​

​

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

​

​

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024

OR

​

​

For the transition period from                      to                

Commission file number: 001-40498

Century Therapeutics, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

​

​

(267) 817-5790

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

​

​

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐ No ☒

​

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ No ☒

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ No ☐

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ☒ No ☐

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

​

​

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☐

​

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☒

​

The aggregate market value of the registrant’s voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $212,506,473 as of June 30, 2024, the last business day of the registrant’s last completed second quarter.

​

As of February 28, 2025, the registrant had 86,045,033 shares of Common Stock, $0.0001 par value per share, outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

​

​

​

TABLE OF CONTENTS

​

​

​

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K and the documents incorporated by reference herein contain forward-looking statements that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. All statements, other than statements of historical facts, included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K or the documents incorporated by reference herein regarding our strategy, future operations, future financial position, future revenues, projected costs, prospects, plans and objectives of management are forward-looking statements. The words “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “predict,” “project,” “will,” “would,” “could,” “should,” “potential,” “seek,” “evaluate,” “pursue,” “continue,” “design,” “impact,” “affect,” “forecast,” “target,” “outlook,” “initiative,” “objective,” “designed,” “priorities,” “goal,” or the negative of such terms and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain these identifying words. Such statements are based on assumptions and expectations that may not be realized and are inherently subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which cannot be predicted with accuracy and some of which might not even be anticipated.

The forward-looking statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the documents incorporated herein by reference include, among other things, statements about:

​

We have based these forward-looking statements largely on our current expectations, estimates, forecasts, and projections about future events and financial trends that we believe may affect our financial condition, results of operations, business strategy, and financial needs. In light of the significant uncertainties in these forward-looking statements, you should not rely upon forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. Although we believe that we have a reasonable basis for each forward-looking statement contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we cannot guarantee that the future results, levels of activity, performance, or events and circumstances reflected in the forward-looking statements will be achieved or occur at all. You should refer to the section titled “Risk Factors” for a discussion of important factors that may cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by our forward-looking statements. Furthermore, if our forward-looking statements prove to be inaccurate, the inaccuracy may be material. Except as required by

law, we undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

You should read this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the documents that we incorporate by reference herein completely and with the understanding that our actual future results may be materially different from what we expect. We do not assume any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

​

​

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS:

Overview:

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company harnessing the power of allogeneic pluripotent stem cell therapies to develop potentially curative cell therapy products for autoimmune diseases and cancer. Our natural killer, or NK, and T cell programs are allogeneic, meaning they are derived from healthy donors for use in any patient, rather than being sourced from an individual for their own specific use, as is the case with autologous T cells. As a result, we believe such “off-the-shelf" therapies have the potential to overcome the limitations of first-generation cell therapies by providing readily available treatments more quickly, reliably, at greater scale, and to a broader patient population. What we believe further sets us apart from other allogeneic approaches is our focus on induced pluripotent stem cells, or iPSCs, which possess the unique ability to self-renew indefinitely and differentiate into any cell type, enabling virtually unlimited genetic editing, consistent reproducibility, and scalable manufacturing. We have created a comprehensive, genetically engineered allogeneic cell therapy platform that includes:

We are leveraging our expertise in cellular reprogramming, differentiation, genetic engineering, and manufacturing to develop therapies with the potential to provide enhanced clinical outcomes compared to existing cell therapy technologies and available therapeutic options. We are unique in the breadth of immune effector cell types we can generate from iPSCs, including iPSC-derived natural killer cells, or iNK cells, iPSC-derived gd T cells, or gd IT cells and iPSC-derived CD4+ and CD8+ ab T cells, or ab iT cells. We believe this capability enables optimal matching of cell characteristics to indication, ensuring we target the right cell for the right indication. Further, we have developed a feeder-free, scalable process that recapitulates normal T cell development in a dish, allowing for what we believe to be the industry-first presentation of iPSC-derived CD4+ and CD8+ CAR-T cells that demonstrate αβ-like T cell function.

Our lead clinical product candidate, CNTY-101, is a CAR-iNK cell therapy with six precision gene edits currently being tested in a Phase 1 clinical trial for patients with B-cell mediated autoimmune diseases. In March 2025, we announced that we have discontinued our ELiPSE-1 Phase 1 clinical trial of CNTY-101 for patients with lymphoma for strategic reasons. While we remain encouraged by tolerability and clinical activity of CNTY-101 in late-stage R/R NHL, emerging data from ELiPSE-1 did not meet our threshold to be considered transformational in this patient population.

In March 2025, we also announced a re-prioritized pre-clinical pipeline intended to further leverage the unique capabilities and technologies we have towards transformative treatments holding strong commercial potential

to treat serious diseases with high unmet need. Accordingly, in addition to our clinical stage programs, we will be focusing on three core pre-clinical programs built on our industry leading iT cell platform. We believe these programs have significant potential for differentiation in their respective categories.

​

Our vision is to become a premier, fully integrated biotechnology company by developing and ultimately commercializing off-the-shelf allogeneic cell therapies that dramatically and positively transform the lives of patients suffering from life-threatening autoimmune diseases and cancers. To achieve our vision, we have assembled a world-class team with decades of collective experience in cell therapy and drug development, manufacturing, and commercialization.

Our Approach:

Our Strategy:

We believe our iPSC-derived allogeneic cell therapy platforms have the potential to overcome the limitations of autologous and donor-derived cell therapies by providing readily available treatments more quickly, reliably, at greater scale, and to a broader patient population. Incorporating industry-leading iPSC differentiation know-how, CRISPR-mediated precision gene editing, sophisticated protein engineering, proprietary Allo-Evasion™ technology, and cutting-edge manufacturing, we seek to provide patients with improved treatment options.

Central to the potential clinical performance of our iPSC-derived cell therapies is our novel and proprietary Allo-Evasion™ technology, which is intended to avoid host recognition and rejection, enable repeat dosing, and increase cell durability and persistence. This may reduce or possibly eliminate the need for immune preconditioning regimens, such as lymphodepleting chemotherapy, or LDC.

LDC is used prior to all approved CAR-T cell therapies, due to its ability to ensure cytokine support for the CAR-T cells and eliminate host cells that can kill the cell therapy. However, the chemotherapeutic agents used for lymphodepletion can cause a variety of toxicities including prolonged cytopenias, severe neurotoxicities, and fertility issues. These can result in patient and provider hesitation and can limit the use of cell therapies in the outpatient setting. The requirement for LDC also limits the number of doses of cell therapy a patient can receive. In particular, avoiding LDC entirely or keeping LDC regimens to a minimum is desirable (to reduce toxicity and increase tolerability as much as possible), and introduces the possibility of treating a broader range of diseases and patients.

Our cells are designed to have the potential to be effective treatments with reduced LDC and ultimately aim to eliminate LDC through the use of engineering steps to provide cytokine support and Allo-Evasion™. Edits that provide cytokine support include secreted IL15 (used in CNTY-101), as well as next-generation cytokine engineering to improve cell proliferation and persistence. With respect to Allo-Evasion™, we continue to evolve our platform and, at present, utilize two versions designed to evade the patient’s immune system and allow for repeat dosing, potentially enabling durable responses, Allo-Evasion™ 1.0, and 5.0. Allo-Evasion™ 1.0 is used in CNTY-101, while Allo-Evasion™ 5.0 (which is also designed to protect against humoral immunity) is included in our pre-clinical pipeline programs. Preliminary data from ELiPSE-1 demonstrated similar exposure to CNTY-101 in the presence or absence of host lymphocytes – evidence of persistence in the presence of a restored immune system. We believe the inclusion of Allo-Evasion™ 5.0 promises to build on the learnings from CNTY-101 and provide an even more comprehensive approach to evading elimination by the patient’s immune system.

The ability of Allo-Evasion™ and engineerability of the iPSC platform to reduce or eliminate LDC could allow treatment of more fragile or less severely affected patient populations, alongside implementation of more flexible and effective dosing protocols that may increase physician and patient access.

A further source of differentiation is our ability to generate multiple immune effector cells including iNK cells, gd iT cells, CD4+ and CD8+ ab iT cells, allowing us to match the “right cell” for the “right indication” based on clinical need. For example, in autoimmune diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus, or SLE, where the rapid removal of pathogenic B cells is desirable, iNK cells that are highly cytotoxic but short-lived may be well suited to achieve B cell depletion and reset without prolonged B cell aplasia. In diseases such as cancer, where uncontrolled growth of tumor cells is a pathological feature, the rapid target-induced expansion of ab iT cells with prolonged persistence may be advantageous. Similarly, ab iT cells may be uniquely suited to solid tumor indications wherein homing and tissue residency could improve efficacy.

CNTY-101 is our first therapeutic development candidate, and incorporates a CD19 CAR, sIL15, EGFR safety switch, and Allo-Evasion™ 1.0 precision edits. CNTY-101 is a consistent, frozen, off the shelf product candidate. As a natural killer cell therapy, in addition to having an expected favorable clinical tolerability profile, it is expected that drug exposure will be more dependent on administered dose than expansion in response to (variable) target antigen levels, allowing repeat dosing to

precisely control drug exposure and increase durability of response. Host rejection is addressed by Allo-Evasion™.

ELiPSE-1, a Phase 1 trial of CNTY-101 in CD19-positive lymphoma patients, evaluated initial safety, efficacy, dose, and regimen, and preliminary proof of concept for our iPSC and Allo-Evasion™ 1.0 platform, including feasibility of multiple dosing. Cell therapies have been approved for use in CD19-positive B-cell malignancies, so we believed this setting was ideal for assessing the initial proof of concept for CNTY-101.

23 patients were treated in the ELiPSE-1 trial. Results demonstrated encouraging clinical activity in the heavily pre-treated R/R NHL patients, with a manageable tolerability profile enabling outpatient dosing. For the highest dose levels DL3B and DL4B we observed encouraging efficacy, with ORR 77% and CRR 22%. Deep B cell depletion was observed through the initial treatment cycle, and CNTY-101 demonstrated trafficking to lymph nodes, while repeat-dosing cycles led to persistent exposure in the presence of an intact endogenous immune system, supportive of the aims of Allo-Evasion™ engineering. In March 2025, we announced the discontinuation of the ELiPSE-1 clinical trial for strategic reasons.

Based on the compelling preliminary efficacy of autologous CD19 CAR T cell therapies in autoimmune disease populations, as an immediately available off the shelf allogeneic NK product candidate, we believe CNTY-101 is well-suited for use in autoimmune disease treatment, where precise control of B-cell targeting and depletion is desirable, and may avoid extended B-cell aplasia that may occur with T cell treatments. We have initiated a Phase 1 trial, CALiPSO-1, in B-cell driven autoimmune diseases SLE, lupus nephritis, or LN, idiopathic inflammatory myopathy, or IIM, and diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis, or DcSSc. The CALiPSO-1 trial is evaluating safety, tolerability, disease activity measures, PK, B cell depletion, and autoantibody effects, serving as a POC for autoimmune efficacy.

CNTY-308 is an investigational CD19-targeted, iPSC-derived CAR T cell therapy candidate engineered with Allo-Evasion™ 5.0 being developed for B cell-mediated autoimmune diseases and malignancies. CNTY-308 is built on our industry-leading iPSC derived CD4+ and CD8+ ab iT cell platform. Our ab iT cells display potent cytotoxicity, cytokine secretion, target-driven proliferation and cell persistence comparable to primary CAR-T cells. Given the initial success of autologous CAR T cell therapies in indications such as autoimmune disease and commercial autologous CAR T cell therapies in B cell malignancies, we believe this program has the potential to show similar benefits with the benefits of an “off-the-shelf” cell therapy.

CNTY-341 is built on our industry leading iPSC-derived CD4+ and CD8+ ab iT cell platform with the intent to develop a differentiated therapy in B cell malignancies. These iPSC-derived ab iT cells are engineered with a proprietary CD19/CD22 dual targeting CAR and are engineered with Allo-Evasion 5.0^TM.

Our first foray into solid tumors will aim to combine superior iT cell performance with additional engineering aimed at enhancing cell performance functionality beyond what is currently demonstrated with autologous T cell therapies.

Our iPSC platform is designed to enable us to produce NK cells and T cells at substantially lower cost, accessible to a much larger patient population, and with a higher degree of batch-to-batch

consistency and product quality, as compared to other donor-derived and autologous cell therapy approaches. In order to realize the advantages of our iPSC-platform, we believe that developing an intimate understanding of the relevant cell types, the processes used to manufacture these cells, and the analytical methods required to accurately and reliably measure critical product attributes is critical to our success. We believe this understanding will enable us to produce safe and efficacious products, implement process and product changes with greater efficiency and support the clinical development of commercial products. We believe that the only way to realize the full cost and capacity advantages of our platform is to develop a significant depth of expertise related to scale manufacturing. And, we believe our investment in in-house manufacturing will enable us to analyze, learn and adapt more rapidly, and increase control of development and manufacturing timelines for efficient clinical development of our product candidates.

The research, development, and clinical investigation of cell therapies for treating human diseases are advancing rapidly. We believe we are well positioned to establish strategic partnerships with third parties seeking to develop iPSC-derived cellular immunotherapies for autoimmune, cancer, and other diseases. To maximize the potential of our innovations and expand patient access, we may pursue additional strategic alliances, joint ventures, collaborations, or licensing agreements that align with our development and commercialization efforts. This approach is particularly relevant for product candidates that we are not actively advancing following the March 2025 pipeline prioritization. By working with partners who share our vision, we aim to accelerate the development and delivery of transformative therapies to patients in need.

Our Pipeline:

CNTY-101: Our CAR-iNK product candidate targeting CD19 for B-cell mediated autoimmune diseases results of evaluation in relapsed, refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (R/R NHL).

Our lead product candidate, CNTY-101, is an allogeneic, iPSC-derived CAR-iNK cell therapy with six precision gene edits. CNTY-101 is engineered to express CD19 CAR, with Allo-EvasionTM 1.0 edits designed to overcome the three major pathways of host vs graft rejection, IL15 to support cell persistence, and a safety switch (EGFR sequence) that enables the elimination of the cells by an EGFR inhibitor if needed. CALiPSO-1, a Phase 1 clinical trial to assess CNTY-101 in patients with B cell-mediated

autoimmune disease) is underway, and an investigator-initiated clinical trial (CARAMEL) to evaluate safety, efficacy, and key translational data of CNTY-101 in SLE, LN, IIM, and DcSSc patients is expected to initiate in mid-2025.

ELiPSE-1, a Phase 1 dose-finding clinical trial of CNTY-101 in patients with B cell malignancies, has been discontinued for strategic reasons. While we remain encouraged by tolerability and clinical activity of CNTY-101 in late-stage R/R NHL, emerging data from ELiPSE-1 did not meet our threshold to be considered transformational in this patient population. We continue to believe the clinical data from CNTY-101 in ELiPSE-1 provides further evidence for the potential of CNTY-101 in autoimmune diseases based on its favorable clinical activity and favorable tolerability profile, demonstrated deep B cell depletion, ability to traffic to lymph nodes, and, supportive of the aims of Allo-Evasion™ engineering, sustained CNTY-101 exposure at planned dose levels.

CAR T cells and B-cell Malignancies

B-cell lymphoma is a cancer that affects B lymphocytes that make up part of the immune system. It generally originates in the lymph nodes. B-cell lymphoma includes both Hodgkin’s disease and approximately 80% to 85% of patients diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, or NHL, a disease classification that includes more than 50 different hematological malignancies. In the United States, approximately 70,000 cases of NHL are diagnosed each year and the number of new diagnoses is increasing each year as the median age in the United States increases. 30-40% of these patients will relapse or have disease refractory to current treatments.

Comprehensive data is available from the use of cellular therapy in R/R B cell lymphoma. In patients treated with FDA-approved CD19 CAR T therapies with ≥24 months of follow-up data, overall response rates ranged from 53-83% and complete response rates from 39-65%. Long-term event-free survival, or EFS, rates of 38-43% indicate an approximate ‘curative’ rate of approximately 40%. Two CD19 CAR-T cell products have also been approved in the second-line setting (patients who were refractory to first-line therapy or relapsed within 12 months) due to a longer EFS compared to autologous stem cell transplant in randomized trials. This background, as well as data from products currently under development, provides benchmarks for assessment of newer cell therapies such as CNTY-101, CNTY-308, and CNTY-341.

The ELiPSE-1 Clinical Trial

We conducted a first-in-human Phase 1 clinical trial of CNTY-101 in the United States (NCT05336409) in relapsed and refractory CD19 positive large B-cell lymphoma, or RR NHL, patients. The primary objective of the Phase 1 clinical trial was to evaluate incidence and nature of dose-limiting toxicities within each dose level cohort and establish the recommended Phase 2 dose, using an adaptive Bayesian Optimum Interval, or BOIN, design. The secondary objectives of the trial included cell pharmacokinetics and persistence, incidence, nature, and severity of adverse events, overall response rate, complete and partial response rates, and duration of response, among other measures. Exploratory measures included evaluation of immunogenicity, correlation of antigen expression with response, and evaluation of cytokine profiles to provide insight into patient safety.

The trial enrolled patients who had relapsed following at least two prior lines of therapy, including prior CD19-CAR-T cell treatment. We evaluated two dosing schedules, a single CNTY-101 infusion per cycle in Schedule A, and three weekly infusions of CNTY-101 per cycle in Schedule B. Patients received lymphodepletion prior to the first cycle of CNTY-101, and prior to the second cycle, if LDC was tolerated. Patients could then receive additional cycles of CNTY-101 treatment without subsequent lymphodepletion. The study was planned to include dose escalation and dose expansion but was discontinued during dose escalation.

As of March 1, 2025, a total of 23 subjects were treated with CNTY-101 with all 23 evaluable for safety and 22 evaluable for preliminary efficacy. Treatment with CNTY-101 continued to be generally well-tolerated with no dose-limiting toxicities reported, a total of n=1 case of Gr 1 immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity

syndrome, or ICANS, and no Grade 3 or higher cytokine release syndrome, or CRS. Consistent with the manageable tolerability profile observed to date, a majority of participants received CNTY-101 infusions in an outpatient setting.

Dose level DL3B (1 billion cells in each of three weekly doses per cycle), which represented the largest single trial cohort (n=6), showed an overall response rate, or ORR of 83% and a complete response rate, or CRR of 33%, with all participants receiving additional cycles of treatment. Overall response rate for Dose Levels 3B and 4B (1 billion cells in each of three weekly doses per cycle and 3 billion cells in each of three weekly doses) is 77% (7/9) and complete response rate was 22% (2/9). ​For DL3B and DL4B (n=9), 2 patients (22%) had G2 cytokine release syndrome and 1 patient (11%) had G2 cytokine release syndrome. No ICANS or events of GR3+ CRS were observed.

Assessment of CNTY-101 pharmacokinetics showed increasing exposure with dose, including extended cell persistence throughout the dosing cycle in Schedule B as dose levels increased to 3B (1 billion cells in each of three weekly doses per cycle) and 4B (3 billion cells in each of three weekly doses per cycle).

CNTY-101 Exposure Increases with Dose, Sustained Exposure at Doses Intended for CALiPSO-1 Study

Error bars show mean ± SD on original scale, subsequently log10 transformed. Due to log scale, low values are truncated at 1. All schedule B LDC+ cycles are included. S: Screen, LOB: Limit of Blank.

Source: Company data available as of March 7, 2025

Allo-Evasion^TM technology is designed to allow CNTY-101 cells to evade a patient’s immune system and enable repeat dosing of the product. To assess this, we evaluated CNTY-101 persistence when infused once weekly for 3 weeks following LDC. CNTY-101 persistence was consistent with each infusion in the absence and upon restoration of the patient’s NK and T cells (restored immune system).

​

​

​

Enabled with Allo-Evasion™, CNTY-101 infusions in dose level 3B showed similar exposure in the presence or absence of endogenous lymphocytes

Graphs show data from 3B cohort (N=6). Lines in the top panel represent mean and shaded area represents 1*SEM. Triangles mark CNTY-101 infusions within a Schedule B cycle, grey arrow indicates LDC. Dotted blue curve is a LOESS fit to medians in bottom panel. S: Screen

*cfDNA concentrations two-days post infusion not significantly different according to Mann-Whitney U test

Translational data available as of March 7^th 2025

Translational data available as of March 7^th 2025

​

B cell depletion was observed in all patients following the initial cycle of CNTY-101 treatment.

CNTY-101 Treatment Demonstrates Deep B-Cell depletion and was associated with naive non-class switched profile of re-emergent B-cells; Data in r/r NHL patients supports the application of CNTY-101 in autoimmune diseases

Left figure: Graphs show data from the initial cycle of all subjects in 3B and 4B who had baseline B cell counts of 1 cell/ mL or greater (N=7). Each line represents an individual subject.

Right figure: Data shows proportion of non-class switched (IgD+, IgM+ or IgD+IgM+) or switched (IgD-IgM-) circulating B cells (CD19+ CD20+) in healthy donors (N=4) or within earliest evaluable re-emergent B cells in patients (N=4). Majority of the B cells exhibited a naïve profile (IgD+ CD27-, data not shown)

Source: Company data, available as of March 7^th 2024

​

Lastly, CNTY-101 cells traffic to lymph nodes, as evaluated by detection in tumor biopsies after treatment with dose levels DL3B and 4B.

Overall, we believe the initial clinical and translational results from the ELiPSE-1 clinical trial provide strong support for use of CNTY-101 DL3B and DL4B in B-cell driven autoimmune diseases in CALiPSO-1 and CARAMEL due to: a favorable initial tolerability profile; ability to be delivered in an outpatient setting; clinical responses in heavily pre-treated R/R NHL patients - for DL3B and DL4B, ORR 77% and CRR 22%, including a majority of post CAR T treated patients; deep B cell depletion observed through the initial CNTY-101 treatment cycle; demonstrated trafficking to lymph nodes; and, repeat-dosing cycles leading to exposure in the presence of an intact endogenous immune system, which we believe supports proof of concept of Allo-Evasion^TM engineering.

B-Cell Mediated Autoimmune Diseases

A number of autoimmune diseases, including SLE and LN, SSc, and IIM, share the characteristic of pathogenic auto-reactive antibodies, which are produced by B-cells that express CD19. SLE/LN is a complex multi-system autoimmune disease. Renal and central nervous system involvement as well as accelerated cardiovascular aging are major causes of morbidity and mortality in SLE. IIM comprise a heterogenous group of rare immune-mediated disorders involving muscle, frequently involve the lung and skin, and may involve other tissues. Patients with associated interstitial lung disease have a significantly increased incidence of mortality compared to those without lung involvement. DcSSc is a rare life-threatening systemic disease characterized by skin thickening of distal and proximal limbs, face and trunk, interstitial lung disease, and progressive dysfunction of multiple other organ systems, commonly including gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, and renal manifestations. The current treatment options for each of these disorders leave many patients without adequate disease control.

Current Treatments and Shortcomings

As described in the figure below, there is significant unmet need for patients with severe disease who have not responded to other therapies. For example, the most recently FDA-approved therapy for SLE, anifrolumab, was approved in 2021 based on results from two randomized clinical trials, TULIP-1 and TULIP-2, which enrolled patients who had moderate to severe SLE despite standard therapy. Anifrolumab was administered to the active patient arm, and all patients were allowed to remain on their standard therapies (except for protocol-mandated attempts to taper corticosteroids) during the trial. TULIP-2 showed response (measured per British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment) in 47.8% of anifrolumab (300 mg)-treated patients compared to 31.5% of placebo-treated patients (Morand 2020). While TULIP-1 did not meet its primary endpoint (SLE responder index of 4 met in 36% of anifrolumab (300 mg)-treated patients compared to 40% of placebo-treated patients), data from the trial was used to support the results from TULIP-2 (Furie 2019). A post-hoc analysis of the combined data from these trials using the more stringent endpoint of Lupus Low Disease Activity State demonstrated that 30% of anifrolumab (300 mg)-treated patients demonstrated low disease activity at Week 52, compared with 19.6% of placebo-treated patients (Morand 2023). Together these results indicate at most half of treated patients meeting efficacy endpoints, and fewer meeting more stringent endpoints, leaving many patients without adequate disease control even while on standard therapies. Treatments for other autoimmune diseases show similarly inadequate responses in many patients.

While patients with these diseases can respond to B-cell depleting agents such as rituximab, suggesting that targeting B-cells is a viable therapeutic approach, many patients experience suboptimal or impermanent efficacy with currently available agents. Our CNTY-101 clinical development program in B-cell mediated autoimmune diseases thus represents potential for benefit in an area of significant medical need.

B-cell-directed autologous CAR T cell therapies have provided new hope for durable remissions through an “immune reset”. However, some of the challenges encountered with auto-CAR-T in oncology related to product availability, toxicities, and potential long-term risks could hamper their widespread adoption in non-oncology indications.

CNTY-101 has been designed with uniquely engineered features which we believe may provide multiple potential treatment advantages in the B-cell-driven autoimmune disease setting. These potential advantages include availability of a consistent off-the-shelf frozen product, an improved tolerability profile, ability to be re-dosed without lymphodepletion while avoiding allo-rejection of the product, and a product design that may enable the elimination of B-cells to effect a decline in auto-antibodies without prolonged B cell aplasia.

The CALiPSO-1 Clinical Trial

The CNTY-101 Phase 1 clinical trial (CALiPSO-1; NCT05336409) is a multi-center Phase 1 clinical trial designed to assess the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and clinical response of CNTY-101 in patients with refractory autoimmune diseases, including SLE/LN, IIM, and DcSSc. Key endpoints include safety, efficacy assessments appropriate for each disease, and translational endpoints including B-cell depletion and auto-antibody decline. The trial will evaluate one to two cycles of 3 weekly doses of CNTY-101 at doses up to 1 billion cells per dose, with lymphodepletion only included prior to the first CNTY-101 infusion. The CALiPSO-1 clinical trial is being run in US sites with EU sites initiating in 2025.

CARAMEL Phase 1/2 Clinical Trial in B-cell Mediated Autoimmune Diseases: Single center Investigator Initiated Trial

We have entered into an agreement for an investigator-initiated Phase 1/2 clinical trial sponsored by Professors Dr. Georg Schett and Dr. Andreas Mackensen of its CD19 CAR-iNK investigational cell therapy candidate CNTY-101 in patients with B-cell mediated autoimmune diseases. The IIT, which is sponsored by the Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, represents the first evaluation by the internationally recognized Schett/Mackensen group of an allogeneic iPSC-derived CD19-directed NK cell therapy for the treatment of autoimmune diseases. Consistent with our ongoing Phase 1 CALiPSO-1 trial (NCT06255028),

the IIT (known as the CARAMEL trial) will evaluate safety, efficacy, and key translational data of CNTY-101 in SLE, LN, IIM, and DcSSc patients. The CARAMEL trial is expected to initiate in mid-2025.

Pre-clinical Pipeline Prioritization

In March 2025, we announced a re-prioritized pre-clinical pipeline intended to further leverage the unique capabilities and technologies we have towards transformative treatments holding strong commercial potential to treat serious diseases with high unmet need. Accordingly, in addition to our clinical stage programs, we will be focusing on three core pre-clinical programs that are all built on our industry leading iT cell platform, which is producing iPSC-derived CAR-T cells with function comparable to primary CAR-T cells. All three programs will incorporate Allo-Evasion 5.0^TM. We believe these three programs have the potential to be differentiated in their category. All other pre-clinical programs will not be progressing internally at this time and may present out-licensing opportunities or be re-evaluated in the future.

​

CNTY-308:

CNTY-308 is a CD19-targeted, iPSC derived CAR T cell therapy engineered with Allo-Evasion™ 5.0. It is being developed for B-cell mediated autoimmune diseases and malignancies. CNTY-308 is built on our industry leading iPSC-derived ab T cell platform. In preclinical studies, CNTY-308 demonstrated potent activity and cell persistence that was comparable to primary CAR-T cell controls. Specifically, these cells have demonstrated three key characteristics of successful CAR T cell therapies:

​

When tested in an established NALM6 tumor model in rodents (CD19-expressing B cell malignancy model), CNTY-308 cells were shown to be capable of controlling tumor growth for the length of the study with a single dose of cells, comparable to primary CAR-T cell controls. Furthermore, CNTY-308 cells were detected in peripheral blood, spleen, and bone marrow for at least 21 days after cell infusion. Importantly, CNTY-308 cells not only persisted but responded to an additional tumor challenge (tumor rechallenge), controlling tumor similarly, if not better, than primary CAR-T cell controls. Taken together, we believe the evolving preclinical

data package for CNTY-308 supports the continuing progression of this program for B-cell mediated autoimmune diseases and malignancies.

CNTY-341:

CNTY-341 is an investigational dual-targeted CD19 and CD22 iPSC-derived CAR-T cell therapy product candidate engineered with Allo-Evasion™ 5.0. CNTY-341 is built on our iT cell platform, with the goal of pairing dual targeting with primary T-cell-like functionality to provide a differentiated cell therapy for B cell malignancies. We have developed our own dual CD19/CD22 CAR, which has displayed robust activity when transduced into primary T cells.

Solid tumors:

Our first investigational solid tumor CAR-T cell program is designed to target validated tumor antigens including Nectin-4 (present on several solid tumors including urothelial cancer, breast cancer and lung cancer) and others using our own developed CAR moieties. The program is being developed on our iT cell platform with Allo-Evasion™ 5.0 and will include additional engineering to overcome some of the key challenges faced by cell therapies in solid tumors. Enhancements may include cytokine support and strategies to overcome the tumor microenvironment.

Manufacturing

We believe our iPSC-derived NK and T cells afford us a significant opportunity to advance multiplex gene-edited cell therapies that can be produced at substantially lower cost and accessible by a much larger patient population as compared to other donor-derived and autologous cell therapy approaches. To capitalize on these advantages, we believe it is imperative to develop an intimate understanding of the relevant cell types, the processes used to manufacture these cells, and the analytical methods required to accurately and reliably measure critical product attributes. We believe this understanding will enable us to produce safe and efficacious products, implement process and product changes with greater efficiency and accelerate the clinical development of commercializable products. In addition, we are developing a significant depth of expertise related to scalable manufacturing, which we believe is essential to enable cell expansion, harvest, and final container filling, along with cryopreservation, at a significantly reduced cost per dose. We have constructed our manufacturing strategy with the intent of achieving these objectives.

We believe our relationship with FUJIFILM Cellular Dynamics Inc., or FCDI and its role in the manufacture of our initial product candidates has provided valuable know-how that accelerated development of our proprietary methods to generate functional iPSC-derived iNK cells. We believe that our optimized iPSC differentiation methods are scalable and compatible with efficient manufacturing processes. Our process development group is responsible for overall management of process optimization efforts and coordinates contracted efforts with FCDI for certain product candidates.

Cryopreservation of allogeneic cell therapies is essential for the ability to deliver these as off-the-shelf products. Therefore, we believe that addressing the key determinants of cryopreservation is of particular relevance to the success of our therapeutic programs. The ability of cells to withstand cryopreservation depends not only on the freezing step itself, but on multiple factors in the entire manufacturing process both preceding and following freezing, including the thawing process and post-thaw handling prior to patient administration. As such, all factors involved in the supply chain, from initial cell engineering to patient administration, are being addressed to characterize the impact of cryopreservation on our cell product candidates, especially its impact on yield, activity, stability, and consistency. We have invested significant resources to optimize our manufacturing processes and continue to iteratively invest in this area. We are also committing additional resources to ensure that adequate infrastructure and expertise is available at clinical sites regarding handling and treatment preparation

​

​

Effective cryopreservation strategies must consider all elements of the supply chain

​

For our ELiPSE-1 clinical trial, FCDI produced the clinical supply of CNTY-101. FCDI currently maintains a cGMP-compliant manufacturing facility in Madison, Wisconsin and our audit of the facility confirmed its Phase 1 readiness. We may also source clinical trial supply for some of our other iNK product candidates, and we will have the option to source NK cell therapies to be sold commercially, if approved, from FCDI.

At the same time, we have constructed our own 53,000 square foot cell therapy manufacturing facility in Branchburg, New Jersey, which is now operational and from which we are sourcing clinical supply of CNTY-101 for our CALiPSO-1 clinical trial. We also intend to use this facility as the primary manufacturing site for our CAR-iT cell therapies; however, we have designed the facility to be a flexible, multi-product facility, capable of producing any immune cell type.

We believe the development of in-house manufacturing will enable us to analyze, learn, and adapt more rapidly and increase control of development and manufacturing timelines for efficient clinical development of our product candidates. Through this enhanced control and investment in our process and analytical development capabilities, we believe we are gaining a deeper understanding of our critical product attributes and the factors that affect product quality. We are also developing expertise in scale-up technologies to enable optimal manufacturing scale for our product candidates, which will reduce cost of goods and improve patient access.

Licensing, partnerships, and collaborations

Fujifilm Cellular Dynamics, Inc.

We are party to an exclusive license with FCDI, dated September 18, 2018, or, as amended, the Differentiation License, pursuant to which we have licensed from FCDI certain patents and know-how related to differentiation of iPSC cells into immune-effector cells in the field of cancer immunotherapeutics. We are also party to a non-exclusive license with FCDI, also dated September 18, 2018, or, as amended, the Reprogramming License, pursuant to which we have licensed from FCDI certain patents and know-how related to the reprogramming of human somatic cells to iPSCs in the field of cancer immunotherapeutics. On October 21, 2019, we entered into a Master Collaboration Agreement with FCDI pursuant to which we agreed to fund research and development work at FCDI pursuant to a research plan, or, as amended, the FCDI Collaboration Agreement. On March 23, 2021, we entered into a Manufacturing and Supply Agreement with FCDI, or the Manufacturing Agreement, pursuant to which FCDI will provide certain agreed upon technology transfer, process development, analytical testing and cGMP manufacturing services to us. On January 7, 2022, we entered into a letter agreement with FCDI, which amends each of the agreements in relation to our collaboration with Bristol-Myers Squibb. On September 22, 2023, we entered into a worldwide license agreement with FCDI, or the Autoimmune License, whereby FCDI will grant non-exclusive licenses to us for certain patent rights and know-how related to cell differentiation and reprogramming for the development and commercialization of iPSC-derived therapies for the treatment of inflammatory and autoimmune diseases.

Reprogramming License Agreement

Under the Reprogramming License, FCDI granted us a non-exclusive, worldwide license, excluding Japan, under certain patent rights and know-how related to cell reprogramming of human cells to iPSCs to exploit FCDI Licensed Products within the field of cancer immunotherapy products. Included within the rights granted to us under such license are rights sublicensed to us under certain patents owned by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, or WARF, relating to the “Thompson Factors” for reprogramming human cells to iPSCs, pursuant to a license agreement between FCDI and WARF, or the WARF License. In return, we granted FCDI a non-exclusive, fully paid up, sublicensable license to manufacture or practice developments made by us in Japan and to practice developments made by us to manufacture FCDI Licensed Products worldwide until the termination of the Reprogramming License. We also granted to FCDI a non-exclusive, sublicensable, worldwide license under certain developments made by us under the Reprogramming License to make, have made, use, have used, research and develop iPSCs for activities outside of the field of cancer immunotherapy, so long as such rights are not used in conjunction with any other technology to differentiate iPSCs into NK cells, T cells, macrophages, or dendritic cells.

Under the Reprogramming License, we agreed to pay FCDI low single-digit percentage royalty payments on net sales of FCDI Licensed Products, as required by the WARF License, until the expiration of the last-to-expire patent licensed thereunder. We also agreed to pay certain milestone payments to FCDI as required by the WARF License upon the achievement of certain development and commercial milestones up to an aggregate of $6 million per FCDI Licensed Product.

The Reprogramming License expires upon the expiration of the last-to-expire patent licensed thereunder, which is currently expected to expire in 2034. Either party may terminate the Reprogramming License upon the other party’s breach of a material obligation, subject to a 60-day notice and cure period, or in the event of the other party’s bankruptcy, if not dispensed or otherwise disposed within 60 days. We may terminate the Reprogramming License for convenience upon 90 days’ notice in its entirety or on a product-by-product or country-by-country basis. FCDI may terminate the Reprogramming License if we fail to achieve certain development milestones within four years of successful completion of the first proof of concept clinical trial for an FCDI Licensed Product in the United States or European Union, subject to an additional extension of up to one year in limited circumstances. FCDI may also terminate the Reprogramming License upon written notice in the event of termination of the Differentiation License.

The Reprogramming License also contains customary representations and warranties, confidentiality, insurance and indemnification provisions.

Differentiation License Agreement

Under the Differentiation License, FCDI granted us an exclusive, fully paid-up, sublicensable, worldwide license, excluding Japan, under certain patent rights and know-how related to human iPSC to exploit cancer immunotherapy products consisting of cells that are or are modifications of NK cells, T cells, dendritic cells and macrophages derived from human iPSC, or FCDI Licensed Products. In return, we granted FCDI an exclusive, fully paid-up, sublicensable license under certain patents and know-how controlled by us to exploit FCDI Licensed Products for any cancer immunotherapy use in Japan or, with respect to any abandoned indication, worldwide, and a non-exclusive license to manufacture the FCDI Licensed Products for any cancer immunotherapy use worldwide until the termination of the Differentiation License. We also granted to FCDI a non-exclusive, sublicensable, worldwide license under certain manufacturing know-how developed by us under the Differentiation License or FCDI Collaboration Agreement for manufacturing and process development activities outside of the field of cancer immunotherapy for cells other than NK cells, T cells, dendritic cells and macrophages derived from human iPSC until the termination of the Differentiation License.

Under the Differentiation License, FCDI has an option, executable once a product candidate meets its primary endpoint(s) in a Phase 2 clinical trial, to exploit FCDI Licensed Products in Japan or, with respect to any abandoned indication, worldwide. If FCDI does not exercise its option, we will have the right to exploit FCDI

Licensed Products in Japan, and we and FCDI will amend the Differentiation License as necessary to permit such exploitation. We also issued shares of common stock to FCDI as consideration under the Differentiation License.

The Differentiation License expires upon the expiration of the last-to-expire patent licensed thereunder, which is currently expected to expire in 2036. Either party may terminate the Differentiation License upon the other party’s breach of any material obligation, subject to a 60-day notice and cure period, or in the event of the other party’s bankruptcy, if not dispensed or otherwise disposed within 60 days. We may terminate the Differentiation License in its entirety or on an indication-by-indication basis, a product-by-product basis or country-by-country basis, for convenience upon 90 days’ written notice. In addition, FCDI may terminate the Differentiation License if we fail to achieve certain development milestones within four years of successful completion of the first proof of concept clinical trial for an FCDI Licensed Product in the United States or European Union, subject to an additional extension of up to one year in limited circumstances. FCDI may also terminate the Differentiation License upon written notice in the event of termination of Reprogramming License. FCDI may also terminate the Differentiation License upon written notice if (i) the Reprogramming License Agreement expires or terminates for any reason or (ii) the WARF License expires or terminates for any reason.

The Differentiation License also contains customary representations and warranties, confidentiality, insurance and indemnification provisions.

FCDI Collaboration Agreement

Under the FCDI Collaboration Agreement, we established a collaborative relationship under which FCDI agreed to render certain services to us for the development and manufacture iPSC-derived cells in accordance with a research plan and approved budget funded by us. For the first three years of the term of the FCDI Collaboration Agreement, we agreed to pay FCDI a minimum of $2.5 million per year. Under the FCDI Collaboration Agreement, with certain exceptions, we have ownership rights to the deliverables made under the collaboration, including any intellectual property rights therein. Such exceptions include, among other things, deliverables that are cells obtained or created by changing the state of a cell to a state of pluripotency using methods or materials covered by the licensed patents, or Reprogrammed iPS Cells, or any compositions or materials derived from the use of Reprogrammed iPS Cells, produced by the use of Reprogrammed iPS Cells or which incorporate wholly or partially Reprogrammed iPS Cells, which, in each case, will be owned by FCDI, unless directly or indirectly derived from or made from the cell lines selected by us pursuant to the terms of the FCDI Collaboration Agreement.

The FCDI Collaboration Agreement expires upon the termination of the Reprogramming License. Either party may terminate the FCDI Collaboration Agreement upon the other party’s material breach, subject to a 30-day notice and cure period. We may terminate the FCDI Collaboration Agreement for convenience by providing FCDI 60-days’ written notice.

The FCDI Collaboration Agreement also contains customary representations and warranties, confidentiality and indemnification provisions.

Letter Agreement

Under the letter agreement, which amends certain terms of each of the FCDI Agreements, including such amendments that (i) amend the definition of Territory under each of the FCDI Agreements, for purposes of the sublicenses under the FCDI Agreements pursuant to our Research Collaboration and License Agreement with Bristol-Myers Squibb dated January 7, 2022, or the Collaboration Agreement, includes Japan, (ii) amends the licenses granted to us and our affiliates under the FCDI Agreements such that the rights are sublicensable to Bristol-Myers Squibb, including with respect to Japan and (iii) the intellectual property developed under the Bristol-Myers Squibb collaboration is not subject to grant-back and option provisions

under the Reprogramming License (iv) waives any right of FCDI to manufacture products developed under the Collaboration Agreement.

Pursuant to the Letter Agreement, and in consideration for amending the FCDI Agreements, we paid to FCDI (i) an upfront payment of $10 million, and will pay (ii) a percentage of any milestone payments received by us under the Collaboration Agreement in respect of achievement of development or regulatory milestones specific to Japan, and (iii) a percentage of all royalties received by us under the Collaboration Agreement in respect of sales of products in Japan.

Manufacturing Agreement

Under the Manufacturing Agreement, FCDI has and will perform certain agreed upon technology transfer, process development, analytical testing, and cGMP manufacturing services for us with respect to clinical supply of certain of our product candidates as agreed to in current and future work orders. The Manufacturing Agreement contains certain exclusivity provisions, which remain effective until the fifth anniversary of the Manufacturing Agreement, including that FCDI will be our exclusive supplier of clinical grade CNTY-101 for use in B-cell malignancies during the exclusivity period and that FCDI will have the option to be our exclusive supplier during the remainder of the exclusivity period of clinical material for the next one or two NK cell products for which we file an IND, depending on the other INDs that we file during the remainder of the exclusivity period. Subject to certain conditions, FCDI may also have the right to be the exclusive clinical supplier for the first product candidate for which we submit an IND after the fifth anniversary of the Manufacturing Agreement and choose not to manufacture ourselves.

Either party may terminate the Manufacturing Agreement upon the other party’s material breach, subject to a 30-day notice and cure period, or in the event that the activities to be performed under the Manufacturing Agreement are unable to be performed for scientific or technical reasons and the parties are unable to resolve such issue within 60 days. We may terminate the Manufacturing Agreement for convenience after March 23, 2026 by providing FCDI 60-days’ written notice.

Worldwide License Agreement

On September 22, 2023, we and FCDI entered into a worldwide license agreement, or the Autoimmune License, whereby FCDI will grant non-exclusive licenses to us for certain patent rights and know-how related to cell differentiation and reprogramming for the development and commercialization of iPSC-derived therapies for the treatment of inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. Under the terms of the Autoimmune License, FCDI will be eligible to receive certain development and regulatory milestone payments as well as low single-digit royalties related to products developed in connection with the Autoimmune License. In addition, on September 22, 2023, we and FCDI amended the Reprogramming License, Differentiation License and the Collaboration Agreement to expand our existing license related to the development and commercialization of iPSC-derived cancer immunotherapeutics to also include inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. In connection with the entry into the Autoimmune License and the amendments to the Reprogramming License and Differentiation License, we made an upfront payment in the amount of $4.0 million. In addition, we paid FCDI a $1.0 million milestone fee pursuant to the Autoimmune License for filing of the IND for SLE for CNTY-101, both of which are included as in-process research and development in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss for the year ended December 31, 2023.

Bayer HealthCare LLC Option Agreement

In June 2019, we entered into an option agreement with Bayer, or the Option Agreement, which was subsequently amended and restated in February 2021, pursuant to which Bayer was granted certain bidding rights relating to the potential transfer of rights with respect to certain product candidates being researched and developed by us which are comprised of allogeneic iPSC-derived natural killer cells, macrophages or dendritic cells, which we refer to as the Research Products. For clarity, T cell programs are excluded from the Bayer Option Agreement Research Products. Under the Option Agreement, Bayer was granted a right of first

refusal, or ROFR, to submit bids for the transfer or license of rights to research, develop and/or commercialize certain Research Products, which we refer to as the Research Product Rights. While CNTY-101 is no longer included in the Bayer option rights, any other wholly owned product candidate comprised of iNK cells that we develop in the future is subject to the terms of the Option Agreement. Bayer’s ROFR is only exercisable with respect to up to four Research Products and the right terminates upon our tenth IND submission. Subject to certain exceptions, Bayer may only exercise these option rights in a non-sequential and alternating manner, and such rights are subject to additional limitations.

In the event that Bayer exercises its ROFR right, we will provide Bayer with our current, minimum offer terms with respect to the relevant Research Product Rights, or the Minimum Offer Terms, as determined by our Board (excluding any director appointed by Bayer), which will include (i) the minimum upfront cash proceeds to be received by us for the Research Product Rights and (ii) any other applicable licensing and financial terms. If Bayer’s bid does not meet the Minimum Offer Terms, Bayer’s ROFR rights with respect to that Research Product terminate except that Bayer will retain topping rights for future third party bids for that Research Product. If Bayer’s bid meets the Minimum Offer Terms, we can accept the bid or seek a third party valuation to determine the fair market value of the Research Product Rights and Bayer will have the opportunity to match the third party valuation. If Bayer does not match the third party valuation, Bayer’s rights with respect to that Research Product terminate except that Bayer will retain topping rights for future third party bids for that Research Product that are less than the third party valuation. The Option Agreement also contains provisions regarding our receipt of an unsolicited bid for certain Research Product Rights prior to an IND submission for a Research Product under which Bayer will have the option to submit a competing bid or relinquish its rights with respect to the transfer of the applicable Research Product in connection with the unsolicited bid.

The Option Agreement terminates upon the earlier of (i) Bayer and its affiliates ceasing to hold any of our capital stock or (ii) a change of control of us, as defined therein. The Option Agreement also contains customary representations and warranties and confidentiality provisions.

Bristol-Myers Squibb

On January 7, 2022, we entered into a Research, Collaboration and License Agreement with Bristol-Myers Squibb Company to collaborate on the research, development and commercialization of induced pluripotent stem cell derived, engineered natural killer cell and/or gamma delta T cell programs for hematologic malignancies, initially focused on acute myeloid leukemia, and multiple myeloma.

In connection with the Collaboration Agreement Bristol-Myers Squibb purchased 2,160,760 shares of our common stock at a price per share of $23.14, for an aggregate purchase price of $50 million.

Following an internal corporate portfolio prioritization process, Bristol-Myers Squibb notified the Company on December 12, 2024 that it would be terminating the Collaboration Agreement in its entirety without cause. The termination was effective as of March 12, 2025.

While we are encouraged by the scientific progress on programs for acute myeloid leukemia (CNTY-104) and multiple myeloma (CNTY-106) under the agreement and their commercial potential, consistent with the pre-clinical pipeline prioritization announced in March 2025, these programs will not be progressing internally at this time and may present out-licensing opportunities or be re-evaluated in the future.

iCELL Inc.

On March 20, 2020, we entered into an exclusive sublicense, or the iCELL Sublicense, with iCELL Inc., or iCELL, for certain patents related to an immune function reconstruction method using multipotent stem cells and the method for producing antigen specific T-cells, in each case, to research, develop and commercialize products in the United States, France, Germany, Italy, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the UK and any other countries where valid claims exist. Additionally, we received a non-exclusive license to

such rights in Japan. The rights sublicensed to us under the iCELL Sublicense were licensed to iCELL by the University of Tokyo, or UTokyo, pursuant to an exclusive license agreement, or the UTokyo License. iCELL reserved for itself and for UTokyo an irrevocable, nonexclusive, royalty-free license to make and use certain non-public information for their own internal educational and research activities.nThe initial term of the sublicense expires on the later of (i) March 31, 2027, or (ii) the expiration of the last-to-expire valid claim covering a licensed product, which is currently expected to expire in 2033. iCELL may terminate the agreement with 30 days’ notice if we have failed to make a payment within 60 days of such payment becoming due and we do not cure such breach within 30 days of written notice. We may terminate the agreement upon 90 days’ written notice if any third party brings a claim against us related to the licensed patents or technology and such claim is not settled within 90 days. Pursuant to the iCELL Sublicense, we paid an upfront license issue fee in the low six-figures and we agreed to make low single-digit percentage royalty payments until the last-to-expire valid claim under the licensed patents to iCELL on certain net sales amounts of the products developed under the iCELL Sublicense, as well as commercial milestone payments on a country-by-country basis based on certain net sales amounts related to products developed under the iCELL Sublicense in the aggregate of $70 million. We also agreed to make certain milestone payments to iCELL upon the achievement of certain developmental and regulatory milestones in the aggregate of $4.25 million. Upon the termination of the UTokyo License, iCELL will use good faith efforts to assist us in exercising any rights available to us under the UTokyo License to become a direct licensee of UTokyo. The iCELL Sublicense also contains customary representation and warranties, confidentiality, insurance, audit, indemnification and miscellaneous provisions.

Inscripta

In January 2019, we entered into a non-exclusive license agreement with Inscripta, Inc. Under the license agreement, we obtained a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, irrevocable license to a patent portfolio covering the composition, production, and use of CRISPR-MAD7, a novel gene-editing CRISPR endonuclease from the Eubacterium rectale genome. The license agreement does not contain any payment terms; thus no payments have been made, or will be made, to Inscripta under the license agreement. The licensed intellectual property includes two issued U.S. patents and any pending applications claiming priority therefrom. Our license covers the use of CRISPR-MAD7 to perform research and development in both academic and commercial setting and use of MAD7 to perform commercial services, provided that such use may not include the (i) sale or resale of MAD7, including as part of a therapeutic product, (ii) continued use of MAD7 in a commercial manufacturing process or (iii) use of MAD7 in the editing of human embryos. Such license will expire upon the expiration of the last valid claim under the licensed patents, which is currently expected to expire in 2037. These licensed issued patents and any licensed patents that may issue from these pending patent applications will expire in 2037, without giving effect to any patent term adjustment or extension.

Intellectual Property

Intellectual property is of vital importance in our field and in biotechnology generally. We seek to protect and enhance our intellectual property, proprietary technology, inventions, and improvements that are commercially important to the development of our business by seeking, maintaining, enforcing and defending patent rights, whether developed internally or licensed from third parties.

We have sought patent protection in the United States and other countries throughout the world related to each of our pipeline programs, including our CNTY-101 product candidate, as well as other iPSC-derived engineered CAR cells comprising certain transgene insertions and deletions, including our proprietary Allo-Evasion™ technology. We have an issued US Patent No. 11,661,459 directed to the safety switch construct incorporated in our CNTY-101 product, and an allowed US Patent Application No. 18/193,030 directed to a composition that includes the iPSC or derivative cell thereof having safety switch construct incorporated in our CNTY-101 product. We have also filed patent applications related to our other product candidates, including CNTY-104, CNTY-107, CNTY-308, and CNTY-341. We have also filed patent applications relating to our T-cell platform related to compositions and methods for generating alpha-beta and gamma delta T-cells from

iPSCs. Additionally, we have filed a patent application on gene transfer vectors and methods of engineering iPSCs. We have also filed patent applications related to genetically engineered cells expressing CD16 variants and NKG2D and uses thereof as well as other technologies. This portfolio covers compositions of programmed cellular immunotherapies, our proprietary Allo-Evasion™ technology and our platform for industrial scale iPSC engineering and differentiation. The portfolio also includes technology for a universal CAR cell platform and a novel safety switch which includes an issued US Patent No.11,883,432. These issued patents and any patents that may be issued from allowed patent applications will expire on dates in 2041, without giving effect to any patent term adjustment or extension.

We have also filed provisional and/or non-provisional patent applications related to iPSC-derived cells engineered to express CXCR4. Additionally, through our acquisition of Clade Therapeutics, Inc., we acquired patent applications related to (i) methods of making and using single positive T cells, and (ii) cells engineered with one or both of a CD300a and NKG2A binding domain to enhance cell cloaking. With regard to such United States provisional patent applications, if we do not timely file any non-provisional patent applications, we may lose our priority date with respect to our provisional patent applications and any patent protection on the inventions disclosed in our provisional patent applications. Such applications may not result in issued patents and, even if patents do issue, such patents may not be in a form that will provide us with meaningful protection for our product candidates. We also rely on trade secrets that may be important to the development of our business, but which may be difficult to protect and provide us with only limited protection.

We expect to file additional patent applications in support of current and new clinical candidates as well as new platform and core technologies. Our commercial success will depend in part on obtaining, maintaining, protecting, and enforcing patent protection and trade secret protection of our current and future product candidates and the methods used to develop and manufacture them, as well as successfully defending such patents against third-party challenges and operating without infringing, violating or misappropriating the intellectual property or proprietary rights of others. Our ability to stop unauthorized third parties from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing our products depends on the extent to which we have rights under valid and enforceable patents or trade secrets that cover these activities. We cannot be sure that patents will be granted with respect to any of our pending patent applications or with respect to any patent applications filed by us in the future, nor can we be sure that any patents that may be granted to us in the future will be commercially useful in protecting our product candidates, discovery programs and processes. For this and more comprehensive risks related to our intellectual property, please see “Risk factors—Risks related to our intellectual property.”

The term of individual patents depends upon the legal term of the patents in the countries in which they are obtained. In most countries in which we file, including the United States, the patent term is generally 20 years from the earliest date of filing a non-provisional or Patent Cooperation Treaty, or PCT patent application. In the United States, a patent’s term may be lengthened by patent term adjustment, which compensates a patentee for administrative delays by the USPTO in examining and granting a patent, or may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over an earlier filed patent. In the United States, the patent term of a patent that covers an FDA-approved drug may also be eligible for patent term extension, which permits patent term restoration as compensation for the patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act, or the Hatch-Waxman Act, permits a patent term extension of up to five years beyond the expiration of the patent. The length of the patent term extension is related to the length of time the drug is under regulatory review. 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 applicable to an approved drug 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. Similar provisions are available in Europe and other foreign jurisdictions to extend the term of a patent that covers an approved drug. In the future, if and when our products receive FDA approval, we expect to apply for patent term extensions on patents covering those products. We plan to seek patent term extensions to any issued patents we may obtain in any jurisdiction where such patent term extensions are available, however there is no guarantee that the applicable authorities, including the FDA in the United States, will agree with our assessment of whether such extensions should be granted, and if granted, the length of such extensions. For more information

regarding the risks related to our intellectual property, see “Risk factors—Risks related to our intellectual property.”

In some instances, we submit patent applications directly with the USPTO as provisional patent applications. Corresponding non-provisional patent applications must be filed not later than 12 months after the provisional application filing date to claim priority to the provisional application filing date. With regard to such United States provisional patent applications, if we do not timely file any non-provisional patent applications, we may lose our priority date with respect to our provisional patent applications and any patent protection on the inventions disclosed in our provisional patent applications. While we intend to timely file non-provisional patent applications relating to our provisional patent applications, we cannot predict whether any such patent applications will result in the issuance of patents that provide us with any competitive advantage.

We will file U.S. non-provisional applications and PCT applications that claim the benefit of the priority date of earlier filed provisional applications, when applicable. The PCT system allows a single application to be filed within 12 months of the original priority date of the patent application, and to designate all of the PCT member states in which national patent applications can later be pursued based on the international patent application filed under the PCT. The PCT searching authority performs a patentability search and issues a non-binding patentability opinion for some or all of the claims filed in the application, which can be used to evaluate the chances of success for the national applications in foreign countries prior to having to incur the filing fees. Although a PCT application does not issue as a patent, it allows the applicant to seek protection in any of the member states through national-phase applications. At the end of the period of two and a half years from the earliest priority date of the PCT application, separate patent applications can be pursued in any of the PCT member states either by direct national filing or, in some cases by filing through a regional patent organization, such as the European Patent Office. The PCT system delays expenses, allows a limited evaluation of the chances of success for national/regional patent applications and enables substantial savings where applications are abandoned within the first two and a half years of filing.

For all patent applications, we determine claiming strategy on a case-by-case basis. We seek to file patents containing claims for protection of all useful applications of our proprietary technologies and any product candidates, as well as all new applications and/or uses we discover for existing technologies and product candidates, assuming these are strategically valuable. We continuously reassess the number and type of patent applications, as well as the pending and issued patent claims to pursue maximum coverage and value for our processes, and compositions, given existing patent office rules and regulations. Further, claims may be modified during patent prosecution to meet our intellectual property and business needs.

We recognize that the ability to obtain patent protection and the degree of such protection depends on a number of factors, including the extent of the prior art, the novelty and non-obviousness of the invention, and the ability to satisfy the enablement requirement of the patent laws. In addition, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and its scope can be reinterpreted or further altered even after patent issuance. Consequently, we may not obtain or maintain adequate patent protection for any of our product candidates, platform, or technology. We cannot predict whether the patent applications we are currently pursuing will issue as patents in any particular jurisdiction or whether the claims of any issued patents will provide sufficient proprietary protection from competitors. In addition, any patents that we hold may be challenged, circumvented or invalidated by third parties.

The patent positions of biotechnology companies like ours are generally uncertain and involve complex legal, scientific, and factual questions. Our commercial success will also depend in part on not infringing, violating, or misappropriating the intellectual property or proprietary rights of third parties. Third-party patents could require us to alter our development or commercial strategies, or our product candidates or processes, obtain licenses, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, or cease certain activities. If third parties prepare and file patent applications in the United States that also claim technology to which we have rights, we may have to participate in interference or derivation proceedings in the USPTO to determine priority of invention. Further, our breach of any license agreements or our failure to obtain a license to

proprietary rights required to develop or commercialize our product candidates may have a material adverse impact on us. For more information, see “Risk Factors—Risks related to intellectual property.”

In addition to patent protection, we also rely on trade secrets, know-how, other proprietary information and/or continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our competitive position. We seek to protect and maintain the confidentiality of proprietary information to protect aspects of our business that are not amenable to, or that we do not consider appropriate for, patent protection. Although we take steps to protect our proprietary information and trade secrets, including through contractual means with our employees and consultants, third parties may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information and techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or disclose our technology. Thus, we may not be able to meaningfully protect our trade secrets. It is our policy to require our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers, and other advisors to execute confidentiality agreements upon the commencement of employment or consulting relationships with us. These agreements provide that all confidential information concerning our business or financial affairs developed or made known to the individual during the course of the individual’s relationship with us is to be kept confidential and not disclosed to third parties except in specific circumstances. Our agreements with employees also provide that all inventions conceived by the employee in the course of employment with us or from the employee’s use of our confidential information are our exclusive property. However, such confidentiality agreements and invention assignment agreements can be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors. To the extent that our consultants, contractors or collaborators use intellectual property owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the rights in related or resulting trade secrets, know-how and inventions. For more information regarding the risks related to our intellectual property, see “Risk factors—Risks related to our intellectual property.”

Intellectual property relating to iPSC technology

We have licensed from FCDI a portfolio of six patent families including issued patents and pending applications broadly applicable to the reprogramming of somatic cells. Our license is non-exclusive within the field of cancer immunotherapeutics in the worldwide territory outside of Japan and for the treatment of inflammatory and autoimmune diseases worldwide. This portfolio covers various aspects of the generation of human iPSCs from somatic cells and, as of May 31, 2021, includes 12 issued U.S. patents claiming methods and compositions used in the reprogramming of human somatic cells to iPSCs. Specifically, the portfolio includes patents with claims for producing human iPSCs from hematopoietic progenitor cells using episomal genetic vectors and includes claims for doing the reprogramming under feeder free conditions. The portfolio also includes a composition of matter patent issued in the United States covering an Epstein-Barr Virus, or EBV, reprogramming vector containing genes for certain reprogramming factors. These issued patents and any patents that may be issued from these pending patent applications will expire on dates ranging from 2029 to 2034, without giving effect to any patent term adjustment or extension.

Included within the license is a sublicense under certain patents, which are directed to compositions and methods of using and making iPSCs, owned by WARF relating to the so-called “Thompson Factors” for reprogramming human cells to iPSCs, the issued United States patents in this portfolio will expire on dates ranging from 2028 to 2029, without giving effect to any patent term adjustment or extension.

Given that the rights granted to us under these patents are non-exclusive, third parties may obtain licenses to these patents and related technology to compete with us. For more information, see “Risk Factors—Risks related to commercialization of our product candidates—We face significant competition, and if our competitors develop product candidates more rapidly than we do or their product candidates are more effective, our ability to develop and successfully commercialize products may be adversely affected.”

Intellectual property relating to genetic engineering

In January 2019, we entered into a non-exclusive license agreement with Inscripta, Inc. Under the license agreement, we obtained a non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable license to a patent portfolio covering the composition, production, and use of CRISPR-MAD7, a novel gene-editing CRISPR endonuclease from the Eubacterium rectale genome. The intellectual property includes two issued U.S. patents and any pending applications claiming priority therefrom. Our license covers the making and using of CRISPR-MAD7 for editing iPSCs, making master engineered iPSC lines and using master engineered iPSC lines to manufacture human therapeutic products. These issued patents and any patents that may be issued from these pending patent applications will expire in 2037, without giving effect to any patent term adjustment or extension.

Given that the rights granted to us under these patents are non-exclusive, third parties may obtain licenses to these patents and related technology to compete with us. For more information, see “Risk Factors—Risks related to commercialization of our product candidates—We face significant competition, and if our competitors develop product candidates more rapidly than we do or their product candidates are more effective, our ability to develop and successfully commercialize products may be adversely affected.”

Intellectual property relating to the differentiation of hematopoietic cells

We have licensed from FCDI a portfolio of six patent families regarding methods of differentiating iPSC cells including issued patents and pending patent applications broadly applicable to the differentiation of iPSC cells, the last of which is currently expected to expire in 2036. Our license is exclusive to exploit cancer immunotherapeutic products and non-exclusive for the products for the treatment of inflammatory and autoimmune diseases consisting of cells that are or are modifications of NK cells, T cells, dendritic cells and macrophages derived from human iPSCs. This portfolio covers various aspects of the generation of hematopoietic precursor and immune effector cells from iPSCs and, as of May 31, 2021, includes five issued U.S. patents claiming methods for the differentiation of human iPSCs to hematopoietic precursor cells and further differentiation into immune effector cells. Specifically, the portfolio includes patents with claims for producing hematopoietic precursor cells from iPSCs using a multi-step process involving certain defined media. These issued patents and any patents that may issue from these pending patent applications will expire on dates ranging from 2030 to 2036, without giving effect to any patent term adjustment or extension.

Intellectual property relating to engineered iPSCs and derivative cells

Currently, we own two issued US patents and fifteen pending US utility patent applications and five pending provisional patent applications covering our engineered iPSC cells, cell differentiation technology, compositions of engineered cellular immunotherapies, and gene transfer vectors and methods of engineering iPSC cells. The portfolio includes composition of matter claims covering CNTY-101, as well as other iPSC-derived engineered CAR cells comprising certain transgene insertions and deletions, including our proprietary Allo-Evasion™ technology. We have an issued US patent No. 11,661,459 directed to the safety switch construct incorporated in our CNTY-101 product and an issued US patent with claims directed to a universal CAR cell platform. We have also filed patent applications relating to our T-cell platform related to compositions and methods for generating alpha-beta and gamma-delta T cells from iPSCs. We have also filed patent applications related to a novel safety switch. Any U.S. patents that may issue from such pending provisional patent applications would expire in from 2040-2043, without giving effect to any patent term adjustment or extension.

Intellectual property relating to engineered T cells

We have exclusively sublicensed from iCELL two families of patents owned by the University of Tokyo relating to immune function reconstruction method using multipotent stem cells and method for producing antigen-specific T cells. The portfolio includes two issued U.S. patents claiming methods for the production of T cells having antigen specificity from iPSC cells derived from human T cells where the T cells differentiated from the iPSC cells retain the antigen specificity of the human T cell from which it was derived. These issued patents will expire in 2031, without giving effect to any patent term adjustment or extension.

Competition

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries have made substantial investment in recent years in the rapid development of novel immunotherapies for the treatment of a range of pathologies, including cancers, and autoimmune disorders, making this a highly competitive market.

We face substantial competition from multiple sources, including large and specialty pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic research institutions and governmental agencies and public and private research institutions. Our competitors compete with us on the level of the technologies employed, or on the level of development of product candidates. In addition, many small biotechnology companies have formed collaborations with large, established companies to (i) obtain support for their research, development and commercialization of products or (ii) combine several treatment approaches to develop longer lasting or more efficacious treatments that may potentially directly compete with our current or future product candidates. We anticipate that we will continue to face increasing competition as new therapies and combinations thereof, technologies, and data emerge within the field of immunotherapy and, furthermore, within the treatment of cancers and autoimmune disorders. In addition to the current standard of care treatments for patients with cancers or autoimmune disorders, numerous commercial and academic preclinical studies and clinical trials are being undertaken by a large number of parties to assess novel technologies and product candidates in the field of immunotherapy. Results from these studies and trials have fueled increasing levels of interest in the field of immunotherapy.

Large pharmaceutical companies that have commercialized or are developing immunotherapies to treat cancer include but are not limited to AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche. Some of these companies, such as Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Roche, are also developing cell therapy therapies for autoimmune diseases.

Companies that compete with us directly on the level of the development of product candidates targeting B-cell lymphomas include but are not limited to Gilead Sciences, Novartis, and Bristol-Myers Squibb, among others. Companies developing Nectin-4 targeted agents include but are not limited to Pfizer, Astellas, and Bicycle Therapeutics.

Other emerging biopharmaceutical companies which can potentially develop competing cell therapy candidates to treat both cancer and autoimmune diseases include but are not limited to Adicet Bio, Allogene Therapeutics, Artiva Biotherapeutics, Caribou Biosciences, CRIPSR Therapeutics, Fate Therapeutics, Nkarta Therapeutics, and Sana Biotechnology. Furthermore, companies pursuing the development of cell therapies in autoimmune diseases include but are not limited to Cabaletta Bio, Cartesian Therapeutics, and Kyverna Therapeutics.

Competition may also arise from non-cell therapy modalities, such as bispecific antibodies and T cell engagers. Many of our competitors, either alone or in combination with their respective strategic partners, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, the regulatory approval process, and marketing than we do. Mergers and acquisition activity in the pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical, and biotechnology sector is likely to result in greater resource concentration among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through sizeable collaborative arrangements with established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if one or more of our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, better tolerated, or of greater convenience or economic benefit than our proposed product offering. Our competitors also may be in a position to obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly, resulting in a stronger or dominant market position before

we are able to enter the market. The key competitive factors affecting the success of all of our programs are likely to be product safety, efficacy, convenience and treatment cost.

​

Government regulation

In the United States, biologic products are licensed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, for marketing under the Public Health Service Act, referred to as the PHS Act, and regulated under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or the FDCA. Both the FDCA and the PHS Act and their corresponding regulations govern, among other things, the testing, manufacturing, safety, purity, potency, efficacy, labeling, packaging, storage, record keeping, distribution, marketing, sales, import, export, reporting, advertising and other promotional practices involving biologic products. FDA clearance must be obtained before clinical testing of biologic products. FDA licensure also must be obtained before marketing of biologic products. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.

United States development process

The process required by the FDA before a biologic product may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

​

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

The clinical study sponsor must submit the results of the nonclinical tests, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature and a proposed clinical protocol, to the FDA as part of the IND. Some nonclinical testing typically continues after the IND is submitted. An IND is an exemption from the FDCA that allows an unapproved product to be shipped in interstate commerce for use in an investigational clinical trial and a request for FDA authorization to administer an investigational product to humans. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA requests certain changes to a protocol before the trial can begin, or the FDA places the clinical trial on a clinical hold within that 30-day time period. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. The FDA may also impose clinical holds on a biologic product candidate at any time before or during clinical trials due to safety concerns or non-compliance. If the FDA imposes a clinical hold, trials may not recommence without FDA authorization and then only under terms authorized by the FDA.

Clinical trials may involve the administration of the biologic product candidate to healthy volunteers or subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators, generally physicians not employed by or under the study sponsor’s control. Clinical trials involving some products for certain diseases, including some rare diseases, may begin with testing in patients with the disease. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the clinical trial, dosing procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria, and the parameters to be used to monitor subject safety, including stopping rules that assure a clinical trial will be stopped if certain adverse events should occur. Each protocol and any amendments to the protocol must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Clinical trials must be conducted and monitored in accordance with the FDA’s regulations comprising the GCP requirements, including the requirement that all research subjects or his or her legal representative provide informed consent. Further, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an independent IRB, at or servicing each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted. An IRB is charged with protecting the welfare and rights of study participants and considers such items as whether the risks to individuals participating in the clinical trials are minimized and are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits. The IRB also approves the form and content of the informed consent that must be signed by each clinical trial subject or his or her legal representative and must monitor the clinical trial until completed. Additionally, some trials are overseen by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the trial sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board or committee.

In addition to the submission of an IND to the FDA before initiation of a clinical trial in the United States, certain human clinical trials involving recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecules are subject to oversight of institutional biosafety committees, or IBCs, as set forth in the National Institutes of Health, or NIH, Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant or Synthetic Nucleic Acid Molecules, or NIH Guidelines. Specifically, under the NIH Guidelines, supervision of human gene transfer trials includes evaluation and assessment by an IBC, a local institutional committee that reviews and oversees research utilizing recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecules at that institution. The IBC assesses the safety of the

research and identifies any potential risk to public health or the environment, and such review may result in some delay before initiation of a clinical trial. While the NIH Guidelines are not mandatory unless the research in question is being conducted at or sponsored by institutions receiving NIH funding for recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecule research, many companies and other institutions not otherwise subject to the NIH Guidelines voluntarily follow them.

​

Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap or be combined:

​

Post-approval clinical trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials, may be conducted after initial marketing approval. These clinical trials are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication, particularly for long-term safety follow-up.

During all phases of clinical development, regulatory agencies require extensive monitoring and auditing of all clinical activities, clinical data, and clinical trial investigators. Annual progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted to the FDA. Written IND safety reports must be promptly submitted to the FDA and the investigators for serious and unexpected adverse events, any findings from other studies, tests in laboratory animals or in vitro testing that suggest a significant risk for human subjects, or any clinically important increase in the rate of a serious suspected adverse reaction over that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure. The sponsor must submit an IND safety report within 15 calendar days after the sponsor determines that the information qualifies for reporting. The sponsor also must notify the FDA of any unexpected fatal or life-threatening suspected adverse reaction within seven calendar days after the sponsor’s initial receipt of the information. Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 3 clinical trials may not be completed successfully within any specified period, if at all. The FDA or the sponsor or its data safety monitoring board may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the biologic has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the physical characteristics of the biologic as well as finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. To help reduce the risk of the introduction of adventitious agents with use of biologics, the PHS Act emphasizes the importance of manufacturing control for products whose attributes cannot be precisely defined. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, the sponsor must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality, potency and purity of the final biological product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and

stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the biological product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

There are also various laws and regulations regarding laboratory practices, the experimental use of animals, and the use and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances in connection with the research. In each of these areas, the FDA and other regulatory authorities have broad regulatory and enforcement powers, including the ability to levy fines and civil penalties, suspend or delay issuance of approvals, seize or recall products, and withdraw approvals.

Information about certain clinical trials must be submitted within specific timeframes to the NIH for public dissemination on its clinicaltrials.gov website. Sponsors or distributors of investigational products for the diagnosis, monitoring, or treatment of one or more serious diseases or conditions must also have a publicly available policy on evaluating and responding to requests for expanded access requests.

United States review and approval processes

After the completion of clinical trials of a biological product, FDA approval of a BLA must be obtained before commercial marketing of the product. The BLA must include results of product development, laboratory and animal studies, human studies, information on the manufacture and composition of the product, proposed labeling and other relevant information. The testing and approval processes require substantial time and effort and there can be no assurance that the FDA will accept the BLA for filing and, even if filed, that any approval will be granted on a timely basis, if at all.

Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, as amended, or PDUFA, each BLA may be accompanied by a significant user fee. Under federal law, the submission of most applications is subject to an application user fee. The sponsor of an approved application is also subject to an annual program fee. Fee waivers or reductions are available in certain circumstances, including a waiver of the application fee for the first application filed by a small business. Additionally, no user fees are assessed on BLAs for product candidates designated as orphan drugs, unless the product candidate also includes a non-orphan indication.

Within 60 days following submission of the application, the FDA reviews a BLA submitted to determine if it is substantially complete before the agency accepts it for filing. The FDA may refuse to file any BLA that it deems incomplete or not properly reviewable at the time of submission and may request additional information. In this event, the BLA must be resubmitted with the additional information. The resubmitted application is also subject to review before the FDA accepts it for filing. The application also needs to be published and submitted in an electronic format that can be processed through the FDA’s electronic systems. If the electronic submission is not compatible with FDA’s systems, the BLA can be refused for filing. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth substantive review of the BLA. The FDA reviews the BLA to determine, among other things, whether the proposed product is safe, potent, and effective, for its intended use, and has an acceptable purity profile, and whether the product is being manufactured in accordance with cGMP to assure and preserve the product’s identity, safety, strength, quality, potency and purity. The FDA may refer applications for novel products or products that present difficult questions of safety or efficacy to an advisory committee, typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts, for review, evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions. During the biological product approval process, the FDA also will determine whether a REMS is necessary to assure the safe use of the biological product. If the FDA concludes a REMS is needed, the sponsor of the BLA must submit a proposed REMS; the FDA will not approve the BLA without a REMS, if required.

Before approving a BLA, the FDA may inspect the facilities at which the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve the product unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more

clinical trial sites to assure that the clinical trials were conducted in compliance with IND study requirements and GCP requirements. To assure cGMP and GCP compliance, an applicant must incur significant expenditure of time, money and effort in the areas of training, record keeping, production, and quality control. Notwithstanding the submission of relevant data and information, the FDA may ultimately decide that the BLA does not satisfy its regulatory criteria for approval and deny approval. Data obtained from clinical trials are not always conclusive and the FDA may interpret data differently than the sponsor interprets the same data. If the agency decides not to approve the BLA in its present form, the FDA will issue a complete response letter that usually describes all of the specific deficiencies in the BLA identified by the FDA. The deficiencies identified may be minor, for example, requiring labeling changes, or major, for example, requiring additional clinical trials.

Additionally, the complete response letter may include recommended actions that the applicant might take to place the application in a condition for approval. If a complete response letter is issued, the applicant may either resubmit the BLA, addressing all of the deficiencies identified in the letter, or withdraw the application.

If a product receives regulatory approval, the approval may be significantly limited to specific diseases and dosages or the indications for use may otherwise be limited, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. Further, the FDA may require that certain contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling. The FDA may impose restrictions and conditions on product distribution, prescribing, or dispensing in the form of a risk management plan, or otherwise limit the scope of any approval. In addition, the FDA may require post marketing clinical trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials, designed to further assess a biological product’s safety and effectiveness, and testing and surveillance programs to monitor the safety of approved products that have been commercialized. As a condition for approval, the FDA may also require additional nonclinical testing as a Phase 4 commitment.

One of the performance goals agreed to by the FDA under the PDUFA is to review standard BLAs in ten months from filing and priority BLAs in six months from filing, whereupon a review decision is to be made. The FDA does not always meet its PDUFA goal dates for standard and priority BLAs and its review goals are subject to change from time to time. The review process and the PDUFA goal date may be extended by three months if the FDA requests or the BLA sponsor otherwise provides additional information or clarification regarding information already provided in the submission within the last three months before the PDUFA goal date.

With respect to oncology products, the FDA may review applications under Real-Time Oncology Review, or RTOR, established by the FDA’s Oncology Center of Excellence. RTOR, which allows an applicant to pre submit components of the application to allow the FDA to review clinical data before the complete filing is submitted, aims to explore a more efficient review process to ensure that safe and effective treatments are available to patients as early as possible, while maintaining and improving review quality. Drugs considered for review under RTOR must, among other things, be likely to demonstrate substantial improvements on a clinically relevant endpoint(s) over available therapy, and must have easily interpreted endpoints. In addition, no aspect of the application should be likely to require a longer review time, such as, for example, a requirement for a new REMS. To determine eligibility for RTOR, the FDA requires top-line efficacy and safety results from an applicant’s pivotal clinical trial(s), as well as completion of database lock for the clinical trial(s). The FDA will generally make a decision regarding acceptance into RTOR within twenty (20) business days of receipt of the request from the applicant. If an applicant is not accepted into RTOR, the applicant will follow routine application submission procedures.

United States post-approval requirements

Maintaining substantial compliance with applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Rigorous and extensive FDA regulation of biological products continues after approval, particularly with respect to cGMP. We will rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the production of clinical and commercial quantities of any products that we may commercialize. Manufacturers of our products are required to comply with applicable requirements in

the cGMP regulations, including quality control and quality assurance and maintenance of records and documentation. Prior to the institution of any manufacturing changes, a determination needs to be made whether FDA approval is required in advance. If not done in accordance with FDA expectations, the FDA may restrict supply and may take further action.

Following approval, manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drugs or biologics, and those supplying products, ingredients, and components of them, are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies. Manufacturing facilities are subject to biennial inspections by the FDA and periodic inspections by certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP requirements and other regulatory requirements. Such inspections may result in an issuance of FDA Form 483 deficiency observations, untitled letters, or warning letters, which can lead to plant shutdown and other more serious penalties and fines.

Annual product reports are required to be submitted annually. Other post-approval requirements applicable to biological products, include reporting of cGMP deviations that may affect the identity, potency, purity and overall safety of a distributed product, record-keeping requirements, reporting of adverse events, reporting updated safety and efficacy information, and complying with electronic record and signature requirements. Additionally, manufacturers and other parties involved in the drug supply chain for prescription drug products must also comply with product tracking and tracing requirements and notify the FDA of counterfeit, diverted, stolen and intentionally adulterated products or products that are otherwise unfit for distribution in the United States.

After a BLA is approved, the product also may be subject to official lot release. As part of the manufacturing process, the manufacturer is required to perform certain tests on each lot of the product before it is released for distribution. If the product is subject to official release by the FDA, the manufacturer submits samples of each lot of product to the FDA together with a release protocol showing a summary of the history of manufacture of the lot and the results of all of the manufacturer’s tests performed on the lot. The FDA also may perform certain confirmatory tests on lots of some products, such as viral vaccines, before releasing the lots for distribution by the manufacturer. In addition, the FDA may conduct laboratory research related to the regulatory standards on the safety, purity, potency, and effectiveness of biological products. Systems need to be put in place to record and evaluate adverse events reported by health care providers and patients and to assess product complaints. An increase in severity or new adverse events can result in labeling changes or product recall. Defects in manufacturing of commercial products can result in product recalls.

We also must comply with the FDA’s advertising and promotion requirements, such as those related to direct-to-consumer advertising, the prohibition on promoting products for uses or inpatient populations that are not described in the product’s approved labeling (known as “off-label use”), industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, and promotional activities involving the internet. Discovery of previously unknown problems or the failure to comply with the applicable regulatory requirements may result in restrictions on the marketing of a product or withdrawal of the product from the market as well as possible civil or criminal sanctions. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or after approval, may subject an applicant or manufacturer to administrative or judicial civil or criminal sanctions and adverse publicity. FDA sanctions could include refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval or license revocation, clinical hold, warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, mandated corrective advertising or communications with doctors, debarment, restitution, disgorgement of profits, or civil or criminal penalties. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect.

Biological product manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved biological products, and those supplying products, ingredients, and components of them, are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP and other laws. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the areas of production and

quality control to maintain cGMP compliance. Discovery of problems with a product after approval may result in restrictions on a product, manufacturer, or holder of an approved BLA, including withdrawal of the product from the market. In addition, changes to the manufacturing process or facility generally require prior FDA approval before being implemented and other types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications and additional labeling claims, are also subject to further FDA review and approval.

From time to time, legislation is drafted, introduced, passed in Congress and signed into law that could significantly change the statutory provisions governing the approval, manufacturing, and marketing of products regulated by the FDA. In addition to new legislation, FDA regulations, guidances, and policies are often revised or reinterpreted by the agency in ways that may significantly affect the manner in which pharmaceutical products are regulated and marketed.

Orphan drug designation

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant Orphan Drug Designation, or ODD, to a biological product intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or more than 200,000 individuals in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making a biological product available in the United States for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product. ODD must be requested before submitting a BLA. After the FDA grants ODD, the identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. ODD does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process.

If a product that has ODD receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same biological product for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as not being able to supply the product for patients or showing clinical superiority to the product with orphan exclusivity.

Competitors, however, may receive approval of different products for the indication for which the orphan product has exclusivity or obtain approval for the same product but for a different indication for which the orphan product has exclusivity. Orphan product exclusivity also could block the approval of one of our products for seven years if a competitor obtains approval of the same biological product as defined by the FDA or if our product candidate is determined to be contained within the competitor’s product for the same indication or disease. If a biological product designated as an orphan product receives marketing approval for an indication broader than what is designated, it may not be entitled to orphan product exclusivity.

Expedited review and approval programs

The FDA has various programs, including fast track designation, priority review, accelerated approval, and breakthrough therapy designation, that are intended to expedite or simplify the process for the development and FDA review of biological products that are intended for the treatment of serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs. The purpose of these programs is to provide important new biological products to patients earlier than under standard FDA review procedures. To be eligible for a fast track designation, the FDA must determine, based on the request of a sponsor, that a biological product is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrates the potential to address an unmet medical need. The FDA will determine that a product will fill an unmet medical need if it will provide a therapy where none exists or provide a therapy that may be potentially superior to existing therapy based on efficacy or safety factors. In addition to other benefits, such as the ability to have greater interactions with the FDA, the FDA may initiate review of sections of a fast track BLA before the application is complete, a process known as rolling review.

The FDA may give priority review designation to biological products that treat a serious condition and, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness. A priority review means that the

goal for the FDA to review an application is six months, rather than the standard review of ten months under current PDUFA guidelines. Most products that are eligible for fast track designation may also be considered appropriate to receive a priority review. In addition, biological products studied for their safety and effectiveness in treating serious or life-threatening illnesses and that provide meaningful therapeutic benefit over existing treatments may receive accelerated approval and may be approved on the basis of adequate and well-controlled clinical trials establishing that the biological product has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require a sponsor of a biological product receiving accelerated approval to perform post-marketing studies to verify and describe the predicted effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical endpoint. Under the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act of 2022, or FDORA, the FDA is permitted to require, as appropriate, that a post-approval confirmatory study or studies be underway prior to approval or within a specified time period after the date of approval for a product granted accelerated approval. Sponsors are also required to send updates to the FDA every 180 days on the status of such studies, including progress toward enrollment targets, and the FDA must promptly post this information publicly. FDORA also gives the FDA increased authority to withdraw approval of a drug or biologic granted accelerated approval on an expedited basis if the sponsor fails to conduct such studies in a timely manner, send the necessary updates to the FDA, or if such post-approval studies fail to verify the drug’s predicted clinical benefit. In addition, the FDA generally requires, unless otherwise informed by the agency, pre-approval of promotional materials for a product approved under the accelerated approval pathway, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product.

Moreover, a sponsor can request designation of a product candidate as a “breakthrough therapy.” A breakthrough therapy is defined as a drug or biological product that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs or biologics, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug or biological product may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. Drug and biological products designated as breakthrough therapies are also eligible for accelerated approval. The FDA must take certain actions, such as holding timely meetings and providing advice, intended to expedite the development and review of an application for approval of a breakthrough therapy.

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

Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, which was enacted as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or PPACA, created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are demonstrated to be “biosimilar” or “interchangeable” with an FDA-licensed reference biological product via an approved BLA. Biosimilarity to an approved reference product requires that there be no differences in conditions of use, route of administration, dosage form, and strength, and no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of safety, purity, and potency. Biosimilarity is demonstrated in steps beginning with rigorous analytical studies or “fingerprinting,” in vitro studies, in vivo animal studies, and generally at least one clinical study, absent a waiver from the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The biosimilarity exercise tests the hypothesis that the investigational product and the reference product are the same. If at any point in the stepwise biosimilarity process a significant difference is observed, then the products are not biosimilar, and the development of a stand-alone BLA is necessary. In

order to meet the higher hurdle of interchangeability, a sponsor must demonstrate that the biosimilar product can be expected to produce the same clinical result as the reference product, and for a product that is administered more than once, that the risk of switching between the reference product and biosimilar product is not greater than the risk of maintaining the patient on the reference product. Complexities associated with the larger, and often more complex, structures of biological products, as well as the process by which such products are manufactured, pose significant hurdles to implementation that are still being evaluated by the FDA. Under the BPCIA, a reference biologic is granted 12 years of exclusivity from the time of first licensure of the reference product.

Regulation outside of the United States

In addition to regulations in the United States, we are subject to a variety of regulations in other jurisdictions governing clinical studies, commercial sales, and distribution of our products. Most countries outside of the United States require that CTAs be submitted to and approved by the local regulatory authority for each clinical study. In the European Union, for example, an application must be submitted to the national competent authority and an independent ethics committee in each country in which we intend to conduct clinical trials, much like the FDA and IRB, respectively. Under the new Clinical Trials Regulation (EU) No 536/2014, which replaced the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC on January 31, 2022, a single application is now made through the Clinical Trials Information System, or CTIS, for clinical trial authorization in up to 30 EU/EEA countries at the same time and with a single set of documentation.

The assessment of applications for clinical trials is divided into two parts (Part I contains scientific and medicinal product documentation and Part II contains the national and patient-level documentation). Part I is assessed by a coordinated review by the competent authorities of all European Union Member States in which an application for authorization of a clinical trial has been submitted (Concerned Member States) of a draft report prepared by a Reference Member State. Part II is assessed separately by each Concerned Member State. The role of the relevant ethics committees in the assessment procedure will continue to be governed by the national law of the Concerned Member State, however overall related timelines are defined by the Clinical Trials Regulation. The new Clinical Trials Regulation also provides for simplified reporting procedures for clinical trial sponsors.

In addition, whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we must obtain approval of a product by the comparable regulatory authorities of countries outside the United States before we can market the product in those countries. The approval process and requirements vary from country to country, so the number and type of nonclinical, clinical, and manufacturing studies needed may differ, and the time may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval.

To obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates under the European Union regulatory system, we are required to submit a marketing authorization application, or MAA, to be assessed in the centralized procedure. The centralized procedure allows applicants to obtain a marketing authorization, or MA, that is valid throughout the European Union, and the additional Member States of the European Economic Area (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway), or EEA. It is compulsory for medicinal products manufactured using biotechnological processes, for orphan medicinal products, for advanced therapy medicinal products (gene-therapy, somatic cell-therapy or tissue-engineered medicines) and for human products containing a new active substance which are not authorized in the European Union and which are intended for the treatment of HIV, AIDS, cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, auto-immune and other immune dysfunctions, viral diseases or diabetes. The centralized procedure is optional for any other products containing new active substances not authorized in the European Union or for products that constitute a significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovation or for which a centralized authorization is in the interests of patients at European Union level. When a company wishes to place on the market a medicinal product that is eligible for the centralized procedure, it sends an application directly to the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, to be assessed by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, or CHMP. The CHMP is responsible for conducting the assessment of whether a medicine meets the required quality, safety and efficacy requirements, and whether the product has a positive risk/benefit profile. The procedure results in a European

Commission decision, which is valid in all European Union Member States. The centralized procedure is as follows: full copies of the MA are sent to a rapporteur and a co-rapporteur designated by the competent EMA scientific committee. They coordinate the EMA’s scientific assessment of the medicinal product and prepare draft reports. Once the draft reports are prepared (other experts might be called upon for this purpose), they are sent to the CHMP, whose comments or objections are communicated to the applicant. The rapporteur is therefore the privileged interlocutor of the applicant and continues to play this role, even after the MA has been granted.

The rapporteur and co-rapporteur then assess the applicant’s replies, submit them for discussion to the CHMP and, taking into account the conclusions of this debate, prepare a final assessment report. Once the evaluation is completed, the CHMP gives a favorable or unfavorable opinion as to whether to grant the authorization. When the opinion is favorable, it shall include the draft summary of product characteristics, or SmPC, the package leaflet and the labeling. The time limit for the evaluation procedure is 210 days (excluding clock stops, when additional written or oral information is to be provided by the applicant in response to questions asked by the CHMP).The EMA then has fifteen days to forward its opinion to the European Commission, which will make a binding decision on the grant of an MA within 67 days of the receipt of the CHMP opinion.

There are two other procedures in the European Union for the grant of an MA in multiple European Union Member States. The decentralized procedure provides for approval by one or more other, or Concerned, Member States of an assessment of an application performed by one Member State, known as the Reference Member State. Under this procedure, an applicant submits an application, or dossier, and related materials including a draft SmPC, and draft labeling and package leaflet, to the Reference Member State and Concerned Member States. The Reference Member State prepares a draft assessment and drafts of the related materials within 120 days after receipt of a valid application. Within 90 days of receiving the Reference Member State’s assessment report, each Concerned Member State must decide whether to approve the assessment report and related materials. If a Member State cannot approve the assessment report and related materials on the grounds of potential serious risk to the public health, the disputed points may eventually be referred to the European Commission, whose decision is binding on all Member States.

The criteria for designating an “orphan medicinal product” in the European Union are similar in principle to those in the United States. Under Article 3 of Regulation (EC) 141/2000, a medicinal product may be designated as an orphan medicinal product if it is intended for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition that affects no more than five in 10,000 persons in the European Union. In addition, orphan designation can be granted if the product is intended for a life threatening, seriously debilitating, or serious and chronic condition in the European Union and where, without incentives, it is unlikely that sales of the product in the European Union would be sufficient to justify the necessary investment in its development. Orphan drug designation is only available if there is no other satisfactory method approved in the European Union of diagnosing, preventing, or treating the applicable orphan condition, or if such a method exists, the proposed orphan drug will be of significant benefit to patients affected by such condition, as defined in Regulation (EC) 847/2000.

Orphan designation provides opportunities for fee reductions, protocol assistance and access to the centralized procedure before and during the first year after a marketing authorization, or MA. Fee reductions are not limited to the first year after a marketing authorization for small and medium enterprises. In addition, if a product that has an orphan designation subsequently receives a centralized MA for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan market exclusivity, which means the EMA may not approve any other application to market a similar medicinal product for the same indication for a period of ten years. A “similar medicinal product” is defined as a medicinal product containing a similar active substance or substances as contained in an authorized orphan medicinal product, and which is intended for the same therapeutic indication. The exclusivity period may be reduced to six years if the designation criteria are no longer met, including where it is shown that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity. Competitors may receive marketing approval of different drugs or biologics for the

indications for which the orphan product has exclusivity. Additionally, an MA may be granted to a similar medicinal product for the same indication at any time if:

A pediatric investigation plan, or PIP, in the European Union is aimed at ensuring that the necessary data are obtained to support the authorization of a medicine for children, through studies in children. All applications for MAs for new medicines have to include the results of studies as described in an agreed PIP, unless the medicine is exempt because of a deferral or waiver. This requirement also applies when a marketing-authorization holder wants to add a new indication, pharmaceutical form, or route of administration for a medicine that is already authorized and covered by intellectual property rights. Several rewards and incentives for the development of pediatric medicines for children are available in the European Union Medicines authorized across the European Union with the results of studies from a PIP included in the product information are eligible for an extension of their supplementary protection certificate, or SPC, by six months(provided an application for such extension is made at the same time as filing the SPC application for the product, or at any point up to 2 years before the SPC expires). This is the case even when the studies’ results are negative. For orphan medicinal products, the incentive is an additional two years of market exclusivity.

Scientific advice and protocol assistance at the EMA are free of charge for questions relating to the development of pediatric medicines. Medicines developed specifically for children that are already authorized but are not protected by a patent or supplementary protection certificate are eligible for a pediatric-use MA, or PUMA. If a PUMA is granted, the product will benefit from ten years of market protection as an incentive.

In March 2016, the EMA launched an initiative, The PRIority Medicines, or PRIME, scheme, to facilitate development of product candidates in indications, often rare, for which few or no therapies currently exist. The PRIME scheme is intended to encourage development of products in areas of unmet medical need and provides accelerated assessment of products representing substantial innovation reviewed under the centralized procedure. Many benefits accrue to sponsors of product candidates with PRIME designation, including but not limited to, early and proactive regulatory dialogue with the EMA, frequent discussions on clinical trial designs and other development program elements, and accelerated MAA assessment once a dossier has been submitted.

Importantly, a dedicated contact and rapporteur from the CHMP is appointed early in the PRIME scheme facilitating increased understanding of the product at EMA’s committee level. An initial meeting initiates these relationships and includes a team of multidisciplinary experts at the EMA to provide guidance on the overall development and regulatory strategies.

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

The United Kingdom left the European Union on January 31, 2020, referred to as Brexit, and the United Kingdom and the European Union have concluded a trade and cooperation agreement, or TCA, which was provisionally applicable since January 1, 2021, and has been formally applicable since May 1, 2021. The TCA includes specific provisions concerning pharmaceuticals, which include the mutual recognition of GMP, inspections of manufacturing facilities for medicinal products and GMP documents issued but does not provide for wholesale mutual recognition of United Kingdom and European Union pharmaceutical regulations. At present, Great Britain has implemented European Union legislation on the marketing, promotion and sale of medicinal products through the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 (as amended) (under the Northern

Ireland Protocol, the European Union regulatory framework continues to apply in Northern Ireland). Except in respect of the new EU Clinical Trials Regulation, the regulatory regime in Great Britain therefore largely aligns with current European Union medicines regulations, however it is possible that these regimes will diverge more significantly in future now that Great Britain’s regulatory system is independent from the European Union and the TCA does not provide for mutual recognition of United Kingdom and European Union pharmaceutical legislation. However, notwithstanding that there is no wholesale recognition of European Union pharmaceutical legislation under the TCA, under the new framework mentioned below which will be put in place by the MHRA from January 1, 2024, the MHRA has stated that it will take into account decisions on the approval of MAs from the EMA (and certain other regulators) when considering an application for a Great Britain MA.

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, or MHRA, the United Kingdom’s medicines regulator, has introduced changes to national licensing procedures, including procedures to prioritize access to new medicines that will benefit patients, an accelerated assessment procedure and new routes of evaluation for novel products and biotechnological products. All existing European Union MAs for centrally authorized products were automatically converted (grandfathered) into United Kingdom MAs free-of-charge on January 1, 2021. For a period of three years from January 1, 2021, the MHRA may rely on a decision taken by the European Commission on the approval of a new MA in the centralized procedure, in order to more quickly grant a new Great Britain MA. A separate application will, however, still be required. On January 24, 2023, the MHRA announced that a new international recognition framework will be put in place from January 1, 2024, which will have regard to decisions on the approval of MAs made by the EMA and certain other regulators when determining an application for a new Great Britain MA.

There is now no pre-MA orphan designation in Great Britain. Instead, the MHRA reviews applications for orphan designation in parallel to the corresponding MAA. The criteria are essentially the same, but have been tailored for the Great Britain market, i.e., the prevalence of the condition in Great Britain (rather than the European Union) must not be more than five in 10,000. Should an orphan designation be granted, the period or market exclusivity will be set from the date of first approval of the product in Great Britain or the European Union, wherever is earliest.

Healthcare laws and regulations

Sales of our product candidate, if approved, or any other future product candidate will be subject to healthcare regulation and enforcement by the federal government and the states and foreign governments in which we might conduct our business. The healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate include the following:

​

Many states have similar laws and regulations, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws that may be broader in scope and may apply regardless of payor, in addition to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs. Additionally, we may be subject to state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the federal government’s and/or pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines, state laws that require drug and biologics manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures, as well as state and foreign laws governing the privacy and security of health information, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA. Additionally, to the extent that our product is sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws.

Healthcare Reform

The United States and many foreign jurisdictions have enacted or proposed legislative and regulatory changes affecting the healthcare system. The United States government, state legislatures and foreign governments also have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs and biologics. In recent years, the United States Congress, or Congress, has considered reductions in Medicare reimbursement levels for drugs and biologics administered by physicians. CMS, the agency that administers the Medicare and Medicaid programs, also has authority to revise reimbursement rates and to implement coverage restrictions for some drugs and biologics. Cost reduction initiatives and changes in coverage implemented through legislation or regulation could decrease utilization of and reimbursement for any approved products. While Medicare regulations apply only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payors often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates. Therefore, any reduction in reimbursement that results from federal legislation or regulation may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act, or collectively the Affordable Care Act, substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly impacts the pharmaceutical industry. The Affordable Care Act is intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against healthcare fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers, and impose additional health policy reforms. Among other things, the Affordable Care Act expanded manufacturers’ rebate liability under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program by increasing the minimum Medicaid rebate for both branded and generic drugs and biologics, expanded the 340B program, and revised the definition of average manufacturer price, or AMP, which could increase the amount of Medicaid drug rebates manufacturers are required to pay to states. The legislation also extended Medicaid drug rebates, previously due only on fee-for-service Medicaid utilization, to include the utilization of Medicaid managed care organizations as well and created an alternative rebate formula for certain new formulations of certain existing products that is intended to increase the amount of rebates due on those drugs.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since passage of the Affordable Care Act. The Budget Control Act of 2011 and subsequent legislation, among other things, include aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to healthcare providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, which remain in effect through 2023. Further, the American Taxpayer Relief Act, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 eliminated the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, previously set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, effective

January 1, 2024. These laws and regulations may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding and otherwise affect the prices we may obtain for any of our product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval or the frequency with which any such product candidate is prescribed or used.

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, includes several provisions that may impact our business to varying degrees, including provisions that reduce the out-of-pocket spending cap for Medicare Part D beneficiaries from $7,050 to $2,000 starting in 2025, thereby effectively eliminating the coverage gap; impose new manufacturer financial liability on certain drugs under Medicare Part D that replace the previous Coverage Gap Discount Program; allow the U.S. government to negotiate Medicare Part B and Part D price caps for certain high-cost drugs and biologics without generic or biosimilar competition; require companies to pay rebates to Medicare for certain drug prices that increase faster than inflation; and delay until January 1, 2032 the implementation of an HHS rebate rule that would have limited the fees that pharmacy benefit managers can charge. Further, under the IRA, orphan drugs are exempted from the Medicare drug price negotiation program, but only if they have just one orphan designation and for which the only approved indication is for that disease or condition. If a product receives multiple orphan designations or has multiple approved indications, it may not qualify for the orphan drug exemption. The implementation of the IRA is currently subject to ongoing litigation that challenges the constitutionality of the IRA’s Medicare drug price negotiation program. The effects of the IRA on our business and the healthcare industry in general is not yet known.

Further legislative and regulatory changes under the Affordable Care Act remain possible. It is unknown what form any such changes or any law would take, and how or whether it may affect our business in the future. We expect that changes or additions to the Affordable Care Act, the Medicare and Medicaid programs, changes allowing the federal government to directly negotiate drug prices and changes stemming from other healthcare reform measures, especially with regard to healthcare access, financing or other legislation in individual states, could have a material adverse effect on the healthcare industry.

The Affordable Care Act has also been subject to challenges in the courts. For example, on June 17, 2021, the Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the Affordable Care Act brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. The Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the law as they had not alleged personal injury traceable to the allegedly unlawful conduct. As a result, the Supreme Court did not rule on the constitutionality of the ACA or any of its provisions.

The Affordable Care Act requires pharmaceutical manufacturers of branded prescription drugs and biologics to pay a branded prescription drug fee to the federal government. Each individual pharmaceutical manufacturer pays a prorated share of the branded prescription drug fee, based on the dollar value of its branded prescription drug sales to certain federal programs identified in the law.

The Affordable Care Act also expanded the Public Health Service’s 340B drug pricing program. The 340B drug pricing program requires participating manufacturers to agree to charge statutorily-defined covered entities no more than the 340B “ceiling price” for the manufacturer’s covered outpatient drugs. The Affordable Care Act expanded the 340B program to include additional types of covered entities: certain free-standing cancer hospitals, critical access hospitals, rural referral centers and sole community hospitals, each as defined by the Affordable Care Act. Because the 340B ceiling price is determined based on the average manufacturer price, or AMP, and Medicaid drug rebate data, revisions to the Medicaid rebate formula and AMP definition could cause the required 340B discounts to increase. Payment methodologies may be subject to changes in healthcare legislation and regulatory initiatives as well. For example, CMS may develop new payment and delivery models, such as bundled payment models. Recently, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products. Such scrutiny has resulted in several recent Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, reduce the cost of drugs under Medicare, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for pharmaceutical products.

President Biden issued – and President Trump is expected to issue – multiple executive orders that seek to reduce prescription drug costs. Although a number of these and other proposed measures may require authorization through additional legislation to become effective, and the presidential administration may reverse or otherwise change these measures, both the presidential administration and Congress have indicated that they will continue to seek new legislative measures to control drug costs.

At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

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

Human capital resources

As of March 1, 2025, we had 140 full-time employees and 10 part-time employees. Of our 150 full and part-time employees, 131 are engaged in research and development activities. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

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

compensation programs with an independent compensation consultant and utilize industry benchmarking in an effort to ensure competitiveness compared to similar biotechnology and biopharmaceutical companies with which we compete for talent, as well as fair and equitable treatment across our workforce with respect to gender, race, and other personal characteristics.

We are an equal opportunity employer and we maintain policies that prohibit unlawful discrimination based on race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, national origin/ancestry, age, disability, marital and veteran status. Our employees are not part of any collective bargaining agreements, and we believe that we have good relations with our employees.

Facilities

Our principal executive offices are located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. We primarily operate in office and laboratory spaces in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania pursuant to a lease that expires in March 2034. Additionally, we lease office and lab space in Boston, Massachusetts pursuant to a lease that expires in November 2030. We also operate in a cell therapy manufacturing facility in Branchburg, New Jersey pursuant to a lease expiring in February 2037. We believe that our current facilities are adequate to meet our ongoing needs. We have leases for lab and office space we’ve currently vacated in Philadelphia with expirations in December 2025 and October 2031 that we are actively marketing for sublease. Additionally, we have a lease for office space in Seattle that expires in September 2030 that is currently under a sublease that expires in November 2025.

Legal proceedings

We are not currently a party to any material legal proceedings. From time to time, we may become involved in other litigation or legal proceedings relating to claims arising from the ordinary course of business.

​

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

Risk Factor Summary

Below is a summary of material factors that make an investment in our common stock speculative or risky. Importantly, this summary does not address all the risks and uncertainties that we face. Additional discussion of the risks and uncertainties summarized in this risk factor summary, as well as other risks and uncertainties that we face, can be found under “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” and “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The below summary is qualified in its entirety by those more complete discussions of such risks and uncertainties.

Risk Factors

The following risk factors and other information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K should be carefully considered. The risks described below are not the only ones facing us. The occurrence of any of the following risks, or of additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe to be immaterial, could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Risks related to our financial position and capital requirements

Our limited operating history may make it difficult for you to evaluate the success of our business to date and to assess our future viability.

We are an early stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history. Our operations to date have been limited to organizing and staffing our company, business planning, raising capital, conducting discovery and research activities, filing patent applications, identifying potential product candidates, conducting clinical trials of CNTY-101, undertaking preclinical studies, in-licensing intellectual property, and acquiring and integrating Clade Therapeutics, Inc., or Clade. We have not yet demonstrated our ability to successfully complete a clinical trial, or submit a biologics license application, or BLA, for a product candidate, obtain regulatory approval for any product candidate, manufacture a product at a commercial-scale or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales, marketing, and distribution activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Consequently, any assumptions you make about our future success or viability may not be as informed as they could be if we had a longer operating history.

We have incurred significant operating losses since our inception and expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future.

We have incurred significant operating losses since our inception. If our product candidates are not successfully developed and approved, we may never generate any revenue. Our net losses for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023 were $126.6 million and $136.7 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2024, we had an accumulated deficit of $782.3 million.

Substantially all of our losses have resulted from expenses incurred in connection with our research and development programs, our clinical trials of CNTY-101, our acquisition of Clade, our acquisition of IPR&D and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. All of our product candidates will require the expenditure of substantial additional development time and resources before we would be able to apply for or receive regulatory approvals and begin realizing product sales. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, and we anticipate these losses will increase as we continue our development of, seek regulatory approval for, and potentially commercialize any of our product candidates and seek to identify, assess, acquire, in-license, or develop additional product candidates. Our prior losses, combined with expected future losses, have had and will continue to have a negative effect on our stockholders’ deficit and working capital.

We expect that it will be several years, if ever, before we have a commercialized product. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if, and as, we:

We may never succeed in any or all of these activities and, even if we do, we may never generate revenue.

We have never generated revenue from product sales and may never achieve or maintain profitability.

We have one product candidate in clinical development for multiple indications and no product candidates approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue. To become and remain profitable, we must develop and eventually commercialize product candidates with significant market potential, which will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities. These activities can include completing preclinical studies and initiating and completing clinical trials of our product candidates, obtaining marketing approval for these product candidates, manufacturing, marketing, and selling those products that are approved and satisfying any post-marketing requirements. We may never succeed in any or all of these activities and, even if we do, we may never generate sufficient revenues to achieve profitability. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with biologics product development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses or when, or if, we will be able to achieve profitability.

Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability. Our failure to become and remain profitable would decrease the value of our company and could impair our ability to raise capital, maintain our research and development efforts, expand our business, or continue our operations.

We will require additional funding in order to finance operations. If we are unable to raise capital when needed, or on acceptable terms, we could be forced to delay, reduce, or eliminate our product development programs or commercialization efforts.

Developing biopharmaceutical products, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, is a time-consuming, expensive, and uncertain process that takes years to complete. Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception, and we expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we conduct preclinical activities and clinical trials of, and seek regulatory and marketing approval for, our product candidates. Even if one or more of our product candidates is approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate. We have financed our operations primarily through private placements of our securities and our initial public offering of common stock, or IPO, which closed in June 2021. Our research and development expenses increased from $92.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2023 to $107.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2024. As of December 31, 2024, we had cash, and cash equivalents of $58.4 million and investments of $161.7 million. Based on our research and development plans, we believe our existing cash, cash equivalents and investments will be sufficient to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditures requirements. Based on our current business plans, we believe our cash, cash equivalents and investments will be sufficient for us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditures into the fourth quarter of 2026.

Attempting to secure additional financing will divert our management from our day-to-day activities, which may impair or delay our ability to develop our product candidates. In addition, demands on our cash resources may change as a result of many factors currently unknown to us including, but not limited to, any unforeseen costs we may incur as a result of preclinical study or clinical trial delays, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned. If we are unable to obtain funding on a timely basis or at all, we may be required to significantly curtail or stop one or more of our research or development programs.

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to our technologies or product candidates.

Until and unless we can generate substantial product revenue, we expect to finance our cash needs through a combination of equity offerings and debt financings, and potentially through additional license and development agreements or strategic partnerships or collaborations with third parties. Financing may not be available in sufficient amounts or on reasonable terms. In addition, market volatility resulting from inflation, pandemics, political unrest and hostilities, or other factors could adversely impact our ability to access capital as and when needed. We have no commitments for any additional financing and will likely be required to raise such financing through the sale of additional securities. If we sell equity or equity-linked securities, our current stockholders may be diluted, and the terms may include liquidation or other preferences that are senior to or otherwise adversely affect the rights of our stockholders. In July 2022, we entered into a sales agreement, or the Sales Agreement, with Cowen and Company, LLC, or Cowen, pursuant to which we may offer and sell shares of our common stock having an aggregate offering price of up to $150 million from time to time through Cowen acting as our sales agent, or the 2022 ATM Facility. For the year ended December 31, 2024, 4,084,502 shares of common stock were issued and sold pursuant to the Sales Agreement at a weighted-average price of $4.50 per share, resulting in approximately $18.4 million in gross proceeds.. In April 2024, we entered into a securities purchase agreement, or the Securities Purchase Agreement, with certain institutional accredited investors, or the PIPE Investors, pursuant to which we agreed to issue and sell to the PIPE Investors in a private placement an aggregate of 15,873,011 shares of common stock at a price per share of $3.78, or the Private Placement. We received aggregate gross proceeds from the Private Placement of approximately $60 million, before deducting placement agent fees and offering expenses.

Moreover, if we issue debt, we may need to dedicate a substantial portion of our operating cash flow to paying principal and interest on such debt and we may need to comply with operating restrictions, such as limitations on incurring additional debt, which could impair our ability to acquire, sell, or license intellectual property rights and impede our ability to conduct our business. Furthermore, the issuance of additional securities, whether equity or debt, by us, or the possibility of such issuance, may cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

If we raise funds through additional licensing or collaboration arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our product candidates or grant licenses under our intellectual property on terms that are not favorable to us. In addition, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with product development, we are unable to predict the timing or amount of increased expenses or when or if we will be able to achieve or maintain profitability.

If we are unable to regain compliance with the listing standards of Nasdaq, our common stock may become delisted, which could have a material adverse effect on the liquidity of our common stock.

Our common stock is listed on The Nasdaq Global Select Market, which imposes continued listing requirements with respect to listed securities, including a minimum bid price requirement.

As previously disclosed, on February 26, 2025, we received notice from the Listing Qualifications staff of The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, or Nasdaq, that, because the closing bid price for our common stock had fallen below $1.00 per share for 30 consecutive trading days, we no longer complied with the minimum bid price requirement for continued listing on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under Nasdaq Listing Rule 5450(a)(1). In accordance with Nasdaq listing rules, we have an initial compliance period of 180 calendar days, or until August 25, 2025, to regain compliance with the minimum bid price requirement. To regain compliance, the closing bid price of our common stock must meet or exceed $1.00 per share for a minimum of 10 consecutive trading days prior to August 25, 2025. If we do not regain compliance by August 25, 2025, we may be eligible for an additional 180 calendar day compliance period if we apply to transfer the listing of our common stock to the Nasdaq Capital Market and meet the continued listing requirement for the market value of our publicly held shares and all other initial listing standards for the Nasdaq Capital Market, with the exception of the minimum bid price requirement, and provide written notice of our intention to cure the minimum bid price deficiency during the second compliance period. As part of its review process, Nasdaq will make a determination as to whether it believes we will be able to cure this deficiency. If Nasdaq staff determines that we will not be able to cure the deficiency, or if we are otherwise not eligible for such additional compliance period, Nasdaq will provide notice that our common stock will be subject to delisting. We would have the right to appeal any determination to delist our common stock, and our common stock would remain listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market until the appeal process is complete.

There can be no assurance that we will be able to regain compliance with the minimum bid price requirement, otherwise maintain compliance with other applicable Nasdaq listing rules, or be successful in appealing any delisting determination. If Nasdaq delists our common stock, it is unlikely that we will be able to list our common stock on another national securities exchange and, as a result, we expect our securities would be quoted on an over-the-counter market. If this were to occur, we and our stockholders could face significant adverse consequences, including limited availability of market quotations and analyst coverage for our common stock, and reduced liquidity for trading of our securities, all of which would likely reduce the market price of our common stock. In addition, our common stock could be considered a “penny stock,” which will require brokers trading in our common stock to adhere to more stringent rules and possibly result in reduced trading activity in the secondary trading market for our common stock. Delisting could result in additional adverse consequences including reduced ability to issue additional securities or obtain additional financing on terms acceptable to us, or at all, as well as the potential loss of confidence of our customers, suppliers and employees, any of which could harm our business and future prospects. Even the perception that we are at heightened risk of delisting could also result in certain of the above these consequences, which could negatively impact the market price and trading volume of our common stock, and harm our stockholders and our business.

Our ability to utilize our net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes may be limited.

To the extent that we continue to generate taxable losses, subject to certain limitations, unused losses will carryforward to offset future taxable income, if any, until such unused losses expire. Under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, if a corporation undergoes an ownership change (generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage points change (by value) in its equity ownership over a rolling three-year period), the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change net operating losses and other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change income may be limited. We were formed in 2018 as Century Therapeutics, Inc., or Prior Century. In 2019, in connection with our investment from Bayer, Prior Century contributed substantially all of its operating assets and cash to a newly formed entity, Century Therapeutics, LLC. Our business was operated through Century Therapeutics, LLC, until February 2021, at which time we converted into a Delaware C corporation. Upon completion of this conversion, Prior Century, whose only significant asset was its equity investment in Century Therapeutics, LLC, merged with the C corporation, and in connection therewith the C corporation changed its name to “Century Therapeutics, Inc.” We believe that Prior Century or we may have experienced an ownership change in the past, which may affect our ability to utilize our net operating loss carryforwards. In addition, we may experience ownership changes in the future as a result of shifts in our stock ownership, some of which are outside our control. Similar limitations will apply to our ability to carry forward any unused tax credits to offset future taxable income.

Changes in tax law may adversely affect us or our investors.

​

The rules dealing with U.S. federal, state and local income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Treasury Department. Changes to tax laws (which changes may have retroactive application) could adversely affect us or holders of our common stock. For example, under Section 174 of the Code, in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2021, expenses that are incurred for research and development in the U.S. will be capitalized and amortized, which may have an adverse effect on our cash flow. In recent years, many such changes have been made, and changes are likely to continue to occur in the future. It cannot be predicted whether, when, in what form or with what effective dates tax laws, regulations and rulings may be enacted, promulgated or issued, which could result in an increase in our or our shareholders’ tax liability or require changes in the manner in which we operate in order to minimize or mitigate any adverse effects of changes in tax law.

Our Option Agreement with Bayer HealthCare LLC may require us to sell certain of our product candidates, which may limit the value we could generate from our product candidates.

We are party to an option agreement, or the Option Agreement, with Bayer HealthCare LLC, or Bayer, pursuant to which Bayer was granted certain bidding rights relating to the potential transfer of rights with respect to certain product candidates being researched and developed by us which are comprised of allogeneic iPSC-derived natural killer cells, macrophages or dendritic cells, which we refer to as the Research Products. Under the Option Agreement, Bayer was granted a right of first refusal, or ROFR, to submit bids for the transfer or license of rights to research, develop and/or commercialize certain Research Products, which we refer to as the Research Product Rights. While CNTY-101 is no longer included in the Bayer option rights, any other wholly owned product candidate comprised of iNK cells that we develop in the future are subject to the terms of the Option Agreement. Bayer may exercise its ROFR for up to four of the first ten Research Products for which an IND is submitted, subject to certain limitations.

If Bayer exercises its ROFR for one of our Research Products, we may be required to transfer such Research Product (by sale, license, or other structure to be negotiated) to Bayer for a market value as determined by our board of directors, and such determination of market value may ultimately prove to be lower than the actual realizable value of applicable Research Product. There can be no guarantee that we will utilize the proceeds received in connection with the exercise of Bayer’s ROFR in a manner which will provide us with greater value than if we had retained the Research Product or sold such Research Product to another party. Any failure to realize or utilize the full value of our Research Products due to the Option Agreement could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operation.

Unstable market and economic conditions may have serious adverse consequences on our business, financial condition, and stock price.

The global credit and financial markets have experienced extreme volatility and disruptions in the past several years, including severely diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, increases in unemployment rates and uncertainty about economic stability. We cannot assure you that further deterioration in credit and financial markets and confidence in economic conditions will not occur. Our general business strategy and ability to raise capital may be adversely affected by any such economic downturn, volatile business environment, or continued unpredictable and unstable market conditions, including as a result of liquidity constraints, failures and instability in U.S. and international financial banking systems. If the current equity and credit markets deteriorate further, or fail to improve, it may make any necessary debt or equity financing more difficult, more costly, and more dilutive. Failure to secure any necessary financing in a timely manner and on favorable terms could have a material adverse effect on our growth strategy, financial performance, and stock price and could require us to delay or abandon clinical development plans. In addition, there is a risk that one or more of our current service providers, manufacturers, and other partners may not survive these difficult economic times, which could directly affect our ability to attain our operating goals on schedule and on budget.

In addition, the stock markets have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have affected and continue to affect the market prices of equity securities of many companies. These fluctuations have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of those companies. Further, the impacts geopolitical turmoil, such as the ongoing Ukrainian War and Israel-Hamas war (including any escalation or expansion), social unrest, political instability in the United States and elsewhere, terrorism, cyberwarfare or other acts of war, could lead to disruption, instability and volatility in the global markets, which may have an adverse impact on our business or ability to access the capital markets. Broad market and industry factors, including potentially worsening economic conditions and other adverse effects, or developments relating to pandemics, political, regulatory, and other market conditions, may negatively affect the market price of shares of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance.

Adverse developments affecting the financial services industry, such as actual events or concerns involving liquidity, defaults or non-performance by financial institutions or transactional counterparties, could adversely affect our current and projected business operations and financial condition and results of operations.

Events involving limited liquidity, defaults, non-performance or other adverse developments that affect financial institutions, transactional counterparties or other companies in the financial services industry or the financial services industry generally, or concerns or rumors about any events of these kinds or other similar risks, have in the past and may in the future lead to market-wide liquidity problems. For example, in early 2023, several financial institutions closed and were taken in receivership by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or FDIC. Even though we assess our banking and customer relationships as we believe necessary or appropriate, our access to funding sources and other credit arrangements in amounts adequate to finance or capitalize our current and projected future business operations could be significantly impaired by factors that affect us, the financial services industry or economy in general. These factors could include, among others, events such as liquidity constraints or failures, the ability to perform obligations under various types of financial, credit or liquidity agreements or arrangements, disruptions or instability in the financial services industry or financial markets, or concerns or negative expectations about the prospects for companies in the financial services industry.

In addition, investor concerns regarding the U.S. or international financial systems could result in less favorable commercial financing terms, including higher interest rates or costs and tighter financial and operating covenants, or systemic limitations on access to credit and liquidity sources, thereby making it more difficult for us to acquire financing on acceptable terms or at all. Any decline in available funding or access to our cash and liquidity resources could, among other risks, adversely impact our ability to meet our operating expenses, financial obligations or fulfill our other obligations, result in breaches of our contractual obligations or result in violations of federal or state wage and hour laws. Any of these impacts, or any other impacts resulting from the factors described above or other related or similar factors not described above, could have material adverse impacts on our liquidity and our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Risks related to our business and industry

We are early in our development efforts. Our business is dependent on our ability to advance our current and future product candidates through preclinical studies and clinical trials, obtain marketing approval, and ultimately commercialize them.

We are early in our development efforts. We have discontinued the Phase 1 ELiPSE-1 clinical trial of CNTY-101 and are currently completing assessments in patients with relapsed or refractory CD19-positive B-cell lymphomas at clinical sites in the US. In the third quarter of 2024, we initiated our Phase 1 CALiPSO-1 clinical trial of CNTY-101 in patients with moderate to severe SLE, including indication-specific cohorts of Lupus Nephritis, or LN, patients, diffuse cutaneous Systemic Sclerosis, or dcSSc, patients and idiopathic inflammatory myopathy, or IIM, patients. We have activated a number of clinical sites in the United States and expect to activate additional sites in the coming months, with ability to enroll patients across indications. We have submitted a clinical trial application (CTA) for the CALiPSO-1 trial to Europe, to include clinical sites in a number of EU countries. Clinical investigation of cell therapies in both B-cell lymphomas and autoimmune diseases including SLE, LN, IIM, and SSc is highly competitive. Moreover, cell therapy modalities as a treatment for autoimmune diseases are a relatively new use, and rheumatology physicians and hospital processes are just beginning to be familiar and comfortable with their use. As a result, the execution and speed of enrollment of clinical trials in these novel and competitive areas are difficult to predict.

Additionally, we are actively engaged in a number of earlier stage discovery programs that may never advance to clinical-stage development. Our ability to generate product revenue, which we do not expect will occur for many years, if ever, will depend heavily on the successful development and eventual commercialization of our product candidates, which may never occur. We currently generate no revenue from product sales and we may never be able to develop or commercialize a marketable product.

Each of our product candidates will require additional preclinical and/or clinical development, regulatory approval in multiple jurisdictions, obtaining manufacturing supply, capacity and expertise, building a commercial organization, or successfully outsourcing commercialization, substantial investment, and significant marketing efforts before we generate any revenue from product sales. Our product candidates must be authorized for marketing by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or the FDA, or certain other foreign regulatory agencies before we may commercialize our product candidates.

The clinical and commercial success of our product candidates will depend on several factors, including the following:

If we do not succeed in one or more of these factors in a timely manner or at all, we could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, if approved, which would materially harm our business. If we are unable to advance our product candidates to clinical development, obtain regulatory approval, and ultimately commercialize our product candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

Our business is highly dependent on the success of our lead product candidate, CNTY-101 and our other product candidates.

While we have successfully initiated the clinical development of CNTY-101 which now has a single sponsored Phase 1 clinical trial ongoing, and one investigator-initiated clinical trial expected to initiate in mid-2025, we cannot guarantee that an IND or CTA application will be cleared to proceed after submission to the FDA or other global health authorities for any additional indications or any of our other product candidates or that CNTY-101 or our other product candidates will be allowed to complete clinical developments and approved for commercialization, on a timely basis or at all. Although certain of our employees have prior experience with clinical trials and regulatory approvals, we have not previously completed any clinical trials or submitted a BLA to the FDA, or similar regulatory approval filings to comparable foreign authorities, for any product candidate, and we cannot be certain that CNTY-101 or our other product candidates will be complete and be successful in clinical trials or receive regulatory approval. The FDA and other comparable global regulatory authorities can delay, limit, or deny development or approval of a product candidate for many reasons. Any delay in obtaining, or inability to obtain, applicable regulatory authorizations or approvals will delay or harm our ability to successfully develop and commercialize CNTY-101 or our other product candidates and materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and growth prospects.

Furthermore, if our clinical trials of CNTY-101 or our other product candidates encounter safety, efficacy, or manufacturing problems, development delays, regulatory issues, or other problems, our development plans

for such product candidates in our pipeline could be significantly impaired, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and growth prospects.

We may also evaluate our product candidates in combination with one or more other cancer therapies that have not yet been approved for marketing by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside of the United States. If the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside of the United States do not approve these other drugs or revoke their approval of, or if safety, efficacy, manufacturing, or supply issues arise with, the drugs we choose to evaluate in combination with any product candidate we develop or combination therapy, we may be unable to obtain approval of or market our product candidates.

Our business depends upon the success of our iPSC-derived allogeneic cell therapy platforms.

Our success depends on our ability to utilize our iPSC-derived allogeneic cell therapy platforms to generate chimeric antigen receptors, or CAR-iNK and CAR-iT cell product candidates, to obtain regulatory approval for product candidates derived from it, and to then commercialize our product candidates addressing one or more indications. Though iPSC-derived cell therapy product candidates have been evaluated by others in clinical trials, our lead product candidate has only commenced evaluation in Phase 1 clinical trials, and we may experience unexpected or adverse results in the future. We are exposed to a number of unforeseen risks and it is difficult to predict the types of challenges and risks that we may encounter during development of our product candidates. All of our product candidates developed from our iPSC allogeneic cell therapy platforms will require significant clinical and non-clinical development, review and approval by the FDA or other regulatory authorities in one or more jurisdictions, substantial investment, access to sufficient commercial manufacturing capacity, and significant marketing efforts before they can be successfully commercialized. In addition, we utilize our proprietary Allo-Evasion technology in our product candidates, which has only been tested in our initial clinical trials, and we may modify our technology for additional product candidates and such technology as so modified will not have been tested in a clinical setting. If any of our product candidates encounter safety or efficacy problems, including as a result of our use or modification of our Allo-Evasion technology, developmental delays, or regulatory issues or other problems, such problems could impact the development plans for our other product candidates because all of our product candidates are based on the same core iPSC technology.

Additionally, a key element of our strategy is to use and expand our iPSC allogeneic cell therapy platforms to build a pipeline of product candidates and progress those product candidates through clinical development for the treatment of a variety of different types of diseases. Although our research and development efforts to date have been focused on identifying a pipeline of product candidates, we may not be able to develop product candidates that a regulatory agency, such as the FDA, will consider safe and effective. Even if we are successful in building our pipeline, the potential product candidates that we identify may not be suitable for clinical development, including as a result of being shown to have harmful side effects or other characteristics that indicate that they are unlikely to be approvable or marketable and achieve market acceptance. If we do not successfully develop, obtain approval for, and begin to commercialize any product candidates for which we receive approval, we will face difficulty in obtaining product revenue in future periods, which could result in significant harm to our financial position and adversely affect our share price.

Utilizing CAR-iNK and CAR-iT cells represents a novel approach to immuno-oncology treatment of cancer and autoimmune diseases, and we must overcome significant challenges in order to develop, commercialize, and manufacture our product candidates.

We have concentrated our research and development efforts on developing CAR-iNK and CAR-iT cell therapies. The processes and requirements imposed by the FDA or other applicable regulatory authorities may cause delays and additional costs in obtaining approvals for our product candidates. Because our iPSC-derived allogeneic cell therapy platforms are novel, and cell-based therapies are relatively new, regulatory agencies may lack experience in evaluating our product candidates utilizing CAR-iNK and CAR-iT cells. This novelty may lengthen the regulatory review process, including the time it takes for the FDA to review our IND applications, if and when submitted, increase our development costs, and delay or prevent commercialization of our iPSC-derived allogeneic cell therapy platform products. Additionally, advancing novel immuno-oncology and autoimmune cell therapies creates significant challenges for us, including:

We must be able to overcome these challenges in order for us to successfully develop, commercialize, and manufacture our product candidates utilizing CAR-iNK and CAR-iT cells. In addition, although CNTY-101 and our future product candidates may differ in certain ways from other cancer immunotherapies and autoimmune diseases, including CD19-directed autologous CAR-T cell immunotherapies, serious adverse events, deaths or other unexpected safety issues in other companies’ clinical trials or that are discovered from post-marketing data sources involving cancer immunotherapies, more generally, even if unrelated to our product candidates, could negatively impact our business. For example, in November 2023, the FDA announced that it would be conducting an investigation into reports of T cell malignancies following BCMA-directed or CD19-directed autologous CAR-T cell immunotherapies following reports of T cell lymphoma in patients receiving these therapies. In January 2024, the FDA determined that new safety information related to T cell malignancies should be included in the labeling with boxed warning language on these malignancies for all currently approved BCMA- and CD-19-directed genetically modified autologous T cell immunotherapies. While CNTY 101 is designed to utilize a different mechanism of action, FDA’s ongoing post-market monitoring of CAR-T therapies could result in increased government regulation, unfavorable public perception and publicity, potential impacts on enrollment in our clinical trials, potential regulatory delays in the testing or approval of our product candidates, stricter labeling requirements for those product candidates that may receive approval, and a decrease in demand for any such product candidates.

​

We have not yet demonstrated long-term stability of cryopreserved CAR-iNK cells.

We have not yet demonstrated long-term stability of cryopreserved CAR-iNK cells and, therefore, do not know if we will be able to store the cryopreserved cells for extended periods of time. If we are unable to demonstrate long-term stability, we will need to reduce the manufacturing batch size to ensure that the material we produce will be used before it expires. In that case, the scaling of our production processes will not deliver the efficiencies we expect, and the cost per dose of our product candidates will be substantially higher. We may also encounter difficulties not only in developing freezing and thawing methodologies for large-scale use, but it is also possible that the freezing and thawing methodologies we develop and implement will not sufficiently preserve the function of one or more of our product candidates, thereby potentially negatively impacting certain clinical results.  

Gene-editing is a rapidly developing technology, and our success is dependent upon our ability to effectively utilize this technology in our product candidates and implement future technological advancements in gene-editing.

We use a CRISPR-based nuclease to enable precise editing of the iPSC genome. For CNTY-101, we used the nuclease Cpf-1 but have shifted to CRISPR-MAD7 for all subsequent product candidates, and we may utilize CRISPR-MAD7 for CNTY-101 in the future. We decided to shift to CRISPR-MAD7 because we entered into a license agreement with Inscripta, Inc. and obtained a non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable license to a patent portfolio covering the composition, production, and use of CRISPR-MAD7. We have optimized the protocols to produce CRISPR-MAD7 and have achieved similar cutting and HDR efficiencies compared to Cpf-1, but we do not have as much experimental data with CRISPR-MAD7 as we do with Cpf1. We may encounter technical liabilities associated with CRISPR-MAD7 that could force us to use a different CRISPR nuclease which could delay our programs and require us to enter into a license agreement for additional technology, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all.

Our gene-editing technology may create unintended changes to the DNA such as a non-target site gene-edit, a large deletion, or a DNA translocation, any of which could impact timelines for new product generation. We have developed various genome characterization assays to identify deletions/insertions that can occur as a result of gene editing.

Although we believe CAR-iNK and CAR-iT based therapies do not require further modification to avoid the risk of graft versus host disease, or GvHD, the gene-editing of our product candidates utilizing CAR-iNK and CAR-iT cells may not be successful in limiting the risk of GvHD or premature rejection by patients.

In addition, the cell therapy industry is rapidly developing, and our competitors may introduce new gene-editing technologies that render our technology less attractive. As the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities begin issuing product approvals for gene-editing products, post-market adverse events or findings could adversely impact developers of gene-editing technologies or competitive pressures may force us to implement new gene-editing technologies at a substantial cost or delay in our clinical development process. In addition, regulatory requirements in the United States and in other jurisdictions governing the development of gene therapy products have changed frequently and may continue to change in the future. Our competitors may have greater financial, technical, and personnel resources that allow them to implement new gene-editing technologies before we can. We cannot be certain that we will be able to implement new gene-editing technologies on a timely basis or at a cost that is acceptable to us. If we are unable to implement technological advancements consistent with industry standards, our operations and financial condition may be adversely affected.

Our product candidates for which we intend to seek approval as biologic products may face competition sooner than anticipated.

The Affordable Care Act, or the ACA, includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a highly similar or “biosimilar” product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first approved by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first approved. During this 12-year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a full BLA for the competing product containing the sponsor’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity, and potency of their product. The law is complex and is still being interpreted and implemented by the FDA. As a result, its ultimate impact, implementation, and meaning are subject to uncertainty. In addition, complexities associated with the larger, and often more complex, structures of biological products such as cell and gene products we are developing, as well as the processes by which

such products are manufactured, pose significant hurdles to implementation of the abbreviated approval pathway that are still being worked out by the FDA.

We believe that any of our product candidates approved as a biological product under a BLA should qualify for the 12-year period of exclusivity. However, there is a risk that this exclusivity could be shortened due to congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider our product candidates to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for competition sooner than anticipated. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of litigation. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, will be substituted for any one of our reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biological products is not yet clear, and will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing. This includes FDA’s evolving view of whether switching studies are needed to support a demonstration of interchangeability.

Jurisdictions in addition to the United States have established abbreviated pathways for regulatory approval of biological products that are biosimilar to earlier approved reference products. For example, the European Union has had an established regulatory pathway for biosimilars since 2004. However, biosimilars can only be authorized once the period of data exclusivity on the reference biological medicine has expired.

The increased likelihood of biosimilar competition has increased the risk of loss of innovators’ market exclusivity. Due to this risk, and uncertainties regarding patent protection, if our product candidates are approved for marketing, it is not possible to predict the length of market exclusivity for any particular product with certainty based solely on the expiration of the relevant patent(s) or the current forms of regulatory exclusivity. It is also not possible to predict changes in United States regulatory law that might reduce biological product regulatory exclusivity. The loss of market exclusivity for a product would likely materially and negatively affect revenues and we may not generate adequate or sufficient revenues from them or be able to reach or sustain profitability.

Preclinical and clinical development involve a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome. We may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of our current product candidates or any future product candidates.

All but one of our product candidates are in preclinical development and the risk of failure for all of our product candidates is high. It is impossible to predict when or if any of our discovery or product candidates will receive regulatory approval. To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to commercialize any product candidates, we must demonstrate through extensive preclinical studies and lengthy, complex, and expensive clinical trials that our product candidates are safe and effective in humans. Clinical testing can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process.

The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials or early cohorts of our clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials or later cohorts of our clinical trials. Our initial clinical trials will begin with relatively small cohorts before expanding in size in subsequent cohorts. The initial cohorts of early-stage clinical trials often involve enrollment of a small number of patients and may not be as predictive as trials with larger cohorts. Additionally, if safety issues arise in an early cohort, we may be delayed or prevented from subsequently expanding into larger trial cohorts. We may be unable to establish clinical endpoints that applicable regulatory authorities would consider clinically meaningful, and a clinical trial can fail at any stage of testing. Differences in trial design between early-stage clinical trials and later-stage clinical trials make it difficult to extrapolate the results of earlier clinical trials to later clinical trials.

Moreover, clinical data is often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of their products. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have

suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or unfavorable safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. There is typically a high rate of failure of product candidates proceeding through clinical trials. Most product candidates that commence clinical trials are never approved as products and there can be no assurance that any of our current clinical trials or future clinical trials, if allowed to proceed, will ultimately be successful or support clinical development of our current or any of our future product candidates.

We may experience delays in initiating or completing clinical trials. We also may experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, any of our current clinical trials or future clinical trials that we could conduct that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize our lead product candidates or any future product candidates, including:

Patient enrollment, a significant factor in the timing of clinical trials, is affected by many factors including the size and nature of the patient population, the number and location of clinical sites we enroll, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the eligibility and exclusion criteria for the trial, the design of the clinical trial, the inability to obtain and maintain patient consents, the risk that enrolled participants will drop out before completion, competing clinical trials, and clinicians’ patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the product candidate being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new drugs or therapeutic biologics that may be approved for the indications being investigated by us, and other factors, such as future pandemics, over which we have no control. Furthermore, we are relying and expect to continue to rely on our collaborators, CROs, and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our current and future clinical trials, including the patient enrollment process, and we have limited influence over their performance. Additionally, we could encounter delays if treating physicians encounter unresolved ethical issues associated with enrolling patients in our current and future clinical trials of our product candidates in lieu of prescribing existing treatments that have established safety and efficacy profiles.

We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, or the FDA or other regulatory authorities, or if a clinical trial is recommended for suspension or termination by the Data Safety Monitoring Board for such trial. A suspension or termination may be imposed due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a product or treatment, failure to establish or achieve clinically meaningful trial endpoints, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions, or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. Clinical studies may also be delayed or terminated as a result of ambiguous or negative interim results. Many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates. Further, the FDA or other regulatory authorities may disagree with our clinical trial design and our interpretation of data from clinical trials, or may change the requirements for approval even after they have reviewed and commented on the design for our clinical trials.

Our product development costs will increase if we experience delays in clinical testing or marketing approvals. We do not know whether any of our clinical trials will begin as planned, will need to be restructured or will be completed on schedule, or at all. Significant clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates and may allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, potentially impairing our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and harming our business and results of operations. Any delays in our clinical development programs may harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations significantly.

As an organization, we have limited experience designing and implementing clinical trials. Failure to adequately design a trial, or incorrect assumptions about the design of the trial, could adversely affect the ability to initiate the trial, enroll patients, complete the trial, or obtain regulatory approval on the basis of the trial results, as well as lead to increased or unexpected costs.

The design and implementation of clinical trials is a complex process. While the employees who will implement our clinical trials have experience in the field, we, as an organization, have not completed any clinical trials. We have limited experience designing and implementing clinical trials, and we may not successfully or cost-effectively design and implement clinical trials that achieve our desired clinical endpoints efficiently, or at all. A clinical trial that is not well designed may delay or even prevent initiation of the trial, can lead to increased difficulty in enrolling patients, may make it more difficult to obtain regulatory approval for the product candidate on the basis of the study results, or, even if a product candidate is approved, could make it

more difficult to commercialize the product successfully or obtain reimbursement from third-party payors. Additionally, a trial that is not well-designed could be inefficient or more expensive than it otherwise would have been, or we may incorrectly estimate the costs to implement the clinical trial, which could lead to a shortfall in funding.

Interim, topline, or preliminary data from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data becomes 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 publicly disclose interim, topline, or preliminary data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials, which is based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or 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 and carefully evaluate all data. Further, modifications or improvements to our manufacturing processes for a therapy may result in changes to the characteristics or behavior of the product candidate that could cause our product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of our ongoing clinical trials. As a result, the topline results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data has been received and fully evaluated. Topline data also remains 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, topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data is available.

Preliminary or interim data from clinical trials is 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. Adverse differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects. Additionally, disclosure of preliminary or interim data by us or by our competitors could result in volatility in the price of our common stock.

Further, others, including regulatory agencies, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions, or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate, and our company in general. If the interim, topline, or preliminary data that we report differs from actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, any of our potential product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, operating results, prospects, or financial condition.

Beyond CNTY-101, we may not be able to file our INDs or CTAs to commence clinical trials on the timelines we expect, and even if we are able to, the FDA or other global health authorities may not permit us to proceed.

We expect our pipeline to yield multiple additional INDs or CTAs, including INDs or CTAs for CNTY-308,and CNTY-341 product candidates from our iPSC-derived allogeneic cell therapy platforms. We cannot be sure that submission of an IND will result in the FDA allowing testing and clinical trials to begin, or that, once begun, issues will not arise that result in suspension or termination of such clinical trials. The manufacturing of our product candidates remains an emerging and evolving field. Accordingly, we expect chemistry, manufacturing and control related topics, including product specifications, will be a focus of IND reviews, and unfavorable findings may delay or prevent the FDA from allowing us to proceed with clinical trials. Further, FDA guidelines for IND submissions may differ from those in the EU. For example, the cell line used to develop IPSC-308 and IPSC-341 was manufactured by Catalent under EU standards. Because the FDA guidelines with respect to the manufacture and utilization of donor cells is not the same as in the EU, IND clearance for IPSC-308, IPSC-341 and any other product candidates using cell lines developed under non-FDA standards may be delayed or ultimately not achieved which could impact our development timelines and harm our business, operating results, prospects, or financial condition.

We are pursuing multiple programs and product candidates in our novel cell therapy development pipeline using an approach that is designed to enable rapid incorporation of new product features. If we elect to incorporate these new features into next-generation product candidates, this may render our existing product candidates obsolete, and we may devote our limited resources in pursuit of a particular program for which there is a greater potential for success and fail to capitalize on development opportunities or product candidates including those which may be more advanced in development.

We focus on the development of programmed cellular immunotherapies for patients with cancer and autoimmune diseases, including off-the-shelf NK- and T-cell product candidates derived from clonal master engineered iPSC lines. Because our iPSC-derived allogeneic cell therapy platforms are designed to enable rapid incorporation of novel functional product features in an evolving clinical setting, we may elect to incorporate these discoveries into next-generation product candidates that render our existing product candidates, including product candidates under clinical development, obsolete. Additionally, because we have limited financial and personnel resources, we may elect or be required to abandon or delay the pursuit of opportunities with existing or future product candidates, including those that may be more advanced in development than those we ultimately elect to pursue. Due to these factors, our spending on current and future research and development programs and product candidates and the scientific innovation arising from these expenditures may not yield commercially viable product candidates.

We intend to study our product candidates in patient populations with significant comorbidities that may result in deaths or serious adverse events or unacceptable side effects and require us to abandon or limit our clinical development activities.

Patients we intend to treat with our product candidates may also receive chemotherapy agents, radiation, chronic immunosuppressants, biologics/monoclonal antibodies, and/or other cell therapy treatments in the course of treatment of their disease, and may therefore experience side effects or adverse events, including death, that are unrelated to our product candidates. While these side effects or adverse events may be unrelated to our product candidates, they may still affect the success of our clinical studies. The inclusion of critically ill patients in our clinical studies may result in deaths or other adverse medical events due to underlying disease or to other therapies or medications that such patients may receive. Any of these events could prevent us from advancing our product candidates through clinical development, and from obtaining regulatory approval, and would impair our ability to commercialize our product candidates, if approved. Any inability to advance our existing product candidates or any other product candidate through clinical development would have a material adverse effect on our business.

We may experience difficulties identifying and enrolling patients in our clinical trials. Difficulty in enrolling patients could delay or prevent clinical trials of CNTY-101 or our other product candidates.

Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in clinical trials of CNTY-101 is critical to our success. The timing of our clinical trials depends in part on the speed at which we can recruit patients to participate in testing CNTY-101, and we may experience delays in our clinical trials if we encounter difficulties in enrollment. The eligibility criteria of our clinical trials may limit the pool of available study participants as it will require patients to have specific characteristics that we can measure to ensure their disease is either severe enough or not too advanced to include them in a clinical trial. The process of finding and diagnosing patients may prove costly. We also may not be able to identify, recruit, and enroll a sufficient number of appropriate patients to complete our clinical trials because of demographic criteria for prospective patients, the perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under study, the proximity and availability of clinical trial sites for prospective patients, and the patient referral practices of physicians. The availability and efficacy of competing therapies and clinical trials can also adversely impact enrollment. If patients are unwilling to participate in our trials for any reason, the timeline for recruiting patients, conducting trials, and obtaining regulatory approval of potential products may be delayed, the commercial prospects of CNTY-101 or our other product candidates will be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenue from any of these product candidates could be delayed or prevented. Furthermore, our inability to enroll a sufficient number of

patients for our clinical trials could result in significant delays or may require us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether. Enrollment delays in our clinical trials may result in increased development costs and jeopardize our ability to achieve our clinical development timeline and goals, including the dates by which we will commence, complete, and receive results from clinical trials. Enrollment delays in our clinical trials may also jeopardize our ability to commence sales of and generate revenues from CNTY-101 or our other product candidates. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition, and prospects significantly.

CNTY-101 and our other product candidates may cause adverse events or undesirable side effects that could delay or prevent its regulatory approval, limit the commercial profile of an approved label, or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval, if any.

Cell therapy is still a relatively new approach to disease treatment and adverse side effects could develop. There also is the potential risk of delayed adverse events following exposure to cell therapy products due to persistent biologic activity of the genetic material or other components of products used to carry the genetic material.

We have been collecting data about CNTY-101 in preclinical studies,our Phase 1 ELiPSE-1 clinical trial, and Phase 1 CALiPSO-1 clinical trial. While, to date, CNTY-101 has been generally well tolerated, the information regarding the side-effect profile of CNTY-101 and other future products in humans is limited. Accordingly, we may experience unexpected side effects and/or higher levels of known side effects in clinical trials, including adverse events known in cell therapies. These include the potential for, among others, cytokine release syndrome, or CRS, and neurotoxicity, or immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome. B-cell directed therapies may also demonstrate infusion reactions/hypersensitivity, serious infections, prolonged cytopenias, hypogammaglobulinemia/B-cell aplasia, and secondary malignancies. Some of these events have been noted in our clinical trials, but have not been DLTs or resulted in pauses to enrollment.

Any adverse events or undesirable side effects caused by, or other unexpected properties of, CNTY-101 or our other product candidates could cause us, any future collaborators, an IRB, or ethics committee or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay, or halt clinical trials of our product candidates and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. It is possible that as we progress CNTY-101 or our other product candidates through preclinical and clinical development, or as the use of CNTY-101 or our other product candidates become more widespread if it receives regulatory approval, illnesses, injuries, discomforts, and other adverse events that were not observed in preclinical studies or clinical trials, as well as conditions that did not occur or went undetected, will be reported by patients. If such side effects become known later in development or after approval, such findings may harm our business, financial condition, and prospects significantly. Further, if a serious safety issue is identified in connection with the use of CNTY-101 or our other product candidates commercially or in third-party clinical trials elsewhere, such issues may adversely affect the development potential of CNTY-101 or our other product candidates or result in regulatory authorities restricting our ability to develop or commercialize CNTY-101 or our other product candidates.

Further, if CNTY-101 or any of our other product candidates were to receive regulatory approval and we or others identify undesirable side effects caused by the product (or any other product) after the approval, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the affected product candidate and could substantially increase the costs of commercializing our product candidates and significantly impact our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, if approved, and generate revenues, all of which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

In addition, although CNTY-101 and our future product candidates may differ in certain ways from other cancer immunotherapies and autoimmune diseases, including CD19-directed autologous CAR-T cell immunotherapies, serious adverse events, deaths or other unexpected safety issues in other companies’ clinical trials or that are discovered from post-marketing data sources involving cancer immunotherapies, more generally, even if unrelated to our product candidates, could negatively impact our business. For example, in November 2023, the FDA announced that it would be conducting an investigation into reports of T cell malignancies following BCMA-directed or CD19-directed autologous CAR-T cell immunotherapies following reports of T cell lymphoma in patients receiving these therapies. In January 2024, the FDA determined that new safety information related to T cell malignancies should be included in the labeling with boxed warning language on these malignancies for all currently approved BCMA- and CD-19-directed genetically modified autologous T cell immunotherapies. While CNTY-101 is designed to utilize a different mechanism of action, FDA’s ongoing post-market monitoring of CAR-T therapies could result in increased government regulation, unfavorable public perception and publicity, potential impacts on enrollment in our clinical trials, potential regulatory delays in the testing or approval of our product candidates, stricter labeling requirements for those product candidates that may receive approval, and a decrease in demand for any such product candidates.

​

Public opinion and scrutiny of cell-based immuno-oncology therapies for treating cancer or immune-related disorders, or negative clinical trial results from our cell-based therapy competitors, may impact public perception of our company and product candidates, or impair our ability to conduct our business.

Our iPSC-derived allogeneic cell therapy platforms utilize a relatively novel technology involving the genetic modification of iPSCs and utilization of those modified cells in other individuals, and no iNK cell-based immunotherapy has been approved to date. Public perception may be influenced by claims, such as claims that cell-based immunotherapy is unsafe, unethical, or immoral and, consequently, our approach may not gain the acceptance of the public or the medical community. Negative public reaction to cell-based immunotherapy in general, or negative clinical trial results from our cell-based therapy competitors, could result in greater government regulation and stricter labeling requirements of cell-based immunotherapy products, including any of our product candidates, and could cause a decrease in the demand for any products we may develop. Adverse public attitudes may adversely impact our ability to enroll clinical trials. More restrictive government regulations or negative public opinion could have an adverse effect on our

business or financial condition and may delay or impair the development and commercialization of our product candidates or demand for any products we may develop.

Our research and development activities could be affected or delayed as a result of possible restrictions on animal testing.

Certain laws and regulations require us to test our product candidates on animals before initiating clinical trials involving humans. Animal testing activities have been the subject of controversy and adverse publicity. Animal rights groups and other organizations and individuals have attempted to stop animal testing activities by lobbying for legislation and regulation in these areas and by disrupting these activities through protests and other means. To the extent the activities of these groups are successful, our research and development activities may be interrupted, delayed, or become more expensive.

If we do not achieve our projected development goals in the time frames we announce and expect, the commercialization of our product candidates, if approved, may be delayed.

From time to time, we estimate the timing of the accomplishment of various scientific, clinical, regulatory, manufacturing and other product development goals, which we sometimes refer to as milestones. These milestones may include the commencement or completion of preclinical studies and clinical trials and the submission of regulatory filings, including IND and BLA submissions. From time to time, we may publicly announce the expected timing of some of these milestones. All of these milestones are, and will be, based on a variety of assumptions. The actual timing of these milestones can vary significantly compared to our estimates, in some cases for reasons beyond our control. We may experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, any clinical trials that we conduct that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize our product candidates.

Changes in regulatory requirements, guidance from the FDA and other regulatory authorities, or unanticipated events during our clinical trials of CNTY-101 or our other product candidates may result in changes to preclinical studies or clinical trials or additional preclinical or clinical trial requirements, which could result in increased costs to us and could delay our development timeline.

Regulatory requirements governing biologic drug products, including cell therapy products, are still evolving and it is difficult to determine how long it will take or how much it will cost to obtain regulatory approvals for CNTY-101 or our other product candidates. Changes in regulatory requirements, FDA guidance or guidance from other regulatory agencies, or unanticipated events during our preclinical studies or clinical trials may force us to terminate or adjust our development program.

In addition, the clinical trial requirements of the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities and the criteria these regulators use to determine the safety and efficacy of a product candidate vary substantially according to the type, complexity, novelty, intended use, and market of such product candidates. The regulatory approval process for novel product candidates such as ours can be more expensive and take longer than for other, better known or more extensively studied product candidates. The FDA, or the applicable regulatory authorities, may impose additional preclinical or clinical trial requirements. Amendments to clinical trial protocols would require resubmission to the FDA, or the applicable regulatory authorities as well as IRBs and ethics committees for review and approval, which may adversely impact the cost, timing, or successful completion of a clinical trial. If we experience delays completing, or if we terminate, any of our clinical trials, or if we are required to conduct additional preclinical or clinical trials, the commercial prospects for CNTY-101 or our other product candidates may be harmed and our ability to generate product revenue will be delayed, and it would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

In order to market any product outside of the United States, we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries regarding biologic development and commercialization. The approval process varies from country to country and can involve additional product testing and additional administrative review periods. The time required to obtain approval in other countries might differ from and be

longer than that required to obtain FDA approval. Regulatory approval in one country does not ensure regulatory approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may negatively impact the regulatory process in others.

Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies caused by funding shortages or global health concerns could hinder their ability to hire, retain, or deploy key leadership and other personnel, or otherwise prevent new or modified products from being advanced, developed, cleared or approved, or commercialized in a timely manner or at all, which could negatively impact our business.

Currently, federal agencies in the U.S. are operating under a continuing resolution that is set to expire on September 30, 2025. Without appropriation of additional funding to federal agencies, our business operations related to our product development activities for the U.S. market could be impacted. The ability of the FDA to review and approve new products or regulatory submissions can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, the FDA’s ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new biologics or modifications to cleared or approved biologics to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business.

If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties to conduct, supervise, and monitor our preclinical studies and clinical trials for our product candidates.

We rely on third-party CROs, study sites, and others to conduct, supervise, and monitor our preclinical studies and clinical trials for our product candidates. We expect to continue to rely on third parties, such as CROs, clinical data management organizations, medical institutions, and clinical investigators, to conduct our preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates. Although we have agreements with these third parties governing their activities, we have limited influence over their actual performance and control only certain aspects of their activities. The failure of these third parties to successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, could substantially harm our business because we may be delayed in completing or unable to complete the preclinical studies and clinical trials required to support future approval of CNTY-101 and our other product candidates, or we may not obtain marketing approval for, or commercialize, CNTY-101 and our other product candidates in a timely manner or at all. Moreover, these agreements might terminate for a variety of reasons, including a failure to perform by the third parties. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements, our product development activities would be delayed and our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects may be materially harmed.

Our reliance on these third parties for development activities reduces our control over these activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory, and scientific standards and our reliance on third parties does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. For example, we will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our preclinical studies and clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for such trial. We must also ensure that our preclinical studies and clinical trials are conducted in accordance with GLP regulations, as appropriate. Moreover, the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities require us to comply with GCPs for conducting, recording, and reporting the results of clinical trials to ensure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity, and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. Regulatory authorities enforce these requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, clinical investigators, and trial sites. If we or any of our third parties fail

to comply with applicable GCPs or other regulatory requirements, we or they may be subject to enforcement or other legal actions, the data generated in our preclinical studies and clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional studies.

In addition, we will be required to report certain financial interests of our third-party investigators if these relationships exceed certain financial thresholds or meet other criteria. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may question the integrity of the data from those clinical trials conducted by investigators who may have conflicts of interest.

We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials will comply with the applicable regulatory requirements. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product candidates that were produced under cGMP regulations.

Failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. We also are required to register certain clinical trials and post the results of certain completed clinical trials on a government-sponsored database, www.clinicaltrials.gov, within specified timeframes. Failure to do so can result in enforcement actions and adverse publicity.

The third parties with which we work may also have relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting trials or other therapeutic development activities that could harm our competitive position. In addition, such third parties are not our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such third parties we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our ongoing developmental and preclinical programs. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines, or conduct our preclinical studies or clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols, if these parties are adversely impacted by macroeconomic or other factors limiting or materially affecting their ability to carry out their contractual duties, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our protocols, regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our preclinical studies and clinical trials may be repeated, extended, delayed, or terminated; we may not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, marketing approvals for CNTY-101 and our other product candidates; we may not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize CNTY-101 or our other product candidates; or we or they may be subject to regulatory enforcement actions. As a result, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for CNTY-101 and our other candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed. To the extent we are unable to successfully identify and manage the performance of third-party service providers in the future, our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects may be materially harmed.

If any of our relationships with these third parties terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative providers or to do so on commercially reasonable terms. Switching or adding additional third parties involves additional cost and requires management’s time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new third party commences work. As a result, delays could occur, which could compromise our ability to meet our desired development timelines.

We may expend our limited resources to pursue a particular product candidate or indication and fail to capitalize on product candidates or indications that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

Because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we focus on research programs, therapeutic platforms, and product candidates that we identify for specific indications. As a result, we may forego or delay our pursuit of opportunities with other therapeutic platforms or product candidates or for other indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs, therapeutic platforms, and product candidates for specific

indications may not yield any commercially viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights, including intellectual property rights, to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing, or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights.

We may explore strategic collaborations that may never materialize or we may be required to relinquish important rights to and control over the development and commercialization of our product candidates to any future collaborators.

Our business strategy includes leveraging our strategic partnership with FUJIFILM Cellular Dynamics Inc., or FCDI, and may include additional future partnerships for product development, product commercialization, manufacturing or other strategic objectives. As a result, we may in the future determine to collaborate with additional companies for development and potential commercialization of one or more therapeutic products. At the current time however, we cannot predict what form such a strategic collaboration might take. We are likely to face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic collaborators, and strategic collaborations can be complicated and time-consuming to negotiate and document.

We may not be able to negotiate strategic collaborations on acceptable terms, if at all. Our ability to reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. If we are unable to reach agreements with suitable collaborators on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all, we may have to curtail the development of a product candidate, reduce or delay one or more of our other development programs, delay our potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities, or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to fund and undertake development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional expertise and additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we fail to enter into collaborations and do not have sufficient funds or expertise to undertake the necessary development and commercialization activities, we may not be able to further develop our product candidates or bring them to market or continue to develop our technology platforms and our business may be materially and adversely affected.

If and when we collaborate with a third party for development and commercialization of a product candidate, we can expect to relinquish some or all of the control over the future success of that product candidate to the third party. We are unable to predict when, if ever, we will enter into any strategic partnerships because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with establishing them, including:

Strategic partners may also delay clinical trials, experience financial difficulties, provide insufficient funding, terminate a clinical trial, or abandon a product candidate, which could negatively impact our development efforts. Additionally, strategic partners may not properly maintain, enforce, or defend our intellectual property rights or may use our proprietary information in a manner that could jeopardize or invalidate our proprietary information or expose us to potential litigation, any of which could adversely affect our business, financial position, and operations.

If our collaborations do not result in the successful development and commercialization of products or if one of our collaborators terminates its agreement with us, we may not receive any future research funding or milestone or royalty payments under the collaboration. All of the risks relating to product development, regulatory approval, and commercialization described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K also apply to the activities of our program collaborators. Additionally, subject to its contractual obligations to us, if one of our collaborators is involved in a business combination, the collaborator may deemphasize or terminate the development or commercialization of any product candidate licensed to it by us. If our collaborator terminates its agreement with us, it may find it more difficult to attract new collaborators.

Risks related to manufacturing

The manufacture and distribution of our iPSC-derived cell product candidates is complex and subject to a multitude of risks. These risks could substantially increase our costs and limit the clinical and commercial supply of our product candidates.

The manufacture and supply of our product candidates involve novel processes that are more complex than those required for most drugs, biologics and other cellular immunotherapies and, accordingly, present significant challenges and are subject to multiple risks. These complex processes include reprogramming human somatic cells to obtain iPSCs, genetically engineering these iPSCs, and differentiating the iPSCs to obtain the desired product candidate. As a result of the complexities in manufacturing biologics and distributing cell therapies, the cost to manufacture and distribute biologics and cell therapies in general, and our cell product candidates in particular, is generally higher than traditional small molecule chemical compounds. In addition, our cost of goods development is at an early stage. The actual cost to manufacture and process our product candidates could be greater than we expect and could materially and adversely affect the commercial viability of our product candidates.

We are still developing optimized and reproducible manufacturing processes for clinical and commercial-scale manufacturing of our product candidates, and none of our manufacturing processes have been validated for commercial production of our product candidates. In addition, we are still optimizing our protocols for the supply and transport of our product candidates for distribution to clinical trial sites. Although we are working to develop reproducible and commercially viable manufacturing processes for our product candidates, and effective protocols for the supply and transport of our product candidates, doing so is a difficult and uncertain task.

We may make changes as we continue to develop and refine the manufacturing and distribution processes for our product candidates for clinical trials and commercialization, and we cannot be sure that even minor changes in these processes will not cause our product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of our ongoing and planned clinical trials or the performance of the product once commercialized. In some circumstances, changes in our manufacturing operations, including to our protocols, processes, materials, or facilities used, may require us to perform additional preclinical or comparability studies, or to collect additional clinical data from patients prior to undertaking additional clinical studies or filing for regulatory approval for a product candidate. These requirements may lead to delays in our clinical development and commercialization plans for our product candidates, and may increase our development costs substantially.

Cell-based therapies depend on the availability of reagents and specialized materials and equipment which in each case are required to be acceptable to the FDA and foreign regulatory agencies, and such reagents, materials, and equipment may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. We rely on third-party suppliers for various components, materials, and equipment required for the manufacture of our product candidates and do not have supply arrangements for certain of these components.

Manufacturing our product candidates requires many reagents and other specialty materials and equipment, some of which are manufactured or supplied by small companies with limited resources and experience to support commercial biologics production. To date, we and our clinical cell processing facilities and CMOs have purchased equipment, materials, and disposables, such as automated cell washing devices, automated cell warming units, commercially available media, and cell transfer and wash sets, used for the manufacture of our existing product candidates from third-party suppliers. Some of these suppliers may not have the capacity to support commercial products manufactured under GMP by biopharmaceutical firms or may otherwise be ill-equipped to support our needs. Reagents and other key materials from these suppliers may have inconsistent attributes and introduce variability into our manufactured product candidates, which may contribute to variable patient outcomes and possible adverse events. We rely on the general commercial availability of materials required for the manufacture of our product candidates, and do not have supply contracts with many of these suppliers and may not be able to obtain supply contracts with them on acceptable terms or at all. Even if we are able to enter into such contracts, we may be limited to a sole third party for the supply of certain required components, including our pharmacologic modulators and components for our cell processing media. As a result macroeconomic factors, the business and operations of our suppliers may be disrupted or delayed, and we in turn may experience disruptions or delays in our supply chain. An inability to continue to source product from any of these suppliers, which could be due to the impacts of global pandemics, macroeconomic factors, recent regulatory actions, or requirements affecting the supplier, adverse financial or other strategic developments experienced by a supplier, labor disputes or shortages, unexpected demands, or quality issues, could adversely affect our ability to satisfy demand for our product candidates, which could adversely and materially affect our product sales and operating results or our ability to conduct clinical trials, either of which could significantly harm our business.

If we are required to change suppliers, or modify the components, equipment, materials, or disposables used for the manufacture of our product candidates, we may be required to change our manufacturing operations or clinical trial protocols or to provide additional data to regulatory authorities in order to use any alternative components, equipment, materials, or disposables, any of which could set back, delay, or increase the costs required to complete our clinical development and commercialization of our product candidates. Additionally, any such change or modification may adversely affect the safety, efficacy, stability, or potency of our product candidates, and could adversely affect our clinical development of our product candidates and harm our business.

We rely on third parties for the manufacture of some of our product candidates for development, although we now operate our own manufacturing facility for the production of certain of our product candidates.

We are now operating our own manufacturing facility but still rely on FCDI for the manufacture of some of our product candidates and CMOs for the manufacture of related raw materials for clinical and preclinical development. It is uncertain whether we will be able to utilize our own manufacturing facilities for commercial manufacturing of our products and therefore, we may need to rely on third parties for commercial manufacturing if any of our product candidates receive marketing approval. We have partnered with FCDI for the manufacture and supply of some of our product candidates for future clinical development, as well as to establish commercial supplies of some of our product candidates, if approved. If either of our Manufacturing Agreement or Master Collaboration Agreement with FCDI terminates, and if we need to enter into alternative arrangements, our product development activities could be delayed and our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects may be materially harmed. We completed construction of our own 53,000 square foot GMP manufacturing facility in Branchburg, New Jersey as well as the fit-out and qualifications for the facility in 2022 and the facility is operational.

The facilities used by us, FCDI, and any other manufacturers with which we may collaborate must be approved by the FDA pursuant to inspections that will be conducted after we submit a BLA to the FDA. For manufacturing facilities in which we do not operate, we do not control the manufacturing process of, and are completely dependent on, CMOs for compliance with cGMP requirements for the manufacture of biologic products. If these CMOs cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA or others, they will not be able to secure and/or maintain regulatory approval for their manufacturing facilities. In addition, we have no control over the ability of CMOs to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance, and qualified personnel. If the FDA or a comparable foreign 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. Our failure, or the failure of our CMO, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including clinical holds, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, seizures or recalls of product candidates or products, operating restrictions, and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our product candidates.

Our or a CMO’s failure to execute on our manufacturing requirements, to do so on commercially reasonable terms and comply with cGMP could adversely affect our business in a number of ways, including:

Any performance failure on the part of us or our existing or future CMOs could delay clinical development or marketing approval, and any related remedial measures may be costly or time-consuming to implement. If our current CMOs cannot perform as agreed or if we face manufacturing issues at our own GMP manufacturing facility in Branchburg, New Jersey, we may be required to replace such manufacturers and we may be unable to replace them on a timely basis or at all.

Our current and anticipated future dependence upon CMOs for the manufacture of our product candidates or products may adversely affect our future profit margins and our ability to commercialize any products that receive marketing approval on a timely and competitive basis.

Delays in commissioning and receiving regulatory approvals for our manufacturing facilities could delay our development plans and thereby limit our ability to generate revenues.

We believe that internal cGMP manufacturing is important to facilitate clinical product supply, lower the risk of manufacturing disruptions, and enable more cost-effective manufacturing. We believe our Branchburg, New Jersey facility will allow us to supply certain of our product candidates needed for our early-stage clinical trials and preclinical studies. The operation and maintenance, and regulatory approvals for such facilities, require substantial capital and technical expertise and any delay could limit our development activities and our opportunities for growth, or negatively impact our financial results.

Furthermore, our manufacturing facility will be subject to ongoing, periodic inspection by the FDA and other comparable regulatory agencies to ensure compliance with cGMP. Our failure to follow and document our adherence to these regulations or other regulatory requirements may lead to significant delays in the availability of products for clinical use or may result in the termination of or a hold on a clinical study. Failure to comply with applicable regulations could also result in sanctions being imposed on us, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, a requirement to suspend or put on hold one or more of our clinical trials, failure of regulatory authorities to grant marketing approval of our product candidates, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of product candidates, operating restrictions, and criminal prosecutions, any of which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and growth prospects.

We also may encounter problems with the following:

Our product candidates, if approved by applicable regulatory authorities, may require significant commercial supply to meet market demand. In these cases, we may need to increase, or “scale up,” the production process by a significant factor over the initial level of production. If we fail to develop sufficient manufacturing capacity and experience, whether internally or with a third party, are delayed in doing so, or fail to manufacture our product candidates economically or on reasonable scale or volumes, or in accordance with

cGMP, or if the cost of this scale-up is not economically feasible, our development programs and commercialization of any approved products will be materially adversely affected and we may not be able to produce our product candidates in a sufficient quantity to meet future demand and our business, financial condition, results of operations, and growth prospects may be materially adversely affected.

​

We cryogenically store our CAR-iNK and CAR-iT cells and master and working cell banks of the engineered iPSC cells at both our own manufacturing facility and at third-party facilities

The CAR-iNK and CAR-iT cells and the master and working cell banks of the engineered iPSC cells are stored in freezers at both third-party biorepositories and in our freezers at our manufacturing facility. If these materials are damaged at either or both our or these third-party facilities, including by the loss or malfunction of these freezers or our back-up power systems, as well as by damage from fire, power loss or other natural disasters, we may need to establish replacement CAR-iNK and CAR-iT cells and master and working cell banks of the engineered iPSC cells, which would impact clinical supply and delay patient treatment. If we are unable to establish replacement materials, we could incur significant additional expenses and liability to patients whose treatment is delayed, and our business could suffer.

Risks related to commercialization of our product candidates

If we are unable to successfully commercialize CNTY-101 or any of our other product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

If we are successful in obtaining marketing approval from applicable regulatory authorities for CNTY-101 or any of our other product candidates, our ability to generate revenues from such product candidates will depend on our success in:

To the extent we are not able to do any of the foregoing, our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects will be materially harmed.

We face significant competition, and if our competitors develop product candidates more rapidly than we do or their product candidates are more effective, our ability to develop and successfully commercialize products may be adversely affected.

The biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapid innovation, intense and dynamic competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary and novel products and product candidates. While we believe that our technology, scientific knowledge, and experience in the field of cellular immunotherapy provide us with competitive advantages, we face potential competition from many different sources, including major pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies, and public and private research institutions, as well as standard-of-care treatments, and new products undergoing development and combinations of existing and new therapies. Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with existing therapies and new therapies, including combinations thereof, that may become available in the future. We compete with these organizations to recruit management, scientists, and clinical development personnel, which could negatively affect our level of expertise and our ability to execute our business plan. We will also face competition in establishing clinical trial sites, enrolling subjects for clinical trials, and in identifying and in-licensing new product candidates. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.

We are developing off-the-shelf cell therapies by differentiating engineered iPSC into NK-, T-, or other immune cells for the treatment of various cancers and autoimmune diseases. While we believe our genetically engineered immune effector cell therapies derived from iPSC are highly differentiated, a number of companies are currently focused on the development of cellular immunotherapies for the treatment of cancer and autoimmune diseases. In addition, because reprogramming technology and gene editing technology are available on a non-exclusive basis, the number of companies developing iPSC-derived products and products using gene-editing technology is expected to increase, which will increase competitive pressure on us. Moreover, the reprogramming technology licensed to us from FCDI and the gene-editing technology licensed to us from Inscripta, Inc. are each licensed to us on a non-exclusive basis, and therefore third parties may obtain licenses to the same technology to compete with us.

Large pharmaceutical companies that have commercialized or are developing immunotherapies to treat cancer include but are not limited to AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche. Some of these companies, such as Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Roche, are also developing cell therapy therapies for autoimmune diseases.

Companies that compete with us directly on the level of the development of product candidates targeting B-cell lymphomas include but are not limited to Gilead Sciences, Novartis, and Bristol-Myers Squibb, among others. Companies developing Nectin-4 targeted agents include but are not limited to Pfizer, Astellas, and Bicycle Therapeutics.

Other emerging biopharmaceutical companies which can potentially develop competing cell therapy candidates to treat both cancer and autoimmune diseases include but are not limited to Adicet Bio, Allogene Therapeutics, Artiva Biotherapeutics, Caribou Biosciences, CRIPSR Therapeutics, Fate Therapeutics, Nkarta Therapeutics, and Sana Biotechnology. Furthermore, companies pursuing the development of cell therapies in autoimmune diseases include but are not limited to Cabaletta Bio, Cartesian Therapeutics, and Kyverna Therapeutics..

Many of our competitors have significantly greater financial, technical, manufacturing, marketing, sales, and supply resources or experience than we do. If we successfully obtain approval for any product candidate, we will face competition based on many different factors, including the safety and effectiveness of our products, the ease with which our products can be administered and the extent to which patients accept relatively new routes of administration, the timing and scope of regulatory approvals for these products, the availability and cost of manufacturing, marketing and sales capabilities, price, reimbursement coverage, and patent position. Competing products could present superior treatment alternatives, including by being more effective, safer, more convenient, less expensive, or marketed and sold more effectively than any products we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval 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. Competitive products may make any products we develop obsolete or noncompetitive before we recover the expense of developing and commercializing our product candidates. If we are unable to compete effectively, our opportunity to generate revenue from the sale of our products we may develop, if approved, could be adversely affected.

We expect to face uncertainty regarding the pricing of our existing product candidates and any other product candidates that we may develop, and for which we may receive approval.

Due to the novel nature of our product candidates, we face significant uncertainty as to the pricing of any such products for which we may receive marketing approval. While we anticipate that pricing for any product candidates that we develop will be relatively high due to their anticipated use in the prevention or treatment of life-threatening diseases where therapeutic options are limited, the biopharmaceutical industry has recently experienced significant pricing pressures, including in the area of orphan drug products. In particular, drug pricing and other healthcare costs continue to be subject to intense political and societal pressures, which we anticipate will continue and escalate on a global basis. These pressures may result in harm to our business and reputation, cause our stock price to decline or experience periods of volatility, and adversely affect results of operations and our ability to raise funds.

In addition, we expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the pricing of any of our product candidates due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations, and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription medicines, medical devices and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the successful commercialization of new products. Further, the adoption and implementation of any future governmental cost containment or other health reform initiative may result in additional downward pressure on the price that we may receive for any approved product.

The insurance coverage and reimbursement status of newly approved products is uncertain. Failure to obtain or maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for new products could limit our product revenues.

Our ability to commercialize any of our product candidates successfully will depend in part on the extent to which reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers, and other organizations. In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement for new therapies are typically made by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, an agency within the United States Department of Health and Human Services. CMS decides whether and to what extent a new therapy will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare, and private payors tend to follow CMS determinations to a substantial degree. The availability and extent of reimbursement by governmental and private payors is essential for most patients to be able to afford expensive treatments, such as cellular immunotherapy. There is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products by government and third-party payors. In particular, there is no body of established practices and precedents for reimbursement of cellular immunotherapies, and it is difficult to predict what the regulatory authority or private payor will decide with respect to reimbursement levels for novel products such as ours. Our products may not qualify for coverage or direct reimbursement, or may be subject to limited reimbursement. If reimbursement or insurance coverage is not available, or is available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates, if approved. Even if coverage is provided, the approved reimbursement amount may not be sufficient to allow us to establish or maintain pricing to generate income. For additional information on coverage and reimbursement, see the section entitled “Business—Government Regulation—Healthcare Reform.”

In addition, reimbursement agencies in foreign jurisdictions may be more conservative than those in the United States. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our product candidates, if approved, may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenues and profits. Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payors, in the United States and abroad, to cap or reduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and level of reimbursement for new products approved, and as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our product candidates. Failure to obtain or maintain adequate reimbursement for any products for which we receive marketing approval will adversely affect our ability to achieve commercial success, and could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, our ability to raise capital needed to commercialize products, and our overall financial condition.

Even if we obtain regulatory and marketing approval for a product candidate, our product candidates will remain subject to regulatory oversight.

Even if we receive marketing and regulatory approval for CNTY-101 or any of our other product candidates, regulatory authorities may still impose significant restrictions on the indicated uses or marketing or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies. CNTY-101 and our other product candidates will also be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements for manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, record-keeping, and submission of safety and other post-market information. The FDA has significant post-market authority, including, for example, the authority to require labeling changes based on new safety information and to require post-market studies or clinical trials to evaluate serious safety risks related to the use of a biologic. Any regulatory approvals that we receive for CNTY-101 or our other product candidates may also be subject to a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including post-approval clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor the quality, safety, and efficacy of the product, all of which could lead to lower sales volume and revenue. For example, the holder of an approved BLA is obligated to monitor and report adverse events and any failure of a product to meet the specifications in the BLA. The holder of an approved BLA also must submit new or supplemental applications and obtain FDA approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling, or manufacturing process. Advertising and promotional

materials must comply with FDA rules and are subject to FDA review, in addition to other potentially applicable federal and state laws.

In addition, product manufacturers and their facilities are subject to payment of user fees and continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP requirements and adherence to commitments made in the BLA or foreign marketing application. If we, or a regulatory authority, discover(s) previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured or disagrees with the promotion, marketing or labeling of that product, a regulatory authority may impose restrictions relative to that product, the manufacturing facility or us, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing. Additionally, under FDORA, sponsors of approved drugs and biologics must provide 6 months’ notice to the FDA of any changes in marketing status, such as the withdrawal of a drug, and failure to do so could result in the FDA placing the product on a list of discontinued products, which would revoke the product’s ability to be marketed.

If we or our contractors fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements following approval, if granted, of CNTY-101 or our other product candidates, a regulatory authority may:

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize CNTY-101 or our other product candidates, if approved, and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Even if we receive marketing approval for CNTY-101 or our other product candidates, we may not achieve broad market acceptance.

The commercial success of CNTY-101 or our other product candidates, if developed and approved for marketing by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority, will depend upon the awareness and acceptance of CNTY-101 or such other product candidate among the medical community, including physicians, patients, advocacy groups, and healthcare payors. Market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved, will depend on a number of factors, including, among others:

If CNTY-101 or any of our other product candidates are approved but do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by patients, advocacy groups, physicians and payors, we may not generate sufficient revenue to become or remain profitable and our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be materially adversely affected. Our efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors about the benefits of CNTY-101 and our other product candidates may require significant resources and may never be successful.

Even if we receive marketing approval for CNTY-101 or our other product candidates in the United States, we may never receive regulatory approval to market CNTY-101 or our other product candidates outside of the United States.

In order to market any product outside of the United States, we must establish and comply with the numerous and varying safety, efficacy, and other regulatory requirements of other jurisdictions, including potential additional clinical trials and/or preclinical studies. Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve additional testing and additional administrative review periods. The time required to obtain approvals in other jurisdictions might differ from that required to obtain FDA approval. The marketing approval processes in other jurisdictions may implicate all of the risks detailed above regarding FDA approval in the United States as well as other risks. In particular, in many jurisdictions outside of the United States, products must receive pricing and reimbursement approval before the product can be commercialized. Obtaining this approval can result in substantial delays in bringing products to market in such jurisdictions. Marketing approval in one jurisdiction does not necessarily ensure marketing approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining marketing approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory process or commercial activities in others. Failure to obtain marketing approval in other jurisdictions or any delay or other setback in obtaining such approval would impair our ability to market a product candidate in such foreign markets. Any such impairment would reduce the size of our potential market, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We may be unable to establish effective marketing, sales and distribution capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell CNTY-101 or our other product candidates, if approved.

We currently do not have a commercial infrastructure for the marketing, sale, and distribution of CNTY-101, or our other product candidates. If CNTY-101 or our other product candidates receive marketing approval, we intend to commercialize such product candidates in the United States and potentially in other geographies. In order to commercialize our products, we must build our marketing, sales, and distribution capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services. We may not be successful in doing so. Should we decide to move forward in developing our own marketing capabilities, we may incur expenses prior to product launch or even approval in order to recruit a sales force and develop a marketing and sales infrastructure. If a commercial launch is delayed as a result of the FDA’s or comparable foreign regulatory authority’s requirements or for other reasons, we would incur these expenses prior to being able to realize any revenue from sales of CNTY-101 and our other product candidates. Even if we are able to effectively hire a sales force and develop a marketing and sales infrastructure, our sales force and marketing teams may not be successful in commercializing CNTY-101 or our other product candidates. This may be costly, and our investment would be lost if we cannot retain or reposition our sales and marketing personnel.

We may also or alternatively decide to collaborate with third-party marketing and sales organizations to commercialize any approved product candidates in the United States, in which event, our ability to generate product revenues may be limited. To the extent we rely on third parties to commercialize any products for which we obtain regulatory approval, we may receive less revenues than if we commercialized these products ourselves, which could materially harm our prospects. In addition, we would have less control over the sales efforts of any other third parties involved in our commercialization efforts, and could be held liable if they failed to comply with applicable legal or regulatory requirements.

We have no prior experience in the marketing, sale, and distribution of biopharmaceutical products, and there are significant risks involved in building and managing a commercial infrastructure. The establishment and development of commercial capabilities, including compliance plans, to market any products we may develop will be expensive and time-consuming and could delay any product launch, and we may not be able to successfully develop this capability. We will have to compete with other biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical companies to recruit, hire, train, manage, and retain marketing and sales personnel, which is expensive and time-consuming and could delay any product launch. Developing our sales capabilities may also divert resources and management attention away from product development.

In the event we are unable to develop a marketing and sales infrastructure, we may not be able to commercialize CNTY-101 or our other product candidates, if approved, in the United States or elsewhere, which could limit our ability to generate product revenues and materially harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

If the market opportunities for our product candidates for which we receive marketing approval are smaller than we believe they are, our revenue may be adversely affected, and our business may suffer.

We focus our research and product development on differentiating engineered iPSC into NK-, T-, or other immune cells for the treatment of various cancers and autoimmune diseases. Our projections of both the number of people who have these cancers or autoimmune diseases, as well as the subset of people with these cancers or autoimmune diseases who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates, are based on beliefs and estimates. These estimates have been derived from a variety of sources, including the scientific literature, surveys of clinics, patient foundations or market research, and may prove to be incorrect. Further, new trials may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of such cancers. The total addressable market across all of our product candidates will ultimately depend upon, among other things, the diagnosis criteria included in the final label for each of our product candidates approved for sale for these indications, the availability of alternative treatments and the safety, convenience, cost, and efficacy of

our product candidates relative to such alternative treatments, acceptance by the medical community and patient access, drug and biologic pricing, and reimbursement. The number of patients in the United States and other major markets and elsewhere may turn out to be lower than expected, patients may not be otherwise amenable to treatment with our product candidates, for which we receive marketing approval, or new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, all of which would adversely affect our results of operations and our business.

Our operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes our future operating results difficult to predict and could cause our operating results to fall below expectations or any guidance we may provide.

Our quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes it difficult for us to predict our future operating results. These fluctuations may occur due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control, including, but not limited to:

The cumulative effects of these factors could result in large fluctuations and unpredictability in our quarterly and annual operating results. As a result, comparing our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. Investors should not rely on our past results as an indication of our future performance.

This variability and unpredictability could also result in our failing to meet the expectations of industry or financial analysts or investors for any period. If our revenue or operating results fall below the expectations of analysts or investors or below any forecasts we may provide to the market, or if the forecasts we provide to the market are below the expectations of analysts or investors, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Such a stock price decline could occur even when we have met any previously publicly stated revenue or earnings guidance we may provide.

Risks related to employee matters, managing growth and other risks related to our business

We are dependent on the services of our management and other clinical and scientific personnel, and if we are not able to retain these individuals or recruit additional management or clinical and scientific personnel, our business will suffer.

Our success depends in part on our continued ability to attract, retain, and motivate highly qualified management, clinical, and scientific personnel, many of whom have been instrumental for us and have substantial experience with our iPSC-derived allogeneic cell therapy platforms, underlying technologies, and related product candidates. Given the specialized nature of our iPSC-derived allogeneic cell therapy platforms and the fact that ours is a novel and emerging field, there is an inherent scarcity of experienced personnel in this field. As we continue developing our product candidates in our pipeline, we will require personnel with medical, scientific, or technical qualifications specific to each program.

We are highly dependent upon our senior management, particularly Brent Pfeiffenberger, Pharm.D., our Chief Executive Officer, as well as our senior scientists and other members of our executive team. The loss of services of any of these individuals could delay or prevent the successful development of our product pipeline, initiation or completion of our planned clinical trials, or the commercialization of CNTY-101 and our other product candidates. We have executed employment agreements or offer letters with each member of our senior management team, these agreements are terminable at will with or without notice and, therefore, we may not be able to retain their services as expected. We do not currently maintain “key person” life insurance on the lives of our executives or any of our employees. This lack of insurance means that we may not have adequate compensation for the loss of the services of these individuals.

Our research and development programs, clinical operations, and sales and marketing efforts depend on our ability to attract and retain highly skilled scientists, engineers, and sales professionals. The competition for qualified personnel in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries is intense, and we have from time to time experienced, and we expect to continue to experience, difficulty in hiring and retaining employees with appropriate qualifications on acceptable terms, or at all. Many of the companies with which we compete for experienced personnel have greater resources than we do, and any of our employees may terminate their employment with us at any time. If we hire employees from competitors or other companies, their former employers may attempt to assert that these employees or we have breached legal obligations, resulting in a diversion of our time and resources, and potentially, damages. In addition, job candidates and existing employees often consider the value of the stock awards they receive in connection with their employment. If the perceived benefits of our stock awards decline, it may harm our ability to recruit and retain highly skilled employees. If we fail to attract new personnel or fail to retain and motivate our current personnel, our business and future growth prospects would be harmed.

We will need to increase the size and capabilities of our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing our growth.

As of March 1, 2025, we had 150 employees and consultants and most of our employees are full-time. As our development and commercialization plans and strategies develop, and as we transition into operating as a public company, we must add a significant number of additional managerial, operational, financial, and other personnel. Future growth will impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including:

Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize CNTY-101 and our other product candidates, if approved, will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth, and our management may also have to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from day-to-day activities in order to devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities. In addition, we expect to incur additional costs in hiring, training, and retaining such additional personnel.

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 CNTY-101 and our other product candidates and, accordingly, may not achieve our research, development, and commercialization goals.

Any pandemic, epidemic, or outbreak of an infectious disease, may materially and adversely affect our business and our financial results and could cause a disruption to the development of our drug candidates.

Public health crises, such as pandemics or similar outbreaks, could adversely impact our business. For example, we experienced modest delays in our discovery and development activities as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, primarily due to temporary and partial shutdowns at certain of our CROs and academic institutions that have since resumed operations, and due to governmental responses to the pandemic. Any future pandemic, epidemic or outbreak of an infectious disease could have similar effects. Furthermore, economic recessions, increased inflation and/or interest rates, and any disruptions to our operations or workforce availability, including those brought on by the effects of a health epidemic may have a negative effect on our operating results. The foregoing could result in an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

​

Potential disruptions to our preclinical and clinical development efforts related to future outbreaks or pandemics may include, but are not limited to, disruptions in our supply chain and our ability to procure the components for each of our product candidates for use in preclinical studies and clinical trials and enrolling patients in clinical trials. We are unable to predict if a future outbreak or pandemic could have similar or different impacts on our preclinical studies, clinical trials, business, financial condition, and results of operations.

We are subject to various foreign, federal, and state healthcare and privacy laws and regulations, and our failure to comply with these laws and regulations could harm our results of operations and financial condition.

Our business operations and current and future arrangements with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors, and customers expose us to broadly applicable foreign, federal and state fraud and abuse, and other healthcare and privacy laws and regulations, including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and the federal False Claims Act, or FCA, which may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which such companies conduct research, sell, market and distribute pharmaceutical products. In particular, the promotion, sales and marketing of healthcare items and services, as well as certain business arrangements in the healthcare industry, are subject to extensive laws designed to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, structuring and commission(s), certain customer incentive programs and other business arrangements generally. Activities subject to these laws also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of patient recruitment for clinical trials. For additional information on coverage and reimbursement, see the section entitled “Business—Government Regulation—Healthcare laws and regulations.”

Ensuring that our internal operations and business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations involves substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices, including any consulting and advisory board arrangements with physicians and other healthcare providers, do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations, agency

guidance, or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental laws and regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal, and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from United States government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, or similar programs in other countries or jurisdictions, disgorgement, individual imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, additional reporting requirements, and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of noncompliance with these laws, diminished profits, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Further, defending against any such actions can be costly, time-consuming, and may require significant financial and personnel resources. Therefore, even if we are successful in defending against any such actions that may be brought against us, our business may be impaired. If any of the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business are found to not be in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil, or administrative sanctions, including exclusion from government funded healthcare programs and imprisonment. If any of the above occur, it could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

Healthcare legislation, including potentially unfavorable pricing regulations or other healthcare reform initiatives, may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval of and commercialize our product candidates.

The commercial potential for our approved products, if any, could be affected by changes in healthcare spending and policy in the United States and abroad. We operate in a highly regulated industry. New laws, regulations, or judicial decisions, or new interpretations of existing laws, regulations or decisions, related to healthcare availability, the method of delivery or payment for healthcare products, and services could adversely affect our business, operations, and financial condition. The United States and many foreign jurisdictions have enacted or proposed legislative and regulatory changes affecting the healthcare system that may affect our ability to profitably sell our products and product candidates, if approved. The United States government, state legislatures, and foreign governments also have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement, and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs and biologics. For additional information on coverage and reimbursement, see the section entitled “Business – Government Regulation – Healthcare reform”.

Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare, Medicaid, or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain and maintain profitability of our product and product candidates, if approved.

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. If we or our collaborators are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we or our collaborators are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, CNTY-101 or any future product candidates may lose any marketing approval that may have been obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

If we fail to maintain proper and effective internal controls over financial reporting our ability to produce accurate and timely financial statements could be impaired.

We are required to maintain internal controls over financial reporting. We must perform system and process design evaluation and testing of the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting to allow management to report on the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting in our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. This has required us to incur substantial additional professional fees and internal costs to expand our

accounting and finance functions and we have expended significant management efforts as compared to prior to our IPO, when we were not required to test our internal controls. If we identify material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting in the future or otherwise fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to accurately or timely report our financial condition or results of operations, which may adversely affect our business.

If we are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, if our independent registered public accounting firm determines that we have a material weakness or a significant deficiency in our internal control over financial reporting, or we are unable to maintain proper and effective internal controls over financial reporting, we may not be able to produce timely and accurate financial statements. As a result, our investors could lose confidence in our reported financial information, the market price of our stock could decline, and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the SEC or other regulatory authorities.

We believe that any internal controls and procedures, no matter how well-conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. We may discover weaknesses in our system of internal financial and accounting controls and procedures that could result in a material misstatement of our financial statements. Our internal control over financial reporting will not prevent or detect all errors and all fraud. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances of fraud will be detected.

These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. For example, our directors or executive officers could inadvertently fail to disclose a new relationship or arrangement causing us to fail to make a required related party transaction disclosure. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people or by an unauthorized override of the controls. Accordingly, because of the inherent limitations in our control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and may not be detected.

We, or our CMOs or suppliers, may use potent chemical agents and hazardous materials, and any claims relating to improper handling, storage or disposal of these materials could be time-consuming or costly.

We, or our CMOs or suppliers, including FCDI, use biological materials, potent chemical agents and may use hazardous materials, including chemicals and biological agents and compounds that could be dangerous to human health and safety of the environment. The operations of our CMOs and suppliers also produce hazardous waste products. Federal, state, and local laws and regulations govern the use, generation, manufacture, storage, handling, and disposal of these materials and wastes. Compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations may be expensive, and current or future environmental laws and regulations may impair our product development efforts.

In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, which have tended to become more stringent over time. These current or future laws and regulations may impair our research, development or production efforts. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties, or other sanctions or liabilities, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

If product liability lawsuits are brought against us, we may incur substantial liabilities and may be required to limit commercialization of our products.

We are exposed to potential product liability and professional indemnity risks that are inherent in the research, development, manufacturing, marketing, and use of pharmaceutical products. While we currently have no product candidates that have been approved for commercial sale, the future use of product

candidates by us in clinical trials, and the sale of any approved products in the future, may expose us to liability claims. For example, we may be sued if CNTY-101 and our other product candidates allegedly cause injury or are found to be otherwise unsuitable during product testing, manufacturing, marketing. or sale. Any such product liability claims may include allegations of defects in manufacturing, defects in design, a failure to warn of dangers inherent in the product candidate, negligence, strict liability, and a breach of warranties. Claims may be brought against us by clinical trial participants, patients, or others using, administering or selling products that may be approved in the future. Claims could also be asserted under state consumer protection acts.

If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to limit or cease the commercialization of our products. Even a successful defense would require significant financial and management resources. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

We currently hold product liability coverage in an amount we consider reasonable. We may need to increase our insurance coverage as we expand our clinical trials or if we commence commercialization of CNTY-101 or our other product candidates. Insurance coverage is increasingly expensive. Our inability to obtain and retain sufficient product liability insurance at an acceptable cost to protect against potential product liability claims could prevent or inhibit the commercialization of CNTY-101 or our other product candidates. Although we maintain such insurance, any claim that may be brought against us could result in a court judgment or settlement in an amount that is not covered, in whole or in part, by our insurance or that is in excess of the limits of our insurance coverage. Our insurance policies will also have various exclusions, and we may be subject to a product liability claim for which we have no coverage. We may have to pay any amounts awarded by a court or negotiated in a settlement that exceed our coverage limitations or that are not covered by our insurance, and we may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient capital to pay such amounts.

We may be unable to adequately protect our or our vendors’ information systems from cyberattacks or other incidents, which could result in the disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, including personal data, damage our reputation, and subject us to significant financial and legal exposure.

We rely on information technology systems that we or our third-party providers operate to process, transmit, and store electronic information in our day-to-day operations. In connection with our product discovery efforts, we may collect and use a variety of personal data, such as names, mailing addresses, email addresses, phone numbers, and clinical trial information. Despite our implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems, and those of our CROs, CMOs, information technology suppliers, and other contractors and consultants are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, cyberattacks, and other unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war, and telecommunication and electrical failures, and sophisticated cyber-attacks, including the theft, fraud, and subsequent misuse of employee credentials, wrongful conduct by insider employees or vendors, denial-of-service attacks, ransomware attacks, business email compromises, computer malware, malicious codes, viruses, breakdown, wrongful intrusions, data breaches, and social engineering (including phishing attacks). Additionally, our security measures or those of our vendors could be breached as a result of employee theft, exfiltration, misuse, malfeasance, or unintentional events. A successful cyberattack or other data breach could result in the theft or destruction of intellectual property, data, or other misappropriation of assets, or otherwise compromise our confidential or proprietary information and disrupt our operations. Cyberattacks could include wrongful conduct by hostile foreign governments, industrial espionage, wire fraud, and other forms of cyber fraud, the deployment of harmful malware, ransomware, denial-of-service, social engineering fraud, or other means to threaten data security, confidentiality, integrity and availability. A successful cyberattack or breach could cause serious negative consequences for us, including, without limitation, breach notification(s) and other disclosure requirements, the disruption of operations, the misappropriation of confidential business information, including financial information, trade secrets, financial loss, and the disclosure of corporate strategic plans. Although we devote resources to protect our information systems, we and our third-party vendors have from time-to-time experienced threats and security incidents that could affect our information or systems. We realize that cyberattacks are a threat, and there can be no assurance that our efforts will prevent information security incidents that would result in business, legal, financial, or reputational harm to us, or would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Any failure to prevent or mitigate security incidents or improper access to, use of, or disclosure of our clinical data or patients’ personal data could result in significant liability under state (e.g., state breach notification laws), federal (e.g., HIPAA, as amended by HITECH), and international law (e.g., the EU and UK GDPR) and may cause a material adverse impact to our reputation, affect our ability to conduct new studies and potentially disrupt our business.

We rely on our third-party providers to implement effective security measures and identify and correct for any such failures, deficiencies, or breaches. If we or our third-party providers fail to maintain or protect our information technology systems and data integrity effectively or fail to anticipate, plan for, or manage significant disruptions to our information technology systems, we or our third-party providers could have difficulty preventing, detecting, and controlling such cyberattacks and any such attacks could result in the losses described above as well as disputes with physicians, patients and our partners, regulatory sanctions, or penalties, increases in operating expenses, expenses or lost revenues or other adverse consequences, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, prospects, and cash flows. Any failure by such third parties to prevent or mitigate security incidents or improper access to or disclosure of such information could have similarly adverse consequences for us. If we are unable to prevent or mitigate the impact of such security or data privacy incidents, we could be exposed to litigation and governmental investigations, which could lead to a potential disruption to our business.

Our contracts may not contain limitations of liability, and even where they do, there can be no assurance that limitations of liability in our contracts are sufficient to protect us from liabilities, damages, or claims related to our privacy and data security obligations. Further, although we maintain cyber liability insurance, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities related to any experienced cybersecurity incident or breach.

Failure to comply with current or future federal, state, and foreign laws and regulations and industry standards relating to privacy and data protection laws could lead to government enforcement actions (which could include civil or criminal penalties), private litigation, and/or adverse publicity and could negatively affect our operating results and business.

We or our collaborators collect, use, process, store and transfer certain personal and/or confidential information as part of our normal business operations. We are therefore subject to federal, state, and international laws and regulations governing the privacy and security of confidential information and personal data. In the United States, we are subject to 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, governing the collection, use, disclosure, storage, transfer, protection, and disposal of health-related and other the personal and/or confidential information we and/or our collaborators utilize A failure or perceived failure to comply with these current or future federal, state, and international laws and regulations and industry standards relating to data privacy and security could lead to investigatory or regulatory action, private litigation or class actions that could result in exposure to civil or criminal penalties, monetary or statutory damages, attorney fee awards and/or exposure to adverse publicity that could negatively affect our operating results and business.

At the federal level, failing to take appropriate steps to keep consumers’ personal information secure may constitute unfair acts or practices in or affecting commerce in violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (the FTCA), 15 U.S.C § 45(a). The FTC expects a company’s data security measures to be reasonable and appropriate in light of the sensitivity and volume of consumer information it holds, the size and complexity of its business and the cost of available tools to improve security and reduce vulnerabilities. Through executive and legislative action, the federal government has also taken steps to restrict data transactions involving certain sensitive data categories – including health data, genetic data, and biospecimens – with persons affiliated with China, Russia, and other countries of concern. In addition, certain state laws govern privacy and security of personal information.

Many state legislatures have adopted legislation that regulates how businesses operate online, including measures relating to privacy, data security, and cybersecurity incidents or data breaches, and laws in all 50 states require businesses to provide notice to customers whose personally identifiable information has been disclosed as a result of a data breach. Such laws are not consistent, and compliance in the event of a widespread security incident may be costly and could disrupt our operations. By way of example, the CCPA created individual privacy rights for California consumers and increases the privacy and security obligations of entities handling certain personal data. The CCPA requires covered companies to provide certain disclosures to consumers about its data collection, use and sharing practices, and to provide affected California residents with ways to opt-out of certain sales or transfers of personal information. The CCPA also provided 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, the CCPA was amended by a California ballot initiative, the California Privacy Rights Act, or the CPRA, which became effective on January 1, 2023. The amendments introduced by the CPRA modified the CCPA significantly, including by imposing additional obligations on companies covered by the legislation, expanding consumers’ rights with respect to certain sensitive personal information, and creating a new state agency that is vested with authority to implement and enforce the CCPA. The effects of the CCPA (as modified by the CPRA) are potentially significant and may increase out potential exposure to regulatory enforcement and/or litigation potentially resulting in further uncertainty and requiring us to incur additional costs and expenses in an effort to comply.

Similar laws have been passed in numerous other states and several states have proposed new privacy laws which, if enacted, may add additional complexity, variation in requirements, restrictions and potential legal risk, require additional investment of resources in compliance programs, impact strategies and the availability of previously useful data, and could result in increased compliance costs and/or changes in business practices and policies. The existence of comprehensive privacy laws in different states in the country would make our compliance obligations more complex and costly and may increase the likelihood that we may be subject to enforcement actions or otherwise incur liability for noncompliance.

​

There are also states that are specifically regulating health information. For example, Washington’s My Health My Data Act, which became effective on March 31, 2024, regulates the collection and sharing of health information and has a private right of action, which further increases the relevant compliance risk. Connecticut and Nevada have also passed similar laws regulating consumer health data. In addition, other states have proposed and/or passed legislation that regulates the privacy and/or security of certain specific types of information. For example, a small number of states have passed laws that regulate biometric data specifically. These various privacy and security laws may impact our business activities, including our identification of research subjects, relationships with business partners and ultimately the marketing and distribution of our products. State laws are changing rapidly and there are discussions in the U.S. Congress of new comprehensive federal data privacy laws to which we could become subject to, if enacted.

​

Foreign data protection laws, may also apply to health-related and other personal information belonging to individuals who reside outside of the United States. In Europe, data collection and use is governed by restrictive regulations, including, in relation to the European Union, the General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or the EU GDPR. Following the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, or Brexit, the EU GDPR has been incorporated into the United Kingdom’s law, or UK GDPR. The EU GDPR and UK GDPR are wide-ranging in scope and impose numerous requirements on companies that process personal data, including, among other obligations and requirements: (i) strict requirements relating to processing certain categories of data (i.e. “sensitive information” or special category data) including health data, (ii) requirements relating to how an organization can obtain and rely upon consent obtained from individuals to process their personal data, (iii) obligations related to providing information to individuals regarding data processing activities, (iv) a responsibility to implement safeguards to protect the security and confidentiality of personal data, (v) requirements to provide notification to competent data protection authorities and/or individuals of personal data breaches, and (vi) taking certain measures when engaging third-party processors. The EU GDPR and UK GDPR also grant individuals certain data protection rights, subject to certain limitations, including the rights to request and access a copy of the personal data processed by an organization, to have inaccurate personal data rectified or completed if incomplete, to object to or restrict the processing of their personal data, and to request deletion of personal data.

​

The EU GDPR and UK also regulate cross-border transfers of personal data. For example, the EU GDPR requires us to enter into an appropriate transfer mechanism and may require us to take additional steps to ensure an essentially equivalent level of data protection. These transfer mechanisms are subject to change, and implementing new or revised transfer mechanisms or ensuring an essentially equivalent protection may involve additional expense and potentially increased compliance risk. Such restrictions may increase our obligations in relation to carrying out international transfers of personal data and cause us to incur additional expense and increased regulatory liabilities. Despite Brexit, the EU GDPR and UK GDPR remain largely aligned. Currently, the most impactful point of divergence between the EU GDPR and the UK GDPR relates to the transfer mechanisms, as explained above. There may be further divergence in the future, including with regard to administrative burdens. The UK Government has introduced a Data Protection and Digital Information Bill to reform the UK data protection legal framework which failed in the UK legislative process. A new Data (Use and Access) Bill (“UK Bill”) has been introduced into parliament. If passed, the final version of the UK Bill may have the effect of further altering the similarities between the UK and European Economic Area data protection regime and threaten the UK adequacy decision from the European Commission, or EC. Further, this may lead to additional compliance costs and could increase our overall risk and we will need to amend our processes and procedures to align with the new framework.

​

Companies that must comply with the GDPR face increased compliance obligations and risk, including more robust regulatory enforcement of data protection requirements and potential fines for noncompliance of up to the greater of 4% of worldwide turnover of the noncompliant company in the preceding financial year or €20 million (under EU GDPR) or £17.5 million (under UK GDPR), as applicable. The EU GDPR and UK GDPR also confer a private right of action on data subjects and consumer associations to lodge complaints with supervisory authorities, seek judicial remedies, and obtain compensation for damages resulting from violations. The EU GDPR and UK GDPR increased our responsibility and liability in relation to personal data that we process where such processing is subject to such laws, and we may be required to put in place additional mechanisms to ensure compliance, including as implemented by individual countries. Compliance with the EU GDPR and UK GDPR will be a rigorous and time-intensive process that may increase our cost of doing business or require us to change our business practices, and despite those efforts, there is a risk that we may be subject to fines and penalties, litigation, and reputational harm in connection with our European activities.

​

All of these evolving compliance and operational requirements impose significant costs, such as costs related to organizational changes, implementing additional protection technologies, training employees and engaging consultants and legal advisors, which are likely to increase over time. In addition, such requirements may require us to modify our data processing practices and policies, utilize management’s time and/or divert resources from other initiatives and projects. Compliance with U.S. federal and state laws and foreign 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, impact our ability to operate in certain jurisdictions. Failure or perceived failure by us or our collaborators to comply with United States and foreign data protection laws and regulations could result in government enforcement actions (which could include civil or criminal penalties), private litigation, and/or adverse publicity and could negatively affect our operating results and business. Moreover, clinical trial subjects about whom we or our potential collaborators obtain information, as well as the providers who share this information with us, may contractually limit our ability to 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, could result in adverse publicity and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Our employees and independent contractors, including principal investigators, CROs, consultants, and vendors, may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements.

We are exposed to the risk that our employees and independent contractors, including principal investigators, CROs, consultants, and vendors may engage in misconduct or other illegal activity. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless, and/or negligent conduct or disclosure of unauthorized activities to us that violate: (1) the laws and regulations of the FDA and other similar regulatory requirements, including those laws that require the reporting of true, complete, and accurate information to such authorities, (2) manufacturing standards, including cGMP requirements, (3) federal and state data privacy, security, fraud and abuse, and other healthcare laws and regulations in the United States and abroad or (4) laws that require the true, complete, and accurate reporting of financial information or data. Activities subject to these laws also involve the improper use or misrepresentation of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, the creation of fraudulent data in our preclinical studies or clinical trials, or illegal misappropriation of drug or biologic product, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. It is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by employees and other third parties, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations. In addition, we are subject to the risk that a person or government could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business and financial results, including, without limitation, the

imposition of significant civil, criminal, and administrative penalties, damages, monetary fines, disgorgements, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, individual imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement, or similar agreement to resolve allegations of noncompliance with these laws, and curtailment of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

Artificial intelligence presents risks and challenges that can impact our business including by posing security risks to our confidential information, proprietary information and personal data.

Issues in the use of artificial intelligence, combined with an uncertain regulatory environment, may result in reputational harm, liability, or other adverse consequences to our business operations. As with many technological innovations, artificial intelligence presents risks and challenges that could impact our business. Our vendors may incorporate generative artificial intelligence tools into their offerings without disclosing this use to us, and the providers of these generative artificial intelligence tools may not meet existing or rapidly evolving regulatory or industry standards with respect to privacy and data protection and may inhibit our or our vendors’ ability to maintain an adequate level of service and experience. If any of our vendors experience an actual or perceived breach or privacy or security incident because of the use of generative artificial intelligence, we may lose valuable intellectual property and confidential information and our reputation and the public perception of the effectiveness of our security measures could be harmed. Further, bad actors around the world use increasingly sophisticated methods, including the use of artificial intelligence, to engage in illegal activities involving the theft and misuse of personal information, confidential information and intellectual property. Any of these outcomes could damage our reputation, result in the loss of valuable property and information, and adversely impact our business.

The increasing use of social media platforms presents new risks and challenges.

Social media is increasingly being used to communicate about pharmaceutical companies’ clinical development activities, and we intend to utilize appropriate social media in connection with our development efforts. Additionally, patients may use social media channels to comment on their experience in an ongoing clinical trial or to report an alleged adverse event. If such disclosures occur in the future in connection with any of our sponsored clinical trials, there is a risk that trial enrollment may be adversely impacted, that we may fail to monitor and comply with applicable adverse event reporting obligations or that we may not be able to defend our business or the public’s legitimate interests in the face of the political and market pressures generated by social media due to restrictions on what we may say about our product candidates. It is also possible for individuals or groups to target companies with disruptive social media campaigns related to a request for access to unapproved drugs for patients with significant unmet medical need. If we experience a similar social media campaign regarding our decision to provide or not provide access to any of product candidates under an expanded access policy, our reputation may be negatively affected and our business may be harmed. There is also a risk of inappropriate disclosure of sensitive or confidential information or negative or inaccurate posts or comments about us on any social networking website. In addition, we may encounter attacks on social media regarding our company, management or our product candidates, and fraudsters could and have attempted to illegally use our name on social media platforms to defraud the public. If any of these events were to occur or we fail to comply with applicable regulations, we could incur liability, face regulatory actions or incur other harm to our business.

Risks related to our intellectual property

We do not currently own issued patents relating to some of our product candidates.

Given the early stage of development of our product candidates, our patent portfolio is similarly at a very early stage. If we do not obtain meaningful patent coverage for our product candidates, their respective components, formulations, combination therapies, methods used to manufacture them, and methods of treatment, competitors may be able to erode or negate any competitive advantage we may have, which would

likely harm our business and ability to achieve profitability. To establish our proprietary position, we have filed patent applications in the United States and internationally related to our products CNTY-101, CNTY-308, CNTY-361 and CNTY-107 and have filed non-provisional and provisional patent applications on other aspects of our technology. However, United States provisional patent applications are not eligible to become issued patents unless and until, among other things, we file a non-provisional patent application within 12 months of filing of one or more of our related provisional patent applications. With regard to such United States provisional patent applications, if we do not timely file any non-provisional patent applications, we may lose our priority date with respect to our provisional patent applications and any patent protection on the inventions disclosed in our provisional patent applications. While we intend to timely file non-provisional patent applications relating to our provisional patent applications, we cannot predict whether any such patent applications will result in the issuance of patents that provide us with any competitive advantage. If we are unable to secure or maintain patent protection with respect to our technology and any proprietary products and technology we develop, our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects could be materially harmed.

If any of our license agreements with FCDI are terminated, we could lose our rights to key components enabling our iPSC-derived allogeneic cell therapy platforms.

Our commercial success will depend in part on the maintenance of our license agreements. We are party to (i) an exclusive license with FCDI, pursuant to which we have received an exclusive license to certain patents and know-how related to the differentiation of iPSC cells into immune-effector cells in the field of cancer immunotherapeutics, or the Differentiation License, (ii) a non-exclusive license for the rights to certain patents and know-how related to the reprogramming of human somatic cells to iPSCs in the field of cancer immunotherapeutics, or the Reprogramming License, and (iii) a worldwide license agreement whereby FCDI will grant non-exclusive licenses to us for certain patent rights and know-how related to cell differentiation and reprogramming for the development and commercialization of iPSC-derived therapies for the treatment of autoimmune diseases, or the Autoimmune License, together with the Reprogramming License and the Differentiation License, the FCDI Licenses. A critical aspect to manufacturing our product candidates involves the reprogramming of certain cells into iPSCs and the differentiation of iPSCs into immune cells. We utilize technology licensed from FCDI to reprogram cells to become iPSCs and to differentiate the iPSCs to generate different immune cell types including NK cells and T cells. By utilizing this licensed technology, we are currently capable of achieving fully functional iNK cells from iPSCs in approximately 30 days.

The FCDI Licenses impose, and future license agreements may impose, various diligence, milestone payment, royalty, and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with our obligations under the FCDI Licenses, our other license agreements, or any future license agreements with any party, or we are subject to a bankruptcy, the licensor may have the right to terminate the license, in which event we would not be able to develop products covered by such license.

If, for any reason, the FCDI Licenses or certain of our other license agreements are terminated or we otherwise lose the rights under such agreements, it would adversely affect our business. If we breach any material obligations under the FCDI Licenses or certain of our other license agreements, FCDI or the applicable licensor may have the right to terminate our license, which could result in us being unable to develop, manufacture, or sell our product candidates that incorporate the intellectual property subject to such license. If these in-licenses are terminated, or if the underlying patents fail to provide the intended exclusivity, competitors would have the freedom to seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products identical to ours. In addition, we may seek to obtain additional licenses from our licensors and, in connection with obtaining such licenses, we may agree to amend our existing licenses in a manner that may be more favorable to the licensors, including by agreeing to terms that could enable third parties (potentially including our competitors) to receive licenses to a portion of the intellectual property that is subject to our existing licenses. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects, and we may be required to identify and license replacement technology from third parties, which may not be available on reasonable terms or at all.

We may not be successful in obtaining or maintaining necessary intellectual property rights in the future for the development of CNTY-101 and our other product candidates.

We may in the future enter into additional license agreements with third parties for other intellectual property rights or assets to advance our research or allow commercialization of CNTY-101 and our other product candidates, and we cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents do not exist which might be enforced against CNTY-101 and our other product candidates in the absence of such a license. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive or may not provide exclusive rights to use such intellectual property and technology in all relevant fields of use and in all territories, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license replacement technology, which may not be feasible on a technical or commercial basis. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected product candidates, which could materially harm our business and the third parties owning such intellectual property rights could seek either an injunction prohibiting our sales, or, with respect to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation. Licensing of intellectual property is of critical importance to our business and involves complex legal, business, and scientific issues. Disputes may arise between us and our licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including:

If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may not be able to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

In addition, certain of our agreements may limit or delay our ability to consummate certain transactions, may impact the value of those transactions, or may limit our ability to pursue certain activities. For example, if we choose to sublicense or assign to any third parties our rights under our existing license agreements with respect to any licensed product, we may be required to pay a specified percentage of all revenue to be received in connection with such transaction.

Under one of the FCDI Licenses and certain other in-licenses under which we sublicense certain rights related to our technology, we rely on FCDI and our other sub-licensors to comply with their obligations under their upstream license agreements where we may have no relationship with the original licensor of such rights. If our sub-licensors fail to comply with their obligations under their upstream license agreements, and

the upstream license agreements are consequently terminated, such termination may result in the termination of our sublicenses and loss of such rights.

Our success depends on our ability to obtain, maintain, protect, and enforce our intellectual property and our proprietary technologies.

Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to obtain, maintain, protect, and enforce our intellectual property and proprietary technologies, including patent protection and trade secret protection for CNTY-101 and our other product candidates, proprietary technologies and their uses as well as our ability to operate without infringing, misappropriating, or otherwise violating the intellectual property or proprietary rights of others. If we are unable to obtain, maintain, protect, or enforce our intellectual property rights or if our intellectual property rights are inadequate for our technology or our product candidates, our competitive position could be harmed, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial conditions, and prospects. Although we have filed patent applications with respect to CNTY-101 and other aspects of our product technology, our patent portfolio is in an earlier stage of prosecution. We own few issued patents related to some of our product candidates. Our patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless, and until, patents are issued from such applications, and then only to the extent the issued claims cover the technology. There can be no assurance that our patent applications will result in patents being issued or that issued patents will afford sufficient protection against competitors with similar technology, nor can there be any assurance that the patents if issued will not be infringed, misappropriated, violated, designed around or invalidated by third parties. Even issued patents may later be found invalid or unenforceable or may be modified or revoked in proceedings instituted by third parties before various patent offices or in courts. The degree of future protection for our intellectual property and proprietary rights is uncertain. Only limited protection may be available and may not adequately obtain, maintain, protect, and enforce our rights or permit us to gain or keep any competitive advantage. These uncertainties and/or limitations in our ability to properly obtain, maintain, protect, and enforce the intellectual property rights relating to CNTY-101 and our other product candidates could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We cannot be certain that the claims in our pending patent applications will be considered patentable by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, courts in the United States or by the patent offices and courts in foreign countries, nor can we be certain that claims that may ultimately issue from our patent applications will not be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged. If we are unable to obtain or maintain patent protection with respect to our product candidates, our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects could be materially harmed.

The patent application process is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, and there can be no assurance that we or any of our potential future collaborators will be successful in protecting CNTY-101 and our other product candidates by obtaining and defending patents. These risks and uncertainties include the following:

The patent prosecution process is also expensive and time-consuming, and we may not be able to file, prosecute, maintain, enforce, or license all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner or in all jurisdictions where protection may be commercially advantageous. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. We cannot be certain that patent prosecution and maintenance activities by our licensors have been or will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations, which may affect the validity and enforceability of such patents or any patents that may issue from such applications. If they fail to do so, this could cause us to lose rights in any applicable intellectual property that we in-license, and as a result our ability to develop and commercialize products or product candidates may be adversely affected and we may be unable to prevent competitors from making, using, and selling competing products.

In addition, although we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, outside scientific collaborators, CROs, CMOs, consultants, advisors, and other third parties, any of these parties may breach such agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection. In addition, publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the 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 licensed patents or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions.

If the scope of any patent protection we obtain is not sufficiently broad, or if we lose any of our patent protection, our ability to prevent our competitors from commercializing similar or identical product candidates would be adversely affected.

The patent position of biopharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions, and has been the subject of much litigation in recent years. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability, and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued which protect our product candidates or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive product candidates.

Moreover, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and its scope can be reinterpreted after issuance. Even if patent applications we own or license currently or in the future issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors or other third parties from competing with us, or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Any patents that we own or in-license may be challenged or circumvented by third parties or may be narrowed or invalidated as a result of challenges by third parties. Consequently, we do not know whether CNTY-101 and our other product candidates will be protectable or remain protected by valid and enforceable patents. Our competitors or other third parties may be able to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing, misappropriating, or violating manner which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity, or enforceability, and our patents may not cover CNTY-101 and our other product candidates or may be challenged in the courts or

patent offices in the United States and abroad. We may be subject to a third-party pre-issuance submission of prior art to the USPTO, or become involved in opposition, derivation, revocation, reexamination, post-grant review, or PGR, and inter parties review, or IPR, or other similar proceedings in the USPTO or foreign patent offices challenging our patent rights. 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 or our predecessors and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. There is no assurance that all potentially relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications or those of our licensors has been found. There is also no assurance that there is not prior art of which we, our predecessors or licensors are aware, but which we do not believe affects the validity or enforceability of a claim in our patents and patent applications or those of our licensors, which may, nonetheless, ultimately be found to affect the validity or enforceability of a claim. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding, or litigation could reduce the scope of, or invalidate or render unenforceable, our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize CNTY-101 and our other product candidates and compete directly with us, without payment to us. Moreover, we, or one of our licensors, may have to participate in interference proceedings declared by the USPTO to determine priority of invention or in post-grant challenge proceedings, such as oppositions in a foreign patent office, that challenge priority of invention or other features of patentability. Such challenges may result in loss of patent rights, loss of exclusivity or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, which could limit our or our licensors’ ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of CNTY-101 and our other product candidates. Such proceedings also may result in substantial costs and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications is threatened, regardless of the outcome, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop, or commercialize current or future product candidates.

The patent protection and patent prosecution for some of our product candidates may be dependent on third parties.

We or our licensors or collaborators may fail to identify patentable aspects of inventions made in the course of development and commercialization activities before it is too late to obtain patent protection on them. Therefore, we may miss potential opportunities to strengthen our patent position. It is possible that defects of form in the preparation or filing of our patents or patent applications may exist, or may arise in the future, for example, with respect to proper priority claims, inventorship, claim scope, or requests for patent term adjustments. If we, our collaborators or our licensors, whether current or future, fail to establish, maintain, or protect such patents and other intellectual property rights, such rights may be reduced or eliminated. If our licensors or collaborators are not fully cooperative or disagree with us as to the prosecution, maintenance, or enforcement of any patent rights, such patent rights could be compromised. If there are material defects in the form, preparation, prosecution, or enforcement of our patents or patent applications, such patents may be invalid and/or unenforceable, and such applications may never result in valid, enforceable patents. Any of these outcomes could impair our ability to prevent competition from third parties, which may have an adverse impact on our business.

As a licensee of third parties, we rely on third parties to file and prosecute patent applications and maintain patents and otherwise protect the licensed intellectual property under some of our license agreements. We have not had and do not have primary control over these activities for certain of our patents or patent applications and other intellectual property rights. We cannot be certain that such activities by third parties have been or will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents or other intellectual property rights. Pursuant to the terms of the license agreements with some of our licensors, the licensors may have the right to control enforcement of our licensed patents or defense of any claims asserting the invalidity of these patents and even if we are permitted to pursue such enforcement or defense, we will require the cooperation of our licensors. We cannot be certain that our licensors will allocate sufficient resources or prioritize their or our enforcement of such patents or defense of such claims to protect our interests in the licensed patents. Even if we are not a party to these legal actions, an adverse outcome could harm our business because it might prevent us from continuing to license

intellectual property that we may need to operate our business. If any of our licensors or any of our future licensors or future collaborators fail to appropriately prosecute and maintain patent protection for patents covering CNTY-101 and our other product candidates, our ability to develop and commercialize those product candidates may be adversely affected and we may not be able to prevent competitors from making, using, and selling competing products.

In addition, even where we have the right to control patent prosecution of patents and patent applications we have acquired or licensed from third parties, we may still be adversely affected or prejudiced by actions or inactions of our predecessors or licensors and their counsel that took place prior to us assuming control over patent prosecution.

Our technology acquired or licensed from various third parties may be subject to retained rights. Our predecessors or licensors often retain certain rights under their agreements with us, including the right to use the underlying technology for non-commercial academic and research use, to publish general scientific findings from research related to the technology, and to make customary scientific and scholarly disclosures of information relating to the technology. It is difficult to monitor whether our predecessors or licensors limit their use of the technology to these uses, and we could incur substantial expenses to enforce our rights to our licensed technology in the event of misuse.

In addition, the research resulting in certain of our in-licensed patent rights and technology was funded in part by the United States government. As a result, the government may have certain rights, or march-in rights, to such patent rights and technology. When new technologies are developed with government funding, the government generally obtains certain rights in any resulting patents, including a nonexclusive license authorizing the government to use the invention for noncommercial purposes. These rights may permit the government to disclose our confidential information to third parties and to exercise march-in rights to use or allow third parties to use our licensed technology. The United States government also has the right to take title to these inventions if the applicable licensor fails to disclose the invention to the government or fails to file an application to register the intellectual property within specified time limits. The government can exercise its march-in rights if it determines that action is necessary because we fail to achieve practical application of the government-funded technology, because action is necessary to alleviate health or safety needs, to meet requirements of federal regulations, or to give preference to United States industry. In addition, our rights in such inventions may be subject to certain requirements to manufacture products embodying such inventions in the United States. Any exercise by the government of such rights could harm our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

If we are limited in our ability to utilize acquired or licensed technologies, or if we lose our rights to critical in-licensed technology, we may be unable to successfully develop, out-license, market, and sell our products, which could prevent or delay new product introductions. Our business strategy depends on the successful development of licensed and acquired technologies into commercial products. Therefore, any limitations on our ability to utilize these technologies may impair our ability to develop, out-license, or market and sell CNTY-101 and our other product candidates.

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, results of operations, and prospects.

Our commercial success depends significantly on our ability to operate without infringing, misappropriating, or otherwise violating the patents and other intellectual property and proprietary rights of third parties. Claims by third parties that we infringe, misappropriate, or violate their intellectual property or proprietary rights may result in liability for damages or prevent or delay our development and commercialization efforts.

Our commercial success depends in part on avoiding infringement, misappropriation, or other violation of the patents, intellectual property, or proprietary rights of third parties. However, our research, development, and commercialization activities may be subject to claims that we infringe, misappropriate, or otherwise violate patents or other intellectual property rights owned or controlled by third parties. Other entities may have or obtain patents or other intellectual property or proprietary rights that could limit our ability to make, use, sell, offer for sale, or import CNTY-101 or our other product candidates that may be approved in the future, or impair our competitive position. There is a substantial amount of litigation, both within and outside the United States, involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biopharmaceutical industry, including patent infringement lawsuits, oppositions, reexaminations, IPR proceedings, and PGR proceedings before the USPTO and/or foreign patent offices. Numerous third-party United States and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications exist in the fields in which we are developing product candidates, including patents and patent applications held by our competitors. There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture, or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of CNTY-101 and our other product candidates.

As the biopharmaceutical industry expands and more patents are issued, the risk increases that CNTY-101 and our other product candidates may be subject to claims of infringement, misappropriation, or other violation of the patent rights of third parties. Because patent applications are maintained as confidential for a certain period of time, until the relevant application is published we may be unaware of third-party patents that may be infringed by commercialization of CNTY-101 and our other product candidates, and we cannot be certain that we were the first to file a patent application related to CNTY-101 and our other product candidates. Moreover, because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications that may later result in issued patents that CNTY-101 and our other product candidates may infringe. In addition, identification of third-party patent rights that may be relevant to our

technology is difficult because patent searching is imperfect due to differences in terminology among patents, incomplete databases, and the difficulty in assessing the meaning of patent claims. In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies infringes upon, misappropriates, or otherwise violates these patents. Any claims asserted by third parties would be time-consuming and could:

Third parties may hold intellectual property or proprietary rights that could prevent CNTY-101 and our other product candidates from being marketed. Any patent-related legal action against us claiming damages and seeking to enjoin activities relating to CNTY-101 and our other product candidates or processes could subject us to potential liability for damages, including treble damages if we were determined to willfully infringe, and require us to obtain a license to manufacture or develop CNTY-101 and our other product candidates. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. We cannot predict whether we would prevail in any such actions or that any license required under any of these patents would be made available on commercially acceptable terms, if at all. Moreover, even if we or our future strategic partners were able to obtain a license, the rights may be nonexclusive, which could result in our competitors gaining access to the same intellectual property. In addition, we cannot be certain that we could redesign CNTY-101 and our other product candidates or processes to avoid infringement, if necessary. Accordingly, an adverse determination in a judicial or administrative proceeding, or the failure to obtain necessary licenses, could prevent us from developing and commercializing CNTY-101 and our other product candidates, which could harm our business, financial condition, and operating results.

Parties making claims against us may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation or administrative proceedings, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise additional funds or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

During the course of any intellectual property litigation, there could be public announcements of the initiation of the litigation as well as results of hearings, rulings on motions, and other interim proceedings in the litigation. If securities analysts or investors regard these announcements as negative, the perceived value of our existing products, programs, or intellectual property could be diminished. Accordingly, the market price of shares of our common stock may decline. Such announcements could also harm our reputation or the market for our future products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

The intellectual property landscape around gene-editing technology is highly dynamic, and third parties may initiate and prevail in legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing, misappropriating, or otherwise violating their intellectual property rights.

The field of gene-editing, especially in the area of CRISPR technology, is still in its infancy, and no such products have reached the market. Further, the ownership of intellectual property rights relating to CRISPR technology is not fully established. Accordingly, we may not be able to secure all the necessary rights to practice the technology. Due to the intense research and development that is taking place by several companies, including us and our competitors, in this field, the intellectual property landscape is in flux, and it may remain uncertain for the coming years. There may be significant intellectual property related litigation and proceedings relating to intellectual property and proprietary rights in the future. Our commercial success depends upon our ability and the ability of our collaborators to develop, manufacture, market, and sell any product candidates that we may develop and use our proprietary technologies without infringing, misappropriating, or otherwise violating the intellectual property and proprietary rights of third parties. The biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by extensive litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights relating to CRISPR. For example, certain patents are currently subject to Interference Proceedings before the USPTO and Opposition Proceedings before the European Patent Office, or EPO. It is uncertain when and how the USPTO, as well as the EPO, will decide in the various proceedings, and the decisions of the respective patent offices may significantly affect the scope or may deny the validity of the respective patents involved in these proceedings. We may in the future become party to, or threatened with, adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to CRISPR technology and any product candidates we may develop. Third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on existing patents or patents that may be granted in the future, regardless of their merit. If we are unable to prove that these patents are invalid or unenforceable or not infringed and we are not able to obtain or maintain a license on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, such third parties could potentially assert infringement claims against us, which could have a material adverse effect on the conduct of our business. If we are found to infringe, misappropriate, or violate such third-party patents, we and our partners may be required to pay damages, cease commercialization of the infringing technology, including our use of gene-editing technology, or obtain a license from such third parties, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all.

We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or the patents of our licensors, which could be expensive, time-consuming, and unsuccessful. Further, our issued patents could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court.

Competitors may infringe, misappropriate, or violate our intellectual property rights or those of our licensors. To prevent infringement, misappropriation, violation, or unauthorized use, we and/or our licensors may be required to file claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition, in a patent infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent we own or license is not valid, is unenforceable and/or is not infringed. If we or any of our licensors or potential future collaborators were to initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent directed at CNTY-101 and our other product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that our patent is invalid and/or unenforceable in whole or in part. In patent litigation, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge include an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness, written description, or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could include an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO or made a misleading statement 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 such product candidate. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications or those of our licensors is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop, or commercialize current or future product candidates. Such a loss of patent protection would have a material adverse impact on our business.

In addition, we may in the future choose to challenge the patentability of claims in a third-party’s patent by requesting that the USPTO review the patent claims in re-examination, post-grant review, inter parties review, interference proceedings, derivation proceedings, and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). We have challenged and may in the future choose to challenge third party patents in patent opposition proceedings in the EPO or another foreign patent office. Even if successful, the costs of these opposition proceedings could be substantial, and may consume our time or other resources. If we fail to obtain a favorable result at the USPTO, EPO, or other patent office we may be exposed to litigation by the third party alleging that the relevant patent may be infringed by our product candidates.

Even if resolved in our favor, litigation, or other legal proceedings relating to our intellectual property rights may cause us to incur significant expenses, and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing, or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources and more mature and developed intellectual property portfolios. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could compromise our ability to compete in the marketplace.

During the course of any intellectual property litigation, there could be public announcements of the initiation of the litigation as well as results of hearings, rulings on motions, and other interim proceedings in the litigation. If securities analysts or investors regard these announcements as negative, the perceived value of our existing products, programs, or intellectual property could be diminished. Accordingly, the market price of shares of our common stock may decline. Such announcements could also harm our reputation or the market for our future products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation or other legal proceedings relating to our intellectual property rights, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation or other proceedings.

Changes in United States patent law, or laws in other countries, could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect CNTY-101 and our other product candidates.

As is the case with other biopharmaceutical companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biopharmaceutical industry involve a high degree of technological and legal complexity. Therefore, obtaining and enforcing biopharmaceutical patents is costly, time-consuming, and inherently uncertain. Changes in either the patent laws or in the interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our intellectual property and may increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. We cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be allowed or enforced in our patents or in third-party patents. In addition, Congress or other foreign legislative bodies may pass patent reform legislation that is unfavorable to us.

For example, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening 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 Congress, the United States federal courts, the USPTO, or similar authorities in foreign 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 we might obtain in the future.

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

We may also be subject to claims that former employees or other third parties have an ownership interest in our patents or other intellectual property. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or ownership. If we or our licensors 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 the exclusive right to use, our owned or in-licensed patents. If we or our licensors are unsuccessful in any interference proceeding or other priority or inventorship dispute, we may be required to obtain and maintain licenses from third parties, including parties involved in any such interference proceedings or other priority or inventorship disputes. Such licenses may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or may be non-exclusive or of a diminished scope. If we are unable to obtain and maintain such licenses, we may need to cease the development, manufacture, and commercialization of one or more of the product candidates we may develop. The loss of exclusivity or the narrowing of our owned and licensed patent claims could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products. Any of the foregoing could result in a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, or prospects. Even if we are successful in an interference proceeding or other similar priority or inventorship disputes, it could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and distraction to management and other employees.

In addition, while it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the conception or development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who, in fact, conceives or develops intellectual property that we regard as our own. The assignment of intellectual property rights may not be self-executing, or the assignment agreements may be breached, and we may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims that they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property. Such claims could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on CNTY-101 and our other 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 its earliest United States non-provisional filing date. Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering CNTY-101 and our other product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition from competitive products. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing, and regulatory review of product candidates, patents protecting CNTY-101 and our other product candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. As a result, our patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

If we do not obtain patent term extension for CNTY-101 and our other product candidates, our business may be materially harmed.

Depending upon the timing, duration, and specifics of FDA marketing approval of CNTY-101 and our other product candidates, one or more of our United States patents may be eligible for limited patent term restoration under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Action of 1984, or Hatch-Waxman Act. The Hatch-Waxman Act permits a patent restoration term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. A maximum of one patent may be extended per FDA approved product as compensation for the 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 such approved drug product, a method for using it or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. Patent term extension may also be available in certain foreign countries upon regulatory approval of our product candidates. However, we may not be granted an extension because of, for example, failing to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise failing to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, failing to apply within applicable deadlines or failing to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the applicable time period or the scope of patent protection afforded could be less than we request. In addition, we may be reliant on third-party licensors and collaborators in applying for such patent term extensions and we may not be able to obtain their cooperation. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or restoration or the term of any such extension is less than we request, our competitors may obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration, and our revenue could be reduced, possibly materially. Further, if this occurs, our competitors may take advantage of our investment in development and trials by referencing our clinical and preclinical data and launch their product earlier than might otherwise be the case.

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

Although we have licenses to issued patents and pending patent applications in the United States and certain other countries, filing, prosecuting, and defending patents in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be 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 state laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their 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 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 many foreign countries do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our intellectual property and proprietary rights. 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 and 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 our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

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 are 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, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects may be adversely affected.

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

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees, and various other governmental fees on patents and/or applications will be due to the USPTO and various foreign patent offices at various points over the lifetime of any patents we ultimately obtain and/or applications we file. We have systems in place to remind us to pay these fees, and we rely on third parties to pay these fees when due. Additionally, the USPTO and various foreign patent offices require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment, and other similar provisions during the patent application process. We employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply, and in many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with rules applicable to the particular jurisdiction. In some cases, we are also dependent on our licensors to take the necessary action to comply with these requirements with respect to our licensed intellectual property. However, 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. If such an event were to occur, potential competitors might be able to enter the market with similar or identical products or technology, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business, and competitive position would be harmed.

In addition, we rely on the protection of our trade secrets, including unpatented know-how, technology, and other proprietary information to maintain our competitive position. Although we have taken steps to protect our trade secrets and unpatented know-how, including entering into confidentiality agreements with third parties, and confidential information and inventions agreements with employees, consultants, and advisors, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed, and any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Trade secrets and know-how can be difficult to protect. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive, and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets.

Because we currently rely on other third parties to manufacture our product candidates and to perform quality testing, we must, at times, share our proprietary technology and confidential information, including trade secrets, with them. We seek to protect our proprietary technology and other trade secrets, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements, consulting agreements, or other similar agreements with our advisors, employees, consultants, and other third parties prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information and other trade secrets. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, proprietary information, and other trade secrets. Despite the contractual provisions employed when working with third parties, the need to share trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by our competitors, are intentionally or inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements.

Moreover, third parties may still obtain this information or may come upon this or similar information independently, and we would have no right to prevent them from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of these events occur or if we otherwise lose protection for our trade secrets, the value of this information may be greatly reduced and our competitive position would be harmed. If we do not apply for patent protection prior to such publication or if we cannot otherwise maintain the confidentiality of our proprietary technology and other confidential information, then our ability to obtain patent protection or to protect our trade secret information may be jeopardized.

We may be subject to claims that we have wrongfully hired an employee from a competitor or that we or our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged confidential information or trade secrets of their former employers.

As is common in the biopharmaceutical industry, in addition to our employees, we engage the services of consultants to assist us in the development of CNTY-101 and our other product candidates. Many of these consultants, and many of our employees, were previously employed at, or may have previously provided or may be currently providing consulting services to, other biopharmaceutical companies including our competitors or potential competitors. We may become subject to claims that we, our employees or a consultant inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed trade secrets or other information proprietary to their former employers or their former or current clients. 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 affect our business. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our management team and other employees.

Risks related to our common stock

The trading price of the shares of our common stock has been highly volatile, and purchasers of our common stock could incur substantial losses.

Our stock price has been volatile since our initial public offering. The stock market in general and the market for stock of biopharmaceutical companies in particular have experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. The market price for our common stock may be influenced by those factors discussed in this “Risk factors” section and many others, including:

In addition, in the past, stockholders have initiated class action lawsuits against biopharmaceutical companies following periods of volatility in the market prices of these companies’ stock. Such litigation, if instituted against us, could cause us to incur substantial costs and divert management’s attention and resources, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

We do not currently intend to pay dividends on our common stock, and, consequently, your ability to achieve a return on your investment will depend on appreciation, if any, in the price of our common stock.

We have never declared or paid any cash dividend on our common stock. We currently anticipate that we will retain future earnings for the development, operation, and expansion of our business and do not anticipate declaring or paying any cash dividends for the foreseeable future. In addition, the terms of any future debt agreements may preclude us from paying dividends. Any return to stockholders will therefore be limited to the appreciation of their stock. There is no guarantee that shares of our common stock will appreciate in value or even maintain the price at which stockholders have purchased their shares.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock by our existing stockholders in the public market could cause our stock price to fall.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock by our existing stockholders in the public market, or the perception that these sales might occur, could depress the market price of our common stock and could impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities. We are unable to predict the effect that such sales may have on the prevailing market price of our common stock.

Our executive officers, directors, principal stockholders, and affiliates have the ability to exercise significant control over our company, which will limit your ability to influence corporate matters and could delay or prevent a change in corporate control.

As of December 31, 2024, the existing holdings of our executive officers, directors and affiliates, represented beneficial ownership, in the aggregate, of approximately 1.47% of our outstanding common stock. As a result, these stockholders, if they act together, will be able to influence our management and affairs and control the outcome of matters submitted to our stockholders for approval, including the election of directors and any sale, merger, consolidation, or sale of all or substantially all of our assets. These stockholders may have interests, with respect to their common stock, that are different from your interests.

and the concentration of voting power among these stockholders may have an adverse effect on the price of our common stock. In addition, this concentration of ownership might adversely affect the market price of our common stock by:

We are an emerging growth company and a “smaller reporting company”, and the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies and “smaller reporting companies” may make our common stock less attractive to investors.

We are an emerging growth company, as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act, or JOBS Act, and may remain an emerging growth company until December 31, 2026. However, if certain events occur prior to the end of such five-year period, including if we become a “large accelerated filer,” our annual gross revenues exceed $1.235 billion, or we issue more than $1.0 billion of non-convertible debt in any three-year period, we will cease to be an emerging growth company prior to the end of such five-year period. For so long as we remain an emerging growth company, we are permitted and intend to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies. The reduced disclosure and other requirements that we may take advantage of include:

We have taken advantage of reduced reporting burdens in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We cannot predict whether investors will find our common stock less attractive if we rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be reduced or more volatile. In addition, the JOBS Act provides that an emerging growth company can take advantage of an extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards. This allows an emerging growth company to delay the adoption of these accounting standards until they would otherwise apply to private companies.

We are also a “smaller reporting company,” meaning that the market value of our stock held by nonaffiliates is less than $700.0 million and our annual revenue is less than $100.0 million during the most recently completed fiscal year. We may continue to be a smaller reporting company if either (i) the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates is less than $250.0 million or (ii) our annual revenue is less than $100.0 million during the most recently completed fiscal year and the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates is less than $700.0 million. If we are a smaller reporting company at the time we cease to be an emerging growth company, we may continue to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are available to smaller reporting companies. Specifically, as a smaller reporting company we may choose to present only the two most recent fiscal years of audited financial statements in our Annual Reports on Form 10-K and, similar to emerging growth companies, smaller reporting companies have reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation.

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

We became a public company in June 2021. As a public company, and particularly after we are no longer an emerging growth company or smaller reporting company, we have and will continue to incur significant legal, accounting, and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and rules subsequently implemented by the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, and The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, or Nasdaq, impose various requirements on public companies, including establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and corporate governance practices. Our management and other personnel devote a substantial amount of time to comply with these requirements. Moreover, these rules and regulations increase our legal and financial compliance costs and make some activities more time-consuming and costly.

Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, we are required to furnish a report by our management on our internal control over financial reporting, including an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. However, while we remain an emerging growth company or a smaller reporting company with less than $100 million in annual revenue, we will not be required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. We could be an emerging growth company for up to five years. To achieve compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act within the prescribed period, we will be engaged in a process to document and evaluate our internal control over financial reporting, which is both costly and challenging. In this regard, we will need to continue to dedicate internal resources, potentially engage outside consultants and adopt a detailed work plan to assess and document the adequacy of internal control over financial reporting, continue steps to improve control processes as appropriate, validate through testing that controls are functioning as documented and implement a continuous reporting and improvement process for internal control over financial reporting. Despite our efforts, there is a risk that neither we nor our independent registered public accounting firm will be able to conclude within the prescribed timeframe that our internal control over financial reporting is effective as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. This could result in an adverse reaction in the financial markets due to a loss of confidence in the reliability of our financial statements.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports or publish unfavorable research or reports about our business, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common stock depends in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us, our business, our market, or our competitors. If one or more of the analysts who covers us downgrades our stock, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases to cover us or fails to regularly publish reports on us, interest in our stock could decrease, which could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.

Provisions in our corporate charter documents and under Delaware law could discourage another company from acquiring us and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management.

Provisions in our second amended and restated certificate of incorporation and our second amended and restated bylaws may discourage, delay, or prevent a merger, acquisition, or other change in control of us that stockholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which stockholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares. These provisions could also limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock, thereby depressing the market price of our common stock. In addition, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of our board of directors. As our board of directors is responsible for appointing the members of our management team, these provisions could in turn affect any attempt by our stockholders to replace current members of our management team. These provisions provide, among other things, that:

Moreover, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, or DGCL, which prohibits a person who owns in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock from merging or combining with us for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the person acquired in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock, unless the merger or combination is approved in a prescribed manner.

Our second amended and restated certificate of incorporation and second amended and restated bylaws provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the exclusive forum for substantially all disputes between us and our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees.

Our second amended and restated certificate of incorporation and second amended and restated bylaws provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, any action asserting a breach of fiduciary duty, any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to the DGCL, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, or our amended and restated bylaws, or any action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine; provided, that, this provision would not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act. Furthermore, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the federal district courts of the United States shall be the exclusive forum for the resolution of any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act. These choice of forum provisions may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or other employees, which may discourage such lawsuits against us and our directors, officers, and other employees. By agreeing to this provision, however, stockholders will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. Furthermore, the enforceability of similar choice of forum provisions in other companies’ certificates of incorporation has been challenged in legal proceedings, and it is possible that a court could find these types of provisions to be inapplicable or unenforceable. If a court were to find the choice of forum provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect our business and financial condition.

We could be subject to securities class action litigation.

In the past, securities class action litigation has often been brought against a company following a decline in the market price of its securities. This risk is especially relevant for us because biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical companies have experienced significant stock price volatility in recent years. If we face such litigation, it could result in substantial costs and a diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could harm our business.

​

​

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

​

ITEM 1C. CYBERSECURITY

Cybersecurity Risk Management and Strategy

​

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

Our principal executive offices are located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. We operate in three office and laboratory spaces in Philadelphia pursuant to leases that expire in December 2025, October 2031 and March 2034. Additionally, we lease office space in Seattle, Washington pursuant to a lease expiring in

September 2030. We also have a 53,000 square foot cell therapy manufacturing facility in Branchburg, New Jersey pursuant to a lease expiring in February 2037. We believe that our current facilities are adequate to meet our ongoing needs.

​

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

We are not currently a party to any material legal proceedings. From time to time, we may become involved in other litigation or legal proceedings relating to claims arising from the ordinary course of business.

​

ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

Not applicable.

​

PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.

Market Information

Our common stock is publicly traded on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “IPSC.”

Holders

As of February 28, 2025, we had approximately 128 record holders of our common stock.

Dividends

We have never declared or paid any dividends on our capital or common stock. We currently intend to retain all available funds and any future earnings, if any, to fund the development and expansion of our business and we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. Any future determination to pay dividends will be made at the discretion of our board of directors.

Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans

Information about our equity compensation plans is incorporated herein by reference to Part III, Item 12 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

There were no sales of unregistered securities during the year ended December 31, 2024 that were not previously reported on a Current Report on Form 8-K.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

None.

​

ITEM 6. RESERVED

​

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes thereto. This discussion, particularly information with respect to our future results of operations or financial condition, business strategy and plans and objectives of management for future operations, includes forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties as described under the heading “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” and “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. You should review the disclosure under the heading “Risk Factors” herein for a discussion of important factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements.

Overview

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company harnessing the power of allogeneic pluripotent stem cell therapies to develop potentially curative cell therapy products for autoimmune diseases and cancer. Our natural killer, or NK, T, and beta cell programs are allogeneic, meaning they are derived from healthy donors for use in any patient, rather than being sourced from an individual for their own specific use, as is the case with autologous T cells. As a result, we believe such “off-the-shelf" therapies have the potential to overcome the limitations of first-generation cell therapies by providing readily available treatments more quickly, reliably, at greater scale, and to a broader patient population. What we believe further sets us apart from other allogeneic approaches is our focus on induced pluripotent stem cells, or iPSCs, which possess the unique ability to self-renew indefinitely and differentiate into any cell type, enabling virtually unlimited genetic editing, consistent reproducibility, and scalable manufacturing. We have created a comprehensive, genetically engineered allogeneic cell therapy platform that includes:

​

​

​

​

​

​

We are leveraging our expertise in cellular reprogramming, differentiation, genetic engineering, and manufacturing to develop therapies with the potential to provide enhanced clinical outcomes compared to existing cell therapy technologies and available therapeutic options. We are unique in the breadth of immune effector cell types we can generate from iPSCs, including iPSC-derived natural killer cells, or iNK cells, iPSC-derived gd T cells, or gd IT cells and iPSC-derived CD4+ and CD8+ ab T cells, or ab iT cells, and iPSC-derived b cells. We believe this capability enables optimal matching of cell characteristics to indication, ensuring we target the right cell for the right indication. Further, we have developed a feeder-free, scalable process that recapitulates normal T cell development in a dish, allowing for what we believe to be the industry-first presentation of iPSC-derived CD4+ and CD8+ CAR-T cells that demonstrate αβ-like T cell function.

​

Our lead product candidate, CNTY-101, is a CAR-iNK cell therapy with six precision gene edits currently being tested in a Phase 1 clinical trial for patients with B-cell mediated autoimmune diseases. In March 2025, we announced that we have discontinued CNTY-101 evaluation in a Phase 1 clinical trial for patients with lymphoma for strategic reasons. While we remain encouraged by tolerability and clinical activity of CNTY-101 in late-stage R/R NHL, emerging data from ELiPSE-1 did not meet our threshold to be considered transformational in this patient population.

​

​

In March 2025, we also announced a re-prioritized pre-clinical pipeline intended to further leverage the unique capabilities and technologies we have towards transformative treatments holding strong commercial potential to treat serious diseases with high unmet need. Accordingly, in addition to our clinical stage programs, we will be focusing on three core pre-clinical programs built on our industry leading iT cell platform. We believe these programs have significant potential for differentiation in their respective categories.

Our vision is to become a premier, fully integrated biotechnology company by developing and ultimately commercializing off-the-shelf allogeneic cell therapies that dramatically and positively transform the lives of patients suffering from life-threatening autoimmune diseases and cancers. To achieve our vision, we have assembled a world-class team with decades of collective experience in cell therapy and drug development, manufacturing, and commercialization.

​

Based on our current business plans, we believe our cash, cash equivalents and investments as of December 31, 2024, will be sufficient for us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditures requirements into the fourth quarter of 2026. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could exhaust our available capital resources sooner than we expect. We anticipate that our expenses and operating losses will increase substantially over the foreseeable future. The expected increase in expenses will be driven in large part by our ongoing activities, if and as we:

We are also investing in building our capabilities in key areas of manufacturing sciences and operations, including development of our iPSC cell therapy platforms, product characterization, and process analytics from the time product candidates are in early research phases. Our investments also include scaled research solutions, scaled infrastructure, and novel technologies intended to improve efficiency, characterization, and scalability of manufacturing.

We anticipate that we will need to raise additional financing in the future to fund our operations, including funding for preclinical studies, clinical trials and the commercialization of any approved product candidates. We intend to use the proceeds from such financings to, among other uses, fund research and development of our product candidates and development programs, including our preclinical and clinical development of CNTY-101, and our other product candidates. Until such time, if ever, as we can generate significant product revenue, we expect to finance our operations with our existing cash and cash equivalents, investments, any future equity or debt financings, and upfront and milestone and royalty payments, if any, received under future licenses or collaborations. We may not be able to raise additional capital on terms acceptable to us or at all. If we are unable to raise additional capital when desired, our business, results of operations, and financial condition would be adversely affected. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with product development, we are unable to predict the timing or amount of increased expenses or when or if we will be able to achieve or maintain profitability.

License and collaboration agreements

Bristol-Myers Squibb

On January 7, 2022, we entered into a Research, Collaboration and License Agreement with Bristol-Myers Squibb Company to collaborate on the research, development and commercialization of induced pluripotent stem cell derived, engineered natural killer cell and/or gamma delta T cell programs for hematologic malignancies, initially focused on acute myeloid leukemia, and multiple myeloma, or the Collaboration Agreement.

​

Under the terms of the Collaboration Agreement, Bristol-Myers Squibb made a non-refundable, upfront cash payment of $100 million and purchased 2,160,760 shares of our common stock at a price per share of $23.14, for an aggregate purchase price of $50.0 million.

​

Following an internal corporate portfolio prioritization process, Bristol-Myers Squibb notified the Company on December 12, 2024 that it would be terminating the Collaboration Agreement in its entirety without cause. The termination was effective as of March 12, 2025.

Fujifilm Cellular Dynamics, Inc. (FCDI)

On September 18, 2018, we entered into a license agreement, or the Differentiation License, with FCDI. The Differentiation License, as amended, provides us with an exclusive license under certain patents and know-how related to human iPSC consisting of cells that are or are modifications of NK cells, T cells, dendritic cells

and macrophages derived from human iPSC. In consideration for the Differentiation License, FCDI received 2,980,803 shares of common stock in connection with the Reorganization.

Also on September 18, 2018, we entered into the non-exclusive license, or the Reprogramming License, with FCDI. The Reprogramming License, as amended, provides us with a non-exclusive license under certain patents and know-how related to the reprogramming of human somatic cells to iPSCs and provide us access to iPSC lines for clinical use. Under the Reprogramming License, we are required to make certain developmental and regulatory milestone payments as well as royalty payments upon commercialization in the low single digits. In connection with the Reprogramming License, we entered into a collaboration agreement, or the FCDI Collaboration Agreement, with FCDI pursuant to which we agreed to fund research and development work at FCDI pursuant to a research plan.

On October 21, 2019, we entered into the FCDI Collaboration Agreement with FCDI, whereby FCDI provides certain services to us to develop and manufacture iPSCs and immune cells derived therefrom. Under the terms of the FCDI Collaboration Agreement, as amended, FCDI will provide services in accordance with the approved research plan and related research budget. The initial research plan covers the period from the date of execution of the FCDI Collaboration Agreement through March 31, 2022. On July 29, 2022 we amended the FCDI Collaboration Agreement to extend the term through September 30, 2025.

On January 7, 2022, we and FCDI entered into a letter agreement, or the Letter Agreement, which amends each of the FCDI agreements as further discussed in Note 16 to our consolidated financial statements. Pursuant to the Letter Agreement, and in consideration for amending the FCDI Agreements, we agreed to pay to FCDI (i) an upfront payment of $10 million, (ii) a percentage of any milestone payments received by us under the Collaboration Agreement, in respect of achievement of development or regulatory milestones specific to Japan, and (iii) a percentage of all royalties received by us under the Collaboration Agreement in respect of sales of products in Japan.

On September 22, 2023, we and FCDI entered into a worldwide license agreement whereby FCDI will grant

non-exclusive licenses to us for certain patent rights and know-how related to cell differentiation and

reprogramming for the development and commercialization of iPSC-derived therapies for the treatment of

inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, or Autoimmune License. Under the terms of the Autoimmune License, FCDI will be eligible to receive certain development and regulatory milestone payments as well as low single digit royalties related to products developed in connection with the Autoimmune License. In addition, on September 22, 2023, we and FCDI amended the Reprogramming License, Differentiation License and the Collaboration Agreement to expand our existing license related to the development and commercialization of iPSC-derived cancer immunotherapeutic to also include inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. In connection with the entry into the Autoimmune License and the amendments to the Reprogramming License and Differentiation License, we recorded an upfront payment in the amount of $4.0 million which is included as In-process research and development in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss for the year ended December 31, 2023. In addition, we paid FCDI a $1.0 million milestone fee pursuant to the Autoimmune License for filing of the IND for SLE for CNTY-101 in 2023. There were no payments related to the Autoimmune License in 2024.

​

During the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, we made payments of $7.4 million and $5.2 million and incurred research and development expenses of $6.3 million and $0.0 million, in-process research and development expenses of $0.0 million and $5.0 million and legal fees of $0.1 million and $0.2 million, respectively, related to the FCDI agreements. The legal fees are recorded within general and administrative expenses in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss.

From inception of the FCDI Collaboration Agreement through December 31, 2024, we incurred $42.7 million of expenses under the FCDI Collaboration Agreement.

iCell and Distributed Bio

We also have entered into a sublicense agreement with iCell Inc. and a master services agreement with Distributed Bio, Inc. See note 10 to our consolidated financial statements.

Components of operating results

Collaboration revenue

We have not generated any revenue from product sales and do not expect to generate any revenue from the sale of products for the foreseeable future. Our revenues to date were generated through our collaboration, option and license agreement with Bristol-Myers Squibb, which was terminated, effective as of March 12, 2025. We recognize revenue over the expected performance period under this agreement. We expect that our revenue for the next several years will be derived primarily from this agreement and any any collaborations that we may enter into in the future. To date, we have not received any royalties under any of our existing collaboration agreements.

Operating expenses

Research and development

To date, research and development expenses have related primarily to the discovery and development of our iPSC cell therapy platform technology and product candidates and acquired in-process research and development. Research and development expenses are recognized as incurred and payments made prior to the receipt of goods or services to be used in research and development are recorded as prepaid expenses until the goods or services are received.

Research and development expenses consist of personnel-related costs, including salaries, and benefits, stock compensation expense, external research and development expenses incurred under arrangements with third parties, laboratory supplies, costs to acquire and license technologies facility and other allocated expenses, including rent, depreciation, and allocated overhead costs, and other research and development expenses.

We deploy our employee and infrastructure resources across multiple research and development programs for developing our iPSC cell therapy platforms, identifying and developing product candidates, and establishing manufacturing capabilities. Due to the number of ongoing projects and our ability to use resources across several projects, the vast majority of our research and development costs are not recorded on a program-specific basis. These include costs for personnel, laboratory, and other indirect facility and operating costs.

Research and development activities account for a significant portion of our operating expenses. We anticipate that our research and development expenses will increase for the foreseeable future as we expand our research and development efforts including expanding the capabilities of our iPSC cell therapy platforms, identifying product candidates, progressing preclinical studies and clinical trials, including for our first clinical product candidate CNTY-101, seeking regulatory approval of our product candidates, and incurring costs to acquire and license technologies aligned with our goal of translating iPSCs to therapies. A change in the outcome of any of these variables could mean a significant change in the costs and timing associated with the development of our product candidates.

General and administrative

General and administrative expenses consist of personnel-related costs, including salaries, benefits, and non-cash stock-based compensation, for our employees in executive, legal, finance, human resources, information technology, and other administrative functions, legal fees, consulting fees, recruiting costs, and

facility costs not otherwise included in research and development expenses. Legal fees include those related to corporate and patent matters.

In-process research and development

We incurred $5.0 million in license fees to FCDI in 2023 for the Autoimmune License. There were no in-process research and development fees incurred in 2024.

Impairment of long-lived assets

We reviewed our property and equipment related assets for impairment by comparing the carrying values of the assets with their estimated future undiscounted cash flows. An impairment charge was calculated as the difference between asset carrying values and fair value of discounted cash flows, indicative fair market quotes received are considered level three fair value estimates.  We incurred $16.4 million in impairment during the year ended December 31, 2023.  There were no impairment charges incurred in 2024.

​

Impairment of goodwill

We reviewed our goodwill for impairment by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit less its carrying value. We performed our annual impairment test as of December 31, 2024. We performed a quantiative assessment of our single reporting unit and determined that the fair value is less than carrying value. Based on the quantitative test performed, we incurred a $4.3 million impairment during the year ended December 31, 2024, which represented the entire goodwill balance.

​

Interest expense

Interest expense relates to interest incurred on the September 14, 2020 $10.0 million Term Loan Agreement we entered into with Hercules Capital, Inc., as well as amortization of the related deferred financing cost. The loan was repaid in full in May 2023. See Note 8 to our consolidated financial statements for additional information.

Interest income

Interest income consists of interest earned on our cash, cash equivalents and investment balances.

Income taxes

Due to historical losses, we maintain a full valuation allowance against the unrealizable portion of our deferred tax assets. For the year ended December 31, 2024, we recorded $1.8 million in provisions for income taxes in the accompanying consolidated financial statements. The main drivers of the tax provision during the year ended December 31, 2024 are the 2023 federal and state provision-to-return adjustments and state tax revaluation of the deferred tax liability for the Clade IPR&D intangible.

Results of operations

Comparison of the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023

The following table summarizes our results of operations for the periods presented:

​

​

Collaboration revenue

For the year ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, we recognized revenue of $6.6 million and $2.2 million

under the Collaboration Agreement with Bristol-Myers Squibb, respectively. Revenue recognized under Collaboration Agreement fluctuated based on the amount and timing of expenses incurred under the agreement. See Notes 9 and 19 to our consolidated financial statements for additional information. The Collaboration Agreement was terminated, effective as of March 12, 2025. As such, we expect to recognize $109.2 million of collaboration for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, and thereafter our collaboration revenue is expected to reduce significantly for the foreseeable future unless we enter into new collaborations or similar arrangements, or obtain new sources of revenue.

​

Research and development expenses

​

The following table summarizes the components of our research and development expenses for the periods presented:

​

​

Research and development expenses were $107.2 million and $92.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. The increase of $14.5 million was primarily due to:

General and administrative expenses

General and administrative expenses were $33.2 million and $34.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. The decrease of $1.5 million was primarily due to a decrease in employee headcount during the 2024 fiscal year.

​

​

In-process research and development

​

In-process research and development expenses were $0.0 million and $5.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. In 2023, $4.0 million of our in-process research and development expense was a result of entering into a worldwide license agreement whereby FCDI granted non-exclusive licenses to us for certain patent rights and know-how related to cell differentiation and reprogramming for the development and commercialization of IPSC-derived therapies for treatment of autoimmune diseases, and $1.0 million related to a milestone fee paid pursuant to the Autoimmune License for filing the CNTY-101 IND for SLE.

​

Impairment on long-lived assets and goodwill

​

Impairment on long-lived assets were $0.0 million and $16.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. In 2023, this was a result of consolidating our leased lab facilities in Philadelphia. We concluded we would exit multiple leases early and as a result we completed an impairment analysis of our asset group related to this lease along with the related property and equipment at this facility. We reviewed the asset group for impairment following Financial Accounting Standards Board’s Accounting Standards Codification, or ASC 360 for Property, Plant, and Equipment. We evaluated our long-lived assets for recoverability due to changes in circumstances that indicated that the carry amounts may not be recoverable.

​

On December 31, 2024, the Company performed its annual impairment test of goodwill, and based on the result this test, we recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $4.3 million to write off goodwill. There was no similar expense associated with the impairment of goodwill for the year ended December 31, 2023.

​

Interest expense

Interest expense was $0.0 million and $0.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively, which related to our Loan Agreement with Hercules. On May 1, 2023, we repaid the loan in its entirety and thus expect our interest expenses to decrease accordingly in subsequent periods.

Interest income

Interest income was $13.0 million and $12.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively, which related to interest earned on our cash, cash equivalents, and investment balances.

Liquidity, capital resources, and capital requirements

Sources of liquidity

To date, we have funded our operations from public and private issuances and sales of our equity securities, debt financing and collaboration revenues. Since our inception, we have raised approximately $666 million in net proceeds from the sales of our equity securities. As of December 31, 2024, we had cash, and cash equivalents of $58.4 million and investments of $161.7 million. Based on our research and development plans, we believe our existing cash, cash equivalents and investments, will be sufficient to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditures requirements into the fourth quarter of 2026. Since our inception, we have incurred significant operating losses. We have not yet commercialized any products and we do not expect to generate revenue from sales of any product candidates for a number of years, if ever. We had an accumulated deficit of $782.3 million as of December 31, 2024.

In July 2022, we entered into a Sales Agreement, or the Sales Agreement, with Cowen and Company, LLC, or Cowen, under which we may offer and sell, from time to time in our sole discretion, shares of our common stock, having an aggregate offering price of up to $150 million through Cowen as sales agent. During the year ended December 31, 2024, 4,084,502 shares of common stock were issued and sold pursuant to the Sales Agreement at a weighted-average price of $4.50 per share, resulting in approximately $18.4 million in gross proceeds. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023, there were no sales made under the Sales Agreement.

​

In April 2024, we entered into a securities purchase agreement, or the Securities Purchase Agreement with certain institutional accredited investors, or the Investors, pursuant to which we issued and sold to the Investors in a private placement an aggregate of 15,873,011 shares of common stock at a price of $3.78 per share, or the Private Placement. We received aggregate gross proceeds from the Private Placement of approximately $60 million, before deducting placement agent fees and offering expenses.

​

Future funding requirements

We expect to incur additional losses in the foreseeable future as we conduct and expand our research and development efforts, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, developing new product candidates, establishing internal and external manufacturing capabilities, and funding our operations generally. We anticipate that we will need to raise additional financing in the future to fund our operations, including the commercialization of any approved product candidates. We are subject to the risks typically related to the development of new products, and we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays, and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our business.

Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:

Until and unless we can generate substantial product revenue, we expect to finance our cash needs through the proceeds from a combination of equity offerings and debt financings, and potentially through additional license and development agreements or strategic partnerships or collaborations with third parties. Financing may not be available in sufficient amounts or on reasonable terms. In addition, market volatility resulting from the effects of pandemics, inflationary pressures, disruptions of financial institutions, political unrest and hostilities, war or other factors could adversely impact our ability to access capital as and when needed. We have no commitments for any additional financing and will likely be required to raise such financing through the sale of additional securities, which, in the case of equity securities, may occur at prices lower than the offering price of our common stock. If we sell equity or equity-linked securities, our current stockholders, may be diluted, and the terms may include liquidation or other preferences that are senior to or otherwise adversely affect the rights of our stockholders. Moreover, if we issue debt, we may need to dedicate a substantial portion of our operating cash flow to paying principal and interest on such debt and we may need to comply with operating restrictions, such as limitations on incurring additional debt, which could impair our ability to acquire, sell or license intellectual property rights which could impede our ability to conduct our business.

Cash flows

The following table summarizes our cash flows for the periods indicated:

​

​

Operating activities

Net cash used in operating activities was $110.1 million and $88.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. Net cash used in operating activities during the year ended December 31, 2024 consisted primarily of a net loss of $126.6 million. The non-cash charges of $25.7 million consisted primarily of $13.3 million for depreciation, stock-based compensation expense of $12.7 million, and impairment of goodwill of $4.3 million. These charges were offset by amortization of marketable securities of $4.8 million and gain on contingent consideration liability of $1.4 million.

​

Net cash used in operating activities was $88.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. Net cash used in operating activities during the year ended December 31, 2023 consisted primarily of a net loss of $136.7 million. The non-cash charges of $38.9 million consisted primarily of $13.0 million for depreciation, stock-based compensation expense of $14.6 million, and impairment of long lived assets of $16.4 million. Changes in operating lease liability of $1.2 million, net were primarily driven by the receipt of $11.9 million of tenant reimbursement.

​

Investing activities

Cash provided by investing activities was $47.5 million and $61.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. Cash provided by investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2024 consisted primarily of the sale of fixed maturity securities of $176.8 million, which was partially offset by purchases of fixed maturity securities of $119.5 million and acquisition of Clade $9.6 million.

Cash provided by investing activities was $61.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. Cash provided by investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2023 consisted primarily of the sale of fixed maturity securities of $283.9 million, which was partially offset by purchases of fixed maturity securities of $212.7 million and acquisition of property and equipment of $13.7 million.

Financing activities

Cash provided by (used in) financing activities was $74.6 million and ($9.7) million for the years ended December 31, 2024, and 2023, respectively. Cash provided by financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2024 consisted of $17.8 million from proceeds from our at-the-market capital raise, $56.6 million from proceeds from our PIPE financing, and $0.1 million from issuance of our common stock from equity incentive plans pursuant to the exercise of employee stock options.

Cash (used in) financing activities was $9.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2023 consisted of $10.2 million for payments on long-term debt, partially offset by $0.5 million from issuance of our common stock from equity incentive plans pursuant to the exercise of employee stock options and purchases through the Employee Stock Purchase Plan, or ESPP.

Contractual obligations and commitments

The following table summarizes our significant contractual obligations and commitments as of December 31, 2024: