivery with Electroporation

13

There are other companies with electroporation intellectual property and devices. We believe we have competitive advantages over other companies focused on electroporation for multiple reasons:

•We have an extensive history and experience in developing the methods and devices that optimize the use of electroporation in conjunction with DNA medicine. This experience has been validated with multiple sets of data from clinical trials assessing DNA medicine against cancers and infectious disease.

•We have a broad product line of electroporation instruments designed to enable DNA delivery, including our intradermal and intramuscular devices.

•We have been proactive in filing for patents, as well as acquiring and licensing additional patents, to expand our global patent estate.

If any of our competitors develop products with efficacy or safety profiles significantly better than our product candidates, we may not be able to commercialize our products, and sales of any of our commercialized products could be harmed. Some of our competitors and potential competitors have substantially greater product development capabilities and financial, scientific, marketing and human resources than we do. Competitors may develop products earlier, obtain FDA approvals for products more rapidly, or develop products that are more effective than those under development by us. We will seek to expand our technological capabilities to remain competitive; however, research and development by others may render our technologies or products obsolete or noncompetitive or result in treatments or cures superior to ours.

Our competitive position will be affected by the disease indications addressed by our product candidates as compared to those of our competitors, as well as the timing of market introduction for these products and the stage of development of other technologies to address these disease indications. For us and our competitors, proprietary technologies, the ability to complete clinical trials on a timely basis and with the desired results, and the ability to obtain timely regulatory approvals to market these product candidates are likely to be significant competitive factors. Other important competitive factors will include efficacy, safety, ease of use, reliability, availability and price of products and the ability to fund operations during the period between technological conception and commercial sales.

The FDA and other regulatory agencies may expand current requirements for public disclosure of DNA-based product development data, which may harm our competitive position with foreign and United States companies developing DNA-based products for similar indications.

Manufacturing

We rely on third parties for the manufacture of clinical supplies for the DNA plasmid component of all of our product candidates. We have service agreements in place with multiple manufacturers for drug substance and drug product depending on the product and clinical stage, including Richter BioLogics, Kaneka Eurogentec, Gedeon Richter and Alliance Medical Products.

Replacement of any third-party manufacturer would require us to qualify new manufacturers and negotiate and execute contractual agreements with them. If any of our supply or service agreements with third-party manufacturers are terminated, we would likely experience delays and additional expenses.

Production processes for biological products are complex, highly regulated, and vary widely from product to product. Shifting or adding manufacturing capacity can be a very lengthy process requiring significant capital expenditures, process modifications, and regulatory approvals. Accordingly, if we were to experience extended shutdowns at one of our own facilities, extended failure of a contract supplier or contract manufacturing organization, or extraordinary unplanned increases in demand, we could experience an interruption in supply of certain products or product shortages until production could be resumed or expanded.

We believe our plasmids can be produced in commercial quantities through uniform methods of fermentation and processing that are applicable to all plasmids. We believe we will be able to obtain sufficient supplies of plasmids for all foreseeable planned clinical trials.

We manufacture our CELLECTRA device at our device manufacturing facilities located in San Diego. Most of the principal materials we use in our manufacturing operations to assemble our devices are available from more than one source. However, we have single source suppliers for molded plastic parts, machined metal parts and fully assembled printed circuit boards (PCBs). In the event one of these suppliers was unable to provide the materials or product, we would generally seek to maintain sufficient inventory to supply the market until an alternative source of supply can be implemented. However, in the event of an extended failure of a supplier, it is possible that we could experience an interruption in supply until we could establish new sources or, in some cases, implement alternative processes.

Commercialization

14

We currently have no approved products in the United States or any country. We cannot market or promote a new product in a country until a marketing application has been approved by the appropriate regulatory authority for that jurisdiction. Subject to receiving marketing authorization in a jurisdiction, we believe we will be able to commercialize in that market because of the broad potential applications of our technologies. We intend to develop and commercialize products both on our own and through our collaborators and licensees. We intend to develop and commercialize products in well-defined specialty markets, such as HPV-related diseases, infectious diseases, and cancer. Where appropriate, we intend to rely on strategic marketing and distribution alliances.

We currently have a small commercial organization to support pre-commercial activities and launch planning for our DNA medicine candidates, if approved, and we do not currently have a sales organization. In order to successfully commercialize INO-3107 or any other products that may receive regulatory approval, we must build our marketing, sales, access/distribution, and other capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services. We contemplate establishing our own sales force or seeking third-party contractors or partners to sell our products. Outside the United States, our strategy is to enter into arrangements with third-party commercial partners for any of our product candidates that obtain marketing approval.

Intellectual Property

Patents and other proprietary rights are essential to our business. We file patent applications to protect our technologies, inventions and improvements to our inventions that we consider important to the development of our business. We file for patent registration extensively in the United States and in key foreign markets. Although our patent filings include claims covering various features of our products and product candidates, including composition, methods of manufacture and use, our patents do not provide us with complete protection, or guarantee, against the development of competing products. In addition, some of our know-how and technology are not patentable. We thus also rely upon trade secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovations and licensing opportunities to develop and maintain our competitive position. We also require employees, consultants, advisors and collaborators to enter into confidentiality agreements, but such agreements may provide limited protection for our trade secrets, know-how or other proprietary information.

As of December 31, 2025, our patent portfolio included approximately 45 issued U.S. patents and approximately 40 U.S. patent applications as well as approximately 500 issued foreign counterpart patents and approximately 355 counterpart foreign patent applications. These are comprised, in part, of:

•two issued U.S. patents, four U.S. patent applications, four issued foreign counterpart patents and approximately 60 counterpart foreign patent applications directed to treatment of RRP;

•nine issued U.S. patents and four U.S. patent applications, as well as approximately 90 issued foreign counterpart patents and approximately 20 counterpart foreign patent applications, directed to treatment of GBM;

•approximately 30 issued U.S. patents and approximately 30 U.S. patent applications, as well as approximately 225 issued foreign counterpart patents and approximately 240 counterpart foreign patent applications, directed to our other earlier-stage product candidates; and

•four issued U.S. patents and three U.S. patent applications, as well as approximately 180 issued foreign counterpart patents and approximately 40 counterpart foreign patent applications, directed to our device delivery systems.

Our issued patents directed to RRP directed to treatment of RRP expire between about 2041 and 2043 and our pending patent applications directed to treatment of RRP, if issued, would expire between about 2040 and 2045. Our issued patents directed to treatment of GBM expire between about 2027 and 2037 and our pending patent applications, if issued, would expire between about 2027 and 2045. Our issued patents directed to our other product candidates expire between about 2027 and 2036 and our pending patent applications, if issued, would expire between about 2027 and 2046. Our issued patents directed to our device delivery systems expire between about 2027 and 2036 and our pending patent applications, if issued, would expire between about 2027 and 2036.

Individual patent terms extend for varying periods of time, depending upon the date of filing of the patent application, the date of patent issuance, and the legal term of patents in the countries in which they are obtained. In most countries in which we file patent applications, including the United States, the patent term is 20 years from the date of filing of the first non-provisional patent application to which priority is claimed (however for design patents, the patent term varies on a country-by-country basis). In some instances, a patent term can be extended under certain circumstances, such as patent term extension or patent term adjustment; alternatively, a patent term may be shortened, for example in the United States, if a patent is terminally disclaimed over an earlier-filed patent. Protection afforded by a patent varies on a product-by-product basis, from country-to-country, and depends upon many factors, including the type of patent, the scope of its coverage, the availability of regulatory-related extensions, the availability of legal remedies in a particular country, and the validity and enforceability of the patent.

15

If we fail to protect our intellectual property rights adequately our competitors might gain access to our technology and our business would thus be harmed. In addition, defending our intellectual property rights might entail significant expense. Any of our intellectual property rights may be challenged by others or invalidated through administrative processes or litigation through the courts. In addition, our patents, or any other patents that may be issued to us in the future, may not provide us with any competitive advantages, or may be challenged by third parties. Furthermore, legal standards relating to the validity, enforceability and scope of protection of intellectual property rights are uncertain. Effective patent, trademark, copyright and trade secret protection may not be available to us in each country where we operate. The laws of some foreign countries may not be as protective of intellectual property rights as those in the United States, and domestic and international mechanisms for enforcement of intellectual property rights in those countries may be inadequate. Accordingly, despite our efforts, we may be unable to prevent third parties from infringing upon or misappropriating our intellectual property or otherwise gaining access to our technology. We may be required to expend significant resources to monitor and protect our intellectual property rights. We may initiate claims or litigation against third parties for infringement of our proprietary rights or to establish the validity of our proprietary rights. Any such litigation, whether or not it is ultimately resolved in our favor, would result in significant expense to us and divert the efforts of our technical and management personnel.

There may be rights we are not aware of, including applications that have been filed but not published that, when issued, could be asserted against us. These third parties could bring claims against us, and that would cause us to incur substantial expenses and, if successful against us, could cause us to pay substantial damages. Further, if a patent infringement suit were brought against us, we could be forced to stop or delay research, development, manufacturing or sales of the product or biologic drug candidate that is the subject of the suit. As a result of patent infringement claims, or in order to avoid potential claims, we may choose or be required to seek a license from the third party. These licenses may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license, the license would likely obligate us to pay license fees or royalties or both, and the rights granted to us might be non-exclusive, which could result in our competitors gaining access to the same intellectual property. Ultimately, we could be prevented from commercializing a product, or be forced to cease some aspect of our business operations, if, as a result of actual or threatened patent infringement claims, we are unable to enter into licenses on acceptable terms. All of the issues described above could also impact our collaborators, which would also impact the success of the collaboration and therefore us.

Important legal issues remain to be resolved as to the extent and scope of available patent protection for biologic products, including vaccines, and processes in the United States and other important markets outside the United States, such as Europe and Japan. Foreign markets may not provide the same level of patent protection as provided under the United States patent system. We recognize that litigation or administrative proceedings may be necessary to determine the validity and scope of certain of our and others’ proprietary rights. Any such litigation or proceeding may result in a significant commitment of resources in the future and could force us to interrupt our operations, redesign our products or processes, or negotiate a license agreement, all of which would adversely affect our revenue. Furthermore, changes in, or different interpretations of, patent laws in the United States and other countries may result in patent laws that allow others to use our discoveries or develop and commercialize our products.

We cannot guarantee that the patents we obtain or the unpatented technology we hold will afford us significant commercial protection.

Government Regulation

Government authorities in the United States at the federal, state and local level and in other countries extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, marketing and export and import of biological products, or biologics, and medical devices, such as our product candidates. Generally, before a new biologic or medical device can be marketed, considerable data demonstrating its quality, safety and efficacy must be obtained, organized into a format specific to each regulatory authority, submitted for review and approved by the regulatory authority. These requirements are continually updated by regulatory authorities to address changes in science, manufacturing and potential new threats, such as cybersecurity concerns.

Review and Approval of Combination Products in the United States

Certain products may be comprised of components that would normally be regulated under different types of regulatory authorities, and frequently by different centers at the FDA. These products are known as combination products. Specifically, under regulations issued by the FDA, a combination product may be:

•a product comprised of two or more regulated components that are physically, chemically, or otherwise combined or mixed and produced as a single entity;

•two or more separate products packaged together in a single package or as a unit and comprised of drug and device products;

16

•a drug, device, or biological product packaged separately that according to its investigational plan or proposed labeling is intended for use only with an approved individually specified drug, device or biological where both are required to achieve the intended use, indication, or effect and where upon approval of the proposed product the labeling of the approved product would need to be changed, e.g., to reflect a change in intended use, dosage form, strength, route of administration, or significant change in dose; or

•any investigational drug, device, or biological packaged separately that according to its proposed labeling is for use only with another individually specified investigational drug, device, or biological product where both are required to achieve the intended use, indication, or effect.

Our product candidates are combination products comprising an electroporation device for delivery of a biologic. Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, the FDA is charged with assigning a center with primary jurisdiction, or a lead center, for review of a combination product. That determination is based on the “primary mode of action” of the combination product, which means the mode of action expected to make the greatest contribution to the overall intended therapeutic effects. Thus, if the primary mode of action of a device-biologic combination product is attributable to the biologic product, that is, if it acts by means of a virus, therapeutic serum, toxin, antitoxin, vaccine, blood, blood component or derivative, allergenic product, or analogous product, the FDA center responsible for premarket review of the biologic product would have primary jurisdiction for the combination product. We believe that all of our product candidates will have a biologic primary mode of action.

U.S. Biological Product Development

In the United States, the FDA regulates biologics under FDCA, and the Public Health Service Act, or PHSA, and their implementing regulations. Biologics are also subject to other federal, state, and local statutes and regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or after approval, may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial sanctions. These sanctions could include, among other actions, the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, a clinical hold, untitled or warning letters, product recalls or withdrawals from the market, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement, or civil or criminal penalties. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect on us.

Our product candidates must be approved by the FDA through the Biologics License Application, or BLA, process before they may be legally marketed in the United States. The process required by the FDA before a biologic may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

•completion of extensive nonclinical, sometimes referred to as pre-clinical laboratory tests, pre-clinical animal studies and formulation studies in accordance with applicable regulations, including the FDA’s Good Laboratory Practice, or GLP, regulations;

•submission to the FDA of an IND, which must become effective before human clinical trials may begin;

•performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials in accordance with applicable IND and other clinical trial-related regulations, sometimes referred to as good clinical practices, or GCPs, to establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed product candidate for its proposed indication;

•submission to the FDA of a BLA;

•satisfactory completion of an FDA pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities where the product is produced to assess compliance with the FDA’s current good manufacturing practice, or cGMP, requirements to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve the product’s identity, strength, quality, purity and potency;

•potential FDA audit of the pre-clinical and/or clinical trial sites that generated the data in support of the BLA; and

•FDA review and approval of the BLA prior to any commercial marketing or sale of the product in the United States.

The data required to support a BLA is generated in two distinct development stages: pre-clinical and clinical. The pre-clinical development stage generally involves laboratory evaluations of drug chemistry, formulation and stability, as well as studies to evaluate toxicity in animals, which support subsequent clinical testing. The conduct of the pre-clinical studies must

17

comply with federal regulations, including GLPs. The sponsor must submit the results of the pre-clinical studies, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature and a proposed clinical protocol, to the FDA as part of the IND. An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational drug product to humans. The central focus of an IND submission is on the general investigational plan and the protocol(s) for human trials. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA raises concerns or questions regarding the proposed clinical trials and places the IND on clinical hold within that 30-day time period. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. The FDA may also impose clinical holds on a product candidate at any time before or during clinical trials due to safety concerns or non-compliance. Accordingly, we cannot be sure that submission of an IND will result in the FDA allowing clinical trials to begin, or that, once begun, issues will not arise that could cause the trial to be suspended or terminated.

The clinical stage of development involves the administration of the product candidate to healthy participants under the supervision of qualified investigators, generally physicians not employed by or under the trial sponsor’s control, in accordance with GCPs, which include the requirement that all research participants provide their informed consent for their participation in any clinical trial. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the clinical trial, dosing procedures, participant selection and exclusion criteria, and the parameters to be used to monitor participant safety and assess efficacy. Each protocol, and any subsequent amendments to the protocol, must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Further, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an independent institutional review board, or IRB, at or servicing each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted. An IRB is charged with protecting the welfare and rights of trial participants and considers such items as whether the risks to individuals participating in the clinical trials are minimized and are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits. The IRB also approves the informed consent form that must be provided to each clinical trial participant or his or her legal representative and must monitor the clinical trial until completed.

There are also requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical trials and completed clinical trial results to public registries. Sponsors of certain clinical trials of FDA-regulated products, including biologics, are required to register and disclose specified clinical trial information, which is publicly available at www.clinicaltrials.gov. Information related to the product, patient population, phase of investigation, trial sites and investigators, and other aspects of the clinical trial is then made public as part of the registration. The FDA requires sponsors to disclose the results of most, but not all, trials after completion.

Clinical trials are generally conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap, known as Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials. Phase 1 clinical trials generally involve a small number of healthy volunteers who are initially exposed to a product candidate. The primary purpose of these clinical trials is to assess the action, side effect tolerability and safety of the product candidate and, if possible, to gain early evidence on effectiveness. Phase 2 clinical trials typically involve studies in patients to determine the dose required to produce the desired benefits. At the same time, safety and preliminary evaluation of efficacy is assessed. Phase 3 clinical trials generally involve large numbers of patients at multiple sites, in multiple countries (from several hundred to several thousand participants) and are designed to provide the data necessary to demonstrate the efficacy of the product for its intended use, its safety in use, and to establish the overall benefit/risk relationship of the product and provide an adequate basis for product approval. Phase 3 clinical trials may include comparisons with placebo and/or other comparator treatments. The duration of treatment is often extended to mimic the actual use of a product during marketing. Generally, two adequate and well-controlled Phase 3 clinical trials are required by the FDA for approval of a BLA.

Post-approval trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials, may be conducted after initial marketing approval. These trials are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication. In certain instances, FDA may grant conditional approval of a BLA on the sponsor’s agreement to conduct additional clinical trials, such as these post-approval trials, to further assess the biologic’s safety and effectiveness after BLA approval. Under the accelerated approval pathway, FDA may require the conduct of confirmatory trials before full approval.

Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted at least annually to the FDA and written IND safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and the investigators for serious and unexpected suspected adverse, findings from other studies suggesting a significant risk to humans exposed to the drug, findings from animal or in vitro testing suggesting a significant risk to humans, and any clinically important rate increase of a serious suspected adverse reaction over that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure. Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials may not be completed successfully within any specified period, if at all. The FDA, the IRB, or the sponsor may suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research participants are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the drug has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients. Additionally, some clinical trials are overseen by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical trial sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board or committee. This group provides authorization for whether or not a trial may move forward at designated intervals based on access to certain data from the trial. We may also suspend or terminate a clinical trial based on evolving business objectives and/or competitive climate. Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional

18

animal studies and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the product candidate as well as finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, 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 product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

BLA and FDA Review Process

Following trial completion, trial data is analyzed to assess safety and efficacy. The results of pre-clinical studies and clinical trials are then submitted to the FDA as part of a BLA, along with proposed labeling for the product and information about the manufacturing process and facilities that will be used to ensure product quality, results of analytical testing conducted on the chemistry of the product candidate, and other relevant information. The BLA is a request for approval to market the biologic in combination with the device, if applicable, for one or more specified indications and must contain proof of safety, purity, potency and efficacy, which is demonstrated by extensive pre-clinical and clinical testing. The application includes positive findings from pre-clinical and clinical trials as well as ambiguous or negative results. Data may come from company-sponsored clinical trials intended to test the safety and efficacy of a use of a product, or from a number of alternative sources, including studies initiated by investigators. To support marketing approval, the data submitted must be sufficient in quality and quantity to establish the safety and efficacy of the investigational product to the satisfaction of the FDA.

Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, as amended, each BLA must be accompanied by a significant user fee, which is adjusted on an annual basis. PDUFA also imposes an annual program fee for approved products. Fee waivers or reductions are available in certain circumstances, including a waiver of the application fee for the first application filed by a small business or a waiver of fee based on orphan drug status.

Once a BLA has been accepted for filing, which occurs, if at all, 60 days after the BLA’s submission, the FDA’s goal is to review BLAs within ten months of the filing date for standard review or six months of the filing date for priority review. The review process is often significantly extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. If not accepted for filing, the sponsor must resubmit the BLA and begin the FDA’s review process again, including the initial 60-day review to determine if the application is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review.

The FDA may also accept the submission of a BLA under its Accelerated Approval Program, which was instituted to allow for earlier approval of drugs that treat serious conditions and fill an unmet medical need based on a surrogate endpoint. A surrogate endpoint is a marker, such as a laboratory measurement, radiographic image, physical sign or other measure that is thought to predict clinical benefit but may not it itself be the final measure of clinical benefit. The use of a surrogate endpoint can considerably shorten the time required prior to receiving FDA approval. Companies are still required to conduct studies to confirm the anticipated clinical benefit. If the confirmatory trial shows that the drug actually provides a clinical benefit, then the FDA would grant full approval for the drug. If the confirmatory trial does not show that the drug provides clinical benefit, FDA has regulatory procedures in place that could lead to the removal of the drug from the market.

After the BLA submission is accepted for filing, the FDA reviews the BLA to determine, among other things, whether the proposed product candidate is safe and effective for its intended use, and whether the product candidate is being manufactured in accordance with cGMP to assure and preserve the product candidate’s identity, strength, quality, purity and potency. The FDA may refer applications for novel drug product candidates or drug product candidates which present difficult questions of safety or efficacy to an advisory committee, typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts, for review, evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions. The FDA will likely re-analyze the clinical trial data, which could result in extensive discussions between the FDA and us during the review process. The review and evaluation of a BLA by the FDA is extensive and time consuming and may take longer than originally planned to complete, and an applicant may not receive a timely approval, if at all.

Before approving a BLA, the FDA will conduct a pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facilities for the new product to determine whether they comply with cGMPs. The FDA will not approve the product unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. In addition, before approving a BLA, the FDA may also audit data from clinical trials to ensure compliance with GCP requirements. After the FDA evaluates the application, manufacturing process and manufacturing facilities, it 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 indicates that the review cycle of the application is complete and the application will not be approved in its present form. A Complete Response Letter usually describes all of the specific deficiencies in the BLA identified by the FDA. The Complete Response Letter may require additional clinical data and/or an additional pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial(s), and/or other significant and time-consuming requirements related to clinical trials, pre-clinical studies or manufacturing. If a Complete

19

Response Letter is issued, the applicant may either resubmit the BLA, addressing all of the deficiencies identified in the letter, or withdraw the application. Even if such data and information is submitted, the FDA may ultimately decide that the BLA does not satisfy the criteria for approval. Data obtained from clinical trials are not always conclusive and the FDA may interpret data differently than we interpret the same data.

There is no assurance that the FDA will ultimately approve a product for marketing in the United States and applicants may encounter significant difficulties or costs during the review process. If a product receives marketing approval, the approval may be significantly limited to specific populations, severities of allergies, and dosages or the indications for use may otherwise be limited, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. Further, the FDA may require that certain contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling or may condition the approval of the BLA on other changes to the proposed labeling, development of adequate controls and specifications, or a commitment to conduct post-market testing or clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the effects of approved products. For example, the FDA may require Phase 4 testing which involves clinical trials designed to further assess the product’s safety and effectiveness and may require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the safety of approved products that have been commercialized. The FDA may also place other conditions on approvals including the requirement for a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, to assure the safe use of the product. If the FDA concludes a REMS is needed, the sponsor of the BLA must submit a proposed REMS. The FDA will not approve the BLA without an approved REMS, if required. A REMS 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. Any of these limitations on approval or marketing could restrict the commercial promotion, distribution, prescription or dispensing of products. Product approvals may be withdrawn for non-compliance with regulatory standards or if problems occur following initial marketing.

Fast Track, Breakthrough Therapy and Priority Review Designations

The FDA is authorized to designate certain products for expedited development or review if they are intended to address an unmet medical need in the treatment of a serious or life-threatening disease or condition. These programs include fast track designation, breakthrough therapy designation and priority review designation.

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 for such diseases or condition. 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 BLA for a fast track product on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor and the 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 application. In addition, fast track designation may be withdrawn by the sponsor or rescinded by the FDA if the designation is no longer supported by data emerging from the clinical trial process.

In addition, the FDA may designate a biologic as a “breakthrough therapy” upon a request made by the IND sponsor. A breakthrough therapy is a drug or biologic that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs or biologics, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug or biologic may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. The FDA must take certain actions with respect to breakthrough therapies, such as holding timely meetings with and providing advice to the product sponsor, which are intended to expedite the development and review of an application for approval of a breakthrough therapy.

Finally, the FDA may designate an application for priority review if it is for a drug or biologic that treats a serious condition and, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness over existing therapy. The FDA determines at the time that the marketing application is submitted, on a case- by-case basis, whether the proposed drug represents a significant improvement in treatment, prevention or diagnosis of disease when compared with other available therapies. Significant improvement may be illustrated by evidence of increased effectiveness in the treatment of a condition, elimination or substantial reduction of a treatment-limiting drug reaction, documented enhancement of patient compliance that may lead to improvement in serious outcomes, or evidence of safety and effectiveness in a new subpopulation. A priority review designation is intended to direct overall attention and resources to the evaluation of such applications, and to shorten the FDA’s goal for taking action on an original marketing application from ten months to six months from the date of filing.

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 or approval will not be shortened. Furthermore, fast track designation, breakthrough therapy designation and priority review do not change the standards for approval and may not ultimately expedite the development or approval process.

Accelerated Approval Pathway

20

In addition, products studied for their safety and effectiveness in treating serious or life-threatening illnesses and that provide meaningful therapeutic benefit over existing treatments may receive accelerated approval from the FDA and may be approved on the basis of adequate and well-controlled clinical trials establishing that the drug product has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. The FDA may also grant accelerated approval for such a drug or biologic when the product has an effect on an intermediate clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality, or IMM, and that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on IMM 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 approval, the FDA will require that a sponsor of a product receiving accelerated approval perform post-marketing clinical trials to verify and describe the predicted effect on IMM or other clinical endpoint, and the product may be subject to expedited withdrawal procedures. Biologics granted accelerated approval must meet the same statutory standards for safety and effectiveness as those granted traditional approval.

For the purposes of accelerated approval, a surrogate endpoint is a marker, such as a laboratory measurement, radiographic image, physical sign, or other measure that is thought to predict clinical benefit but is not itself a measure of clinical benefit. Surrogate endpoints can often be measured more easily or more rapidly than clinical endpoints. An intermediate clinical endpoint is a measurement of a therapeutic effect that is considered reasonably likely to predict the clinical benefit of a drug or biologic, such as an effect on IMM.

The accelerated approval pathway is usually contingent on a sponsor’s agreement to conduct, in a diligent manner, additional post-approval confirmatory studies to verify and describe the drug’s clinical benefit. As a result, a program or development candidate approved on this basis is typically subject to rigorous post-marketing compliance requirements, including the completion of Phase 4 or post-approval clinical trials to establish the effect on the clinical endpoint. Failure to conduct required post-approval studies, or to confirm the predicted clinical benefit of the product during post-marketing studies, may allow the FDA to withdraw approval of the drug. The FDA may require the sponsor of a product granted accelerated approval to have a confirmatory trial underway prior to approval. The sponsor must also submit progress reports on a confirmatory trial every six months until the trial is complete, and such reports are published on FDA’s website.

All promotional materials for products approved under the accelerated approval program are subject to prior review by the FDA.

Orphan Drug Designation and Exclusivity

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to a biologic product intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or more than 200,000 individuals in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available in the United States a biologic for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales in the United States for that biologic. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting a BLA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use will be disclosed publicly by the FDA; the posting will also indicate whether the biologic is no longer designated as an orphan drug. More than one program or development candidate may receive an orphan drug designation for the same indication. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process.

If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to seven years of orphan product exclusivity. During the seven-year exclusivity period, the FDA may not approve any other applications to market a product containing the same active moiety for the same disease, except in very limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity. A product is clinically superior if it is safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. Thus, orphan drug exclusivity could block the approval of one of our potential products for seven years if a competitor obtains approval of the same product as defined by the FDA and we are not able to show the clinical superiority of our program or development candidate or if our program or development candidate’s indication is determined to be contained within the competitor’s product orphan indication. In addition, the FDA will not recognize orphan drug exclusivity if a sponsor fails to demonstrate upon approval that the product is clinically superior to a previously approved product containing the same active moiety for the same orphan condition, regardless of whether or not the previously approved product was designated an orphan drug or had orphan drug exclusivity. A product that has received orphan drug designation may not receive orphan exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received the designation. Orphan exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different drug or biological product for the same disease or condition, or the same product for a different disease or condition.

Post-Marketing Requirements

Following approval of a new product, a manufacturer and the approved product are subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, monitoring and recordkeeping activities, reporting to the applicable regulatory authorities of adverse experiences with the product, providing the regulatory authorities with updated safety and efficacy information, product sampling and distribution requirements, and complying with promotion and advertising requirements, which include,

21

among others, standards for direct-to-consumer advertising, restrictions on promoting products for uses or in patient populations that are not described in the product’s approved labeling, also known as off-label use, limitations on industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, and requirements for promotional activities involving the internet. Although physicians may prescribe legally available drugs and biologics for off-label uses, manufacturers may not market or promote such off-label uses. Modifications or enhancements to the product or its labeling or changes of the site of manufacture are often subject to the approval of the FDA and other regulators, which may or may not be received or may result in a lengthy review process. Prescription drug promotional materials must be submitted to the FDA in conjunction with their first use.

In the United States, once a product is approved, its manufacture is subject to comprehensive and continuing regulation by the FDA. The FDA regulations require that products be manufactured in specific approved facilities and in accordance with cGMP. Moreover, the constituent parts of a combination product retain their regulatory status, for example, as a biologic or device, and as such, we may be subject to additional requirements in the Quality Management System Regulation, or QMSR, applicable to medical devices, such as design controls, purchasing controls, and corrective and preventive action. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the production of clinical and commercial quantities of our products in accordance with cGMP regulations. cGMP regulations require, among other things, quality control and quality assurance as well as the corresponding maintenance of records and documentation and the obligation to investigate and correct any deviations from cGMP. Manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved products are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP and other laws. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance. These regulations also impose certain organizational, procedural and documentation requirements with respect to manufacturing and quality assurance activities. BLA holders using contract manufacturers, laboratories or packagers are responsible for the selection and monitoring of qualified firms, and, in certain circumstances, qualified suppliers to these firms. These firms and, where applicable, their suppliers are subject to inspections by the FDA at any time, and the discovery of violative conditions, including failure to conform to cGMP, could result in enforcement actions that interrupt the operation of any such facilities or the ability to distribute products manufactured, processed or tested by them. Discovery of problems with a product after approval may result in restrictions on a product, manufacturer, or holder of an approved BLA, including, among other things, recall or withdrawal of the product from the market.

The FDA also may require post-approval testing, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 testing, REMS and post-marketing surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved product or place conditions on an approval that could restrict the distribution or use of the product. Discovery of previously unknown problems with a product or the failure to comply with applicable FDA requirements can have negative consequences, including adverse publicity, judicial or administrative enforcement, warning letters from the FDA, mandated corrective advertising or communications with doctors, and civil or criminal penalties, among others. Newly discovered or developed safety or effectiveness data may require changes to a product’s approved labeling, including the addition of new warnings and contraindications, and also may require the implementation of other risk management measures. Also, new government requirements, including those resulting from new legislation, may be established, or the FDA’s policies may change, which could delay or prevent regulatory approval of our products under development.

Biosimilars and Reference Product Exclusivity

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. Biosimilarity, which requires that there be no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of safety, purity, and potency, can be shown through analytical studies, animal studies, and a clinical study or studies. Interchangeability requires that a product is biosimilar to the reference product and the product must demonstrate that it can be expected to produce the same clinical results as the reference product in any given patient and, for products that are administered multiple times to an individual, the biologic and the reference biologic may be alternated or switched after one has been previously administered without increasing safety risks or risks of diminished efficacy relative to exclusive use of the reference biologic without such alteration or switch. Upon licensure by the FDA, an interchangeable biosimilar may be substituted for the reference product without the intervention of the health care provider who prescribed the reference product.

The biosimilar applicant must demonstrate that the product is biosimilar based on data from (1) analytical studies showing that the biosimilar product is highly similar to the reference product; (2) animal studies (including toxicity); and (3) one or more clinical studies to demonstrate safety, purity and potency in one or more appropriate conditions of use for which the reference product is approved. In addition, the applicant must show that the biosimilar and reference products have the same mechanism of action for the conditions of use on the label, route of administration, dosage and strength, and the production facility must meet standards designed to assure product safety, purity and potency.

A reference biological product is granted 12 years of data exclusivity from the time of first licensure of the product, and the first approved interchangeable biologic product will be granted an exclusivity period of up to one year after it is first

22

commercially marketed. In addition, the FDA will not accept an application for a biosimilar or interchangeable product based on the reference biological product until four years after the date of first licensure of the reference product.

Coverage and Reimbursement

Patients in the United States and elsewhere generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse part or all of the costs associated with their prescription drugs and vaccines. Accordingly, a pharmaceutical company’s ability to commercialize its products successfully depends in part on the extent to which private health insurers, other third-party payors, and governmental authorities, including Medicare and Medicaid, establish appropriate coverage and reimbursement levels for its product candidates and related treatments. As a threshold for coverage and reimbursement, third-party payors generally require that products be approved for marketing by the FDA.

Coverage decisions may not favor new products when more established or lower cost therapeutic alternatives are available. The process for obtaining coverage for a product or service is separate from the process to obtain the associated reimbursement. Reimbursement levels can affect the adoption of products and services by physicians and patients. Additionally, products used in connection with medical procedures may not be reimbursed separately, but their cost may instead be bundled as part of the payment received by the provider for the procedure only. Separate reimbursement for a product or the treatment or procedure in which the product is used may not be available.

Coverage and reimbursement policies for drug products and vaccines can differ significantly from payor to payor as there is no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for drug products among third-party payors in the United States. There may be significant delays in obtaining coverage and reimbursement as the process of determining coverage and reimbursement is often time consuming and costly which may require the provision of scientific and clinical support for the use of the product to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage or adequate reimbursement will be obtained.

A significant trend in the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere is cost containment. Third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular products and services. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the effectiveness of and prices charged for medical products and services. Moreover, the U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governmental entities have shown significant interest in implementing cost containment programs to limit the growth of government paid healthcare costs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and coverage and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs.

Healthcare Reform

In both the United States and certain foreign jurisdictions there have been, and continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system that impact the ability to sell pharmaceutical products profitably. In the United States, the federal government enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively, the ACA, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers.

There have been amendments to and judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, on July 4, 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, or the OBBBA, was signed into law, which narrowed access to ACA marketplace exchange enrollment and declined to extend the ACA enhanced advanced premium tax credits that expired at the end of 2025, which, among other provisions in the law, are anticipated to reduce the number of Americans with health insurance. The OBBBA also is expected to reduce Medicaid spending and enrollment by implementing work requirements for some beneficiaries, capping state-directed payments, reducing federal funding, and limiting provider taxes used to fund the program. Congress is considering proposed legislation intended to further reduce healthcare costs with alternatives to replace the expired ACA subsidies. Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. These changes include aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which began in 2013 and will remain in effect until 2032 unless additional Congressional action is taken.

The current administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government agencies including at HHS, the FDA, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. For example, the current administration has announced agreements with several pharmaceutical companies that require the drug manufacturers to offer, through a direct to consumer platform, or TrumpRx, U.S. patients and Medicaid programs prescription drug Most-Favored Nation pricing equal to or lower than those paid in other developed nations, with additional mandates for direct-to-patient discounts and repatriation of foreign revenues. Other recent actions, for example, include (1) directing agencies to reduce agency workforce and cut programs; (2) directing HHS and other agencies to lower prescription drug costs through a variety of initiatives; (3) imposing tariffs on imported pharmaceutical products; and (4) as part of the Make America Healthy Again, or MAHA, Commission’s Strategy Report released in September 2025, working across government agencies to increase enforcement on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. Additionally, the current administration recently called on Congress to enact "The Great Healthcare

23

Plan," to codify and expand Most-Favored Nation pricing, lower government subsidies to private insurance companies, increase healthcare price transparency, expand pharmaceutical drugs available for over-the-counter purchase, and enact restrictions on pharmacy benefit manager, or PBM, payment methodologies, among other things. These actions and policies may significantly reduce U.S. drug prices, potentially impacting manufacturers’ global pricing strategies and profitability, while increasing their operational costs and compliance risks. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision greatly reduced judicial deference to regulatory agencies, which could increase successful legal challenges to federal regulations affecting our operations. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program.

At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological 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.

Healthcare Laws

Certain federal, state, local and foreign healthcare laws and regulations pertaining to fraud and abuse, transparency, patients' rights, and privacy are applicable to the business of a pharmaceutical company. The laws that may affect a pharmaceutical company’s ability to operate include:

•the federal healthcare program Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, people from soliciting, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, to induce or reward either the referral of an individual, or the purchasing, ordering, or leasing of an item, good, facility or service, for which payment may be made by a federal healthcare program such as Medicare or Medicaid;

•Federal civil and criminal false claims laws, including the civil False Claims Act, which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment from Medicare, Medicaid, or other third-party payors that are false or fraudulent;

•the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, which prohibits, among other things, executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or making false statements relating to healthcare matters;

•HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and their implementing regulations, which imposes certain requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information on certain individuals and entities;

•the Physician Payments Sunshine Act, created under the ACA, which requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with certain exceptions, to report annually to CMS, information related to payments or other transfers of value made to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists, and chiropractors) and other healthcare professionals (such as physicians assistants and nurse practitioners) and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members;

•the FDCA, which among other things, strictly regulates drug product marketing, prohibits manufacturers from marketing drug products for off-label use and regulates the distribution of drug samples;

•the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which, among other things, prohibits companies issuing stock in the U.S. from bribing foreign officials for government contracts and other business;

•state law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers, state and local laws requiring certain regulatory licenses to manufacture or distribute our products commercially and/or the registration of pharmaceutical sales and medical representatives, and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts; and

•additional state and local laws such as laws in California and Massachusetts, which mandate implementation of compliance programs, compliance with industry ethics codes, and spending limits, and other state and local laws, such

24

as laws in Vermont, Maine, and Minnesota which require reporting to state governments of gifts, compensation, and other remuneration to physicians.

A pharmaceutical company will need to spend substantial time and money to ensure that its business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations. Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors available, which require strict compliance in order to offer protection, it is possible that governmental authorities may conclude that its business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations, agency guidance or case law involving applicable healthcare laws. If a pharmaceutical company’s operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental regulations that apply to it, it may be subject to significant penalties, including administrative, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, imprisonment, integrity and/or other oversight obligations, contractual damages, reputational harm and the curtailment or restructuring of operations.

Other Regulations

We also are subject to various federal, state and local laws, regulations, and recommendations relating to safe working conditions, laboratory and manufacturing practices, the experimental use of animals, and the use and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances, including radioactive compounds and infectious disease agents, used in connection with our research. The extent of government regulation that might result from any future legislation or administrative action cannot be accurately predicted.

Significant Customers and Research and Development

During the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, we derived 100% of our revenue from ApolloBio.

Since our inception, virtually all of our activities have consisted of research and development efforts related to developing our electroporation technologies and immunotherapies. Research and development expense consists of expenses incurred in performing research and development activities including salaries and benefits, facilities and other overhead expenses, clinical trials, contract services and other outside expenses. Our research and development expense was $54.2 million in 2025 and $75.6 million in 2024.

Geographic Information

All of our revenue for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024 was earned in the United States. All of our long-lived assets are located in the United States.

Corporate Information

Our corporate headquarters are located at 660 W. Germantown Pike, Suite 110, Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania 19462, and our main telephone number is (267) 440-4200.

Available Information

Our Internet website address is www.inovio.com. In addition to the information contained in this Annual Report, information about us can be found on our website. Our website and information included in or linked to our website are not part of this Annual Report.

We make our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act, available free of charge on our website as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. The SEC maintains an Internet site (www.sec.gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC, including us.

Information regarding our corporate governance, including the charters of our audit committee, our nomination and corporate governance committee and our compensation committee, our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, our Corporate Governance Guidelines, and information for contacting our board of directors is available on our website.

Our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics includes our Code of Ethics applicable to our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, who also serves as our principal accounting officer. Any amendments to or waivers of the Code of Ethics will be promptly posted on our website or in a report on Form 8-K, as required by applicable law.

Employees and Human Capital Resources

As of March 11, 2026, we employed 112 people on a full-time basis. Of the total, 84 were in product research, which includes research and development, quality assurance, clinical, engineering and manufacturing, and 28 were in general and administrative functions, which includes corporate development, information technology, legal, commercial, investor relations, finance and corporate administration. Approximately one-half of our workforce is comprised of women and approximately one-

25

half is comprised of individuals with ethnically diverse backgrounds. In addition, four of the eight members of our board of directors are women. None of our employees are subject to collective bargaining agreements. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

We compete in the highly competitive biotechnology industry. Attracting, developing and retaining talented people in research, quality assurance, clinical, engineering, manufacturing and other positions is crucial to executing our strategy and our ability to compete effectively. Our ability to recruit and retain such talent depends on several factors, including compensation and benefits, talent development and career opportunities, and work environment. To that end, we invest in our employees to be an employer of choice.

Employee Engagement

As we work to make an impact on how healthcare is delivered, we believe it is critical that our employees are informed and engaged. We communicate frequently and transparently with our employees through a variety of communication methods, including video and written communications, town hall meetings and our company intranet, and acknowledge individual contributions to our company’s success through several rewards and recognition initiatives. We believe these engagement efforts keep employees informed about our strategy, culture and purpose and motivated to do their best work.

Health, Safety and Wellness

The physical health, financial well-being, life balance and mental health of our employees is vital to our success. We have a company-wide comprehensive wellness program inclusive of financial, physical, and mental well-being.

Our environmental, health and safety team stays abreast of local, regional and global concerns and trends and ensures safety procedures are in place to mitigate workplace injuries and safety risks. Employees are required to complete training in various safety procedures for the laboratories and manufacturing facilities and specialized safety training based on particular job duties. Designated Safety Officers and response teams oversee safety-related initiatives and a safety committee provides input on safety procedures, practices, and policies. Employees are required to wear personal protective equipment relevant for their particular job duties. Occupational injuries at our workplace have historically been very low and are always investigated to determine if any environmental or other changes need to be implemented.

26