NASDAQ: SNTI

Our Pipeline

Our lead product candidate, SENTI-202, is a potentially first-in-class Logic Gated off-the-shelf CAR-NK cell therapy for the treatment of blood cancers currently being studied in an open-label, multi-center Phase 1 clinical trial in the United States and Australia for the treatment of relapsed/refractory hematological malignancies, including Acute Myeloid Leukemia (“AML”). Our pipeline also includes additional preclinical programs: (i) a solid tumor cell therapy program, (ii) our partnered programs related to cell therapies for regenerative medicines with BlueRock Therapeutics, Inc. (“BlueRock Therapeutics”). Our most advanced program, SENTI-202, originates from our internal pipeline of programs.

Our Strategy

Our goal is to maintain and build upon our leadership position in the cell and gene therapy landscape utilizing our proprietary gene circuit technology and synthetic biology expertise. We are pursuing this goal by leveraging our unique approach to programming gene circuits, which we believe may be broadly applicable toward engineering optimal efficacy, precision and control into cell or gene-based medicines, rapidly advancing our pipeline of cell

6

Table of Contents

therapies for oncology indications and establishing strategic collaborations/partnerships to support our non-oncology programs and manufacturing.

We plan to develop and, if approved, commercialize cell therapy products for the treatment of cancer. We believe achieving this goal will play a critical role in addressing major challenges in oncology and providing potentially lifesaving treatments for people living with cancer.

Key elements of our strategy include:

•Advance internal pipeline of CAR-NK cell therapies for blood cancer indications through the clinical development of our lead product candidate, SENTI-202;

•Advance the development of additional solid tumor cell therapy programs utilizing the gene circuit technologies and strategies similar to those in our clinical stage program SENTI-202;

•Leverage partnering to support indications beyond oncology, including our ongoing partnership with BlueRock Therapeutics to develop cell therapies for regenerative medicines;

•Establish additional value-creating collaborations to access the full potential of our technology in additional modalities including T cells, tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (“TILs”), stem cells including induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (“iPSCs”) and Hematopoietic Stem Cells (“HSCs”), in vivo gene therapy such as adeno associated virus (“AAV”), and messenger ribonucleic acid (“mRNA”).

SENTI-202 for the Potential Treatment of Hematologic Malignancies including Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Overview

Our lead product candidate SENTI-202 is a potentially first-in-class Logic Gated off-the-shelf CAR-NK cell therapy designed to selectively target and eliminate CD33 and/or FLT3 expressing hematologic malignancies, including AML, while sparing healthy bone marrow cells, even if they express CD33 and/or FLT3 due to our unique NOT gate design. SENTI-202 is currently being studied in an open-label Phase 1 clinical trial in the United States and Australia for the treatment of relapsed/refractory hematologic malignancies, including AML. We reported clinical data for this trial in 2024 and 2025, which included twenty AML patients treated in our Phase 1 clinical trial protocol (the “Phase 1 Patients”). The initial clinical data showed that of the Phase 1 Patients, there was a 50% overall response rate during our Phase 1 clinical trial, 42% of the Phase 1 Patients achieved a CR/CRh (with 100% of the CRs and 83% of all responses being assessed as measurable residual disease (“MRD”) negative at the recommended phase 2 dose (“RP2D”), with a 7.6 months median duration of composite Complete Remission across all patients. All patients treated with SENTI-202 showed a favorable safety profile.

On June 18, 2025, we announced that the FDA has granted Orphan Drug Designation to SENTI-202 for the treatment of relapsed/refractory hematologic malignancies including acute myeloid leukemia. Also, on December 9, 2025, we announced that the FDA has granted SENTI-202 Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy (“RMAT”) designation. The FDA granted the RMAT designation based on data from the Company’s ongoing Phase 1 clinical trial of SENTI-202 in adult patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) CD33 and/or FLT3 expressing hematologic malignancies, including AML.

SENTI-202 has been designed to incorporate three chimeric proteins using a Logic Gated gene circuit and delivered through a single retrovirus.

The first chimeric protein that we have engineered SENTI-202 to express is a bivalent CAR as an OR GATE directed against the tumor-associated antigens (“TAAs”), CD33 and/or FLT3, where one or both are expressed in 95% of AML patients. CD33 is typically found on bulk AML blasts and FLT3 is typically found on leukemic stem cells (“LSCs”). LSCs are a rare sub-population of AML cells that possess stem cell like properties of self-renewal

7

Table of Contents

and drug resistance, contributing to relapse and poor prognosis after treatment. We believe that targeting FLT3 in addition to CD33 could result in deeper and more prolonged remissions.

In addition to attacking cancer cells, in an attempt to protect the healthy cells that express FLT3 during treatment, the second chimeric protein we have engineered SENTI-202 to include is an inhibitory CAR (“iCAR”), which we refer to as a NOT Gate, to protect the healthy cells from potential on-target/off-tumor toxicity. The iCAR is designed to recognize the healthy cell surface protein endomucin (“EMCN”). EMCN was chosen as the protective antigen using a multi-step unbiased bioinformatics pipeline designed to identify a cell surface antigen specifically expressed on healthy HSCs but absent on AML tumor cells including both blasts and LSCs. EMCN is expressed on healthy cells, specifically HSCs (and early progenitors) which we believe will confer protection from an activating CAR (“aCAR”) mediated cytotoxicity on EMCN-expressing cells, even if those cells express CD33 and/or FLT3, thus expected to impart selectivity to SENTI-202 anti-cancer cytotoxicity.

The final protein in the SENTI-202 Gene Circuit is a calibrated release interleukin-15 (“crIL15”), an engineered protein technology that is designed with a protease cleavage site to be able to express and release cytokines from the cell in a calibrated fashion via a protease ubiquitously expressed by the cell. We believe that crIL15 stimulates surrounding immune cells and promotes CAR-NK cell expansion, persistence, and tumor killing activity. The SENTI-202 gene circuit design was systematically optimized through evaluation of over 500 constructs by initially optimizing each component separately and then together.

The following figure illustrates the design of SENTI-202 Logic Gating gene circuits to kill AML LSCs and blasts, while sparing healthy HSCs via (CD33 OR FLT3) NOT EMCN logic.

Acute Myeloid Leukemia: an Unmet Medical Need

Almost 10% of new cancer cases in the United States each year are hematologic malignancies, including leukemia, lymphoma and myeloma. AML is a type of acute leukemia characterized by an accumulation of malignant immature white blood cells. It is the most common type of acute leukemia in adults, constituting 80% to 85% of

8

Table of Contents

cases, and is the second most common—as well as the deadliest—in children. Due to the absence of highly efficacious therapies, AML has poor prognosis with a low five-year survival rate at just 31.9%.

Patients with CD33 and/or FLT3 expressing malignancies, which includes myeloid malignancies such as AML, have a grim prognosis and a high unmet need. AML is typically a disease of the elderly with a median age of diagnosis being approximately 65 years. The treatment at diagnosis for the majority of patients who cannot tolerate the toxicities of intensive chemotherapy includes either hypomethylating agents or low-dose cytosine arabinoside (“Ara-C”, also known as cytarabine), as monotherapy or in combination with venetoclax, or best supportive care. In patients who can tolerate more intensive treatments, the goal of treatment is to induce a complete response (“CR”) with intensive chemotherapy and consolidate with allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (“HCT”). Treatment is combined with the respective targeted agents in patients who have CD33‑positive disease or a FLT3‑mutated disease (Mylotarg USPI; Rydapt USPI; Xospata USPI). Other therapies for AML include targeted agents for the minority of patients with either isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-1 or IDH-2 mutated disease. Despite these therapies being recently approved for patients with AML, the prognosis continues to be poor with the majority of patients refractory to or relapsing from front-line therapy and a median overall survival (OS) of five months at relapse.

Development of targeted AML treatments is difficult because the disease is highly heterogeneous. More than 200 types of chromosome translocations and mutations have been identified in AML patients. As such, therapies targeting a single TAA are often insufficient to kill all the cancer cell subsets in AML, leading to eventual disease relapse. To drive patients into deeper remissions and prevent relapses, therapies designed to target multiple AML antigens are needed. Additionally, recent studies suggest relapse is associated with the less targeted AML subpopulation of LSCs; however, while the development of therapies targeting AML LSCs is much needed, this strategy has been particularly challenging because LSC targets are often expressed on healthy cells, such as HSCs, leading to on-target, off-tumor treatment-induced toxicities.

CAR Cell Therapy for AML

The therapeutic administration of CAR cell therapies has considerably advanced the treatment of certain cancers, such as B-cell malignancies, but the successes of CAR cell therapies have not yet translated to successful treatment of AML, in part due to the absence of AML-specific target antigens. Due to their nonrestrictive expression, most AML antigens are also expressed on healthy HSCs or myeloid cells. Thus, on-target, off-tumor killing effects of the therapy may lead to the ablation of hematopoietic stem, progenitor or myeloid cells. This off-tumor killing of HSCs leads to serious clinical sequelae including sepsis and febrile neutropenia contributing to morbidity and mortality. Thus, the identification of antigens that enable more robust targeting of AML cells, including LSCs, along with new strategies to reduce off-target killing of HSCs, are critically needed to realize the promise of CAR cell therapies for AML treatment. These described challenges also extend to other potential AML therapeutic modalities, such as antibodies and bispecific T cell engagers.

SENTI-202 Clinical Data

We reported data from our Phase 1 clinical trial of SENTI-202 in 2024 and 2025. Initial data we reported included data related to the Phase 1 patients who were treated at various dose levels following lymphodepletion with fludarabine/cytarabine). Of the Phase 1 patients, there was a 50% overall response rate during our Phase 1 clinical trial, 42% of the Phase 1 patients achieved CR/CRh (with 100% of the CRs and 83% of all responses being assessed as measurable residual disease (“MRD”) negative at the recommended phase 2 dose (“RP2D”), with a 7.6 months median duration of composite Complete Remission across all patients. All patients treated with SENTI-202 showed a favorable safety profile.

Development Plan and Key Next Steps for SENTI-202

In December 2023, our IND application for evaluation of SENTI-202 in patients with hematologic malignancies was cleared by the FDA, and we began dosing patients in an open-label Phase 1 clinical trial in the United States and Australia in the second quarter of 2024.

9

Table of Contents

Our Phase 1 clinical trial aims to evaluate SENTI-202 in patients with relapsed/refractory CD33 and/or FLT3 positive hematologic malignancies including AML. Key features of the study design that are intended to increase the potential for deep, durable remissions for AML patients include:

•Disease-specific lymphodepletion (“LD”): We plan to administer three-to-five doses of SENTI-202 following a disease-specific LD regimen known as fludarabine (flu) and cytarabine (ara-C), or flu/ara-C. The use of flu/ara-C is an NCCN Category 2a chemotherapy regimen for patients with relapse-refractory AML. In large Phase 3 randomized trials, where flu/ara-C with or without idarubicin, another chemotherapeutic agent approved for AML, has been administered as control arm chemotherapy, the regimen was well tolerated with mild non-hematologic toxicities, most commonly mucositis, and true CR rates of ~10% (cumulative CR rates including CR with incomplete bone marrow recovery of ~ 20%-30%) have been reported. Flu/ara-C LD conditioning followed by multiple doses of NK cell therapies have been well-tolerated, with CR rates in the range of 50-60%. Further, preclinical data reveals that pre-treatment with ara-C increases CD33 and FLT3 expression of a CD33/FLT3-negative AML cell line (e.g., KG-1a), leading to enhanced SENTI-202-mediated cytotoxicity in vitro, which could contribute to potential clinical synergistic anti-AML activity along with the additive debulking of AML blasts prior to administering SENTI-202 to potentially achieve deep responses.

72h Ara-C Treatment Significantly Upregulated CD33 and FLT3 Expression in KG-1a Cells

**p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001

Ara-C Pre-Treated KG-1a Cells Sensitized to SENTI-202-Mediated Cytotoxicity

*** p < 0.001, **** p < 0.0001

10

Table of Contents

•Multi-dose and multi-cycle administration: The SENTI-202 Phase 1 study is evaluating two dose levels (1 billion and 1.5 billion CAR+ NK cells per dose) administered after LD in either a three dose regimen (Schedule 1: Days 0, 7, 14) or a five dose regimen (Schedule 2: Days 0, 3, 7, 10, 14), followed by bone marrow assessment at the end of the fourth week (and these four weeks make up one cycle). At the end of a cycle, we will evaluate both efficacy and safety. Patients may be eligible to receive additional such cycles based on both tumor response and tolerability of treatment. The study will evaluate efficacy, pharmacodynamics and cytometry by Time-Of-Flight markers in addition to standard Phase 1 objectives of safety, pharmacokinetics and dose finding.

•Adaptive design and seamless transition to pivotal: The Phase 1 study design also includes the ability to evaluate an ultra-low dose IL2 cohort, which could further augment SENTI-202 activity and persistence. The study is designed to seamlessly expand and rapidly transition to a pivotal study assuming the data supports the expansion.

Our CAR-NK Cell Source

Our preferred cell source for SENTI-202, our off-the-shelf CAR-NK cell therapy program, is peripheral blood NK cells because it allows us to immediately leverage an established supply chain, a mature GMP process, and extensive clinical experience to develop our next generation CAR-NK cell therapies as described below.

Natural killer cells are an integral part of the innate immune system and comprise 5 to 20% of circulating lymphocytes. They play a key immune surveillance role by recognizing and killing malignantly or virally transformed cells by directed release of lytic granules or by inducing death receptor-mediated apoptosis. Unlike T cells, NK cells possess intrinsic or endogenous anti-cancer activity without engineering or specific antigen priming. NK cells sample potential target cells on a cell-by-cell basis to recognize transformed cells based on the balance of activating and inhibitory signals received by the NK cell from the individual target cell. Other key differences of NK

11

Table of Contents

cells compared to T cells, which we believe make NK cells attractive candidates as cellular backbones for novel anti-cancer therapies, include:

•Lack of explosive proliferation and outpouring of cytokines when exposed to target cells, have shown to result in an improved safety profile and to allow repeat dosing due to a general lack of chimeric antigen receptor (“CAR”) T cell-like adverse events such as cytokine release syndrome (“CRS”) or immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (“ICANS”),

•Lack of a T cell receptor (“TCR”) in NK cells have shown to result in inability to initiate graft-versus-host disease (GvHD), enabling NK cells to be used in allogeneic therapies without need for additional genetic manipulation, and

•Allogeneic NK cells have shown to have a finite lifespan of approximately 2-3 weeks in patients when administered after LD due to clearance from host immune cell recovery, leading to decreased potential for long term side effects such as second primary malignancies.

Over 900 patients have safely received NK cell-based therapies since 2005. This includes over 800 patients across more than 30 single institution academic studies who received non-engineered allogeneic NK cell therapy, the majority from healthy adult donors, and 150+ patients who have received CAR NK cells via single and multi-center early phase trials.

NK and CAR NK cell products are generally well tolerated and show clinical efficacy as a stand-alone treatment, with 20-60% CR rate on average across a wide variety of oncological conditions, including in patients with AML. This clinical activity was enhanced under several different conditions: (1) when the NK cells had been engineered with CARs, (2) cultured with cytokines, (3) after ‘activation’ by co-culturing with K562 cell lines (themselves modified to express cytokines), (4) when NK cell doses increased, and (5) for AML patients when fludarabine/ara-C (flu/ara-C) LD was used as lymphodepleting conditioning. Key limitations of the clinical experience with NK cells in AML patients include limited persistence of the infused cells, short durability of the observed responses, and immune evasion of LSCs. Other challenges include manufacturing, with culturing and cryopreserving NK cells precluding higher or multiple doses.

We also believe that our proprietary donor selection process could confer us unique advantages. The process begins with healthy donors screened by our vendor(s) via their protocol(s) for various viruses and ability to undergo leukapheresis. Senti then performs a manufacturing suitability assessment of a research use only leukopak from the healthy donors selected by the vendor(s). The results are then utilized to specify which healthy donors we would like to request for clinical grade leukopaks to be used in our GMP manufacturing process.

Gene Circuits Could Enhance Precision, Control, and Activity of Cell & Gene Therapies

Our Gene Circuit Solutions

In our pursuit to create a new generation of smarter medicines, we have built a toolbox of proprietary gene circuit platform technologies that we believe may enhance the risk benefit paradigm of cell and gene therapy products. Four core categories of gene circuits comprise our gene circuit platform: Multi-Arming, Logic Gating, Regulator Dials and Smart Sensors. Each of our gene circuit platform technologies is designed to confer greater clinical and therapeutic activity, precision and control to cell and gene therapies.

We believe that our core gene circuit platform technologies are the foundation of smarter medicines that are designed to precisely kill diseased cells, spare healthy cells, increase specificity to target cells and control the expression of drugs even after administration. These technologies can be categorized as follows:

12

Table of Contents

Logic Gating: Logic Gating gene circuits are designed to enable cell and gene therapies to control their therapeutic activity in response to the presence or absence of multiple disease biomarkers. Below are examples of Logic Gates applied to cancer, although Logic Gating may also be applied to various other disease indications.

NOT GATE: NOT GATE gene circuits are designed to widen the therapeutic window by enabling effective killing of cancer cells while preserving healthy cells. The NOT GATE functions by recognizing Protective Antigens (PAs), or antigens that are selectively expressed on healthy cells and not on cancer cells, thus limiting on-target, off-tumor killing. By protecting healthy cells, the NOT GATE has the potential to enable more effective on-target, on-tumor killing of tumor cells that express TAAs. Generally, existing cancer drugs target only a single antigen, which means they can only be effectively and safely used in situations where that antigen is uniquely expressed on tumors and not in healthy cells, or where the on- target, off-tumor effects are tolerable.

OR GATE: OR GATE gene circuits are designed to address tumor heterogeneity and limit antigen escape. The OR GATE functions by killing tumor cells that express any one of multiple antigens. Generally, current medicines are unable to address more than one target at a time and are thus susceptible to tumor evasion.

Multi-Arming: Multi-Arming gene circuits are designed to incorporate multiple payloads into a single cell or gene therapy product. These gene circuits are intended to activate various biological pathways in complementary ways to prevent diseases from evading single-target treatments, and thereby potentially improve treatment efficacy. Existing combination therapies that target complex diseases require the application of multiple individual drugs, which is difficult due to research, clinical development, regulatory and pharmacology barriers.

Regulator Dial: Regulator Dial gene circuits are designed to enable the precise tuning of therapeutic activity from a cell or gene therapy product. For example, this can be implemented by regulating therapeutic payload expression in response to varying concentrations of FDA-approved drugs. Regulator Dials are expected to enable the exogenous regulation of next-generation cell and gene therapies even after they have been delivered in vivo. Existing cell and gene therapies cannot be modulated once they have been delivered into patients.

Smart Sensor: A Smart Sensor is a gene circuit, or combination of gene circuits, designed to precisely detect distinct cell types or disease environments, and thus distinguish between the “disease state” and “healthy state.” For example, Smart Sensors can be engineered to detect whether certain conditions, or disease biomarkers, are present before responding with a specific therapeutic response. Conventional medicines are generally unable to dynamically change their behavior in response to cell or disease specific conditions.

We Believe Our Gene Circuits May Have Broad Applicability in Multiple Treatment Modalities and Disease Areas

13

Table of Contents

We believe that our gene circuit platform may have broad applicability across treatment modalities and disease areas, and is also potentially applicable toward engineering optimal efficacy, precision and control into cell or gene-based medicines.

Treatment Modalities: Our gene circuit platform technologies are designed to be applied in a modality-agnostic manner, with applicability to NK cells, T cells, TILs, stem cells including iPSCs and HSCs, in vivo gene therapy such as AAV, and mRNA. We have conducted research in multiple cell types and vector types, and the initial focus of our internal pipeline utilizes off-the-shelf CAR-NK cells outfitted with gene circuit technologies in oncology indications.

Disease Areas: Our gene circuits can be customized to address many aspects of disease biology. We have demonstrated and published applications of gene circuits across many different in vivo disease models. Thus, we believe that our gene circuit platform technologies can be used against a broad range of diseases that span therapeutic areas such as oncology, immunology, genetic diseases, neurology, cardiology, metabolic diseases, ophthalmology and regenerative medicine.

The following figure presents our perspective on how our gene circuit technologies can be utilized across modalities and corresponding therapeutic areas:

Portfolio Expansion Opportunities

14

Table of Contents

We have developed a proprietary, versatile, and robust internal research engine to enable development and adaptation of our gene circuits to address broad set of new disease and therapeutic modality challenges:

We believe that our REVEALTM platform enables us to effectively explore innumerable application opportunities for gene circuits and efficiently optimize best-in-class solutions. Opportunities include, but are not limited to: (i) the application of the NOT GATE gene circuit toward new solid and/or liquid tumor CAR-NK or CAR-T cell therapies, (ii) the application of the Multi-Arming gene circuit to enhance and power new solid and/or liquid tumor CAR or TCR based cell therapies (iii) the development of promoters that are multi-fold stronger than current commonly used promoter benchmarks for various cell types, and (iv) cell-type and cell-state specific promoters for gene and cell therapies. We believe our platform can enable the development of multiple product candidates that harness the full breadth of our gene circuit platform beyond Logic Gating and Multi-Arming of CAR or TCR based cell therapies within oncology. Our additional discovery efforts are focused on a diverse set of cell and gene therapy applications outside of oncology. We previously entered into collaborations with Spark Therapeutics (subsidiary of Roche Holding AG) for the design of Smart Sensors for disease- and tissue-specific gene therapy. That collaboration has terminated. We also previously entered into a collaboration with BlueRock Therapeutics (subsidiary of Bayer AG) for the use of Smart Sensors and Regulator Dials for regenerative medicines.

Tumor-Associated Antigen and Protective Antigen Paired Discovery Platform

We have developed a proprietary TAA and PA paired discovery platform to select and validate NOT GATE antigen candidates, as shown in the figure below. We have built a generalizable bioinformatics pipeline that uses RNA transcriptomics data to discover and prioritize tumor and healthy tissue PAs. We identify TAAs that are highly expressed in cancer cells with minimal healthy tissue expression (antigen A in figure below). We then identify healthy tissue selective PAs (antigen E in figure below) that can protect those healthy tissues that express the TAAs (tissues 2 and 5 below). This process evaluates differences in PA gene expression in healthy versus tumor tissue. Leads are selected based on the co-expression of TAAs and PAs in healthy tissues, the localization of the PAs to the cell surface, PA topology (presence of extracellular domain) and PA-specific antibody availability. Prioritized TAA and PA pairs are further validated in primary cancer and primary healthy tissue samples. We leveraged this platform to identify PA targets for the SENTI-202 and other internal programs, thus demonstrating our ability to target both liquid and solid tumors. This approach allows us to potentially expand our NOT GATE approach to additional cancer indications in which existing single-target approaches, such as monoclonal antibodies, antibody-drug conjugates and single-target CAR cells, are inadequate due to a lack of specificity for cancer cells.

15

Table of Contents

Manufacturing

In August 2023, we announced the sale of our manufacturing assets and a sublease of our 92,000 square foot manufacturing facility to Valere Bio, Inc. (“Valere Bio” or “Valere”) a wholly-owned subsidiary of Celadon Partners LLC (“Celadon Partners” or “Celadon”), a private equity group, who created a new independent contract manufacturing organization for cell and gene therapy, and synthetic biology biofoundry called GeneFab, LLC (“GeneFab”).

In connection with the transaction, we were entitled to receive total consideration of $37.8 million, of which $18.9 million was due at closing and was netted against a prepayment owed by us for manufacturing and research activities to GeneFab. We also received $8 million in manufacturing services credit and subleased our 92,000 square foot good manufacturing practice (“cGMP”) facility in Alameda, CA to GeneFab. That facility lease has subsequently been amended to include approximately half of the original space for GeneFab to perform its manufacturing. Refer to Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data —Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 15 — Subsequent Events” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for details on the lease and sublease amendments. The remaining consideration of $18.9 million was waived by us and GeneFab in connection with an investment by Celadon Partners, the sole investor in GeneFab, into our 2024 PIPE transaction described herein. Refer to Note 6. Stockholders’ Equity in Part II - Item 8, Financial and Supplementary Data - Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, for additional details regarding the PIPE transaction.

The transaction has allowed us to focus on advancing our oncology programs into the clinic. GeneFab will conduct the clinical manufacturing of our CAR-NK pipeline in the United States, including SENTI-202, through a service contract.

Our Material Agreements

Exclusive/Co-Exclusive Patent License Agreement with the National Cancer Institute for FLT3 Technology

In July 2020, we entered into an Exclusive/Co-Exclusive Patent License Agreement, as amended, (“NCI FLT3 Agreement”) with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, as represented by the National Cancer Institute, or the NCI, under which the NCI granted us a worldwide, royalty-bearing, sublicensable license under the

16

Table of Contents

NCI’s patent rights related to FLT3-targeting chimeric antigen receptor, or CAR, technology (i) exclusively for the development of a universal or split CAR-based immunotherapy using T-cells or NK cells transduced with lentiviral vectors or other retroviral vectors, depending on the cell type, for the prophylaxis or treatment of cancers expressing FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3, or FLT3, where the CAR construct binds to specific domains and (ii) co-exclusively, with a third party, for the development of a multi-specific FLT3 CAR-based immunotherapy or FLT3-specific regulated or switch or Logic Gated CAR-based immunotherapy using T-cells or NK cells transduced with lentiviral vectors or other retroviral vectors, depending on the cell type, for the prophylaxis or treatment of FLT3-expressing cancers, where the CAR construct contains specific domains, in each case of (i) and (ii), to make and have made, use and have used, sell and have sold, offer to sell and import products covered by the licensed patent rights and to practice and have practiced processes covered by the licensed patent rights. In addition to the co-exclusive rights held by a third party, the foregoing license is subject to (a) certain rights of the United States government, including an irrevocable, non-exclusive, non-transferable, royalty-free license for the government to practice all licensed patent rights throughout the world and (b) the NCI’s reserved rights to grant a non-exclusive license to practice the licensed patent rights for purposes of internal research (and not for purposes of commercial manufacture or distribution) at an academic or corporate facility.

Pursuant to the NCI FLT3 Agreement, we must use commercially reasonable efforts to adhere to a commercial development plan, including by achieving certain specified development and regulatory milestones by certain dates, provided that we may request to extend the timelines of such milestones, which the NCI shall not unreasonably deny if the request is supported by a reasonable showing of our diligent performance under the commercial development plan. Upon the first commercial sale of a licensed product or process, we must also use commercially reasonable efforts to make the licensed product or process reasonably accessible to the United States public.

In consideration for the rights granted to us under the NCI FLT3 Agreement, we paid the NCI a one-time, non- refundable license issue fee of $75,000, and are required to pay the NCI a minimum flat annual royalty fee of a dollar amount in the low five digits. We are also obligated to pay the NCI certain development, regulatory and commercial milestone payments of up to an aggregate of $4.6 million for the first licensed product to achieve the applicable event. We will also be required to pay the NCI a tiered royalty in the low-single digit percentages on net sales of each licensed product by us and our sublicensees, subject to specified reductions and offsets, including against the minimum annual royalty payments. Further, the NCI is entitled to receive a portion of the amounts – excluding royalties and certain payments – we receive as a result of the grant of a sublicense under the rights granted under the NCI FLT3 Agreement at a percentage ranging from the low-single digits to low-double digits, depending on the stage of development at which the sublicense is granted. Additionally, we are obligated to pay for a portion of patent expenses that NCI incurred with respect to the licensed patent rights.

The NCI FLT3 Agreement will expire, on a licensed product-by-licensed product and country-by-country basis, on the expiration of all licensed patent rights that claim the applicable licensed product in the applicable country. Licensed patent rights are currently expected to expire in 2037, absent patent term extension or adjustment. We may terminate the NCI FLT3 Agreement in its entirety or with respect to a country for any reason by providing 60 days’ prior written notice to the NCI. The NCI may terminate the NCI FLT3 Agreement if (i) we breach any material obligations under the NCI FLT3 Agreement and fail to cure such breach within 90 days after receiving written notice thereof, or (ii) if the NCI reasonably determines that (a) we are not using commercially reasonable efforts to execute the commercial development plan, including the milestones specified therein, (b) we have willfully made a false statement or omitted a material fact in our license application or any report to the NCI, (c) we have committed a material breach of a covenant or agreement to the NCI, (d) we are not keeping the licensed products or licensed services reasonably available to the public after commercial use commences, or (e) we cannot reasonably justify a failure to comply with the domestic production requirement, in each case of (a) through (e), where we fail to alleviate the NCI’s concerns in 90 days. Additionally, the NCI reserves the right to terminate or modify the NCI FLT3 Agreement if the NCI determines that such action is necessary to meet the requirements for public use specified by federal regulations issued after the date of the license and these requirements are not reasonably satisfied by us.

Exclusive Patent License Agreement with the National Cancer Institute for CD33 Technology

17

Table of Contents

In May 2021, we entered into an Exclusive Patent License Agreement (“NCI CD33 Agreement), with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, as represented by the NCI, under which the NCI granted us an exclusive, royalty-bearing, sublicensable, worldwide license under the NCI’s patent rights related to CD33 targeting CAR technology to make and have made, use and have used, sell and have sold, offer to sell and import products covered by the licensed patent rights and to practice and have practiced processes covered by the licensed patent rights, for the development of a CD33-specific logic-gated CAR-based immunotherapy using autologous human T cells transduced with lentiviral vectors or off-the-shelf human NK cells transduced with retroviral vectors for the prophylaxis or treatment of CD33-expressing cancers. The foregoing license is subject to (i) certain rights of the United States government, including an irrevocable, non-exclusive, nontransferable, royalty-free license for the government to practice all licensed patent rights throughout the world and (ii) the NCI’s reserved rights to grant a non-exclusive license to practice the licensed patent rights for purposes of internal research (and not for purposes of commercial manufacture or distribution) at an academic or corporate facility.

Pursuant to the NCI CD33 Agreement, we must use commercially reasonable efforts to adhere to a commercial development plan, including by achieving certain specified development and regulatory milestones by certain dates, provided that we may request to extend the timelines of such milestones, which the NCI shall not unreasonably deny if the request is supported by a reasonable showing of our diligent performance under the commercial development plan. Upon the first commercial sale of a licensed product or process, we must also use commercially reasonable efforts to make the licensed product or process reasonably accessible to the United States public.

In consideration for the rights granted to us under the NCI CD33 Agreement, we paid the NCI a one-time, non- refundable license issue fee of $150,000, and are required to pay the NCI a minimum flat annual royalty fee of a dollar amount in the low five digits. We are obligated to pay the NCI certain development, regulatory and commercial milestone payments of an aggregate of $3.5 million for the first licensed product to achieve the applicable events. We will also be required to pay the NCI a flat royalty in the low single-digit percentages on net sales of each licensed product by us and our sublicensees, subject to specified reductions and offsets, including against the minimum annual royalty payments. Further, the NCI is entitled to receive a portion of the amounts—excluding royalties and certain payments—we receive as a result of the grant of a sublicense under the rights granted under the NCI CD33 Agreement at a percentage ranging from the low-single digits to low-double digits, depending on the stage of development at which the sublicense is granted. Additionally, we are obligated to pay for patent expenses that NCI incurred with respect to the licensed patent rights.

The NCI CD33 Agreement will expire, on a licensed product-by-licensed product and country-by-country basis, on the expiration of all licensed patent rights that claim the applicable licensed product in the applicable country. Licensed patent rights are currently expected to expire in 2039, absent any patent term extension or adjustment. We may terminate the NCI CD33 Agreement in its entirety or with respect to a country for any reason by providing 60 days’ prior written notice to the NCI. The NCI may terminate the NCI CD33 Agreement if (i) we breach any material obligations under the NCI CD33 Agreement and fail to cure such breach within 90 days after receiving written notice thereof, or (ii) if the NCI reasonably determines that (a) we are not executing the commercial development plan, including the milestones specified therein, (b) we have willfully made a false statement or omitted a material fact in our license application or any report to the NCI, (c) we have committed a material breach of a covenant or agreement to the NCI, (d) we are not keeping the licensed products or licensed services reasonably available to the public after commercial use commences, (e) we cannot reasonably satisfy unmet health and safety needs, (f) we cannot reasonably justify a failure to comply with the domestic production requirement or (g) we have been found by a court to have violated antitrust laws in connection with our performance under the NCI CD33 Agreement, in each case of (a) through (f), where we fail to alleviate the NCI’s concerns in 90 days. Additionally, the NCI reserves the right to terminate or modify the NCI CD33 Agreement if the NCI determines that such action is necessary to meet the requirements for public use specified by federal regulations issued after the date of the license and these requirements are not reasonably satisfied by us.

Research Collaboration and License Agreement with Spark Therapeutics, Inc.

In April 2021, we entered into a Research Collaboration and License Agreement (“Spark Agreement”), with Spark Therapeutics. Under the Spark Agreement, we engaged in a collaborative research program with Spark

18

Table of Contents

Therapeutics to design, build and test synthetic promoters that are intended to have each one of five sets of desired characteristics, or promoter profiles. Spark Therapeutics is obligated to reimburse us for our costs and expenses incurred in connection with the conduct of the research program. Upon completion of work under the research program for a particular promoter profile, Spark Therapeutics may select and designate, subject to a specified maximum, a certain number of synthetic promoters that are designed, built and tested or identified by us under the research program with respect to such promoter profiles as optioned promoters. On a promoter profile-by-promoter-profile basis, for each optioned promoters, Spark Therapeutics will have the right to obtain an exclusive, royalty-bearing, sublicensable, worldwide license under our intellectual property rights to develop, manufacture, commercialize and otherwise exploit, for the cure, treatment, palliation, prevention or diagnosis of specified indications, or a licensed field, in vivo gene therapy products incorporating such applicable optioned promoter with respect to such promoter profile and is directed towards specific cell types in the central nervous system, eye, or liver. Spark Therapeutics may exercise its option for any optioned promoter prior to the expiration of the applicable evaluation period. Spark Therapeutics opted to not exercise its option following completion of the research under this collaboration.

Pursuant to the Spark Agreement, we received an upfront payment from Spark Therapeutics of $3 million. If Spark Therapeutics exercises an option for a particular promoter profile, it will be required to pay us an option exercise fee in the low to mid-single digit millions. For each licensed promoter-containing in vivo gene therapy product, or licensed product, developed and commercialized by Spark Therapeutics or its affiliates or sublicensees, we are eligible to receive development, regulatory and commercialization milestone payments from Spark Therapeutics up to an aggregate dollar amount in the tens of millions, and sales milestone payments from Spark Therapeutics up to an aggregate dollar amount in the low hundred millions. In total, we are potentially eligible to receive upfront, opt-in and milestone payments exceeding $645 million if Spark Therapeutics exercises its options for all five promoter profiles and Spark Therapeutics, its affiliates and its sublicensees successfully develop and commercialize five licensed products; we will be eligible to receive additional milestone payments if additional licensed products are developed and commercialized by Spark Therapeutics, its affiliates and its sublicensees. Further, Spark Therapeutics will be obligated to pay us royalties in the low-single digits percentage on net sales of each licensed product sold by Spark Therapeutics, its affiliates and its sublicensees, subject to specified reductions and offsets. Spark Therapeutics’ obligation to pay royalties to us will expire for each licensed product when certain licensed patents and regulatory exclusivities have expired in the country of sale and a minimum number of years has elapsed since the first commercial sale of such licensed product in such country. The Spark Agreement will expire at the end of the last evaluation period if Spark Therapeutics does not exercise any of its options. If Spark Therapeutics exercises at least one option, then the Spark Agreement will expire, on a licensed product-by- licensed product and country-by-country basis, upon the expiration of Spark Therapeutics’ royalty obligation for such licensed product in such country. Spark Therapeutics may terminate the Spark Agreement in its entirety, or on a promoter profile-by-promoter profile or licensed promoter-by-licensed promoter basis, following a specified notice period. Either party may terminate the Spark Agreement in its entirety or in part if the other party fails to cure its material breach of the Spark Agreement within a specified cure period, or immediately if the other party becomes bankrupt or insolvent. We may terminate the Spark Agreement if Spark Therapeutics or any of its affiliates commences any action challenging the validity or enforceability of the licensed patents, other than in certain specified circumstances, or if Spark Therapeutics’ sublicensee challenges our licensed patents, under certain specified circumstances.

Collaboration and Option Agreement with BlueRock Therapeutics LP

In May 2021, we entered into a Collaboration and Option Agreement (“BlueRock Agreement”), with BlueRock Therapeutics LP (“BlueRock”). BlueRock is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bayer Healthcare LLC. Bayer Healthcare LLC’s parent company is Bayer AG, which served as the lead investor in our Series B financing through its Leaps by Bayer unit. We amended the BlueRock Agreement effective September 4, 2025, to, among other things, extend BlueRock’s research term in order to further facilitate its research thereunder. Under the BlueRock Agreement, we have engaged in three collaboration programs with BlueRock to research and develop gene circuits that have specified functions. We are responsible for up to $10 million in costs and expenses incurred in connection with our conduct of research activities under an agreed-upon research plan. If the parties mutually agree to add new research activities to the research plan, then BlueRock will be obligated to reimburse us for the costs and expenses that we incur in connection with the agreed-upon additional research activities that, together with costs and expenses

19

Table of Contents

incurred under the initial research plan, exceed $10 million. We have not yet received any payment from BlueRock under the BlueRock Agreement and we do not have any obligations to make any payments to BlueRock under the BlueRock Agreement. We are obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to conduct the research activities assigned to us under the research plan. If we materially breach that obligation and do not cure it within a specified period, BlueRock will have the right to receive a transfer of technology and perform the remainder of the research plan at its own expense.

Upon completion of work under a research plan for a collaboration program, the joint steering committee established by the parties will identify, subject to a specified maximum, a number of gene circuits per collaboration program, or option gene circuits, that have been successfully developed under such collaboration program. We have granted to BlueRock an option, on a collaboration program-by-collaboration program basis, to obtain an exclusive or non-exclusive license under our intellectual property rights to develop, manufacture and commercialize, for the prevention, treatment or palliation of specified indications, or a licensed field, cell therapy products that contain cells of specified types that incorporate an option gene circuit from such collaboration program or a closely related derivative gene circuit. For each collaboration program, BlueRock may conduct evaluation activities on the option gene circuits from such collaboration program to determine whether to exercise its option, and BlueRock may exercise its option to such option gene circuits together with certain closely related derivative gene circuits, or licensed gene circuits, prior to the expiration of a certain time period (the “option exercise period”), which includes a minimum amount of time after the expiration of the three-year research term, delivery of a data package to BlueRock, and completion of a transfer of technology to enable BlueRock’s evaluation activities, whichever happens last. If BlueRock exercises its option for a collaboration program, the parties shall negotiate the financial terms, which will be within certain pre-agreed parameters and may be determined by baseball arbitration if the parties do not reach agreement within the specified negotiation period, and enter into an otherwise agreed-upon written license agreement, or a commercial license. If the parties enter into a commercial license, BlueRock will be responsible, at its sole expense, for the development, manufacture and commercialization, in the applicable licensed field, of cell therapy products containing cells of an applicable type that incorporate an applicable licensed gene circuit, and we will be eligible to receive from BlueRock development, regulatory and commercialization milestone payments, in amounts to be agreed-upon before entry into the commercial license, and royalties, subject to negotiation, equal to low single digit percentages of net sales of applicable cell therapy products sold by BlueRock, its affiliates and its sublicensees, subject to specified reductions and offsets. If BlueRock does not exercise its option for a collaboration program prior to the expiration of the applicable option exercise period, then we will retain all rights to the gene circuits developed under such collaboration program without any further obligations to BlueRock.

For each collaboration program, we are obligated to work exclusively with BlueRock on the development, manufacture and commercialization, in the applicable licensed field, of cell therapy products that contain cells of specified types that incorporate the specific type of gene circuit for such collaboration programs. The end date for this exclusivity obligation for each collaboration program will depend upon whether BlueRock exercises its option for such collaboration program and, if it does, whether the parties enter into a commercial license for such collaboration program. If BlueRock does not exercise its option, then it will end on the expiration of the applicable option exercise period. If BlueRock exercises its option but the parties do not enter into a commercial license, then it will end after a specified time following expiration of the applicable negotiation or baseball arbitration period for the commercial license. If BlueRock exercises its option and the parties enter into a commercial license, then it will end a certain amount of time after the later of completion of research activities or execution of the commercial license.

In addition to the option described above, we granted a right of first negotiation to BlueRock, on a collaboration program-by-collaboration program basis, to obtain a license under our intellectual property rights to research, develop, manufacture and commercialize, for the prevention, treatment or palliation of a specified disease area (the “negotiation field”), cell therapy products containing cells of a specified type (“negotiation cells”), that incorporate an applicable efficacy gene circuit developed under such collaboration program. This right of first negotiation does not overlap with the option described above because it pertains to different combinations of fields, cell types and gene circuits. Starting from the effective date of the BlueRock Agreement and, on a collaboration program-by-collaboration program basis, continuing for 12 months or, if later, until the completion of a certain portion of the research plan for such collaboration program, we are obligated to work exclusively with BlueRock on the

20

Table of Contents

development, manufacture and commercialization, in the negotiation field, of cell therapy products containing negotiation cells that incorporate the specific type of gene circuit for such collaboration program.

The BlueRock Agreement will expire, on a collaboration program-by-collaboration program basis, upon the earliest of the expiration of the option exercise period for such collaboration program, the effective date of the commercial license, the expiration of the applicable negotiation or baseball arbitration period for the commercial license, or the date the parties mutually agree to cease negotiations for the commercial license. Such expiration shall occur no later than January 2026 unless the parties mutually agree to extend the research term. BlueRock may terminate the BlueRock Agreement in its entirety, or on a collaboration program-by-collaboration program basis, following a specified notice period. Either party may terminate the BlueRock Agreement if the other party fails to cure its material breach of the BlueRock Agreement within a specified cure period, or immediately if the other party becomes bankrupt or insolvent. We may terminate the BlueRock Agreement if BlueRock or any of its affiliates commences any action challenging the validity or enforceability of our patents, other than in certain specified circumstances, or if BlueRock’s sublicensee challenges our patents under certain specified circumstances.

National Cancer Institute (NCI) Contract to Support Development of SENTI-202 in Acute Myeloid Leukemia

In September 2021, we were awarded funding from the National Cancer Institute in the form of a Small Business Innovation Research (“SBIR”) contract to support further development of SENTI-202 for AML towards clinical development. The Direct to Phase II SBIR contract provided funding over two years from the NCI of the National Institutes of Health (“NIH”) and is titled: “Logic-Gated Chimeric Antigen Receptor- Natural Killer Cell Therapy for Acute Myeloid Leukemia.” The period of funding and performance under this SBIR contract ended on July 31, 2023 and we received notice from the NIH that this SBIR contract has been administratively closed on February 26, 2024. As a result of the award of this contract, the SENTI-202 program was funded in part with Federal funds from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, under Contract No. 75N91021C00026.

Exclusive Patent License Agreement with the National Cancer Institute for GPC3 Technology

In February 2021, we entered into an Exclusive Patent License Agreement (“NCI GPC3 Agreement”), with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, as represented by the NCI, under which the NCI granted us an exclusive, royalty-bearing, sublicensable, worldwide license under the NCI’s patent rights related to glypican-3, or GPC3, targeting CAR technology to make and have made, use and have used, sell and have sold, offer to sell and import products covered by the licensed patent rights and to practice and have practiced processes covered by the licensed patent rights, for the development, production and commercialization of a monospecific CAR-based immunotherapy for the prophylaxis and treatment of GPC3 expressing human cancers using unmodified, off-the-shelf natural killer cells transduced with a viral vector that expresses a CAR, and a gene circuit regulating the expression of one or more armoring payloads, specifically excluding the use of autologous T cells or T cells that have been genetically modified to become off-the-shelf. The foregoing license is subject to (i) certain rights of the United States government, including an irrevocable, non-exclusive, nontransferable, royalty-free license for the government to practice all licensed patent rights throughout the world and (ii) the NCI’s reserved rights to grant a non-exclusive license to practice the licensed patent rights for purposes of internal research (and not for purposes of commercial manufacture or distribution) at an academic or corporate facility.

The NCI GPC3 Agreement will expire, on a licensed product-by-licensed product and country-by-country basis, on the expiration of all licensed patent rights that claim the applicable licensed product in the applicable country. Licensed patent rights are currently expected to expire in 2033, absent any patent term extension or adjustment. We may terminate the NCI GPC3 Agreement in its entirety or with respect to a country for any reason by providing 60 days’ prior written notice to the NCI. The NCI may terminate the NCI GPC3 Agreement if (i) we breach any material obligations under the NCI GPC3 Agreement and fail to cure such breach within 90 days after receiving written notice thereof, or (ii) if the NCI reasonably determines that (a) we are not executing the commercial development plan, including the milestones specified therein, (b) we have willfully made a false statement or omitted a material fact in our license application or any report to the NCI, (c) we have committed a material breach of a covenant or agreement to the NCI, (d) we are not keeping the licensed products or licensed services reasonably

21

Table of Contents

available to the public after commercial use commences, (e) we cannot reasonably satisfy unmet health and safety needs, (f) we cannot reasonably justify a failure to comply with the domestic production requirement or (g) we have been found by a court to have violated antitrust laws in connection with our performance under the NCI GPC3 Agreement, in each case of (a) through (f), where we fail to alleviate the NCI’s concerns in 90 days. Additionally, the NCI reserves the right to terminate or modify the NCI GPC3 Agreement if the NCI determines that such action is necessary to meet the requirements for public use specified by federal regulations issued after the date of the license and these requirements are not reasonably satisfied by us.

Framework Agreement with GeneFab, LLC

On August 7, 2023, we entered into a framework agreement, (the “Framework Agreement”), with GeneFab, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, or GeneFab, and Valere Bio, Inc., a Delaware corporation and the parent company of GeneFab, (“Valere”), which is wholly owned by a company managed by Celadon Partners, pursuant to which we, subject to the terms and conditions therein, (i) sold, assigned and transferred its rights, title and interest in certain of the assets and contractual rights to GeneFab, including all of our equipment and leasehold improvements at our facilities in Alameda, California (the “Alameda Facility”) and certain of our intellectual property related to the schematics for and design of the Alameda Facility, and (ii) subleased to GeneFab its premises under the lease, which has subsequently been amended in March 2026, for the Alameda Facility (a portion of which is subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions), or collectively, the Purchased Assets. Refer to Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data —Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 15 — Subsequent Events” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for details on the lease and sublease amendments. In addition, we agreed to grant a license to GeneFab under certain of its intellectual property rights to conduct manufacturing services and to research, develop, manufacture and commercialize products outside of oncology, pursuant to a license agreement under negotiation (“the License Agreement”). Donald Tang, a member of our Board of Directors appointed in December 2024, is a manager of Celadon Partners.

Pursuant to the Framework Agreement, we sold the Purchased Assets, and consummated, or will consummate, the other transactions contemplated thereby, for total consideration of $37.8 million in cash. Fifty percent of the Cash Consideration, or $18.9 million, was paid at closing and the parties waived payment of the remaining $18.9 million in connection with Celadon’s investment in the private placement in December 2024 as described in Part II - Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation - Recent Developments of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

GeneFab was also provided an option (which was subsequently assigned to Celadon Partners) to purchase up to 1,963,344 shares (i.e., up to $20.0 million worth) of our common stock at an exercise price of $10.18670, or the GeneFab Option. The GeneFab Option is exercisable upon the execution of the License Agreement, no later than August 7, 2026. The GeneFab Option may be exercised in installments of common stock equal to no more than 19.9% of our outstanding shares of common stock as of the closing date of the transaction.

As additional consideration for the transaction, we entered into a seller economic share agreement with GeneFab (“GeneFab Economic Share”), pursuant to which we will be entitled to receive ten percent of the realized gains of GeneFab’s parent company arising and resulting from any cash or in-kind distributions from GeneFab in connection with a dividend or sale event, subject to the terms and conditions of the GeneFab Economic Share.

On December 10, 2024, in connection with the private placement described in further detail in Part II, Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data —Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 6 — Stockholders’ Equity” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we entered into an amendment of the GeneFab Framework Agreement with GeneFab and Valere Bio, Inc. As part of the agreement, the GeneFab Note Receivable was waived by the parties. Additionally, we entered into an amended and restated development and manufacturing services agreement with GeneFab.

Collaboration and Option Agreement with Celest Therapeutics, (Shanghai) Co. Ltd.

22

Table of Contents

In November 2023, we entered into a Collaboration and Option Agreement (the “Celest Agreement”), with Celest Therapeutics. Under the Celest Agreement, we agreed to collaborate with Celest Therapeutics for Celest Therapeutics to carry out an investigator-initiated trial (“IIT”) of the SENTI-301A gene circuit in Celest Therapeutics’ SN301A product candidate (manufactured by Celest) in mainland China with certain technical support from us. Celest initiated a Phase 1 clinical trial for SN301A in China in 2024. Based on the observation of certain dose limiting toxicities in the SN301A Investigator Sponsored Trial (the “SN301A Trial”), Celest decided to cease enrollment of the clinical trial in April 2025.

Under our agreement with Celest, Celest Therapeutics has an exclusive option to obtain an exclusive, royalty-bearing, license in mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan under our intellectual property rights to research, develop, manufacture, commercialize and otherwise exploit SN301A, an off-the-shelf CAR-NK cell therapy product candidate that consists of NK cells that have been engineered to express our CAR having an antigen binding portion that is directed to GPC3 and our crIL15. Celest Therapeutics may exercise its option prior to the expiration of a certain time period (the “option exercise period”). If Celest Therapeutics exercises its option during the option exercise period, the parties shall negotiate the terms of the license agreement, which will include and be consistent with pre-agreed financial terms, and Celest Therapeutics will be required to pay us an option exercise fee in the mid-single digit millions upon the execution of the license agreement. If the parties enter into a license agreement having terms consistent with the pre-agreed financial terms, we will be eligible to receive certain option exercise fee and milestone payments, in an aggregate amount of $156.0 million, as well as certain tiered royalty payment. Based on the initial results of the SN301A Trial, we do not anticipate that Celest will exercise its option.

The Celest Agreement will expire upon the earliest of the expiration of the option exercise period, the expiration of the negotiation period of the license agreement, or on the date of execution of the license agreement. We may terminate the Celest Agreement if Celest Therapeutics does not proceed to certain IIT preparation stages or if there is a delay to meeting the target date for the IIT initiation and the parties are unable to agree to an extension target date. We may also terminate the Celest Agreement if Celest Therapeutics or any of its affiliates commences any action challenging the validity or enforceability of our patents, other than in certain specified circumstances. Either party may terminate the Celest Agreement if the other party fails to cure its material breach of the Celest Agreement within a specified cure period, or immediately if the other party becomes bankrupt or insolvent.

Competition

We are aware of other companies that are developing technologies that may compete with elements of our gene circuit platform technologies, including A2 Biotherapeutics, Inc., Arsenal Biosciences, Inc., Beam Therapeutics Inc., CRISPR Therapeutics AG, Encoded Therapeutics, Inc., ImmPACT Bio USA, Inc., Intellia Therapeutics, Inc., MeiraGTx Holdings plc, Obsidian Therapeutics, Inc. and Strand Therapeutics Inc. We are also aware of other companies that are focused on the application of engineered CAR-based immune cell therapies, including NK cells, to oncology, and such competitors include Allogene Therapeutics, Inc., Artiva Biotherapeutics, Inc., Atara Biotherapeutics, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Century Therapeutics, Inc., Caribou Biosciences, Inc., Cytovia Therapeutics, Inc., Fate Therapeutics, Inc., Gilead Sciences, Inc., Lyell Immunopharma, Inc., Nkarta, Inc., Sana Biotechnology, Inc., Shoreline Biosciences, Inc., Takeda Pharmaceutical Company and Vor Biopharma Inc. Some of these companies may have substantially greater financial and other resources than we have, such as larger research and development staff and well- established marketing and salesforces. Mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology industry may result in even greater resource concentration among a smaller number of competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, either alone or through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.

These companies compete with us in recruiting scientific and managerial talent. Our success will partially depend on our ability to obtain, maintain, enforce and defend patents and other intellectual property rights with respect to our product candidates. Our competitors may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their product candidates more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any products that we may develop.

23

Table of Contents

Intellectual Property

Intellectual property is critical to our differentiated technology. Our overall strategy is to own and control all intellectual property related to our gene circuits. We protect our proprietary technology and intellectual property rights through a combination of wholly-owned patent rights, licensed patent rights in particular fields of use, trademark rights, trade secrets and know-how, contractual provisions and confidentiality procedures. Our general strategy includes protecting our proprietary technology and intellectual property rights domestically and in certain key foreign markets. We continually grow and supplement our intellectual property portfolio with new filings and applications not only to strengthen the protection of proprietary technology and intellectual property rights, but also to protect and support the development and commercialization of current and future product candidates. In addition, we seek to protect our technological innovations and branding efforts by filing new patent and trademark applications at the appropriate time and in strategically relevant jurisdictions.

Our patent portfolio relates to our ongoing research and development activities and includes a combination of patents and pending patent applications licensed from third parties, jointly owned with third parties, and solely owned by us. The patents and pending patent applications in our portfolio can be categorized as relating to our gene circuit platform technologies, including Logic Gating gene circuits, Multi-Arming gene circuits, Regulator Dial gene circuits and Smart Sensor gene circuits; our product candidates, including SENTI-202 and SENTI-301A, as well as other possible pipeline product candidates; and alternative technologies, and our patents and patent application include claims directed to compositions, methods (including preparation, use, or treatment), processes, dosing and formulations. As of March 19, 2026, our in-licensed and owned patent portfolio consists of over 15 issued patents and 237 pending patent applications, of which we own or co-own 215 pending patent applications, and have licensed 3 patents and 22 pending patent applications.

The term of a patent in our patent portfolio varies depending upon a number of factors such as 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. Generally, patents issued from applications filed in the United States are effective for 20 years from the earliest non-provisional filing date of the patent application to which the patent claims priority. In the United States, a term of a patent may be lengthened by patent term adjustment (“PTA”), which compensates a patentee for administrative delays by the USPTO in examining and granting a patent, or may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over an earlier filed patent. In addition, in certain instances, the patent term of a U.S. patent that covers an FDA-approved drug may also be eligible for extension to recapture a portion of the term effectively lost as a result of clinical trials and the FDA regulatory review period, such extension is referred to as patent term extension (“PTE”). The restoration period cannot be longer than five years, and the total patent term, including the restoration period, must not exceed 14 years following FDA approval. Similar provisions are available in Europe and certain other foreign jurisdictions to extend the term of a patent that covers an approved drug. However there is no guarantee that the applicable authorities, including the FDA in the United States, will agree with our assessment of whether such extensions should be granted, and if granted, the length of such extensions. The duration of patents outside of the United States varies in accordance with provisions of applicable local law, but typically is also 20 years from the earliest non-provisional filing date of the patent application to which the patent claims priority. The actual 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.

We also utilize trademark rights to protect our brand and have filed trademark applications for the marks “SENTI,” “SENTI BIOSCIENCES,” “SENTI BIO,” and Senti’s “S” logo in the United States and in certain marks in foreign countries. As of March 19, 2026, we own six United States trademark registrations, one pending and/or allowed United States trademark applications, and five foreign trademark registrations. We have also registered multiple internet domain names to further supplement the protection of our brand.

Government Regulation

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, and other regulatory authorities at federal, state and local levels, as well as in foreign countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing,

24

Table of Contents

manufacture, quality control, import, export, safety, effectiveness, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, record keeping, approval, advertising, promotion, marketing, sampling post-approval monitoring and post-approval reporting of biologics such as those we are developing. Any product candidates that we develop must be approved by the FDA before they may be legally marketed in the United States and by the appropriate foreign regulatory agency before they may be legally marketed in those foreign countries. Generally, our activities in other countries will be subject to regulation that is similar in nature and scope as that imposed in the United States, although there can be important differences.

U.S. Biologics Regulation

In the United States, biological products are subject to regulation under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Public Health Service Act, and other federal, state, local and foreign statutes and their implementing regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. The process required by the FDA before biologics may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

•completion of preclinical laboratory tests and animal studies performed in accordance with the FDA’s Good Laboratory Practice requirements, or GLP;

•submission to the FDA of an investigational new drug application, or IND, which must become effective before clinical trials may begin;

•approval by an institutional review board, or IRB, or ethics committee at each clinical site before the trial is commenced;

•performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials according to the FDA’s regulations commonly referred to as good clinical practice, or GCP, regulations and any additional requirements for the protection of human research subjects and their health information to establish the safety, purity and potency of the proposed biologic product candidate for its intended purpose;

•preparation of and submission to the FDA of a Biologics License Application, or BLA, after completion of all pivotal clinical trials;

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

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

•satisfactory completion of an FDA pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities at which the proposed product is produced to assess compliance with cGMP, and to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve the biological product’s continued safety, purity and potency and, if applicable, to assess compliance with the FDA’s current Good Tissue Practice, or cGTP, requirements for the use of human cellular and tissue products, and of selected clinical investigation sites to assess compliance with GCPs;

•potential FDA audit of the nonclinical and clinical study sites that generated the data in support of the BLA; and

•FDA review and approval of the BLA to permit commercial marketing of the product for particular indications for use in the United States.

Before testing any biological product candidate in humans, the product candidate enters the preclinical testing stage. Preclinical tests, also referred to as nonclinical studies, include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, toxicity and formulation, as well as animal studies to assess the potential safety and activity of the product candidate. The conduct of the preclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements including GLPs.

25

Table of Contents

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

In addition to the submission of an IND to the FDA before initiation of a clinical trial in the United States, certain human clinical trials involving recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecules are subject to oversight of institutional biosafety committees, or IBCs, as set forth in the National Institutes of Health, or NIH, Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules (“NIH Guidelines”). Specifically, under the NIH Guidelines, supervision of human gene transfer trials includes evaluation and assessment by an IBC, a local institutional committee that reviews and oversees research utilizing recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecules at that institution. The IBC assesses the safety of the research and identifies any potential risk to public health or the environment, and such review may result in some delay before initiation of a clinical trial. While the NIH Guidelines are not mandatory unless the research in question is being conducted at or sponsored by institutions receiving NIH funding of recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecule research, many companies and other institutions not otherwise subject to the NIH Guidelines voluntarily follow them.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with GCPs, which include the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent for their participation in any clinical study. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the study, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. A separate submission to the existing IND must be made for each successive clinical trial conducted during product development and for any subsequent protocol amendments. Furthermore, an independent IRB for each site proposing to conduct the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial and its informed consent form before the clinical trial begins at that site, and must monitor the study until completed. 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 subject or his or her legal representative and must monitor the clinical trial until completed. Regulatory authorities, the IRB or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or that the trial is unlikely to meet its stated objectives. Some studies also include oversight by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical study sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board, which provides authorization for whether or not a study may move forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the study and may halt the clinical trial if it determines that there is an unacceptable safety risk for subjects or other grounds, such as no demonstration of efficacy. There are also requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical studies and clinical study results to public registries.

For purposes of BLA approval, human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap or be combined:

•Phase 1—The investigational product is initially introduced into healthy human subjects or patients with the target disease or condition. These studies are designed to test the safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism and distribution of the investigational product in humans, the side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, to gain early evidence on effectiveness. In the case of some products for severe or life-

26

Table of Contents

threatening diseases, such as cancer, especially when the product may be too inherently toxic to ethically administer to healthy volunteers, the initial human testing is often conducted in patients.

•Phase 2—The investigational product is administered to a limited patient population with a specified disease or condition to evaluate the preliminary efficacy, optimal dosages, dose tolerance and dosing schedule and to identify possible adverse side effects and safety risks. Multiple Phase 2 clinical trials may be conducted to obtain information prior to beginning larger and more expensive Phase 3 clinical trials.

•Phase 3—The investigational product is administered to an expanded patient population to further evaluate dosage, to provide statistically significant evidence of clinical efficacy and to further test for safety, generally at multiple geographically dispersed clinical trial sites. These clinical trials are intended to establish the overall risk/benefit ratio of the investigational product and to provide an adequate basis for product approval. Generally, two adequate and well-controlled Phase 3 clinical trials are required by the FDA for approval of a BLA.

In March 2022, the FDA released final guidance titled “Expansion Cohorts: Use in First-In-Human Clinical Trials to Expedite Development of Oncology Drugs and Biologics,” which outlines how drug developers can utilize an adaptive trial design commonly referred to as a seamless trial design in early stages of oncology drug development (i.e., the first-in-human clinical trial) to compress the traditional three phases of trials into one continuous trial called an expansion cohort trial. Information to support the design of individual expansion cohorts are included in IND applications and assessed by FDA. Expansion cohort trials can potentially bring efficiency to drug development and reduce development costs and time.

In some cases, the FDA may require, or companies may voluntarily pursue, additional clinical trials after a product is approved to gain more information about the product in the intended therapeutic indication, particularly for long-term safety follow-up. Completion of these so-called Phase 4 studies may also be made a condition to approval of the BLA.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies may complete additional animal studies and develop additional information about the biological characteristics of the product candidate, and must 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 safety, purity and potency 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 Submission and Review by the FDA

Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, the results of product development, nonclinical studies and clinical trials are submitted to the FDA as part of a BLA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. The BLA must include all relevant data available from preclinical and clinical studies, including negative or ambiguous results as well as positive findings, together with detailed information relating to the product’s chemistry, manufacturing, controls and proposed labeling, among other things. Data can come from company-sponsored clinical studies intended to test the safety and effectiveness of a use of the product, or from a number of alternative sources, including studies initiated by independent investigators. To support marketing approval, the data submitted must be sufficient in quality and quantity to establish the safety and effectiveness of the investigational drug product to the satisfaction of the FDA. The submission of a BLA requires payment of a substantial application user fee to the FDA, unless a waiver or exemption applies.

Within 60 days following submission of the application, the FDA reviews a BLA submitted to determine if it is substantially complete before the FDA accepts it for filing. The FDA may refuse to file any BLA that it deems incomplete or not properly reviewable at the time of submission and may request additional information. In this

27

Table of Contents

event, the BLA must be resubmitted with the additional information. The resubmitted application also is subject to review before the FDA accepts it for filing.

Once a BLA has been accepted for filing, the FDA’s goal is to review standard applications within ten months after the filing date, or, if the application qualifies for priority review, six months after the FDA accepts the application for filing. In both standard and priority reviews, the review process may also be extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA reviews a BLA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe, pure and potent and the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packed or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, purity and potency. The FDA may also convene an advisory committee to provide clinical insight on application review questions. An advisory committee is a panel of independent experts, including clinicians and other scientific experts, that reviews, evaluates and provides a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions.

Before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. For a product candidate that is also a human cellular or tissue product, the FDA also will not approve the application if the manufacturer is not in compliance with cGTPs. These are FDA regulations that govern the methods used in, and the facilities and controls used for, the manufacture of human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue based products, or HCT/Ps, which are human cells or tissue intended for implantation, transplant, infusion, or transfer into a human recipient. The primary intent of the GTP requirements is to ensure that cell and tissue based products are manufactured in a manner designed to prevent the introduction, transmission and spread of communicable disease. FDA regulations also require tissue establishments to register and list their HCT/Ps with the FDA and, when applicable, to evaluate donors through screening and testing. Additionally, before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP. If the FDA determines that the application, manufacturing process or manufacturing facilities are not acceptable, it will outline the deficiencies in the submission and often will request additional testing or information. Notwithstanding the submission of any requested additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval.

After the FDA evaluates a BLA and conducts inspections of manufacturing facilities where the investigational product and/or its drug substance will be produced, the FDA may issue an approval letter or a Complete Response Letter, or CRL. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A CRL indicates that the review cycle of the application is complete, and the application will not be approved in its present form. A CRL will describe all of the deficiencies that the FDA has identified in the BLA, except that where the FDA determines that the data supporting the application are inadequate to support approval, the FDA may issue the CRL without first conducting required inspections, testing submitted product lots, and/or reviewing proposed labeling. In issuing the CRL, the FDA may recommend actions that the applicant might take to place the BLA in condition for approval, including requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA may delay or refuse approval of a BLA if applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied, require additional testing or information and/or require post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor safety or efficacy of a product. If a CRL is issued, the sponsor must resubmit the BLA, addressing all of the deficiencies identified in the letter, or withdraw the application. Even if such data and information are submitted, the FDA may decide that the BLA does not satisfy the criteria for approval.

If regulatory approval of a product is granted, such approval will be granted for particular indications and may entail limitations on the indicated uses for which such product may be marketed. For example, the FDA may approve the BLA with a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, to ensure the benefits of the product outweigh its risks, or otherwise limit the scope of any approval. A REMS is a safety strategy implemented to manage a known or potential serious risk associated with a product and to enable patients to have continued access to such medicines by managing their safe use, and could include medication guides, physician communication plans or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization

28

Table of Contents

tools. The FDA also may condition approval on, among other things, changes to proposed labeling or the development of adequate controls and specifications. Once approved, the FDA may withdraw the product approval if compliance with pre- and post-marketing requirements is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the marketplace. The FDA may require one or more Phase 4 post-market studies and surveillance to further assess and monitor the product’s safety and effectiveness after commercialization, and may limit further marketing of the product based on the results of these post-marketing studies.

Expedited Development and Review Programs

The FDA offers a number of expedited development and review programs for qualifying product candidates. For example, new biological products are eligible for fast track designation if they are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the disease or condition. Fast track designation applies to the combination of the product and the specific indication for which it is being studied. The sponsor of a new biologic may request that the FDA designate the biologic as a fast track product at any time during the clinical development of the product. The sponsor of a fast track product has opportunities for more frequent interactions with the applicable FDA review team during product development and, once a BLA is submitted, the product candidate may be eligible for priority review. A fast track product may also be eligible for rolling review, where the FDA may consider for review sections of the BLA on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the BLA, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the BLA and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the BLA.

A product candidate intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition may also be eligible for breakthrough therapy designation to expedite its development and review. A product candidate can receive breakthrough therapy designation if preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product candidate, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs or biologics, may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. The designation includes all of the fast track program features, as well as more intensive FDA interaction and guidance beginning as early as Phase 1 and an organizational commitment to expedite the development and review of the product candidate, including involvement of senior managers.

Any marketing application for a biologic submitted to the FDA for approval, including a product candidate with a fast track designation and/or breakthrough therapy designation, may be eligible for other types of FDA programs intended to expedite development and review, such as priority review and accelerated approval. A product candidate is eligible for priority review if it has the potential to provide safe and effective therapy where no satisfactory alternative therapy exists or a significant improvement in the treatment, diagnosis or prevention of a disease compared to marketed products. The FDA will attempt to direct additional resources to the evaluation of an application for a new biological product designated for priority review in an effort to facilitate the review. For original BLAs, priority review designation means the FDA’s goal is to take action on the marketing application within six months of the 60-day filing date (as compared to ten months under standard review).

Additionally, product candidates studied for their safety and effectiveness in treating serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions may receive accelerated approval upon a determination that the product has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. As a condition of accelerated approval, the FDA will generally require the sponsor to perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing clinical studies to verify and describe the anticipated effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. Under the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act of 2022, or FDORA, the FDA may require, as appropriate, that such trials be underway prior to approval or within a specific time period after the date of approval for a product granted accelerated approval. Under FDORA, the FDA has increased authority for expedited procedures to withdraw approval of a biologic or indication approved under accelerated approval if, for example, the sponsor fails to conduct the required post-marketing studies or if such studies fail to verify the predicted clinical benefit. In addition, for products being considered for

29

Table of Contents

accelerated approval, the FDA generally requires, unless otherwise informed by FDA, that all advertising and promotional materials intended for dissemination or publication within 120 days of marketing approval be submitted to FDA for review during the pre-approval period.

The FDA established a new regenerative medicine advanced therapy, or RMAT, designation, which is intended to facilitate an efficient development program for, and expedite review of, any biologic that meets the following criteria: (i) the biologic qualifies as a RMAT, which is defined as a cell therapy, therapeutic tissue engineering product, human cell and tissue product, or any combination product using such therapies or products, with limited exceptions; (ii) the biologic is intended to treat, modify, reverse, or cure a serious or life-threatening disease or condition; and (iii) preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the biologic has the potential to address unmet medical needs for such a disease or condition. RMAT designation provides all the benefits of breakthrough therapy designation, including more frequent meetings with the FDA to discuss the development plan for the product candidate and eligibility for rolling review and priority review. Product candidates granted RMAT designation may also be eligible for accelerated approval on the basis of a surrogate or intermediate endpoint reasonably likely to predict long-term clinical benefit, or reliance upon data obtained from a meaningful number of clinical trial sites, including through expansion of trials to additional sites. RMAT-designated products that receive accelerated approval may, as appropriate, fulfill their post-approval requirements through submission of clinical evidence, clinical studies, patient registries, or other sources of real-world evidence (such as electronic health records); through the collection of larger confirmatory data sets; or via post-approval monitoring of all patients treated with such therapy prior to approval of such therapy.

Fast track designation, breakthrough therapy designation, priority review, accelerated approval, and RMAT designation, do not change the standards for approval but may expedite the development or approval process. Even if a product candidate 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.

Orphan Drug Designation and Exclusivity

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a biologic intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as a disease or condition with a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 individuals in the United States and when there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available the drug or biologic in the United States 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 generic identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process. On June 18, 2025, we announced that the FDA has granted Orphan Drug Designation to SENTI-202 for the treatment of relapsed/refractory hematologic malignancies including acute myeloid leukemia.

In the United States, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user-fee waivers. In addition, if a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for a particular drug or biologic for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a full BLA, to market the same biologic for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity or if the FDA finds that the holder of the orphan drug exclusivity has not shown that it can assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the orphan drug to meet the needs of patients with the disease or condition for which the drug was designated. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different drug or biologic for the same disease or condition, or the same drug or biologic for a different disease or condition. Competitors may receive approval of different products for the indication for which the orphan product has exclusivity or obtain approval for the same product but for a different indication for which the orphan product has exclusivity. Orphan product exclusivity also could block the approval of one of our products for seven years if a

30

Table of Contents

competitor obtains approval of the same biological product as defined by the FDA or if our product candidate is determined to be contained within the competitor’s product for the same indication or disease.

A designated orphan drug may not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan designation. In addition, orphan drug exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or, as noted above, if a second applicant demonstrates that its product is clinically superior to the approved product with orphan exclusivity or the manufacturer of the approved product is unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.

Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy (RMAT) Designation

As part of the 21st Century Cures Act, Congress created the Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy (“RMAT”) designation to facilitate an efficient development program for, and expedite review of, a product candidate that meets the following criteria: (1) it qualifies as a RMAT, which is defined as a cell therapy, therapeutic tissue engineering product, human cell and tissue product, or any combination product using such therapies or products, with limited exceptions; (2) it is intended to treat, modify, reverse, or cure a serious or life-threatening disease or condition; and (3) preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug has the potential to address unmet medical needs for such a disease or condition. A sponsor may request that the FDA designate a drug as a RMAT concurrently with or at any time after submission of an IND. The FDA has 60 calendar days to determine whether the drug meets the criteria. A BLA for a regenerative medicine therapy that has received RMAT designation may be eligible for priority review or accelerated approval through use of surrogate or intermediate endpoints reasonably likely to predict long-term clinical benefit, or reliance upon data obtained from a meaningful number of sites. Benefits of RMAT designation also include early interactions with FDA to discuss any potential surrogate or intermediate endpoint to be used to support accelerated approval. A regenerative medicine therapy with RMAT designation that is granted accelerated approval and is subject to post-approval requirements may, as appropriate, fulfill such requirements through the submission of clinical evidence from clinical trials, patient registries, or other sources of real world evidence, such as electronic health records; the collection of larger confirmatory data sets; or post-approval monitoring of all patients treated with such therapy prior to its approval. Like some of FDA’s other expedited development programs, RMAT designation does not change the standards for approval but may help expedite the development or approval process. The FDA granted SENTI-202 an RMAT designation in December 2025.

Post-Approval Requirements

Biologics are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to record-keeping, reporting of adverse experiences, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, and advertising and promotion of the product. After approval, most changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications or other labeling claims, are subject to prior FDA review and approval. There also are continuing, annual program fees for any marketed products. Biologic manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved biological products, and those supplying products, ingredients, and components of them, 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 requirements and other laws, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements upon us and our third-party manufacturers. Manufacturers and other parties involved in the drug supply chain for prescription drug products must also comply with product tracking and tracing requirements and for notifying the FDA of counterfeit, diverted, stolen and intentionally adulterated products or products that are otherwise unfit for distribution in the United States. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain GMP compliance. Changes to the manufacturing process or facility are strictly regulated, and, depending on the significance of the change, may require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose reporting requirements upon us and any third-party manufacturers that we may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMP and other aspects of regulatory compliance.

31

Table of Contents

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

•restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, complete withdrawal of the product from the market or product recalls;

•fines, warning letters, or untitled letters;

•clinical holds on clinical studies;

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

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

•consent decrees, corporate integrity agreements, debarment or exclusion from federal healthcare programs;

•mandated modification of promotional materials and labeling and the issuance of corrective information;

•the issuance of safety alerts, Dear Healthcare Provider letters, press releases and other communications containing warnings or other safety information about the product; or

•injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

The FDA also may require post-marketing testing, known as Phase 4 testing, and surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved 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.

The FDA closely regulates the marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of biologics. A company can make only those claims relating to safety and efficacy, purity and potency that are approved by the FDA and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses. The federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion of off-label use and has enjoined companies from engaging in off-label promotion. The FDA and other regulatory agencies have also required that companies enter into consent decrees or permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in, among other things, adverse publicity, warning letters, corrective advertising and potential civil and criminal penalties. FDA sanctions could include refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, clinical hold, warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, mandated corrective advertising or communications with doctors, debarment, restitution, disgorgement of profits, or civil or criminal penalties. Physicians may prescribe, in their independent professional and medical judgment, legally available products for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and that differ from those tested and approved by the FDA. Such off-label uses are common across medical specialties. Physicians may believe that such off-label uses are the best treatment for many patients in varied circumstances. The FDA does not regulate the

32

Table of Contents

behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. The FDA does, however, restrict manufacturer’s communications on the subject of off-label use of their products.

Biosimilars and Reference Product Exclusivity

The Affordable Care Act, signed into law in 2010, includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act, or BPCIA, which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. The FDA has issued several guidance documents outlining an approach to review and approval of biosimilars.

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. However, complexities associated with the larger, and often more complex, structures of biological products, as well as the processes by which such products are manufactured, pose significant hurdles to implementation of the abbreviated approval pathway that are still being worked out by the FDA.

Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed. During this 12-year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a full BLA for the competing product containing that applicant’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of its product. The BPCIA also created certain exclusivity periods for biosimilars approved as interchangeable products. At this juncture, it is unclear whether products deemed “interchangeable” by the FDA will, in fact, be readily substituted by pharmacies, which are governed by state pharmacy law.

A biological product can also obtain pediatric market exclusivity in the United States. Pediatric exclusivity, if granted, adds six months to existing regulatory exclusivity periods for all formulations, dosage forms, and indications of the active moiety. This six-month exclusivity, which runs from the end of other exclusivity protection or patent term, may be granted based on the voluntary completion of a pediatric study in accordance with an FDA-issued “Written Request” for such a study, provided that at the time pediatric exclusivity is granted there is not less than nine months of term remaining. The BPCIA is complex and continues to be interpreted and implemented by the FDA. In addition, government proposals have sought to reduce the 12-year reference product exclusivity period. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation. As a result, the ultimate impact, implementation, and impact of the BPCIA is subject to significant uncertainty.

Coverage and Reimbursement

Our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers and other organizations. Even if coverage is provided, the approved reimbursement amount may not be high enough to allow us to establish or maintain pricing sufficient to realize a sufficient return on our investment. Government authorities and third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which medications they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels.

There is also significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products and coverage may be more limited than the purposes for which the medicine is approved by the FDA or

33

Table of Contents

comparable foreign regulatory authorities. In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement for new medicines are typically made by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. CMS decides whether and to what extent a new medicine will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare and private payors tend to follow CMS to a substantial degree. Factors payors consider in determining reimbursement are based on whether the product is:

•a covered benefit under its health plan;

•safe, effective and medically necessary;

•appropriate for the specific patient;

•cost-effective; and

•neither experimental nor investigational.

Net prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for medical products. We cannot be sure that reimbursement will be available for any product candidate that we commercialize and, if reimbursement is available, the level of reimbursement. In addition, many pharmaceutical manufacturers must calculate and report certain price reporting metrics to the government, such as average sales price, or ASP, and best price. Penalties may apply in some cases when such metrics are not submitted accurately and timely. Further, these prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs.

We expect that healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize our products. Legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for pharmaceutical products. We cannot be sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether existing regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals or clearances of our product candidates, if any, may be.

In addition, in some foreign countries, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug pricing vary widely from country to country. For example, the European Union provides options for its Member States to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval, some of these countries may require the completion of clinical trials that compare the cost effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies. A Member State may approve a specific price for the medicinal product or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our product candidates. Historically, products launched in the European Union do not follow price structures of the United States and generally prices tend to be significantly lower.

Healthcare Reform

In the United States, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs. For example, in 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the “ACA”) was enacted, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly

34

Table of Contents

impacted the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Among the provisions of the ACA, of greatest importance to the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry are the following:

•an increase in the statutory minimum rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program to 23.1% and 13% of the average manufacturer price for most branded and generic drugs, respectively, and a cap on the total rebate amount for innovator drugs at 100% of the Average Manufacturer Price;

•extension of manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program; and

•a Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 70% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted.

•The Budget Control Act of 2011 and subsequent legislation, among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress that include aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which remain in effect through 2031. The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 further reduced Medicare payments to several providers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years.

•On March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law. Due to the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, estimated budget deficit increases resulting from the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, and subsequent legislation, Medicare payments to providers were further reduced starting on January 1, 2025; however, legislation has been introduced in the U.S. Congress that would, if enacted, reverse these payment reductions. In addition to provider payment cuts under Medicare, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 also eliminated the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, previously set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, beginning January 1, 2024. These laws and regulations may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding and otherwise affect the prices we may obtain for any of our product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval or the frequency with which any such product candidate is prescribed or used.

•On April 13, 2017, CMS published a final rule that gives states greater flexibility in setting benchmarks for insurers in the individual and small group marketplaces, which may have the effect of relaxing the essential health benefits required under the ACA for plans sold through such marketplaces.

•On May 30, 2018, the Right to Try Act was signed into law. The law, among other things, provides a federal framework for certain patients to access certain investigational new drug products that have completed a Phase 1 clinical trial and that are undergoing investigation for FDA approval. Under certain circumstances, eligible patients can seek treatment without enrolling in clinical trials and without obtaining FDA permission under the FDA expanded access program. There is no obligation for a pharmaceutical manufacturer to make its drug products available to eligible patients as a result of the Right to Try Act.

•On May 23, 2019, CMS published a final rule to allow Medicare Advantage Plans the option of using step therapy for Part B drugs beginning January 1, 2020.

Additionally, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to drug pricing practices. Specifically, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, and review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, includes several provisions that may impact our business to varying degrees, including provisions that reduce the out-of-pocket spending cap for

35

Table of Contents

Medicare Part D beneficiaries from $7,050 to $2,000 starting in 2025, thereby effectively eliminating the coverage gap; impose new manufacturer financial liability on certain drugs under Medicare Part D; allow the U.S. government to negotiate Medicare Part B and Part D price caps for certain high-cost drugs and biologics without generic or biosimilar competition; require companies to pay rebates to Medicare for certain drug prices that increase faster than inflation; and delay until January 1, 2032 the implementation of the HHS rebate rule that would have limited the fees that pharmacy benefit managers can charge. Further, under the IRA, orphan drugs are exempted from the Medicare drug price negotiation program, but only if they have one orphan designation and for which the only approved indication is for that disease or condition. If a product receives multiple orphan designations or has multiple approved indications, it may not qualify for the orphan drug exemption. The implementation of the IRA is currently subject to ongoing litigation challenging the constitutionality of the IRA’s Medicare drug price negotiation program. The effects of the IRA on our business and the healthcare industry in general is not yet known.

At a federal level, President Trump reversed some of President Biden’s executive orders including rescinding Executive Order 14087 entitled “Lowering Prescription Drug Costs for Americans.” President Trump may issue new executive orders designed to impact drug pricing. President Trump has also implemented workforce reduction/cost saving measures which may impact our FDA review timelines. A number of these and other proposed measures may require authorization through additional legislation to become effective. Congress and the Trump administration have indicated that they will continue to seek new legislative measures to control drug costs.

There has also been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products. For example, there have been several recent Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products.

At the state level, individual states are increasingly aggressive in passing legislation and implementing 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. In addition, regional health care authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other health care programs. These measures could reduce the ultimate demand for our products, once approved, or put pressure on our product pricing, which could negatively affect our business, financial conditions, results of operation and prospects.

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

Any denial in coverage or reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government-funded programs may result in a similar denial or reduction in payments from private payors, which may prevent us from being able to generate sufficient revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our products. It is not clear how other future potential changes to the ACA will change the reimbursement model and market outlook for our current and future product candidates.

Other U.S. Healthcare Laws

Healthcare providers, physicians and third-party payors, among others, will play a primary role in the prescription and recommendation of any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our arrangements with third-party payors, providers and customers, among others, may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations in the future that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we market, sell and distribute our product candidates for which we

36

Table of Contents

obtain marketing approval. Restrictions under applicable federal and state healthcare laws and regulations in the United States and other countries, include the following:

•the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, a person or entity from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, paying, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, lease order, arranging for or recommendation of, any good, facility, item or service, for which payment may be made, in whole or in part, by a federal healthcare program, such as Medicare or Medicaid. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. Violations are subject to civil and criminal fines and penalties for each violation, plus up to three times the remuneration involved, imprisonment, and exclusion from government healthcare programs;

•federal civil and criminal false claims laws, including the federal False Claims Act, which provides for civil whistleblower or qui tam actions, and civil monetary penalties laws, that impose penalties against individuals or entities for knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the federal government, claims for payment that are false or fraudulent or making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items and services resulting from a referral made in violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act; Manufacturers can be held liable under the federal False Claims Act even when they do not submit claims directly to government payors if they are deemed to “cause” the submission of false or fraudulent claims. The federal False Claims Act also permits a private individual acting as a “whistleblower” to bring actions on behalf of the federal government alleging violations of the federal False Claims Act and to share in any monetary recovery;

•HIPAA, which imposes criminal and civil liability for executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, or knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;

•HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH”) and its implementing regulations, including the Final Omnibus Rule published in January 2013, which impose obligations on certain covered entity healthcare providers, health plans and healthcare clearinghouses as well as their business associates and their subcontractors that perform certain services involving the use or disclosure of individually identifiable health information, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information, and require notification to affected individuals and regulatory authorities of certain breaches of security of individually identifiable health information. HITECH also created new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, there may be additional federal, state, and non-U.S. laws which govern the privacy and security of health and other personal information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts;

•the federal false statements statute, which prohibits knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services;

•federal price reporting laws, which require manufacturers to calculate and report complex pricing metrics to government programs, where such reported prices may be used in the calculation of reimbursement and/or discounts on approved products;

37

Table of Contents

•federal consumer protection and unfair competition laws, which broadly regulate marketplace activities and activities that potentially harm consumers;

•the federal physician payment transparency requirements, sometimes referred to as the “Sunshine Act” under the Affordable Care Act, require certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies that are reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program to report to the CMS information related to transfers of value made to physicians (currently defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain other licensed health care practitioners and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests of physicians and their immediate family members; and

•analogous local, state and foreign laws and regulations, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws that may apply to healthcare items or services reimbursed by third party payors, including private insurers, local, state and foreign transparency laws that require manufacturers to report information related to payments and transfers of value to other healthcare providers and healthcare entities, marketing expenditures, or drug pricing, state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to register certain employees engaged in marketing activities in the location and comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government, and state and foreign 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.

Government Regulation Outside of the United States

In addition to regulations in the United States, we will be subject to a variety of regulations in other jurisdictions governing, among other things, clinical studies and any commercial sales and distribution of our products. Because biologically sourced raw materials are subject to unique contamination risks, their use may be restricted in some countries.

Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we must obtain the requisite approvals from regulatory authorities in foreign countries prior to the commencement of clinical studies or marketing of the product in those countries. Certain countries outside of the United States have a similar process that requires the submission of a clinical study application much like the IND prior to the commencement of human clinical studies.

The requirements and process governing the conduct of clinical studies, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary from country to country. In all cases, the clinical studies are conducted in accordance with GCP and the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki.

Similar to the United States, the various phases of preclinical and clinical research in the European Union are subject to significant regulatory controls. In April 2014, the European Union adopted a Clinical Trials Regulation (EU) No 536/2014, which replaced the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC on January 31, 2022. The Clinical Trials Regulation is directly applicable in all Member States (and so does not require national implementing legislation in each Member State), and aims at simplifying and streamlining the approval of clinical studies in the European Union. For example, a single application is now made through the Clinical Trials Information System, for clinical trial authorization in up to 30 European Economic Area (“EEA”) (comprised of the EU Member States plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein) countries at the same time and with a single set of documentation.

To obtain regulatory approval of a medicinal product under European Union regulatory systems, we must submit a marketing authorization application. The application used to file the BLA in the United States is similar to that required in the European Union. In the European Union, medicinal products can only be commercialized after obtaining a marketing authorization. There are two types of marketing authorization:

•The centralized marketing authorization is issued by the European Commission through the centralized procedure, based on the opinion of the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (“CHMP”) of the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”), and is valid throughout the entire territory of the EU. The centralized

38

Table of Contents

procedure is mandatory for certain types of products, such as biotechnology medicinal products, orphan medicinal products, advanced therapy medicinal products (gene-therapy, somatic cell-therapy or tissue-engineered medicines) and medicinal products containing a new active substance indicated for the treatment of HIV, AIDS, cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, diabetes, auto-immune and other immune dysfunctions and viral diseases. The centralized procedure is optional for products containing a new active substance not yet authorized in the European Union, or for products that constitute a significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovation or which are in the interest of public health in the European Union. Under the centralized procedure, the maximum timeframe for the evaluation of a marketing authorization application by the EMA is 210 days, excluding clock stops, when additional written or oral information is to be provided by the applicant in response to questions asked by the CHMP. Clock stops may extend the timeframe of evaluation of a marketing authorization application considerably beyond 210 days. Where the CHMP gives a positive opinion, the EMA provides the opinion together with supporting documentation to the European Commission, who makes the final decision to grant a marketing authorization, which is issued within 67 days of receipt of the EMA’s recommendation. Accelerated assessment might be granted by the CHMP in exceptional cases, when a medicinal product is expected to be of a major public health interest, particularly from the point of view of therapeutic innovation. The timeframe for the evaluation of a marketing authorization application under the accelerated assessment procedure is 150 days, excluding clock stops, but it is possible that the CHMP may revert to the standard time limit for the centralized procedure if it determines that the application is no longer appropriate to conduct an accelerated assessment.

•National marketing authorizations, which are issued by the competent authorities of the Member States of the European Union and only cover their respective territory, are available for products not falling within the mandatory scope of the centralized procedure. Where a product has already been authorized for marketing in a Member State of the European Union, this national marketing authorization can be recognized in other Member States through the mutual recognition procedure. If the product has not received a national marketing authorization in any Member State at the time of application, it can be approved simultaneously in various Member States through the decentralized procedure.

Under the above described procedures, before granting the marketing authorization, the EMA or the competent authorities of the Member States of the European Union make an assessment of the risk-benefit balance of the product on the basis of scientific criteria concerning its quality, safety and efficacy.

The European Union also provides opportunities for market exclusivity. For example, in the European Union, upon receiving marketing authorization, new chemical entities or innovative medicinal products generally receive eight years of data exclusivity and an additional two years of market exclusivity. If granted, data exclusivity prevents generic or biosimilar applicants from referencing the innovator’s preclinical and clinical trial data contained in the dossier of the reference product when applying for a biosimilar or generic marketing authorization, for a period of eight years from the date on which the reference product was first authorized in the EU. During the additional two-year period of market exclusivity, a biosimilar or generic marketing authorization can be submitted, and the innovator’s data may be referenced, but no biosimilar or generic product can be marketed in the EU until the expiration of the market exclusivity. The overall ten-year period will be extended to a maximum of 11 years if, during the first eight years of those ten years, the marketing authorization holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to their authorization, are determined to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with currently approved therapies. However, there is no guarantee that a product will be considered by the European Union’s regulatory authorities to be a new chemical entity, and products may not qualify for data exclusivity. Even if a product gains the prescribed period of data exclusivity, another company may market another version of the product if such company obtained a marketing authorization based on an application with a complete and independent data package of pharmaceutical tests, preclinical tests and clinical trials.

The criteria for designating an “orphan medicinal product” in the European Union are similar in principle to those in the United States. Under Article 3 of Regulation (EC) 141/2000, the European Commission grants an orphan designation in respect of a product if its sponsor can establish that (1) the product is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition; (2) either (a) such

39

Table of Contents

condition affects no more than five in 10,000 persons in the European Union when the application is made, or (b) the product, without the benefits derived from orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the European Union to justify the necessary investment in its development; and (3) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of such condition authorized for marketing in the European Union, or if such a method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition, as defined in Regulation (EC) 847/2000. Orphan medicinal products are eligible for financial incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers and are, upon grant of a marketing authorization, entitled to ten years of market exclusivity during which no marketing authorization may be granted in the EU for a “similar medicinal product” to the authorized orphan product for the same therapeutic indication (subject to limited exceptions outlined below). A “similar medicinal product” is defined as a medicinal product containing a similar active substance or substances as contained in an authorized orphan medicinal product, and which is intended for the same therapeutic indication. An orphan product can also obtain an additional two years of market exclusivity in the European Union for pediatric studies submitted in compliance with an EMA-approved pediatric investigation plan. The application for orphan designation must be submitted before the application for marketing authorization. The applicant will receive a fee reduction for the marketing authorization application if the orphan designation has been granted, but not if the designation is still pending at the time the marketing authorization is submitted. Orphan designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process.

The 10-year market exclusivity may be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the product no longer meets the criteria for orphan designation, for example, if the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity. Additionally, marketing authorization may be granted to a similar medicinal product for the same indication as an authorized orphan product at any time if:

•The second applicant can establish that its product, although similar to the authorized orphan product, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior;

•The marketing authorization holder for the authorized orphan product consents to a second orphan medicinal product application; or

•The marketing authorization holder for the authorized orphan product cannot supply enough orphan medicinal product.

The aforementioned European Union rules are generally applicable in the EEA.

The European Commission introduced legislative proposals in April 2023 that, if implemented, will replace the current regulatory framework in the European Union for all medicines (including those for rare diseases and for children). The European Commission has provided the legislative proposals to the European Parliament and the European Council for their review and approval. In October 2023, the European Parliament published draft reports proposing amendments to the legislative proposals, which will be debated by the European Parliament. Once the European Commission’s legislative proposals are approved (with or without amendment), they will be adopted into European Union law.

For other countries outside of the European Union, such as countries in Eastern Europe, Latin America or Asia, the requirements governing the conduct of clinical studies, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary from country to country. In all cases, again, the clinical studies are conducted in accordance with GCP and the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki.

If we fail to comply with applicable foreign regulatory requirements, we may be subject to, among other things, fines, suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals, product recalls, seizure of products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecution.

European Data Collection

40

Table of Contents

The collection and processing of personal data (including health data) in the European Economic Area, or EEA and the United Kingdom, or UK is governed by the EU General Data Protection Regulation, or EU GDPR (with regards to the EEA) and the UK General Data Protection Regulation, or UK GDPR (with respect to the UK), as well as applicable data protection laws in effect in the Member States of the EEA and in the UK (including the UK Data Protection Act 2018). The EU and UK data protection regimes are independent of each other but remain largely aligned. However, the UK Government has introduced a Data Protection and Digital Information Bill, or Data Reform Bill into the UK legislative process to reform the UK data protection legal framework.

In this Form 10-K, “GDPR” refers to both the EU GDPR and the UK GDPR, unless specified otherwise. The GDPR applies to any company established in the EEA/UK and to companies established outside the EEA/UK that process personal data in connection with the offering of goods or services to data subjects in the EEA/UK or the monitoring of the behavior of data subjects in the EEA/UK. The GDPR imposes numerous stringent requirements on companies that process personal data, including requirements relating to processing health and other sensitive data, obtaining consent of data subjects, providing detailed information to data subjects about how personal data is used, conducting privacy impact assessments for “high risk” processing, implementing safeguards to protect the security and confidentiality of personal data, implementing limitations on the retention of personal data, providing mandatory data breach notification, implementing “privacy by design” requirements, and taking certain measures when engaging service providers acting as data processors. The GDPR also imposes strict rules on the transfer of personal data to countries outside of the EEA/UK that do not ensure an adequate level of protection, including the United States in certain circumstances, unless derogation exists or a valid GDPR transfer mechanism (for example, the European Commission approved Standard Contractual Clauses, or SCCs, and the UK International Data Transfer Agreement/Addendum, or UK IDTA) have been put in place. Where relying on the SCCs/UK IDTA for data transfers, transfer impact assessments are required to assess whether the recipient is subject to local laws which allow public authority access to personal data. Although the UK is regarded as a third country under the European Union’s GDPR, the European Commission has now issued a decision recognizing the UK as providing adequate protection under the EU GDPR and the UK government has issued a similar decision, therefore, transfers of personal data between the EU to the UK remain unrestricted.

Failure to comply with the requirements of the GDPR and the related national data protection laws of the EEA Member States and the UK may result in fines up to €20 million (€17.5 million for the UK GDPR) or 4% of a company’s global annual revenues for the preceding financial year, whichever is higher. The GDPR also confers a private right of action on data subjects and consumer associations to lodge complaints with supervisory authorities, seek judicial remedies, and obtain compensation for damages resulting from violations of the GDPR.

Employees and Human Capital Resources

As of March 19, 2026, we had 39 employees, all of whom were full-time, consisting of clinical, research, operations, regulatory, finance and business development personnel. 7 of our employees hold Ph.D. or M.D. degrees. None of our employees are subject to a collective bargaining agreement. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing and integrating our existing and additional employees. The principal purposes of our equity incentive plans are to attract, retain and motivate selected employees, consultants and directors through the granting of stock-based compensation awards, in order to increase stockholder value and the success of our company by motivating such individuals to perform to the best of their abilities and achieve our objectives.

Facilities

We currently occupy approximately 40,000 square feet of office and research and development space in South San Francisco, CA under a lease that expires in April 2027, with an option to extend for an additional eight years. We entered into a sublease agreement with GeneFab to sublease approximately 7,400 square feet of our office space in South San Francisco expiring April 2027. On March 9, 2026, we and GeneFab agreed to terminate the sublease, effective March 31, 2026. We also entered into a sublease agreement with BKPBIOTECH, Inc. and JLSA2

41

Table of Contents

Therapeutics, Inc. to sublease approximately 11,001 square feet of our office space in South San Francisco commencing October 2024 and also expiring April 2027. In June 2023, we completed the build-out of a cell therapy manufacturing facility designed to meet cGMP. We subsequently subleased this 92,000 square feet of manufacturing space under an agreement with GeneFab that was executed in August 2023, with such sublease expiring in September 2032. On March 17, 2026 we entered into a First Amendment to Lease (the “Lease Amendment”), a First Amendment to Sublease (the “Sublease Amendment”), a First Amendment to Landlord’s Consent to Sublease (the “Consent Amendment”) and a Letter Agreement (the “GeneFab Letter Agreement”) all related to the Alameda Facility with GeneFab and 1430 South Loop Owner, LLC (the “Landlord”), pursuant to which we reduced the leased premises from approximately 92,000 rentable square feet to approximately 46,000 rentable square feet. The Lease Amendment also reduces our future base rent obligations for the remaining term of the lease and modifies certain cost-sharing arrangements with respect to operating expenses, taxes, and utilities. We believe that this space, collectively, is sufficient to meet our existing needs.

Periodic Reporting and Financial Information

We are a “smaller reporting company” as defined in Item 10(f)(1) of Regulation S-K. Smaller reporting companies may take advantage of certain reduced disclosure obligations, including, among other things, providing only two years of audited financial statements. We will remain a smaller reporting company if (1) the market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates is less than $250 million as of the last business day of the second fiscal quarter, or (2) our annual revenues in our most recent fiscal year completed before the last business day of our second fiscal quarter are less than $100 million and the market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates is less than $700 million as of the last business day of the second fiscal quarter.

Corporate Information

We were incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware on June 9, 2016. Our principal executive office is located at 2 Corporate Drive, First Floor, South San Francisco, California 94080, and our telephone number is (650) 382-3281. Our website address is www.sentibio.com. References to our website address to not constitute incorporation by reference of the information contained on the website, and the information on the website is not part of this document.

On June 8, 2022, Dynamics Special Purpose Corp., a Delaware corporation, or DYNS, consummated a previously announced Merger pursuant to the terms of the Business Combination Agreement with Senti Sub I, Inc., formerly Senti Biosciences, Inc., and Explore Merger Sub, Inc., a Delaware corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of DYNS, or Merger Sub. Pursuant to the terms of the Business Combination Agreement, Merger Sub merged with and into Senti Sub I, Inc., with Senti Sub I, Inc. surviving the merger as a wholly-owned subsidiary of DYNS. The Merger was approved by DYNS’s stockholders at a meeting held on June 7, 2022. In connection with the consummation of the Merger on the Closing Date, DYNS changed its name from DYNS to Senti Biosciences, Inc. On June 9, 2022, our common stock, formerly of DYNS, began trading on the Nasdaq Global Market under the trading symbol “SNTI.”

Available Information

Our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to these reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, are available free of charge on our website located at www.sentibio.com as soon as reasonably practicable after they are filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). The SEC maintains an Internet website that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding us and other issuers that file electronically with the SEC. The SEC’s Internet website address is www.sec.gov.

A copy of our Corporate Governance Guidelines, Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and the charters of the Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of our Board of Directors are posted on our website, www.sentibio.com, under “Investors”.

42

Table of Contents