Up to 27,793,034 Shares of Common Stock

This prospectus relates to the issuance by us of (i) up to an aggregate of 2,407,500 shares of our common stock that may be issued upon exercise of warrants to purchase common stock at an exercise price of $11.50 per share (the “Public Warrants”), which were originally issued by Tottenham Acquisition I Limited, a British Virgin Islands exempted company and our predecessor (“Tottenham”), in its initial public offering, (ii) up to an aggregate of 110,000 shares of our common stock that may be issued upon exercise of warrants to purchase common stock at an exercise price of $11.50 per share (the “Option Warrants”), which were originally issued by Tottenham, pursuant to a unit purchase option, (iii) up to an aggregate of 1,119,750 shares of our common stock that may be issued upon exercise of warrants to purchase common stock at an exercise price of $0.01 per share (the “PIPE Warrants”), and (iv) up to an aggregate of 904,231 shares of our common stock that may be issued upon exercise of warrants to purchase common stock at an exercise price of $1.97 per share (the “Founder Warrants” and together with the Public Warrants and the Option Warrants, the “Warrants”), which were issued as part of private placement in connection with the closing of the Reverse Recapitalization (as defined below) (the “PIPE”).

This prospectus also relates to the offer and sale, from time to time, by the selling shareholders named in this prospectus (the “Selling Shareholders”), or any of their pledgees, donees, assignees and successors-in-interest (“Permitted Transferees”), of (i) up to an aggregate of 2,239,500 shares of our common stock that were issued to certain investors in connection with the PIPE (collectively, the “PIPE Investors”), (ii) up to an aggregate of 21,012,053 shares of our common stock otherwise held by the Selling Shareholders. This prospectus also covers any additional securities that may become issuable by reason of share splits, share dividends or other similar transactions.

We will not receive any proceeds from the sale of shares of common stock or warrants by the Selling Shareholders pursuant to this prospectus, except with respect to amounts received by us upon exercise of the warrants to the extent such warrants are exercised for cash. However, we will pay the expenses, other than underwriting discounts and commissions and certain expenses incurred by the Selling Shareholders in disposing of the securities, associated with the sale of securities pursuant to this prospectus.

We are registering the offer and sale of the securities described above to satisfy certain registration rights we have granted. Our registration of the securities covered by this prospectus does not mean that either we or the Selling Shareholders will issue, offer or sell, as applicable, any of the securities. The Selling Shareholders and any of their permitted transferees may offer and sell the securities covered by this prospectus in a number of different ways and at varying prices. Additional information on the Selling Shareholders, and the times and manner in which they may offer and sell the securities under this prospectus, is provided under “Selling Shareholders” and “Plan of Distribution” in this prospectus.

You should read this prospectus and any prospectus supplement or amendment carefully before you invest in our securities.

Our common stock and warrants are listed on Nasdaq under the symbols “CLNN” and “CLNNW”, respectively. On March 25, 2021, the closing price of our common stock was $13.87 per share and the closing price of our warrants was $1.1700 per share.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as that term is defined under the federal securities laws and, as such, are subject to certain reduced public company reporting requirements.

Investing in our securities involves risks that are described in the “Risk Factors” section beginning on page 11 of this prospectus.

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of the securities to be issued under this prospectus or determined if this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

The date of this prospectus is               , 2021.

ABOUT THIS PROSPECTUS

This prospectus is part of a registration statement on Form S-1 that we filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) using the “shelf” registration process. Under this shelf registration process, the Selling Shareholders may, from time to time, sell the securities offered by them described in this prospectus. We will not receive any proceeds from the sale by such Selling Shareholders of the securities offered by them described in this prospectus. This prospectus also relates to the issuance by us of the shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise of any Warrants. We will receive proceeds from any exercise of the Warrants for cash.

Neither we nor the selling shareholders have authorized anyone to provide you with any information or to make any representations other than those contained in this prospectus or any applicable prospectus supplement or any free writing prospectuses prepared by or on behalf of us or to which we have referred you. Neither we nor the selling shareholders take responsibility for, and can provide no assurance as to the reliability of, any other information that others may give you. Neither we nor the selling shareholders will make an offer to sell these securities in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted.

We may also provide a prospectus supplement or post-effective amendment to the registration statement to add information to, or update or change information contained in, this prospectus. You should read both this prospectus and any applicable prospectus supplement or post-effective amendment to the registration statement together with the additional information to which we refer you in the sections of this prospectus entitled “Where You Can Find More Information.”

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Certain statements in this prospectus may constitute “forward-looking statements” for purposes of the federal securities laws. Our forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding our or our management team’s expectations, hopes, beliefs, intentions or strategies regarding the future. In addition, any statements that refer to projections, forecasts or other characterizations of future events or circumstances, including any underlying assumptions, are forward-looking statements. The words “anticipate,” “believe,” “contemplate,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intends,” “may,” “might,” “plan,” “possible,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” “should,” “will,” “would” and similar expressions may identify forward-looking statements, but the absence of these words does not mean that a statement is not forward-looking. Forward-looking statements in this prospectus may include, for example, statements about:

•        the benefits of the Reverse Recapitalization;

•        the future financial performance of the Company following the Reverse Recapitalization;

•        the clinical results of our drug candidates;

•        the likelihood of commercial success for our drug candidates;

•        changes in the market for our services;

•        expansion plans and opportunities; and

•        other factors detailed under the section entitled “Risk Factors.”

These forward-looking statements are based on information available as of the date of this Registration Statement on Form S-1, the information incorporated herein by reference and our management’s current expectations, forecasts and assumptions, and involve a number of judgments, risks and uncertainties. Accordingly, forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing our views as of any subsequent date. We undertake no obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date they were made, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as may be required under applicable securities laws.

As a result of a number of known and unknown risks and uncertainties, our actual results or performance may be materially different from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Some factors that could cause actual results to differ include:

•        the outcome of any legal proceedings that may be instituted against us following announcement of the consummated Reverse Recapitalization and transactions contemplated thereby;

•        the inability to maintain the listing of our common stock or warrants on The Nasdaq Stock Market following the Reverse Recapitalization;

•        the risk that the Reverse Recapitalization disrupts current plans and operations as a result of the announcement and consummation of the transactions described herein;

•        the inability to recognize the anticipated benefits of the Reverse Recapitalization, which may be affected by, among other things, competition and the ability of the combined business to grow and manage growth profitably;

•        costs related to the Reverse Recapitalization;

•        our ability to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of our drug candidates;

•        the clinical results for our drug candidates, which may not support further development or marketing approval;

•        actions of regulatory agencies, which may affect the initiation, timing and progress of clinical trials and marketing approval;

•        our ability to achieve commercial success for our marketed products and drug candidates, if approved;

•        our ability to obtain and maintain protection of intellectual property for our technology and drugs;

•        our reliance on third parties to conduct drug development, manufacturing and other services;

•        our limited operating history and our ability to obtain additional funding for operations and to complete the licensing or development and commercialization of our drug candidates;

•        the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our clinical development, commercial and other operations;

•        changes in applicable laws or regulations;

•        the possibility that we may be adversely affected by other economic, business, and/or competitive factors; and

•        other risks and uncertainties set forth in the section entitled “Risk Factors”.

MARKET AND INDUSTRY DATA AND FORECASTS

We obtained the industry and market data used throughout this prospectus from our own internal estimates and research, as well as from independent market research, industry and general publications and surveys, governmental agencies, publicly available information and research, surveys and studies conducted by third parties. Internal estimates are derived from publicly available information released by industry analysts and third-party sources, our internal research and our industry experience, and are based on assumptions made by us based on such data and our knowledge of our industry and market, which we believe to be reasonable. In some cases, we do not expressly refer to the sources from which this data is derived. In addition, while we believe the industry and market data included in this prospectus is reliable and based on reasonable assumptions, such data involve material risks and other uncertainties and are subject to change based on various factors, including those discussed in the section entitled “Risk Factors.” These and other factors could cause results to differ materially from those expressed in the estimates made by the independent parties or by us.

size of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the number and scope of our drug development programs and the associated costs of those programs, the cost of commercializing any approved products, our ability to generate revenues and the timing and amount of milestones and other payments we make or receive through arrangements with third parties. If any of our drug candidates fails in clinical trials or does not gain regulatory approval, or if approved, fails to achieve market acceptance, we may never become profitable. Our failure to become and remain profitable would decrease our value significantly and impair our ability to raise capital, maintain our R&D efforts, expand our business or continue our operations.

Our ability to continue as a going concern requires that we obtain sufficient funding to finance our operations, which may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. A failure to obtain this necessary capital when needed could force us to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our drug development or commercialization efforts.

As of December 31, 2020, we had cash totaling $59.3 million and an accumulated deficit of $153.6 million. During 2020, we incurred a net loss totaling $19.3 million, and used cash in operating activities totaling $18.9 million. We expect to continue to incur losses and use cash in operating activities in 2021 and for the foreseeable future. We expect that the cash on hand as of December 31, 2020 will be sufficient to fund our operations for a period extending beyond twelve months from the date the consolidated financial statements are issued. For details, please see Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources. Our ability to continue as a going concern requires that we obtain sufficient funding to finance our operations until our drug candidates begin generating sufficient revenue. As part of our ongoing business plans, we will continue seeking funding through equity financing and may seek debt financing or other capital sources. We may not be able to obtain financing on acceptable terms, or at all. The terms of any financing may adversely affect the holdings or the rights of our shareholders. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on acceptable terms, we would be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate research and development programs and commercialization efforts. These factors, among others, may raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

We have a limited operating history, which may make it difficult to evaluate our current business and predict our future performance.

We are a biopharmaceutical company formed in December 2012 focusing on the discovery and development of innovative drugs for the treatment of neurological diseases and other disorders. Our limited operating history, particularly in light of the rapidly evolving nanocrystal therapies field, may make it difficult to evaluate our current business and predict our future performance.

As a relatively new business, we have not yet demonstrated an ability to manufacture drugs at a commercial scale, or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful commercialization. We have not had any product approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales. Consequently, any assessment you make about our current business or future success or viability may not be as accurate as it could be if we had a longer operating history and had been able to reduce some of the uncertainties as set out above. Further, our limited financial track record, without any revenue yet from our expected future principal business, may be of limited reference value for your assessment of our business.

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

As we seek to advance our drug candidates through clinical trials, we will need to expand our development, regulatory, compliance, manufacturing, marketing and sales capabilities or contract with third parties to provide these capabilities for us. As our operations expand, we expect that we will need to manage additional relationships with various strategic partners, suppliers and other third parties. Future growth will impose significant added responsibilities on members of management. Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize our drug candidates and to compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to manage any future growth effectively. To that end, we must be able to manage our development efforts and clinical trials effectively and hire, train and integrate additional management, administrative, and sales and marketing personnel. We may not be able to accomplish these tasks, and our failure to accomplish any of them could prevent us from successful growth and could harm our future business, financial condition and operating results.

Changes in government regulation or in practices relating to the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, including potential healthcare reform, could decrease the need for our drug candidates, or make it more difficult to obtain regulatory approvals for our drug candidates and commercialize them.

In recent years, the U.S. Congress, the President, executive branch agencies, and state legislatures have considered various types of healthcare reform to control growing healthcare costs. Similar reform movements have occurred in parts of Europe and Asia. Healthcare reform legislation could also increase the costs of drug development and commercialization that could limit the profits to be made from the development of new drugs. This could adversely affect R&D expenditures by pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, which could in turn decrease the business opportunities available to us in the U.S. and other countries. We are unable to predict what reform proposals will be adopted in the future, if any.

If we, or any CRO we may engage, fails to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business.

We and certain of the third parties we contract with, such as our contract research organizations, or CROs, are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures and the handling, use, storage, treatment, and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. In addition, our planned construction projects can only be put into operation after certain regulatory procedures have been completed with the relevant administrative authorities in charge of environmental protection, health and safety. Our operations involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological materials. Our operations also may produce hazardous waste products at some future time. We generally contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and wastes. We cannot entirely eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from our use of hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources.

Although we maintain workers’ compensation insurance to cover the costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of or exposure to hazardous materials, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. We do not maintain insurance for environmental liability or toxic tort claims that may be asserted against us in connection with our storage, use or disposal of biological or hazardous materials.

In addition, the environmental, health and safety laws and regulations applicable to us and our third-party contractors may change and impose stricter requirements in the future. As a result, we may be required to incur substantial costs to comply with future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. These current or future laws and regulations may impair our research, development or production efforts. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.

Our internal computer systems, or those used by any CRO or other contractors or consultants we may engage, may fail or suffer security breaches.

Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems and those of our CROs and other contractors and consultants are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses and unauthorized access. Although, to our knowledge, we have not experienced any material system failure or security breach to date, if such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our development programs and business operations.

In the ordinary course of our business, we collect and store sensitive data, including, among other things, legally protected patient health information, personally identifiable information about our employees, intellectual property, and proprietary business information. We manage and maintains our applications and data utilizing on-site systems and outsourced vendors. These applications and data encompass a wide variety of business-critical information including research and development information, commercial information, and business and financial information. Because information systems, networks and other technologies are critical to many of our operating activities, shutdowns or service disruptions of our systems or those of the vendors that provide information systems, networks or other services to us pose increasing risks. Such disruptions may be caused by events such as computer hacking, phishing attacks, ransomware, dissemination of computer viruses, worms and other destructive or disruptive software, denial of service

attacks and other malicious activity, as well as power outages, natural disasters (including extreme weather), terrorist attacks or other similar events. Such events could have an adverse impact on us and our business, including loss of data and damage to equipment and data. In addition, system redundancy may be ineffective or inadequate, and our disaster recovery planning may not be sufficient to cover all eventualities. Significant events could result in a disruption of our operations, damage to our reputation or a loss of revenues. In addition, we may not have adequate insurance coverage to compensate for any losses associated with such events.

We could be subject to risks caused by misappropriation, misuse, leakage, falsification or intentional or accidental release or loss of information maintained in our information systems and networks and those of our vendors, including personal information of our employees and patients, and company and vendor confidential data. In addition, outside parties may attempt to penetrate our systems or those of our vendors or fraudulently induce our personnel or the personnel of our vendors to disclose sensitive information in order to gain access to our data and/or systems. Like other companies, we have on occasion experienced, and will continue to experience, threats to our data and systems, including malicious codes and viruses, phishing and other cyber-attacks. The number and complexity of these threats continue to increase over time. If a material breach of our information technology systems or those of our vendors occurs, the market perception of the effectiveness of our security measures could be harmed and our reputation and credibility could be damaged. We could be required to expend significant amounts of money and other resources to repair or replace information systems or networks.

In addition, we could be subject to regulatory actions and/or claims made by individuals and/or groups in private litigation involving privacy issues related to data collection and use practices and other data privacy laws and regulations, including claims for misuse or inappropriate disclosure of data, as well as unfair or deceptive practices. Although we develop and maintain systems and controls designed to prevent these events from occurring, and we have a process to identify and mitigate threats, the development and maintenance of these systems, controls and processes is costly and requires ongoing monitoring and updating as technologies change and efforts to overcome security measures become increasingly sophisticated. Moreover, despite our efforts, the possibility of these events occurring cannot be eliminated entirely. As we outsource more of our information systems to vendors, engages in more electronic transactions with payers and patients and relies more on cloud-based information systems, the related security risks will increase and we will need to expend additional resources to protect our technology and information systems.

We manufacture all of our drug candidates ourselves, and intend to manufacture most, if not all, of any approved drugs ourselves as well.

We currently have manufacturing facilities in the U.S. and may build additional manufacturing facilities in other markets to expand our manufacturing capacity. These facilities may encounter unanticipated delays and expenses due to a number of factors, including regulatory requirements. If construction, regulatory evaluation, and/or approval of our new facilities is delayed, we may not be able to manufacture sufficient quantities of our drug candidates, if approved, which would limit our development and commercialization activities and our opportunities for growth. Cost overruns associated with constructing or maintaining our facilities could require us to raise additional funds from other sources, which may not be available on favorable terms or at all.

Much of the equipment used in our manufacturing process was developed and built by us, and it would be difficult or even impossible to purchase or create suitable replacements in a short period of time. Further, for much of this equipment we have an insufficient amount of or no spare parts available. Were certain equipment, some of which is critical to the production of our drug candidates, to become damaged, lost, or otherwise unusable, we would have to construct new parts, which could take a considerable time, causing a temporary halt to at least a portion of our production operations in the meantime. Further, we are constantly seeking to further fine-tune and develop our advanced manufacturing techniques and process controls to fully utilize our facilities. Advances in manufacturing techniques may render our facilities and equipment inadequate, in which case we may lose competitive advantage.

To produce our drug candidates in the quantities that we believe will be required to meet anticipated market demand, if approved, we will need to increase or “scale up” the production process by a significant factor over current levels of production. A significant part of the scaling up process will include seeking for ways to increase the automation and semi-automation of our production process, which will require additional research and development, investment, potential new regulatory approvals, and cooperation with third parties, some of which may not be successful. If we are unable or delayed in scaling up, or if the cost of doing so is not economically feasible for us, we may not be able to produce our approved drug candidates in a sufficient quantity to meet future demand.

Delays in completing and receiving regulatory approvals for our manufacturing facilities could delay our development plans or commercialization efforts.

Our manufacturing facilities will be subject to ongoing, periodic inspection by various regulatory authorities, including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), European Medicines Agency (“EMA”), China’s National Medical Products Administration (“NMPA”), Health Canada, and the Australian Therapeutics Goods Administration (“TGA”) or other comparable regulatory agencies to ensure compliance with good manufacturing practices (“GMP”). Our failure to follow and document our adherence to such GMP or other regulatory requirements may lead to significant delays in the availability of products for clinical or, in the future, commercial use, and may result in the termination of or a hold on a clinical trial, or may delay or prevent filing or approval of marketing applications for our drug candidates or the commercialization of our drugs, if approved. We also may encounter problems with the following:

•        achieving adequate or clinical-grade materials that meet FDA, EMA, NMPA, Health Canada, TGA or other comparable regulatory agency standards or specifications with consistent and acceptable production yield and costs;

•        shortages of qualified personnel, raw materials or key contractors; and

•        ongoing compliance with GMP and other requirements of the FDA, EMA, NMPA, TGA or other comparable regulatory agencies.

Failure to comply with applicable regulations could also result in sanctions being imposed on us, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, a requirement to suspend or put on hold one or more of our clinical trials, failure of regulatory authorities to grant marketing approval of our drug candidates, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, supply disruptions, license revocation, seizures, or recalls of our drug candidates, operating restrictions and civil or criminal prosecutions, any of which could harm our business.

Damage to, destruction of or interruption of production at our manufacturing facilities would negatively affect our business and prospects.

If our manufacturing facilities or the equipment in them is damaged or destroyed, we may not be able to quickly or inexpensively replace our manufacturing capacity or replace it at all. In the event of a temporary or protracted loss of the facilities or equipment, we might not be able to transfer manufacturing to a third party. Even if we could transfer manufacturing to a third party, the shift would likely be expensive and time-consuming, particularly since the new facility would need to comply with the necessary regulatory requirements and we would need regulatory agency approval before selling any of our future approved drugs manufactured at that new facility. Such an event could delay our clinical trials or reduce our product sales if and when we are able to commercialize one or more of our drug candidates. Any interruption in manufacturing operations at our manufacturing facilities could result in our inability to satisfy the demands of our clinical trials or commercialization. Any disruption that impedes our ability to manufacture our drugs in a timely manner could materially harm our business, financial condition and operating results.

Currently, we maintain insurance coverage against damage to our property and equipment in amounts we believe are reasonable. However, our insurance coverage may not reimburse us, or may not be sufficient to reimburse us, for any expenses or losses we may suffer. We may be unable to meet the requirements for our drugs if there were a catastrophic event or failure of our manufacturing facilities or processes.

Our future success depends on our ability to retain key executives and to attract, train, retain and motivate qualified and highly skilled personnel.

We are highly dependent on Mark Mortenson, our co-founder and chief science officer, Rob Etherington, CEO, President and a Director, and the other principal members of our management and scientific teams. Although we have formal employment agreements with select executive officers, these agreements do not prevent our executives from terminating their employment with us at any time. Further, Mr. Etherington and Mr. Mortenson have not entered into formal employment agreements with us. We do not maintain “key person” insurance for any of our executives or other employees. The loss of the services of any of these persons could impede the achievement of our research, development and commercialization objectives.

Recruiting and retaining qualified scientific, technical, clinical, and manufacturing and sales and marketing personnel in the future will also be critical to our success. In addition, we rely on consultants and advisors, including scientific and clinical advisors, to assist us in formulating our discovery, clinical development, operations, and commercialization strategy. The loss of the services of our executive officers or other key employees and consultants could impede the achievement of our research, development, and commercialization objectives and seriously harm our ability to successfully implement our business strategy.

We benefit from certain tax and financial incentives, the expiration of or changes to which could adversely affect our profitability.

We benefit from certain tax treatments, as well as tax concessions in relation to our research and development costs. We receive refundable tax credits through the R&D tax credits in the United States, Australia, and the state of Maryland. In the United States, the R&D credit is used to offset federal employment taxes on our United States payroll. In Australia, we receive a refundable tax offset of 43.5% of R&D deductions. In Maryland, we receive the Basic Research and Development Tax credit of 3% of the lesser of eligible R&D expenses and the Maryland Base Amount, which is used to offset state income taxes and may be applied against following years’ taxes until the credit is used or the credit may be carried forward for seven years. We also receive a tax exemption in Maryland for state personal property and sales tax, as well as the Maryland enterprise zone hiring and job creation tax credits.

In addition, current or future tax treatments, tax concessions, tax allowances and financial incentives applicable to us may be changed, terminated, or otherwise become unavailable due to many factors, including changes in government policy or administrative decisions by the relevant government authorities. Due to potential changes in government policies, we cannot be certain of the level of government grants we will receive in the future. Our post-tax profitability and cash flows may be adversely affected as a result of one or more of these or other factors.

Our financial position and operations may be adversely affected by the COVID-19 outbreak.

An outbreak of the respiratory illness COVID-19 caused by a strain of novel coronavirus, SARS-Cov-2, has spread worldwide, causing many governments to implement measures to slow the spread of the outbreak through quarantines, strict travel restrictions, heightened border scrutiny, and other measures. The outbreak and government measures taken in response have had a significant impact, both direct and indirect, on businesses and commerce. The future progression of the outbreak and its effects on our business and operations are uncertain.

We and our CROs and clinical sites may experience disruptions in supply of drug candidates and/or procuring items that are essential for our research and development activities, including raw materials used in the manufacturing of our drug candidates, medical and laboratory supplies used in our clinical trials or preclinical studies or animals that are used for preclinical testing, in each case, for which there may be shortages because of ongoing efforts to address the outbreak. Any disruption in the supply chain from the recent COVID-19 outbreak, or any potential future outbreak could have a material adverse effect on our clinical trial plans and business operations.

Additionally, we have enrolled, and will seek to enroll, patients in our clinical trials at sites located in many areas affected by COVID-19 and, as a result, our trials may be impacted. In addition, even if sites are actively recruiting, we may face difficulties recruiting or retaining patients in our ongoing and planned clinical trials if patients are affected by the virus or are fearful of visiting or traveling to clinical trial sites because of the outbreak. Prolonged delays or closure to enrollment in our trials or patient discontinuations could have a material adverse impact on our clinical trial plans and timelines.

The response to the COVID-19 pandemic may redirect resources with respect to regulatory and intellectual property matters in a way that would adversely affect our ability to obtain regulatory approvals and protect our intellectual property. In addition, we may face impediments to regulatory meetings and approvals due to measures intended to limit in-person interactions.

Any negative impact that the COVID-19 outbreak has on the ability of our suppliers to provide materials for our drug candidates or on recruiting or retaining patients in our clinical trials or our ability to collect patient data could cause costly delays to clinical trial activities, which could adversely affect our ability to obtain regulatory approval for and to commercialize our drug candidates, increase our operating expenses, and have a material adverse effect on our financial results.

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted economies worldwide, which could result in adverse effects on our business and operations. We cannot be certain what the overall impact of the COVID-19 pandemic will be on our business. It has the potential to adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We will incur increased costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management will be required to devote substantial time to new compliance initiatives.

As a public company, and particularly after we are no longer an emerging growth company, we will incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and rules subsequently implemented by the SEC and the Nasdaq Global Market have imposed various requirements on public companies, including establishing and maintaining effective disclosure and financial controls and corporate governance practices. Our management and other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, these rules and regulations will increase our legal and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time-consuming and costly. For example, we expect that these rules and regulations may make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance.

We have identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. If we fail to remediate the material weakness, or if we experience additional material weaknesses in the future or otherwise fails to maintain an effective system of internal controls in the future, we may not be able to accurately or timely report our financial condition or results of operations, which may adversely affect investor confidence in us and, as a result, the value of our Common Stock.

Effective internal control over financial reporting is necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and, together with adequate disclosure controls and procedures, is designed to prevent fraud. Any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation, could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. In addition, any testing by us, as and when required, conducted in connection with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act or any subsequent testing by our independent registered public accounting firm, as and when required, may reveal deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting that are deemed to be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses or that may require prospective or retroactive changes to our financial statements or identify other areas for further attention or improvement. Inferior internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the trading price of our Common Stock.

In connection with the audit of our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, our management identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. The material weaknesses identified relate to the fact that we did not design or maintain an effective control environment commensurate with our financial reporting requirements, including (a) lack of a sufficient number of trained professionals with an appropriate level of accounting knowledge, training and experience to appropriately analyze, record and disclose accounting matters timely and accurately, and (b) lack of structures, reporting lines and appropriate authorities and responsibilities to achieve financial reporting objectives. This deficiency in our control environment contributed to the following additional deficiencies (each of which individually represents a material weakness) in our internal control over financial reporting.

•        we did not design and maintain formal accounting policies, procedures and controls to achieve complete, accurate and timely financial accounting, reporting and disclosures, including controls over the preparation and review of account reconciliations and journal entries;

•        we did not design and maintain effective controls over segregation of duties related to manual journal entries. Specifically, certain personnel have the ability to both prepare and post manual journal entries without an independent review by someone without the ability to prepare and post manual journal entries;

•        we did not design and maintain formal accounting policies, processes and controls to analyze, account for and disclose complex transactions. Specifically, we did not design and maintain controls to analyze, account for and disclose warrants to purchase preferred stock and convertible promissory notes with embedded derivatives, including ensuring complete and accurate data was used in the valuations; and

•        we did not design and maintain effective controls over certain information technology general controls for IT systems that are relevant to the preparation of the financial statements. Specifically, we did not design and maintain: (a) user access controls to ensure appropriate segregation of duties and that adequately restrict user and privileged access to financial applications, programs, and data to appropriate personnel, (b) program change management controls to ensure that IT program and data changes affecting financial IT applications and underlying accounting records are identified, tested, authorized and implemented appropriately, (c) computer operations controls to ensure that data backups are authorized and monitored, and (d) testing and approval controls for program development to ensure that new software development is aligned with business and IT requirements.

The control deficiencies identified resulted in the misstatement of our redeemable convertible preferred stock warrant liability, accrued liabilities, general and administrative expenses, Australian research and development credit, and amounts and classification within our statement of cash flows and related financial disclosures, which led to a restatement of our 2017 financial statements. Additionally, each of the control deficiencies described above could result in a misstatement of one or more account balances or disclosures that would result in a material misstatement to the annual or interim consolidated financial statements that would not be prevented or detected. Accordingly, our management has determined that each of the control deficiencies described above constitute a material weakness.

To remedy the identified material weaknesses, we have implemented and continue to implement, several measures, including, among others:

•        hiring additional competent and qualified accounting and reporting personnel with appropriate knowledge and experience of U.S. GAAP and SEC financial reporting requirements;

•        establishing and designing internal financial reporting structures and authorizing certain departments or capable and responsible persons to be in charge of the overall financial management and financial objectives;

•        establishing an ongoing program to provide sufficient additional training to our accounting staff, especially training related to U.S. GAAP and SEC financial reporting requirements;

•        designing and preparing accounting policies in accordance with relevant rules, especially in relation to complex and major transactions;

•        updating our internal staff manual and ensuring effective segregation of duties for our accounting staff in relation to manual journal entries; and

•        upgrading our internal IT systems to facilitate financial management and reporting procedures.

Although we have begun to implement measures to address the material weaknesses, the implementation of these measures may not fully address the material weaknesses and deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting, and we cannot conclude that these matters have been fully remedied. Further, in the future we may determine that we have additional material weaknesses. Our failure to remediate the material weaknesses or failure to identify and address any other material weaknesses or control deficiencies could result in inaccuracies in our financial statements and could also impair our ability to comply with applicable financial reporting requirements and related regulatory filings on a timely basis, which could cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which may result in volatility in and a decline in the market price of our securities.

Pursuant to Section 404, after the Reverse Recapitalization, we, as the surviving entity, are required to furnish a report by our management on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, including an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. However, while we remain an emerging growth company, we will not be required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. To achieve compliance with Section 404 within the prescribed period, we will be engaged in a process to document and evaluate our internal control over financial reporting, which is both costly and challenging. In this regard, we will need to continue to dedicate internal resources, potentially engage outside consultants and adopt a detailed work plan to assess and document the adequacy of internal control over financial reporting, continue steps to improve control processes as appropriate, validate through testing that controls are functioning as documented and implement a continuous reporting and improvement process for internal control over financial reporting. Despite our efforts, there is a risk

that neither we nor our independent registered public accounting firm will be able to conclude within the prescribed timeframe that our internal control over financial reporting is effective as required by Section 404. This could result in an adverse reaction in the financial markets due to a loss of confidence in the reliability of our financial statements.

There is significant uncertainty associated with our drug candidates and their viability as a commercial product.

Metallic nanocrystal therapeutic candidates, such as our lead product, CNM-Au8, are considered emerging and novel investigational products for the potential treatment of neurological diseases and other disorders. We are developing CNM-Au8 for the treatment of neurological disorders such as MS, ALS, and PD through remyelination and/or neuroprotection mechanisms related to catalysis of certain biological reactions. There are currently no approved remyelination therapies and the evidence for an effect of neuroprotection treatments on these indications is thus far limited. Since there is limited clinical trial data and precedent for the development of nanocrystal therapies that promote remyelination and neuroprotection to treat these indications, there is a substantial risk that the design or outcomes of our clinical trials will not be satisfactory to support regulatory approval. In addition, there are generally limited or no regulatory precedents concerning metallic nanocrystal drug marketing authorization, or a regulatory framework to appropriately differentiate approved nanocrystal product labeling. Our lead metallic nanocrystal drug candidate, CNM-Au8, contains nanocrystals made entirely of high purity gold alone. It is unclear how regulatory authorities will identify or classify the active moiety of CNM-Au8, including whether it is classified as a new chemical entity or comparable designation. The inability to obtain sufficiently differentiated active moiety classification from gold generically could potential limit CNM-Au8 and our drug candidates from ever achieving profitability.

Moreover, the mechanisms of action for nanocrystal therapies are not thoroughly understood, and adverse events or side effects may be observed in clinical studies and reported by medical practitioners in connection with patient usage in the future. If those adverse events or side effects prove significant, they may hamper the ability of our drug candidates to pass through clinical trials or they may outweigh the benefits that patients derive from using our drug candidates, both of which could potentially prevent our drug candidates from ever achieving profitability.

Our drug candidates are not metabolized and may accumulate in the body following long-term usage, making the long-term effects of taking our drug candidates for substantial periods of time uncertain. While all of the current toxicology studies of our drug candidates have resulted in no-adverse-effect levels as the date of this prospectus, we have not completed reproductive or carcinogenicity studies, which we are required to complete in the future. Any negative results from these studies could materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Moreover, the results of clinical trials for nanocrystal therapies could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of undesirable side effects. Any such side effects could adversely impact our ability to obtain regulatory approvals. For example, the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or other comparable authorities could order us to suspend or terminate our studies or to cease further clinical development of or deny approval of our drug candidates. In addition, any adverse drug-related side effects could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete trials or may result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

We have not previously obtained any regulatory approval for a drug candidate and we may be unable to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining regulatory approval for any of our drug candidates.

Our business is substantially dependent on our ability to complete the development of, obtain regulatory approval for and successfully commercialize drug candidates in a timely manner. We cannot commercialize drug candidates without obtaining regulatory approval to market each drug from the FDA, NMPA, Health Canada, TGA, EMA and other comparable regulatory authorities. The time required to obtain approval from regulatory authorities is unpredictable but typically takes years following the commencement of pre-clinical studies and clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. In addition, approval policies, regulations or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a drug candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions.

Our drug candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including:

•        failure to begin or complete clinical trials due to disagreements with regulatory authorities;

•        failure to begin or complete clinical trials due to inability to recruit sufficient numbers of study participants;

•        failure to demonstrate that a drug candidate is safe and effective or is safe, pure and potent for our proposed indication;

•        failure of clinical trial results to meet the level of statistical significance required for approval;

•        data integrity issues related to our clinical trials;

•        disagreement with our interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials;

•        changes in approval policies or regulations that render our preclinical and clinical data insufficient for approval or require us to amend our clinical trial protocols;

•        regulatory requests for additional analysis, reports, data, nonclinical studies and clinical trials, or questions regarding interpretations of data and results and the emergence of new information regarding our drug candidates;

•        insufficient data from the clinical trials of our drug candidates to obtain regulatory approval;

•        failure by us or our investigators to conduct a clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical trial protocols; and

•        clinical sites, investigators or other participants in our clinical trials deviating from a trial protocol, failing to conduct the trial in accordance with regulatory requirements, or dropping out of a trial.

The FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or a comparable regulatory authority may require more information, including additional preclinical or clinical data, to support approval, which may delay or prevent approval and our commercialization plans, or we may decide to abandon the development program.

New or unexpected adverse events, or changes in regulatory requirements and guidance may also occur, and we may need to amend clinical trial protocols submitted to applicable regulatory authorities to reflect these changes. Amendments may require us to resubmit clinical trial protocols to institutional review boards (“IRBs”) or human research ethics committees (“HREC”) for re-examination, which may impact the costs, timing or successful completion of a clinical trial.

If we experience delays in the completion of, or the termination of, a clinical trial of any of our drug candidates, the commercial prospects of that drug candidate will be harmed, and our ability to generate product sales revenues from any of those drug candidates will be delayed. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our drug candidate development and approval process, and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate related revenues for that product. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our drug candidates.

We may not be able to successfully identify, discover, develop or in-license new drug candidates.

We cannot guarantee that we will be successful in identifying potential drug candidates for clinical development for a number of reasons. For example, our research methodology may be unsuccessful in identifying potential drug candidates or those we identify may be shown to have harmful side effects or other characteristics that make them unmarketable or unlikely to receive regulatory approval. we have devoted significant resources to discovery efforts through our proprietary electro-crystal-chemistry drug development platform, and we cannot guarantee that we will be successful in identifying additional potential drug candidates, or that we will be able to successfully identify and in-license new drug candidates with high potential from other parties.

Research programs to pursue the development of our drug candidates for additional indications and to identify new drug candidates and drug targets require substantial technical, financial, and human resources. our research programs may initially show promise in identifying potential indications and/or drug candidates, yet fail to yield results for clinical development for a number of reasons, including:

•        the research methodology used may not be successful in identifying potential indications, and/or drug candidates;

•        potential drug candidates may, after further study, be shown to have harmful adverse effects or other characteristics that indicate they are unlikely to be effective drugs; or

•        it may take greater human and financial resources to identify additional therapeutic opportunities for our drug candidates or to develop suitable potential drug candidates through internal research programs than we will possess, thereby limiting our ability to diversify and expand our drug portfolio.

Accordingly, there is no assurance that we will ever be able to identify additional therapeutic opportunities for our drug candidates or to develop suitable potential drug candidates through internal research programs, which could materially and adversely affect our future growth and prospects. we may focus our efforts and resources on potential drug candidates or other potential programs that ultimately prove to be unsuccessful.

Pre-clinical and clinical development of drug candidates involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and we are unable to predict if or when we will successfully develop or commercialize any of our drug candidates.

There is a risk of failure for each of our drug candidates. It is difficult to predict when or if any of our drug candidates will prove effective and safe in humans or will receive regulatory approval. Before obtaining regulatory approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of any of our drug candidates, we must complete pre-clinical studies and then conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our drug candidates in humans. our internal discovery programs for some of our drug candidates are at an early stage of development and will require significant investment and regulatory approvals prior to commercialization. We are not permitted to market or promote any of our drug candidates until we receive regulatory approval from the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or comparable regulatory authorities, and we may never receive such regulatory approval for any of our drug candidates.

We could encounter regulatory delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us or, as applicable, by the institutional review boards or the ethics committees of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, by the data safety monitoring board, which is an independent group of experts that is formed to monitor clinical trials while ongoing, or by the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or other regulatory authorities. Such authorities may impose a suspension or termination due to a number of factors, including: a failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or the applicable clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or other regulatory authorities that results in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a drug, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions, or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. Many of the factors that cause a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our drug candidates. Further, the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or other regulatory authorities may disagree with our clinical trial design or our interpretation of data from clinical trials, or may change the requirements for approval even after it has reviewed and commented on the design for our clinical trials.

Pre-clinical studies and clinical trials are expensive, difficult to design and implement, and can take many years to complete. Moreover, pre-clinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analysis, and many companies that have believed their drug candidates performed satisfactorily in pre-clinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain regulatory approval of their drug candidates. Future clinical trials of our drug candidates may not be successful.

Commencement of clinical trials is subject to finalizing the trial design based on ongoing discussions with the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA and/or other regulatory authorities. The FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA and other regulatory authorities could change their position on the acceptability of trial designs or clinical endpoints, which could require us to complete additional clinical trials or impose approval conditions that we do not currently expect. Successful completion of our clinical trials is a prerequisite to submitting an NDA (or analogous filing) to the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA and/or other regulatory authorities for each drug candidate and, consequently, the ultimate approval and commercial marketing of our drug candidates. We do not know whether the clinical trials for our drug candidates will be completed on schedule, if at all.

Results of earlier clinical trials may not be predictive of results of later-stage clinical trials.

The results of pre-clinical studies and early clinical trials of our drug candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Drug candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through pre-clinical studies and initial clinical trials. Future clinical trial results may not be favorable for these and other reasons.

In some cases, there can be significant variability in the safety and/or efficacy results between different trials of the same drug candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial procedures set forth in protocols, differences in the size and type of the patient populations, including genetic differences, patient adherence to the dosing regimen, and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. As drug candidates are developed through pre-clinical to early- to late-stage clinical trials towards approval and commercialization, it is customary that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing and formulation, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize processes and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives. In the case of any trials we conduct, results may differ from earlier trials due to the larger number of clinical trial sites and additional countries and languages involved in such trials. Any of these changes could make the results of planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials we may initiate less predictable and could cause our drug candidates to perform differently, which could delay completion of clinical trials, delay approval of our drug candidates, and/or jeopardize our ability to commence commercialization of our drug candidates.

Clinical trials of our drug candidates may fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of regulatory authorities, or may not otherwise produce positive results, which may cause us to incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of our drug candidates.

Before obtaining regulatory approval for the sale of our drug candidates, we must conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our drug candidates in humans. We may experience numerous unexpected events during, or as a result of, clinical trials that could delay or prevent us from receiving regulatory approval or commercializing our drug candidates, including:

•        regulators, IRBs, or HRECs may not authorize us or our investigators to commence a clinical trial or conduct a clinical trial at a prospective trial site;

•        our inability to reach agreements on acceptable terms with prospective CROs, clinical trial vendors, and trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and trial sites;

•        manufacturing issues, including problems with manufacturing, supply quality, compliance with GMP, or obtaining from third parties sufficient quantities of a drug candidate for use in a clinical trial;

•        clinical trials of our drug candidates may produce negative or inconclusive results, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical trials or abandon drug development programs;

•        the number of patients required for clinical trials of our drug candidates may be larger than we anticipate;

•        our third-party contractors, including clinical investigators, may fail to comply with regulatory requirements or meet their contractual obligations to us in a timely manner, or at all;

•        we may not investigate, may not be able to license, or may be unable to properly conduct companion diagnostic tests to identify patients who are likely to benefit from treatment with our drug candidates;

•        we might have to suspend or terminate clinical trials of our drug candidates for various reasons, including a finding of a lack of clinical response or other unexpected characteristics or a finding that participants are being exposed to unacceptable health risks;

•        regulators, IRBs or HRECs may require that we or our investigators suspend or terminate clinical research or not rely on the results of clinical research for various reasons, including non-compliance with regulatory requirements;

•        the cost of clinical trials of our drug candidates may be greater than we anticipate;

•        the supply or quality of our drug candidates or other materials necessary to conduct clinical trials of our drug candidates may be insufficient or inadequate; and

•        our drug candidates may have undesirable side effects or unexpected characteristics, causing us or our investigators, regulators, institutional review boards or ethics committees to suspend or terminate the clinical trials, or reports may arise from pre-clinical studies or clinical trials of other therapies that raise safety or efficacy concerns about our drug candidates.

If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our drug candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate, if we are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our drug candidates or other testing, if the results of these trials or tests are not positive or are only modestly positive or if they raise safety concerns, we may (i) be delayed in obtaining regulatory approval for our drug candidates; (ii) not obtain regulatory approval at all; (iii) obtain approval for indications that are not as broad as intended; (iv) have the drug removed from the market after obtaining regulatory approval; (v) be subject to additional post-marketing testing requirements; (vi) be subject to restrictions on how the drug is distributed or used; or (vii) be unable to obtain reimbursement for use of the drug.

Significant clinical trial delays may also increase our development costs and could shorten any periods during which we have the exclusive right to commercialize our drug candidates or allow our competitors to bring drugs to market before we do. This could impair our ability to commercialize our drug candidates and may harm our business and results of operations.

If we encounter difficulties enrolling patients in clinical trials, clinical trials of our drug candidates may be delayed or otherwise adversely affected.

The timely completion of clinical trials in accordance with their protocols depends, among other things, on our ability to enroll a sufficient number of patients who remain in the trial until our conclusion. we may experience difficulties in patient enrollment in our clinical trials for a variety of reasons, including:

•        the size and nature of the patient population;

•        the design of the trial, including the patient eligibility criteria defined in the protocol;

•        the size of the study population required for analysis of the trial’s primary endpoints;

•        the proximity of patients to trial sites;

•        our ability to recruit clinical trial investigators with the appropriate competencies and experience;

•        competing clinical trials for similar therapies or other new therapeutics;

•        clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages and side effects of the drug candidate being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new drugs or treatments that may be approved for the indications we are investigating;

•        our ability to obtain and maintain patient consents;

•        the risk that patients enrolled in clinical trials will not complete a clinical trial; and

•        the availability of approved therapies that are similar in mechanism to our drug candidates.

Failure of our timely completion of clinical trials would delay the approval and commercialization of our drug candidates, impair the commercial performance of our drug candidates, and consequently harm our business and results of operations.

If we are not able to obtain, or experiences delays in obtaining, required regulatory approvals, we will not be able to commercialize our drug candidates, and our ability to generate revenue will be materially impaired.

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of any drug candidate for a target indication, we must demonstrate in preclinical studies and well-controlled clinical trials, and, with respect to approval in the U.S., to the satisfaction of the FDA, that the drug candidate is safe and effective for use for that target indication and that the manufacturing facilities, processes and controls are adequate. In addition to preclinical and clinical data, the New

Drug Application (“NDA”) must include significant information regarding the chemistry, manufacturing, and controls for the drug candidate. Obtaining approval of an NDA is a lengthy, expensive and uncertain process, and approval may not be obtained. After we submits an NDA to the FDA, the FDA decides whether to accept or reject the submission for filing. We cannot be certain that any submissions will be accepted for filing and review by the FDA.

We have not yet demonstrated an ability to file for or receive regulatory approval for our drug candidates. For example, we do not have experience in preparing the required materials for regulatory submission or navigating the regulatory approval process. As a result, our ability to successfully submit an NDA and obtain regulatory approval for our drug candidates may involve more inherent risk, take longer, and cost more than it would if we were a company with experience in obtaining regulatory approvals.

Regulatory authorities outside of the U.S., such as the NMPA and EMA, also have requirements for approval of drugs for commercial sale with which we must comply prior to marketing in those areas. Regulatory requirements can vary widely from country to country and could delay or prevent the introduction of our drug candidates. Clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and obtaining regulatory approval in one country does not mean that regulatory approval will be obtained in any other country. Approval processes vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and validation, and additional administrative review periods. Seeking non-U.S. regulatory approval could require additional nonclinical studies or clinical trials, which could be costly and time consuming. The non-U.S. regulatory approval process may include all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA approval. For all of these reasons, we may not obtain non-U.S. regulatory approvals on a timely basis, if at all.

The process to develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize drug candidates is long, complex and costly both inside and outside the United States, and approval is never guaranteed. Even if our drug candidates were to successfully obtain approval from the regulatory authorities, any approval might significantly limit the approved indications for use, or require that precautions, contraindications or warnings be included on the product labeling, or require expensive and time-consuming post-approval clinical trials or surveillance as conditions of approval. Following any approval for commercial sale of our drug candidates, certain changes to the drug, such as changes in manufacturing processes and additional labeling claims, may be subject to additional review and approval by the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA and comparable regulatory authorities. Also, regulatory approval for any of our drug candidates may be withdrawn. If we are unable to obtain regulatory approval for our drug candidates in one or more jurisdictions, or any approval contains significant limitations, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our drug candidates will be harmed. Furthermore, we may not be able to obtain sufficient funding or generate sufficient revenue and cash flows to continue the development of any other drug candidate in the future.

Favorable designations may not be granted, or if granted, be withdrawn later, for any of our drug candidates, and may not lead to faster development or regulatory review or approval.

We do not currently have Fast Track Designation or, Breakthrough Therapy Designation, but may seek one or more of such designations in the future.

If a drug is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and the drug demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical need for that condition, the drug sponsor may apply for FDA Fast Track Designation. The FDA has broad discretion whether or not to grant this designation. Even if we believe a particular drug candidate is eligible for this designation, we cannot assure that the FDA would decide to grant it. Even if we do receive Fast Track Designation, we may not experience a development, review or approval process faster than conventional FDA procedures. The FDA may withdraw a Fast Track Designation if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program. Many drugs that have received Fast Track Designation have failed to obtain approval from the FDA.

A Breakthrough Therapy is defined as a drug that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For drugs that have been designated as Breakthrough Therapies, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor can help to identify the most efficient path for development.

Designation as a Breakthrough Therapy is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe, after completing early clinical trials, that one of our drug candidates meets the criteria for designation as a Breakthrough Therapy, the FDA may disagree and instead decide not to grant that designation. In any event, the receipt of a Breakthrough Therapy Designation for a drug candidate may not result in a faster development, review or approval process compared to drugs considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one or more of our drug candidates qualify as Breakthrough Therapies, the FDA may later decide that such drug candidates no longer meet the conditions for qualification.

The U.S. FDA granted orphan drug development status to our lead drug candidate, CNM-Au8, for the treatment of ALS in May 2019. Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the U.S. and the European Union, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a drug as an orphan drug if it is a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a disease with a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the U.S., or that affects more than 200,000 individuals in the U.S. and for which there is no reasonable expectation that costs of research and development of the product for the indication can be recovered by sales of the product in the U.S. Generally, if a drug with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first regulatory approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the drug is entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA or EMA, from approving another marketing application for the same drug for the same indication during the period of exclusivity. The applicable period is seven years in the United States and 10 years in the European Union. The European exclusivity period can be reduced to six years if a drug no longer meets the criteria for orphan drug designation or if the drug is sufficiently profitable so that market exclusivity is no longer justified. Orphan drug exclusivity may be lost if the FDA or the EMA determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.

Although we have obtained orphan drug exclusivity for CNM-Au8 for the treatment of ALS in the U.S., and may obtain the same exclusivity for other drug candidates or indication, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the drug candidate from competition because different drugs can be approved for the same condition and the same drugs can be approved for a different condition but used off-label for any orphan indication we may obtain. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve a drug that is otherwise the same drug for the same condition if the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective, or makes a major contribution to patient care.

Any of our future approved drug candidates will be subject to ongoing or additional regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experiences unanticipated problems with our drug candidates.

Any of our future approved drug candidates will be subject to ongoing or additional regulatory requirements for manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, record-keeping, conduct of post-marketing studies, and submission of safety, efficacy, and other post-market information, including both federal and state requirements in the U.S. and requirements of comparable regulatory authorities in European Union, China, Australia and other markets.

Manufacturers and manufacturers’ facilities are required to comply with extensive FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA and other comparable regulatory authority requirements ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to GMP. As such, we will be subject to continual review and inspections to assess compliance with GMP and adherence to commitments made in any NDA, other marketing application, and previous responses to any inspection observations if we were to build manufacturing facilities in the future. Accordingly, we and others with whom we work must continue to expend time, money and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production, and quality control.

Any approvals that we receive for our drug candidates may be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the drug may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, which could adversely affect the drug’s commercial potential or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the drug candidate. The FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or a comparable regulatory authority may also require a risk evaluation mitigation strategy program as a condition of approval of our drug candidates or following approval. In addition, if the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or a comparable regulatory authority approves our

drug candidates, we will have to comply with requirements, including, for example, submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as continued compliance with GMP and good clinical practice GCP, for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval.

The FDA and other regulatory authorities strictly regulate the marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of products that are placed on the market. Drugs may be promoted only for their approved indications and for use in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA and other regulatory authorities actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability.

Even if we are able to commercialize any approved drug candidates, the drugs may become subject to national or other third-party reimbursement practices or unfavorable pricing regulations, which could harm our business.

The regulations that govern regulatory approvals, pricing and reimbursement for new therapeutic products vary widely from country to country. In Europe, Canada, Australia, China, and some markets outside China, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. As a result, we might obtain regulatory approval for a drug in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations that delay our commercial launch of the drug and negatively impact our revenues.

Our ability to commercialize any approved drug candidates successfully also will depend in part on the extent to which reimbursement for these drugs and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers, and other organizations.

A primary trend in the global healthcare industry is cost containment. Government authorities and these third-party payers have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications.

In the U.S., no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for drugs exists among third-party payers. As a result, obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval of a drug from a government or other third-party payer is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us to provide to each payer supporting scientific, clinical, and cost-effectiveness data for the use of our future approved drugs on a payer-by-payer basis, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained. Even if we obtain coverage for a given drug, the resulting reimbursement rates might not be adequate for us to achieve or sustain profitability or may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. Additionally, third-party payers may not cover, or provide adequate reimbursement for, long-term follow-up evaluations required following the use of our future approved drug candidates. Patients are unlikely to use any of our future approved drugs unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover a significant portion of the cost of the drug. Because some of our drug candidates may have a higher cost of goods than conventional small molecule therapies, and may require long-term follow-up evaluations, the risk that coverage and reimbursement rates may be inadequate for us to achieve profitability may be greater.

Increasingly, third-party payers are requiring that companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for medical products. We cannot assure that reimbursement will be available for any approved drug candidate that we commercializes and, if reimbursement is available, what the level of reimbursement will be. Reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any approved drug candidate that we commercialize. If reimbursement is not available or is available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any drug candidate that it successfully develops.

There may be significant delays in obtaining reimbursement for approved drug candidates, and coverage may be more limited than the purposes for which the drug candidates are approved by the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or other comparable regulatory authorities. Moreover, eligibility for reimbursement does not imply that any drug will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including research, development, manufacture, sale and distribution. Interim payments for new drugs, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover our costs and may not be made permanent. Payment rates may vary according to the use of the drug and the clinical setting in which it is used, may be based on payments allowed for lower cost drugs that are already reimbursed, and may be incorporated into existing payments for other services. Net prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payers and by any future weakening of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the U.S. our inability to promptly obtain

coverage and profitable payment rates from both government-funded and private payers for any future approved drug candidates and any new drugs that we develop could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and overall financial condition.

We intend to seek approval alone or in conjunction with partners to market our drug candidates in the U.S., China, European Union, Australia, Canada, and other jurisdictions. In China, Australia, Canada, and the European Union, the pricing of drugs is subject to governmental control, and it can take considerable time after obtaining marketing regulatory approval to get the future approved drugs reimbursed. Market acceptance and sales of any of our future approved drug candidates will depend significantly on the availability of adequate coverage and reimbursement from third-party payers for drugs and may be affected by existing and future healthcare reform measures.

Our drug candidates approved in the future may fail to achieve the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payers and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success and the market opportunity for the drug candidate may be smaller than we estimate.

Our future approved drug candidates may fail to gain sufficient market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payers and others in the medical community. For example, current multiple sclerosis treatments are well established in the medical community, and physicians may continue to rely on these treatments to the exclusion of our drug candidates that are in clinical trials for the same or similar indications. In addition, physicians, patients, and third-party payers may prefer other novel products to ours. If our drug candidates do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant product sales revenues and we may not become profitable. The degree of market acceptance of our drug candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including:

•        the clinical indications for which our drug candidates are approved;

•        whether physicians, hospitals, treatment centers and patients consider our drug candidates as a safe and effective treatment;

•        the potential and perceived advantages of our drug candidates over alternative treatments;

•        the prevalence and severity of any side effects;

•        product labeling or product insert requirements of regulatory authorities;

•        limitations or warnings contained in the labeling approved by regulatory authorities;

•        the timing of market introduction of our drug candidates as well as competitive drugs;

•        the cost of treatment in relation to alternative treatments;

•        the availability of adequate coverage, reimbursement and pricing by third-party payers and government authorities;

•        the willingness of patients to pay out-of-pocket in the absence of coverage and reimbursement by third-party payers and government authorities; and

•        the effectiveness of our sales and marketing efforts.

If any approved drug candidates that we commercialize fail to achieve market acceptance among physicians, patients, hospitals, treatment centers or others in the medical community, we will not be able to generate significant revenue. Even if our future approved drug candidates achieve market acceptance, we may not be able to maintain that market acceptance over time if new products or technologies are introduced that are more favorably received than our drug candidates, are more cost-effective or render our drug candidates obsolete.

If our drug candidates cause, or are perceived to cause, undesirable side effects, it can result in delays or failure to receive regulatory approval or limitations on the commercial profile of an approved label.

Undesirable side effects caused by our drug candidates could cause either us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or other regulatory authorities. If the results of the ongoing clinical trials of our drug

candidates reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of undesirable side effects, the clinical trials of our drug candidates could be suspended or terminated and the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or comparable regulatory authorities could order us to cease further development of or deny approval of our drug candidates for any or all targeted indications. The drug-related side effects could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the clinical trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Clinical trials assess a sample of the potential patient population. With a limited number of patients and a limited duration of exposure, rare and severe side effects of our drug candidates may only be uncovered with a significantly larger number of patients exposed to the drug candidates. If our drug candidates receive regulatory approval and we or others discover undesirable side effects caused by such drugs (or any other similar drugs) or that such drug candidates are less effective than previously believed, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

•        the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or other comparable regulatory authorities may withdraw or limit their approval of such drug candidates;

•        the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or other comparable regulatory authorities may require the addition of labeling statements, such as a “boxed” warning or a contra-indication;

•        we may be required to create a medication guide outlining the risks of such side effects for distribution to patients;

•        we may be required to change the way such drug candidates are distributed or administered, conduct additional clinical trials or change the labeling of our drug candidates;

•        the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or other comparable regulatory authorities may require the development of risk evaluation and mitigation strategies and plans to mitigate risks, which could include medication guides, physician communication plans, or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools;

•        we may be subject to regulatory investigations and government enforcement actions;

•        we may decide to remove such drug candidates from the marketplace;

•        we could be sued and held liable for injury caused to individuals exposed to or taking our drugs; and

•        our reputation may suffer.

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the affected drug candidates and could substantially increase the costs of commercializing our drugs, if approved, and significantly impact our ability to successfully commercialize our drugs and generate revenue.

Adverse drug reactions and negative results from off-label use of our products could materially harm our business reputation, product brand name, financial condition and expose us to liability.

Products distributed or sold in the pharmaceutical market may be subject to off-label drug use. Off-label drug use is prescribing a product for an indication, patient population, dosage strength or frequency, or other condition of use that is not in accordance with regulatory approved usage and labeling. Even though the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA and other comparable regulatory authorities actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label use, there remains the risk that our products are subject to off-label drug use and is prescribed in a patient population or dosage that has not been approved by competent authorities. Off-label use of our products may be less effective or entirely ineffective and may cause adverse drug reactions. Any of these occurrences can create negative publicity and significantly harm our business reputation, product brand name, commercial operations, and financial condition, including our share price. These occurrences may also expose us to liability and cause, or lead to, a delay in the progress of our clinical trials and may also ultimately result in failure to obtain regulatory approval for our drug candidates.

As a company, we have no experience in launching and marketing drugs. If we are unable to develop sales, marketing and distribution capabilities or enter into sales, marketing and distribution agreements or arrangements with third parties, we may not be successful in commercializing any drugs and generate drug candidate sales revenue.

We have not yet demonstrated an ability to launch and commercialize any of our drug candidates. As a result, our ability to successfully commercialize any approved drugs may involve more inherent risk, take longer, and cost more than it would if we were a company with prior experience launching and marketing drugs.

We will have to compete with other pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical companies to recruit, hire, train and retain marketing and sales personnel. We must either develop internal sales, marketing, and commercial distribution capabilities for any or all of our approved drugs or pursue collaborative arrangements regarding the sales and marketing of our approved drugs. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to develop such distribution capabilities or establish or maintain such collaborative arrangements, or if we are able to do so, that they will have effective sales forces. Any revenue we receive will depend upon the efforts of such third parties. we would have little or no control over the marketing and sales efforts of such third parties, and our revenue from product sales may be lower than if we had commercialized our approved drugs by ourselves. We also face competition in our search for third parties to assist it with the sales and marketing efforts for our approved drugs.

As a result, we may not be able to generate product sales revenue.

We face substantial competition from other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, and our operating results may suffer if we fail to compete effectively.

The development and commercialization of new drugs is highly competitive. We face competition from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, and biotechnology companies worldwide. There are a number of large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that currently market and sell drugs or are pursuing the development of drugs for the treatment of neurological diseases and other disorders for which we are commercializing our drugs or developing our drug candidates. Potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies, and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, seek patent protection and establish collaborative arrangements for research, development, manufacturing, and commercialization.

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize drugs that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient, or are less expensive than any drugs that we commercialize or may develop. Our competitors may also obtain approval from the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or other comparable regulatory authorities for their drugs more rapidly than we may obtain approval for our drugs, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market and/or could slow our regulatory approval.

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

We may be subject, directly or indirectly, to applicable anti-kickback, false claims laws, physician payment transparency laws, fraud and abuse laws or similar healthcare and security laws and regulations in the U.S. and other jurisdictions, which could expose us to criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm and diminished profits and future earnings.

Healthcare providers, physicians and others play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any products for which we obtain regulatory approval. If we obtain FDA approval for any of our drug candidates and begin commercializing those drugs in the U.S., our operations may be subject to various federal and state fraud and abuse laws, including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal False Claims Act, and physician

payment sunshine laws and regulations. These laws may impact, among other things, our proposed sales, marketing, and education programs. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business.

Additionally, we are subject to state and non-U.S. equivalents of each of the healthcare laws described above, among others, some of which may be broader in scope and may apply to healthcare services reimbursed by any source, not just governmental payers, including private insurers. In addition, some states have passed laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the April 2003 Office of Inspector General Compliance Program Guidance for Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and/or other voluntary industry codes of conduct. Several states also impose other marketing restrictions or require pharmaceutical companies to make marketing or price disclosures to the state. There are ambiguities as to what is required to comply with these state requirements, and if we fail to comply with applicable state law requirements, we could be subject to penalties.

Violations of fraud and abuse laws may be punishable by criminal and/or civil sanctions, including penalties, fines and/or exclusion or suspension from federal and state healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid and debarment from contracting with the U.S. government. In addition, private individuals have the ability to bring actions on behalf of the U.S. government under the federal False Claims Act as well as under the false claims laws of several states.

Neither the U.S. government nor the U.S. courts have provided definitive guidance on limitations to potential liability under the fraud and abuse laws as they may apply to our business. Law enforcement authorities are increasingly focused on enforcing these laws, often using new and creative legal theories, and it is possible that some of our practices may be challenged under these laws. Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. Regardless of the compliance efforts, it is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, defending against such actions, even if successful, would distract the company and key personnel from our core mission and impose potentially significant costs. If we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, disgorgement, monetary fines, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal healthcare programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and curtailment of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations. In addition, the approval and commercialization of any of our approved drugs outside the U.S. will also likely subject us to non-U.S. equivalents of the healthcare laws mentioned above, among other non-U.S. laws, as well as the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).

If any of the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business are found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs, which may also adversely affect our business.

Any failure to perform proper quality control and quality assurance would have a material adverse effect on our business and financial results.

The manufacturing of our drug candidates and future approved drugs is subject to applicable laws, regulations, and GMP. These regulations govern manufacturing processes and procedures, including record keeping and the implementation and operation of quality management systems to control and assure the quality of investigational products and products approved for sale. We apply stringent quality controls at each stage of our production process to comply with these requirements. We perform extensive tests throughout the manufacturing processes to ensure the safety and effectiveness of our drug candidates. We may, however, detect instances in which an unreleased product was produced without adherence to our manufacturing procedures or the raw material used in our production process was not collected to store in accordance with the GMP or other regulations, resulting in a determination that the implicated products should be destroyed.

In addition, if we fail to comply with relevant quality control requirements under laws and GMP, we could experience a disruption in the supply of our products, which could delay or prevent further sales of such products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial results.

In addition, quality issues may arise during scale-up activities. If we are unable to successfully ensure consistent and high quality of our products during large-volume production, the sales of our products may not be able to be promoted, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial results.

We may explore the licensing of commercialization rights or other forms of collaboration worldwide, which will expose us to additional risks.

Non-U.S. markets are an important component of our growth strategy. we initially intend to focus on opportunities in the U.S., European Union, Canada, Australia, Japan, and China, in particular. If we fail to obtain licenses or enter into collaboration arrangements with third parties in these or other markets, or if these parties are not successful, our revenue-generating growth potential will be adversely affected. Moreover, international business relationships subject us to additional risks that may materially adversely affect our ability to attain or sustain profitable operations, including:

•        efforts to enter into collaboration or licensing arrangements with third parties in connection with our international sales, marketing, and distribution efforts may increase our expenses or divert our management’s attention from the acquisition or development of our drug candidates;

•        difficulty of effective enforcement of contractual provisions in local jurisdictions;

•        differing regulatory requirements for drug approvals and marketing internationally;

•        changes in a specific market’s political and cultural climate or economic condition;

•        potential third-party patent rights or potentially reduced protection for intellectual property rights;

•        unexpected changes in tariffs, trade barriers, and regulatory requirements;

•        economic weakness, including inflation;

•        compliance with tax, employment, immigration, and labor laws for employees traveling abroad;

•        the effects of applicable non-U.S. tax structures and potentially adverse tax consequences;

•        currency fluctuations, which could result in increased operating expenses and reduced revenue;

•        production shortages resulting from any events affecting raw material supply or manufacturing capabilities abroad;

•        workforce uncertainty and labor unrest;

•        failure of our employees and contracted third parties to comply with Office of Foreign Asset Control rules and regulations and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act; and

•        business interruptions resulting from geo-political actions, including war and terrorism, or natural disasters, including earthquakes, volcanoes, typhoons, floods, hurricanes, and fires.

These and other risks may materially and adversely affect our ability to attain or sustain revenue from international markets.

Illegal and/or parallel imports and counterfeit pharmaceutical products may reduce demand for our future approved drug candidates and could have a negative impact on our reputation and business.

The importation, whether authorized by governmental policy or illegally, of competing products from countries where government price controls or other market dynamics result in lower prices may adversely affect the demand for our future approved drugs and, in turn, may adversely affect our sales and profitability where we commercialize our products. Unapproved foreign imports of prescription drugs are illegal under the current laws of the U.S., China, European Union, Australia and other jurisdictions. However, illegal imports may continue to occur or even increase as the ability of patients to obtain these lower priced imports continues to grow. Furthermore, cross-border imports from lower-priced markets (parallel imports) into higher-priced markets could harm sales of our future approved drugs and exert commercial pressure on pricing within one or more markets. In addition, competent government authorities may

expand consumers’ ability to import lower priced versions of our future approved products or competing products from outside the countries where we operate. Any future legislation or regulations that increase consumer access to lower priced medicines from outside the countries where we operate could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Certain products distributed or sold in the pharmaceutical market may be manufactured without proper licenses or approvals, or are fraudulently mislabeled with respect to their content or manufacturers. These products are generally referred to as counterfeit pharmaceutical products. The counterfeit pharmaceutical product control and enforcement system, particularly in developing markets such as China, may be inadequate to discourage or eliminate the manufacturing and sale of counterfeit pharmaceutical products imitating our products. Since counterfeit pharmaceutical products in many cases have very similar appearances compared with the authentic pharmaceutical products but are generally sold at lower prices, counterfeits of our products can quickly erode the demand for our future approved drugs. Our reputation and business could suffer harm as a result of counterfeit pharmaceutical products sold under our or our collaborators’ brand name(s). In addition, theft of inventory at warehouses, plants or while in-transit, which are not properly stored and which are sold through unauthorized channels, could adversely impact patient safety, as well as our reputation and business.

We rely on third parties to conduct our preclinical studies and clinical trials and we must work effectively with collaborators to develop our drug candidates. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our drug candidates and our business could be substantially harmed.

We rely upon and plan to continue to rely upon third-party CROs and third-party vendors to monitor, collect samples, analyze samples, report data, and manage data for our ongoing preclinical and clinical programs. We rely on these parties for execution of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and controls only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal and regulatory requirements, and scientific standards, and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We, our CROs and third-party vendors supporting our clinical programs, and our clinical investigators, are required to comply with GCPs, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA, and other comparable regulatory authorities for all of our drugs in clinical development. If we or any of our CROs or clinical investigators fails to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, NMPA, TGA, EMA or comparable regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. In addition, our pivotal clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under GMP. our failure to comply with these regulations may require it to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.

If any of our relationships with these third-parties terminates, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs or vendors, or to do so on commercially reasonable terms. In addition, our CROs are not our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such CROs, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our ongoing clinical and nonclinical programs. If CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they or our clinical investigators obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols, regulatory requirements, or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our drug candidates. As a result, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for our approved drugs would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed.

Switching or adding additional CROs involves additional cost and delays, which can materially influence our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. There can be no assurance that we will not encounter similar challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and prospects.

Our future revenues are dependent on our ability to work effectively with collaborators to develop our drug candidates, including to obtain regulatory approval. Our arrangements with collaborators will be critical to successfully bringing products to market and commercializing them. We relies on collaborators in various respects, including to undertake research and development programs, conduct clinical trials, manage or assist with the regulatory filings and approval process, and to assist with our commercialization efforts. We do not control our collaborators; therefore, we cannot ensure that these third parties will adequately and timely perform all of their obligations to us. If they fail to

complete the remaining studies successfully, or at all, it could delay, adversely affect or prevent regulatory approval. We cannot guarantee the satisfactory performance of any of our collaborators and if any of our collaborators breach or terminate their agreements with us, we may not be able to successfully commercialize the licensed product which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, cash flows and results of operations.

Our third-party CROs and third-party vendors may also be impacted by the COVID-19 outbreak. See “— Our financial position and operations may be adversely affected by the COVID-19 outbreak.”

We have entered into research collaborations and may form or seek collaborations or strategic alliances or enter into licensing arrangements in the future, and we may not realize the benefits of such collaborations, alliances, or licensing arrangements.

We may form or seek strategic alliances, create joint ventures or collaborations, or enter into licensing arrangements with third parties that we believe will complement or augment our development and commercialization efforts with respect to our drug candidates and any future drug candidates that we may develop. Any of these relationships may require us to incur non-recurring and other charges, increase our near and long-term expenditures, issue securities that dilute our existing shareholders, or disrupt our management and business.

We have entered into collaborative research arrangements with some of the world’s leading academic institutions and research centers and are working with key scientists in the field of central nervous system disorders. We face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic partners and the negotiation process is time-consuming and complex. Moreover, we may not be successful in our efforts to establish a strategic partnership or other alternative arrangements for our drug candidates because they may be deemed to be at too early of a stage of development for collaborative effort and third parties may not view our drug candidates as having the requisite potential to demonstrate safety and efficacy or commercial viability. If and when we collaborate with a third party for development and commercialization of a drug candidate, we can expect to relinquish some or all of the control over the future success of that drug candidate to the third party. For any drug candidates that we may seek to in-license from third parties, we may face significant competition from other pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies with greater resources or capabilities than we have, and any agreement that we do enter may not result in the anticipated benefits.

Further, collaborations involving our drugs are subject to numerous risks, which may include the following:

•        collaborators have significant discretion in determining the efforts and resources that they will apply to a collaboration;

•        collaborators may not pursue development and commercialization of our drug candidates or may elect not to continue or renew development or commercialization programs based on clinical trial results, changes in their strategic focus due to the acquisition of competitive drugs, availability of funding, or other external factors, such as a business combination that diverts resources or creates competing priorities;

•        collaborators may delay clinical trials, provide insufficient funding for a clinical trial, stop a clinical trial, abandon a drug candidate, repeat or conduct new clinical trials, or require a new formulation of a drug candidate for clinical testing;

•        collaborators could independently develop, or develop with third parties, drugs that compete directly or indirectly with our drugs;

•        a collaborator with marketing and distribution rights to one or more drugs may not commit sufficient resources to their marketing and distribution;

•        collaborators may not properly develop, maintain, or defend our intellectual property rights or may use our intellectual property or proprietary information in a way that gives rise to actual or threatened litigation that could jeopardize or invalidate our intellectual property or proprietary information or expose us to potential liability;

•        disputes may arise between us and a collaborator that cause the delay or termination of the research, development, or commercialization of our drug candidates, or that result in costly litigation or arbitration that diverts management attention and resources;

•        collaborations may be terminated and, if terminated, may result in a need for additional capital to pursue further development or commercialization of the applicable drug candidates; and

•        collaborators may own or co-own intellectual property covering our drugs that results from our collaborating with them, and in such cases, we would not have the exclusive right to commercialize such intellectual property.

As a result, we may not be able to realize the benefit of current or future research collaborations, strategic partnerships, or the potential licensing of third-party drugs if we are unable to successfully integrate such products with our existing operations and company culture, which could delay our timelines or otherwise adversely affect our business. We also cannot be certain that, following a strategic transaction or license, we will achieve the revenue or specific net income that justifies such transaction. If we are unable to reach agreements with suitable collaborators on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all, we may have to curtail the development of a drug candidate, reduce or delay our development program or one or more of our other development programs, delay our potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities, or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to fund and undertake development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional expertise and additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we fail to enter into collaborations and do not have sufficient funds or expertise to undertake the necessary development and commercialization activities, we may not be able to further develop our drug candidates or bring them to market and generate product sales revenue, which would harm our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Our business depends on the use of raw materials, and a decrease in the supply, or an increase in the cost of these raw materials could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In order to manufacture our products, we must obtain sufficient quantities of high-quality raw materials at commercially acceptable prices and in a timely manner. Certain critical raw materials, such as wires made of high-purity gold and other transition elements, are available from a limited number of suppliers in the market. As a result, any disruption in production or inability of our suppliers to produce adequate quantities to meet our needs could impair our ability to operate our business on a day-to-day basis and to continue our research and development of future drug candidates. Moreover, we expect our demand for such materials to increase as we expand our business scale and commercialize our products, and we cannot guarantee that current suppliers have the capacity to meet our demand. We are also exposed to the risk of increased material costs, which we may not be able to pass on to customers and as a result, we could have lower profitability. In addition, although we have implemented quality inspection procedures on such materials before they are used in our manufacturing processes and also require our suppliers to maintain high quality standards, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to secure sufficient quantities of raw materials at high quality standards, nor detect all quality issues in the supplies we use. For example, should the highly purified water that we utilize be compromised in any way, it could render entire batches unusable or, depending on the nature of the impurity, potentially dangerous to patients. We cannot assure you that third parties will be able to maintain and renew all licenses, permits, and approvals necessary for their operations or comply with all applicable laws and regulations. Failure to do so by them may lead to interruption in their business operations, which in turn may result in shortages of the raw materials utilized by us. If we are unable to obtain adequate raw materials and the quality of our products suffer as a result, we may have to delay clinical trials and regulatory filings, recall our products, be subject to product liability claims, fail to comply with continuing regulatory requirements, and incur significant costs to rectify such issues, which may have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we are unable to obtain and maintain sufficient patent protection for our drug candidates through intellectual property rights, or if the scope of such intellectual property rights obtained is not sufficiently broad, third parties could develop and commercialize products similar or identical to our products, and our ability to commercialize our approved drugs successfully may be adversely affected.

Our success depends in large part on our ability to protect our proprietary technology, drug candidates in clinical studies, and approved drugs on market (if approved) from competition by obtaining, maintaining and enforcing our intellectual property rights, including patent rights. We seek to protect the drug candidates and technology that it considers commercially important by filing patent applications in most important commercial markets, including the

U.S., the People’s Republic of China (“PRC”), Europe, Canada, Japan, Korea, and other countries, relying on trade secrets or pharmaceutical regulatory protection or employing a combination of these methods. However, the patent prosecution process is expensive, time-consuming and complex, and we may not be able to file, prosecute, maintain, enforce or license all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. As a result, we may not be able to prevent competitors from developing and commercializing competitive drugs in all such fields and territories.

Patents may be invalidated and patent applications may not be granted for a number of reasons, including known or unknown prior art, deficiencies in the patent application or the lack of novelty of the underlying invention or technology. Although we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to confidential or patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and any other third parties, any of these parties may breach such agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection. In addition, publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the U.S. and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, or in some cases, not at all. Therefore, we cannot be certain that it was the first to make the inventions claimed in our patents or pending patent applications or that it was the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. Furthermore, the PRC, EPO, and the U.S. have adopted the “first-to-file” system under which whoever first files a patent application will be awarded the patent if all other patentability requirements are met. Under the first-to-file system, third parties may be granted a patent relating to a technology which we invented.

The coverage sought by the claims in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and the scope of the claims can be reinterpreted after issuance. Even if patent applications we license or own currently or in the future issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors or other third parties from competing with us, or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. In addition, the patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions, and has been the subject of much litigation in recent years. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain.

The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to our inventorship, scope, validity, or enforceability, and our patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in any country. We may be subject to a third-party preissuance submission of prior art to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, or become involved in opposition, derivation, revocation, re-examination, post-grant and inter partes review, or interference proceedings or similar proceedings in foreign jurisdictions challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope of, or invalidate, our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize our technology or approved drugs and compete directly with us without payment, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize drug candidates and approved drugs without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating third-party patent rights. Moreover, we may have to participate in interference proceedings declared by the USPTO to determine priority of invention or in post-grant challenge proceedings, such as oppositions in a foreign patent office, that challenge the priority of our invention or other features of patentability of our patents and patent applications. Such challenges may result in loss of patent rights, loss of exclusivity, or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology and drug candidates. Such proceedings also may result in substantial costs and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us. Consequently, we do not know whether any of our technology or drug candidates will be protectable or remain protected by valid and enforceable patents. Our competitors or other third parties may be able to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner.

Furthermore, although various extensions may be available, the life of a patent and the protection it affords, is limited. For example, approved therapies may face competition from generic medications after the related patents have expired, or if they are challenged and invalidated even before their expiry. Manufacturers of generic drugs may challenge the scope, validity or enforceability of our patents in court, and we may not be successful in enforcing or defending those intellectual property rights and, as a result, may not be able to develop or market the relevant product exclusively, which would have a material adverse effect on any potential sales of that product. The issued patents and pending patent applications, if issued, for our drug candidates are expected to expire on various dates as described

in “Business — Intellectual Property” of this prospectus. Upon the expiration of our issued patents or patents that may issue from our pending patent applications, we will not be able to assert such patent rights against potential competitors and our business and results of operations may be adversely affected.

Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new drug candidates, patents protecting such drug candidates might expire before or shortly after such drugs are commercialized. As a result, our patents and patent applications may not provide it with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to our products. Moreover, some of our patents and patent applications may in the future be co-owned with third parties. If we are unable to obtain an exclusive license to any such third-party co-owners’ interest in such patents or patent applications, such co-owners may be able to license their rights to other third parties, including our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. In addition, we may need the cooperation of any such co-owners of our patents in order to enforce such patents against third parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world or prevent unfair competition by third parties.

Filing, prosecuting, maintaining, and defending patents on drug candidates in all countries throughout the world could be prohibitively expensive for us, and our intellectual property rights in some non-U.S. countries can have a different scope and strength than do those in the U.S. In addition, the laws of certain non-U.S. countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the U.S. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the U.S., or from selling or importing drugs made using our inventions in and into the U.S. or non-U.S. jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own drugs and further, may export otherwise infringing drugs to non-U.S. jurisdictions where we have patent protection, but where enforcement rights are not as strong as those in the U.S. These drugs may compete with our future approved drugs and our patent rights or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or adequate to prevent them from competing.

We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our intellectual property, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful. our patent rights relating to our drugs could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court or before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office or comparable non-U.S. authority.

Competitors may infringe our patent rights or misappropriate or otherwise violate our intellectual property rights. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, litigation may be necessary in the future to enforce or defend our intellectual property rights, protect our trade secrets or determine the validity and scope of our own intellectual property rights or the proprietary rights of others. Enforcement or defense of intellectual property rights can be expensive and time consuming. Any claims that we assert against perceived infringers could also provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe their intellectual property rights. Many of our current and potential competitors have the ability to dedicate substantially greater resources to enforce and/or defend their intellectual property rights than we can. Accordingly, despite our efforts, we may not be able to prevent third parties from infringing upon or misappropriating our intellectual property. An adverse result in any litigation proceeding could put our patents, as well as any patents that may issue in the future from our pending patent applications, at risk of being invalidated, held unenforceable or interpreted narrowly. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation.

In patent litigation in the U.S., defendant counterclaims in district courts or in the patent trademark and appeal board (PTAB) alleging invalidity or unenforceability are commonplace, and there are numerous grounds upon which a third party can assert invalidity or unenforceability of a patent. Third parties may also raise similar claims before administrative bodies in the U.S. or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include ex parte re-examination, inter partes review, post-grant review, derivation and equivalent proceedings in non-U.S. jurisdictions, such as opposition proceedings. Such proceedings could result in revocation or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover and protect our drug candidates. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity of our patents, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art of which we, our patent counsel, and the patent examiner were unaware during

prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on our drug candidates. Such a loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business.

We may not be able to prevent misappropriation of our trade secrets or confidential information, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the U.S. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation.

If we are sued for infringing the intellectual property rights of third parties, such litigation could be costly and time consuming and could prevent or delay us from developing or commercializing our drug candidates.

Our commercial success depends in part on our avoiding infringement of the patents and other intellectual property rights of third parties. We are aware of other issued patents belonging to third parties that exist in fields in which we are developing our drug candidates. There may also be third-party patents or patent applications of which we are currently unaware, and given the dynamic area in which we operate, additional patents are likely to be issued that relate to some aspects of our business. There is a substantial amount of litigation and other claims and proceedings involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries generally. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our drug candidates may give rise to claims of infringement of the patent rights of others.

Third parties may assert that we are using technology in violation of their patent or other proprietary rights. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, could involve substantial litigation expense and divert our technical personnel, management personnel, or both from their normal responsibilities. If third parties bring successful claims against us for infringement of their intellectual property rights, we may be subject to injunctive or other equitable relief, which could prevent us from developing and commercializing one or more of our drug candidates. We may also have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees in the case of willful infringement, or redesign our infringing drug candidates, which may be impossible or require substantial time and cost. In the event of an adverse result in any such litigation, or even in the absence of litigation, we may need to obtain licenses from third parties to advance our research or allow commercialization of our drug candidates. Any such license might not be available on reasonable terms or at all. In the event that we are unable to obtain such a license, we would be unable to further develop and commercialize one or more of our drug candidates, which could harm our business significantly. We may also elect to enter into license agreements in order to settle patent infringement claims or to resolve disputes prior to litigation, and any such license agreements may require us to pay royalties and other fees that could significantly harm our business.

Intellectual property litigation may lead to unfavorable publicity that harms our reputation and increases our operating losses, causing the market price of our Common Stock to decline.

During the course of any intellectual property litigation, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments, and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the market price of the ordinary shares. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing, or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to adequately conduct such litigation or proceedings. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace.

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

Periodic maintenance fees on any issued patent are due to be paid to the USPTO and most foreign jurisdictions either annually or in several stages over the lifetime of the patent. The USPTO and various non-U.S. governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment, and other similar provisions during the patent application process. Although an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late

We may be subject to claims that our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed the alleged trade secrets of their former employers.

Many of our employees, including our senior management, were previously employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Some of these employees, including each member of our senior management, executed proprietary rights, non-disclosure and non-competition agreements in connection with such previous employment. Although we try to ensure that our employees do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or these employees have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such employee’s former employer. we are not aware of any threatened or pending claims related to these matters or concerning the agreements with our senior management, but in the future litigation may be necessary to defend against such claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, or personnel. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management.

Intellectual property rights do not necessarily protect us from all potential threats to our competitive advantages.

The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations, and may not adequately protect our business, or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. The following examples are illustrative:

•        others may be able to make compounds that are similar to our drug candidates but that are not covered by the claims of the patents that we own or may in the future exclusively license;

•        we might not have been the first to make the inventions covered by the issued patents or pending patent applications that it owns or may in the future exclusively license, which could result in the patent applications not issuing or being invalidated after issuing;

•        we might not have been the first to file patent applications covering certain of our inventions, which could prevent the issuance of the patent applications or cause them to be invalidated after issuance;

•        others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of our technologies without infringing our intellectual property rights;

•        it is possible that our pending patent applications will not lead to issued patents;

•        issued patents that we own or have exclusively licensed may not provide it with any competitive advantages, or may be held invalid or unenforceable, as a result of legal challenges by our competitors;

•        we may obtain patents for certain drug candidates many years before it receives NDA approval for these drugs, and because patents have a limited life, which may begin to run prior to the commercial sale of the related drugs, limiting the commercial value of our patents;

•        our competitors might conduct research and development activities in countries where we does not have patent rights and then use the information learned from such activities to develop competitive drugs for commercialization in our major markets;

•        we may fail to develop additional proprietary technologies that are patentable;

•        we may fail to apply for or obtain adequate intellectual property protection in all the jurisdictions in which it operates; and

•        the patents of others may have an adverse effect on our business, for example by preventing we from commercializing one or more of our drug candidates for one or more indications.

•        any of the aforementioned threats to our competitive advantage could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Risks Related to the Reverse Recapitalization and Integration of Businesses

We will incur significant increased expenses and administrative burdens as a public company, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

As a newly public company, we will face increased legal, accounting, administrative and other costs and expenses as a public company that we did not incur as a private company. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”), including the requirements of Section 404, as well as rules and regulations subsequently implemented by the SEC, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 and the rules and regulations promulgated and to be promulgated thereunder, the PCAOB and the securities exchanges, impose additional reporting and other obligations on public companies. Compliance with public company requirements will increase costs and make certain activities more time-consuming. A number of those requirements will require us to carry out activities we have not done previously. In addition, additional expenses associated with SEC reporting requirements will be incurred. Furthermore, if any issues in complying with those requirements are identified (for example, if the auditors identify a material weakness or significant deficiency in the internal control over financial reporting), we could incur additional costs rectifying those issues, and the existence of those issues could adversely affect our reputation or investor perceptions of it. It may also be more expensive to obtain director and officer liability insurance. Risks associated with our status as a public company may make it more difficult to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on the board of directors or as executive officers. The additional reporting and other obligations imposed by these rules and regulations will increase legal and financial compliance costs and the costs of related legal, accounting and administrative activities. These increased costs will require us to divert a significant amount of money that could otherwise be used to expand the business and achieve strategic objectives. Advocacy efforts by shareholders and third parties may also prompt additional changes in governance and reporting requirements, which could further increase costs.

We qualify as an emerging growth company within the meaning of the Securities Act, and if we take advantage of certain exemptions from disclosure requirements available to emerging growth companies, it could make our securities less attractive to investors and may make it more difficult to compare our performance to the performance of other public companies.

We qualify as an “emerging growth company” as defined in Section 2(a)(19) of the Securities Act, as modified by the JOBS Act. As such, we are eligible for and intend to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies for as long as we continue to be an emerging growth company, including (i) the exemption from the auditor attestation requirements with respect to internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, (ii) the exemptions from say-on-pay, say-on-frequency and say-on-golden parachute voting requirements and (iii) reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements. We will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest of (i) the last day of the fiscal year in which the market value of the shares of our Common Stock that are held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of June 30 of that fiscal year, (ii) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have total annual gross revenue of $1.07 billion or more during such fiscal year, (iii) the date on which we have issued more than $1 billion in non-convertible debt in the prior three-year period or (iv) the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the date of the first sale of common stocks in TOTA’s IPO.

Under the JOBS Act, emerging growth companies can also delay adopting new or revised accounting standards until such time as those standards apply to private companies. We have elected to use this extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards that have different effective dates for public and private companies until the earlier of the date we (i) are no longer an emerging growth company or (ii) affirmatively and irrevocably opt out of the extended transition period provided in the JOBS Act. As a result, we will not be subject to the same new or revised accounting standards as other public companies that are not emerging growth companies and our financial statements may not be comparable to other public companies that comply with new or revised accounting pronouncements as of public company effective dates. We may choose to early adopt any new or revised accounting standards whenever such early adoption is permitted for private companies.

Further, even after we no longer qualify as an emerging growth company, we may still qualify as a “smaller reporting company,” which would allow us to take advantage of many of the same exemptions from disclosure requirements, including reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements. In addition, if we are a smaller reporting company with less than $100 million in annual revenue, we would not be required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

The unaudited pro forma financial information included elsewhere in this prospectus may not be indicative of what our actual financial position or results of operations would have been.

The unaudited pro forma financial information in this prospectus is presented for illustrative purposes only and has been prepared based on a number of assumptions. Accordingly, such pro forma financial information may not be indicative of our future operating or financial performance and our actual results of operations may vary materially from our pro forma results of operations contained elsewhere in this prospectus, including as a result of such assumptions not being accurate. The unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial information does not give effect to any anticipated synergies, operating efficiencies or cost savings that may be associated with the Business Combination. See “Unaudited Pro Forma Condensed Combined Financial Information.”

We cannot predict if investors will find our common shares less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common shares less attractive as a result, there may be a less of an active trading market for our common shares and our share price may be more volatile.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

Provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws that went into effect upon the consummation of the Reverse Recapitalization could make a merger, tender offer or proxy contest difficult, thereby depressing the trading price of our Common Stock.

Provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws may discourage, delay or prevent a merger, acquisition or other change in control that shareholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which shareholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares. These provisions could also limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our Common Stock, thereby depressing the market price of our Common Stock. Such provisions including the following:

•        a classified board of directors with three-year staggered terms, which could delay the ability of shareholders to change the membership of a majority of our board of directors;

•        the ability of our board of directors to issue shares of preferred stock and to determine the price and other terms of those shares, including preferences and voting rights, without shareholder approval, which could be used to significantly dilute the ownership of a hostile acquiror;

•        the requirement for the affirmative vote of holders of at least 66⅔% of the voting power of all of the then-outstanding shares of the voting stock, voting together as a single class, to amend the provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws, which may inhibit the ability of an acquiror to effect such amendments to facilitate an unsolicited takeover attempt;

•        the exclusive right of our board of directors to elect a director to fill a vacancy created by the expansion of our board of directors or the resignation, death or removal of a director, which prevents shareholders from being able to fill vacancies on our board of directors for a period of time; and

•        the requirement that a special meeting of shareholders may be called only by the board of directors, the chairman of our board of directors or our Chief Executive Officer, which could delay the ability of our shareholders to force consideration of a proposal or to take action, including the removal of directors.

These and other provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws could make it more difficult for shareholders or potential acquirors to obtain control of our board of directors or initiate actions that are opposed by our then-current board of directors, including the ability to delay or impede a merger, tender offer or proxy contest. The existence of these provisions could negatively affect the price of our Common Stock and limit opportunities for shareholders to realize value in a corporate transaction.

There can be no assurance that we will be able to comply with the continued listing standards of Nasdaq.

If Nasdaq delists our shares of Common Stock or warrants from trading on its exchange for failure to meet Nasdaq’s listing standards, we and our shareholders could face significant material adverse consequences including:

•        a limited availability of market quotations for our securities;

•        reduced liquidity for our securities;

•        a determination that our Common Stock is a “penny stock” which will require brokers trading in our Common Stock to adhere to more stringent rules and possibly result in a reduced level of trading activity in the secondary trading market for our securities;

•        a limited amount of news and analyst coverage; and

•        a decreased ability to issue additional securities or obtain additional financing in the future.

The price of our Common Stock and warrants may be volatile.

The stock markets in general and the markets for biotechnology stocks have experienced extreme volatility. The market for the common stock of smaller companies such as ours is characterized by significant price volatility when compared to the shares of larger, more established companies that trade on a national securities exchange and have large public floats, and our share price is more volatile than the shares of such larger, more established companies for the indefinite future.

The price of our Common Stock and warrants may fluctuate due to a variety of factors, including:

•        changes in the industries in which we operate;

•        variations in our operating performance and the performance of our competitors in general;

•        material and adverse impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the markets and the broader global economy;

•        actual or anticipated fluctuations in our quarterly or annual operating results;

•        publication of research reports by securities analysts about us or our competitors or our industry, such as occurred in February 2021;

•        the public’s reaction to our press releases, our other public announcements and our filings with the SEC;

•        our failure or the failure of our competitors to meet analysts’ projections or guidance that we or our competitors may give to the market;

•        additions and departures of key personnel;

•        changes in laws and regulations affecting our business;

•        commencement of, or involvement in, litigation involving us;

•        changes in our capital structure, such as future issuances of securities or the incurrence of additional debt;

•        the volume of shares of our Common Stock available for public sale; and

•        general economic and political conditions such as recessions, interest rates, fuel prices, foreign currency fluctuations, international tariffs, social, political and economic risks, pandemics and acts of war or terrorism.

These market and industry factors may materially reduce the market price of our Common Stock and our warrants regardless of our operating performance.

Products

Our CSN therapeutic candidates aim to address high unmet medical needs in several disease areas including:

(1)    disease modification of central nervous system disorders, including MS, PD and ALS;

(2)    the treatment of infectious diseases, including COVID-19;

(3)    accelerated wound healing and scar formation; and,

(4)    the treatment of selected cancer types.

In addition to the development of faceted, clean-surfaced nanocrystals, our electro-crystal-chemistry platform can produce ionic solutions of various transition elements including silver, zinc, and others — elements which have proven historical utility in the treatment of disease.

•        CNM-Au8, our lead asset, is a highly concentrated aqueous suspension of clean-surfaced, highly faceted nanocrystalline gold (“Au”). CNM-Au8’s nanocatalytic mechanisms target the bioenergetic deficits, oxidative stress, and accumulation of misfolded proteins that are common to many neurodegenerative diseases. CNM-Au8 is hypothesized to act as a neuroprotective and remyelinating therapy in neurodegenerative disease states in order to: 1) drive, support, and maintain beneficial metabolic and energetic intracellular reactions within diseased, stressed, and/or damaged cells, 2) directly catalyze the reduction of harmful, reactive oxygen species, and 3) promote protein homeostasis via activation of the heat shock factor-1 pathway, recognized to dampen the cytotoxicity caused by misfolded and denatured proteins, which are known to occur ubiquitously in neurodegenerative diseases. We believe that CNM-Au8 is the only drug candidate in development with these unique nanocatalytic mechanisms of action. Nonclinical toxicology studies have demonstrated no adverse effect levels (“NOAELs”) even up to maximum feasible dosing levels for oral administration. In vitro and in vivo pharmacology studies have demonstrated that CNM-Au8 treatment enhances remyelination and neuroprotection in numerous models of MS, PD, and ALS. A Phase 1 First-In-Human study did not reveal safety or tolerability concerns for CNM-Au8 in healthy human volunteers dosed in accordance with the study protocol. There are four Phase 2 clinical studies presently underway evaluating the efficacy and safety of CNM-Au8 for the treatment of MS, PD, and ALS, an Expanded Access Program for ALS, and one Phase 3 registrational clinical trial underway that has the potential to fully support a New Drug Application (NDA) for the treatment of ALS, each of which is discussed in detail below.

•        CNM-ZnAg is a broad-spectrum antiviral, antibacterial agent comprised of zinc (Zn2+) and silver (Ag+) ions under development to treat disease-causing infections, such as COVID-19, and to provide immune support for symptom resolution. Zn2+ and Ag+ ions are produced in aqueous solutions using our electrochemistry manufacturing platform; combining Zn2+ and Ag+ ions made in this manner leads to enhanced bioavailability of the ions and potentially, synergistic immune system effects. One clinical study commenced in February, 2021 in Brazil, to determine ZnAg efficacy for the treatment of symptomatic subjects with COVID-19 to prevent hospitalization.

•        CNM-AgZn-17 is a gel polymer suspension of Ag+ and Zn2+ under development for treatment of infectious diseases and to support wound healing. We have demonstrated in in vitro assays that CNM-AgZn17 has broad-based anti-viral and anti-bacterial activity against common and antibiotic resistant pathogens such as Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. We have also shown enhanced wound healing benefits in animal models of diabetic wound healing and decreased scar formation following burns. We anticipate filing an Investigational New Drug (IND) application with the FDA and subsequently plan to initiate a Phase 1 dermal First-In-Human safety study with CNM-AgZn17 in 2022.

•        CNM-PtAu7 is a gold-platinum combination nanocrystal with the potential to be an effective treatment for oncology indications. We have demonstrated in vitro up-regulation of pro-apoptotic and down-regulation of anti-apoptotic genes in the human breast cancer cell lines EFM-19 and MT-3 using CNM-PtAu7. We have further demonstrated down-regulation of genes associated with the electron transport chain activity which may relate to changes in tumorigenesis activity. We anticipate initiating standard animal toxicology programs in late 2022 with an IND filing planned between 2023 – 2024, subject to evaluation of the safety and efficacy learnings from the preclinical oncology assays and toxicology findings.

Supplements

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

Dietary supplements are marketed and distributed through our wholly owned subsidiary, dOrbital, Inc. (“dOrbital”), or through an exclusive license with 4Life Research LLC (“4Life”). These include:

•        rMetx™ (ZnAg Immune Boost) by dOrbital; rMetx™ is an aqueous zinc-silver ion dietary (mineral) supplement made using our electrochemistry manufacturing platform with bioactive immune-supporting properties. rMetx™ is sold through dOrbital, and, a substantially similar product under the tradename, Zinc Factor™, is sold by 4Life Research LLC (“4Life”), an international supplier of health supplements and a related party, under a supply agreement.

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

Clinical Development Pipeline

We have four Phase 2 clinical studies presently underway for the treatment of neurodegenerative disorders including MS, ALS, and PD, one Expanded Access Program for ALS patients, one Phase 3 registrational clinical trial presently underway for disease-modification in ALS, and a Phase 2 clinical study for the treatment of COVID-19, which has received regulatory approval for conduct in Brazil. In addition, we anticipate launching a clinical study for the treatment of PD in late 2021. The chart below reflects the respective stages of our main drug candidates.

Our CSN Therapeutics Platform

We have developed a new pharmaceutical technology, CSN therapeutics. By uniting concepts from electrochemistry, nanotechnology, plasma and quantum physics, material science, and biochemistry, we have created and refined a proprietary electrocrystallization method that results in a single component or multiple components in nanocrystals of the transition elements that are clean-surfaced, highly faceted, and biologically catalytically active.

These nanocrystals can be concentrated as aqueous suspensions and orally administered. We are further able to produce ionic solutions of various transitions elements utilizing our electrochemistry manufacturing platform. Once in the gastrointestinal system, nanocrystals pass into the blood stream, and accumulate in organs such as the liver, kidneys, and spleen, with lower amounts crossing the blood brain barrier and reaching the brain, spinal cord, and cerebrospinal fluid. Nanocrystals can remain active within the body for days before they are eliminated via the hepatobiliary-fecal system as well as via the urinary system.

Once inside the body, CSN therapeutics cross cellular membranes and enter cells where they directly donate and receive electrons within biological systems. In this way, each nanocrystal acts as a potent nanocatalyst, that can drive, support, and maintain beneficial metabolic and energetic intercellular reactions within diseased, stressed, and damaged cells. These catalytic, nanocrystal-based therapeutic drugs represent an entirely new approach to drug development, substantially differing from the standard paradigm of small-molecule drugs and large-molecule biologics. Unlike traditional pharmacological approaches, which are limited to single targets or specific signaling pathways, our technology platform has produced metallic nanocrystals that are beneficial through multi-modal activities in multiple cell types across multiple diseases. By utilizing intracellular medicinal catalysts to support bioenergetic reactions within cells, we believe this technology represents a revolutionary advance in the treatment of the underlying pathophysiology of neurodegeneration and related diseases associated with bioenergetic failure.

Figure 1 below shows examples of the kinds of nanocrystals that can be produced using our CSN therapeutic platform.

Figure 1.    Representative CSN Therapeutic Nanocrystals

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

Nanocatalysis

A catalyst lowers the activation energy of a chemical reaction in such a way as to accelerate the rate of the reaction, without being consumed in the reaction. In doing so, it does not change the equilibrium of the substrates and products, and it can catalyze both forward and reverse reactions until homeostasis, or a balance of substrates and products, has been achieved.

Several industrial uses of metal nanocatalysts have been discovered, but to our knowledge, we are the only company currently developing nanocatalysts to directly modulate biological systems as therapeutic drug candidates. Prior to our invention of the CSN therapeutic platform, the methods employed to make stable nanoparticles required the use of organic solvents or capping agents, which would contaminate the surfaces of the nanoparticles and were substantially difficult to remove. There are multiple conflicting reports in the literature regarding the toxicity of these nanoparticles, ranging from reportedly non-toxic to highly toxic to living organisms. We believe this lack of consistency may have been due to the varying degrees to which different nanoparticle preparations were contaminated with organic reagents, leading to observed toxic effects. Because our electrocrystal chemistry method does not involve the use of any organic solvents or reduction chemicals, we have observed that our nanocrystals possess substantially higher catalytic activity in living organisms than those reported for nanoparticles made using other methods. All of the toxicology studies completed with our lead asset, CNM-Au8, have resulted in NOAEL findings.

Transition metal nanocatalysts are surface catalysts. Unlike enzymes, which are protein catalysts that lower activation energies using active site binding pockets, metal nanocatalysts carry out their catalytic activities on their surfaces, where they act as exceptionally efficient electron donors and receivers. For this reason, unmodified, clean surfaces that are free of contaminating chemicals are extremely important for catalytic activity. The facets and vertices of the nanocrystals serve as the surface areas where electron exchange can take place. Metal nanocatalysts have been shown to have a variety of different catalytic activities, including superoxide dismutase, peroxidase, and catalase-like activities for reducing reactive oxygen species, to reactions involving the oxidation of glucose, ascorbic acid, or the energetic metabolite, nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (“NAD”). Figure 2 is an illustration of nanocatalysis, showing a single gold nanocrystal converting molecules of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide hydride (“NADH”) in the background into NAD in the foreground. Gold nanocrystals have been described as electron reservoirs because their surfaces can readily accept as well as donate thousands of electrons per second in order to catalyze biochemical reactions, allowing them to accelerate reaction rates to extraordinarily high levels. For example, the conversion of NADH to NAD is usually very slow at room temperature. Upon addition of our gold nanocrystal suspension CNM-Au8, we have observed the very rapid conversion of NADH into NAD. Importantly, the NAD reaction drives adenosine triphosphate (ATP) production in both the mitochondrion as well as in the cytoplasm, via a reaction called glycolysis. ATP is the universal currency of energy in all living things; without the ability to convert NADH to NAD and vice versa, cells would be quickly depleted of ATP energy stores and die. CSN therapeutics capture the natural, extraordinary nanocatalytic activities of clean-surfaced, faceted nanocrystals to produce metabolites of high energetic or protective value to the cell.

Figure 2.    Nanocatalysis Mechanism Representation

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

Our Focus on Central Nervous System Disorders

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

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

Preclinical work has shown that CNM-Au8 nanocrystals cross the blood brain barrier to potentially protect multiple central nervous system cell types. In multiple preclinical studies, we have demonstrated these central nervous system cells may benefit from nanocatalysis in several ways: oligodendrocytes receive an energetic boost sufficient to drive myelin production; dopaminergic, hippocampal, and cortical neurons improve energy metabolism sufficient to enhance survival and maintain function in response to multiple disease-relevant stressors. Human astrocytes derived from patients with ALS have the capacity to kill motor neurons when grown in a co-culture, and these motor neurons exhibit markedly reduced toxicity when co-cultures are treated with CNM-Au8. By their very nature, faceted clean-surfaced nanocrystals with nanocatalytic capabilities circumvent many of the challenges that have plagued the central nervous system pharmaceutical drug development field in the past. Importantly, the mechanism by which they act through nanocatalysis produces several useful energetic metabolites while reducing the presence of harmful ones. These mechanisms are well suited to address the complex failures that occur in neurodegenerative diseases on multiple levels and within multiple central nervous system cell types.

The innovation of CSN therapeutics is that we are positioned to address the most significant challenge posed by numerous central nervous system diseases. Unlike the “one drug-one target” model, faceted clean surfaced nanocrystals act by multiple mechanisms to enhance the cellular bioenergetic state, while simultaneously and independently reducing oxidative stress and stimulating protein homeostasis inside central nervous system cells. Each nanocrystal is capable of exchanging thousands of electrons per second, potentially addressing deficits in diseased central nervous system cells in a manner that does not further deplete the cells of their internal energy stores. Our data demonstrate CSN therapeutics thereby support cells and replenish cellular bioenergetic deficiencies. In other words, CSN therapeutics support the cells of the central nervous system with the basic building blocks of energy they require to function normally.

Market Potential of CSN Therapeutics for Neurodegenerative Diseases

Despite the urgent demand for treatments and the tremendous market opportunities for neurodegenerative disease therapeutics, effective treatments are limited. Currently, there are no existing therapies that either promote remyelination or have been demonstrated to improve function in people with non-active, progressive MS. People with non-active, progressive MS account for approximately one-third of all MS cases and they suffer progressive loss of function, severely reduced quality of life and shortened life spans. Further, the current FDA-approved therapeutic agents for ALS have very limited disease-modifying effects. And, there are no currently available disease-modifying therapies for PD. All of the existing PD therapies are limited to symptomatic improvement and none have been shown to prevent or slow the loss of dopaminergic neurons. If the clinical studies presently underway provide evidence of remyelination or demonstrate improved neurological function, CSN therapeutics will have significant commercial sales potential in treating MS, PD, or ALS.

Not a single approved MS drug worldwide has been approved to show an effect on remyelination and neuroprotection. CNM-Au8’s effects on remyelination and neuroprotection for central nervous system disorders, together with the urgent market demand for safe and effective treatments, provides us with a global unique first-mover-advantage with significant market potential for the treatment of central nervous system diseases. Our most advanced CSN therapeutic candidate, CNM-Au8, has been developed to address the significant unmet medical needs in the treatment of the central nervous system disorders, MS, PD, and ALS. MS, PD, and ALS each severely impact healthspan and lifespan of those who suffer from these disorders, resulting in significant demand for disease-modifying treatments.

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

Overview

CNM-Au8 is a concentrated, orally-delivered suspension of pure gold nanocrystals in pharmaceutical grade water buffered with sodium bicarbonate. A single 60 milliliter, 30 milligram dose contains over one quadrillion nanocrystals. The median ferret diameter of CNM-Au8 nanocrystals is approximately 13 nanometers with each nanocrystal consisting of an estimated 30,000 to 70,000 gold atoms. CNM-Au8’s nanocatalytic mechanism, directly donating and/or receiving electrons, enhances intracellular bioenergetic reaction rates without requiring associated energetic investment from cells, thus increasing cells’ net energetic capacity. CNM-Au8 treatment results in improved bioenergetic metabolism within cells of the central nervous system. Through this mechanism, CNM-Au8 may protect multiple neuronal and glial populations including oligodendrocytes and/or neurons from oxidative, inflammatory, hypoxic, and excitotoxic insults, potentially resulting in enhanced myelination and improved neuronal survival while preserving neurite processes and synapse integrity.

Standard ICH M3(R2) toxicology studies were conducted on CNM-Au8 in three animal species, which yielded no toxicity findings resulting in a NOAEL finding up to maximum feasible dosing. A First-in-Humans Phase 1 Clinical Trial of orally administered single and multiple ascending doses of CNM-Au8 was then carried out in 86 healthy human volunteers. All doses (up to 90 mg/day) of CNM-Au8 were well-tolerated.

CNM-Au8 has received regulatory approval to proceed to Phase 2 clinical studies designed to assess the safety and efficacy of CNM-Au8 for brain metabolite target engagement and functional and physiologic improvements indicative of remyelination, and neuroprotection. Details for each clinical trial of CNM-Au8 are given below in the Clinical Development Plan section for each indication.

Mechanism of Action

CNM-Au8 acts through nanocatalysis to improve the bioenergetics, reduce harmful reactive oxygen species, and induce protein homeostatsis, via the heat shock protein-1 pathway in nervous system cells. These unique mechanism of actions lead to a cascade of beneficial effects as summarized in Figure 3.

Figure 3.    Nanocatalytic Biological Mechanism of Action

Figure 3.    CNM-Au8 mediated nanocatalysis enhances cellular energetic capacity and decreases oxidative stress, resulting in increased NAD and ATP production as well as increased proteostatic activity via the heat shock factor 1 pathway. Together, these activities lead to a cascade of enhanced disease responses in neurons, oligodendrocytes, and astrocytes, cell types that are most vulnerable to energetic deficiencies. CNM-Au8 thereby mediates remyelination and neuroprotective effects in neurodegenerative diseases such as MS, ALS, and PD.

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

The statistical analyses shown in Figure 4 were conducted by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to compare means of each treatment group to mean of the vehicle control (corrected for multiple comparisons). The p-value (Fig. 4E, F) represents the probability of obtaining test results at least as extreme as the results observed in the assay, under the general assumption that there is no difference between the groups (the null hypothesis). The lower (smaller) the p-value, the greater the statistical significance of the observation, and the less likely the null hypothesis is true. The scientific community and regulatory authorities, such as the FDA, conventionally regard p-values of 0.05 or less to be significant when replicated in independent clinical studies. Consistently statistically significant preclinical results, such as those described here, are used to support investigative new drug applications to investigate the clinical effects of an investigational product.

One significant stressor shared by many neurodegenerative diseases is the accumulation of harmful reactive oxygen species (“ROS”) within neurons as their energetic demands begin to exceed their ability to produce enough ATP to carry out normal functions. Chronic oxidative stress, caused by accumulation of ROS, can overwhelm the mitochondrial systems that normally tightly regulate ROS levels. Accumulation of excess ROS damages cell membranes, allows calcium ion imbalances, and eventually leads to cell death.

Figure 4.    NAD Oxidation and Biological Effects on ATP and NAD+

Figure 4.    Bioenergetic nanocatalysis by CNM-Au8. A, The NAD-NADH reduction-oxidation couple plays a key role in both ATP-generating reactions, glycolysis and mitochondrial electron transport chain (“ETC”) oxidative phosphorylation. B, Ultraviolet-visible light spectroscopy was used to show the catalytic activity of CNM-Au8 with time. As the reaction progresses, NADH is consumed, as demonstrated by the decrease in the NADH absorbance peak at 340 nm, while NAD+ is generated, as shown by the corresponding increase in the NAD+ absorbance peak at 260 nm. C, the rate of decay of the NADH absorbance peak is greater for CNM-Au8 than it is for citrate-reduced gold, nanoparticles of 10 nm (orange) and 30 nm (red) diameters (purchased from the National Institute of Standards and Technology), indicating that CNM-Au8 has a catalytic rate at least three-fold higher than NIST comparators under the same reaction conditions. D, Catalytic rate of CNM-Au8 is demonstrably superior to several commercially available gold nanoparticles. Sigma Aldrich provides reactant-free, “citrate reduced” gold nanoparticles, in which extra procedures are used to clean the surfaces of reactants. “Citrate” gold nanoparticles may still have residual reactants present in the suspensions. E, Intracellular NAD+ levels increase in response to CNM-Au8 treatment in primary rodent neuron-glial co-cultures. F, Intracellular ATP levels increase in primary rodent oligodendrocyte cultures in response to CNM-Au8 treatment. Panels E-F, quantities shown are group means +/− SEM. One-way ANOVA, corrected for multiple comparisons, was used to compare means of each treatment group to mean of the vehicle control; a statistically significant difference between treatment and vehicle is denoted by asterisks: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.

In addition to boosting NAD+ levels inside nervous system cells, CNM-Au8 directly acts to reduce ROS by directly catalyzing their reduction (Fig. 5). CNM-Au8 possesses anti-oxidative catalytic activity and has been demonstrated to directly reduce oxygen radicals in a superoxide dismutase-like manner, as well as convert hydrogen peroxide into water and oxygen in a catalase-like manner (Fig. 5A, B). Anti-oxidative activity for CNM-Au8 has been demonstrated in primary mouse oligodendrocyte cultures, in which basal levels of ROS were reduced with treatment (Fig. 5C). In a Parkinson’s Disease in vitro model, ROS generated by treating primary rodent dopaminergic cells with the neurotoxin 1-methyl-4-phenylpyridinium (“MPP”) was lowered in response to CNM-Au8 treatment in the presence of MPP (Fig. 5D). The statistical analyses shown in Figure 5 were conducted by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)

to compare means of each treatment group to mean of the vehicle control (corrected for multiple comparisons). The p-value (Fig. 5C, D) represents the probability of obtaining test results at least as extreme as the results observed in the assay, under the general assumption that there is no difference between the groups (the null hypothesis).

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

Figure 5.    Reduction of Reactive Oxygen Species

Figure 5.    CNM-Au8 is a catalytically active antioxidant. A, SOD-like activity of CNM-Au8 on superoxide radicals was measured using a colorimetric SOD assay kit (Cayman Chemical). B, Decay of the absorbance peak of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) as the dismutation of H2O2 takes place in the presence of CNM-Au8 (green) or comparator AuNPs of similar diameter (red) or no gold (black). C,D, Neurotoxin (MPP+) induced mitochondrial stress and death of dopaminergic neurons in primary E15 rat co-cultures is prevented by CNM-Au8 (green), as determined by TH+ cell number (not shown), reduction of ROS as measured as by the fraction of dopaminergic (“TH”) cells fluorescing with

CELLROX Green signal, a marker of cytosolic oxidizing environment (C), and increased mitochondrial membrane potential (Mitotracker Red CMXRos) (D). Panels C-D, quantities shown are group means +/− SEM. One-way ANOVA, corrected for multiple comparisons was used to compare means of each treatment group of MPP with CNM-Au8 treatment to the mean of the MPP (4μM) alone treatment group; a statistically significant difference between each CNM-Au8 treatment group and MPP alone is denoted by asterisks: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.000. Untreated “Control” group is included to demonstrate the significant effect of MPP treatment to increase levels of ROS in TH neurons in Panel C and reduce mitochondrial membrane potential in Panel D, which was not included in the ANOVA analysis.

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

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

(1)    Enhancement of bioenergetic metabolism via increased production of NAD+ and ATP

(2)    Reduction of oxidative stress, and

(3)    Enhancement of proteostatic, autophagic responses that reduce accumulation of toxic protein aggregates that are hallmarks of neurodegenerative diseases.

Figure 6.    Reduction in Misfolded Protein Aggregates

Figure 6.    CNM-Au8 reduces accumulation of protein aggregates in cellular models of PD and ALS. A) Primary culture of E15 rat mesencephalic neurons were pre-treated with vehicle, CNM-Au8, or positive control BDNF for 48h on day 4 of culture. 6-OHDA (20 uM) was added for 48 h then fixed and stained for anti-TH and anti- a-syn. B, Rat spinal motor neurons were cultured and treated with vehicle, glutamate (5 uM) or glutamate (5 uM) and CNM-Au8, then fixed and stained for anti-neurofilament, anti-TDP-43, and Hoechst. Group means plotted +/- SEM. * p <0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; **** p< 0.0001; treatment vs. vehicle, one-way ANOVA corrected for multiple comparisons.

Safety and Tolerability of CNM-Au8

We completed a Phase 1 First-In-Human study of CNM-Au8 in 2016 to demonstrate it was safe for further clinical development, and to assess the pharmacokinetic profile at different dosing concentrations.

Trial design.    The Phase 1 First-In-Human study of CNM-Au8 was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, escalating single- and multiple-dose study to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of CNM-Au8 in healthy male and female volunteers. There were two phases to this study: a single-ascending dose (“SAD”) phase and a multiple-ascending dose (“MAD”) phase. The SAD Phase was conducted first followed by the MAD Phase of the study.

•        Single Ascending Dose: 40 subjects were randomized to CNM-Au8 (n=30) or placebo (n=10) at a 3:1 ratio in single dose escalating cohorts who received CNM-Au8 at 15 mg, 30 mg, 60 mg, or 90 mg with follow-up study duration for each subject of 18 days.

•        Multiple Ascending Dose: 46 subjects were randomized to CNM-Au8 (n=35) or placebo (n=11) in multiple dose cohorts who received CNM-Au8 at 15mg, 30 mg, 60 mg, and 90 mg with the duration of treatment at 21 days and follow-up of each subject was up to 50 days.

Safety.    Safety assessments revealed no significant findings. All doses used in this study were determined to be well-tolerated based on the frequency of reported treatment emergent adverse events (“TEAEs”). TEAEs occurred more frequently on placebo (86%) than in the CNM-Au8 dosing groups in both the SAD and MAD phases combined (75%). No subjects discontinued the study due to TEAEs and no serious adverse events (“SAEs”) were reported across any treatment group. The most frequently reported TEAEs were almost entirely of Grade 1 (mild) severity and transient. The most frequently reported TEAEs consisted of headaches, somnolence, fatigue, abdominal pain, diarrhea, nausea, and dizziness.

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

Conclusion.    The First-In-Human safety results demonstrated no safety signals following dosing with CNM-Au8 at or above clinically used doses and drug exposure levels in humans either matched or exceeded the equivalent exposure that demonstrated neuroprotection and remyelination efficacy in animal models.

After successful completion of Phase 1 studies of CNM-Au8, we progressed CNM-Au8 into multiple Phase 2 studies designed to test the efficacy of CNM-Au8 in specific disease indications. Based on the safety findings and the strength of our preclinical remyelination and neuroprotection data, we have initiated four Phase 2 studies in central nervous system disorders including MS, PD, and ALS. We have also partnered with a major academic institution to implement a Phase 3 registrational clinical program with CNM-Au8 for the treatment of ALS. We are accumulating increasing human safety exposure in our ongoing Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical programs. To date, on a blinded basis we have seen no concerning or dose-limiting safety signals, and two independent data safety monitoring boards overseeing our randomized double-blind placebo controlled trials have recommended continuing the conduct of the trials following unblinded evaluation of the safety data.

Multiple Sclerosis

MS Market Opportunity

Multiple sclerosis is an inflammatory and degenerative disorder of the central nervous system involving immune-mediated destruction of the brain, optic nerves, and spinal cord. MS results from autoimmune attacks on the myelin sheath, the protective covering wrapping the axons of neurons. When myelin is destroyed by autoinflammatory immune attacks, neurons become damaged and can ultimately die, leading to motor symptoms, cognitive disability, visual impairment and other neurological impairments.

MS typically begins between the ages from 20 to 40, and it is the leading cause of non-traumatic disability in young adults. Women are affected approximately three-times as often as men, except in individuals with the less common, primary-progressive form of the disease, where there is no gender preponderance. MS is the most common inflammatory demyelinating disease, with a prevalence that varies considerably, from high levels in North America and Europe to low rates in Eastern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.

The diagnosis of multiple sclerosis is predominantly a clinical one that is aided by radiological tests (e.g., magnetic resonance imaging). Other diagnostic methods include blood tests, evoked potential tests, lumbar puncture, and optical coherence tomography, which is a new technology for examining the effects of multiple sclerosis on the health of nerve cells and axons in the retina. Utilizing magnetic resonance imaging, a new diagnostic classification for multiple sclerosis — clinically isolated syndrome has been included in the updated 2017 International (McDonald) Criteria. Ongoing improvements in diagnostic technologies may increase the number of patients diagnosed with multiple sclerosis.

MS Current Therapies and Limitations

All of the currently available drugs for treating multiple sclerosis either treat the symptoms caused by MS or act to reduce the degree of autoimmune-mediated inflammation. These drugs are typically referred to as disease-modifying therapies (“DMTs”). Nearly all of the current approved DMTs are approved for the treatment of relapsing forms of MS (“RMS”). They commonly act via immunosuppression or via immunomodulation, and thereby act to minimize autoimmune-associated attacks on myelin. Immunomodulatory DMTs reduce the risk of having an inflammatory attack, referred to as a “relapse”, and can slow the development of disability in those patients having attacks (i.e., “active” patients). As a corollary, DMTs may possibly diminish the risk of conversion of relapsing MS to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (“SPMS”). The newer DMTs have been shown to substantially reduce autoimmune-mediated attacks and to delay the progression of the disease in active patients. However, there are no drugs available which can reduce the ongoing loss of function (i.e., disease progression) in non-active (those no longer having attacks) MS patients. None of the approved DMTs have been shown to clinically improve remyelination of damaged and demyelinated axons in MS lesions. Currently available DMTs for the treatment of MS include: Injectable medications, Avonex (interferon beta-1a), Betaseron (interferon beta-1b), Extavia (interferon beta-1b), Copaxone (glatiramer acetate), Plegridy (peginterferon beta-1a), Rebif (interferon beta-1a), Glatiramer acetate generic equivalent (Glatiramer Acetate Injection, Glatopa (glatiramer acetate); Oral medications, Aubagio (teriflunomide), Gilenya (fingolimod), Tecfidera (dimethyl fumarate), Mavenclad (cladribine), Mayzent (siponimod); Infusion medications, Lemtrada (alemtuzumab), Novantrone (mitoxantrone), Ocrevus (ocrelizumab), and Tysabri (natalizumab). Advances in MS treatment with new B-cell depleting therapies, including ocrelizumab, have largely ameliorated inflammatory disease activity as measured by the reduction in risk of having relapses and the lack of occurrence of new gadolinium enhancing (inflammatory) lesions, as detected by MRI. However, despite the stabilization of MS disease activity in active MS patients by these agents for these MS patients, significant improvement in overall function has not been shown. Importantly, for the DMTs that have been approved to date, efficacy and safety are generally inversely correlated.

There is an increasing demand for better treatment strategies. Although current drugs for multiple sclerosis can reduce the risk of an inflammatory attack and slow down the progression of the disease in some MS patients, patients’ responses to drugs can be variable and suboptimal. For non-active MS patients, there is no available DMT that can substantially alter their progressive worsening. Also, the side effects of current MS drugs range from mild to serious, which may lead to reduced patient adherence.

Potential Advantages of CNM-Au8 for MS

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

Summary of Nonclinical Pharmacology Myelination Studies for MS

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

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

We investigated the ability of CNM-Au8 to address OL energetic deficits, to induce remyelination and to restore functional activities and motor behaviors in a comprehensive remyelination preclinical program involving multiple in vitro and in vivo assays to determine CNM-Au8 efficacy. This work has been published as a peer-reviewed publication in Scientific Reports and is briefly summarized here.

In vitro experiments on primary OL precursor cells demonstrated robust induction of myelin production by CNM-Au8. RNASeq analyses of CNM-Au8 treated OL precursors cells demonstrated that multiple transcripts for known myelination genes are upregulated, and that glycolytic activity and ATP production are also increased. Several in vivo experiments were also conducted to demonstrate that orally delivered CNM-Au8 results in increased remyelination in the brains and spinal cords of animals treated with cuprizone or lysolecithin, two agents that are known to strip neurons of myelin via different mechanisms (Robinson et al. Sci Rep. 2020 Feb 11;10(1):1936). As fully described in the peer-reviewed publication by Robinson et al. both orally delivered cuprizone, or stereotactically injected lysolecithin are commonly used techniques to cause demyelination of the corpus callosum or spinal cord, respectively. Cuprizone, which is administered to rodents by including this agent in their chow, is a copper chelating agent that specifically causes mature oligodendrocyte death within multiple brain regions, including the corpus callosum. Maximal demyelination due to cuprizone feeding typically occurs within five weeks, which can be visually monitored and quantified using transmission electron microscopy. Lysolecithin injection results in the rapid degradation of myelin within a localized area of the spinal cord, observable using Luxol Fast Blue or toluidine staining for myelin with light microscopy, or also with transmission electron microscopy of the lesion, within a day of injury, allowing for the observation of remyelination within the induced lesion within the following weeks. Remyelination of the corpus callosum or spinal cord using either technique requires the migration of surviving oligodendrocyte precursor cells to the sites of demyelination, differentiation of these cells into mature myelinating oligodendrocytes, and rapid generation of specialized proteins and lipids for formation of new myelin membrane wraps around axons in this energetically demanding process. Multiple independent in vivo remyelination assays, using either cuprizone or lysolecithin as demyelination agents, were performed to demonstrate the remyelinating ability of CNM-Au8. For example, CNM-Au8 was provided either prophylactically, at the same time as the start of cuprizone feeding, or only after two weeks of cuprizone feeding, therapeutically, in order to allow demyelination to start to take place prior to administration of CNM-Au8. In both contexts, CNM-Au8 demonstrated greater recovery of myelin in affected brain areas than vehicle-treated controls. Furthermore, animals that were provided with CNM-Au8 only after full demyelination (five complete weeks of cuprizone treatment) had taken place displayed evidence of higher levels of mature myelin marker expression in their brains than vehicle controls, indicating that CNM-Au8 was not blocking the action of cuprizone but rather inducing recovery by stimulating the differentiation of oligodendrocytes. Similar results were confirmed by the lysolecithin experiments, which indicated that myelin destroyed by a completely different mechanism could be recovered with the daily oral administration of CNM-Au8 for one or two weeks after focal demyelination by lysolecithin. Treatment with CNM-Au8 significantly improved not only the quantifiable detection of myelinated axons in the brains of experimental animals, but also mouse behaviors and functional movements in the open field test and kinematic assays. For example, quantitation of the number of myelinated versus unmyelinated axons in 587 transmission electron microscope images, averaging 84 images per treatment group (with 15 mice per treatment

group, seven treatment groups total), demonstrated a statistically significant (p < 0.0001 using one-way ANOVA corrected for multiple comparisons) recovery of remyelinated axons in therapeutically treated animals who were dosed with CNM-Au8 by gavage compared to vehicle treated, cuprizone-fed controls. In independent demyelination model studies using lysolecithin, lesioned animals treated with CNM-Au8 exhibited a 43% mean increase in myelinated axons within lesions post-LPC injection compared to vehicle controls (p = 0.15, unpaired t-test comparing CNM-Au8 treated rats to vehicle treated controls). Finally, in a cuprizone-mediated demyelination model study of both gross and fine motor behaviors, the group of animals receiving therapeutically delivered CNM-Au8 displayed detectable improvements in behaviors in both open field and fine motor kinetics assessments. Principal component analysis of gait metrics showed no statistical difference (p = 0.47) between CNM-Au8 treated, cuprizone-fed animals compared to the sham treated group, whereas there was a detectable difference in vehicle-treated, cuprizone-fed animals and sham controls (p = 0.032; 2-way ANOVA) by the end of study at week 6. Figure 7 shows examples of the observed induction of myelination by CNM-Au8 from selected in vitro and in vivo experiments reported in Robinson et al. These studies were fully funded by Clene and were the result of collaborations among academic researchers from Northwestern University, George Washington University, and various other academic consultants and employees of Clene.

Figure 7.    Remyelination Summary

Figure 7.    A summary of myelinating activities of CNM-Au8. Top row, Left: illustration of the demyelination (red) of a neuron’s axon (yellow) that occurs in MS. Right: Illustration of restored myelination along the axon (blue) provided by the OL (blue cell). Middle row: isolated primary mouse OL precursors treated with vehicle control (left), 3 μg/mL CNM-Au8, or positive control and myelin-inducing agent tri-iodothyronine (“T3”). Cells are fixed and stained for Myelin Basic Protein (“MBP”), a marker of mature myelin in red, and the nuclear stain DAPI in blue, to reveal the presence of all OL precursor cells in the field of view. Many more cells expressing MBP are seen in the CNM-Au8 treated cells compared to vehicle-treated cells. Bottom row: transmission electron images of slices of corpus callosum

of mice treated with, left to right: no cuprizone, cuprizone for five weeks, CNM-Au8 for five weeks, or cuprizone for five weeks and CNM-Au8 for the last three of the five weeks. Myelin can be seen as dark rings in each micrograph. Cuprizone treatment destroys myelin, while CNM-Au8 treatment alone does not change myelin. CNM-Au8 treatment of cuprizone-treated animals results in the recovery of myelin in the brains of these animals.

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

Based on safety findings in our Phase 1 clinical study of CNM-Au8 and our robust preclinical remyelination data, we have launched two Phase 2 clinical studies to investigate the effects of CNM-Au8 in MS patients.

VISIONARY-MS

The VISIONARY-MS study, launched in December 2018, is an ongoing double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled Phase 2 trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of two doses of CNM-Au8 as a remyelinating and neuroprotective treatment in people who have stable relapsing MS with chronic visual impairment. Enrolled participants must have chronic optic neuropathy, defined as visual impairment with no episodes of acute optic neuritis within the six months prior to enrollment, and stable (non-active) disease, defined as no MS relapses within the three months prior to entry. Concomitant immunomodulatory MS DMTs are allowed. Participants are randomized to low-dose CNM-Au8 (15 mg/day), high-dose CNM-Au8 (30 mg/day), or matching placebo. The primary endpoint is improvement in low contrast letter acuity (“LCLA”) from baseline to week 24.

Contrast is the quantity of lightness or darkness contained by an object in comparison to its background. The smallest difference in contrast distinguished by the eye is known as the contrast threshold, usually reported as its reciprocal value, which is also known as contrast sensitivity (1/contrast threshold). Therefore, if a large amount of contrast is necessary for a patient to identify an object, they have poor contrast sensitivity and will have a low numerical value for this measurement. Contrast sensitivity can be thought of as a spectrum, in that black letters on a white background will be easier for any individual to discern than lower-contrast grey on white letter chart, regardless of whether or not visual abnormalities are present. The contrast threshold is the minimum amount of contrast necessary for an individual to discern an object from its background, and for people with MS the contrast threshold has been found to be higher than that of healthy individuals, even when visual acuity is equal between the two groups. contrast sensitivity is on a spectrum and may elicit more subtle changes in the contrast threshold that will be missed by high contrast visual acuity. LCLA tests low-contrast vision at various spatial frequencies that may be particularly affected by damage to specific inter-neural connections in the complex visual pathway.

In the VISIONARY-MS study, all participants remain in the double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment period through week 48, until the last participant completes week 24. In this way, double-blind, placebo-controlled data will be generated for most patients in the study through week 48, improving the study’s ability to assess the long-term effects of CNM-Au8 on clinical endpoints. The study is presently being conducted across eight clinical sites in Australia, and site expansion into North America is presently underway. Health Canada and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) have both approved conduct of the trial within Canada and the United States, respectively. Incremental clinical research site initiation is subject to ongoing COVID-19 related research restrictions. As of February 26, 2021, 56 participants were enrolled in the VISIONARY-MS study with exposure to the investigational product up to 48-weeks.

Preliminary, interim, blinded efficacy results from VISIONARY-MS were reported as an invited oral presentation at the Joint NAIMS-IMSVISUAL Symposium at the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (“ACTRIMS”) Forum 2020 held February 27-29 in West Palm Beach, Florida. Results from the first 34 enrolled participants up to week 36 demonstrate clinically-relevant median improvements in LCLA and the three remaining modified Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite sub-scales (“(m)MSFC”), including Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT, cognition), 9-Hole Peg Test (9HPT, upper extremity function), and Timed 25-foot Walk (T25FWT, gait) in the population, as a whole. Updated preliminary, interim, blinded efficacy results were presented at the 8th Joint ACTRIMS-ECTRIMS meeting, called MS Virtual, on September 11th, 2020, and at the ACTRIMS Forum 2021 on February 26, 2021. These updated blinded interim analyses compared changes in Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC) scores over the study treatment period to the baseline values of study participants with mild disease, as defined by Baseline Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores of 1.5 or less. Notably, baseline scores for these participants demonstrate less neurological impairment than those of the overall study population, providing a valid comparator group. Changes in the four MSFC sub-scales (LCLA, SDMT, 9HPT, and T25FW) were compared to baseline scores of the comparator group with mild disease. These comparisons were performed at each

study time-point (Weeks 12, 24, and 36). At each visit, the overall study population (randomized 2:1 active CNM-Au8 to placebo) showed notable increasing mean improvements in overall MSFC scores and key MSFC sub-scales compared to the comparator group (mixed-effects model; p<0.0001 vs. baseline). We believe these data support CNM-Au8’s potential to drive meaningful neurological improvements in MS patients. Further, we believe these observations are notable given the expected long-term decline in LCLA, SDMT, 9HPT, and T25FW amongst MS patients reported from data sets including from the MS Outcome Assessments Consortium (“MSOAC”) (Goldman et al. Neurology. 2019 Nov 19;93(21):e1921-e1931). MSOAC includes prospectively acquired RMS patient-level data from fourteen separate MS clinical trials including over 12,776 participants combined into a single database and followed for up to 24-months. When LCLA, SDMT, 9HPT, and T25FW were analyzed as a multidimensional measure rather than individually, progression on any one of these performance measures was more sensitive than the commonly used MS Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), and demonstrated long-term declines in RMS patients. The increasing mean improvements observed across the entire study population (CNM-Au8 and placebo) may suggest a clinical effect CNM-Au8 when contrasted with the anticipated decline reported in publications from the MSOAC data. Figure 8 represents a summary of the observed average change in an integrated MSFC average 6-component Z-score of the change from Baseline by each 12-week study interval across all study participants in VISIONARY-MS (e.g., low dose, high dose, placebo) for all visits recorded as of 13-January-2021 and indicate continuing improvement over the course of the study.

Figure 8.    VISIONARY-MS Mean (m)MSFC Z-Score Change vs. Baseline

Glanzman, R., H. Beadnall, M. T. Hotchkin, A. Klistorner, M. Barnett, R. Sergott, A. Rynders, K. S. Ho, and Mark G. Mortenson. “Update to a Phase 2 clinical trial of catalytic gold nanocrystals, CNM-Au8, for the treatment of chronic optic neuropathy.” Presented at the ACTRIMS Forum 2021, February 26, 2021.

Available blinded safety data from VISIONARY-MS indicate that CNM-Au8 is well-tolerated with most adverse events characterized as mild in severity. No serious adverse events related to the investigational product (e.g., placebo, CNM-Au8) have been reported to date. The most frequently reported adverse events include headache, upper respiratory infection, and sore throat. The full unblinded results from the study are anticipated in the first half of 2022, subject to ongoing COVID-19 related research restrictions.

REPAIR-MS and REPAIR-PD

Two Phase 2, central nervous system imaging trials, REPAIR-MS and REPAIR-PD, were initiated to demonstrate central nervous system target engagement by measuring the effects of orally delivered CNM-Au8 on brain energy metabolites in patients with MS and PD in vivo. These bioenergetic metabolites are measured non-invasively and semi-quantitatively by utilizing 31P-MRS imaging with a 7 Tesla (7T) MRI scanner. The REPAIR studies are being conducted at the University of Texas Southwestern, a center with specialized capabilities for conducting and analyzing 7T 31P-MRS imaging studies. Both REPAIR studies were approved for clinical conduct by the FDA and commenced in December 2019 (REPAIR-PD)/January 2020 (REPAIR-MS) with full data availability anticipated in the second half of 2021 for both REPAIR-PD and REPAIR-MS, subject to ongoing COVID-19 related research restrictions. As of February 25, 2021, twelve participants were enrolled in REPAIR-PD study with exposure to CNM-Au8 up to 21-weeks, and ten participants were enrolled in the REPAIR-MS study with exposure to CNM-Au8 up to 18-weeks.

An interim analysis of data from study completers as of mid-July 2020 from these ongoing trials was conducted and reported at the 8th Joint ACTRIMS-ECTRIMS (MS Virtual 2020) meeting held September 11th, 2020. A full volume head coil was used to collect whole brain spectral waveforms in ~600 voxels with a spatial resolution of 2 cm3 for the following metabolites: NAD pool (both NAD+ and NADH together), ATP, phosphocreatine, extracellular and intracellular inorganic phosphate, uridine diphosphate glucose, phosphocholine, phosphoethanolamine, glycerophosphocholine, and glycerophosphoethanolamine. A partial volume head coil was used in the same patient cohort to measure occipito-parietal levels of individual NAD+ and NADH phosphorous metabolites to determine the ratio of NAD+/NADH. Results for 4 MS and 6 PD completers (all competed subjects prior to a COVID-19 related research pause) were analyzed. Percent change from baseline (“BL”) at the end-of-study (“EOS”) visit was highly correlated to BL levels for key bioenergetic markers. Overall, the data indicate that CNM-Au8 normalized the levels of multiple bioenergetic metabolites measured. Patients with whole-brain NAD levels less than the BL mean significantly increased NAD levels at the EOS visit, while patients with whole-brain BL NAD levels greater than the mean normalized levels to the BL mean. Importantly, this relationship was observed for total NAD levels (r2 = 0.6585; p = 0.0044), ß-ATP (r2 = 0.8705; p < 0.0001), and several other 31P metabolites, indicating a homeostatic effect of CNM-Au8 on brain bioenergetics. In the 4 MS patients, there were marked correlations for NAD (r2 = 0.9241; p = 0.039), ß-ATP (r2 = 0.968; p=0.016), and several other phosphorous metabolites. These preliminary results reflect target engagement in the brains of PD and MS patients, and provide the first clinical evidence to support the catalytic effects of CNM-Au8 on brain bioenergetic metabolites. Figure 9 below illustrates the changes in NAD/NADH ratio via the partial volume coil assay and correlations in mean ß-ATP levels versus baseline values for the full volume coil.

Figure 9.    Interim Data from All Completers in REPAIR-MS and REPAIR-PD

Left, Change in NAD+/NADH Ratio by Subject. Right, Normalization of Brain ß-ATP by Subject

A subsequent updated interim analysis of MS participants was presented at the ACTRIMS Forum 2021 on February 26, 2021, specific to the 5 MS participants who have completed the 31P-MRS imaging. Among those who completed the study, the data indicate that CNM-Au8 increased the ratio of NAD+/NADH in the brains of MS subjects, resulting in normalized levels of multiple bioenergetic metabolites measured including ATP. Patients with whole-brain α-ATP and γ-ATP levels less than the BL mean significantly increased these levels at the EOS visit, while patients with whole-brain BL α-ATP and γ-ATP levels greater than the mean normalized levels to the BL mean, indicating a homeostatic effect of CNM-Au8 on brain bioenergetics (r2 = 0.94 [α-ATP] and 0.96 [γ-ATP]; p < 0.01) (Figure 10).

Figure 10.    Updated Interim Data from All Completers in REPAIR-MS

Left, Change in NAD+/NADH Ratio by Subject. Center and Right, Normalization of Brain ATP by Subject

Parkinson’s Disease

PD Market Opportunities

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a chronic, progressive neurodegenerative disorder involving the progressive loss of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra area of the midbrain. The degeneration of dopaminergic neurons leads to resting tremor, bradykinesia, limb rigidity, and gait and balance problems as well as increasingly recognized cognitive loss and behavioral changes due to more generalized neuronal loss. Both genetic and environmental factors are thought to contribute to the development of PD in addition to ageing, which is the most significant risk factor for developing the disease. Approximately one in one hundred individuals over the age of 60 is affected by PD.

PD Current Therapies and Limitations

While there are a number of approved Parkinson’s therapies, such as dopamine agonists, COMT and MAO-B inhibitors, and deep brain stimulation, these treatments are limited to symptomatic improvement. No treatment is currently available to prevent the destruction of dopaminergic neurons. The inexorable progression of loss of dopaminergic innervation leads to progressively worsening symptoms with “on” (dyskinesias) and “off” (rigidity) symptoms that become increasingly difficult to manage. In addition, long-term use of levodopa, a commonly-prescribed dopamine precursor used to treat Parkinsonian symptoms, often results in dyskinesia that in itself becomes disabling. Despite an enormous effort over the past several decades, no disease-modifying or neuroprotective therapeutic for PD is available. A therapeutic that alters or slows the clinical progression, and thus improves PD healthspan and lifespan, would address a very significant unmet need.

Neuronal bioenergetic failure underlies PD, as evidenced by the observed impaired mitochondrial and lysosomal functioning, neuronal sensitivity to glutamate toxicity, accumulation of oxidative stress, autophagic failure in clearing misfolded proteins, and loss of synapse integrity associated with this disease. As such, improvement of cellular bioenergetic efficiency, as is possible with CNM-Au8, represents an important and previously unaddressed therapeutic target for this disease.

Potential Advantages of CNM-Au8 for PD

We believe that CNM-Au8 has the potential to be a global first-in-class disease modifying nanotherapeutic drug for PD. While current therapies for PD are designed to stimulate surviving dopaminergic neurons in order to elicit partial functional effects, none of them prevent the inexorable degeneration of dopaminergic neurons to change the course of disease progression. Our nonclinical studies demonstrate that CNM-Au8 is robustly neuroprotective of dopaminergic neurons across a variety of disease-relevant insults created using a variety of toxins and stressors. In addition, CNM-Au8 may have a tolerability profile superior to existing approved products like commonly used drugs for PD, such as levodopa/carbidopa that result in risk of dyskinesias after long-term use.

Summary of Nonclinical Pharmacology and General Neuroprotection Studies for PD

Excitotoxic injury, oxidative stress, and the accumulation of misfolded alpha-synuclein are hallmarks of the failing bioenergetic pathways associated with PD. In order to determine whether CNM-Au8 could act as a neuroprotective agent for PD, we conducted a series of in vitro and in vivo studies designed to test efficacy of CNM-Au8 in protecting various neuronal cell types from a variety of PD relevant disease-related stressors.

The potential of CNM-Au8 to confer neuroprotection in PD disease-specific cellular models was first demonstrated in vitro. Primary rat dopaminergic cells were challenged with 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tatrahydropyridine, (MPTP, which is metabolized to its active form MPP+) or alternatively with 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA), which are both toxins specific to dopaminergic neurons. Treatment of primary neuronal-glial cocultures with CNM-Au8 increased the numbers of surviving dopaminergic neurons in response to either toxin in a dose-dependent manner, as well as affected overall improvement in neuronal health by a variety of metrics, including preservation of neurite network, reduction in oxidative stress, increase in mitochondrial staining, and reduction in alpha-synuclein aggregates. The activity of CNM-Au8 was then tested in the standard 6-OHDA-unilateral lesion model of PD. Lesioned rats, and a sham control group, were orally administered vehicle or CNM-Au8 for 4-weeks (2-weeks post-lesion) or 6-weeks (one-day post lesion) following the establishment of a lesion in the striatum. Significant functional improvements due to CNM-Au8 treatment was demonstrated in both the behavioral apomorphine-induced rotation and cylinder

paw placement tests. In addition, larger numbers of surviving dopaminergic neurons were detected in the striatum of CNM-Au8-treated lesioned animals compared to vehicle controls. These studies independently demonstrated that CNM-Au8 treatment has robust neuroprotective properties in preclinical models of PD.

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

REPAIR-PD

We initiated the Phase 2 REPAIR-PD study to determine CNS target engagement by measuring the effects of orally delivered CNM-Au8 on brain energy metabolites in patients with PD as discussed previously. The REPAIR-PD study is being conducted at the University of Texas Southwestern. The REPAIR-PD study was approved for clinical conduct by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and commenced in December 2019. The REPAIR-PD study is anticipated to conclude in the second half of 2021 subject to COVID-19 related research restrictions. As of February 25, 2021, twelve participants were enrolled in the REPAIR-PD study with exposure up to 21-weeks.

In July 2020, an interim analysis of data from completers of these ongoing trials was conducted. A full volume coil was used to collect whole brain spectral waveforms in ~600 voxels with a spatial resolution of 2 cm3 for the following metabolites: NAD pool (both NAD+ and NADH together), ATP, phosphocreatine, extracellular and intracellular inorganic phosphate, uridine diphosphate glucose, phosphocholine, phosphoethanolamine, glycerophosphocholine, and glycerophosphoethanolamine. A partial volume coil was used on the same patient cohort to measure combined occipital and parietal levels of NAD+ and NADH phosphorous metabolites to determine the ratio of NAD+/NADH. Results for 4 MS and 6 PD completers (all competed subjects prior to a COVID-19 related research pause) were analyzed. These data suggest that CNM-Au8 was able to normalize the levels of all bioenergetic metabolites measured. Percent change from BL at the EOS visit was highly correlated to BL levels for key bioenergetic markers. Patients with NAD levels less than the BL mean significantly increased whole-brain NAD levels at the EOS visit, while patients with BL NAD levels greater than the mean normalized levels to the BL mean. Importantly, this relationship was observed for total NAD levels (r2 = 0.6585; p = 0.0044), ß-ATP (r2 = 0.8705; p < 0.0001), and several other 31P metabolites, indicating a homeostatic effect of CNM-Au8 on brain bioenergetics. These preliminary results robustly demonstrate target engagement in the brains of PD patients, and provide the first clinical evidence demonstrating the catalytic effects of CNM-Au8 on brain bioenergetic metabolites. For details, please see the “— REPAIR-MS and REPAIR-PD” section and Figure 9 above.

RESCUE-PD

A second Phase 2 clinical study is planned to investigate the effects of CNM-Au8 on slowing or preventing disease progression in PD patients. This study, the RESCUE-PD study, will follow patients with PD to determine the effects of CNM-Au8 on stabilizing disease activity as a neuroprotective therapeutic. The RESCUE-PD study is planned to commence in late 2022, with results anticipated within 24-36 months following study initiation.

Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis

ALS Market Opportunities

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is an adult-onset, progressive, and fatal neurodegenerative disorder of the neuromuscular system resulting in muscle weakness and paralysis leading to death as early as three to five years after initial diagnosis. ALS involves the progressive degeneration of motor neurons in the spinal cord and brain, which are responsible for controlling voluntary muscle movement. In ALS, this progressive loss of motor neurons leads to muscle weakness, loss of muscle mass, and inability to control movement. Although there are two FDA approved drugs for ALS, riluzole and edaravone, neither treatment substantially halts or reverses the progressive nature of this disease. The onset of disease for the majority of individuals with ALS occurs between 40 and 60 years old and is more common in men. After the age of 65, the difference in incidence between males and females decreases.

ALS Current Therapies and Limitations

Current ALS treatment therapies are largely palliative, aiming only to provide temporary relief from symptoms without addressing the underlying disease progression. For example, one approach to the loss of respiratory function, which is the most common cause of ALS-related death, is non-invasive ventilation. Despite the great need for an

effective disease-modifying treatment, and significant research efforts by the pharmaceutical industry to meet this need, there have been limited clinical successes and no curative therapies approved to date. There are two FDA-approved therapeutic agents for the treatment of ALS: riluzole, an anti-glutamatergic agent, and edaravone, a free-radical scavenger. However, both of these treatments are acknowledged to have limited disease-modifying effects, as riluzole extends participant lifespans by an average of only two to three months, while edaravone slows the decline of the ALSFRS-R score, a clinical measure of functional decline, in only a small subset of participants who are at an early stage of disease. There is clearly an urgent unmet need for the development of safe and effective disease-modifying therapeutics for ALS.

Potential Advantages of CNM-Au8 for ALS

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

Summary of Nonclinical Pharmacology Neuroprotection Studies for ALS

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

Aggregation of misfolded proteins that display neurotoxic properties is a hallmark of many neurodegenerative diseases, including ALS. Accumulation of mis-localized, cytoplasmic TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (“TDP-43”) in motor neurons is associated with over 90% of ALS cases, and TDP-43 aggregates have been shown to disrupt cellular functions in motor neurons. In neuron-glial co-culture assays, application of glutamate or A-beta to rat motor neurons causes TDP-43 aggregates to accumulate in the cytoplasm of motor neurons. Treatment of the glutamate- or A-beta-challenged motor neurons with CNM-Au8 significantly reduced the accumulation of TDP-43 aggregates in a dose-dependent manner.

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

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

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

Orphan Drug Status for ALS

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

RESCUE-ALS

RESCUE-ALS is a Phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of CNM-Au8 in ALS patients. As of September 7th, 2020, the study was fully enrolled with 42 participants. In the study, patients will be randomized 1:1 to either receive 30 mg of CNM-Au8 once daily or matching placebo over a 36-week double-blind treatment period. Efficacy will be assessed as the change in motor neuron loss as measured by electromyography (e.g., MUNIX, the primary endpoint; and secondary endpoints, including MScanFit, MUSIX, Split Hand Index, and the Neurophysiology Index). Exploratory endpoints include standard clinical, safety, and quality of life assessments. The study is being conducted at two sites in Australia and led by ALS clinicians who are experts in electrophysiology techniques. As of February 25, 2021, the study had over-enrolled with 45 of, 42 planned participants in the RESCUE-ALS study with exposure to the investigational product up to 36-weeks. Twelve participants had enrolled in the long-term open-label extension following completion of the week 36 end-of-study visit.

RESCUE-ALS is being substantially funded by FightMND who provided Clene with a grant of AUD$1.37 million. In general, the grant terms from Fight MND include repayment of funds received in the event of commercialization of CNM-Au8 for the treatment of ALS in Australia from future net sales proceeds up to a mid single-digit multiplier of the original grant amount of AUD $1.37M. Funding is disbursed based on the achievement of performance milestones related to patient enrollment targets. All intellectual property rights from the study activities will be owned by the company. Results of this study are anticipated in the second half of 2021.

Healey-ALS Platform Trial

In September of 2019, the Sean M. Healey & AMG Center (“Healey Center”) for ALS at Massachusetts General Hospital selected CNM-Au8 as one of the first three drugs for inclusion in the first Platform Trial for the treatment of ALS. The Healey Center Platform Trial for ALS will test promising experimental therapeutics with a design that allows for the testing of multiple drugs simultaneously in order to rapidly identify and accelerate the development of novel therapies for ALS, while offering the advantages of reduced trial time, reduced costs and increased patient participation. The trial includes substantial financial support from philanthropic donors and the Healey Center, and provides access to 54 expert ALS clinical trial sites across the United States from the Northeast Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (“NEALS”) consortium.

The trial is a Phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, placebo controlled registrational clinical trial to assess the safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of CNM-Au8 in treating ALS. Participants will be randomized 3:1 between active treatment and placebo with active treatment equally distributed between low dose (30 mg) CNM-Au8 and high dose (60 mg) CNM-Au8. The primary endpoint is rate of change in ALSFRS-R score from baseline to week 24, with secondary endpoints of changes in slow vital capacity and hand-held dynamometry measurements. Exploratory endpoints include a combined joint-rank score based on survival and change in ALSFRS-R score from baseline to week 24, voice pathology measurements, and biofluid-based pharmacodynamic and metabolic markers.

Clene will contribute a direct fee to the Healey ALS Center toward the clinical conduct of this trial; there will be no additional licensing fees or milestone requirements. Clene will own all CNM-Au8 data while placebo data will be shared across the different treatment regimens within the platform trial. Study enrollment commenced in August 2020. Results for CNM-Au8 are anticipated in the first half of 2022 subject to the achievement of enrollment targets.

CNM-Au8 Expanded Access Program

Based on interest in the potential of CNM-Au8 to delay disease progression in ALS patients, clinical experts at Massachusetts General Hospital requested early access to use CNM-Au8 in an Expanded Access Program (“EAP”). An EAP is a potential pathway for a patient with an immediately life-threatening condition or serious disease or condition to gain access to an investigational medical product (drug, biologic, or medical device) for treatment outside of clinical trials when no comparable or satisfactory alternative therapy options are available. To qualify an EAP within the United States the following should apply, (i) a patient has a serious disease or condition, or whose life is immediately threatened by their disease or condition, (ii) there is no comparable or satisfactory alternative therapy to diagnose, monitor, or treat the disease or condition, (iii) patient enrollment in a clinical trial is not possible, (iv) potential patient benefit justifies the potential risks of treatment, and (iv) providing the investigational medical product will not interfere with investigational trials that could support a medical product’s development or marketing approval for the treatment indication. The EAP is conducted under a study protocol filed with the FDA and commenced in August 2019. The EAP will collect safety and pharmacokinetic data in ALS patients not otherwise eligible for clinical studies due to standard inclusion and exclusion criteria. As of February 25, 2021, 37 participants had been enrolled in the EAP with exposure up to 69-weeks. An EAP provides additional safety data for FDA review and will be considered as part of the safety data package for CNM-Au8, and may provide supportive long-term safety data with respect to an NDA submission should the Healey ALS platform trial result in a statistically significant treatment benefit.

REPAIR-ALS

The REPAIR-ALS Phase 2 study is modeled after the REPAIR-MS and REPAIR-PD studies, discussed previously, and will investigate the effects of CNM-Au8 on improvement of bioenergetics and brain cellular membrane markers by non-invasively measuring brain levels of these markers utilizing 31P-MRS. The REPAIR-ALS study has been approved for clinical conduct by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and is planned to commence following completion of the REPAIR-MS and REPAIR-PD programs.

Additional CSN Therapeutics in the Pipeline

Three other drug candidates are at various IND-enabling stages of research. Utilizing our CSN therapeutic drug development platform, we have developed additional drug candidates based on the transition elements silver and zinc (CNM-ZnAg) for anti-viral/anti-bacterial and wound healing applications (CNM-AgZn17), and gold and platinum (CNM-PtAu7) for oncology applications.

CNM-ZnAg, a Broad Spectrum Anti-viral and Anti-Bacterial agent in Development for Treatment of COVID-19

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

In the human body, zinc is an essential structural component of <750 zinc finger transcription factors, and is a catalytic component of approximately 2000 enzymes, encompassing all known enzyme classes. Most significantly, zinc is essential for the proper function of the immune system, and is specifically involved in multiple steps in the antiviral response. Zinc has demonstrated direct antiviral properties; in addition, zinc stimulates both innate and acquired antiviral responses. Thus, zinc-based treatments are hypothesized to support systemic immunity, while also acting to specifically inhibit viral replication, viral protein processing, and/or viral-infection-related symptoms. Silver has long been studied for its anti-infective activity. Silver’s microbial-treatment properties have been documented for centuries, and silver has been the most extensively studied metal for the purpose of fighting infections and preventing food spoilage. Prophylaxis of silver nitrate against gonococcal ophthalmia neonatorum with silver ions was considered the standard of care in many countries until the end of the 20th century, prior to the advent of antibiotics. Independent research had demonstrated silver nanoparticles have been shown to be active against several types of viruses including

human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B virus, herpes simplex virus, respiratory syncytial virus, and monkey pox virus. Silver nanoparticles and silver ions reduce viral infectivity when added concomitantly with the virus inocula, possibly by blocking interaction of the virus with the host cell.

A standard toxicology program based on ICH M3(R2) guidelines has been completed for CNM-ZnAg. The toxicity of CNM-ZnAg was evaluated at high concentrations up to the maximum feasible dose administered via oral gavage up to four times daily for 28 days in rats and 7 days in canines. Across all studies, there were no deaths, no test-article-related clinical observations, and no effects on: body weight, food consumption, hematology endpoints, clinical pathology findings, blood coagulation times, urinalysis, or urine chemistry. Standard in vivo genotoxicity studies in rodents, including a 2-day COMET assay and a 28-day evaluation of micronucleated reticulocytes, revealed no test-article effects on genotoxicity.

A seven-day human tolerability study of the dietary supplement was previously conducted by an antecedent company to determine the safety and tolerability in forty (40) healthy human volunteers. There were no self-reported adverse events and laboratory assessments indicated no significant changes from baseline in body weight, blood pressure, heart rate, liver enzymes (AST/ALT), blood glucose, or blood lipids (total cholesterol, LDL/HDL, triglycerides). There were no safety findings associated with administration of the dietary supplement over the 7-day dosing period.

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

COVID-19 is a rapidly emerging respiratory disease, resulting in substantial morbidity and mortality. Symptoms of COVID-19 are highly variable, with most infected individuals presenting with varying degrees of respiratory distress, fever, cough, sore throat, malaise, myalgias, nausea, diarrhea, anosmia, and ageusia. The median incubation period, from exposure to symptom onset, is approximately 4 to 5 days, and 97.5% of patients who are symptomatic will have symptoms within 11.5 days after infection. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the viral infection which causes COVID-19. Due to the international infection rates and potentially serious nature of this disease, COVID-19 was characterized as a pandemic by the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020. A CDC summary of PCR-positive COVID-19 cases in the U.S. as of May 30th, 2020 showed approximately 28% were known to be symptomatic, 14% had been hospitalized, 2% were admitted to an intensive care unit, and 5% died.

To reduce disease impact on public health, a strategy of identifying, isolating, and quarantining infected or exposed individuals has been put in place to slow or stop transmission; however, these preventative activities, while necessary, do not alleviate the disease burden of individuals who have already become infected. The anti-viral therapy remdesivir is approved by the FDA for emergency use within the U.S. for treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, however, the therapeutic benefit demonstrated in clinical trials was modest, and access has been limited regionally. Outside of the hospital setting, there are no therapies proven to reduce the severity or duration of COVID-19 infection. Further, the timeline and efficacy for vaccine development remains uncertain. Therefore, there is a significant unmet medical need to urgently decrease the morbidity and improve time to recovery in COVID-19 infected individuals.

Because of exigent worldwide need, Clene determined to rapidly develop CNM-ZnAg as a candidate treatment for COVID-19 based on the hypothesis that CNM-ZnAg may provide immune support benefits. On a limited basis, a dietary supplement version of ZnAg has been provided under 21 CFR 111 to support immune health. Preliminary uncontrolled observational case series with the dietary supplement yielded results suggesting oral administration of ZnAg to individuals with PCR-confirmed, COVID-19 infections may improve subject well-being and limit the duration of the disease. Results from a large case-series study of a COVID-19 outbreak in a US-based industrial food processing facility and its associated congregate housing are described below. Sixty-two (62) company employees and managers voluntarily received the ZnAg dietary supplement orally daily (while in quarantine and in congregate housing), completed a standardized daily symptom survey, and underwent repeated SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing prior to ZnAg treatment initiation and again following 7 days of ZnAg supplement intake. The study population was of predominantly Hispanic ethnicity (74%). The mean age was 33.6 (10.8) years, with 84% male. Twenty-seven (27) subjects were identified prior to supplement intake as SARS-CoV-2 positive by PCR testing. Amongst subjects with PCR+ confirmed SARS-CoV-2 at treatment start, 44% transitioned to PCR negative following 7-days of supplement administration (Fig. 11A). Amongst the 35 SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative subjects prior to treatment initiation, 88% remained SARS-CoV-2 negative by repeat PCR testing after 7-days of treatment. Amongst the 27 SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals, 24 reported symptoms consistent with COVID-19, generally self-reported as mild-to-moderate intensity.

Symptom resolution (Fig. 10A), and PCR detected viral clearance (Fig. 11C) decreased rapidly following ZnAg treatment initiation consistent with a marked improvement in participants’ global impression of change (Fig. 11B). The rate of symptomatic resolution (~75%) by Day 7 appears qualitatively greater than the placebo improvement rate (~50%) from a study completed in a comparable COVID-19 non-hospitalized symptomatic patient population (Fig. 11D, Skipper et al. Ann Intern Me. 2020 Jul 16;M20-4207).

Figure 11.    PCR Status and Symptomatic Changes in Food Processing Facility Workers Infected with, or Exposed to, COVID-19

Given the potential for a clinical effect together with no identified safety signals from animal toxicology or initial human tolerability studies, we are planning to investigate CNM-ZnAg in a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial to determine the efficacy and safety of CNM-ZnAg for symptomatic improvement of COVID-19. This clinical study intended for 276 patients launched in Brazil in February 2021. Brazil represents a geography with a significant number of COVID-19 cases, robust clinical infrastructure and clinical trial experience, reasonable economic costs, and limited competition for participants for the enrollment of COVID-19 clinical research. The study is a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study of CNM-ZnAg to decrease the incidence of hospitalization

(primary endpoint) at Day 28 and improve the time to symptom resolution (secondary endpoint) in PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-19 subjects aged 40 and over. The study will evaluate two different doses of CNM-ZnAg, for which will be combined for analyses versus placebo.

CNM-AgZn17 for Wound-Healing and Burn Treatment

CNM-AgZn17 consists of an ionic solution of silver and zinc in a polymer gel formulation for topical application to the skin. We have demonstrated in in vitro assays that CNM-AgZn17 has broad-based anti-viral and anti-bacterial activity against common and antibiotic resistant pathogens such as Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. We have also shown enhanced wound healing benefits in animal models of diabetic wound healing and less scar formation from during burn healing.

We are presently completing a standard toxicology program in animals to demonstrate safety in order to advance to first-in-human dosing studies. We have progressed to GLP dermal toxicity studies for topical applications expected to complete in 2022. Subject to regulatory filings of these toxicology findings and other results, we anticipate initiating a standard Phase 1 dermal First-In-Human safety study with CNM-AgZn17 with single-ascending dose and multiple-ascending dose cohorts by late 2022. The goal of this study will be to demonstrate safety sufficient to advance to Phase 2 clinical programs with CNM-AgZn17. Given the multiple preclinical benefits demonstrated to date with CNM-AgZn17, we envision a clinical program focused on healing burn and/or surgical wounds, which is anticipated to initiate in 2023.

CNM-PtAu7 — Our Oncology Targeted Nanotherapeutic

CNM-PtAu7 is a suspension of novel nanocrystals comprised of alloyed gold and platinum. We have demonstrated that treatment of human breast cancer cell lines EFM-19 and MT-3 with CNM-PtAu7 induces the expression of pro-apoptotic genes and represses the expression of anti-apoptotic genes, consistent with an anti-oncogenic effect. We have further demonstrated down-regulation of genes associated with the electron transport chain activity, which may also suppress tumorigenic activity. Further investigations related to the anti-tumor effects of CNM-PtAu7 are planned in additional malignant cell lines. CNM-PtAu7 has been patented in all major markets worldwide including the United States, Europe, China, Singapore, and Japan.

Research and Development

Overview

We are deeply invested in our research and development (“R&D”) program. Our R&D activities are essential to attaining and sustaining the position as a recognized global leader in the development of CSN therapeutics. Our R&D plan is to continue the innovation of novel nanocatalysts and ionic suspensions of metallic transition elements with recognized medicinal value and underexplored, or as yet undiscovered, physicochemical and catalytic properties.

We have developed in-house all of the technologies that are critical to our R&D processes, and guard those technologies with appropriate intellectual property protections, and will continue to do so. We conduct our research activities through an in-house R&D team at our facility in Maryland, and engage in external clinical research collaborations to support our R&D activities as well.

Internal R&D

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

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

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

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

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

We monitor and evaluate our CROs and external research partners with various activities including site visits, ongoing project team reviews, and/or assessments by third party assessors. We strive to achieve clinical trial excellence by maintaining strong quality control measures. We perform core functions such as clinical development strategy formulation and protocol design in house, and exercise control and oversight over key functions of clinical trial management. We conduct regular site visits to oversee site initiation, patient recruitment, and data quality monitoring, except when precluded by COVID-19 related research restrictions. We also engage third party consultants to perform clinical trial audits. Data quality is further assessed by in-house data review, including medical review, document review, and monitoring report review. We will not work with a vendor who does not have processes established surrounding data privacy and safeguards to ensure compliance through the clinical trial. We have maintained a stable relationship with our CROs and other external research partners.

Clinical Trial Management

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

Financial Grants

We have been awarded grants from various organizations, including the U.S. Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program administered by the Department of Defense, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, and FightMND, a not-for-profit registered charity in Australia, who together have issued us grants totaling approximately $2.6 million. We also receive indirect financial support for one of the clinical studies in which we participate, the Healey ALS Platform Trial, administered by the Massachusetts General Hospital, which is conducting a study of our CNM-Au8 drug candidate along with other drugs in a platform trial, at significantly lower costs to us than we would otherwise incur if we were to conduct a comparably designed study on our own at reasonable market rates.

These grants include the following terms:

•        The Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program administered by the Department of Defense is an award for $1.25M for additional preclinical work in specific ALS models, which was awarded to us in December 2019. At the time of this prospectus we had not yet finalized contracting with the Department of Defense.

•        The NMSS grant is for a total of $339,000 for biomarker analyses of the VISIONARY-MS study. The grant was awarded to us in September 2019 and includes terms related to repayment of funds received in the event of commercialization of CNM-Au8 for the treatment of MS based on achievement of sales milestones up to a mid single-digit multiplier of the original grant amount. Funding is milestone based on the achievement of analytical validation and reporting to the NMSS. All intellectual property rights from grant related activities vest in the company.

•        The FightMND grant is for AUD $1.37M and was awarded to us in August 2019. The grant includes terms related to repayment of funds received in the event of commercialization of CNM-Au8 for the treatment of ALS in Australia from future net sales proceeds up to a mid single-digit multiplier of the original grant amount. Funding is milestone based on the achievement of performance milestones related to patient enrollment targets. All intellectual property rights from grant related activities will be owned by the company.

•        The Michael J. Fox Foundation grant was awarded to us in January 2021. The grant provides for preclinical research funding for an in vivo rodent model with CNM-Au8 treatment in well characterized alpha-synuclein over-expression, and additional research in human induced pluripotent stem cell derived neurons with commonly recognized Parkinson’s genetic defects. Funding is milestone based and all intellectual property rights from grant related activities will be owned by the company.

Manufacturing

We manufacture CSN therapeutics at our own production facility based in Maryland, USA based on novel manufacturing processes and devices that were entirely invented by us. Our Maryland manufacturing facility is compliant with GMP where we operate an ISO8 level clean room that contains the specialized electro-crystal-chemistry devices, or continuous flow trough apparatuses, that we have invented and patented to produce our CSN therapeutics from highly pure raw materials. At our present operating scale, we produce in-process gold nanocrystal suspension, the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) for our lead asset, CNM-Au8, on an ongoing basis. Our current API production capabilities are fully sufficient to meet our needs for both research and development and supply for our ongoing Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials, and we believe our processes can be scaled to achieve commercially viable quantities.

Through years of intensive research and development we have fine-tuned our production and delivery processes to the point where we can consistently, reliably, and affordably produce our core drug candidates, including CNM-Au8. We have also invested considerable time and substantial resources in perfecting the handling and storage systems in a manner that maintains stability and efficacy of our nanocrystal suspensions. In general, the manufacturing process for CSN therapeutics involves the following steps:

•        Sufficient quantities of processing enhancers (e.g., sodium bicarbonate, others) are dissolved in highly purified water. The resulting mixture is referred to as “process water.”

•        The process water is transferred to the conditioning portion of the trough apparatus at a constant nominal rate, where the process water is exposed to an atmospheric plasma in each trough apparatus, creating “conditioned water.”

•        The conditioned water then flows into the electrochemical crystal growth portion of the trough apparatus, at a constant rate, where the conditioned water is exposed to a series of pairs of wire electrodes. The flow of the conditioned water is controlled, and the electrodes are continuously monitored and controlled by computerized, automated controllers.

•        The electrodes are slowly advanced at a nominal rate to ensure that the conditioned water is exposed to the same electrochemical processing conditions to ensure batch-to-batch reproducibility, thus maintaining consistent size and shapes of the nanocrystals in each nanocrystal suspension.

•        In-process bulk product, API, containing elemental nanocrystals, is continuously produced. The in-process bulk product is collected into large containers.

•        The nominal concentration of active drug ingredients is achieved by executing a concentration step where in-process API is treated by a proprietary concentration procedure.

•        The concentrated product is verified to adhere to physiochemical release specifications.

•        The concentrated bulk suspension is subsequently filtered during filling to remove any microbiological contaminants and volumetrically filled into single unit containers. The final drug candidate is assayed to ensure it meets release specifications.

We have developed plans to expand our production capacity at our Maryland facility in order to supply additional planned Phase 3 clinical studies following evaluation of the Phase 2 clinical trial results. We have the technical expertise and capabilities to expand capacity to support eventual commercialization. During Part 1 of this planned expansion, we will more than triple the number of continuous flow trough apparatus and increase our storage capacity within our existing clean room environment. During Part 2 of our planned expansion, we will scale our production capacity by more than doubling our clean-room area along with the addition of more continuous flow trough apparatus and storage reservoirs. At the completion of this planned expansion we believe we will have sufficient capacity to support multiple Phase 3 studies in addition to enabling initial commercial supply of CNM-Au8. We also have initiated design studies to significantly scale our production processes as demand for our products increases to supply commercial marketing needs. We believe our current production environment has established Clene as the leading world-class manufacturer of clean surfaced nanocrystal therapeutics, and following the completion of our planned expansion, our facilities, equipment, and processes will comply with international practices and support our long term strategic plans, taking into consideration quality, costs, manageability, expandability and controls.

License Arrangements

In 2018, we established a license agreement and an exclusive supply agreement with 4Life, an international supplier of health supplements and one of our shareholders.

Under this license agreement, we granted to 4Life an exclusive and royalty-bearing license in relation to products that are very low concentration silver, gold, and other similar very low-concentration non-pharmaceutical supplement products produced by our electro-crystal-chemistry technology platform. This exclusive grant does not include ZnAg, for which 4Life has a non-exclusive right. 4Life is allowed to develop, make, manufacture, use, sell and commercialize the licensed products worldwide within the field of dietary supplements and certain non-pharmaceutical products for human use, internally or externally, which contain metallic-based constituents that are formed by our electrochemistry manufacturing techniques. 4Life will use its reasonably diligent commercial efforts to introduce the products to certain commercial markets following regulatory approval for their sale as nutritional mineral supplements. The initial term of this license agreement commenced on August 31, 2018 and will continue until five years after 4Life’s introduction of the first nutritional supplement licensed product into the marketplace, which occurred on July 1, 2020. The license agreement may be renewed for additional five year periods by mutual agreement. Upon expiration of the license agreement the exclusive provisions in the agreement will convert to non-exclusive. The license agreement may only terminate by mutual agreement between the parties, or upon breach by either party that results in termination of the agreement under applicable law.

Under an exclusive supply agreement, 4Life will purchase the licensed products exclusively from us and we will sell the licensed products exclusively through 4Life, except for ZnAg which is not exclusively sold through 4Life. Upon the occurrence of certain future events, 4Life can achieve the right to exclusively manufacture the licensed products under the license agreement, other than ZnAg for which this right does not apply. The initial term of the exclusive supply agreement commenced on August 31, 2018 and will continue until five years after the minimum sales commencement date, which both parties anticipate will be in April 2021. The exclusive supply agreement may be renewed for additional five year periods by mutual agreement. 4Life may terminate the exclusive supply agreement for cause, which is stated to include repudiation, uncured material breach, insolvency, bankruptcy, general assignment for benefit of creditors, failure to provide reasonable assurances of financial and operational capacity, prolonged unremedied force majeure, and failure to proper notify of change in control. Clene may terminate the exclusive supply agreement in the event of a repudiation, uncured material breach, insolvency, bankruptcy or general assignment for benefit of creditors by 4Life.

At the time of commercial sales, single-digit royalty payments are owed to us by 4Life based on the size of 4Life’s basket of total product sales. Royalties are payable quarterly under the license agreement until termination of the license agreement. In addition, 4Life will pay us our fully encumbered manufacturing expenses plus a guaranteed double-digit margin. We began supplying KHC46 (Gold Factor™) and a low dose zinc-silver solution (Zinc Factor™) during the first half of 2020 under this license agreement.

To date, we have not licensed our electrochemistry platform, any CSN therapeutics or any drug candidates to any other parties.

Competition

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

Intellectual Property

Our intellectual property is protected through extensive global patents, institutional expertise and experience, and specialized technical know-how, which enable us to maintain our leading position in the development of CSN therapeutics for high-medical need diseases.

To date, we have over 100 issued patents worldwide and over 30 patents pending worldwide. We have world-wide rights to protect and thus commercialize our CSN therapeutics and believe that our issued, and pending patents, provide sufficient protection to secure the future commercial potential of our CSN therapeutics.

We have filed and obtained patents in the United States (US); Australia (AU); Brazil (BR); Canada (CA); China (CN); European Patent Office (EP), including Switzerland (CH), Germany (DE), Denmark (DK), Finland (FI), France (FR), Great Britain (CB), Ireland (IE), Italy (IT), Netherlands (NL), Norway (NO), Spain (ES), and Sweden (SE); Egypt (EG); India (IN); Indonesia (ID); Israel (IL); Japan (JP); Korea (KR); Mexico (MX); New Zealand (NZ); Philippines (PH); Russia (RU); Singapore (SG); and the United Arab Emirates (AE); with multiple fundamental patent families protecting our CSN therapeutics. The following table lists the material granted patent families in connection with our CSN therapeutics.

To date, we have not been involved in any proceedings in respect of, and we had not received notice of any claims of infringement of, any intellectual property rights that may be threatened or pending, in which we may be a claimant or a respondent.

Government Regulation

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

FDA Drug Approval Process

In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”) and implementing regulations. The process required by the FDA before drug candidates 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 current Good Laboratory Practices regulations;

•        submission to the FDA of an investigational new drug (“IND”) application, which must become effective before clinical trials may begin and must be updated annually or when significant changes are made;

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

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

•        preparation of and submission to the FDA of a new drug application (“NDA”) after completion of all pivotal clinical trials that includes substantial evidence of safety and efficacy from results of nonclinical testing and clinical trials;

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

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

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

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

Preclinical and Clinical Development

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

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with Good Clinical Practice (GCP) and regulations governing the protection of human research subjects, including the requirement that all research subjects provide voluntary informed consent for their participation in any clinical study. Clinical trials are conducted under clinical study 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. For new indications, a separate new IND may be required. An Institutional Review Board (IRB) must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial and its informed consent form before the clinical trial begins. and must monitor the study until completed. Often each institution or clinical site has its own IRB. The IRB is responsible for ensuring that human subject’s rights and privacy are maintained. Regulatory authorities, the IRB, or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or that the trial is unlikely to meet its stated objectives. Some studies also include oversight by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical study sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board (DSMB), 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. The DSMB may halt the clinical trial if it determines that there is an unacceptable safety risk for subjects or other grounds, such as no demonstration of efficacy. There are also requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical studies and clinical study results to public registries. For purposes of NDA approval, human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases (which may overlap or be combined).

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

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

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

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

Drug companies such as Clene are subject to legal requirements restricting, or imposing penalties for, the employment or use of individuals who have been debarred or excluded under various laws, including the provisions of 21 U.S.C. §§ 335a, 335b, or 335c, 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7, in connection with making materially false or fraudulent statements to FDA, the offering or making of any prohibited payment, gratuity or other thing of value to personnel of the FDA or any other Governmental Entity, or other acts, statements, or omissions subject to FDA’s policy titled “Fraud, Untrue Statements of Material Facts, Bribery, and Illegal Gratuities” set forth in 56 Fed. Reg. 46191 (September 10, 1991), Employment of such individuals, or the occurrence of such violations in the development and regulatory application process may prevent or delay any approval of a company’s new drug application.

NDA Submission, Review and Approval

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

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

After the FDA evaluates a NDA and conducts inspections of manufacturing facilities where the investigational product and/or its drug substance will be produced, the FDA may issue an approval letter or a Complete Response Letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A Complete Response Letter will describe all of the deficiencies that the FDA has identified in the NDA, except that, where the FDA determines that the data supporting the application are inadequate to support approval, the FDA may issue the Complete Response Letter without first conducting required inspections, testing submitted product lots, and/or reviewing proposed labeling. In issuing the Complete Response Letter, the FDA may recommend actions that the applicant might undertake to resolve any findings and place the NDA in condition for approval, including requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA may delay or refuse approval of a NDA 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 regulatory approval of a product is granted, such approval will be granted for particular indications and may entail limitations on the indicated uses for which such product may be marketed. For example, the FDA may approve the NDA with a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (“REMS”), to ensure the benefits of the product outweigh its risks. A REMS is a safety strategy to manage a known or potential serious risk associated with a product and to enable patients to have continued access to such medicines by managing their safe use, and could include medication guides, physician communication plans, or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. The FDA also may condition approval on, among other things, changes to proposed labeling or the development of adequate controls and specifications. Once approved, the FDA may withdraw the product approval if compliance with pre- and post-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

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

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

To be eligible for a fast track designation, the FDA must determine, based on the request of a sponsor, that a product is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrates the potential to address an unmet medical need by providing a therapy where none exists or a therapy that may be potentially superior to existing therapy based on efficacy or safety factors. Fast track designation provides opportunities for more-frequent interactions with the FDA review team to expedite development and review of the product. The FDA may also review sections of the NDA for a fast track product on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor and FDA agree on a schedule for the submission of the application sections, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the NDA. The review clock does not begin until the final section of the NDA is submitted.

In addition, under the provisions of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (“FDASIA”) enacted in July 2012, a sponsor can request designation of a drug candidate as a “breakthrough therapy.” A breakthrough therapy is defined as a drug that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. Drugs designated as breakthrough therapies are also eligible for accelerated approval. The FDA must take certain actions, such as holding timely meetings and providing advice, intended to expedite the development and review of an application for approval of a breakthrough therapy.

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

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

Orphan Drug Designation

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

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

Post-Approval Requirements

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

The FDA may withdraw approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information; imposition of post-market studies or clinical 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 a product, mandated modification of promotional materials or issuance of corrective information, issuance by FDA or other regulatory authorities of safety alerts, Dear Healthcare Provider letters, press releases or other communications containing warnings or other safety information about the product, or complete withdrawal of the product from the market or product recalls;

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

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

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

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

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

Other U.S. Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements

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

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, any person or entity, from knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving any remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase, lease or order of any item or service reimbursable, in whole or in part, under Medicare, Medicaid, or other federal healthcare programs. The term remuneration has been interpreted broadly to include anything of value. The Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between therapeutic product manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, and formulary managers on the other. There are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe

harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution. The exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly and practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchasing, or recommending may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. Failure to meet all of the requirements of a particular applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the conduct per se illegal under the Anti-Kickback Statute. Instead, the legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all of its facts and circumstances. Clene’s practices may not in all cases meet all of the criteria for protection under a statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor.

Additionally, the intent standard under the Anti-Kickback Statute was amended by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (“Affordable Care Act”), to a stricter standard such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. Violations of the Anti-Kickback Statute can result in significant civil and criminal fines and penalties, imprisonment, and exclusion from federal healthcare programs. In addition, the Affordable Care Act codified case law that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal False Claims Act (“FCA”) (discussed below).

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

HIPAA created additional federal criminal statutes that prohibit, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud or to obtain, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises, any money or property owned by, or under the control or custody of, any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense, and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up by trick, scheme or device, a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. Like the Anti-Kickback Statute, the Affordable Care Act amended the intent standard for certain healthcare fraud statutes under HIPAA such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation.

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

pharmacies and other healthcare entities from providing certain physician prescribing data to pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for use in sales and marketing, and to prohibit certain other sales and marketing practices. All of Clene’s activities are potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws.

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

Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement

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

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

•        a covered benefit under its health plan;

•        safe, effective and medically necessary;

•        appropriate for the specific patient;

•        cost-effective; and

•        neither experimental nor investigational.

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

Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price, examining the medical necessity, and reviewing the cost-effectiveness, of medical products, therapies and services, in addition to questioning their safety and efficacy. Obtaining reimbursement for Clene’s products may be particularly difficult because of the higher prices often associated with branded drugs and drugs administered under the supervision of a physician. Clene may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of its products, in addition to the costs required to obtain FDA approvals. Clene’s drug candidates may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective by payors. Obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval of a product from a government or other third-party payor is a time-consuming and costly process that could require Clene to provide to each payor supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data for the use of Clene’s product on a payor-by-payor basis, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained. A payor’s decision to provide coverage for a product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Further, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage for the product. Adequate

third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable Clene to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on its investment in product development. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, Clene may not be able to successfully commercialize any drug candidate that it successfully develops.

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

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

Healthcare Reform

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

For example, the Affordable Care Act has substantially changed healthcare financing and delivery by both governmental and private insurers. Among the Affordable Care Act provisions of importance to the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, in addition to those otherwise described above, are the following:

•        an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports certain specified branded prescription drugs and biologic agents apportioned among these entities according to their market share in some government healthcare programs;

•        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 capped the total rebate amount for innovator drugs at 100% of the Average Manufacturer Price (“AMP”);

•        changes to the Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 50% point-of-sale discounts, which through subsequent legislative amendments, has been increased to 70%, starting in 2019, off negotiated prices of applicable branded drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturers’ outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D;

•        extension of manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability to covered outpatient drugs dispensed to individuals who are enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations;

•        expansion of eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs by, among other things, allowing states to offer Medicaid coverage to additional individuals and by adding new mandatory eligibility categories for individuals with income at or below 133% of the federal poverty level, thereby potentially increasing manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability;

•        expansion of the entities eligible for discounts under the 340B Drug Discount Program;

•        a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research;

•        expansion of healthcare fraud and abuse laws, including the FCA and the Anti-Kickback Statute, new government investigative powers, and enhanced penalties for noncompliance;

•        a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted, or injected;

•        requirements to report certain financial arrangements with physicians and teaching hospitals;

•        a requirement to annually report certain information regarding drug samples that manufacturers and distributors provide to physicians;

•        establishment of a Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation at CMS to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending; and

•        a licensure framework for follow on biologic products.

Some of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act have yet to be implemented, and there have been legal and political challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. Clene anticipates that the Affordable Care Act, if substantially maintained in its current form, will continue to result in additional downward pressure on coverage and the price that it receives for any approved product, and could seriously harm its business. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare and other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent Clene from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize its products. Such reforms could have an adverse effect on anticipated revenue from drug candidates that Clene may successfully develop and for which it may obtain regulatory approval and may affect its overall financial condition and ability to develop drug candidates.

Further legislation or regulation could be passed that could harm Clene’s business, financial condition and results of operations. Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. For example, in August 2011, President Obama signed into law the Budget Control Act of 2011, which, among other things, included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect beginning on April 1, 2013 and will stay in effect through 2027 unless additional Congressional action is taken. In January 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years.

Additionally, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed federal legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. Congress and the Trump administration have each indicated that it will continue to seek new legislative and/or administrative measures to control drug costs. Individual states in the United States have also become increasingly active in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control biopharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

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

Compliance and Legal Proceedings

We may be involved in legal proceedings in the ordinary course of business from time to time. To date, none of us or our officers or Directors were involved in any litigation, arbitration or administrative proceedings which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition or results of operations. As of the Latest Practicable Date, we are not aware of any pending or threatened litigation, arbitration or administrative proceedings against us or our Directors which may have a material and adverse impact on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Reverse Recapitalization with Tottenham and Clene Nanomedicine

On December 30, 2020, we completed the previously announced Reverse Recapitalization, pursuant to which Tottenham was reincorporated and merged with and into PubCo with PubCo surviving the merger in connection with the Reincorporation Merger and the Merger Sub was merged with and into Clene Nanomedicine, resulting in Clene Nanomedicine being a wholly owned subsidiary of PubCo. On the closing of the Reverse Recapitalization, PubCo changed its name from Chelsea Worldwide Inc. to Clene Inc.

At the closing of the Reverse Recapitalization, Clene Inc. acquired 100% of the issued and outstanding Clene Nanomedicine common stock, in exchange for 54,339,012 shares of Clene Inc. Common Stock issued to the Clene Nanomedicine common shareholders, among which 2,716,958 shares of the Clene Inc. Common Stock are to be issued and held in escrow to satisfy any indemnification obligations incurred under the Merger Agreement.

At the closing of the Reverse Recapitalization, each stock option of Clene Nanomedicine common stock was cancelled and the holders thereof in exchange received 0.1320 newly issued stock options of our Common Stock, which is 95% of the exchange ratio determined in the Merger Agreement. Pursuant to the Merger Agreement, we issued 370,101 of restricted stock units (“RSUs”) to the option holders which complements the 5% closing payment shares held in escrow for Clene Nanomedicine common shareholders discussed above. In addition, we issued 1,136,961 RSUs to option holders to complement the earn-out payments that would contingently be issued to certain current Clene Nanomedicine’s shareholders upon the achievement of milestones. See “Earn-out Share” for the milestones detail.

Immediately after giving effect to the Reverse Recapitalization and the PIPE offering discussed in below, there were 59,526,171 shares of Common Stock issued and outstanding, and warrants to purchase 5,566,363 shares of Common Stock issued and outstanding.

The transaction was accounted for as a “reverse recapitalization” and Tottenham was treated as the “acquired” company for accounting purposes. Accordingly, for accounting purposes, the Reverse Recapitalization was treated as the equivalent of Clene Nanomedicine issuing shares for the net assets of Tottenham, accompanied by a recapitalization. The net assets of Tottenham were recorded at historical costs, with no goodwill or other intangible assets recorded. Reported amounts from operations included herein prior to the Reverse Recapitalization are those of Clene Nanomedicine.

The PIPE Offering

Prior to the completion of the Reverse Recapitalization on December 30, 2020, we entered into subscription agreements on December 28, 2020, with various investors (the “PIPE”). Pursuant to the subscription agreements, we issued 2,239,500 shares of our Common Stock (the “PIPE Shares”) at a price of $10.00 per share with net proceeds of $22.2 million. The purpose of the PIPE is to fund general corporate expenses. In addition, investors in the PIPE offering will also receive warrants to purchase a number of shares equal to one-half (1/2) of the number of PIPE Shares, for an aggregate total of 1,119,750 shares of our Common Stock, at an exercise price of $0.01 per share (the “PIPE Warrants”), subject to a 180-day holding period. 

Basis of Presentation and Consolidation 

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) and include the accounts of the Company and its wholly owned subsidiaries, Clene Nanomedicine, a subsidiary incorporated in Delaware, Clene Australia Pty Ltd (“Clene Australia”), a subsidiary incorporated in Australia, and dOrbital, Inc., a subsidiary incorporated in Delaware, after elimination of all significant intercompany accounts and transactions.

Key Factors Affecting Our Results of Operations

Our results of operations, financial condition and the period-to-period comparability of our financial results are principally affected by the following factors:

Earn-out Shares 

In connection with the Reverse Recapitalization, certain of Clene Nanomedicine’s current shareholders and Tottenham’s former officers and directors and the Sponsor (collectively, the “Initial Shareholders”) are entitled to receive earn-out payments (collectively, referred to as “Earn-out Shares”) based on achieving milestones discussed below. The earn-out payments (the “Contingent Earn-out”) have been classified as liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2020 and will be initially measured at fair value and remeasured subsequently in each reporting period. The change in fair value of the contingent earn-out will be recorded in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss.

The Clene Nanomedicine contingent earn-out provision includes (i) Milestone 1 that is based on achieving a certain volume-weighted average price of the shares of the Company Common Stock within three years after the closing of the Reverse Recapitalization or the change of control price equaling or exceeding a certain price if a change of control transaction occurs within the three years following the closing of the Reverse Recapitalization, (ii) Milestone 2 that is based on achieving a certain volume-weighted average price of the shares of the Company Common Stock within five years after the closing of the Reverse Recapitalization or the change of control price equaling or exceeding a certain price if a change of control transaction occurs within the five years following the closing of the Reverse Recapitalization, and (iii) Milestone 3 that is based on completing by December 30, 2021 a randomized placebo-controlled study for treatment of COVID-19 coronavirus.

The Initial Shareholders contingent earn-out provision includes Milestone 1 and Milestone 2 listed above. Upon the consummation of the Reverse Recapitalization, Clene Nanomedicine and the Initial Shareholders are entitled to receive up to 8,346,185 and 750,000 shares of the Company’s Common Stock, respectively.

The estimated fair value of the contingent consideration was determined using a Monte Carlo simulation that simulated the future path of the Company’s stock price over the earn-out period. The assumptions utilized in the calculation are based on the achievement of certain stock price milestones including projected stock price, volatility, and risk-free rate. For potential payments related to a product development milestone, the fair value was determined based on the Company’s expectations of achieving such a milestone and the simulated estimated stock price on the expected date of achievement.

Contingent earn-out payments involve certain assumptions requiring significant judgment and actual results may differ from assumed and estimated amounts.

Research and Development Expenses

The discovery and development of novel drug candidates require a significant investment of resources over a prolonged period of time, and a core part of our strategy is to continue making sustained investments in this area. As a result of this commitment, our pipeline of drug candidates has been advancing and expanding, with two clinical-stage drug candidates currently being investigated.

We anticipate that our research and development expenses will increase significantly due to the increase in clinical trial expenses incurred to develop our drug candidates, expenses incurred for payments to CROs, principal investigators and clinical trial sites, costs of materials to support our clinical trials and preclinical studies, costs associated with preclinical activities, share awards granted to our research and development personnel and salaries for our expanding research and development personnel headcount. Our research and development expenses are affected by the timing and advancement of our existing product pipeline as well as the timing and quantity of new drug programs commenced.

Since inception, we have dedicated significant resources to our research and development activities. Our research and development expenses were $15.2 million and $9.6 million, representing 74.8%, and 58.6% of our total operating expenses in 2020 and 2019, respectively. As we continue to advance our clinical programs for our drug products, we expect our research and development expenses to increase in absolute amounts and to continue to represent a significant percentage of our total operating expenses.

Funding for Our Operations

Since our inception, we have dedicated substantially all of our resources to the development of our drug candidates. We have financed our operations principally through proceeds from the issuance of preferred stock, issuance of common stock upon exercise of common stock options, convertible promissory notes, issuances of notes payable, and the consummation of the Reverse Recapitalization.

Since our inception and through the date of this prospectus, we have funded our operations primarily with proceeds from the following sources:

•        gross proceeds of $87.2 million from sales of our preferred stock and other equity financing;

•        gross proceeds of $28.1 million from borrowings under convertible promissory notes;

•        gross proceeds of $0.6 million through external lenders; and

•        gross cash proceeds of $31.7 million through the Reverse Recapitalization and the PIPE offering.

In February 2021, we filed a registration statement on Form S-1 to register 4,541,481 shares of Common Stock underlying outstanding warrants. We will receive aggregate gross proceeds of $30.7 million if all of these are exercised. In addition, we received $0.5 million from a Michael J. Fox Foundation grant in January 2021 which provides for our preclinical research funding.

We have also been awarded grants from various other organizations, including the U.S. Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program administered by the Department of Defense, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, and FightMND, a not-for-profit registered charity in Australia, who together have issued us grants totaling approximately $2.6 million. We also receive indirect financial support for one of the clinical studies in which we participate, the Healey ALS Platform Trial, administered by the Massachusetts General Hospital, which is conducting a study of our CNM-Au8 drug candidate along with other drugs in a platform trial, at significantly lower costs to us than we would otherwise incur if we were to conduct a comparably designed study on our own at reasonable market rates.

The net cash used in our operating activities was $18.9 million and $13.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively. As of December 31, 2020, we had cash of $59.3 million. We expect that the cash on hand as of December 31, 2020 will be sufficient to fund our operations for a period extending beyond twelve months from the date the consolidated financial statements are issued. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we may exhaust our available capital resources sooner than we anticipate. See “— Liquidity and Capital Resources.” We expect our expenses to increase significantly in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we advance the clinical development of our clinical-stage drug products and continue research and development of our preclinical drug products and initiate additional clinical trials of, and seek regulatory approval for, these and other future drug products. As we continue to grow and expand, we will incur more expenses relating to regulatory compliance and sales and marketing personnel as we prepare to commence commercialization once we obtain regulatory approval of our drug products.

General and Administrative Expenses

Our administrative expenses consist primarily of staff costs, agency and consulting fees, utilities, rent and general office expenses, and share grants. We recorded administrative expenses of $5.2 million and $6.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively. We anticipate that our administrative expenses will further increase in future periods to support increases in our research and development activities and as we continue to rapidly advance the clinical programs of our drug products and expect to commercialize our products once we receive regulatory approval. These increases will likely include increased headcount, increased share compensation charges, expanded infrastructure and increased insurance expenses. We also anticipate increasing legal, compliance, accounting and investor and public relations expenses associated with being a public company.

Grants and Government Tax Incentives

We received grants issued by non-government entities related to income which have future related costs expected to be incurred and require us to comply with conditions attached to the grants. These non-government grants related to income are recognized in profit or loss as an offset to research and development expenses when funding has been

received and related costs have been incurred. We received tax incentives from the Australian government in the form of cash subsidies for research and development activities related to clinical trial activities conducted by our Australian subsidiary, which are recognized as other income upon compliance with certain conditions. We recognized $0.8 million and $0.1 million of grant funding against research and development expenses for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively. We recognized $3.2 million and $0.6 million of other income for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively, that we classified as Australia research and development credit.

Commercialization of Our Drug Candidates

Our business and results of operations depend on our ability to commercialize our drug candidates, if approved for marketing. Our pipeline is comprised of four drug candidates ranging from pre-clinical to late-stage clinical programs, including two drug candidates at the clinical stage or IND stage. Although we currently do not have any drug candidates approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue from drug product sales, we expect to commercialize one or more of our drug products in the coming years as they move toward the final stages of development. While we began selling our ZnAg Immune Boost product online in May 2020, we anticipate revenue generated from sales of this dietary supplement will be small compared to our operating expenses as well as the revenue we expect to generate from future sales of our drug candidates for which we are currently conducting clinical trials.

Components of Results of Operations

Revenue

Because all our drug candidates are still at clinical stage, we did not generate any revenue for the year ended December 31, 2019. We generated an immaterial amount of revenue for the year ended December 31, 2020, which we separate as product revenue and royalty revenue. Product revenue is generated under our dietary supplement segment from 4Life, LLC, a related party, related to supply agreements for the low dose mineral supplement KHC46 and a low dose zinc-silver solution, two dietary (mineral) supplements that we began supplying during this period. We also generated minimal product revenue from sales of rMetx™ ZnAg Immune Boost during this period.

Royalty revenue is paid to us by 4Life, LLC, under an exclusive and royalty-bearing license agreement relating to sales of KHC46 only. For more details on this agreement, see Item 1. Business — License Arrangements.

Operating Expenses

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development costs are charged to operations as incurred. We account for nonrefundable advance payments for goods and services that will be used in future research and development activities initially as an asset and then as expenses when the goods have been received or when the service has been performed rather than when the payment is made.

 We had research and development expenses for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 of $15.2 million and $9.6 million, respectively. Research and development expenses consist of costs incurred by us for the discovery and development of our drug candidates. Research and development costs include payroll and personnel expenses, including salaries and related benefits and stock-based compensation for employees engaged in research and development functions, clinical trial supplies, fees for clinical trial services, consulting costs, and allocated overhead, including rent, equipment, utilities, depreciation, insurance, and facilities maintenance costs. We expect our research and development expenses to increase as more of our drug candidates progress through their clinical trials.

Historically, substantially all of our research and development expenses relate to CNM-Au8, our lead asset. Drug candidates in later stages of clinical development generally have higher development costs than those in earlier stages of clinical development, primarily due to per patient clinical trial site fees for larger studies, the costs of opening and monitoring clinical sites, CRO activity, and manufacturing expenses. We expect that our research and development expenses will increase in connection with our clinical development activities in the near term and in the future.

Clinical trial costs, including clinical trial supplies and fees for clinical trial services, are charged to research and development expense as incurred. Our clinical trial accrual process seeks to account for expenses resulting from obligations under contracts with CROs, consultants, and under clinical site agreements in connection with conducting

clinical trials. The financial terms of these contracts are subject to negotiations, which vary from contract to contract and may result in payment flows that do not match the periods over which materials or services are provided to us under such contracts. We reflect the appropriate trial expenses in the consolidated financial statements by matching the appropriate expenses with the period in which services and efforts are expended. In the event advance payments are made to a CRO, the payments will be recorded as a prepaid asset, which will be expensed over the period of time the contracted services are performed.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses consist of employee salary and benefits, share-based compensation expenses, professional fees for legal, consulting and audit services and business development activities, facility, travel expenses, rental fees and other administrative expenses. We expect our general and administrative expenses to increase as we continue to grow and expand.

Other Income (Expenses)

Other income (expenses) consists of interest expenses, interest income, gains from the termination of a lease arrangement, changes in fair value of preferred stock warrant liability, changes in fair value of derivative liability, change in fair value of contingent earn-out, a research and development credit received from the Australian government, foreign exchange gain, loss on disposal of assets, and loss on extinguishment of convertible notes.

Comparison of the Years Ended December 31, 2020 and 2019

The following table summarizes our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019:

Revenue

We generated revenue of $0.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2020 while no revenue was generated for 2019. $0.2 million of our revenue for the year ended December 31, 2020 was product revenue from supply agreements with a related party for KHC46 and a low dose zinc-silver solution, two dietary supplements that we began supplying during this period. We also generated minimal product revenue from sales of rMetx™ ZnAg Immune Boost during this period. In addition, $30 thousand of our revenue during the same period was royalty revenue from a license agreement with the same related party.

Operating Expenses

Cost of Sales

We incurred cost of sales of $0.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2020 relating to production and distribution costs for the sales of our KHC46 and low dose zinc-silver solution dietary supplement products through supply agreements we have entered into with a related party while no cost of sales was incurred for 2019.

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses were $15.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2020 compared to $9.6 million for 2019. During these periods, substantially all of our research and development expenses were related to the development and clinical trials of CNM-Au8. This increase of $5.6 million, or 59.0%, was primarily due to the progression of our drug candidates through the clinical development process, including increased enrollment into the REPAIR-PD and the REPAIR-MS studies, and calendar payments due for our participation in the Healey-ALS Platform Trial. These efforts resulted in greater associated costs and manufacturing expenses in support of these trials.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses were $5.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2020 compared to $6.8 million for 2019. This decrease of $1.6 million, or 23.9% was primarily due to decreased expenses relating to efforts to list our shares on an international public exchange during 2019, which were subsequently abandoned. For the year ended December 31, 2020, we had a small increase in employee salary and benefits, shares based-compensation expenses due to the growth of our business and professional expenses related to fund raising activities.

Other Income (Expenses)

Other income (expenses), net for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 included the following:

(i)     recognized interest expense of $1.0 million and $0.1 million, respectively, due to an increase in the fair value of the Company’s notes payable. As of December 31, 2020, the fair value of the Company’s notes payable is determined based on the closing price of CLNN shares listed on the Nasdaq.

(ii)    recognized expense of $14.6 million and $0.4 million relating to the changes in fair value of preferred stock warrant liability, respectively. The increase of $14.2 million in association with the changes in fair value of preferred stock warrant liability was primarily a result of the increase in the value of outstanding warrants as the estimated value of our company and the likelihood of a liquidation event increased due to consideration of the Reverse Recapitalization. Upon the consummation of the Reverse Recapitalization, we determined that the warrants qualify for classification as permanent equity and we reclassified the resulting warrant liability to additional paid-in capital. No change in fair value of preferred stock warrant liability will be recorded going forward.

(iii)   recognized Clene Nanomedicine contingent earn-out liability of $64.7 million upon the closing of the Reverse Recapitalization and subsequently remeasured the contingent earn-out liability to the fair value of $52.1 million at the reporting date. The change in fair value of our Clene Nanomedicine contingent earn-out of $12.6 million was primarily a result of the decrease of the closing price of CLNN shares listed on the Nasdaq for $9.01 per share on December 31, 2020 from $10.82 per share on December 30, 2020 when we recognized the Clene Nanomedicine contingent earn-out liability at inception.

(iv)   recognized Initial Shareholders contingent earn-out liability of $7.4 million upon the closing of the Reverse Recapitalization and subsequently remeasured the contingent earn-out liability to the fair value of $5.9 million at the reporting date. The change in fair value of our Initial Shareholders contingent earn-out of $1.5 million was primarily a result of the decrease of the closing price of CLNN shares listed on the Nasdaq for $9.01 per share on December 31, 2020 from $10.82 per share on December 30, 2020 when we recognized the Initial Shareholders contingent earn-out liability at inception.

(v)    recognized income of $3.2 million and $0.6 million relating to a research and development credit received from the Australian government, respectively. We recognized Australian research and development credit in an amount equal to the qualifying expenses incurred in each period multiplied by the applicable reimbursement percentage. The increase in research and development credit is the result of increased research and development activities during the year ended December 31, 2020.

(vi)   recognized expense of $0.5 million due to loss of extinguishment of convertible notes, while not recording any similar expenses in 2019.