TABLE OF CONTENTS

i

ii

PRESENTATION OF FINANCIAL AND OTHER INFORMATION

Unless otherwise stated or the context otherwise indicates, (i) references to the “company”, “we”, “our” or “us” refer to Immatics N.V., together with its subsidiaries, including Immatics Biotechnologies GmbH; (ii) references to “Immatics” refer solely to Immatics N.V.; and (iii) references to “Immatics OpCo” refer solely to Immatics Biotechnologies GmbH. Immatics N.V. is a Dutch public limited liability company (naamloze vennootschap) incorporated on March 10, 2020 and the holding company of Immatics Biotechnologies GmbH, a German biopharmaceutical company incorporated in 2000 focused on the development of T cell receptor-based immunotherapies for the treatment of cancer. Immatics Biotechnologies GmbH holds all material assets and conducts all business activities and operations of Immatics N.V.

Trademarks, Service Marks

The Immatics logo , Immatics^®, XPRESIDENT^®, ACTengine^®, ACTallo^®, ACTolog^®, XCEPTOR^®, TCER^®, AbsQuant^®, IMADetect^® and other trademarks or service marks of Immatics appearing in this filing (“Annual Report”) are the property of the company. Solely for convenience, some of the trademarks, service marks, logos and trade names referred to in this Annual Report are presented without the ^® and ^TM symbols, but such references are not intended to indicate, in any way, that we will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, our rights or the rights of the applicable licensors to these trademarks, service marks and trade names. This Annual Report contains additional trademarks, service marks and trade names of others. All trademarks, service marks and trade names appearing in this Annual Report are, to our knowledge, the property of their respective owners. We do not intend our use or display of other companies’ trademarks, service marks, copyrights or trade names to imply a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, any other companies.

Financial Information

The terms “dollar,” “USD” or “$” refer to the U.S. dollar and the term “euro,” “EUR” or “€” refer to the euro, unless otherwise indicated. The exchange rate used for conversion between U.S. dollars and euros is based on the ECB euro reference exchange rate published by the European Central Bank.

Our consolidated financial statements are presented in euros and have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (“IFRS”). None of the consolidated financial statements were prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”). We have made rounding adjustments to some of the figures included in this Annual Report. Accordingly, any numerical discrepancies in any table between totals and sums of the amounts listed are due to rounding.

Market and Industry Data

This Annual Report contains industry, market and competitive position data that are based on general and industry publications, surveys and studies conducted by third parties, some of which may not be publicly available, and our own internal estimates and research. Third-party publications, surveys and studies generally state that they have obtained information from sources believed to be reliable, but do not guarantee the accuracy and completeness of such information. These data involve a number of assumptions and limitations and contain projections and estimates of the future performance of the industries in which we operate.

iii

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report contains forward-looking statements regarding our current expectations or forecasts of future events. All statements other than statements of historical facts contained in this Annual Report, including statements regarding our future results of operations and financial position, business strategy, product candidates, research pipeline, ongoing and planned preclinical studies and clinical trials, regulatory submissions and approvals, research and development costs, timing and likelihood of success, as well as plans and objectives of management for future operations are forward-looking statements. Many of the forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report can be identified by the use of forward-looking words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “could,” “expect,” “should,” “plan,” “intend,” “estimate,” “will” and “potential,” among others. These forward-looking statements include:

iv

These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this Annual Report and are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions described under the sections in this Annual Report titled “Item 3. Key Information—D. Risk Factors” and “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects” and elsewhere in this Annual Report. Because forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties, some of which cannot be predicted or quantified and some of which are beyond our control, you should not rely on these forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. The events and circumstances reflected in our forward-looking statements may not be achieved or occur and actual results could differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements. Moreover, we operate in an evolving environment. New risk factors and uncertainties may emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for management to predict all risk factors and uncertainties. Except as required by applicable law, we do not plan to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements contained herein, whether as a result of any new information, future events, changed circumstances or otherwise.

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

v

PART I

A. Directors and Senior Management

Not applicable.

B. Advisers

Not applicable.

C. Auditors

Not applicable.

A. Offer Statistics

Not applicable.

B. Method and Expected Timetable

Not applicable.

A. [Reserved]

B. Capitalization and Indebtedness

Not applicable.

C. Reasons for the Offer and Use of Proceeds

Not applicable.

D. Risk Factors

Risk Factors Summary

Our business faces significant risks and uncertainties. You should carefully consider all of the information set forth in this Annual Report and in other documents we file with or furnish to the SEC, including the following risk factors, before deciding to invest in or to maintain an investment in our securities. Our business, as well as our reputation, financial condition, results of operations and share price, could be materially adversely affected by any of these risks, as well as other risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or not currently considered material. These risks include, among others, the following:

1

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital

We have a history of operating losses and expect to continue to incur losses.

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company active in the development and discovery of potential T cell redirecting immunotherapies for the treatment of cancer. We have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated revenue from operations. We have incurred net losses in each year since inception except for the year ended December 31, 2022, as a result of our having received upfront payments from our licensing agreements which we have recorded partially as a one-time revenue under revenue recognition guidelines. As of December 31, 2022, we had accumulated consolidated losses of €500.3 million. We do not expect to generate any meaningful revenue from commercializing products for the foreseeable future. We expect to incur significant additional operating losses in the future as we continue and expand our research and development efforts for our product candidates.

We do not know when or whether we will become profitable. To become and remain profitable, we must succeed in developing, obtaining regulatory approval for and commercializing one or more of our product candidates. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including completing preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates, discovering and developing additional product candidates, making regulatory submissions, obtaining regulatory approval for any product candidates that successfully complete clinical trials, establishing commercialization capabilities for any approved products, manufacturing any approved products and achieving market acceptance for any approved products. We may never succeed in these activities. Even if we succeed in these activities, we may never generate revenue in an amount sufficient to achieve profitability.

2

Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with biotechnology product development and commercialization, we are unable to accurately predict whether and when we will achieve profitability.

Even if we achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain profitability in subsequent periods. After we achieve profitability, if ever, we expect to continue to engage in substantial research and development activities and to incur substantial expenses to develop, manufacture and commercialize additional product candidates. In addition, we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our revenues, expenses and profitability.

Our failure to achieve or sustain profitability would depress our market value and could impair our ability to execute our business plan, raise capital, develop additional product candidates or continue our operations. A decline in the value of our company could cause our shareholders to lose all or part of their investment.

We will need additional capital to fund our operations and complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates. Our inability to obtain this capital when needed could force us to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development efforts.

Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception. The development of biotechnology product candidates is capital intensive and we expect that we will continue to expend substantial resources for the foreseeable future to develop and commercialize our current and future product candidates. Our expenditures in the foreseeable future may include costs associated with conducting research and development activities, conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, undertaking commercialization activities, establishing our sales and marketing capabilities, manufacturing and selling approved products and potentially acquiring or in-licensing new technologies.

As of December 31, 2022, we had €362.2 million in cash and cash equivalents and other financial assets. We believe that we have sufficient financial resources available to fund our projected operating requirements for at least the next twelve months. Because the outcome of our current and planned clinical trials is highly uncertain, we cannot reasonably estimate the actual amounts necessary to successfully complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates. Our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including, but not limited to:

3

Additional funds may not be available when we need them or on terms that are acceptable to us. If adequate funds are not available to us on a timely basis or on terms acceptable to us, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our research and development efforts.

If we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, our existing shareholders’ ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of such equity or convertible debt securities may include liquidation or other preferences that are senior to or otherwise adversely affect the rights of our existing shareholders. If we raise additional capital through the sale of debt securities or through entering into credit or loan facilities, we may be restricted in our ability to take certain actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, acquiring or licensing intellectual property rights, declaring dividends or encumbering our assets to secure future indebtedness. Such restrictions could adversely impact our ability to conduct our operations and execute our business plan. If we raise additional capital through collaborations with third parties, we may be required to relinquish valuable rights to our intellectual property or product candidates or we may be required to grant licenses for our intellectual property or product candidates on unfavorable terms.

We are exposed to risks related to currency exchange rates.

We operate internationally and are exposed to fluctuations in foreign exchange rates between the euro and other currencies, particularly the U.S. dollar. Our reporting currency is the euro and, as a result, financial line items are converted into euros at the applicable foreign exchange rates. As our business grows, we expect that at least some of our revenues and expenses will continue to be denominated in currencies other than the euro. Unfavorable developments in the value of the euro relative to other relevant currencies, especially the U.S. dollar, could adversely affect our business and financial condition. In the past, we have seen USD-EUR exchange rate fluctuations, that materially impacted our Statement of Profit and Loss.

The use of net operating loss carryforwards may be limited.

Both Immatics OpCo and Immatics US, Inc. (“Immatics US”) incurred significant losses in the past and therefore are entitled to use net operating loss carryforwards. For the year ended December 31, 2022, we had German federal net operating loss carryforwards of €210.4 million and Immatics US had U.S. federal net operating loss carryforwards of €146.8 million. German federal net operating loss carryforwards and U.S. federal net operating loss carryforwards arising in taxable years ending after December 31, 2017 do not expire, whereas U.S. federal net operating loss carryforwards arising before or in taxable years ending December 31, 2017 will begin to expire in 2027. Limitation on tax loss carry forwards with respect to U.S. federal net operating losses is 80% of each subsequent year`s net income starting with losses generated after January 1, 2018 and with respect to German federal net operating losses, 60% of each subsequent year`s net income. These have an indefinite carry forward period, but no carry back option. The operating loss carryforwards are subject to various

4

limitations, including limitations under Sections 382 and 383 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) if Immatics US has a cumulative change in ownership of more than 50% within a three-year period. Further, due to our limited income, there is a high risk that our operating loss carryforwards will expire in part and cannot be used to offset future taxable income.

Furthermore, any net operating loss carryforwards that we report on our tax returns are subject to review by the relevant tax authorities. Consequently, we are exposed to the risk that the tax authorities may not accept the reported net operating loss carryforwards in part or in their entirety. Any limitations in our ability to use net operating loss carryforwards to offset taxable income could adversely affect our financial condition.

Risks Related to the Development of Our Product Candidates

Our product candidates represent novel approaches to the treatment of diseases, and there are many uncertainties regarding the development of our product candidates.

Human immunotherapy products are a new category of therapeutics. Because this is a relatively new and expanding area of novel therapeutic interventions, there are many uncertainties related to development of our product candidates. There can be no assurance as to the number of required clinical trials, the length of the trial period, the number of patients the FDA, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities will require to be enrolled in the trials in order to establish the safety and efficacy of immunotherapy products, or that the data generated in these trials will be acceptable to the FDA, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities to support marketing approval. The FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authorities may take longer than usual to come to a decision on any BLA, MAA or similar marketing application that we submit and may ultimately determine that there is not enough data, information or experience with our product candidates to support an approval decision. Regulatory authorities may also require that we conduct additional post-marketing studies or implement risk management programs.

Our current product candidates are in various stages of development, and it is possible that none of our product candidates will ever become commercial products.

Our success depends heavily on the successful further development of our current and future product candidates and our research pipeline and regulatory approval of our current and future product candidates, all of which are subject to risks and uncertainties beyond our control. We are conducting clinical trials for IMA201, IMA203 and IMA401 and preclinical studies for our other product candidates. However, the FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authorities may ultimately disagree that data generated from our clinical trials are sufficient for regulatory approval. There can be no assurance that any of our product candidates will prove to be safe, effective or commercially viable treatments for cancer.

If we discontinue development of a product candidate, we will not receive the anticipated revenues from that product candidate, and we may not receive any return on our investment in that product candidate. In the future, we may discontinue other product candidates for clinical reasons if such product candidates do not prove to be safe and effective. Any unexpected safety events or our failure to generate sufficient data in our clinical trials to demonstrate efficacy may cause a product candidate to fail clinical development. Furthermore, even if that product candidate meets its safety and efficacy endpoints, we may discontinue its development for various reasons, such as changes in the competitive environment or the standard of care and the prioritization of our resources.

We may also find that the development of a companion diagnostic for our product candidates is more difficult or more expensive than anticipated, resulting in an inability to provide the required diagnostic testing for our clinical trials, or if approved, for the market. Moreover, because of the complexity and novelty of our companion diagnostic biomarker, there are only a limited number of providers who have the capability of supporting the development of a companion diagnostic. Should any of our clinical research organizations (“CROs”) fail to meet our development goals, it may take us significant time to find a replacement, if we are able to find a replacement at all.

5

Due to the uncertain and time-consuming clinical development and regulatory approval process, we may not successfully develop any of our product candidates and may choose to discontinue the development of any of our product candidates. Therefore, it is possible that none of our current product candidates will ever become commercial products. Our failure to develop and commercialize our current and future product candidates could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Delays in the commencement and completion of clinical trials could increase costs and delay or prevent regulatory approval and commercialization of our product candidates.

We cannot guarantee that clinical trials of our product candidates will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of the clinical trial process, and other events may cause us to temporarily or permanently stop a clinical trial. Events that may prevent successful or timely commencement and completion of clinical development include:

6

Delays, including delays caused by the above factors, can be costly and could negatively affect our ability to complete a clinical trial. Further, there can be no assurance that submission of an IND, IND amendment or CTA will result in the FDA or any comparable regulatory authority allowing testing and clinical trials to begin, or that, once begun, issues will not arise that suspend or terminate such clinical trials. The manufacturing and preclinical safety and efficacy testing requirements of both ACT and TCR Bispecifics remain emerging and evolving fields. Accordingly, we expect chemistry, manufacturing and control related topics, including product specification, as well as preclinical safety testing, will be a focus of IND reviews, which may delay the allowance of INDs by the FDA or CTA approval by comparable regulatory authorities. If we are not able to successfully complete clinical trials, we will not be able to obtain regulatory approval and will not be able to commercialize our product candidates.

If we experience delays or difficulties in patient enrollment for clinical trials, our research and development efforts and the receipt of necessary regulatory approvals could be significantly delayed or prevented.

Commencement and successful and timely completion of clinical trials require us to enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in these trials as required by the FDA, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities. Any delay or difficulty in patient enrollment could significantly delay or otherwise hinder our research and development efforts and delay or prevent receipt of necessary regulatory approvals. Despite diligent planning of our clinical trials and analysis of their feasibility regarding patient recruitment, we may experience difficulties, delays or inability in patient enrollment in our clinical trials for a variety of reasons, including:

7

Not all patients suffering from a specific cancer that is in principle addressable by our product candidates are eligible for our clinical trials and therapies. First, patients must express a specific genetic marker called HLA-A*02. While this marker is found on approximately 40-50% of individuals in North America and Europe, it is less frequent in other populations, such as China or Japan. If human leukocyte antigen (“HLA”) screening for a patient shows that HLA-A*02 is not expressed, he or she cannot be treated with our current product candidates. Second, the prevalence of the targets addressed by IMA201, IMA203 and IMA401 differs between different tumor entities. For a given patient, a biomarker assay must be performed in order to find out whether he or she expresses one of the targets and can be treated with one of our product candidates. We cannot be certain that the anticipated and assumed target prevalence rates are confirmed in the patient populations of our clinical trials, and lower target prevalence rates may be experienced. Third, further eligibility criteria are in place to ensure that the patients can tolerate and potentially benefit from the treatment. Thus, only a few of the patients screened for our clinical trials will receive cellular or TCR Bispecifics products. Patients may therefore be hesitant to consent to our trials, and overall, many more patients will have to be screened to treat the targeted number of patients. It is uncertain how many more patients we will be required to screen. If the required number of patient screenings is much higher than anticipated, our clinical trial costs may increase. To mitigate this risk, we are testing several tumor targets in parallel in our clinical trials and have further product candidates against other HLA-types in early preclinical development. However, we cannot be certain whether this will be successful and effective in enhancing recruitment.

Our clinical trials will compete with other clinical trials for product candidates that are in the same therapeutic areas as our product candidates, and this competition will reduce the number and types of patients available to us because some eligible patients may instead opt to enroll in a competitor’s trial. Because the number of qualified clinical investigators is limited, we expect to conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which will reduce the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials at such clinical trial sites. Enrolling patients at the same sites as our competitors may compromise the quality and conclusiveness of our clinical data by introducing bias. Moreover, because our product candidates represent a departure from more commonly used methods for cancer treatment, potential patients and their doctors may be inclined to use conventional therapies, such as chemotherapy and approved immunotherapies, rather than enroll patients in any clinical trial. In addition, potential enrollees in our ACT trials with IMA201 or IMA203 may opt to participate in other clinical trials because of the length of time between the time that their tumor is analyzed, and the cellular product is manufactured and infused back into the patient. Challenges in recruiting and enrolling suitable patients to participate in clinical trials could increase costs, affect the timing and outcome of our planned clinical trials and result in delays to our current development plan for our product candidates.

Clinical trials are expensive, time-consuming and difficult to design and implement, and our clinical trial costs may be higher than for more conventional therapeutic technologies or drug products.

Clinical trials are expensive and difficult to design, implement and conduct, in part because they are subject to rigorous regulatory requirements. Because our ACT product candidates are based on new cell therapy

8

technologies and manufactured on a patient-by-patient basis, we expect that such candidates will require extensive research and development and have substantial manufacturing costs per dose. Our TCR Bispecific product candidates also require extensive research and development, as the applicable technology is new and experience with developing such biologics is rare in the field. Moreover, the development of a companion diagnostic will also require extensive research and development, and such companion diagnostic must be suitable to support both enrollment into larger clinical trials and routine hospital procedures after marketing approval. Any failure or delay in developing a suitable companion diagnostic will delay or make it impossible to conduct larger clinical trials for ACT product candidates and/or TCR Bispecific product candidates.

In addition, costs to treat patients with recurrent and/or refractory cancer and to treat potential side effects that may result from our product candidates, non-investigational medicinal products, rescue or prophylactic medication applied in our clinical trials can be significant. Some clinical trial sites do not bill or obtain coverage from Medicare, Medicaid, health insurance or other third-party payors for some or all of these costs for patients enrolled in our clinical trials, and we can be required by those trial sites to pay such costs. In countries outside the United States, we expect that all costs related to the clinical trial and to the management of study patients (for example, management of adverse reactions or hospitalization) are paid by the sponsor of the clinical trial. As trial designs for development of our product candidates are complex, our clinical trial costs are likely to be significantly higher per patient than those of more conventional therapeutic technologies or drug products. At some point, we may combine two or more of our ACT or TCR Bispecific product candidates within one clinical trial or within a multi-TCR-T or multi-TCR Bispecifics concept in order to enhance clinical efficacy results and to increase the patient population. The setup and conduct of such multi-TCR-T or multi-TCR Bispecifics clinical trials is expensive and may bear unknown risks, such as regulatory, preclinical, safety and manufacturing risks. In addition, our proposed personalized product candidates involve several complex and costly manufacturing and processing steps, the costs of which will be borne by us. We are also responsible for the manufacturing costs of products for patients that do not receive the product due to any reason (for example, rapid degradation of general health status, not meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria for infusion). Depending on the number of patients that we ultimately screen and enroll in our trials, the number of trials that we may need to conduct, and the companion diagnostic we need to develop, our overall clinical trial costs may be higher than for more conventional treatments.

Our product candidates may cause undesirable side effects or have other properties that may delay or prevent their development or regulatory approval or limit their commercial potential.

Undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates or by similar product candidates developed by others could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in more restrictive labeling or the denial of regulatory approval by the FDA, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities and potential product liability claims.

In our cell therapy clinical trials, most commonly reported Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (“TEAEs”) were cytopenias. In addition, we have observed dose-limiting toxicities (“DLT”). There can be no assurance that patients treated with our product candidates will not experience these and other serious adverse side effects and there can be no assurance that the FDA, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities will not place clinical holds on our current or future clinical trials, the result of which could delay or prevent us from obtaining regulatory approval. In particular, our clinical trials enroll patients who have failed all available standard-of-care treatments. As a result, these patients may be immunocompromised and thus are more susceptible to serious adverse side effects. In addition, certain of our protocols involve further weakening of patients’ immune response (e.g., through lymphodepletion) prior to receiving our product candidates, which may further increase the severity and frequency of serious adverse side effects.

Further, because our product candidates represent novel approaches to the treatment of cancer, we may be less able to predict the nature, severity and frequency of adverse events and thus less able to undertake measures

9

to prevent serious adverse events and mitigate their effects. For example, infused T cells may be more active than we expect or than we previously observed. Moreover, because our ACTengine product candidates for a specific patient are manufactured using that patient’s white blood cells, each patient receives an individually manufactured ACTengine product candidate. As a result, it may be difficult to predict how a patient will respond to that individualized product candidate.

This could lead to more severe or prolonged toxicities or even patient deaths, which could result in us or the FDA, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities delaying, suspending or terminating one or more of our clinical trials and which could jeopardize regulatory approval.

Furthermore, clinical trials by their nature utilize a sample of the potential patient population. With a limited number of subjects and limited duration of exposure, rare and severe side effects of our product candidates may only be uncovered with a significantly larger number of patients exposed to the drug. In addition, some of our product candidates are developed or intended to be used in combination with other therapies. When used in combination, the severity and frequency of undesirable side effects may be greater than the cumulative severity and frequency of such side effects when the therapies are used as monotherapies and the nature of undesirable side effects may be different than such side effects when the therapies are used as monotherapies.

If we or others identify undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates or those of our competitors, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining regulatory approval and market acceptance of our product candidates and could substantially increase commercialization costs.

Results from preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials may not be predictive of results from late-stage or other clinical trials.

Positive and promising results from preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials may not be predictive of results from late-stage clinical trials or from clinical trials of the same product candidates. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. Late-stage clinical trials could differ in significant ways from early-stage clinical trials, including changes to inclusion and exclusion criteria, efficacy endpoints, dosing regimen and statistical design. In particular, we expect there may be greater variability in results for products

10

processed and administered on a patient-by-patient basis, as for our cellular therapy product candidates, than for “off-the-shelf” products, like many other drugs. Therefore, despite positive results observed in early-stage clinical trials, our product candidates may fail to demonstrate sufficient efficacy in our pivotal or confirmatory clinical trials.

Preliminary interim or “top-line” data that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data.

From time to time, we may announce or publish preliminary interim or “top-line” data from clinical trials. Positive preliminary data may not be predictive of such trial’s subsequent or overall results. Preliminary data are subject to the risk that one or more of the outcomes may materially change as more data become available. Additionally, preliminary data are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available.

For example, our studies of cellular therapies in patients without any indicated standard-of-care treatment utilize an “open-label, single arm, dose-escalation/de-escalation” trial design. This trial design has the potential to create selection bias by encouraging the investigators to enrol a more favorable patient population (for example, indications better suitable for immunotherapies, fitter patients, fewer prior therapies) compared to a broader patient population. In our current Phase 1 clinical trials, investigators have significant discretion over the selection of patient participants. As the trials continue, the investigators may prioritize patients with more progressed forms of cancer and/or worse general health condition than the initial patient population, based on the safety/success or perceived safety/success of that initial population. Patients with more progressed forms of cancer or worse general health conditions may experience more and/or worse adverse events or be less responsive to treatment, and accordingly, interim or final safety and efficacy data may show an increase in frequency or severity of adverse events and/or a decline in patient response rate or change in other assessment metrics. As the trials continue or in subsequent trials, investigators may shift their approach to the patient population, which may ultimately experience more and/or worse adverse events and/or result in a decline in both interim and final efficacy data from the preliminary data, or conversely, a decrease in frequency and/or severity of adverse events or an increase in final efficacy data following a decline in the interim efficacy data, as patients with more progressed forms of cancer or worse general health condition are cycled out of the trials and replaced by patients with less advanced forms of cancer or with better general health conditions. This opportunity for investigator selection bias in our trials as a result of open-label design, which is standard in dose-escalation/de-escalation trials, may not be adequately handled and may cause a decline in or distortion of clinical trial data from our preliminary results.

Therefore, positive preliminary results in any ongoing clinical trial may not be predictive of such results in the completed trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully evaluate all data. As a result, preliminary data that we report may differ from future results from the same clinical trials, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Preliminary data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Material adverse changes in the final data compared to preliminary data could significantly harm our business prospects.

The deviations in our proposed new products from existing products may require us to perform additional testing, which will increase the cost, and extend the time for obtaining approval.

Our ACT based therapy is based on first-generation adoptive cell therapy technology suitable for delivering for small, early-phase clinical trials. While we have implemented advancements to the process, the current methods of treatment are very labor intensive and expensive, which has limited their widespread application. We

11

have developed new processes that we anticipate will enable more efficient manufacturing of ACT. We may have difficulty demonstrating that the products produced from our new processes are comparable to the existing products. The FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authorities may require additional clinical testing before permitting a larger clinical trial with the new processes, and the product may not demonstrate the desired activity in new clinical trials. In the manufacturing of cellular products, even small changes in manufacturing processes could alter the cell types, so our ability to predict the outcomes with newer manufacturing processes is limited. The changes that we have made to the historical manufacturing process may require additional testing, which may increase costs and timelines associated with these developments.

Our TCR Bispecific product candidates contain features that have not been previously tested in this composition in clinical trials or marketed products. The FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authorities may require additional non-clinical studies before permitting us to enter clinical trials with our product candidates. Regulatory authorities may also ask for additional early-stage trials or production of additional batches of TCR Bispecific product candidates before permitting larger clinical trials or registration trials. To comply with those requests would increase costs and timelines for the development of our TCR Bispecific product candidates.

Risks Related to Regulatory Approval of Our Product Candidates

The regulatory review and approval processes of the FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authorities are lengthy, time-consuming and uncertain. If we are unable to obtain, or if there are delays in obtaining, regulatory approval for our product candidates, we will not be able to commercialize our product candidates and our ability to generate revenue will be materially impaired.

Our product candidates must be approved by the FDA in the United States, by the EMA in the European Union and by comparable regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions prior to commercialization. In order to obtain regulatory approval for the commercial sale of any product candidates, we must demonstrate through extensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that the product candidate is safe and effective for use in each target indication and that manufacturing of the product candidate is robust and reproducible. The time required to obtain approval by the FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authorities is uncertain, typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that any of our product candidates will receive regulatory approval in the United States, the European Union or other jurisdictions.

Regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process. They may refuse to accept any application or may decide that our data are insufficient for approval and require additional clinical trials or other studies. We expect the novel nature of our product candidates to create additional challenges in obtaining regulatory approval. For example, the FDA has limited experience with commercial development of T cell directed therapies for cancer. Therefore, even if we believe the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA, the EMA or any comparable regulatory authority. If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of any of our product candidates beyond those that are contemplated, we may incur significant additional costs and the regulatory approval of our product candidates may be delayed or prevented. Furthermore, additional clinical trials or other testing could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates and could allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, which may prevent the successful commercialization of our product candidates.

Furthermore, the process and time required to obtain regulatory approval differ by jurisdiction. In many countries outside the United States, a drug must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that country. Approval by one regulatory authority does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions. Obtaining foreign regulatory approvals and compliance with foreign regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of our

12

products in certain countries. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets and/or receive applicable marketing approvals, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our product candidates will be harmed.

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

Applications for regulatory approval and regulatory approval of our product candidates could be delayed or be denied for many reasons, including but not limited to the following:

Any of these factors, some of which are beyond our control, may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, which would significantly harm our business, financial condition and prospects.

13

The regulatory landscape that will govern our product candidates is still evolving. Regulations relating to more established gene therapy and cell therapy products and TCR Bispecific products are still developing, and changes in regulatory requirements could result in delays or discontinuation of development of our product candidates or unexpected costs in obtaining regulatory approval.

Because we are developing novel cell immunotherapy product candidates that are unique biological entities, the regulatory requirements to which we will be subject are not entirely clear and may change rapidly. Even with respect to more established products that fit into the categories of gene therapies or cell therapies, the regulatory landscape is still developing. For example, regulatory requirements governing gene therapy products and cell therapy products have become more stringent and comprehensive frequently and may continue to extend in the future. Moreover, there is substantial, and sometimes uncoordinated, overlap in those responsible for regulation of existing gene therapy products and cell therapy products. For example, in the United States, the FDA has established the Office of Tissues and Advanced Therapies (“OTAT”), formerly known as the Office of Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies (“OCTGT”), within its Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (“CBER”) to consolidate the review of gene therapy and related products, and the Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies Advisory Committee to advise CBER on its review. Gene therapy clinical trials in the U.S. are also subject to review and oversight by an institutional biosafety committee (“IBC”), a local institutional committee that reviews and oversees basic and clinical research conducted at the institution participating in the clinical trial. Similar regulatory bodies exist in Europe and other jurisdictions. In addition, adverse developments in clinical trials of gene therapy products conducted by others may cause the FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authorities to change the requirements for approval of any of our product candidates.

While there is already a T cell engaging bispecific molecule approved and regulatory guidelines have been issued for this class of drugs, bispecific therapeutics are still new in the field and regulators have even less experience with TCR Bispecifics. Thus, guidance for development and regulatory approval of such drugs may change.

Complex regulatory environments exist in the different jurisdictions in which we might consider seeking regulatory approvals for our product candidates, further complicating the regulatory landscape. For example, in the European Union, a special committee called the Committee for Advanced Therapies was established within the EMA in accordance with Regulation (EC) No. 1394/2007 on advanced therapy medicinal products (“ATMPs”) to assess the quality, safety and efficacy of ATMPs, and to follow scientific developments in the field. ATMPs include gene therapy products as well as somatic cell therapy products and tissue engineered products.

These various regulatory review committees and advisory groups and new or revised guidelines that they promulgate from time to time may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional studies, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of our product candidates or lead to significant post-approval limitations or restrictions. Because the regulatory landscape for our cell immunotherapy product candidates is new, our product candidates may face even more cumbersome and complex regulations than those emerging for other gene therapy products and cell therapy products. Furthermore, even if our product candidates obtain required regulatory approvals, such approvals may later be revoked, suspended or otherwise withdrawn as a result of changes in regulations or the interpretation of regulations by applicable regulatory agencies. Delay or failure to obtain, or unexpected costs in obtaining, the regulatory approval necessary to bring a potential product to market could decrease our ability to generate sufficient product revenue to maintain our business.

Development of a product candidate intended for use in combination with an already approved product may present more or different challenges than development of a product candidate for use as a single agent.

We evaluate our ACT and TCR Bispecifics product candidates in combination with other therapies, such as checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapies. The development of product candidates for use in combination with

14

another product may present challenges. For example, the FDA may require us to use more complex clinical trial designs, in order to evaluate the contribution of each product and product candidate to any observed effects. It is possible that the results of these trials could show that most or any positive results are attributable to the already approved product. Moreover, following product approval, the FDA may require that products used in conjunction with each other be cross-labelled. To the extent that we do not have rights to already approved products, this may require us to work with another company to satisfy such a requirement. Moreover, developments related to the already approved products may impact our clinical trials for the combination as well as our commercial prospects should we receive marketing approval. Such developments may include changes to the approved product’s safety or efficacy profile, changes to the availability of the approved product, and changes to the standard of care.

The FDA may disagree with our regulatory plan and we may fail to obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates.

If and when our ongoing Phase 1 clinical trials for IMA203 and/or IMA401 are completed and, assuming positive data, we expect to advance to potential registrational trials, either directly or following a Phase 2 trial.

If the trial results are sufficiently compelling, we intend to discuss with the FDA a BLA submission for the relevant product candidate. Further, we plan to have discussions with other authorities, such as the EMA or Health Canada regarding any planned marketing authorization submissions. It cannot be guaranteed that FDA, the EMA and other regulatory authorities will agree to move to a registrational trial on the basis of data generated and may ask for additional data. Even if the FDA, the EMA or other regulatory authorities agrees with the design and implementation of the clinical trials set forth in an IND and CTA, we cannot guarantee that the regulatory authorities will not change their requirements in the future. For example, the regulatory authorities may require that we conduct a comparative trial against an approved therapy including potentially an approved autologous T cell therapy, which would significantly delay our development timelines and require substantially more resources. In addition, the regulatory authorities may only allow us to evaluate patients that have already failed autologous therapy or very late-stage patients, which are extremely difficult patients to treat and patients with advanced and aggressive cancer, and our product candidates may fail to improve outcomes for such patients.

Certain of our current clinical trials are being conducted outside the United States, and the FDA may not accept data from trials conducted in foreign locations.

Certain current clinical trials of our drug candidates are being conducted or planned to be conducted partially or fully outside the United States. We may also conduct future clinical trials for our drug candidates partially or fully outside the United States. Although the FDA may accept data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States, acceptance of this data is subject to certain conditions imposed by the FDA. For example, the clinical trial must be well designed and conducted and performed by qualified investigators in accordance with ethical principles and good clinical practice (“GCP”) requirements. Further, the data must be applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice in ways that the FDA deems clinically meaningful. In general, the patient population for any clinical trials conducted outside of the United States must be representative of the population for whom we intend to label the product in the United States. In addition, while these clinical trials are subject to the applicable local laws, FDA acceptance of the data will be dependent upon its determination that the trials also complied with all applicable U.S. laws and regulations.

There can be no assurance that the FDA will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States. If the FDA does not accept the data from such clinical trials, it would likely result in the need for additional clinical trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay or permanently halt our development of our product candidates.

15

We may seek accelerated approval for some of our product candidates, which may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process and does not increase the likelihood that the product candidates will receive marketing approval.

We may attempt to seek approval on a per indication basis for our product candidates on the basis of a single pivotal trial or on the basis of data from one or more uncontrolled trials. While the FDA requires in most cases two adequate and well-controlled pivotal clinical trials to demonstrate the efficacy of a product candidate, a single trial with strong confirmatory evidence may be sufficient in instances where the trial is a large multicenter trial demonstrating internal consistency and a statistically very persuasive finding of a clinically meaningful effect on mortality, irreversible morbidity or prevention of a disease with a potentially serious outcome and if confirmation of the result in a second trial would be practically or ethically impossible. In rare cancer indications with very limited treatment options, a large and/or controlled trial is often not feasible and thus data from smaller and even uncontrolled trials may be sufficient for regulatory approval. It is difficult for us to predict with such a novel technology exactly what will be required by the regulatory authorities in order to take our product candidates to market or the timeframes under which the relevant regulatory approvals can be obtained.

For treatments granted accelerated approval, post-marketing confirmatory clinical trials are required to describe the anticipated effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. These confirmatory clinical trials must be completed with due diligence and, in some cases, the FDA may require that the trial be designed, initiated and/or fully enrolled prior to approval. If any of our competitors were to receive full approval on the basis of a confirmatory clinical trial for an indication for which we seek accelerated approval before we receive accelerated approval, the indication we are seeking may no longer qualify as a condition for which there is an unmet medical end and accelerated approval of our product candidate would be more difficult. Moreover, the FDA may withdraw approval of our product candidate approved under the accelerated approval pathway if, for example:

Recently, the accelerated approval pathway has come under scrutiny within the FDA and by Congress. The FDA has put increased focus on ensuring that confirmatory studies are conducted with diligence and, ultimately, that such studies confirm the benefit. For example, FDA has convened its Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee to review what the FDA has called dangling or delinquent accelerated approvals where confirmatory studies have not been completed or where results did not confirm benefit. In addition, Congress recently enacted the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act (“FDORA”), which included provisions related to the accelerated approval pathway and authorizes the FDA to require a post-approval study to be underway prior to approval or within a specified time period following approval.

We may pursue orphan drug designation for certain of our product candidates, which we may not receive, and even if we receive such designation, we may be unable to maintain the associated benefits.

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States and the European Union, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs.

In the United States, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user fee waivers. In addition, if a product receives

16

the first FDA approval for the indication for which it has orphan designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means the FDA may not approve any other application to market the same biologic (meaning, a product with the same principal molecular structural features) for that indication for a period of seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority over the product with orphan exclusivity or where the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient product quantity. In the European Union, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers and ten years of market exclusivity for the orphan indication following drug or biological product approval, provided that the criteria for orphan designation are still applicable at the time of the granting of the marketing authorization. This period may be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, the orphan drug designation criteria are no longer met, including where it is shown that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity. However, orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug or therapeutic biologic nor gives the drug or therapeutic biologic any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process.

We may pursue orphan drug designation for one or more of our product candidates. However, obtaining an orphan drug designation can be difficult, and we may not be successful in doing so. Even if we obtain orphan drug designation for our product candidates in specific indications, we may not be the first to obtain regulatory approval of these product candidates for the orphan-designated indication. In addition, exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be limited if we seek approval for an indication broader than the orphan-designated indication or 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. Furthermore, even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because a different biologic (with different principal molecular structural features) can be approved for the same condition. Even after an orphan product is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve the same biologic for the same condition if the FDA concludes that the later biologic is safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. Our inability to obtain orphan drug designation for any product candidates for the treatment of rare cancers and/or our inability to maintain that designation for the duration of the applicable exclusivity period, could reduce our ability to make sufficient sales of the applicable product candidate to balance our expenses incurred to develop it.

Breakthrough Therapy Designation, Fast Track Designation and Priority Review Designation by the FDA, or comparable designations by comparable regulatory authorities, for our product candidates may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process and do not increase the likelihood that a product candidate would receive regulatory approval.

We do not currently have Breakthrough Therapy Designation, Fast Track Designation or Priority Review Designation or comparable designations by comparable regulatory authorities for our product candidates. A breakthrough therapy is defined as a product candidate 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 currently approved therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For product candidates 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. A Fast Track Designation may be available if a product candidate is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and preclinical or clinical data demonstrate the potential to address an unmet medical need for this condition. Priority review may be granted for products that are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety and effectiveness compared to available therapies. The FDA will attempt to direct additional resources to the evaluation of an application designated for priority review in an effort to facilitate the review.

In Europe, the EMA has implemented the so-called “PRIME” (PRIority MEdicines) status in order support the development and accelerate the approval of complex innovative medicinal products addressing an unmet

17

medical need. The PRIME status enables early dialogue with the relevant EMA scientific committees and, possibly, some payers; and thus, reinforces the EMA’s scientific and regulatory support. It also opens accelerated assessment of the marketing authorization application (150 days instead of 210 days). The PRIME status, which is decided by the EMA, is reserved to medicines that may benefit from accelerated assessment, i.e., medicines of major interest from a public health perspective, in particular from a therapeutic innovation perspective and that target unmet medical need.

The FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authorities have broad discretion whether or not to grant Breakthrough Therapy Designation, Fast Track Designation and Priority Review Designation and comparable designations. Accordingly, even if we believe, after completing early clinical trials, that one of our product candidates meets the criteria for such designations, the applicable regulatory authority may disagree and instead determine not to make such designations. Even if we receive such designation for a product candidate, it may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional procedures and does not guarantee ultimate approval by the applicable regulatory authority. Many drugs that have received such designations have failed to obtain ultimate approval. In addition, the applicable regulatory authority may decide to rescind such designations if it determines that our product candidates no longer meet the conditions for qualification, including as a result of the product candidates’ failure to meet endpoints in any clinical trial.

We are required to comply with comprehensive and ongoing regulatory requirements for any product candidates that receive regulatory approval, including conducting confirmatory clinical trials of any product candidates that receive accelerated approval.

Any product candidates for which we receive accelerated approval from the FDA or similar conditional approval from the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities are required to undergo one or more confirmatory and post-marketing clinical trials. If such a product candidate fails to meet its safety and efficacy endpoints in such confirmatory and post-marketing clinical trials, the regulatory authority may withdraw its approval. There is no assurance that any such product will successfully advance through its confirmatory and post-marketing clinical trial(s).

Moreover, the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities will continue to closely monitor the safety profile of any product even after approval. If the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities become aware of new safety information after approval of any of our product candidates, they may withdraw approval, require labeling changes or establishment of a REMS or similar strategy, impose significant restrictions on a product’s indicated uses or marketing, or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies or post-market surveillance.

In addition, any product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval in a particular jurisdiction and the activities associated with their commercialization, including testing, manufacture, recordkeeping, labeling, storage, approval, advertising, promotion, sale and distribution, will be subject to comprehensive regulation by the FDA, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities. These requirements include, without limitation, submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration and listing requirements, the FDA’s cGMP and cGTPs requirements or comparable requirements in foreign jurisdictions, requirements relating to manufacturing, quality control, quality assurance and corresponding maintenance of records and documents, including periodic inspections by the FDA, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities, requirements regarding the distribution of samples to physicians, tracking and reporting of payments to physicians and other healthcare providers and recordkeeping. In the United States, the FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of drugs to ensure drugs are marketed only for the approved indications and in a manner consistent with the provisions of the approved labeling. The FDA also imposes stringent restrictions on manufacturers’ communications regarding use of their products and, if we promote our products beyond their approved indications or in a manner inconsistent with the approved labeling, we may be subject to enforcement action for off-label promotion. Violations of the U.S. Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the “FDCA”) relating to the promotion of prescription drugs may lead to investigations alleging violations of federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, as well as state consumer protection laws.

18

The policies of the FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authorities may change and additional regulations may be enacted. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or to the adoption of new requirements, or not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any regulatory approval that may have been obtained. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad, as the regulatory environment changes rapidly.

Risk Related to the Manufacturing of Our Product Candidates

Our product candidates are complex and difficult to manufacture. We could experience manufacturing problems that result in delays in our development or commercialization programs.

Our product candidates are cellular products or biologics and the process of manufacturing our products is complex, highly regulated and subject to multiple risks. The manufacture of our cellular product candidates involves complex processes, including, for example, for ACTengine genetically modified autologous T cell products (IMA201, IMA203, and IMA204), harvesting and transporting blood cells from every patient for T cell isolation, engineering of the T cells to express a specific T cell receptor for a tumor target, ex vivo multiplying the T cells to obtain the desired cell numbers for the dose, and finally transporting of the T cell product back to the patient for infusing the modified T cells back into the same patient. As a result of the complexities, the cost to manufacture cellular products per dose is generally higher than traditional small molecule chemical compounds or biologics, and the manufacturing process is less reliable, more variable and is more difficult to reproduce. Our manufacturing process may be susceptible to product loss or failure due to logistical issues associated with the collection of patients’ blood cells, shipping such material to the manufacturing site, shipping the final product back to the patient, and infusing the patient with the product. Product loss or failure may also be caused by manufacturing issues associated with the variability in patient starting material especially from heavily treated cancer patients, interruptions in the manufacturing process, contamination, equipment failure, assay failures, improper installation or operation of equipment, vendor or operator error, inconsistency in cell growth, and variability in product characteristics. Even minor deviations from normal manufacturing processes could result in reduced production yields, product defects, and other supply disruptions. If for any reason we lose a patient’s starting material, or any intermediate product at any point in the process, or if any product does not meet the present specifications, the manufacturing process for that patient will need to be restarted, sometimes including re-collection of blood cells from the patient, and the resulting delay may adversely affect that patient’s outcome. It may even happen, that failed product manufacture may prevent a patient from getting a T cell product. If microbial, environmental or other contaminations are discovered in our product candidates or in the manufacturing facilities in which our product candidates are made, such manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination. If such contaminations or other product quality issues are not discovered and if as a result thereof patients are exposed to a health risk, we may be held liable. Our insurance may not cover those cases, or the financial coverage may not be sufficient.

Because our ACTengine cellular product candidates are manufactured specifically for each individual patient, we will be required to maintain a chain of identity with respect to the patient’s cellular material as it moves from the patient to the manufacturing facility, through the manufacturing process, and back to the patient. Maintaining such a chain of identity is difficult and complex, and failure to do so could result in adverse patient outcomes, loss of product, or regulatory action including withdrawal of our products from the market. Further, as product candidates are developed through preclinical to late-stage clinical trials towards approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods, are altered along the way to optimize processes and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives, and any of these changes could cause our product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials or otherwise necessitate the conduct of additional studies, including bridging clinical trials, which can be costly and time-consuming.

Currently, our cellular product candidates are manufactured using processes developed or modified by us but based on current industry standards sufficient to serve early-stage development of our product candidates. We

19

anticipate to implement further developments for registration-directed and commercial manufacturing. The final process will be closed, partially automated and viable for advanced clinical trials through product registration, and all ongoing and future company-sponsored clinical trials. Although we believe that this process is commercially viable, there are risks associated with scaling to the level required for advanced clinical trials or commercialization, including, among others, cost overruns, potential problems with process upscaling, scale-out, process reproducibility, technology transfer, stability issues, lot consistency, and timely availability of raw materials. This includes potential risks associated with FDA not agreeing with all of the details of our validation data or our potency assay for our Phase 1 or future Phase 2 clinical trials. Furthermore, we or some of our CMOs may not be able to establish comparability of our/their products with the ACT products used in our Phase 1 or future Phase 2 clinical trials or may not be fully validated prior to starting our pivotal or registration clinical trial. As a result of these challenges, we may experience delays in our clinical development and/or commercialization plans. We may ultimately be unable to reduce the cost of goods for our product candidates to levels that will allow for an attractive return on investment if and when those product candidates are commercialized.

Our manufacturing capabilities for our allogenic cellular therapy product candidate(s) IMA30x are still in the process of being developed. We may not successfully establish a robust production process that fulfills the requirements of the FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authorities. If we fail to establish such a manufacturing process, we may not be able to commence clinical trials or clinical trials may be delayed. There can be no assurance that the production process we are currently developing is viable and can be effectively scaled up or transferred to a CMO for later-phase clinical testing and commercialization. If we fail to develop a process that can be used throughout the life cycle of the product candidate, commercialization may be delayed or may not occur.

Manufacturing of TCR Bispecifics (TCER), such as IMA401, IMA402, IMA403 and potential future product candidates, is susceptible to product loss due to contamination, equipment failure or improper installation or operation of equipment, vendor or operator error, inconsistency in yields, issues with purity, variability in product characteristics and difficulties in scaling the production process. Even minor deviations from normal manufacturing processes could result in reduced production yields, inacceptable purity, product defects, loss of production batches and other supply disruptions. In such cases, our development program may experience major delays and we may have to produce a new batch of a given TCER. This will be costly and will delay our TCER development program. In particular, production of a new cGMP batch may be time-consuming, as it relies on the availability of facilities with cGMP capabilities at our CMO, and such facilities must be booked far in advance. We may also experience failure of production of the master cell bank that is used to produce our TCER molecules. For example, missing clonality of the cell line or non-sterility of the cell bank may require production of a new master cell bank which would be associated with additional costs and delays.

Any failure to follow cGMP and cGTP or other regulatory requirements or any delay, interruption or other issues that arise in the manufacture, fill and finish, packaging, or storage of our product candidates as a result of a failure of our facilities or the facilities or operations of third parties to comply with regulatory requirements or pass any regulatory authority inspection could significantly impair our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates, including leading to significant delays in the availability of drug product for our clinical trials or the termination of or hold on a clinical trial, or the delay or prevention of a filing or approval of marketing applications for our product candidates.

Our TCR Bispecific product candidates that have been produced and are stored for later use may degrade, become contaminated or suffer other quality defects, which may cause the affected product candidates to no longer be suitable for their intended use in clinical trials or other development activities. If the defective product candidates cannot be replaced in a timely fashion, we may incur significant delays in our development programs that could adversely affect the value of such product candidates.

We are constructing our own manufacturing facility. However, we have no experience as a company in developing a large manufacturing facility. The designing and building process will be time consuming,

20

expensive, and we may not realize the benefit of this investment. The manufacture of biopharmaceutical products, especially of those cellular in nature like our ACT product candidates, is complex and requires significant expertise, including the development of advanced manufacturing techniques and process controls.

Manufacturers of cell therapy products often encounter difficulties in production, particularly in scaling up initial production. These problems include difficulties with production costs and yields, quality control, including stability, patient to patient variability of the product candidate and quality assurance testing, shortages of qualified personnel, and compliance with strictly enforced federal, state, local and foreign regulations. Any problems or delays we or our CMOs experience in preparing for commercial scale manufacturing of a cell therapy or biologic product candidate or component may result in a delay in the regulatory approval of the product candidate or may impair our ability to manufacture commercial quantities or such quantities at an acceptable cost, which could result in the delay, prevention, or impairment of clinical development and commercialization of our product candidates and could adversely affect our business. Furthermore, if we or our commercial manufacturers fail to deliver the required commercial quantities or supply of our product candidates on a timely basis and at reasonable costs, we would likely be unable to meet demand for our products, and we would lose potential revenues.

In addition, the manufacturing process and facilities for any products that we may develop is subject to FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authority approval processes, and we and our CMOs will need to meet all applicable regulatory authority requirements, including cGMP and cGTP requirements, on an ongoing basis, including requirements pertaining to quality control, quality assurance, and the maintenance of records and documentation. The FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authorities enforce these requirements through facility inspections. Manufacturing facilities must be approved by the FDA pursuant to inspections that will be conducted after we submit our marketing applications. Manufacturers are also subject to continuing FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authority inspections following marketing approval. Further, we, in cooperation with our CMOs, must supply all necessary chemistry, manufacturing, and control documentation in support of a BLA on a timely basis.

We, or our CMOs’ manufacturing facilities, may be unable to comply with our specifications, cGMP and cGTP requirements, and with other regulatory requirements. Poor control of production processes can lead to the introduction of adventitious agents or other contaminants, or to inadvertent changes in the properties or stability of product candidates that may not be detectable in final product testing. If we or our CMOs are unable to reliably produce products to specifications acceptable to the FDA, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities, or in accordance with the strict regulatory requirements, we may not obtain or maintain the approvals we need to commercialize such products. Even if we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, there can be no assurance that either we or our CMOs will be able to manufacture the approved product to specifications acceptable to the FDA, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities, to produce it in sufficient quantities to meet the requirements for the potential launch of the product, or to meet potential future demand. Deviations from manufacturing requirements may further require remedial measures that may be costly and/or time-consuming for us or a third party to implement and may include the temporary or permanent suspension of a clinical trial or commercial sales or the temporary or permanent closure of a facility. Any such remedial measures imposed upon us or third parties with whom we contract could materially harm our business.

Risks Related to the Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

As a company, we have never commercialized a product. We currently have no active sales force or commercial infrastructure. We may lack the necessary expertise, personnel and resources to successfully commercialize our product candidates.

We currently have no active sales force or commercial infrastructure. As a company, we have never commercialized a product for any indication. Even if we receive regulatory approval for one or more of our product candidates from the FDA, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities, we will need to develop robust internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities to commercialize such products, which will be expensive and time-consuming, or enter into collaborations with third parties to perform these services.

21

There are costs and risks involved with establishing our own sales, marketing and distribution capabilities. For example, recruiting and training a sales force is expensive and time-consuming and could delay any product launch. If the commercial launch of a product candidate for which we recruit a sales force and establish marketing capabilities is delayed or does not occur for any reason, we would have prematurely or unnecessarily incurred these commercialization expenses. This may be costly, and our investment would be lost if we cannot retain or reposition our sales and marketing personnel. We must also compete with other biotechnology companies to recruit, hire, train and retain marketing and sales personnel.

Alternatively, we may wish to establish collaborations with third parties to maximize the potential of our product candidates jurisdictions in which a product candidate has been approved. The biotechnology industry is characterized by intense competition. Therefore, we may not be successful in entering into such commercialization arrangements with third parties on favorable terms, or at all. In addition, we may have limited control over such third parties, and any of them may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell, market and distribute our products effectively.

There can be no assurance that we will be able to develop the necessary commercial infrastructure and capabilities to successfully commercialize our product candidates or be able to establish or maintain relationships with third parties necessary to perform these services. As a result, we may not successfully commercialize any product in any jurisdiction.

Our commercial success depends upon attaining significant market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved, among physicians, patients, patient advocacy groups, third-party payors and the medical community.

If we obtain regulatory approval for any of our current or future product candidates, that product candidate may nevertheless not gain sufficient market acceptance among physicians, patients, patient advocacy groups, third-party payors and the medical community. For example, they may prefer current, well-established cancer treatments, such as chemotherapy and radiation therapy, to the exclusion of our product candidates or may prefer other novel product candidates rather than our product candidates. Efforts to educate physicians, patients, patient advocacy groups and third-party payors on the benefits of our product candidates may require significant resources and may not be successful. If our product candidates do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant product revenues and may not receive a satisfactory return on our investment into the research and development of those product candidates.

Market acceptance of our product candidates is heavily dependent on patients’ and physicians’ perceptions that our product candidates are safe and effective treatments. The perceptions of any product are influenced by perceptions of competitors’ products that are in the same class or that have a similar mechanism of action. As a result, adverse public perception of our competitors’ products may negatively impact the market acceptance of our product candidates. If any approved products are not accepted by the market to the extent that we expect, we may not be able to generate significant product revenues and may not become or remain profitable.

The market opportunities for our product candidates may be smaller than we estimate.

Our projections of both the number of people who have the cancers we are targeting, as well as the subset of people with these cancers who are in a position to receive our product candidates, and who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates, are based on our beliefs and estimates that have been derived from a variety of sources, including scientific literature, surveys of clinics, patient foundations, or market research by third parties, and may prove to be incorrect. These estimates may be inaccurate or based on imprecise data. We do not have verifiable internal marketing data regarding the potential size of the commercial market for our product candidates, nor have we obtained current independent marketing surveys to verify the potential size of the commercial markets for our current product candidates or any future product candidates. Since our current product candidates and any future product candidates will represent novel approaches to treating various

22

conditions, it may be difficult, in any event, to accurately estimate the potential revenues from these product candidates. The number of patients in the addressable markets may turn out to be lower than expected, patients may not be otherwise amenable to treatment with our product candidates or new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, all of which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

For any product candidates developed in combination with other therapies, regulatory approval, safety or supply issues with these other therapies may delay or prevent the development and approval of our product candidates.

For any product candidates developed for use in combination with an approved therapy, we are subject to the risk that the FDA, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities could revoke approval of, or that safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise with, the therapy used in combination with our product candidate. If the therapies we use in combination with our product candidates are replaced as the standard of care, the FDA, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities may require us to conduct additional clinical trials. The occurrence of any of these risks could result in our product candidates, if approved, being removed from the market or being less successful commercially.

For any product candidates developed for us in combination with a therapy that has not been approved by the FDA, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities, we may not be able to market our product candidate for use in combination with such an unapproved therapy, unless and until the unapproved therapy receives regulatory approval. These unapproved therapies face the same risks described with respect to our product candidates currently in development, including serious adverse effects and delays in their clinical trials. In addition, other companies may also develop their products or product candidates in combination with the unapproved therapies with which we are developing our product candidates for use in combination. Any setbacks in these companies’ clinical trials, including the emergence of serious adverse effects, may delay or prevent the development and approval of our product candidates.

If the FDA, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities do not approve or revoke their approval of, or if safety, efficacy, manufacturing, or supply issues arise with, therapies we choose to evaluate in combination with any of our product candidates, we may be unable to obtain regulatory approval of or to commercialize such product candidates in combination with these therapies.

Coverage and reimbursement may be limited or unavailable for our product candidates, which could make it difficult to sell our products profitably.

The availability and extent of coverage and adequate reimbursement by governmental and private third-party payors are essential for most patients to be able to afford expensive medical treatments. In both domestic and foreign markets, sales of our product candidates will depend substantially on the extent to which the costs of our product candidates will be covered by third-party payors, such as government health programs, commercial insurance and managed healthcare organizations. These third-party payors decide which products will be covered and establish reimbursement levels for those products. We cannot be certain that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be available for any of our product candidates, if approved, or that reimbursement policies will not reduce the demand for any of our product candidates, if approved. If coverage and adequate reimbursement are not available, or are available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates.

Obtaining coverage approval and reimbursement for a product from a government or other third-party payor is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us to provide supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data for the use of our products to the payor. We may not be able to provide data sufficient to gain acceptance with respect to coverage and reimbursement at a satisfactory level. If coverage and adequate reimbursement of our future products, if any, are unavailable or limited in scope or amount, such as may result

23

where alternative or generic treatments are available, we may be unable to achieve or sustain profitability. Adverse coverage and reimbursement limitations may hinder our ability to recoup our investment in our product candidates, even if such product candidates obtain regulatory approval.

Our ACT product candidate may be provided to patients in combination with other agents provided by third parties. The cost of such combination therapy may increase the overall cost of ACT therapy and may result in issues regarding the allocation of reimbursements between our therapy and the other agents, all of which may affect our ability to obtain reimbursement coverage for the combination therapy from third-party medical insurers.

Furthermore, the containment of healthcare costs has become a priority of foreign and domestic governments as well as private third-party payors. The prices of drugs have been a focus in this effort. Governments and private third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications, which could affect our ability to sell our product candidates profitably. We also expect to experience pricing pressures due to the trend towards managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes. These and other cost-control initiatives could cause us to decrease the price we might establish for products, which could result in lower-than-anticipated product revenues. In addition, the publication of discounts by third-party payors or authorities may lead to further pressure on the prices or reimbursement levels within the country of publication and other countries. If pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels or if coverage and adequate reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, our revenues and the potential profitability of our product candidates in those countries would be negatively affected.

Healthcare reform legislation and other changes in the healthcare industry and in healthcare spending may adversely affect our business model.

Our revenue prospects could be affected by changes in healthcare spending and policies in the United States, the European Union and any other potential jurisdictions we may seek to commercialize our product candidates, if approved. We operate in a highly regulated industry, and new laws, regulations and judicial decisions, or new interpretations of existing laws, regulations and decisions, related to healthcare availability, the method of delivery and payment for healthcare products and services could negatively affect our business, financial condition and prospects. There is significant interest in promoting healthcare reforms, and it is likely that federal and state legislatures within the United States and the governments of other countries will continue to consider changes to existing healthcare legislation.

In addition, there have been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the United States federal and state levels that seek to reduce healthcare costs. Any significant spending reductions affecting Medicare, Medicaid or other publicly funded or subsidized health programs that may be implemented, or any significant taxes or fees that may be imposed on us, as part of any broader healthcare cost reduction effort, could have an adverse impact on our anticipated product revenues. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. We expect that additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future. Any adopted health reform measure could reduce the ultimate demand for our products, if approved, or put pressure on our product pricing.

Risks Related to Our Relationships with Third Parties

We rely on third parties to conduct preclinical studies and/or clinical trials of our product candidates. If they do not properly and successfully perform their obligations to us, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approvals for our product candidates.

We currently, and we expect that we will continue to, rely on independent clinical investigators and CROs to conduct our clinical trials. CROs also assist us in the collection and analysis of data. As a result of our reliance

24

on these third parties, we have less direct control over the conduct, timing and completion of these clinical trials and the management of data developed through clinical trials than we would otherwise have if we relied entirely upon our own staff. These third parties are not our employees and we have limited control over the amount of time and resources that they dedicate to our product candidates. In addition, communications with outside parties can also be challenging, potentially leading to mistakes as well as difficulties in coordinating activities. Outside parties may:

If these third parties do not successfully carry out their duties under their agreements, or if the quality or accuracy of the data they obtain is compromised due to their failure to adhere to clinical trial protocols or to regulatory requirements, or if they otherwise fail to comply with clinical trial protocols or meet expected deadlines, the clinical trials of our product candidates may not meet regulatory requirements. Specifically, the FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authorities require compliance with regulations and standards, including GCP, for designing, conducting, monitoring, recording, analyzing and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that the data and results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of study participants are protected. Although we rely, and intend to continue to rely, on third parties to conduct our clinical trials, they are not our employees, and we are responsible for ensuring that each of these clinical trials is conducted in accordance with its general investigational plan, protocol, legal and regulatory requirements and scientific standards. Our reliance on these third parties for research and development activities will reduce our control over these activities, but will not relieve us of our responsibilities. If our third-party research and development partners fail to comply with applicable GCPs or other regulatory requirements, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and preclinical development activities or clinical trials may be extended, delayed, suspended or terminated.

We compete with many other companies for the resources of these third parties. These third parties may have contractual relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors, which may draw time and resources from our product candidates. The third parties with whom we contract might not be diligent, careful or timely in conducting our preclinical studies or clinical trials, resulting in the preclinical studies or clinical trials being delayed or unsuccessful.

If any of our relationships with any third-party research and development partner terminates its relationship with us, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative third-party research and development partners or to do so on commercially reasonable terms. Switching or adding additional third-party research and development partners involves additional cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new third-party research and development partner commences work. As a result, delays may occur in our clinical trials, which can materially impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. There can be no assurance that we will not encounter challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

We rely on third parties to obtain reagents and raw materials.

The manufacture of our product candidates by us or any of our CMOs requires access to a number of reagents and other critical raw materials from third-party suppliers. Such third parties may refuse to supply such reagents or other raw materials or alternatively refuse to supply on commercially reasonable terms. There may

25

also be capacity issues at such third-party suppliers that impact our ability to increase production of our product candidates. Some of the materials used in the manufacture and processing of our product candidates may only be supplied by one or a few vendors, which means that, should those vendors be unable to supply, for whatever reason, our ability to manufacture product candidates and progress product candidates through clinical trials could be severely impacted and result in additional delays. Such failure to supply could also impact other supply relationships with other third parties and potentially result in additional payments being made or required in relation to such delays. In addition, where any raw material or precursor material (including, for example, lentiviral vector, cell culture medium, chromatographic column material or other essential raw material) is currently supplied by one or a few vendors, replacing such raw material or precursor or finding alternative vendors may not be possible or may significantly impact on the timescales for manufacture and supply of our product candidates. Even where alternative materials or precursors or alternative vendors are identified, such alternative materials, precursors or vendors and their materials will need to be properly assessed and qualified and additional regulatory approvals may also need to be obtained all of which could result in significant delays to the supply of our product candidates or an inability to supply product candidates within anticipated timescales, if at all.

We currently rely on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates. Our dependence on these third parties may impair the clinical advancement and commercialization of our product candidates.

All clinical T cell products are currently manufactured by our employees through a collaboration with the Evelyn H. Griffin Stem Cell Therapeutics Research Laboratory at UTHealth (“UTH”) McGovern Medical School in Houston, Texas.

To scale our cell therapies for pivotal trials and initial commercial manufacturing, we have started the construction of a state-of-the-art GMP manufacturing facility in Houston metropolitan area, Texas. We have contractual agreements in place with GMP suppliers of lentiviral vectors, which is the most critical raw material for the manufacturing of genetically modified T cells products.

Our manufacturing strategy for TCER includes CMOs for cell line development, process development, formulation development, cGMP manufacturing, analytics, release testing, fill and finish, packaging and storage.

Reliance on third-party providers may expose us to different risks than if we were to manufacture and supply product candidates ourselves. The facilities used by our CMOs or other third-party manufacturers to manufacture our product candidates must be approved by the EMA and comparable regulatory authorities, and the FDA requires our CMOs or other third-party manufacturers to maintain a compliance status acceptable to the FDA, pursuant to inspections that will be conducted after we submit the marketing application to the applicable regulatory authorities. Although we have auditing rights with all our manufacturing counterparties, we do not have control over a supplier’s or manufacturer’s compliance with these laws, regulations, applicable cGMP and cGTP standards and other laws and regulations, such as those related to environmental health and safety matters.

If our CMOs or other third-party manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authorities, or if the quality or accuracy of the manufacturing and quality control data they obtain is compromised due to their failure to adhere to protocols or to regulatory requirements, we will not be able to secure and/or maintain regulatory approval for our product candidates. In addition, we have no control over the ability of our CMOs or other third-party manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If a CMO or other third-party manufacturer cannot maintain a compliance status acceptable to the FDA, or if the EMA or a comparable regulatory authority does not approve these facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates or if it withdraws any such approval in the future, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product candidates, if approved. Any failure to achieve and maintain compliance with these laws, regulations and standards could subject us to the risk that we may have to suspend the manufacturing of our product candidates and that obtained approvals could be revoked, which would adversely affect our business and reputation.

26

Establishing additional or replacement CMOs could take a substantial amount of time and it may be difficult to establish replacement CMOs who meet regulatory requirements. There are a limited number of manufacturers that operate under cGMP and, for cellular products, also under cGTP regulations and that are both capable of manufacturing for us and willing to do so. In addition, there are limited CMOs specialized in the manufacturing of cellular therapy products. If we have to switch to a replacement CMO, the manufacture and delivery of our product candidates could be interrupted for an extended period, which could adversely affect our business. If we are able to find a replacement CMO, the replacement CMO would need to be qualified and may require additional regulatory authority approval, which could result in further delay regulatory approval and commercialization of our product candidates.

Furthermore, third-party providers may breach, terminate or decline to renew agreements they have with us because of factors beyond our control, such as their own financial difficulties or business priorities, international trade restrictions and financial costs, potentially at a time that is costly or otherwise inconvenient for us or our partners. In such cases, we would face the challenge of transferring complicated manufacturing techniques to other CMOs. We may incur significant costs and be required to devote significant time to verify that the new manufacturer maintains facilities and procedures that comply with quality standards and with all applicable regulations and guidelines. A transfer of the manufacturing process for our product candidates would be time-consuming, and we or our partners may not be able to achieve such transfer. If we are unable to find an adequate replacement or another acceptable solution in time, clinical trials of our product candidates could be delayed or our commercial activities could be harmed.

Failure of third-party contractors to successfully develop and commercialize companion diagnostics for use with our product candidates could harm our ability to commercialize our product candidates.

We plan to develop companion diagnostics for our product candidates where appropriate. Such developments are expensive and time-consuming. The FDA, the EMA and comparable regulatory authorities may request or require the development and regulatory approval of a companion diagnostic as a condition to approving one or more of our product candidates. We do not have experience or capabilities in developing, seeking regulatory approval for or commercializing diagnostics and plan to rely in large part on third parties to perform these functions.

We will likely outsource the development, production and commercialization of companion diagnostics to third parties. By outsourcing these companion diagnostics to third parties, we become dependent on the efforts of our third-party contractors to successfully develop and commercialize these companion diagnostics. Our contractors:

We collaborate with third parties in the research, development and commercialization of certain of our product candidates and may enter into other collaborations in the future for our other product candidates. If our collaborators do not perform as expected or if we are unable to maintain existing or establish additional collaborations, our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates may be adversely affected.

From time to time, we may enter into collaboration agreements with third parties that have experience in product development, manufacturing and/or commercialization for other product candidates and/or research

27

programs. We may face significant competition in seeking appropriate partners for our product candidates, and the negotiation process may be time-consuming and complex. In order for us to successfully partner our product candidates, potential collaborators must view these product candidates as economically valuable in markets they determine to be attractive in light of the terms that we are seeking and other available products for licensing by other companies. Even if we are successful in our efforts to establish collaborations, the terms that we agree upon may not be favorable to us, and we may not be able to maintain such collaborations if, for example, development or approval of a product candidate is delayed or sales of an approved product are disappointing. If we fail to establish and maintain collaborations related to our product candidates, we could bear all of the risk and costs related to the development of any such product candidate, and we may need to seek additional financing, hire additional employees and otherwise develop expertise for which we have not budgeted. This could negatively affect the development and commercialization of our product candidates.

We have collaboration agreements and license agreements with, for example MD Anderson, Genmab and Bristol-Myers Squibb (“BMS”). These agreements provide us with important funding for our development programs and technology platforms. If our therapeutic programs and related collaborations do not result in the successful development and commercialization of products or if one of our collaborators or licensors terminates its agreement with us, we may not receive any future research funding or milestone or royalty payments associated with such collaboration or license arrangement. For example, our collaboration agreement with GlaxoSmithKline was terminated in 2022. As a result, we will not receive any future milestone or royalty payments under these collaborations. In addition, any termination of an agreement by the relevant collaborators could affect our ability to develop further such product candidates or adversely affect how we are perceived in scientific and financial communities. All of the risks relating to product development, regulatory approval and commercialization described in this Annual Report also apply to the activities of our program collaborators.

In our collaboration arrangements, we depend on the performance of our collaborators. Our collaborators may fail to perform their obligations under the collaboration agreements or may not perform their obligations in a timely manner. If conflicts arise between our collaborators and us, the other party may act in a manner adverse to us and could limit our ability to implement our strategies. Furthermore, our collaborators may not properly obtain, maintain, enforce or defend our intellectual property or proprietary rights or may use our proprietary information in such a way as to invite litigation that could jeopardize or invalidate our proprietary information or expose us to potential litigation. In addition, we cannot control the amount and timing of resources our collaborators may devote to our product candidates. They may separately pursue competing products, therapeutic approaches or technologies to develop treatments for the diseases targeted by us. Competing products, either developed by the collaborators or to which the collaborators have rights, may result in the withdrawal of support for our product candidates. Even if our collaborators continue their contributions to the strategic collaborations, they may nevertheless determine not to actively pursue the development or commercialization of any resulting products. Additionally, if our collaborators pursue different clinical or regulatory strategies with their product candidates based on similar technology as used in our product candidates, adverse events with their product candidates could negatively affect our product candidates. Any of these developments could harm our product development efforts.

If our collaborators terminate or breach our agreements with them, or otherwise fail to complete their obligations in a timely manner, it may have a detrimental effect on our financial position by reducing or eliminating the potential for us to receive technology access and license fees, milestones and royalties, reimbursement of development costs, as well as possibly requiring us to devote additional efforts and incur costs associated with pursuing internal development of product candidates. Furthermore, if our collaborators do not prioritize and commit sufficient resources to our product candidates, we or our partners may be unable to develop or commercialize these product candidates, which would limit our ability to generate revenue and become profitable.

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

We may form or seek strategic alliances, create joint ventures or collaborations or enter into additional licensing arrangements with third parties that we believe will complement or augment our development and commercialization

28

efforts with respect to our product candidates and any future product candidates that we may develop. Additionally, although we intend to develop product candidates through our own internal research, we may need to obtain additional licenses from others to advance our research or allow commercialization of our product candidates and it is possible that we may be unable to obtain additional licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. 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. In addition, we face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic collaborations and licenses and the negotiation process is time-consuming and complex. We may also be unable to identify product candidates that we believe are an appropriate strategic fit for our company and intellectual property relating to, or necessary for, such product candidates. The in-licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies are also pursuing strategies to in-license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, cash resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. Furthermore, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may not be successful in our efforts to establish strategic collaborations or other alternative arrangements for our product candidates because they may be deemed to be at too early a stage of development for collaborative effort and third parties may not view our product candidates as having the requisite potential to demonstrate safety and efficacy. Any delays in entering into new strategic collaboration agreements related to our product candidates could delay the development and commercialization of our product candidates in certain geographies for certain indications, which would harm our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

We depend on intellectual property licensed from third parties and termination of any of these licenses could result in the loss of significant rights, which would harm our business.

We are dependent or may depend in the future on patents, know-how and proprietary technology licensed from others. We may also enter into additional license agreements that are material to the development of our product candidates. Our current license agreements impose, and future agreements may impose, various development, diligence, commercialization and other obligations on us and require us to meet development timelines, or to exercise commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize licensed products, in order to maintain the licenses. Disputes may arise between us and our licensors and licensees regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including those related to:

If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed, or will license in the future, prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates. Furthermore, if our licenses are terminated, or if the underlying patents fail to provide the intended exclusivity, competitors or other third parties would have the freedom to seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products identical or competitive to ours and we may be required to cease our development and commercialization of certain of our product candidates. We are generally also subject to all of the same risks with respect to protection of intellectual property that we license, as it is for intellectual property that we own, which are described below. If we or our licensors fail to adequately protect this intellectual property, our ability to commercialize products could suffer.

29

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If we are unable to obtain and maintain sufficient patent protection for our product candidates, or if the scope of the patent protection is not sufficiently broad, our competitors could develop and commercialize products similar or identical to ours, and our ability to commercialize our product candidates successfully may be adversely affected.

Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection in the United States and other countries with respect to our product candidates. If we do not adequately protect or enforce our intellectual property, competitors and other third parties may be able to erode or negate any competitive advantage we may have, which could harm our business. To protect our proprietary position, we file patent applications in the United States and abroad related to our product candidates that are important to our business. The patent application and approval process is expensive, complex and time-consuming. We may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner.

The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain. No consistent policy regarding the breadth of claims allowed in biotechnology and pharmaceutical patents has emerged to date in the United States or in many foreign jurisdictions. In addition, the determination of patent rights with respect to biological and pharmaceutical products commonly involves complex legal and factual questions, which has in recent years been the subject of much litigation. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issue from such applications. Assuming the other requirements for patentability are met, currently, the first to file a patent application is generally entitled to the patent. However, prior to March 16, 2013, in the United States, the first to invent was entitled to the patent. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, or in some cases not at all. Therefore, we cannot be certain that we were the first to make the inventions claimed in our patents or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions.

Moreover, because the issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, our patents or pending patent applications may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. For example, we may be subject to a third-party preissuance submission of prior art to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), or become involved in post-grant review procedures, oppositions, derivations, reexaminations, inter partes review or interference proceedings, in the United States or elsewhere, challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. An adverse determination in any such challenges may result in loss of exclusivity or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, 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 products. In addition, given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized.

Even if our patent applications issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Our competitors may be able to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner. Alternatively, our competitors may seek to market generic versions of any approved products and may claim that patents owned or licensed by us are invalid, unenforceable or not infringed. In these circumstances, we may need to defend or assert our patents, or both, including by filing lawsuits alleging patent infringement. In any of these types of proceedings, a court or other agency with jurisdiction may find our patents invalid or unenforceable, or that our competitors are competing in a non-infringing manner. Thus, even if we have valid and enforceable patents, these patents still may not provide protection against competing products or processes sufficient to achieve our business objectives. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business.

30

If third parties claim that our activities or products infringe upon their intellectual property, our operations could be adversely affected.

There is a substantial amount of litigation, both within and outside the United States, involving patents and other intellectual property rights in the pharmaceutical industry. We may, from time to time, be notified of claims that we or our third-party suppliers are infringing upon patents, trademarks, copyrights, or other intellectual property rights owned by third parties, and we cannot provide assurances that other companies will not, in the future, pursue such infringement claims against us or any third-party proprietary technologies we have licensed. If we or our third-party suppliers were found to infringe upon a patent or other intellectual property right, or if we failed to obtain or renew a license under a patent or other intellectual property right from a third party, or if a third party that we were licensing technologies from was found to infringe upon a patent or other intellectual property rights of another third party, we may be required to pay damages, including treble damages if the infringement is found to be willful, suspend the manufacture of certain product candidates or reengineer or rebrand our product candidates, if feasible, or we may be unable to enter certain new product markets. We could also be required to obtain a license to such patents in order to continue the development and commercialization of the infringing product or technology, however such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if such license were available, it may require substantial payments or cross-licenses under our intellectual property rights, and it may only be available on a nonexclusive basis, in which case third parties, including our competitors, could use the same licensed intellectual property to compete with us. Any such claims could also be expensive and time-consuming to defend and divert management’s attention and resources. Our competitive position could suffer as a result. In addition, if we have declined to enter into a valid non-disclosure or assignment agreement for any reason, we may not own an invention or intellectual property rights and may not be adequately protected. Although we have reviewed certain third-party patents and patent filings that we believe may be relevant to our product candidates, we have not conducted a full freedom-to-operate search or analysis for such product candidates, and we may not be aware of patents or pending or future patent applications that, if issued, would block us from commercializing our product candidates. In addition, because patent applications can take many years to issue, may be confidential for 18 months or more after filing and can be revised before issuance, there may be applications now pending which may later result in issued patents that may be infringed by the manufacture, use, sale or importation of our product candidates and we may not be aware of such patents. Thus, we cannot guarantee that we can successfully commercialize product candidates in a way that will not infringe any third party’s intellectual property.

Where we license certain technology from a third party, the prosecution, maintenance and defense of the patent rights licensed from such third party may be controlled by the third party which may impact the scope of patent protection which will be obtained or enforced.

Where we license patent rights or technology from a third party, control of such third-party patent rights may vest in the licensor, particularly where the license is non-exclusive or field restricted. This may mean that we are not able to control or affect the scope of the claims of any relevant third-party patent or have control over any enforcement of such a patent. Therefore, we cannot be certain that such patents and patent applications will be prepared, filed, prosecuted, maintained, enforced, and defended in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. Where a licensor brings an enforcement action, this could negatively impact our business or result in additional restrictions being imposed on the license we have and the scope of such license or result in invalidation or limitation of the scope of the licensed patent. In addition, should we wish to enforce the relevant patent rights against a third person, we may be reliant on consent from the relevant licensor or the cooperation of the licensor. The licensor may refuse to bring such action and leave us unable to restrict competitor entry into the market.

We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or the patents of our licensors, or lawsuits accusing our products of patent infringement, which could be expensive, time-consuming and unsuccessful.

Competitors or third parties may infringe our patents or the patents of our licensors. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In

31

addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that one or more of our patents is not valid or is unenforceable or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in question. Further, such third parties could counterclaim that we infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate their intellectual property or that a patent or other intellectual property right asserted against them is invalid or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims challenging the validity, enforceability or scope of asserted patents are commonplace. The outcome of any such proceeding is generally unpredictable.

An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated, held unenforceable, or interpreted narrowly and could put our patents applications at risk of not issuing. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expenses and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may be enjoined from manufacturing, using, and marketing our products, or may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties or redesign our infringing products, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. Any required license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if such license were available, it may require substantial payments or cross-licenses under our intellectual property rights, and it may only be available on a nonexclusive basis, in which case third parties, including our competitors, could use the same licensed intellectual property to compete with us. 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 litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearing, motions, or other interim developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of shares of our stock.

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 non-compliance with these requirements.

Periodic maintenance fees on any issued patent are due to be paid to the USPTO and foreign patent agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patent. The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with several procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Noncompliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. In such an event, our competitors might be able to enter the market, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

We may incur substantial costs as a result of litigation or other proceedings relating to patent and other intellectual property rights.

The cost to us of any litigation or other proceeding relating to intellectual property rights, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. Some of our competitors may be better able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation because they have substantially greater resources. If there is litigation against us, we may not be able to continue to operate.

Should third parties file patent applications or be issued patents claiming technology we also use or claim, we may be required to participate in interference proceedings in the USPTO to determine priority of invention. We may be required to participate in interference proceedings involving our issued patents and pending

32

applications. We may be required to cease using the technology or to license rights from prevailing third parties as a result of an unfavorable outcome in an interference proceeding. A prevailing party in that case may not offer us a license on commercially acceptable terms or at all.

Issued patents covering our product candidates could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court or the USPTO.

If we or one of our licensing collaborators initiates legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering one of our product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our product candidate, as applicable, is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/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 United States or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, inter partes and post grant review, and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (for example, opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in revocation or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our product candidates. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art of which 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 product candidates. Such a loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business.

We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our patents and other intellectual property.

Our agreements with employees and our personnel policies generally provide that any inventions conceived by such individuals in the course of rendering services to us shall be our exclusive property or that we may obtain full rights to such inventions, at our election. However, we may not obtain these agreements in all circumstances, and individuals with whom we have these agreements may not comply with their terms. We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators, or other third parties have an ownership interest in our patents or other intellectual property. Ownership disputes may arise, for example, from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing our development candidates.

We also face the risk that present or former employees could continue to hold rights to intellectual property we use, may demand the registration of intellectual property rights in their name and demand damages or compensation pursuant to the German Employee Invention Act. In addition, under the German Employee Invention Act, certain employees retain rights to patents they invented or co-invented and disclosed to us prior to October 1, 2009 if the employee inventions were not actively claimed by us after notification by the employee inventors. While we believe that all of our current and past German employee inventors have assigned to us their interest in inventions and patents they invented or co-invented, there can be no assurance that all such assignments are fully effective. Even if we lawfully own all inventions of our employee inventors who are subject to the German Act on Employees’ Inventions, we are required under German law to reasonably compensate such employees for the use of the inventions. If we are required to pay increased compensation or face other disputes under the German Act on Employees’ Inventions, our business could be adversely affected.

Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or ownership. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse impact on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

33

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

In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we seek to rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our product discovery and development processes that involve proprietary know-how, information or technology that is not covered by patents. Trade secrets, however, may be difficult to protect. Although we require all of our employees to assign their inventions to us, and require all of our employees and key consultants who have access to our proprietary know-how, information, or technology to enter into confidentiality agreements, we cannot be certain that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. Furthermore, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States. As a result, we may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our intellectual property both in the United States and abroad. If we are unable to prevent unauthorized material disclosure of our intellectual property to third parties, we will not be able to establish or maintain a competitive advantage in our market, which could materially adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.

We may be subject to claims that we or our employees, consultants or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties, that our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of their former employers, or claiming ownership of what we regard as our own intellectual property.

We employ individuals who were previously employed at universities or other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. In addition, our employees involved in our strategic collaborations have access to certain joint confidential information or such information from the collaborator. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants, and independent contractors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, from time to time we may be subject to claims that we, or our employees, consultants, or independent contractors, have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any of our employees’ former employers or other third parties, or that patents and applications we have filed to protect inventions of these individuals, even those related to one or more of our product candidates, are rightfully owned by their former or concurrent employer. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, which could adversely impact our business. Such intellectual property rights could be awarded to a third party, and we could be required to obtain a license from such third party to commercialize our technology or products. Such a license may not be available on an exclusive basis or on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees. Such liability can also occur if we publish or disclose confidential information from our collaboration without permission of the respective collaborator.

Changes in U.S. or foreign countries’ patent law could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products.

As is the case with other biopharmaceutical companies, our success is dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biopharmaceutical industry involve both technological and legal complexity, and is therefore costly, time-consuming and inherently uncertain. In addition, the U.S. Congress or other foreign legislative bodies may pass patent reform legislation that is unfavorable to us. Recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on decisions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, or similar authorities in foreign

34

jurisdictions, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future. We cannot predict how future decisions by the courts, the U.S. Congress or the USPTO may impact the value of our patents, nor can we predict changes in international patent law.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

The legal protection afforded to inventors and owners of intellectual property in countries outside of the United States may not be as protective or effective as that in the United States and we may, therefore, be unable to acquire and enforce intellectual property rights outside the United States to the same extent as in the United States. Many countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patent. If we or any of our licensors is forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be impaired and our business may be harmed.

Whether filed in the United States or abroad, our patent applications may be challenged or may fail to result in issued patents. In addition, our existing patents and any future patents we obtain may not be sufficiently broad to prevent others from utilizing our technologies or from developing or commercializing competing products. Furthermore, others may independently develop or commercialize similar or alternative technologies or therapies, or design around our patents. Our patents may be challenged, invalidated, circumvented or narrowed, or fail to provide us with any competitive advantages. In many foreign countries, patent applications and/or issued patents, or parts thereof, must be translated into the native language. If our patent applications or issued patents are translated incorrectly, they may not adequately cover our technologies; in some countries, it may not be possible to rectify an incorrect translation, which may result in patent protection that does not adequately cover our technologies in those countries. Filing, prosecuting, enforcing, and defending patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States are less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and certain state laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from utilizing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors or other third parties may use our technologies, or technology that we license, in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop our own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our lead product candidate or any other current or future product candidates and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology. In addition, certain countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. Thus, it may be difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or the marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights, generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, could place our patent applications at risk of not issuing, and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we own or license.

35

Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on our product candidates or any future product candidates for an adequate amount of time.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from our earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date. Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of any FDA marketing approval of any product candidates we may develop, one or more of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Action of 1984 (the “Hatch-Waxman Act”). The Hatch-Waxman Act permits a patent extension term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. A patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval, only one patent may be extended and only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it, or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. In the European Union, a maximum of five and a half years of supplementary protection can be achieved for an active ingredient or combinations of active ingredients of a medicinal product protected by a basic patent, if a valid marketing authorization exists (which must be the first authorization to place the product on the market as a medicinal product) and if the product has not already been the subject of supplementary protection. However, we may not receive an extension because of, for example, failing to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, failing to apply within applicable deadlines, failing to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents, or otherwise failing to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the length of the extension could be less than we request.

Even if patents covering our product candidates or any future product candidates are obtained and even if we are successful in obtaining patent term extension, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition from competitive products. The launch of a similar or biosimilar version of one of our products would likely result in an immediate and substantial reduction in the demand for our product, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing, and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting our current product candidates or any future product candidates might expire before or shortly after we or our collaborators commercialize those candidates. As a result, our patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

Our business depends on a strong and trusted brand, and any failure to maintain, protect, and enhance our trademarks, trade names and brand would have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results or operations and prospects.

We may rely on trademarks and trade names to protect our business. Our trademarks or trade names may be challenged, infringed, circumvented or declared generic or determined to be infringing on other marks. We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names or may be forced to stop using these names or marks which we need for name recognition by potential partners or customers in our markets of interest. During trademark registration proceedings, we may receive rejections. Although we would be given an opportunity to respond to those rejections, we may be unable to overcome such rejections. In addition, in the USPTO and in comparable agencies in many foreign jurisdictions, third parties are given an opportunity to oppose pending trademark applications and to seek to cancel registered trademarks. Opposition or cancellation proceedings may be filed against our trademarks, and our trademarks may not survive such proceedings. If we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, we may not be able to compete effectively and our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects may be adversely affected. At times, competitors may adopt trade names or trademarks similar to ours, thereby impeding our ability to build brand identity and possibly leading to market confusion. At times, competitors may adopt trade names or trademarks similar to ours, thereby impeding our ability to build brand identity and possibly leading to market confusion. For example, we have filed an opposition against Immunocore Limited’s U.S. trademark application for IMMTAX and a petition to cancel Immunocore Limited’s EU trademark registration for IMMTAX and Immunocore Limited has brought counterclaims against our registered trademark IMMATICS

36

and IMTX. In addition, TaurX Pharmaceutical Ltd. has also filed a trademark opposition against our EU trademark IMTX. If we are unsuccessful in this opposition or cancellation proceeding or if Immunocore Limited and/or TaurX Pharmaceutical Ltd. is successful in its counterclaims, we may be required to change our branding which could cause us to incur substantial costs and impede our ability to build and sustain name recognition for such platform. For more information on the opposition proceeding see “Business — Legal Proceedings.” Over the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be able to compete effectively, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be significantly harmed. Our efforts to enforce or protect our proprietary rights related to trademarks, trade secrets, domain names, copyrights or other intellectual property may be ineffective and could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources and could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

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

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

Should any of these events occur, it could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

37

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

Our business could be adversely affected by the effects of health epidemics in regions where we or third parties on which we rely have significant manufacturing facilities, concentrations of clinical trial sites or other business operations.

Our business could be adversely affected by health epidemics in regions where we have clinical trial sites or other business operations; epidemics could also cause significant disruptions in the operations of third-party manufacturers and CROs upon whom we rely. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused us to modify our business practices including restricting employee travel, developing social distancing plans for our employees and cancelling physical participation in meetings, events and conferences. In addition to these observed impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, pandemics, epidemics or outbreaks of infectious diseases generally, including new variants of COVID-19, could also disrupt our research and development outcomes and schedules, clinical trials, supply and manufacturing of our products and regulatory submissions and interactions and could subject us to additional expenses and obligations. To the extent any pandemic, epidemic or outbreak of an infectious disease adversely affects our business and financial results, it may also have the effect of heightening many of the other risks described in this “Risk Factors” section.

We are highly dependent on our key personnel, and if we are not successful in attracting and retaining highly qualified personnel, we may not be able to successfully implement our business strategy.

Our ability to compete in the highly competitive biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified managerial, scientific and medical personnel. We are highly dependent on our management, scientific and medical personnel, including our Chief Executive Officer and other executive officers in our senior management. Despite our efforts to retain valuable employees, members of our management, scientific and development teams could always terminate their employment with us on short notice. Even though we have employment agreements in place with all our employees including key personnel, these employment agreements provide for at-will employment, which means that any of our employees could leave us at any time, subject to notice periods and non-competition clauses. The loss of the services of any of our executive officers, other key employees and other scientific and medical advisors, and our inability to find suitable replacements could result in delays in product development and harm our business.

In addition, our failure to put in place adequate succession plans for senior and key management roles or the failure of key employees to successfully transition into new roles could have an adverse effect on our business and operating results. The unexpected or abrupt departure of one or more of our key personnel and the failure to effectively transfer knowledge and effect smooth key personnel transitions may have an adverse effect on our business resulting from the loss of such person’s skills, knowledge of our business, and years of industry experience. If we cannot effectively manage leadership transitions and management changes in the future, our reputation and future business prospects could be adversely affected.

Competition for skilled personnel is intense, particularly in the biotechnology industry. We conduct substantially all of our operations at our facilities in Tübingen, Germany, Houston, Texas and Munich, Germany. We face competition for personnel from other companies, universities, public and private research institutions and other organizations. This competition may limit our ability to hire and retain highly qualified personnel on acceptable terms, or at all. We may not be able to attract and retain these personnel on acceptable terms. This possibility is further compounded by the novel nature of our product candidates, as fewer people are trained in or are experienced with product candidates of this type. In addition, we rely on consultants and advisors, including scientific and clinical advisors, to assist us in formulating our research and development and commercialization strategy. Our consultants and advisors may be employed or may have commitments under consulting or advisory contracts with other entities that may limit their availability to us.

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

As we seek to advance our product candidates through clinical trials and commercialization, we are expanding our development, regulatory, manufacturing, marketing and sales capabilities and may need to further

38

expand or contract with third parties to provide these capabilities. In addition, as our operations expand, we expect that we will need to manage additional relationships with various collaborators, suppliers and other third parties. Our growth will impose significant added responsibilities on members of management. Our management may have to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from our day-to-day activities and devote a substantial amount of time to these growth activities, including identifying, recruiting, integrating, maintaining and motivating additional employees, managing our research and development efforts effectively, including the clinical trials and the FDA’s, the EMA’s or comparable regulatory authority’s review process for our product candidates, while complying with our contractual obligations to contractors and other third parties and improving our operational, financial and management controls, reporting systems and procedures.

Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize our product candidates and to compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to manage our growth effectively. To that end, we must be able to effectively manage our research and development efforts 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 successfully growing our company or could disrupt our operations.

In addition, we currently rely, and for the foreseeable future will continue to rely, in substantial part on certain independent organizations, advisors and consultants to provide certain services. There can be no assurance that the services of these independent organizations, advisors and consultants will continue to be available to us on a timely basis when needed or that we can find qualified replacements. Furthermore, if we are unable to effectively manage our outsourced activities or if the quality or accuracy of the services provided by consultants is compromised for any reason, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates or otherwise advance our business. There can be no assurance that we will be able to manage our existing consultants or find other competent outside contractors and consultants on economically reasonable terms, if at all.

If we are not able to effectively expand our organization by hiring new employees and expanding our groups of consultants and contractors, we may not be able to successfully implement the tasks necessary to further develop and commercialize our product candidates and, accordingly, may not achieve our research, development and commercialization goals.

As a result of being a public company, we have incurred costs and expect to continue to incur additional costs, and we may not manage to comply with our internal control procedures and corporate governance structures.

To comply with the requirements imposed on us as a public company, we have incurred, and expect to continue to incur, significant legal, insurance, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. The increased costs may require us to reduce costs in other areas of our business. In addition, our board of directors (the “Board”), management and administrative staff are required to perform additional tasks. For example, we bear all of the internal and external costs of preparing and distributing periodic public reports in compliance with our obligations under the securities laws. We have invested, and intend to continue to invest, resources to comply with evolving laws, regulations and standards, and this investment will result in increased general and administrative expenses and may divert management’s time and attention from research and development activities. These laws, regulations and standards are often subject to varying interpretations, in many cases due to their lack of specificity, and, as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. This could result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters, enforcement proceedings and higher costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

39

We face substantial competition, which may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing products, treatment methods and/or technologies before or more successfully than we do.

The biotechnology industry is characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary products. We face competition with respect to our current product candidates and will face competition with respect to any product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future. See “Item 4. Information on the Company—B. Business Overview—Competition.” Our competitors include large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, 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. Many of our competitors have significantly greater financial resources and capabilities in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approval and marketing than we do. In addition, many of these competitors are active in seeking patent protection and licensing arrangements in anticipation of collecting royalties for use of technology that they have developed. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through strategic collaborations with large and established companies. Furthermore, mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology industry may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors.

Our commercial opportunities could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects or are more convenient than any products that we may develop, which would render our products obsolete or non-competitive. Our competitors also may obtain FDA, the EMA or regulatory approval in other jurisdictions for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. We anticipate that we will face increased competition in the future as additional companies enter our market and scientific developments surrounding other cancer therapies continue to accelerate.

If we do not achieve our projected development and commercialization goals in the timeframes we announce and expect, the commercialization of any of our product candidates may be delayed, and our business will be harmed.

For planning purposes, we sometimes estimate the timing of the accomplishment of various scientific, clinical, regulatory and other product development objectives. These milestones may include our expectations regarding the commencement or completion of scientific studies and clinical trials, the regulatory submissions or commercialization objectives. From time to time, we may publicly announce the expected timing of some of these milestones, such as the completion of an ongoing clinical trial, the initiation of other clinical trials, receipt of regulatory approval or the commercial launch of a product. The achievement of many of these milestones may be outside of our control. All of these milestones are based on a variety of assumptions which may cause the timing of achievement of the milestones to vary considerably from our estimates, including:

40

If we fail to achieve announced milestones in the timeframes we expect, the commercialization of any of our product candidates may be delayed, and our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects may be adversely affected.

Failure to comply with health and data protection laws and regulations could lead to government enforcement actions, private litigation and/or adverse publicity and could negatively affect our operating results and business.

We receive, generate and store significant and increasing volumes of sensitive information, such as employee and patient data. In addition, we actively seek access to medical information, including patient data, through research and development collaborations or otherwise. We have legal and contractual obligations regarding the protection of confidentiality and appropriate use of personal data. We and any potential collaborators may be subject to federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations that apply to the collection, use, retention, protection, disclosure, transfer and other processing of personal data. In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including federal health information privacy laws, state data breach notification laws, state health information privacy laws, and federal and state consumer protection laws (for example, Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), that govern the collection, use, disclosure and protection of health-related and other personal information could apply to our operations or the operations of our collaborators. In addition, we may obtain health information from third parties, including research institutions from which we obtain clinical trial data, that are subject to privacy and security requirements under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”), as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009 (“HITECH”). Depending on the facts and circumstances, we could be subject to civil, criminal and administrative penalties if we knowingly obtain, use, or disclose individually identifiable health information maintained by a HIPAA-covered entity in a manner that is not authorized or permitted by HIPAA.

Several foreign jurisdictions, including the European Union, its member states and Australia, among others, have adopted legislation and regulations that increase or change the requirements governing the collection, use, disclosure and transfer of the personal information of individuals in these jurisdictions and place greater control with the data subject. In the United States, the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) increased the requirements governing the collection, use, disclosure and transfer of the personal information of individuals in the state of California. The CCPA gives California residents expanded rights to access and request deletion of their personal information, opt out of certain sales of personal information and receive detailed information about how their personal information is used by requiring covered companies to provide new disclosures to California residents regarding such use. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for data breaches that is expected to increase data breach litigation. Additionally, California voters approved a new privacy law, the California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA”), which went into effect on January 1, 2023, and significantly modifies the CCPA, including by expanding consumers’ rights with respect to certain sensitive personal information. The CPRA also creates a new state agency that will be vested with authority to implement and enforce the CCPA and the CPRA. As we expand our operations and research and development efforts, the CCPA and CPRA may impose new and burdensome privacy compliance obligations on our business, may increase our compliance costs and potential liability. Other states are considering similar laws.

These laws and regulations are complex and change frequently, at times due to changes in political climate, and existing laws and regulations are subject to different and conflicting interpretations, which adds to the complexity of processing personal data from these jurisdictions. These laws have the potential to increase costs of compliance, risks of non-compliance and penalties for non-compliance. Regulation 2016/679, known as the

41

General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), as well as European Union member state implementing legislations, apply to the collection and processing of personal data, including health-related information, by companies located in the European Union, or in certain circumstances, by companies located outside of the European Union and processing personal information of individuals located in the European Union.

These laws impose strict obligations on the ability to process personal data, including health-related information, in particular in relation to their collection, use, disclosure and transfer. These include several requirements relating to (i) obtaining, in some situations, the consent of the individuals to whom the personal data relates, (ii) the information provided to the individuals about how their personal information is used, (iii) ensuring the security and confidentiality of the personal data, (iv) the obligation to notify regulatory authorities and affected individuals of personal data breaches, (v) extensive internal privacy governance obligations, and (vi) obligations to honor rights of individuals in relation to their personal data (for example, the right to access, correct and delete their data). The GDPR prohibits the transfer of personal data to countries outside of the European Economic Area (the “EEA”), such as the United States, which are not considered by the European Commission to provide an adequate level of data protection. Switzerland has adopted similar restrictions. Although there are legal mechanisms to allow for the transfer of personal data from the EEA and Switzerland to the United States, they are subject to legal challenges and uncertainty about compliance with European Union data protection laws remains. For example, in July 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union invalidated the so-called Privacy Shield, which provided a framework for data transferred from the European Union to the United States. To the extent that we were to rely on the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework, we will not be able to do so in the future, which could increase our costs and limit our ability to process personal data from the EU. The same decision also cast doubt on the ability to use one of the primary alternatives to the Privacy Shield, namely, the European Commission’s Standard Contractual Clauses, to lawfully transfer personal data from Europe to the United States and most other countries. At present, there are few if any viable alternatives to the Privacy Shield and the Standard Contractual Clauses.

Potential pecuniary fines for noncompliant companies may be up to the greater of €20 million or 4% of annual global revenue. Such penalties are in addition to any civil litigation claims by data controllers, customers and data subjects. The GDPR has increased our responsibility and liability in relation to personal data that we process, and we may be required to put in place additional potential mechanisms to ensure compliance with new European Union data protection rules. The GDPR also contains a private right of action allowing data subjects and consumer associations to lodge complaints with supervisory authorities, seek judicial remedies, and obtain compensation for damages resulting from violations of the GDPR.

Additionally, the United Kingdom’s vote in favor of exiting the EU, often referred to as Brexit, and ongoing developments in the United Kingdom have created uncertainty with regard to data protection regulation in the United Kingdom. As of January 1, 2021, and the expiry of transitional arrangements agreed to between the United Kingdom and EU, data processing in the United Kingdom is governed by a United Kingdom version of the GDPR (combining the GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018), exposing us to two parallel regimes, each of which potentially authorizes similar fines and other potentially divergent enforcement actions for certain violations. On June 28, 2021, the European Commission announced a decision of “adequacy” concluding that the United Kingdom ensures an equivalent level of data protection to the GDPR, which provides some relief regarding the legality of continued personal data flows from the EEA to the United Kingdom. This adequacy determination will automatically expire in June 2025 unless the European Commission renews or extends it and may be modified or revoked in the interim. Should the European Commission modify or revoke its adequacy determination, the United Kingdom may become an “inadequate third country” under the GDPR and transfers of data from the EEA to the United Kingdom would require a “transfer mechanism,” such as the standard contractual clauses. In the future there may be increasing scope for divergence in application, interpretation and enforcement of the data protection law as between the United Kingdom and EEA.

Compliance with U.S. and international data protection laws and regulations could require us to take on more onerous obligations in our contracts, restrict our ability to collect, use and disclose data, or in some cases,

42

impact our ability to operate in certain jurisdictions. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations could result in government enforcement actions, which could include civil, criminal and administrative penalties, private litigation, and/or adverse publicity and could negatively affect our operating results and business. Moreover, clinical trial subjects, employees and other individuals about whom we or our potential collaborators obtain personal information, as well as the providers who share this information with us, may limit our ability to collect, use and disclose the information. Claims that we have violated individuals’ privacy rights, failed to comply with data protection laws, or breached our contractual obligations, even if we are not found liable, could be expensive and time-consuming to defend and could result in adverse publicity that could harm our business.

Our current and future operations are subject to applicable fraud and abuse, transparency, government price reporting, privacy and security, and other healthcare laws. If we are unable to comply, or do not fully comply, with such laws, we could face substantial penalties.

Healthcare providers, physicians and third-party payors will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our operations, including any arrangements with healthcare providers, physicians, third-party payors and customers may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws that may affect the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we would market, sell and distribute our products. The healthcare laws that may affect our ability to operate include, but are not limited to:

43

We have entered into consulting and scientific advisory board arrangements with physicians and other healthcare providers, including some who could influence the use of our product candidates, if approved. Because of the complex and far-reaching nature of these laws, regulatory agencies may view these transactions as prohibited arrangements that must be restructured, or discontinued, or for which we could be subject to other significant penalties. We could be adversely affected if regulatory agencies interpret our financial relationships with providers who may influence the ordering and use of our drug candidates, if approved, to be in violation of applicable laws.

Ensuring that our business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will likely be costly. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business

44