Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington D.C. 20549

​

FORM 10-K

​

​

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021

​

OR

​

​

For the transition period from                to                

​

Commission file number: 001-36294

​

uniQure N.V.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

​

The Netherlands

(Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

​

Paasheuvelweg 25,

1105 BP Amsterdam, The Netherlands

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

​

+31-20-240-6000

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

​

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

​

​

Securities registered under Section 12(g) of the Act: None

​

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 such files).   Yes ☒ No ☐

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a 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. ☒

​

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

​

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting ordinary shares held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2021 was $1,418.3 million, based on the closing price reported as of June 30, 2021 on the NASDAQ Global Select Market.

​

As of February 23, 2022, the registrant had 46,456,984 ordinary shares, par value €0.05, outstanding.

​

The documents incorporated by reference are as follows:

​

Portions of the registrant's definitive Proxy Statement for its 2022 Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission no later than April 30, 2022 and to be delivered to shareholders in connection with the 2022 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, are herein incorporated by reference in Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

​

​

​

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

SPECIAL CAUTIONARY NOTICE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

​

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains “forward-looking statements” as defined under federal securities laws. Forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations of future events and many of these statements can be identified using terminology such as “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “plans,” “may,” “will,” “projects,” “continues,” “estimates,” “potential,” “opportunity” and similar expressions. These forward-looking statements, which include, but are not limited to, statements related to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic, our collaboration and license agreements, our beliefs about our competitive advantage and the capabilities of our manufacturing facility, our cash runway, the advancement of our clinical trials, our intellectual property portfolio, and the impact of regulatory actions on our regulatory submission timelines, may be found in Part I, Item 1 “Business,” Part 1, Item 1A “Risk Factors,” Part II, Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and other sections of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

​

Forward-looking statements are only predictions based on management’s current views and assumptions and involve risks and uncertainties, and actual results could differ materially from those projected or implied. The most significant factors known to us that could materially adversely affect our business, operations, industry, financial position or future financial performance include those discussed in Part I, Item 1A “Risk Factors,” as well as those discussed in Part II, Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as well as other factors which may be identified from time to time in our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), or in the documents where such forward-looking statements appear. You should carefully consider that information before you make an investment decision.

You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date that they were made. Our actual results or experience could differ significantly from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements and from historical results, due to the risks and uncertainties described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K including in “Part I, Item 1A. “Risk Factors,” as well as others that we may consider immaterial or do not anticipate at this time. These cautionary statements should be considered in connection with any written or oral forward-looking statements that we may make in the future or may file or furnish with the SEC. We do not undertake any obligation to release publicly any revisions to these forward-looking statements after completion of the filing of this Annual Report on Form 10-K to reflect later events or circumstances or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events. All forward-looking statements attributable to us are expressly qualified in their entirety by these cautionary statements.

In addition, with respect to all our forward-looking statements, we claim the protection of the safe harbor for forward-looking statements contained in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

​

Table of Contents

Summary Risk Factors

The following is a summary of the principal risks associated with an investment in our ordinary shares:

Table of Contents

​

​

​

Table of Contents

Part I

​

Unless the context requires otherwise, references in this report to “uniQure,” “Company,” “we,” “us” and “our” and similar designations refer to uniQure N.V. and our subsidiaries.

​

Item 1. Business.

​

Overview

​

We are a leader in the field of gene therapy and seek to deliver to patients suffering from rare and other devastating diseases single treatments with potentially curative results. We are advancing a focused pipeline of innovative gene therapies, including product candidates for the treatment of hemophilia B, which effective May 6, 2021, we licensed to CSL Behring pursuant to the CSL Behring Agreement (as defined below), and Huntington’s disease. We believe our technology platform and manufacturing capabilities provide us distinct competitive advantages, including the potential to reduce development risk, cost, and time to market. We produce our Adeno-associated virus (“AAV”) -based gene therapies in our own facilities with a proprietary, commercial-scale, current good manufacturing practices (“cGMP”)-compliant, manufacturing process. We believe our Lexington, Massachusetts-based facility is one of the world’s most versatile gene therapy manufacturing facilities.

Key events

​

Acquisition of Corlieve Therapeutics

​

On June 21, 2021, we entered into a share and purchase agreement (“SPA”) to acquire all outstanding ordinary shares of Corlieve Therapeutics SAS (“Corlieve”), a privately held French gene therapy company (together, the “Corlieve Transaction”). Upon the closing of the Corlieve Transaction on July 30, 2021 (“Acquisition Date”), we acquired 97.7% of the outstanding ordinary shares of Corlieve in return for EUR 44.9 million ($53.3 million as of the Acquisition Date). As contractually required in the SPA, we acquired the remaining outstanding ordinary shares on February 9, 2022 following the expiration of a minimum holding period (“Mandatorily Redeemable Shares”). We recorded a liability related to these Mandatorily Redeemable Shares for an amount of EUR 0.7 million ($0.9 million) as of the Acquisition Date. We financed the Corlieve Transaction from cash on hand.

​

Following its formation in November 2019, Corlieve obtained exclusive licenses to certain patents from two French research institutions that continue to collaborate with Corlieve and us. Corlieve also obtained an exclusive license from Regenxbio Inc. (“Regenxbio”) for the use of AAV9 to deliver any sequence that affects the expression of the Glutamate inotropic receptor kainate type subunit 2 (“GRIK 2”) gene sequence in humans. Corlieve and Regenxbio simultaneously entered into a collaboration plan related to agreed joint preclinical research and development activities. At the Acquisition Date, Corlieve and its Swiss subsidiary, Corlieve Therapeutics AG, employed seven employees.

​

Corlieve’s gene therapy program, AMT-260, employs micro ribonucleic acid (“miRNA”) silencing technology to target suppression of aberrantly expressed kainate receptors in the hippocampus of patients with temporal lobe epilepsy (“TLE”). TLE affects approximately 1.3 million people in the U.S. and Europe alone, of which approximately 0.8 million patients are unable to adequately control acute seizures with currently approved anti-epileptic therapies. Patients with refractory TLE experience increased morbidity, excess mortality, and poor quality of life.

​

In addition to the payments to acquire 100% of the outstanding ordinary shares, Corlieve’s former and remaining shareholders are eligible to receive up to EUR 35.8 million (or $40.6 million as of December 31, 2021) upon the achievement of development milestones through Phase I/II and EUR 143.1 million (or $162.3 million as of December 31, 2021) upon the achievement of milestones associated with Phase III development and obtaining approval to commercialize AMT-260 in the United States of America and the European Union. We may elect to pay up to 25% of such milestone payments through the issuance of our ordinary shares. We recorded a EUR 20.2 million ($24.0 million) liability related to these contingent consideration payments as of the Acquisition Date.

​

Table of Contents

Total consideration of EUR 65.8 million ($78.1 million), which consisted of the cash paid upon the Acquisition Date, the payment for the Mandatorily Redeemable Shares and the contingent consideration payments, was allocated to identifiable intangible assets related to the in-process research and development of AMT-260 (“IPR&D Intangible Asset”). The IPR&D Intangible Asset’s fair value was determined at EUR 53.6 million ($63.6 million) as of the Acquisition Date. We also recognized a EUR 13.4 million ($15.9 million) deferred tax liability in relation to this IPR&D Intangible Asset. The total consideration in excess of the net assets acquired was EUR 23.9 million ($28.4 million) and was allocated to goodwill.

​

CSL Behring commercialization and license agreement

​

On June 24, 2020, (the “Signing Date”), uniQure biopharma B.V., a wholly-owned subsidiary of uniQure N.V., entered into a commercialization and license agreement (as amended, the “CSL Behring Agreement”) with CSL Behring LLC (“CSL Behring”) pursuant to which CSL Behring received exclusive global rights to etranacogene dezaparvovec, our investigational gene therapy for patients with hemophilia B (the “Product”).

The transaction became fully effective on May 6, 2021, one day after the waiting period under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (the “HSR Act”) expired on May 5, 2021.

CSL Behring is responsible for the development and commercialization of the Product. We agreed to complete the validation of the current manufacturing process as well as to the development and validation of a next generation manufacturing process. We will be entitled to receive a development milestone payment if we complete these activities in accordance with an agreed development plan and timeline. CSL Behring is responsible for global regulatory submissions and commercialization requirements for the Product. Certain clinical development and regulatory activities performed by us are reimbursed by CSL Behring.

On the Signing Date, we and CSL Behring also entered into a development and commercial supply agreement, pursuant to which, among other things, we will supply the Product to CSL Behring at an agreed-upon price commensurate with the stand-alone selling price (“SSP”). We will be responsible to supply the Product until such time that these capabilities may be transferred to CSL Behring or its designated contract manufacturing organization.

Other than under the CSL Behring Agreement, neither we nor CSL Behring may perform any clinical trials, with the exception of trials required to extend the label or gain marketing authorization outside the United States or the European Union, for any gene therapy product, gene-editing product, or any other product comprising an AAV vector to conduct nucleotide transfer (including deoxyribonucleic acid (“DNA”) and ribonucleic acid (“RNA”)) for the treatment, prevention, or cure of hemophilia B for a period commencing on June 24, 2020 and continuing for a period of four years following the first commercial sale of the Product in the United States, and neither we nor CSL Behring may commercialize such a product for a period commencing as of June 24, 2020 and continuing for a period of seven years following the first commercial sale of the Product in the United States. This exclusivity commitment would not bind an acquirer of us that owns or controls such a product so long as certain precautions are followed to ensure that CSL Behring’s confidential information and our proprietary technology related to the Product are not used or accessed by personnel of such acquirer who are developing or commercializing such competing product.

Unless earlier terminated as described below, the CSL Behring Agreement will continue on a country-by-country basis until expiration of the royalty term in a country. The royalty term expires in a country on the later of (a) 15 years after the first commercial sale of the Product in such country, (b) expiration of regulatory exclusivity for the Product in such country and (c) expiration of all valid claims of specific licensed patents covering the Product in such country. Either we or CSL Behring may terminate the CSL Behring Agreement for the other party’s material breach if such breach is not cured within a specified cure period. In addition, if CSL Behring fails to commercialize the Product in any of a group of major countries for an extended period of time following the first regulatory approval of the Product in any of such group of countries (other than due to certain specified reasons) and such failure has not been cured within a specified cure period, then we may terminate the CSL Behring Agreement. CSL Behring may also terminate the CSL Behring Agreement for convenience.

The effectiveness of the transactions contemplated by the CSL Behring Agreement was contingent on completion of review under antitrust laws in the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom, and certain provisions of the CSL Behring Agreement did not become effective until after we had received all such regulatory approvals and after the waiting period under the HSR Act expired on May 5, 2021.

Table of Contents

Following the closing of the CSL Behring Agreement, we recorded $462.4 million, including a $450.0 million upfront cash payment, as license revenue. Upon closing, we contractually owed to our licensors $15.5 million of the upfront payment received from CSL Behring.

We are eligible to receive more than $0.3 billion in regulatory, development, and first commercial sale milestones, $1.3 billion in additional commercial milestones, and tiered double-digit royalties of up to a low-twenties percentage of net product sales arising from the collaboration. As of December 31, 2021, we accrued revenue of $55.0 million related to milestone payments we expect to receive under the CSL Behring Agreement following the submissions of a Biological License Application (“BLA”) to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) and a Marketing Access Authorization (“MAA”) to the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”), which are expected to be submitted during the first half of 2022.

Hemophilia B program – Etranacogene dezaparvovec (AMT-061)

Etranacogene dezaparvovec is our lead gene therapy candidate and includes an AAV serotype 5 (“AAV-5”) vector incorporating the functional human Factor IX (“FIX”) Padua variant. We are currently conducting, on behalf of CSL Behring, a pivotal Phase III study in 54 patients with severe and moderately-severe hemophilia B (“HOPE-B Study”). We expect that a BLA is to be submitted to the FDA and MAA to the EMA in the first half of 2022.

The FDA has agreed that etranacogene dezaparvovec will fall under the existing Breakthrough Therapy Designation and IND for AMT-060 (our first-generation hemophilia B gene therapy), and the EMA has also agreed that etranacogene dezaparvovec will fall under the PRIME designation.

On December 9, 2021, we announced the achievement of the pre-specified primary endpoint of non-inferiority in annualized bleeding rate (“ABR”) 18-months following administration compared to baseline Factor IX (“FIX”) prophylactic therapy in the HOPE-B Study. ABR for all bleeds after stable FIX expression, assessed at 18 months, was 1.51 compared with the ABR of 4.19 for the lead-in period of at least six months, achieving the primary non-inferiority endpoint and a secondary superiority endpoint (p=0.0002) in the HOPE-B Study. ABR for investigator-adjudicated FIX-treated bleeds was 0.83 compared with lead-in ABR of 3.65 (p<0.0001). All participants continued to demonstrate durable, sustained increases in FIX activity at 18-months post-infusion with a mean FIX activity of 36.9 percent of normal, as measured by a one-stage activated partial thromboplastin time-based (“aPTT-based”) clotting assay, compared to a mean FIX activity of 39.0 percent of normal at 26-weeks of follow-up. Etranacogene dezaparvovec was generally well-tolerated with over 80% of adverse events considered mild.

Huntington’s disease program (AMT-130)

AMT-130 is our novel gene therapy candidate for the treatment of Huntington’s disease. AMT-130 utilizes our proprietary, gene-silencing miQURE platform and incorporates an AAV vector carrying a miRNA specifically designed to silence the huntingtin gene and the potentially highly toxic exon 1 protein fragment. We are currently conducting a Phase I/II clinical trial for AMT-130 in the U.S. and a Phase Ib/II study in the EU. Together, these studies are intended to establish safety, proof of concept, and the optimal dose of AMT-130 to take forward into Phase III development or into a confirmatory study should an accelerated registration pathway be feasible. AMT-130 has received Orphan Drug and Fast Track designations from the FDA and Orphan Medicinal Product Designation from the EMA.

On April 5, 2021, we announced the completion of enrollment of the low-dose cohort of the U.S. Phase I/II study of AMT-130. The low- dose cohort includes 10 patients, of which six patients received treatment with AMT-130 and four patients received imitation (“Sham”) surgery. The U.S. Phase I/II clinical trial is a randomized, controlled, double-blinded, dose-escalation study of AMT-130.

On June 13, 2021, we announced the enrollment of the first two patients in the high-dose cohort of a U.S. Phase I/II study. The high-dose cohort is planned to include 16 patients, of which 10 patients will receive treatment with AMT-130 and six patients will receive Sham surgery. The initiation of patient enrollment in the high-dose cohort followed a meeting of the trial’s independent Data Safety Monitoring Board (“DSMB”) that reviewed safety data for the fully enrolled first cohort of 10 patients.

Table of Contents

On December 16, 2021, we announced initial 12-month observations on the first four patients enrolled in the low-dose cohort of the U.S. Phase I/II study. Two of the four enrolled patients received AMT-130, and two patients received Sham surgery as a control. AMT-130 was generally well tolerated in the treated patients, with no serious adverse events related to AMT-130. Neurofilament light chain (“NfL”), a biomarker of injury in the brain, increased as expected immediately following the surgical procedure and returned to baseline in the treated patients. NfL remained relatively constant in the two untreated control patients. Structural magnetic resonance imaging did not reveal any clinically meaningful safety findings in either treated or control patients at one year of follow-up. Measurements of total and mutant HTT protein in the cerebral spinal fluid of the four patients were highly variable and inconclusive. As of December 31, 2021, 19 patients have been enrolled in the clinical trial to date, including nine of 16 in the high-dose cohort.

Also on December 16, 2021, we announced the initiation of patient screening in our 15 patient, open-label, Phase Ib/II study of AMT-130 in the EU, as well our plans to initiate a third cohort in the ongoing U.S. Phase I/II clinical trial. The third cohort, which will include up to 18 additional randomized patients receiving the higher dose, will explore the use of alternative stereotactic navigation systems to simplify placement of catheters for infusions of AMT-130.

Financing

​

As of December 31, 2020, a $35.0 million term loan was outstanding in accordance with the Second Amended and Restated Loan and Security Agreement (the “2018 Amended Facility”) between us and Hercules Capital, Inc. (“Hercules”).

​

On January 29, 2021, we and Hercules amended the 2018 Amended Facility (“2021 Amended Facility”). Pursuant to the 2021 Amended Facility, Hercules agreed to an additional Facility of $100.0 million (“Tranche B”) increasing the aggregate principal amount of the term loan facilities from $35.0 million to up to $135.0 million. On January 29, 2021, we drew down $35.0 million of the Tranche B. Advances under Tranche B bore interest at a rate equal to the greater of (i) 8.25% or (ii) 8.25% plus the prime rate, less 3.25% per annum. The principal balance of $70.0 million and all accrued but unpaid interest on advances under Tranche B was due on June 1, 2023. The back-end fee in respect of advances under the 2021 Amended Facility ranged from 1.65% to 6.85%, depending on the repayment date. In addition to Tranche B, the 2021 Amended Facility also extended the interest only payment period of the previously funded $35.0 million term loan (“Tranche A”) from January 1, 2022 to June l, 2023.

On December 15, 2021, we and Hercules amended and restated the 2021 Amended Facility (“2021 Restated Facility”). Pursuant to the 2021 Restated Facility, Tranche A and Tranche B of the 2021 Amended Facility with a total  outstanding balance of $70.0 million were consolidated into one tranche with a total commitment of $100.0 million. We drew down an additional $30.0 million, resulting in total principal outstanding as of December 31, 2021 of $100.0 million. The 2021 Restated Facility extended the loan’s maturity date from June 1, 2023 until December 1, 2025. The interest-only period is extended from January 1, 2023 to December 1, 2024, or December 1, 2025 if, prior to June 30, 2024, either (a) the BLA for AMT-061 is approved by the FDA or (b) AMT-130 is advanced into a pivotal trial. The interest rate is adjustable and is the greater of (i) 7.95% and (ii) 7.95% plus the prime rate less 3.25% per annum. Under the 2021 Restated Facility, we owe a back-end fee of 4.85% of the outstanding debt. We are required to repay the facility in equal monthly installments of principal and interest between the end of the interest-only period and the maturity date. We continue to owe a $2.5 million back-end fee related to the 2021 Amended Facility which is due on June 1, 2023.

​

On March 1, 2021, we entered into a Sales Agreement with SVB Leerink LLC (“SVB Leerink”) with respect to an at-the-market (“ATM”) offering program, under which we may, from time to time in our sole discretion, offer and sell through SVB Leerink, acting as agent, our ordinary shares, up to an aggregate offering price of $200.0 million. We pay SVB Leerink a commission equal to 3% of the gross proceeds of the sales price of all ordinary shares sold through it as a sales agent under the Sales Agreement.

​

In March and April of 2021, we issued 921,730 ordinary shares at a weighted average price of $33.52 per ordinary share, with net proceeds of $29.6 million, after deducting underwriting discounts and net of offering expenses.

Table of Contents

Facilities

​

In February 2021, we commenced the expansion of our Amsterdam site to build additional laboratories to support the expansions of our research and development activities as well as the construction of a cleanroom capable of manufacturing cGMP materials at a 500-liter scale. The construction and validation of the cleanroom and the additional laboratories were completed in December 2021. In May 2021, we entered into a sublease agreement to let an additional approximately 1,080 square meters of office space at our Amsterdam site to accommodate the hiring of additional full-time employees. The lease expires in October 2028 and includes an option to break the lease on October 31, 2023.

In December 2021, we entered into a new lease for an additional facility in Lexington, Massachusetts, United States of approximately 13,501 square feet of space. The lease is expected to commence in the second half of 2022, is set for seven years starting from the rent commencement date and is non-cancellable. The lease is renewable for one five-year term.

In February 2022, we also entered into a new lease for an additional facility in Lexington, Massachusetts, United States of approximately 12,716 square feet. The lease is expected to commence in the second half of 2022 and is set for a non-cancellable period of seven years and four months. The lease is renewable for one five-year term.

Organization

On May 17, 2021, Pierre Caloz was appointed as Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Caloz oversees all manufacturing operations, global CMC development and innovation, supply chain, and facilities.

​

On June 15, 2021, Christian Klemt was appointed as Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Klemt was our Chief Accounting Officer from August 2017 to June 2021, and he will continue to serve as general manager of our Amsterdam site. Matthew Kapusta, who has been our Chief Executive Officer since December 2016 and had been our Chief Financial Officer from January 2015 to June 2021, will continue to serve as our Chief Executive Officer. In connection with his transition to Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Klemt will also serve as our Principal Financial Officer.

​

On June 16, 2021, our shareholders voted to approve the reappointment of Mr. David Meek and Ms. Paula Soteropoulos as non-executive directors of the Board of Directors. Mr. Meek has been appointed chairman of the Board. Mr. Philip Astley-Sparke did not stand for reappointment and retired from the Board on June 16, 2021.

​

On October 21, 2021, we held an Extraordinary General Meeting of our shareholders and Rachelle Jacques was appointed to the Board of Directors (the “Board”). Ms. Jacques will also serve as a member of the Audit Committee of the Board effective as of October 21, 2021.

Intellectual Property

On May 11, 2021, Pfizer, Inc. filed three petitions at the USPTO seeking Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,982,248 (the “‘248 Patent”) and 10,465,180 (the “‘180 Patent” and together with the ‘248 Patent, the “Patents”). The petitions collectively seek to invalidate all claims of the Patents. In August 2021, we filed our responses asking the USPTO to deny institution of the IPR proceedings. On November 17, 2021, the PTAB issued decisions granting institution on all three IPR proceedings. Our response to the petition is currently due to be filed on March 3, 2022.

​

Table of Contents

Our Mission and Strategy

​

Our mission is to deliver curative, one-time administered genomic medicines that transform the lives of patients. We aim to build an industry-leading, fully integrated, and global company that leverages its technology and proprietary manufacturing platform to deliver these medicines to patients with serious unmet medical needs.

Our strategy to achieve this mission is to:

In collaboration with our partner, achieve regulatory approvals and the commercial launch of etranacogene dezaparvovec (AMT-061). Etranacogene dezaparvovec is a one-time administered gene therapy that combines the potential advantages of AAV5 with an enhanced Padua-FIX transgene, and may provide clinical and tolerability benefits to nearly all patients with hemophilia B. In June 2020, we entered into a commercialization and license agreement with CSL Behring pursuant to which CSL Behring received exclusive global rights to etranacogene dezaparvovec. We are responsible for the manufacturing of etranacogene dezaparvovec and CSL Behring is responsible for the development and commercialization of the Product. In September 2021, we completed the last patient’s 78-week follow-up visit in the HOPE-B Phase III pivotal study, which enrolled a total of 54 patients.

Advance the development of AMT-130, a potential one-time gene-therapy approach for the treatment of Huntington’s disease. AMT-130 is the first AAV-based gene therapy to enter clinical development for Huntington’s disease. It consists of an AAV5 vector carrying an artificial micro-RNA specifically tailored to silence the huntingtin gene and leverages our proprietary miQURE™ silencing technology. The therapeutic goal of AMT-130 is to inhibit the production of the mutant protein (mHTT). Patient enrollment is ongoing in two clinical trials of AMT-130 being conducted in the U.S. and Europe.

Build a pipeline of gene therapy programs focused on rare, liver-directed and central-nervous system (“CNS”) diseases. Beyond our lead clinical program in Huntington’s disease and our late-stage program in hemophilia B now partnered with CSL Behring, we have a pipeline of additional AAV-based gene therapy programs in various stages of preclinical development focused on larger market opportunities and built on validated targets and technologies. We are leveraging novel vectors, promoters, and manufacturing capabilities, to develop gene therapies that have the potential to be best or first in class and are primarily focused on rare, monogenic liver-directed, and CNS disorders as well as cardiovascular and muscle diseases.

Maintain our leadership position in commercial-scale AAV manufacturing. We have established cGMP, commercial-scale manufacturing capabilities for AAV-based gene therapies in our state-of-the-art Lexington, Massachusetts facility and begun construction of a second cGMP manufacturing facility in our Amsterdam, the Netherlands facility that will complement our work in Lexington. We seek to establish larger scale and highly cost-effective capabilities to address more prevalent disorders, and we believe the modularity of our platform provides us with distinct advantages, including the potential for reduced development risk and faster times to market.

Leverage the favorable immunogenicity profile of AAV5-based gene therapies to develop multiple products. We have developed extensive experience with our AAV5-based gene therapies, including in five clinical trials in multiple liver-directed and CNS diseases. During these clinical trials, no patient treated with AAV5-based gene therapies experienced a confirmed immune response to the AAV5 capsid or complications associated with T-cell activation. Additionally, the AAV5 capsid has demonstrated a low avidity to pre-existing neutralizing antibodies (“Nab”), which may enable all, or nearly all patients to be eligible for treatment with AAV5-based gene therapies. We are now in the process of developing Smart AAV capsids that combine the advantages of AAV5 with antibody-directed delivery to move cargo across the blood brain barrier and to improve transduction of cells in the CNS.

​

Invest in next-generation technologies with the goal of enhancing safety, improving efficacy, and expanding the applicability of gene therapy to patients. We are developing proprietary technologies that have the potential to augment the safety and efficacy of our product candidates and broaden the applicability of our gene therapies to a wider range of diseases and patients. These technologies include (i) miQURE, our one-time administered gene silencing platform, (ii) goQURE for simultaneous silencing of a disease gene and replacement with a healthy gene, (iii) AbQURE, using the power of AAV5 to deliver therapeutic antibodies systemically from the liver or into the CNS from cells in the brain, (iv) QUREDose for dosing through neutralizing antibodies and re-dosing technology; along with other tailored vectors, promoters, and novel transgenes. These technologies are developed both in-house by our experienced research team in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, as well as via collaborations with third parties.

Table of Contents

​

Continue to expand our intellectual property portfolio. We have established what we believe is a leading intellectual property portfolio covering various aspects of our technology and programs, including (i) elements of our gene therapy constructs, such as AAV vectors, promoters and transgenes (ii) innovative delivery technologies, such as re-administration of AAV gene therapy; and (iii) proprietary manufacturing processes covering key components of our upstream and downstream capabilities. We expect to continue to expand our intellectual property portfolio by aggressively seeking patent protection for promising aspects of our technology platform and product candidates.

​

Our Product Candidates

​

A summary of our key development programs is provided below:

​

​

​

​

​

Liver-directed diseases

​

Hemophilia B (etranacogene dezaparvovec)

​

Hemophilia B Disease and Market Background

Hemophilia B is a serious and rare inherited disease in males characterized by insufficient blood clotting. The condition can lead to repeated and sometimes life-threatening episodes of external and internal bleeding following accidental trauma or medical interventions. Severe hemophilia is characterized by recurrent episodes of spontaneous joint bleeds that cause long-term damage to the joints resulting in disabling arthropathy. Bleeds may be fatal if they occur in the brain. The deficient blood clotting results from the lack of functional human Factor IX (“hFIX”). Treatment of hemophilia B today consists of prophylactic or on-demand protein replacement therapy, in which one to three times weekly intravenous administrations of plasma-derived or recombinant hFIX are required to prevent bleeding and once daily infusions in case bleeding occurs. Hemophilia B occurs in approximately 1 out of 30,000 live male births.

Table of Contents

CSL Behring collaboration

On June 24, 2020, we entered into the CSL Behring Agreement pursuant to which CSL Behring received exclusive global rights to etranacogene dezaparvovec. The transaction became fully effective on May 6, 2021, one day after the waiting period under the HSR Act expired on May 5, 2021.

CSL Behring is responsible for the development and commercialization of the Product. We agreed to complete the validation of the current manufacturing process as well as to the development and, if requested by CSL Behring, the validation of a next generation manufacturing process. We will be entitled to receive a development milestone payment if we complete these activities in accordance with an agreed development plan and timeline. CSL Behring is responsible for global regulatory submissions and commercialization requirements for the Product. Certain clinical development and regulatory activities performed by us are reimbursed by CSL Behring.

​

On the Signing Date, we and CSL Behring also entered into a development and commercial supply agreement, pursuant to which, among other things, we will supply the Product to CSL Behring at an agreed-upon price commensurate with the SSP. We will be responsible to supply the Product until such time that these capabilities may be transferred to CSL Behring or its designated contract manufacturing organization.

Development of etranacogene dezaparvovec for Hemophilia B

We believe we have substantially completed the development of etranacogene dezaparvovec, a gene therapy for patients with hemophilia B that is designed to restore FIX activity, an essential protein for blood clotting. Etranacogene dezaparvovec includes an AAV5 vector incorporating the FIX-Padua variant (“FIX-Padua”).

Etranacogene dezaparvovec is intended to be delivered by intravenous (“IV”)-infusion, without immunosuppressant therapy, through the peripheral vein in a single treatment session for approximately 30 minutes.

Our goal for etranacogene dezaparvovec was to develop a gene therapy with the following profile:

​

​

AAV5-based gene therapies have been used in a multitude of clinical trials, including five clinical trials conducted by us in patients with hemophilia B and other disorders. No patient treated in clinical trials with our AAV5-based gene therapies has experienced any confirmed, cytotoxic T-cell-mediated immune response to the capsid. An independent clinical trial has demonstrated that AAV5 has the lowest prevalence of pre-existing neutralizing antibodies compared to other AAV vectors. Data from our clinical, preclinical, and nonclinical studies suggest that all, or nearly all patients may be eligible for treatment with etranacogene dezaparvovec.

In June 2018, we initiated our Phase III HOPE-B pivotal trial of etranacogene dezaparvovec. The trial is a multinational, multi-center, open-label, single-arm study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of etranacogene dezaparvovec.

In March 2020, we completed dosing of the 54 patients in the HOPE-B trial. The targeted number of patients to be dosed per the clinical trial protocol was 50. The adult hemophilia B patients, who were classified as severe or moderately severe, were enrolled in a six-month observational period prior to dosing during which time they continued to use their current standard of care to establish a baseline control. After the six-month lead-in period, patients received a single IV-administration of etranacogene dezaparvovec. Patients enrolled in the HOPE-B trial were tested for the presence of pre-existing neutralizing antibodies to AAV5 but not excluded from the trial based on their titers. Following a pre-BLA submission meeting with the FDA on June 4, 2021 the primary endpoint was set as a non-inferiority analysis in ABR 18-months following administration compared to baseline FIX prophylactic therapy in the pivotal Phase III HOPE-B gene therapy trial (approximately 52-weeks after steady-state is achieved). In September 2021, we completed the last patient’s 18-months follow-up visit which enrolled a total of 54 patients.

Table of Contents

On December 9, 2021, we announced the achievement of the pre-specified primary endpoint of non-inferiority in ABR 18-months following administration compared to baseline FIX prophylactic therapy in the HOPE-B Study. ABR for all bleeds after stable FIX expression, assessed at 18 months, was 1.51 compared with the ABR of 4.19 for the lead-in period of at least six months, achieving the primary non-inferiority endpoint and a secondary superiority endpoint (p=0.0002) in the HOPE-B Study. ABR for investigator-adjudicated FIX-treated bleeds was 0.83 compared with lead-in ABR of 3.65 (p<0.0001). All participants continued to demonstrate durable, sustained increases in FIX activity at 18-months post-infusion with a mean FIX activity of 36.9 percent of normal, as measured by a one-stage aPTT-based clotting assay, compared to a mean FIX activity of 39.0 percent of normal at 26-weeks of follow-up. Etranacogene dezaparvovec was generally well-tolerated with over 80% of adverse events considered mild.

We expect that a BLA is to be submitted to the FDA and a MAA to the EMA in the first half of 2022.

In September 2018, we completed the dosing of a Phase IIb dose-confirmation study of etranacogene dezaparvovec. The Phase IIb study is an open-label, single-dose, single-arm, multi-center trial being conducted in the United States. The objective of the study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of etranacogene dezaparvovec and confirm the dose based on FIX activity at six weeks after administration. Three patients with severe hemophilia were enrolled in this study and received a single intravenous infusion of 2x10¹³ genome copies per kilogram (“gc/kg”). Patients were evaluated for the presence of pre-existing neutralizing antibodies to AAV5 but were not excluded from the trial on this basis. We have followed the patients for more than two years to assess FIX activity, bleeding rates and usage of FIX replacement therapy, and will monitor the three patients for a total of five years to evaluate the safety of etranacogene dezaparvovec.

In December 2018, the study’s Data Monitoring Committee evaluated initial data from the Phase IIb study and confirmed the dose of 2x10¹³ gc/kg for the Phase III pivotal trial.

In February, May, July, and December 2019, and in December 2020, we presented updated data from the Phase IIb dose-confirmation study of etranacogene dezaparvovec. The most recent data that we announced in December 2020 from the Phase IIb study of etranacogene dezaparvovec showed that all three patients experienced increasing and sustained FIX levels after a one-time administration of etranacogene dezaparvovec. Mean FIX activity was 44.2% of normal two years after administration, exceeding threshold FIX levels generally considered sufficient to significantly reduce the risk of bleeding events. The first patient achieved FIX activity of 44.7% of normal, the second patient was 51.6% of normal and the third patient was 36.3% of normal. The second and third patients had previously screen-failed and were excluded from another gene therapy study due to pre-existing neutralizing antibodies to a different AAV vector. At two years after dosing, two of the three participants remain free from bleeds and use of FIX replacement therapy. A single bleed has been reported in one participant, who has used a total of two FIX infusions (excluding surgery). All patients have remained free of prophylaxis in the two years since receiving etranacogene dezaparvovec.

The FDA has agreed that etranacogene dezaparvovec will fall under the existing Breakthrough Therapy Designation and IND for AMT-060 (our first-generation hemophilia B gene therapy), and the EMA has also agreed that etranacogene dezaparvovec will fall under the PRIME designation.

Intellectual Property for etranacogene dezaparvovec

In 2017, we acquired intellectual property from Professor Paolo Simioni (“Dr. Simioni”), a hemophilia expert at the University of Padua, Italy. The intellectual property includes U.S. Patent Number 9,249,405, (the “‘405 Patent”). The ‘405 Patent was subject to Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) proceedings at the Patent Trials and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) of the USPTO. Ultimately, the challenged claims of the ‘405 Patent were withdrawn but the unchanged claims remain in force. The ‘405 Patent thus covers compositions of FIX-Padua polypeptides (proteins), their therapeutic uses as well as nucleic acid sequences encoding FIX-Padua. The FIX Padua variant is a FIX protein carrying a leucine at the R338 position, often called the “FIX-Padua” or “Padua mutant”.

On May 29, 2018, the USPTO granted us a second patent, U.S. Patent Number 9,982,248, which covers methods of treating coagulopathies (bleeding disorders), including hemophilia B, using AAV-based gene therapy with nucleic acid encoding the hyperactive FIX Padua variant. 

On November 5, 2019, the USPTO granted us a third patent, U.S. Patent Number 10,465,180, which covers any AAV comprising a nucleic acid encoding a FIX-Padua protein, and promoter sequences, transcription termination and control elements. The claims also cover FIX-Padua variants with at least 70% sequence identity to FIX-R338L.

Table of Contents

In addition to the U.S. patents, on February 20, 2018, the Canadian Intellectual Property Office granted Patent Number 2,737,094, which covers FIX-Padua nucleic acids for use in gene therapy and FIX-Padua polypeptides for use in FIX replacement therapy.

In Europe, European Patent 2337849 directed to a FIX polypeptide protein was withdrawn during opposition proceedings with the European Patent Office (“EPO”). In addition, EP 3252157, a refused divisional European patent application was withdrawn. We are still pursuing a European divisional patent application that was filed on May 14, 2019. Both in the U.S. and in Europe, we have pending divisional applications still in prosecution phases.

On May 11, 2021, Pfizer, Inc. filed three petitions at the USPTO seeking Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,982,248 (the “‘248 Patent”) and 10,465,180 (the “‘180 Patent” and together with the ‘248 Patent, the “Patents”). The petitions collectively seek to invalidate all claims of the Patents. In August 2021, we filed our responses asking the USPTO to deny institution of the IPR proceedings. On November 17, 2021, the PTAB issued decisions granting institution on all three IPR proceedings. Our response to the petition is currently due to be filed on March 3, 2022.

​

Fabry disease program (AMT-191)

Fabry Disease and Market Background

Fabry disease is a progressive, inherited, multisystemic lysosomal storage disease characterized by specific neurological, cutaneous, renal, cardiovascular, cochleo-vestibular, and cerebrovascular manifestations. Fabry disease is caused by a defect in a gene that encodes for a protein called α-galactosidase A (“GLA”). The GLA protein is an essential enzyme required to breakdown globotriaosylsphingosine (“Gb3”) and lyso-globotriaosylsphingosine (“lyso-Gb3”). In patients living with Fabry disease, Gb3 and lyso-Gb3 accumulate in various cells throughout the body causing progressive clinical signs and symptoms of the disease. Current treatment options, which consist of bi-weekly intravenous enzyme replacement therapy, typically have no therapeutic benefit in patients with advanced renal or cardiac disease. Studies have also shown that a majority of male patients develop antibodies that inhibit the GLA protein and interfere with therapeutic efficacy.

Fabry disease has two major disease phenotypes: the type 1 “classic” and type 2 “later-onset” subtypes. Both lead to renal failure, and/or cardiac disease, and early death. Type 1 males have little or no functional a-Gal A enzymatic activity (<1% of normal mean) and marked accumulation of GL-3/Gb3 and related glycolipids in capillaries and small blood vessels which cause the major symptoms in childhood or adolescence. In contrast, males with the type 2 “later-onset” phenotype (previously called cardiac or renal variants) have residual a-Gal A activity, lack GL-3/Gb3 accumulation in capillaries and small blood vessels, and do not manifest the early manifestations of type 1 males. They experience an essentially normal childhood and adolescence. They typically present with renal and/or cardiac disease in the third to seventh decades of life. Most type 2 later-onset patients have been identified by enzyme screening of patients in cardiac, hemodialysis, renal transplant, and stroke clinics and recently by newborn screening. Fabry disease occurs in all racial and ethnic populations and affects males and females. It is estimated that type 1 classic Fabry disease affects approximately one in 40,000 males. The type 2 later-onset phenotype is more frequent, and in some populations may occur as frequently as about 1 in 1,500 to 4,000 males.

Our Development of AMT-191 for Fabry Disease

In September 2020, we selected a lead gene therapy candidate (AMT-191) for the treatment of Fabry disease to advance into Investigational New Drug-enabling studies (“IND-enabling studies”). The lead candidate is a one-time administered AAV5 gene therapy incorporating the GLA transgene. In preclinical studies comparing multiple product candidates, including constructs incorporating a modified alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidase transgene (modNAGA), AMT-191 demonstrated the most robust and sustained increases in GLA activity.

In October 2021, we presented preclinical data for AMT-191 at the European Society of Gene and Cell Therapy (“ESGCT”), confirming efficiency and cross correction in a Fabry mouse model, with increased gamma-linolenic acid in the liver, kidney, heart, and brain and normalized lysoglobotriaosylceramide-3 levels in main target organs.

Table of Contents

Central Nervous System diseases

​

Huntington’s Disease

Huntington’s Disease and Market Background

Huntington’s disease is a severe genetic neurodegenerative disorder causing loss of muscle coordination, behavioral abnormalities, and cognitive decline, often resulting in complete physical and mental deterioration over a 12 to 15-year period. The median survival time after onset is 15 to 18 years (range: 5 to >25 years). Huntington’s disease is caused by an inherited defect in a single gene that codes for a protein called Huntingtin (“HTT”). The prevalence of Huntington’s disease is three to seven per 100,000 in the general population, similar in men and women, and it is therefore considered a rare disease. Despite the ability to identify Huntington’s disease mutation carriers decades before onset, there is currently no available therapy that can delay onset or slow progression of the disease. Although some symptomatic treatments are available, they only are transiently effective despite significant side effects.

Our Development of AMT-130 for Huntington’s Disease

AMT-130 is our novel gene therapy candidate for the treatment of Huntington’s disease. AMT-130 utilizes our proprietary, gene-silencing miQURE platform and incorporates an AAV vector carrying a miRNA specifically designed to silence the huntingtin gene and the potentially highly toxic exon 1 protein fragment. We are currently conducting a Phase I/II clinical trial for AMT-130 in the U.S. and a Phase Ib/II study in the EU. Together, these studies are intended to establish safety, proof of concept, and the optimal dose of AMT-130 to take forward into Phase III development or into a confirmatory study should an accelerated registration pathway be feasible. AMT-130 has received Orphan Drug and Fast Track designations from the FDA and Orphan Medicinal Product Designation from the EMA.

Our goal for AMT-130 is to develop a gene therapy with the following profile:

​

In January 2019, our IND application for AMT-130 was cleared by the FDA.

In February 2019, we presented new preclinical data at the 14^th Annual CHDI Huntington’s disease Therapeutics Conference that illustrate the therapeutic potential of AMT-130 in restoring function of damaged brain cells in Huntington’s disease. In that study, AMT-130 was generally well-tolerated and resulted in a sustained reduction of mutant huntingtin protein.

On April 5, 2021, we announced the completion of enrollment of the low-dose cohort of the U.S. Phase I/II study of AMT-130. The low-dose cohort includes 10 patients, of which six patients received treatment with AMT-130 and four patients received Sham surgery. The U.S. Phase I/II clinical trial is a randomized, controlled, double-blinded, dose-escalation study of AMT-130.

On June 13, 2021, we announced the enrollment of the first two patients in the high-dose cohort of a U.S. Phase I/II study. The high-dose cohort is planned to include 16 patients, of which 10 patients will receive treatment with AMT-130 and six patients will receive Sham surgery. The initiation of patient enrollment in the high-dose cohort followed a meeting of the trial’s independent DSMB that reviewed safety data for the fully enrolled first cohort of 10 patients.

Table of Contents

On December 16, 2021, we announced initial 12-month observations on the first four patients enrolled in the low-dose cohort of the U.S. Phase I/II study. Two of the four enrolled patients received AMT-130, and two patients received Sham surgery as a control. AMT-130 was generally well tolerated in the treated patients, with no serious adverse events related to AMT-130. NfL, a biomarker of injury in the brain, increased as expected immediately following the surgical procedure and returned to baseline in the treated patients. NfL remained relatively constant in the two untreated control patients. Structural magnetic resonance imaging did not reveal any clinically meaningful safety findings in either treated or control patients at one year of follow-up. Measurements of total and mutant HTT protein in the cerebral spinal fluid of the four patients were highly variable and inconclusive. As of December 31, 2021, 19 patients have been enrolled in the clinical trial to date, including nine of 16 in the high-dose cohort.

Also on December 16, 2021, we announced the initiation of patient screening in our 15 patient, open-label, Phase Ib/II study of AMT-130 in the EU, as well our plans to initiate a third cohort in the ongoing U.S. Phase I/II clinical trial. The third cohort, which will include up to 18 additional randomized patients receiving the higher dose, will explore the use of alternative stereotactic navigation systems to simplify placement of catheters for infusions of AMT-130.

Temporal Lobe Epilepsy Program (AMT-260)

Temporal Lobe Epilepsy Disease and Market Background

TLE affects approximately 1.3 million people in the U.S. and Europe alone, of which approximately 0.8 million patients are unable to adequately control acute seizures with currently approved anti-epileptic therapies. Patients with refractory TLE experience increased morbidity, excess mortality, and poor quality of life.

​

Our Development of AMT-260 for Temporal Lobe Epilepsy

AMT-260 is being developed based on exclusive licenses to certain patents obtained in 2020 from two French research institutions that continue to collaborate with us.

​

AMT-260 is a gene therapy using an AAV9 vector. The use of AAV9 to deliver any sequence that affects the expression of the GRIK 2 gene sequence in humans has been exclusively licensed from Regenxbio. Regenxbio provides contractually agreed research and development services up to the transfer of manufacturing activities to a designated contract manufacturer.

​

AMT-260, employs miRNA silencing technology to target suppression of aberrantly expressed kainate receptors in the hippocampus of patients with TLE.

​

In October 2021, we presented preclinical data for AMT-260 at the ESGCT. AMT-260 reduces the expression of GluK2 in cortical neurons, reduces epileptiform activity and hyperlocomotion in a preclinical model of epilepsy and blocks epileptiform discharges in organotypic slices from patients with TLE.

​

Parkinson’s Disease (AMT-210)

AMT-210 is our preclinical product candidate for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease, targeting alpha-synuclein as a potential treatment for Parkinson’s disease.

Parkinson’s disease is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that leads to motor deterioration and debilitating non-motor symptoms. It is the second most common neurodegenerative disorder after Alzheimer’s disease, and no disease-modifying therapies are available.

Parkinson’s disease is believed to be caused through the presence of toxic alpha-synuclein aggregates, affecting dopaminergic circuits. AMT-210 is a one-time, brain-targeting AAV gene therapy incorporating uniQure’s miQURE gene silencing technology. It is designed to halt misfolded alpha-synuclein and subsequent fibril formation in familial and sporadic Parkinson’s disease patients.

Table of Contents

Alzheimer’s Disease (AMT-240)

AMT-240 is our preclinical product candidate for the treatment autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s disease is the most prevalent neurodegenerative disease, causing dementia and subsequent gradual loss of ability to function with disease progression. Apolipoprotein E (APOE) is believed to potentially be an important factor in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease. APOE consists of 3 major isoforms that are structurally and functionally different. The APOE4 isoform is believed to potentially be the largest risk factor to develop Alzheimer’s. In contrast to the toxic properties of APOE4, clinical case studies indicate a potentially protective role of other APOE variants.

AMT-240 is a one-time gene therapy using uniQure's miQURE gene-silencing technology to silence the toxic APOE variant, in combination with overexpressing a protective APOE variant as treatment for autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease patients.

Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (AMT-160)

AMT-161 is our preclinical product candidate utilizing our miQURE gene silencing technology to target toxic C9ORF72 as a potential treatment for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). 

ALS is caused by degeneration of upper and lower motor neurons, resulting in muscle weakness and atrophy. This rapid progressive loss of motor neurons typically starts at mid-life and median survival from disease manifestation is no more than two to four years.

The most prevalent genetic defect causing ALS is a G4C2 hexanucleotide repeat expansion in the C9ORF72 gene, which acquires toxic properties resulting in degeneration starting in motor neurons in the spinal cord. AMT-161 is designed to be a one-time, intrathecally-administered AAV gene therapy using the miQURE silencing technology to target repeat-expanded C9ORF72 to lower toxic RNA aggregates and prevent dipeptide protein formation. 

Spinocerebellar Ataxia, Type 3 (AMT-150)

After conducting a comprehensive review of our product candidates, we decided in December 2021 to deprioritize the preclinical development of AMT-150, shifting resources and focus to our other research programs.

BMS Partnered Research Programs

We and Bristol-Myers Squibb (“BMS”) entered into a collaboration and license agreement in May 2015 (“BMS CLA”). The BMS CLA provides BMS with exclusive access to our gene therapy technology platform for four targets primarily in cardiovascular diseases.

New Technology Development

​

We are seeking to develop next-generation technologies with the goal of further improving the potential of AAV-based gene therapies to treat patients suffering from debilitating diseases.

We are focused on innovative technologies across each of the key components of an AAV-based gene therapy, including: (i) the capsid, or the outer viral protein shell that encloses the target DNA; (ii) the promoter, or the DNA sequence that drives the expression of the transgene; and (iii) the transgene, or therapeutic gene.

We dedicate significant effort to designing and screening novel AAV capsids with the potential for (i) higher biological potency; (ii) improved biodistribution including greater cell transduction and increased cellular specificity; and (iii) enhanced safety. We believe we have significant expertise in vector engineering and have created promising genetically engineered capsids using a “rational design” approach.

We are focusing our efforts on rationally engineering the AAV capsids to target them to specific cells and/or tissues. These engineered viruses contain antibody fragments or peptides that target them to specific tissues or cells and to diminish potential off target effects.

Table of Contents

We work extensively on designing synthetic promoters with the potential of enabling higher levels of protein expression in specific tissue types. A “promoter” is an essential component of a gene therapy construct that controls expression of a therapeutic protein. Synthetic promoters, that do not exist in nature, are optimally tailored to drive gene expression at a desired level and specificity.

To further tailor and optimize gene therapies to address certain disorders we may also incorporate specific modifications into the transgenes of our gene therapy constructs. For example, we incorporated the Padua-FIX variant into our hemophilia B gene therapy to substantially increase the resulting FIX activity and potentially improve clinical outcomes. For other programs, such as our gene therapy construct for Fabry disease, we have also utilized modified transgenes with the goal of enhancing efficacy, durability, and safety, as well as expanding the access of gene therapies to patients with inhibitors.

We are developing methods for delivering multiple doses of a gene therapy to a patient using a combination of immune modulation and antibody neutralization. The ability to deliver multiple doses of an AAV to a patient could potentially increase our ability to deliver the correct dose of a virus to a patient and might enable us to re-administer our gene therapies to patients that have lost expression of a transgene.

We have also demonstrated the ability to deliver engineered DNA constructs that can silence or suppress disease-causing genes. Our miQURE gene silencing platform, based on exclusively licensed technology from Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (“CSHL”), is designed to degrade mutated genes without off-target toxicity and induce silencing of the mutated gene in the entire target organ through secondary exosome-mediated delivery. miQURE-based gene therapy candidates, such as AMT-130, incorporate proprietary, therapeutic miRNA constructs that can be delivered using AAVs to potentially provide long-lasting activity. Preclinical studies of miQURE-based gene therapies have demonstrated several important advantages, including enhanced tissue-specificity, improved nuclear and cytoplasmic gene lowering and no off-target effects associated with impact to the cellular miRNA or messenger RNA transcriptome.

Commercial-Scale Manufacturing Capabilities

The ability to reliably produce at a high quality and at commercial scale is a critical success factor in AAV gene therapy. We produce our gene therapies at our state-of-the-art, Lexington, Massachusetts-based manufacturing facility using a proprietary baculovirus expression vector system.

We believe our integrated manufacturing capabilities provide us several potential advantages, including:

Table of Contents

​

Intellectual Property

​

Introduction

​

We strive to protect the proprietary technologies that we believe are important to our business, including seeking and maintaining patent protection in the United States, Europe, and other countries for novel components of gene therapies, the chemistries, and processes for manufacturing these gene therapies, the use of these components in gene therapies, our technology platform, and other inventions and related technology. We also rely on trade secrets, security measures and careful monitoring of our proprietary information to protect aspects of our business that are not amenable to, or that we do not consider appropriate for, patent protection.

​

We expect that our probability of success will be significantly enhanced by our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other proprietary protection for commercially important technology, inventions and know-how related to our business, defend and enforce our patents, maintain our licenses to use intellectual property owned by third parties, preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets and operate without infringing the valid and enforceable patents and other proprietary rights of third parties. We also rely on know-how, continuing technological innovation and in-licensing opportunities to develop, strengthen and maintain our proprietary position in the field of AAV-based gene therapies.

​

In some cases, we are dependent on the patented or proprietary technology of third parties to develop and commercialize our products. We must obtain licenses from such third parties on commercially reasonable terms, or our business could be harmed, possibly materially. For example, we license from third parties essential parts of the therapeutic gene cassettes as well as the principal AAV vectors we use and key elements of our manufacturing process. We anticipate that we will require additional licenses in the future.

​

Because most patent applications throughout the world are confidential for 18 months after the earliest claimed priority date, and since the publication of discoveries in the scientific and patent literature often lags actual discoveries, we cannot be certain that we were the first to invent or file applications for the inventions covered by our pending patent applications. Moreover, we may have to participate in post-grant proceedings in the patent offices of the United States or foreign jurisdictions, such as oppositions, reexaminations, or interferences, in which the patentability or priority of our inventions are challenged. Such proceedings could result in substantial cost, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us.

​

Our intellectual property portfolio consists of owned and in-licensed patents, copyrights, licenses, trademarks, trade secrets and other intellectual property rights.

​

Patent Portfolio

​

Our gene therapy programs are protected by patents and patent applications directed to various aspects of our technology. For example, our gene therapy programs are protected by patents and patent applications with composition-of-matter or method of use claims that cover the therapeutic gene, the promoter, the viral vector capsid, or other specific parts of these technologies. We also seek protection of core aspects of our manufacturing process, particularly regarding our baculovirus expression system for AAV vectors in insect cells. In addition, we have filed manufacturing patent applications with claims directed to alternative compositions-of-matter and manufacturing processes to seek better protection from competitors.

​

We file the initial patent applications for our commercially important technologies in both Europe and the United States. For the same technologies, we typically file international patent applications under the PCT within a year. We also may seek, usually on a case-by-case basis, local patent protection in Canada, Australia, Japan, China, India, Israel, South Africa, New Zealand, South Korea, and Eurasia, as well as South American jurisdictions such as Brazil and Mexico.

​

Table of Contents

As of December 31, 2021, our intellectual property portfolio included 105 issued patents (including 27 U.S. patents and 10 patents granted by the European Patent Office (“EPO”) and 120 pending patent applications (including 24 U.S. patent applications and 23 EPO patent applications.

​

These patents relate to a variety of technologies including our product candidates that are in development and our manufacturing and technology platform.

​

Our Patent Portfolio Related to Certain Development Programs

​

Hemophilia B (AMT-061)

​

We own a patent family, including patents and patent applications, directed to the use of the Padua mutation in hFIX for gene therapy in etranacogene dezaparvovec.

​

Huntington’s disease (AMT-130)

​

We own two patent families directed to gene therapy treatment of Huntington’s disease, including with AMT-130. This miQURE gene silencing technology platform is designed to degrade disease-causing genes, without off-target toxicity, and induce silencing of the entire target organ through secondary exosome-mediated delivery.

​

Licenses

​

We have obtained exclusive or non-exclusive rights from third parties under a range of patents and other technology that we use in our product and development programs, as described below. Our agreements with these third parties generally grant us a license to make, use, sell, offer to sell, and import products covered by the licensed patent rights in exchange for our payment of some combination of an upfront amount, annual fees, royalties, a percentage of amounts we receive from our licensees and payments upon the achievement of specified development, regulatory or commercial milestones. Some of the agreements specify the extent of the efforts we must use to develop and commercialize licensed products. The agreements generally expire upon expiration of the last-to-expire valid claim of the licensed patents. Each licensor may terminate the applicable agreement if we materially breach our obligations and fail to cure the breach within a specified cure period.

​

Technology Used for Multiple Programs

​

We are exploiting technology from third-party sources described below in more than one of our programs.

​

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

​

In 2015, we entered into a license agreement with CSHL in which CSHL granted to us an exclusive, sublicensable license to develop and commercialize certain of CSHL’s patented RNAi-related technology for use in connection with the treatment or prevention of Huntington’s disease. The standard 20-year patent term for the licensed patents expires in 2031.

​

In 2018, we entered into an amendment of the license agreement with CSHL that expanded the license to include the diagnosis, treatment, or prevention of all CNS diseases in the Field, including but not limited to Huntington’s disease. In addition, under the amended license agreement CSHL granted to us an exclusive license for a three-year term to develop and commercialize therapeutic products for the additional disease classifications in the Field of liver diseases, neuromuscular diseases, and cardiovascular diseases. If we meet certain diligence milestones during the initial three-year development term, we may include exclusively additional disease classifications within the additional Fields on similar terms and conditions as the CNS diseases.

​

Table of Contents

Under this license agreement, annual fees, development milestone payments and future single-digit royalties on net sales of a licensed product are payable to CSHL.

​

Protein Sciences

​

In 2016, we revised our existing license contract with Protein Sciences Corporation for the use of its expresSF+ insect cell line and associated technology for human therapeutic and prophylactic uses (except influenza) to provide us with a royalty free, perpetual right and license to the licensed technology in the field of AAV-based gene therapy.

​

National Institutes of Health—AAV production

​

In 2007, we entered into a non-exclusive license agreement with the NIH, which we amended in 2009 and 2013. The patents under this license cover technology to produce AAV vectors in insect cells. We may only grant sublicenses under this agreement with the NIH’s consent, which may not be unreasonably withheld. The standard 20-year term for the underlying patents will expire in 2022.

​

Payment obligations to the NIH under this license agreement include a low single-digit percentage royalty on the net sales of licensed products by us or on our behalf; development and regulatory milestone payments; and an annual maintenance fee creditable against royalties. We do not have to pay royalties or milestone fees under this agreement if we must pay royalties or milestone fees under our 2011 agreement with the NIH, described below, for the same product. Under the license agreement, we have agreed to meet benchmarks in our development efforts, including as to development events, clinical trials, and marketing approval, within specified timeframes.

​

The NIH may terminate this agreement in specified circumstances relating to our insolvency or bankruptcy. We may terminate this agreement for any reason, in any territory, subject to a specified notice period.

​

National Institutes of Health—AAV5

​

In 2011, we entered into another license agreement with the NIH, superseding the 2007 agreement. This agreement was amended in 2016. Under this agreement, the NIH granted us an exclusive, worldwide license to patents relating to AAV5 for use in therapeutic products to be delivered to the brain or liver for treatment of human diseases originating in the brain or liver but excluding arthritis-related diseases, and a non-exclusive, worldwide license to patents relating to AAV5 for all other diseases. We refer to the products licensed under this agreement as AAV5 products. We may grant sublicenses under this agreement only with the NIH’s consent, which may not be unreasonably withheld. The last patent under this license expired in July 2021.

​

Payment obligations to the NIH under this license agreement include royalties equal to a low single-digit percentage of net sales of AAV5 products; development and regulatory milestone payments; and an annual maintenance fee creditable against royalties. If an AAV5 product is also covered by our 2007 agreement with the NIH, our obligation to pay royalties on net sales and our obligation to pay milestone fees only apply under this 2011 agreement and not the 2007 agreement. We have agreed to meet benchmarks in our development efforts, including as to development events, clinical trials, and marketing approval, within specified timeframes.

​

Table of Contents

Technology Used for Specific Development Programs

​

Hemophilia B

​

Padua

​

On April 17, 2017, we entered into an Assignment and License Agreement with Dr. Simioni (the “Padua Assignment”). Pursuant to the Padua Assignment, we acquired from Dr. Simioni all right, title and interest in a patent family covering the variant of the FIX gene, carrying an R338L mutation (FIX-Padua; “Padua IP”). Under the Padua Assignment, we have also licensed certain know-how included in the Padua IP. We have provided Dr. Simioni with an initial license fee and reimbursement of past expenses. Under the agreement, additional payments may come due upon the achievement of certain milestone events related to the development of the Padua IP or as royalties on a percentage of certain revenues. We have granted a license of the Padua IP back to Dr. Simioni for therapeutic or diagnostic use of a modified Factor IX protein (other than in connection with gene therapy) and any application for non-commercial research purposes. We have agreed to indemnify Dr. Simioni for claims arising from our research, development, manufacture, or commercialization of any product making use of the Padua IP, subject to certain conditions. The Padua Assignment will remain in effect, unless otherwise terminated pursuant to the terms of the Padua Assignment, until the later of (i) the expiration date of the last of the patents within the Padua IP and (ii) the expiration of the payment obligations under the Padua Assignment.

​

St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital

​

In 2008, we entered into a license agreement with St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital (“St. Jude”), which we amended in 2012. Under this license agreement, St. Jude has granted us an exclusive license, with a right to sublicense, to patent rights relating to expression of hFIX in gene therapy vectors, to make, import, distribute, use, and commercialize products containing hFIX covered by a valid patent claim in the field of gene therapy for treatment or prophylaxis of hemophilia B. In addition, we have a first right of negotiation regarding any patent applications that are filed by St. Jude for any improvements to the patent rights licensed to us. The U.S. patent rights will expire in 2028 and the European patents will expire in 2025.

​

We have agreed to pay St. Jude a royalty equal to a low single-digit percentage of net sales, if any, by us or our sublicensees of products covered by the licensed patent rights, and a portion of certain amounts we receive from sublicensees ranging from a mid-single digit to a mid-teen double-digit percentage of such amounts. With respect to our collaboration with CSL Behring, we have agreed with St. Jude on an apportionment of certain amounts we receive from CSL Behring as sublicensing revenue that is equivalent to a low-single digit percentage of such amounts.

​

We have also agreed to pay St. Jude a one-time milestone of $5.0 million upon the BLA and MAA approval, and an annual maintenance fee creditable against royalties and milestones in the same year.

​

The agreement will remain in effect until no further payment is due relating to any licensed product under this agreement or either we or St. Jude exercise our rights to terminate it. St. Jude may terminate the agreement in specified circumstances relating to our insolvency. We may terminate the agreement for convenience at any time subject to a specified notice period.

​

Temporal Lobe Epilepsy

​

Regenxbio

​

In June 2020, Corlieve entered into an agreement, subsequently amended in June 2021, with Regenxbio for an exclusive (in the field of using AAV9 to expression of the GRIK 2 gene in humans (the “Field”)), sublicensable, royalty-bearing, worldwide license under Regenxbio’s interest in EU patent application 19185533.7 (the “Foreground Patents”) and related patents, as well as patents covering inventions developed during the collaboration and certain patents and know-how relating to AAV9 (the “Background Technology”). The license also includes non-exclusive rights to exploit the licensed Foreground Patents and certain related patents know-how developed in collaboration pursuant to the license agreement outside the Field. The license also includes retained and license back rights that permit Regenxbio and its upstream licensors to exploit for any research, development, commercialization, or other purposes certain patents, inventions and know-how (other than the Foreground Patents) subject to or created pursuant to the license agreement.

Table of Contents

​

Payment obligations under the agreement provide for royalty payments on net sales in the mid-single digit to low-double digits, and milestone payments to Regenxbio in the mid-tens of millions of dollars related to clinical trials, commercialization, and net sales. The agreement also calls for sublicense fees in the low-double digit range. The royalty is paid on sales of license products using any of licensed patents or know-how for as long as the agreement is in effect. Royalty and milestone payments may continue to be owed under the license following termination of the agreement if licensed products are sold following termination of the license. Under the agreement, Corlieve has certain diligence obligations and Regenxbio has certain obligations related to the pre-clinical development of manufacturing technology.

​

Inserm Transfert

​

In January 2020, Corlieve entered into license agreement with Inserm Transfert SA (also acting as a delegate for the French National Institute of Health and Medical Research) and La societe SATT Aquitaine (the counterparties collectively referred to as “Inserm Transfert”). Under the license agreement, Corlieve is granted an exclusive, sublicensable, royalty-bearing, worldwide license under European Patent (“EP”) patent application 13306265.3 in the field of the prevention and treatment of epilepsy, and in Inserm Transfert’s share in EP patent application 19185533.7 (which is co-owned by Regenxbio) in the field of all human use. Corlieve also is granted a non-exclusive, sublicensable, royalty-bearing, worldwide license under certain know-how in the fields that may be developed by Inserm pursuant to the agreements. Under the agreements, Inserm retains certain rights for teaching, academic and/or research purposes.

​

Payment obligations under the agreements include a royalty on the net sales of license products in the low single digits, milestone payments associated with clinical trial and regulatory approval milestones of multiple licensed products totaling in the low-single digit millions of Euros. The agreement also calls for sublicense fees in the low to mid double-digit range depending on the timing of such sublicense. The obligation to pay royalties extends until the later of the expiration of the patent rights, any regulatory exclusivity period, and 10 years from the first commercial sale of a licensed product.

​

Trade Secrets

​

In addition to patents and licenses, we rely on trade secrets and know-how to develop and maintain our competitive position. For example, significant aspects of the process by which we manufacture our gene therapies are based on unpatented trade secrets and know-how. We seek to protect our proprietary technology and processes and obtain and maintain ownership of certain technologies, in part, through confidentiality agreements and invention assignment agreements with our employees, consultants, scientific advisors, contractors and commercial collaborator. We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data, trade secrets and know-how by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems.

​

Trademarks

​

We have a number of material registered trademarks, including “uniQure”, that we have registered in various jurisdictions including the United States and the European Union. We may seek trademark protection for other product candidates and technologies as and when appropriate.

​

Competition

​

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, including in the gene therapy field, are characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition, and a strong emphasis on intellectual property. We face substantial competition from many different sources, including large and specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic research institutions and governmental agencies and public and private research institutions.

​

We face worldwide competition from larger pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology firms, universities and other research institutions and government agencies that are developing and commercializing pharmaceutical products. Our key competitors focused on developing therapies in various indications, include among others, Pfizer, Freeline Therapeutics, Intellia Therapeutics, Sangamo Biosciences, Voyager Therapeutics, Passage Bio, Roche, PTC Therapeutics, Prilenia Therapeutics, Triplet Therapeutics, CombiGene, AvroBio, Caritas Therapeutics, and 4D Molecular Therapeutics.

​

Table of Contents

We also compete with existing standards of care, therapies, and symptomatic treatments, as well as any new therapies that may become available in the future for the indications we are targeting.

​

Many of our current or potential competitors, either alone or with their collaborators, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials and marketing approved products than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and gene therapy industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and 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.

​

The key competitive factors affecting the success of all our programs are likely to be their efficacy, safety, convenience, price, and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payers. We also believe that, due to the small size of the patient populations in the orphan indications we target, being first to market will be a significant competitive advantage. We believe that our advantages in vector and manufacturing technology will allow us to reach market in a number of indications ahead of our competitors, and to capture the markets in these indications.

​

Government Regulation and Reimbursement

​

Government authorities in the United States, European Union and other countries extensively regulate, among other things, the approval, research, development, preclinical and clinical testing, manufacture (including any manufacturing changes), packaging, storage, recordkeeping, labeling, advertising, promotion, distribution, marketing, post-approval monitoring and reporting, reimbursement, and import and export of pharmaceutical products, biological products, and medical devices. We believe that all our product candidates will be regulated as biological products, or biologics, and in particular, as gene therapies, and will be subject to such requirements and regulations under U.S. and foreign laws. For other countries outside of the United States and the European Union, marketing approval and pricing and reimbursement requirements vary from country to country. If we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, we may be subject to, among other things, fines, refusal to approve pending applications, suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals, product recalls, seizure of products, operating restrictions, and criminal prosecution.

​

Regulation in the United States

​

In the United States, the FDA regulates biologics under the Public Health Service Act (“PHSA”) and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”) and regulations and guidance implementing these laws. These laws and regulatory guidance are continually evolving. By example, in March 2020, the U.S. Congress passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or CARES Act, which includes various provisions regarding FDA drug shortage reporting requirements, as well as provisions regarding supply chain security, such as risk management plan requirements, and the promotion of supply chain redundancy and domestic manufacturing. The FDA has also issued a number of guidance documents concerning how sponsors and investigators may address COVID-19 challenges, including challenges specific to gene therapies. These guidance documents are continually evolving.

​

Obtaining regulatory approvals and ensuring compliance with applicable statutes and regulatory requirements entails the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources, including payment of user fees for applications to the FDA. All our current product candidates are subject to regulation by the FDA as biologics. An applicant seeking approval to market and distribute a new biologic in the United States must typically undertake the following:

​

Table of Contents

​

Human Clinical Studies in the United States under an IND

​

Before initiating clinical studies in the United States or under an IND, investigational product sponsors must first complete pre-clinical studies. Preclinical studies include laboratory evaluation of chemistry, pharmacology, toxicity, and product formulation, as well as animal studies to assess potential safety and efficacy. Such studies must generally be conducted in accordance with the FDA’s Good Laboratory Practices (“GLPs”).

​

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational biologic to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with current GCP requirements, which includes requirements for informed consent, study conduct, and IRB review and approval. A protocol for each clinical trial and any subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of an IND. INDs include preclinical study reports, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data, or literature, and proposed clinical study protocols among other things. A clinical trial may not proceed in the United States unless and until an IND becomes effective, which is 30 days after its receipt by the FDA. The FDA may raise concerns or questions related to one or more components of an IND and place the IND on clinical hold if during its review the FDA determines that study subjects would be exposed to significant risk of illness or injury. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. Clinical holds also may be imposed by the FDA at any time before or during trials due to safety concerns or non-compliance.

​

The protocol and informed consent documents, as well as other subject communications must also be approved by an IRB that continues to oversee that trial. In the case of gene therapy studies, an IBC at the local level must also review and maintain oversight over the particular study, in addition to the IRB. The FDA, an IRB, and IBC, or the sponsor may suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or that research requirements are not being met. Information about certain clinical trials, including results, must be submitted within specific timeframes for listing on the 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. Investigators must also provide certain information to the clinical trial sponsors to allow the sponsors to make certain financial disclosures to the FDA.

​

Subsequent clinical protocols and amendments must also be submitted to an active IND but are not subject to the 30-day review period imposed on an original IND. Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must also be submitted at least annually to the FDA and the IRB and more frequently if serious adverse events or other significant safety information is found. There is a risk that once a new protocol or amendment is submitted to an active IND there may be an extended period before the FDA may comment or provide feedback. This may result in a need to modify an ongoing clinical trial to incorporate this feedback or even a clinical hold of the trial. There is also risk that FDA may not provide comments or feedback but may ultimately disagree with the design of the study once a BLA is submitted.

​

Table of Contents

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

​

​

In addition, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, a BLA or BLA supplement for a new active ingredient, indication, dosage form, dosage regimen, or route of administration, must contain data that are adequate to assess the safety and effectiveness of the product for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations, and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. The FDA may, on its own initiative or at the request of the applicant, grant deferrals for submission of some or all pediatric data until after approval of the product for use in adults, or full or partial waivers from the pediatric data requirements. Orphan products are also exempt from the PREA requirements.

The manufacture of investigational drugs and biologics for the conduct of human clinical trials is subject to cGMP requirements. Investigational drugs and biologics and active ingredients and therapeutic substances imported into the United States are also subject to regulation by the FDA. Further, the export of investigational products outside of the United States is subject to regulatory requirements of the receiving country as well as U.S. export requirements under the FDCA.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the product candidate as well as finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, manufacturers must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality, potency, and purity of the final product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

Regulation and FDA Guidance Governing Gene Therapy Products

​

The FDA has and continues to issue various guidance documents with respect to the development and commercialization of gene therapies. These include guidance on, among other things, the proper preclinical and nonclinical assessment of gene therapies; the chemistry, manufacturing, and controls; the design and conduct of clinical trials; the design and analysis of shedding studies for virus or bacteria based gene therapies; the proper design of tests to measure product potency in support of an IND or BLA application; and measures to observe delayed adverse effects in subjects and patients who have been exposed to gene therapies via long-term follow-up with associated regulatory reporting. The FDA has also issued guidance documents specific to gene therapies during the COVID-19 public health emergency, including one on manufacturing considerations and the conduct of risk assessments. FDA has further issued guidance focused on the development of gene therapies for the treatment of rare neurodegenerative diseases, rare diseases, and hemophilia, as such products may face special challenges.

​

Certain gene therapy studies are also subject to the National Institutes of Health’s Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules, (“NIH Guidelines”). The NIH Guidelines include the review of the study by an IBC. The IBC assesses the compliance of the research with the NIH Guidelines, assesses the safety of the research and identifies any potential risk to public health or the environment.

​

Table of Contents

Compliance with cGMP Requirements

​

Manufacturers of biologics must comply with applicable cGMP regulations, including quality control and quality assurance and maintenance of records and documentation. Manufacturers and others involved in the manufacture and distribution of such products must also register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and provide the FDA a list of products manufactured at the facilities. Recently, the information that must be submitted to the FDA regarding manufactured products was expanded through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security, or CARES, Act to include the volume of drugs produced during the prior year. Establishments may be subject to periodic unannounced inspections by government authorities to ensure compliance with cGMPs and other laws. Discovery of non-compliance may result in the FDA placing restrictions on a product, manufacturer, or holder of an approved BLA, and may extend to requiring withdrawal of the product from the market, among other consequences. The FDA will not approve an application 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.

​

FDA Programs to Expedite Product Development

​

The FDA has several programs to expedite product development, including fast track designation and breakthrough therapy designation. These are outlined in specific FDA guidance. Under the fast track program, the sponsor of a biologic candidate may request the FDA to designate the product for a specific indication as a fast track product concurrent with or after the filing of the IND for the product candidate. To be eligible for a fast track designation, the FDA must determine that a product candidate is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrates the potential to address an unmet medical need. This may be demonstrated by clinical or nonclinical data. If granted, the benefits include greater interactions with the FDA and rolling review of sections of the BLA. In some cases, a fast track product may be eligible for accelerated approval or priority review.

​

Moreover, under the provisions of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act, enacted in 2012, a sponsor can request designation of a product candidate as a breakthrough therapy. A breakthrough therapy is defined as a product that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other products, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the 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. Products designated as breakthrough therapies are eligible for rolling review, intensive guidance on an efficient development program beginning as early as Phase 1 trials, and a commitment from the FDA to involve senior managers and experienced review staff in a proactive collaborative, cross disciplinary review.

​

Biologics 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, which means the FDA may approve the product based upon 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. A biologic candidate approved on this basis is subject to rigorous post-marketing compliance requirements, including the completion of Phase 4 or post-approval clinical trials to confirm the effect on the clinical endpoint. Failure to conduct required post-approval studies, or confirm a clinical benefit during post-marketing studies, will allow the FDA to withdraw the drug or biologic from the market on an expedited basis. All promotional materials for drug or biologic candidates approved under accelerated regulations are subject to prior review by the FDA. In recent years, the accelerated approval pathway has come under significant FDA and public scrutiny. Accordingly, the FDA may be more conservative in granting accelerated approval or, if granted, may be more apt to withdrawal approval if clinical benefit is not confirmed.

​

Even if a product qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened.

​

Table of Contents

Submission of a BLA

​

The results of the preclinical and clinical studies, together with detailed information relating to the product’s chemistry, manufacture, controls, and proposed labeling, among other things, are submitted to the FDA as part of a BLA requesting a license to market the product for one or more indications. The submission of a BLA is subject to an application user fee, though products with orphan designation are exempt from the BLA filing fee. The sponsor of an approved BLA is also subject to annual program user fees. Orphan products may also be exempt from program fees provided that certain criteria are met. These fees are typically increased annually. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (“PDUFA”) the FDA has agreed to specified performance goals in the review of BLAs.

​

Most such applications are meant to be reviewed within ten months from the filing acceptance date (typically 60 days after date of filing), and most applications for priority review products are meant to be reviewed within six months of the filing acceptance date (typically 60 days after date of filing). Priority review designation may be assigned to product candidates that are intended to treat serious conditions and, if approved, would provide significant improvements in the safety or effectiveness of the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of the serious condition.

​

The FDA may refuse to file an application and request additional information. In this event, the application must be refiled with the additional information. The refiled application is also subject to assessment of content before the FDA accepts it for review. Once the submission is accepted, the FDA begins an in-depth substantive review. The FDA will assign a date for its final decision for the product (the PDUFA action date) but can extend this date to complete review of a product application or to consider additional information submitted during the application review period. The PDUFA action date is only a goal, thus, the FDA does not always meet its PDUFA dates. Additionally, this review period may change as the PDUFA statute must be reauthorized by Congress by September 2022.

​

The FDA may also refer certain applications to an advisory committee. Before approving a product candidate for which no active ingredient (including any ester or salt of active ingredients) has previously been approved by the FDA, the FDA must either refer that product candidate to an external advisory committee or provide in an action letter, a summary of the reasons why the FDA did not refer the product candidate to an advisory committee. The FDA may also refer other product candidates to an advisory committee if the FDA believes that the advisory committee’s expertise would be beneficial. An advisory committee is typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts, which review, evaluate, and make a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions.

The FDA reviews applications to determine, among other things, whether a product candidate meets the agency’s approval standards and whether the manufacturing methods and controls are adequate to assure and preserve the product’s identity, strength, quality, potency, and purity. Before approving a marketing application, the FDA typically will inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured, referred to as a Pre-Approval Inspection. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities, including contract manufacturers and subcontractors, are in compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving a marketing application the FDA will inspect one or more clinical trial sites to assure compliance with GCPs.

After evaluating the marketing application and all related information, including the advisory committee recommendation, if any, and inspection reports regarding the manufacturing facilities and clinical trial sites, the FDA may issue an approval letter or a complete response letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the biological product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A complete response letter generally outlines the deficiencies in the submission and may require substantial additional testing or information for the FDA to reconsider the application. Even with submission of this additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval. If and when those deficiencies have been addressed to the FDA’s satisfaction in a resubmission of the BLA, the FDA will issue an approval letter. Many drug applications receive complete response letters from the FDA during their first cycle of FDA review.

​

Table of Contents

If the FDA approves a product, it may limit the approved indications for use of the product; require that contraindications, warnings, or precautions be included in the product labeling, including boxed warnings; require that post-approval studies, including Phase IV clinical trials, be conducted to further assess a biologic’s efficacy and safety after approval; or require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the product after commercialization. The FDA may prevent or limit further marketing of a product based on the results of post-market studies or surveillance programs. The FDA may also not approve label statements that are necessary for successful commercialization and marketing.

​

In addition to the above conditions of approval, the FDA also may require submission of a REMS to ensure that the benefits of the product candidate outweigh the risks. The REMS plan could include medication guides, physician communication plans, and elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries, or other risk minimization tools. An assessment of the REMS must also be conducted at set intervals. Following product approval, a REMS may also be required by the FDA if new safety information is discovered, and the FDA determines that a REMS is necessary to ensure that the benefits of the product outweigh the risks. In guidance, FDA stated that during the review of a BLA for a gene therapy, it will assess whether a REMS is necessary. Several gene therapy products that have been approved by FDA have required substantial REMS, which included requirements for dispensing hospital and clinic certification, training, adverse event reporting, documentation, and audits and monitoring conducted by the sponsor, among other conditions. REMS, such as these, can be expensive and burdensome to implement, and burdensome for hospitals, clinics, and healthcare providers to comply with.

​

Biosimilars and Exclusivity

​

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”) which amended the PHSA authorized the FDA to approve biosimilars under Section 351(k) of the PHSA. Under the BCPIA, a manufacturer may submit an application for licensure of a biologic product that is biosimilar to or interchangeable with a previously approved biological product or reference product. For the FDA to approve a biosimilar product, it must find that it is highly similar to the reference product notwithstanding minor differences in clinically inactive components and that there are no clinically meaningful differences between the reference product and proposed biosimilar product in safety, purity or potency. A finding of interchangeability requires that a product is determined to be biosimilar to the reference product, and that the product can be expected to produce the same clinical results as the reference product and, for products administered multiple times, the biologic and the reference biologic may be switched after one has been previously administered without increasing safety risks or risks of diminished efficacy relative to exclusive use of the reference biologic.

​

An application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following approval of the reference product, and it may not be approved until 12 years thereafter. These exclusivity provisions only apply to biosimilar companies and not companies that rely on their own data and file a full BLA. Moreover, this exclusivity is not without limitation. Certain changes and supplements to an approved BLA, and subsequent applications filed by the same sponsor, manufacturer, licensor, predecessor in interest, or other related entity do not qualify for the twelve-year exclusivity period. Further, the twelve-year exclusivity market period in the U.S. for biologics has been controversial and may be shortened in the future.

The PHSA also includes provisions to protect reference products that have patent protection. The biosimilar product sponsor and reference product sponsor may exchange certain patent and product information for the purpose of determining whether there should be a legal patent challenge. Based on the outcome of negotiations surrounding the exchanged information, the reference product sponsor may bring a patent infringement suit and injunction proceedings against the biosimilar product sponsor. The biosimilar applicant may also be able to bring an action for declaratory judgment concerning the patent.

The FDA maintains a list of approved biological products, which is commonly referred to as the Purple Book. This list includes product names, the date of licensure, and any periods of regulatory exclusivity. Additionally, under a newly enacted statute related to biological product patent transparency, following the exchange of patent information between the biosimilar and reference product sponsor, the reference product sponsor must also provide the exchanged patent information and patent expiry dates to the FDA. The FDA then publishes this information in the Purple Book.

Table of Contents

To increase competition in the drug and biologic product marketplace, Congress, the executive branch, and the FDA have taken certain legislative and regulatory steps. By example, the FDA finalized a guidance to facilitate biologic product importation. Moreover, the 2020 Further Consolidated Appropriations Act included provisions requiring that sponsors of approved biologic products, including those subject to REMS, provide samples of the approved products to persons developing biosimilar products within specified timeframes, in sufficient quantities, and on commercially reasonable market-based terms. Failure to do so can subject the approved product sponsor to civil actions, penalties, and responsibility for attorney’s fees and costs of the civil action. This same bill also includes provisions with respect to shared and separate REMS programs.

Orphan Drug Exclusivity

​

Under the Orphan Drug Act of 1983, the FDA may designate a biological product as an orphan drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or more in cases in which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making a biological product available in the United States for treatment of the disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product. Additionally, sponsors must present a plausible hypothesis for clinical superiority to obtain orphan drug designation if there is a product already approved by the FDA that is considered by the FDA to be the same as the already approved product and is intended for the same indication. This hypothesis must be demonstrated to obtain orphan exclusivity. With respect to gene therapies, the FDA has issued a specific guidance on how the agency interprets its sameness regulations. Specifically, whether two products are deemed to be the same by the FDA will depend on the products’ transgene expression, viral vectors groups and variants, and additional product features that may contribute to therapeutic effect. Minor product differences will not, generally, result in a finding that two products are different and there are some factors that FDA will consider on a case by case basis. Any of the FDA sameness determinations could impact our ability to receive approval for our product candidates and to obtain or retain orphan drug exclusivity.

​

If a product with orphan designation receives the first FDA approval, it will be granted seven years of marketing exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications for the same product for the same indication for seven years, unless clinical superiority is demonstrated. Competitors may receive approval of different products for the indication for which the orphan product has exclusivity and may obtain approval for the same product but for a different indication. Orphan product designation does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process. The FDA has granted orphan drug designation to AMT-130 for the treatment of Huntington’s disease as well as for etranacogene dezaparvovec; meaning that they would receive orphan drug exclusivity if they are the first products approved for their respective indications.

​

Pediatric Exclusivity

​

Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act of 2003, pediatric exclusivity provides for the attachment of an additional six months of marketing protection to the term of any existing regulatory exclusivity in the US, including orphan exclusivity and exclusivity against biosimilars. This six-month exclusivity may be granted if the FDA issues a written request to the sponsor for the pediatric study, the sponsor submits a final study report after receipt of the written request and meets the terms and timelines in the FDA’s written request.

​

Regenerative Advanced Therapy Designation

​

The 21^st Century Cures Act became law in December 2016 and created a new program under Section 3033 in which the FDA has authority to designate a product as a regenerative medicine advanced therapy (“RMAT”). A drug is eligible for a RMAT designation if: 1) it is a regenerative medicine therapy which is a cell therapy, therapeutic tissue engineering product, human cell and tissue product, or any combination product using such therapies or products, except those products already regulated under Section 361 of the PHSA; 2) the drug is intended to treat, modify, reverse, or cure a serious or life-threatening disease or condition; and 3) preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug has the potential to address unmet medical needs for such disease or condition. A RMAT must be made with the submission of an IND or as an amendment to an existing IND. FDA will determine if a product is eligible for RMAT designation within 60 days of submission. Advantages of the RMAT designation include all the benefits of the fast track and breakthrough therapy designation programs, including early interactions with the FDA. These early interactions may be used to discuss potential surrogate or intermediate endpoints to support accelerated approval. In 2019 the FDA stated in guidance that human gene therapies, including genetically modified cells, that lead to a sustained effect on cells or tissues, may meet the definition of a regenerative therapy.

​

Table of Contents

FDA Regulation of Companion Diagnostics and Other Combination Products

​

We may seek to develop companion diagnostics for use in identifying patients that we believe will respond to our gene therapies. Similarly, our product candidates may require delivery devices. A biologic product may be regulated as a combination product if it is intended for use in conjunction with a medical device, such as a drug delivery device or an in vitro diagnostic device. For combination products, the biologic and device components must, when used together, be safe and effective and the product labeling must reflect their combined use. In some cases, the medical device component may require a separate premarket submission. Moreover, clinical trial sponsors using investigational devices in their studies must comply with FDA’s investigational device exemption regulations. Once approved or cleared, the device component sponsor (or the combination product sponsor, if both components are covered by one application) must comply with the FDA’s post-market device requirements, including establishment registration, device listing, device labeling, unique device identifier, quality system regulation, medical device reporting, and reporting of corrections and removals requirements.

​

If the safety or effectiveness of a biologic product is dependent on the results of a diagnostic, the FDA may require that the in vitro companion diagnostic device and biologic product be contemporaneously approved, with labeling that describes the use of the two products together. The type of premarket submission required for a companion diagnostic device will depend on the FDA device classification. A premarket approval (“PMA”), application is required for high risk devices classified as Class III; a 510(k) premarket notification is required for moderate risk devices classified as Class II; and a de novo request may be used for novel devices not previously classified by the FDA that are low or moderate risk. Except in some limited circumstances, the FDA generally will not approve a biologic that is dependent upon the use of a companion diagnostic device if the device is not contemporaneously FDA-approved or -cleared.

Post-approval Requirements

Any products manufactured or distributed pursuant to the FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements related to manufacturing, recordkeeping, and reporting, including adverse experience reporting, deviation reporting, shortage reporting, and periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, advertising, marketing, promotion, certain electronic records and signatures, and post-approval obligations imposed as a condition of approval, such as Phase 4 clinical trials, REMS, and surveillance to assess safety and effectiveness after commercialization.

After approval, most changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications or other labeling claims, are subject to prior FDA review and approval. There also are continuing annual program user fee requirements for approved products, excluding orphan products provided that certain criteria are met. Regulatory authorities may withdraw product approvals, require label modifications, or request product recalls, among other actions, if a company fails to comply with regulatory standards, if it encounters problems following initial marketing, or if previously unrecognized problems are subsequently discovered.

Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated and often require prior FDA approval or notification before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and specifications and impose reporting and documentation requirements upon the sponsor and any third-party manufacturers that the sponsor may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance.

The FDA also strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising, and promotion of products that are placed on the market. A company can make only those claims relating to a product that are approved by the FDA. Physicians, in their independent professional medical judgment, may prescribe legally available products for unapproved indications that are not described in the product’s labeling and that differ from those tested and approved by the FDA. Biopharmaceutical companies, however, are required to promote their products only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability, including, but not limited to, criminal and civil penalties under the FDCA and False Claims Act, exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs, mandatory compliance programs under corporate integrity agreements, suspension and debarment from government procurement and non-procurement programs, and refusal of orders under existing government contracts.

Table of Contents

In addition, the distribution of prescription biopharmaceutical samples is subject to the Prescription Drug Marketing Act (the “PDMA”), which regulates the distribution of samples at the federal level. Both the PDMA and state laws limit the distribution of prescription biopharmaceutical product. Certain reporting related to samples is also required and laws and regulations impose requirements to ensure accountability in distribution. Free trial or starter prescriptions provided through pharmacies are also subject to regulations under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and potential liability under anti-kickback and false claims laws.

Moreover, the enacted Drug Quality and Security Act (“DQSA”), imposes obligations on sponsors of biopharmaceutical products related to product tracking and tracing. Among the requirements of this legislation, sponsors are required to provide certain information regarding the products to individuals and entities to which product ownership is transferred, are required to label products with a product identifier, and are required to keep certain records regarding the product. The transfer of information to subsequent product owners by sponsors is also required to be done electronically. Sponsors must also verify that purchasers of the sponsors’ products are appropriately licensed. Further, under this legislation, manufactures have product investigation, quarantine, disposition, and notification responsibilities related to counterfeit, diverted, stolen, and intentionally adulterated products that would result in serious adverse health consequences or death to humans, as well as products that are the subject of fraudulent transactions or which are otherwise unfit for distribution such that they would be reasonably likely to result in serious health consequences or death. Similar requirements additionally are also imposed through this legislation on other companies within the biopharmaceutical product supply chain, such as distributors and dispensers, as well as certain sponsor licensees and affiliates.

Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements before or after approval, may result in significant regulatory actions. Such actions may include refusal to approve pending applications, license or approval suspension or revocation, imposition of a clinical hold or termination of clinical trials, warning letters, untitled letters, cyber letters, modification of promotional materials or labeling, provision of corrective information, imposition of post-market requirements including the need for additional testing, imposition of distribution or other restrictions under a REMS, product recalls, product seizures or detentions, refusal to allow imports or exports, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, FDA debarment, injunctions, fines, consent decrees, corporate integrity agreements, suspension and debarment from government procurement and non-procurement programs, and refusal of orders under existing government contracts, exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs, restitution, disgorgement, or civil or criminal penalties, including fines and imprisonment, and adverse publicity, among other adverse consequences.

Additional controls for biologics

To help reduce the increased risk of the introduction of adventitious agents, the PHSA emphasizes the importance of manufacturing controls for products whose attributes cannot be precisely defined. The PHSA also provides authority to the FDA to immediately suspend licenses in situations where there exists a danger to public health, to prepare or procure products in the event of shortages and critical public health needs, and to authorize the creation and enforcement of regulations to prevent the introduction or spread of communicable diseases in the United States and between states.

After a BLA is approved, the product may also be subject to official lot release as a condition of approval. 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 the results of all the manufacturer’s tests performed on the lot. The FDA may also perform certain confirmatory tests on lots of some products before releasing the lots for distribution by the manufacturer.

In addition, the FDA conducts laboratory research related to the regulatory standards on the safety, purity, potency, and effectiveness of biological products.

Table of Contents

Patent Term Restoration

​

If approved, biologic products may also be eligible for periods of U.S. patent term restoration. If granted, patent term restoration extends the patent life of a single unexpired patent, that has not previously been extended, for a maximum of five years. The total patent life of the product with the extension also cannot exceed fourteen years from the product’s approval date. Subject to the prior limitations, the period of the extension is calculated by adding half of the time from the effective date of an IND to the initial submission of a marketing application, and all the time between the submission of the marketing application and its approval. This period may also be reduced by any time that the applicant did not act with due diligence.

Anti-Kickback Provisions and other Fraud and Abuse Requirements

​

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute is a criminal statute that prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting, or receiving remuneration directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering, or arranging for the purchase, lease or order of any healthcare item or service reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid or other federally financed healthcare programs, in whole or in part. The term “remuneration” has been interpreted broadly to include anything of value. The Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between biopharmaceutical industry members on the one hand and prescribers, purchasers, and formulary managers on the other. The Beneficiary Inducement Civil Monetary Penalties Law imposes similar restrictions on interactions between the biopharmaceutical industry and federal healthcare program beneficiaries. There are certain statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors to the Anti-Kickback Statute protecting some common activities from prosecution. The exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly, and practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce or reward prescribing, purchases, or recommendations may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. Failure to meet all the requirements of a particular applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the conduct per se illegal under the Anti-Kickback Statute. Instead, the legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all its facts and circumstances.

​

Several courts have interpreted the statute’s intent requirement to mean that if any one purpose of an arrangement involving remuneration is to induce or reward referrals of federal healthcare program business, including purchases of products paid by federal healthcare programs, the statute has been violated. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, of 2010, as amended, (the “ACA”) modified the intent requirement under the Anti-Kickback Statute to a stricter standard, such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it to have committed a violation. In addition, the ACA also provided that a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute is grounds for the government or a whistleblower to assert that a claim for payment of items or services resulting from such violation constitutes a per se false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal civil False Claims Act. The Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) recently promulgated a regulation with respect to the safe harbors that is effective in two phases. First, the regulation excludes from the definition of “remuneration” limited categories of (a) Pharmacy Benefit Manager (“PBM”) rebates or other reductions in price to a plan sponsor under Medicare Part D or a Medicaid Managed Care Organization plan reflected in point-of-sale reductions in price and (b) PBM service fees. Second, the regulation expressly provides that rebates to plan sponsors under Medicare Part D either directly to the plan sponsor under Medicare Part D, or indirectly through a pharmacy benefit manager will not be protected under the anti-kickback discount safe harbor. Recent legislation delayed implementation of this portion of the rule until January 1, 2026, and further proposed legislation would permanently prohibit implementation of the rule beginning in 2026.

​

Table of Contents

The federal Civil False Claims Act prohibits any person from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment to, or approval by, the federal government, knowingly making, using, or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim to the federal government, or avoiding, decreasing, or concealing an obligation to pay money to the federal government. A claim includes “any request or demand” for money or property presented to the U.S. government. The civil False Claims Act has been used to assert liability on the basis of kickbacks and other improper referrals, improperly reported government pricing metrics such as Best Price or Average Manufacturer Price, improper use of Medicare provider or supplier numbers when detailing a provider of services, improper promotion of off-label uses not expressly approved by the FDA in a product’s label, and allegations as to misrepresentations with respect to products, contract requirements, and services rendered. In addition, private payers have been filing follow-on lawsuits alleging fraudulent misrepresentation, although establishing liability and damages in these cases is more difficult than under the FCA. Intent to deceive is not required to establish liability under the civil False Claims Act. Rather, a claim may be false for deliberate ignorance of the truth or falsity of the information provided or for acts in reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of that information. Civil False Claims Act actions may be brought by the government or may be brought by private individuals on behalf of the government, called “qui tam” actions. If the government decides to intervene in a qui tam action and prevails in the lawsuit, the individual will share in the proceeds from any damages, penalties or settlement funds. If the government declines to intervene, the individual may pursue the case alone. The civil FCA provides for treble damages and a civil penalty for each false claim, such as an invoice or pharmacy claim for reimbursement, which can aggregate into tens and even hundreds of millions of dollars. For these reasons, since 2004, False Claims Act lawsuits against biopharmaceutical companies have increased significantly in volume and breadth, leading to several substantial civil and criminal settlements, as much as $3.0 billion, regarding certain sales practices and promoting off label uses. Civil False Claims Act liability may further be imposed for known Medicare or Medicaid overpayments, for example, overpayments caused by understated rebate amounts, that are not refunded within 60 days of discovering the overpayment, even if the overpayment was not caused by a false or fraudulent act. In addition, conviction, or civil judgment for violating the FCA may result in exclusion from federal healthcare programs, suspension and debarment from government procurement and non-procurement programs, and refusal of orders under existing government contracts. The majority of states also have statutes or regulations similar to the federal anti-kickback law and false claims laws, which apply to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payer.

​

The government may further prosecute conduct constituting a false claim under the criminal False Claims Act. The criminal False Claims Act prohibits the making or presenting of a claim to the government knowing such claim to be false, fictitious, or fraudulent and, unlike the civil False Claims Act, requires proof of intent to submit a false claim.

​

The civil monetary penalties statute is another potential statute under which biopharmaceutical companies may be subject to enforcement. Among other things, the civil monetary penalties statue imposes fines against any person who is determined to have knowingly presented, or caused to be presented, claims to a federal healthcare program that the person knows, or should know, is for an item or service that was not provided as claimed or is false or fraudulent.

​

Payment or reimbursement of prescription therapeutics by Medicaid or Medicare requires sponsors to submit certified pricing information to Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”). The Medicaid Drug Rebate statute requires sponsors to calculate and report price points, which are used to determine Medicaid manufacturer rebate payments shared between the states and the federal government and Medicaid payment rates for certain therapeutics. For therapeutics paid under Medicare Part B, sponsors must also calculate and report their Average Sales Price, which is used to determine the Medicare Part B payment rate. In addition, therapeutics covered by Medicaid are subject to an additional inflation penalty which can substantially increase rebate payments. For certain products, including those approved under a BLA (including biosimilars), the Veterans Health Care Act (the “VHCA”) requires sponsors to calculate and report to the Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) a different price called the Non-Federal Average Manufacturer Price, which is used to determine the maximum price that can be charged to certain federal agencies, referred to as the Federal Ceiling Price (“FCP”). Like the Medicaid rebate amount, the FCP includes an inflation penalty. A Department of Defense regulation requires sponsors to provide this discount on therapeutics dispensed by retail pharmacies when paid by the TRICARE Program. All these price reporting requirements create risk of submitting false information to the government, potential FCA liability and exclusion from certain of these programs.

​

Table of Contents

The VHCA also requires sponsors of covered therapeutics participating in the Medicaid program to enter into Federal Supply Schedule contracts with the VA through which their covered therapeutics must be sold to certain federal agencies at FCP. This necessitates compliance with applicable federal procurement laws and regulations, including submission of commercial sales and pricing information, and subjects companies to contractual remedies as well as administrative, civil, and criminal sanctions. In addition, the VHCA requires sponsors participating in Medicaid to agree to provide different mandatory discounts to certain Public Health Service grantees and other safety net hospitals and clinics under the 340B program based on the sponsor’s reported Medicaid pricing information. The 340B program has its own regulatory authority to impose sanctions for non-compliance, adjudicate overcharge claims against sponsors by the purchasing entities, and impose civil monetary penalties for instances of overcharging.

​

The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, (“HIPAA”), also created federal criminal statutes that prohibit, among other actions, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud or to obtain, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises, any of the money or property owned by, or under the custody or control of, a healthcare benefit program, regardless of whether the payor is public or private, in connection with the delivery or payment for healthcare benefits, knowingly and willfully embezzling or stealing from a healthcare benefit program, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing, or covering up by any trick or device a material fact or making any materially false statements in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items, or services relating to healthcare matters. Additionally, the ACA amended the intent requirement of certain of these criminal statutes under HIPAA so that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute, or the specific intent to violate it, to have committed a violation.

​

In addition, as part of the ACA, the federal government enacted the Physician Payment Sunshine Act. Manufacturers of drugs biologics and devices for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) are required to annually report to CMS certain payments and other transfers of value made to or at the request of covered recipients, which are physicians (as defined under the Social Security Act), physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, certified registered nurse anesthetists and certified nurse midwifes licensed in the U.S. and U.S. teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family. Payments made to principal investigators and research institutions at teaching hospitals for clinical trials are also included within this law. Reported information is made publicly available by CMS. Failure to submit required information may result in civil monetary penalties. If not preempted by this federal law, several states currently also require reporting of marketing and promotion expenses, as well as gifts and payments to healthcare professionals and organizations. State legislation may also prohibit gifts and various other marketing related activities or require the public posting of information. Certain states also require companies to implement compliance programs.

Further, we may be subject to data privacy and security regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, (“HITECH Act”), and their respective implementing regulations impose certain requirements on covered entities relating to the privacy, security, and transmission of protected health information. Among other things, the HITECH Act, and its implementing regulations, made HIPAA’s security standards and certain privacy standards directly applicable to “business associates,” defined as persons or organizations, other than members of a covered entity’s workforce, that create, receive, maintain, or transmit protected health information on behalf of a covered entity for a function or activity regulated by HIPAA. The HITECH Act also strengthened the civil and criminal penalties that may be imposed against covered entities, business associates, and individuals, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, other federal and state laws, such as the California Consumer Privacy Act, may govern the privacy and security of health and other information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways, thus complicating compliance efforts.

Table of Contents

Many states have also adopted laws similar to each of the above federal laws, which may be broader in scope and apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers. Certain state laws also regulate sponsors’ use of prescriber-identifiable data. Certain states also require implementation of commercial compliance programs and compliance with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the applicable compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government, or otherwise restrict payments or the provision of other items of value that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; impose restrictions on marketing practices; or require sponsors to track and report information related to payments, gifts, and other items of value to physicians and other healthcare providers. Recently, states have enacted or are considering legislation intended to make drug prices more transparent and deter significant price increases that impose reporting requirements on biopharmaceutical companies. These laws may affect our future sales, marketing, and other promotional activities by imposing administrative and compliance burdens. Such laws also typically impose significant civil monetary penalties for each instance of reporting noncompliance that can quickly aggregate into the millions of dollars.

​

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws or regulations described above or any other laws that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties or other enforcement actions, including criminal and significant civil monetary penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, corporate integrity agreements, suspension and debarment from government procurement and non-procurement programs, and refusal of orders under existing government contracts, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our business.

​

U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

​

The U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, to which we are subject, prohibits corporations and individuals from engaging in certain activities to obtain or retain business or to influence a person working in an official capacity. It is illegal to pay, offer to pay or authorize the payment of anything of value to any foreign government official, government staff member, political party, or political candidate in an attempt to obtain or retain business or to otherwise influence a person working in an official capacity.

​

Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement

​

The containment of healthcare costs has become a priority of federal, state, and foreign governments, and the prices of drugs have been a focus in this effort. Third-party payers and independent non-profit healthcare research organizations such as the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review are also increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical products and services and examining the medical necessity, budget-impact, and cost-effectiveness of medical products and services, in addition to their safety and efficacy. If these third-party payers do not consider a product to be cost-effective compared to other available therapies and/or the standard of care, they may not cover the product after approval as a benefit under their plans or, if they do, measures including prior authorization and step-throughs could be required, manufacturer rebates may be negotiated or required and/or the level of payment may not be sufficient to allow a company to sell its products at a profit. The U.S. federal and state governments and foreign governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price controls, restrictions on coverage and reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs. In this regard, for example, on November 27, 2020, CMS issued an interim final rule implementing a Most Favored Nation payment model under which reimbursement for certain Medicare Part B drugs and biologicals will be based on a price that reflects the lowest per capital Gross Domestic Product-adjusted (“GDP-adjusted”) price of any non-U.S. member country of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (“OECD”) with a GDP per capita that is at least sixty percent of the U.S. GDP per capita. While this rule now has been rescinded, government negotiation of certain Medicare drug pricing continues to be the focus of recent proposed legislation. The Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress. Failure of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to reach required deficit reduction goals triggered the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This includes aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers up to 2% per fiscal year. While President Biden previously signed legislation to eliminate this reduction through the end of 2021, recent legislation will restart the reductions, which will thereafter remain in effect through 2031 unless additional congressional action is taken. Adoption of additional healthcare reform controls and measures and tightening of restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could limit payments for pharmaceuticals.

​

Table of Contents

As a result, the marketability of any product which receives regulatory approval for commercial sale may suffer if the government and third-party payers choose to provide low coverage and reimbursement. In addition, an increasing emphasis on managed care in the United States has increased and will continue to increase the pressure on drug pricing. Decisions regarding whether to cover any of our products, the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided are made on a plan-by-plan basis. Further, no uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement exists in the United States, and coverage and reimbursement can differ significantly from payor to payor. Coverage policies, third party reimbursement rates and drug pricing regulation may change at any time. In particular, the ACA contains provisions that may reduce the profitability of drug products, including, for example, increased rebates for drugs sold to Medicaid programs, extension of Medicaid rebates to Medicaid managed care plans, mandatory discounts for certain Medicare Part D beneficiaries and annual fees based on pharmaceutical companies’ share of sales to federal healthcare programs. Multiple other current and proposed legislative and regulatory efforts require and likely will in the future require payment of increased manufacturer rebates and implement mechanisms to reduce drug prices. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products that receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.

​

Regulation in the European Union

​

Product development, the regulatory approval process and safety monitoring of medicinal products and their manufacturers in the European Union proceed broadly in the same way as they do in the United States. Therefore, many of the issues discussed above apply similarly in the context of the European Union. In addition, drugs are subject to the extensive price and reimbursement regulations of the various EU member states. The Clinical Trial Regulation EU 536/2014 (“CTR”), which replaced the current Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC, as amended (“CTD”), on January 31, 2022, provides a system for the approval of clinical trials in the European Union via (in the case of the CTD) implementation through national legislation of the member states. The CTR is directly applicable in all member states without the need for national implementation. Whilst, for trials conducted in only one  country, approval has to be obtained from the competent national authority of an EU member state in which the clinical trial is to be conducted before cross-border trials within the EU, it is possible to make a single harmonized electronic submission and have a single assessment process for clinical trials conducted in multiple member states. Furthermore, a clinical trial may only be started after a competent ethics committee has issued a favorable opinion on the clinical trial application (“CTA”), which must be supported by an investigational medicinal product dossier with supporting information prescribed by the CTD and corresponding national laws of the member states and further detailed in applicable guidance documents. In the case of Advanced Therapy Investigational Medical Products (“ATIMPs”) consisting of or containing Genetically Modified Organisms (“GMOs”), as is the case for uniQure’s products, an additional approval for the environmental and biosafety aspects of the use and release of the GMO is required by the GMO competent authorities and GMO directives have been implemented in different ways by Member States; either following the directive for “Contained use” (Directive 2009/41/EC) or “deliberate release” (Directive 2001/18/EC). This results in some EU member states, the GMO application must be approved before the Clinical Trial Application (CTA) is submitted, in some after approval of the CTA and in some parallel.

​

The sponsor of a clinical trial, or its legal representative, must be based in the European Economic Area (“EEA”). European regulators and ethics committees also require the submission of adverse event reports during a study and a copy of the final study report. Under the CTR, member states may dispense with the requirement for a legal representative for a non-EU resident sponsor provided there is a contact person based in the EEA.

​

Under the CTR, the introduction of a new databased called the Clinical Trial Information System (“CTIS”), requires sponsors to upload and submit all data, including initial clinical trial application data and documentation, to the CTIS, with such data being publicly available, with few exceptions. This means data transparency throughout the development process with the onus on sponsors to protect patient confidentiality at the point of submission.

​

Table of Contents

Marketing approval

​

Marketing approvals under the European Union regulatory system may be obtained through a centralized or decentralized procedure. The centralized procedure results in the grant of a single marketing authorization that is valid for all—currently 28—EU member states. Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, as amended, the centralized procedure is mandatory for drugs developed by means of specified biotechnological processes, and advanced therapy medicinal products as defined in Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007, as amended. Drugs for human use containing a new active substance for which the therapeutic indication is the treatment of specified diseases, including but not limited to acquired immune deficiency syndrome, neurodegenerative disorders, auto-immune diseases and other immune dysfunctions, as well as drugs designated as orphan drugs pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, as amended, also fall within the mandatory scope of the centralized procedure. Because of our focus on gene therapies, which fall within the category of advanced therapy medicinal products (“ATMPs”) and orphan indications, our products and product candidates will need to go through the centralized procedure.

​

In the MAA the applicant must properly and sufficiently demonstrate the quality, safety, and efficacy of the drug. Guidance on the factors that the EMA will consider in relation to the development and evaluation of ATMPs have been issued and include, among other things, the preclinical studies required to characterize ATMPs; the manufacturing and control information that should be submitted in a MAA; and post-approval measures required to monitor patients and evaluate the long-term efficacy and potential adverse reactions of ATMPs. Although these guidelines are not legally binding, we believe that our compliance will effectively be necessary to gain and maintain approval for any of our product candidates. The maximum timeframe for the evaluation of an MAA under the centralized procedure is 210 days after receipt of a valid application subject to clock stops during which the applicant deals with EMA questions.

​

Market access can be expedited through the grant of conditional authorization for a medicine that may fulfil unmet needs which may be granted provided that the benefit-risk balance of the product is positive. The benefit-risk balance is likely to be positive if the applicant can provide comprehensive data and the benefit to public health of the medicinal product's immediate availability on the market outweighs the risks due to need for further data. Such authorizations are valid for one year and can be renewed annually. The holder will be required to complete specific obligations (ongoing or new studies, and in some cases additional activities) with a view to providing comprehensive data confirming that the benefit-risk balance is positive. Once comprehensive data on the product have been obtained, the marketing authorization may be converted into a standard marketing authorization (not subject to specific obligations). Initially, this is valid for 5 years, but can be renewed for unlimited validity. Applicants for conditional authorizations can benefit from early dialogue with EMA through scientific advice or protocol assistance and discuss their development plan well in advance of the submission of a marketing-authorization application. Other stakeholders (e.g., health technology assessment bodies) can be included.

​

In addition, the priority medicines (PRIME) scheme for medicines that may offer a major therapeutic advantage over existing treatments, or benefit patients without treatment options based on early clinical data, is intended to support the development of medicines that target an unmet medical need. This voluntary scheme is based on enhanced interaction and early dialogue with developers of promising medicines, to optimize development plans and speed up evaluation so these medicines can reach patients earlier. Early dialogue and scientific advice also ensure that patients only participate in trials designed to provide the data necessary for an application, making the best use of limited resources.

​

Table of Contents

The European Union also provides for a system of regulatory data and market exclusivity. According to Article 14(11) of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, as amended, and Article 10 of Directive 2001/83/EC, as amended, upon receiving marketing authorization, new chemical entities approved on the basis of complete independent data package benefit from eight years of data exclusivity and an additional two years of market exclusivity. Data exclusivity prevents regulatory authorities in the European Union from referencing the innovator’s data to assess a generic (abbreviated) application during the eight-year period from when the first placement of the product on the EEA market. During the additional two-year period of market exclusivity, a generic marketing authorization can be submitted, and the innovator’s data may be referenced, but no generic medicinal product can be marketed until the expiration of the market exclusivity. The overall ten-year period will be extended to a maximum of eleven years if, during the first eight years of those ten years, the marketing authorization holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to their authorization, are held to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies. Even if a compound is considered to be a new chemical entity and the innovator can gain the period of data exclusivity, another company nevertheless could also market another version of the drug if such company obtained marketing authorization based on an MAA with a complete independent data package of pharmaceutical test, preclinical tests, and clinical trials. The EMA has also issued guidelines for a comprehensive comparability exercise for biosimilars, and for specific classes of biological products.

​

Under Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 article 3 as amended (Orphan Drug Regulation, (“ODR”)) a product can benefit from orphan drug status if it is intended for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition affecting not more than five in 10,000 people in the European Community (EC) when the application is made. The principal benefit of such status is 10 years’ market exclusivity once they are approved preventing the subsequent approval of similar medicines with similar indications although this may be reduced to six years under certain circumstances including if the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity.

​

Additional rules apply to medicinal products for pediatric use under Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006, as amended. Potential incentives include a six-month extension of any supplementary protection certificate granted pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 469/2009, however not in cases in which the relevant product is designated as an orphan medicinal product pursuant to the ODR. Instead, medicinal products designated as orphan medicinal product may enjoy an extension of the ten-year market exclusivity period granted under Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, as amended, to twelve years subject to the conditions applicable to orphan drugs.

​

Manufacturing and promotion

​

Pursuant to Commission Directive 2003/94/EC as transposed into the national laws of the member states, the manufacturing of investigational medicinal products and approved drugs is subject to a separate manufacturer’s license and must be conducted in strict compliance with cGMP requirements, which mandate the methods, facilities, and controls used in manufacturing, processing, and packing of drugs to assure their safety and identity. Manufacturers must have at least one qualified person permanently and continuously at their disposal. The qualified person is ultimately responsible for certifying that each batch of finished product released onto the market has been manufactured in accordance with cGMP and the specifications set out in the marketing authorization or investigational medicinal product dossier. cGMP requirements are enforced through mandatory registration of facilities and inspections of those facilities. Failure to comply with these requirements could interrupt supply and result in delays, unanticipated costs, and lost revenues, and subject the applicant to potential legal or regulatory action, including but not limited to warning letters, suspension of manufacturing, seizure of product, injunctive action, or possible civil and criminal penalties.

​

Advertising

​

In the European Union, the promotion of prescription medicines is subject to intense regulation and control, including a prohibition on direct-to-consumer advertising. All medicines advertising must be consistent with the product’s approved summary of products characteristics, factual, accurate, balanced and not misleading. Advertising of medicines pre-approval or off-label is prohibited. Some jurisdictions require that all promotional materials for prescription medicines be subjected to either prior internal or regulatory review & approval.

​

Table of Contents

Other Regulatory Requirements

​

A holder of a marketing authorization for a medicinal product is legally obliged to fulfill several obligations by virtue of its status as a marketing authorization holder (“MAH”). The MAH can delegate the performance of related tasks to third parties, such as distributors or marketing collaborators, provided that this delegation is appropriately documented and the MAH maintains legal responsibility and liability.

​

The obligations of an MAH include:

​

​

We may hold any future marketing authorizations granted for our product candidates in our own name or appoint an affiliate or a collaborator to hold marketing authorizations on our behalf. Any failure by an MAH to comply with these obligations may result in regulatory action against an MAH and ultimately threaten our ability to commercialize our products.

​

Reimbursement

​

In the European Union, the pricing and reimbursement mechanisms by private and public health insurers vary largely by country and even within countries. In respect of the public systems, reimbursement for standard drugs is determined by guidelines established by the legislature or responsible national authority. Some jurisdictions operate positive and negative list systems under which products may only be marketed once a reimbursement price has been agreed. Other member states allow companies to determine the prices for their medicines but monitor and control company profits and may limit or restrict reimbursement and can include retrospective rebates to the Government. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products and some of EU countries require the completion of studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies to obtain reimbursement or pricing approval. Special pricing and reimbursement rules may apply to orphan drugs.

​

Inclusion of orphan drugs in reimbursement systems tend to focus on the medical usefulness, need, quality and economic benefits to patients and the healthcare system as for any drug. Acceptance of any medicinal product for reimbursement may come with cost, use and often volume restrictions, which again can vary by country. In addition, results-based rules or agreements on reimbursement may apply. Recently, a process has been formalized that allows sponsors to receive parallel advice from EMA and relevant national health technology assessment (“HTA”) bodies for pivotal clinical studies designed to support marketing approval. This process was followed for etranacogene dezaparvovec.

​

Table of Contents

Orphan Drug Regulation

​

We have been granted orphan drug exclusivity for etranacogene dezaparvovec for the treatment of hemophilia B as well as for AMT-130 for the treatment of Huntington’s disease subject to the conditions applicable to orphan drug exclusivity in the European Union. Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, as amended, states that a drug will be designated as an orphan drug if its sponsor can establish:

​

​

Regulation (EC) No 847/2000 sets out further provisions for implementation of the criteria for designation of a drug as an orphan drug. An application for the designation of a drug as an orphan drug must be submitted at any stage of development of the drug before filing of a marketing authorization application.

​

If an EU-wide community marketing authorization in respect of an orphan drug is granted pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, as amended, the European Union and the member states will not, for a period of 10 years, accept another application for a marketing authorization, or grant a marketing authorization or accept an application to extend an existing marketing authorization, for the same therapeutic indication, in respect of a similar drug.

​

This period may however be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established, in respect of the drug concerned, that the criteria for orphan drug designation are no longer met, in other words, when it is shown on the basis of available evidence that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a marketing authorization may be granted, for the same therapeutic indication, to a similar drug if:

​

​

Regulation (EC) No 847/2000 lays down definitions of the concepts similar drug and clinical superiority, which concepts have been expanded upon in subsequent Commission guidance. Other incentives available to orphan drugs in the European Union include financial incentives such as a reduction of fees or fee waivers and protocol assistance. Orphan drug designation does not shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process.

​

Table of Contents

Human Capital Resources

​

As of December 31, 2021, we had a total of 463 employees, 250 of whom are based in The Netherlands, 206 in the United States of America, and seven in other European countries. As of December 31, 2021, 142 of our employees had an M.D. or Ph.D. degree, or the foreign equivalent. During 2017, we established a works council in the Netherlands. None of our employees are subject to collective bargaining agreements or other labor organizations. We believe that we have good relations with all our employees and with the works council in the Netherlands.

​

Our values are to:

​

Development of our culture is reflected as part of our annual corporate goals. We invest in numerous learning opportunities focused on individual, management and team development and other initiatives to support our employees and build our culture. In 2021 we initiated activities to coordinate our various ongoing activities and initiatives within an environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) framework.

​

Corporate Information

​

uniQure B.V. (the “Company”) was incorporated on January 9, 2012 as a private company with limited liability (besloten vennootschap met beperkte aansprakelijkheid) under the laws of the Netherlands. We are a leader in the field of gene therapy and seek to deliver to patients suffering from rare and other devastating diseases single treatments with potentially curative results. Our business was founded in 1998 and was initially operated through our predecessor company, Amsterdam Molecular Therapeutics Holding N.V (“AMT”). In 2012, AMT undertook a corporate reorganization, pursuant to which uniQure B.V. acquired the entire business and assets of AMT and completed a share-for-share exchange with the shareholders of AMT. Effective February 10, 2014, in connection with the initial public offering, we converted into a public company with limited liability (naamloze vennootschap) and changed its legal name from uniQure B.V. to uniQure N.V.

​

We are registered in the trade register of the Dutch Chamber of Commerce (Kamer van Koophandel) under number 54385229. Our headquarters are in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, and its registered office is located at Paasheuvelweg 25, Amsterdam 1105 BP, the Netherlands and its telephone number is +31 20 240 6000.

​

From our initial public offering until December 31, 2018, we were an emerging growth company, as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012. On the last business day of our second quarter in fiscal year 2018 the aggregate worldwide market value of ordinary shares held by our non-affiliate shareholders exceeded $700.0 million. As a result, as of December 31, 2018, we were considered a large accelerated filer and as a consequence lost our status as an emerging growth company.

​

Our website address is www.uniqure.com. We make available free of charge through our Internet website our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K, and any amendments to these reports, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish such material to, the SEC. Also available through our website’s “Investors & Newsroom: Corporate Governance” page are charters for the Audit, Compensation and Nominations and Corporate Governance committees of our board of directors and our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics. We are not including the information on our website as a part of, nor incorporating it by reference into, this report.

​

Table of Contents

Item 1A.  Risk Factors

​

An investment in our ordinary shares involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the following information about these risks, together with the other information appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including our financial statements and related notes thereto, before deciding to invest in our ordinary shares. We operate in a dynamic and rapidly changing industry that involves numerous risks and uncertainties. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Other risks and uncertainties, including those that we do not currently consider material, may impair our business. If any of the risks discussed below actually occur, our business, financial condition, operating results, or cash flows could be materially adversely affected. This could cause the value of our securities to decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment.

​

Risks Related to the Current Covid Pandemic

Our business, operations, human resources and supply chain have been, and may continue to be, materially and adversely affected by the ongoing Covid pandemic.

On March 11, 2020, the WHO declared the ongoing outbreak of Covid a pandemic. The Covid pandemic is affecting the United States and global economies and has affected and may continue to affect our operations and those of third parties on which we rely. The Covid pandemic has caused and may continue to cause disruptions in our raw material supply, our commercial-scale manufacturing capabilities for AAV-based gene therapies, the development of our product candidates, employee productivity and the conduct of current and future clinical trials. In addition, the Covid pandemic has affected and may continue to affect the operations of the FDA, EMA, and other health authorities, which could result in delays of reviews and approvals, including with respect to our product candidates.

As evidenced by the postponement of procedures for two patients in our Phase I/II clinical study of AMT-130, the evolving Covid pandemic has impacted the pace of enrollment and procedures in our clinical trials, as well as caused challenges in scheduling follow-up visits and managing other aspects of our clinical trials. We may in the future be affected by similar delays as patients may avoid or may not be able to travel to healthcare facilities and physicians’ offices unless due to a health emergency and clinical trial staff may no longer be able to get to the clinic due to restrictions or illness. Such facilities and offices have been and may continue to be required to focus limited resources on non-clinical trial matters, including treatment of Covid patients, thereby decreasing availability, in whole or in part, for clinical trial services. In addition, employee disruptions and remote working environments related to the Covid pandemic, and federal, state, and local public health measures designed to mitigate the spread of the virus, have impacted, and could continue to negatively impact the efficiency and pace with which we work and develop our product candidates and our manufacturing capabilities. Further, while the potential economic impact brought by, and the duration of, the Covid pandemic is difficult to assess or predict, the impact of the Covid pandemic on global financial markets may reduce our ability to access capital, which could negatively impact our long-term liquidity. The ultimate impact of the Covid pandemic is highly uncertain and subject to change. We do not yet know the full extent of potential delays or impacts on our business, financing, or clinical trial activities or on healthcare systems or the global economy as a whole. However, these negative effects could have a material impact on our liquidity, capital resources, operations, and business and those of the third parties on whom we rely.

Global supply chains have been disrupted, causing shortages, which could further impact our clinical trials. This disruption of our employees, distributors and suppliers has historically impacted and may continue to impact our future operating results. Additionally, to the extent that inspections of facilities by governmental authorities are required, the review of our marketing applications or supplements may further be delayed as regulatory authorities, such as FDA, have significantly limited facility inspections during the pandemic.

We may also be subject to further laws, regulations, guidelines, executive orders and other requirements at the federal, state and local levels related to the pandemic, which we may be required to undertake or that we choose to undertake. Any such requirements or guidelines that we adopt could have a material impact on our business operations.

Table of Contents

Risks Related to the Development of Our Product Candidates

None of our product candidates have been approved for commercial sale and they might never receive regulatory approval or become commercially viable. We have never generated any significant revenue from product sales and may never be profitable.

All of our product candidates are in research or development. We have not generated any revenues from the sale of products or manufacturing of a product for a third party and do not expect to generate any such revenue before 2022, at the earliest. Our product candidates including AMT-130 and any of our other potential product candidates will require extensive preclinical and/or clinical testing, manufacture development and regulatory approval prior to commercial use. Our research and development efforts may not be successful. Even if our clinical development efforts result in positive data, our product candidates may not receive regulatory approval or be successfully introduced and marketed at prices that would permit us to operate profitably.

We have encountered and may encounter future delays in and impediments to the progress of our clinical trials or fail to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates.

Clinical and non-clinical development is expensive, time-consuming, and uncertain as to outcome. Our product candidates are in different stages of clinical or preclinical development, and there is a significant risk of failure or delay in each of these programs. For example, we experienced an immaterial but unexpected delay when our clinical trials of etranacogene dezaparvovec were placed on clinical hold by the FDA from December 2020 to April 2021, following a preliminary diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in one patient. We cannot guarantee that any preclinical tests or clinical trials will be completed as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. A failure of one or more preclinical tests or clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing. Events that may prevent successful or timely completion of clinical development, as well as product candidate approval, include, but are not limited to:

Table of Contents

Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of our product candidates, we must conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product candidates in humans. Such trials and regulatory review and approval take many years. It is impossible to predict when or if any of our clinical trials will demonstrate that product candidates are effective or safe in humans.

If the results of our clinical trials are inconclusive, or fail to meet the level of statistical significance required for approval or if there are safety concerns or adverse events associated with our product candidates, we may:

Because of the nature of the gene therapies we are developing, regulators may also require us to demonstrate long-term gene expression, clinical efficacy and safety, which may require additional or longer clinical trials, and which may not be able to be demonstrated to the regulatory authorities’ standards.

Our ability to recruit patients for our trials is often reliant on third parties, such as clinical trial sites. Clinical trial sites may not have the adequate infrastructure established to handle gene therapy products or may have difficulty finding eligible patients to enroll into a trial.

Table of Contents

In addition, we, or any collaborators we may have may not be able to locate and enroll enough eligible patients to participate in these trials as required by the FDA, the EMA or similar regulatory authorities outside the United States and the European Union. This may result in our failure to initiate or continue clinical trials for our product candidates or may cause us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether. Because our programs are focused on the treatment of patients with rare or orphan or ultra-orphan diseases, our ability to enroll eligible patients in these trials may be limited or slower than we anticipate considering the small patient populations involved and the specific age range required for treatment eligibility in some indications. In addition, our potential competitors, including major pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions and governmental agencies and public and private research institutions, may seek to develop competing therapies, which would further limit the small patient pool available for our studies. Also, patients may be reluctant to enroll in gene therapy trials where there are other therapeutic alternatives available or that may become available, which may be for various reasons including uncertainty about the safety or effectiveness of a new therapeutic such as a gene therapy and the possibility that treatment with a gene therapy therapeutic could preclude future gene therapy treatments due to the formation of antibodies following and in response to the treatment.

Any inability to successfully initiate or complete preclinical and clinical development could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to receive marketing approval, to generate revenues from product sales or obtain regulatory and commercialization milestones and royalties. In addition, if we make manufacturing or formulation changes to our product candidates, including changes in the vector or manufacturing process used, we may need to conduct additional studies to bridge our modified product candidates to earlier versions. It is also possible that any such manufacturing or formulation changes may have an adverse impact on the performance of the product candidate. Clinical trial delays could also shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, which could impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may materially harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Our progress in early-stage clinical trials may not be indicative of long-term efficacy in late-stage clinical trials, and our progress in trials for one product candidate may not be indicative of progress in trials for other product candidates.

Study designs and results from previous studies are not necessarily predictive of our future clinical study designs or results, and initial, top-line, or interim results may not be confirmed upon full analysis of the complete study data. Our product candidates may fail to show the required level of safety and efficacy in later stages of clinical development despite having successfully advanced through initial clinical studies. Changes to product candidates may also impact their performance in subsequent studies.

A number of companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in later-stage clinical trials even after achieving promising results in early-stage clinical trials. If a larger population of patients does not experience positive results during clinical trials, if these results are not reproducible or if our products show diminishing activity over time, our product candidates may not receive approval from the FDA or EMA. Data obtained from preclinical and clinical activities are subject to varying interpretations, which may delay, limit, or prevent regulatory approval. In addition, we may encounter regulatory delays or rejections because of many factors, including changes in regulatory policy during the period of product development. Failure to confirm favorable results from earlier trials by demonstrating the safety and effectiveness of our products in later-stage clinical trials with larger patient populations could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Fast track product, breakthrough therapy, priority review, or RMAT designation by the FDA, or access to the PRIME scheme by the EMA, for our product candidates may not lead to faster development or regulatory review or approval process, and it does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval.

We have obtained and may in the future seek one or more of fast track designation, breakthrough therapy designation, RMAT designation, PRIME scheme access or priority review designation for our product candidates. A fast track product designation is designed to facilitate the clinical development and expedite the review of drugs intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and which demonstrate the potential to address an unmet medical need. A breakthrough therapy is defined as a drug that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, where preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. A RMAT designation is designed to accelerate approval for regenerative advanced therapies. Priority review designation is intended to speed the FDA marketing application review timeframe for drugs that treat a serious condition and, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness. PRIME is a scheme provided by the EMA, similar to the FDA’s breakthrough therapy designation, to enhance support for the development of medicines that target an unmet medical need.

Table of Contents

For drugs and biologics that have been designated as fast track products, RMAT, or breakthrough therapies, or granted access to the PRIME scheme, interaction and communication between the regulatory agency and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development. Sponsors of fast track products, RMAT products, or breakthrough therapies may also be able to submit marketing applications on a rolling basis, meaning that the FDA may review portions of a marketing application before the sponsor submits the complete application to the FDA, if the sponsor pays the user fee upon submission of the first portion of the marketing application and the FDA approves a schedule for the submission of the remaining sections. For products that receive a priority review designation, the FDA's marketing application review goal is shortened to six months, as opposed to ten months under standard review.

Designation as a fast track product, breakthrough therapy, RMAT, PRIME, or priority review product is within the discretion of the regulatory agency. Accordingly, even if we believe one of our product candidates meets the relevant criteria, the agency may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. In any event, the receipt of such a designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to drugs considered for approval under conventional regulatory procedures and does not assure ultimate marketing approval by the agency. In addition, the FDA may later decide that the products no longer meet the applicable conditions for qualification as either a fast track product, RMAT, or a breakthrough therapy or, for priority review products, decide that the period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened.

We may not be successful in our efforts to use our gene therapy technology platform to build a pipeline of additional product candidates.

An element of our strategy is to use our gene therapy technology platform to expand our product pipeline and to progress these candidates through preclinical and clinical development ourselves or together with collaborators. Although we currently have a pipeline of programs at various stages of development, we may not be able to identify or develop product candidates that are safe and effective. Even if we are successful in continuing to build our pipeline, the potential product candidates that we identify may not be suitable for clinical development. Research programs to identify new product candidates require substantial technical, financial, and human resources. We or any collaborators may focus our efforts and resources on potential programs or product candidates that ultimately prove to be unsuccessful. If we do not continue to successfully develop and commercialize product candidates based upon our technology, we may face difficulty in obtaining product revenues in future periods, which could result in significant harm to our business, results of operations and financial position and materially adversely affect our share price.

Our strategy of obtaining rights to key technologies through in-licenses may not be successful.

We seek to expand our product pipeline from time to time in part by in-licensing the rights to key technologies, including those related to gene delivery, genes, and gene cassettes. The future growth of our business will depend in significant part on our ability to in-license or otherwise acquire the rights to additional product candidates or technologies, particularly through our collaborations with academic research institutions. However, we may be unable to in-license or acquire the rights to any such product candidates or technologies from third parties on acceptable terms or at all. The in-licensing and acquisition of these technologies is a competitive area, and many more established companies are also pursuing strategies to license or acquire product candidates or technologies that we may consider attractive. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, cash resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be competitors may be unwilling to license rights to us. Furthermore, we may be unable to identify suitable product candidates or technologies within our areas of focus. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to suitable product candidates or technologies, our business, financial condition, and prospects could suffer.

Negative public opinion and increased regulatory scrutiny of gene therapy and genetic research may damage public perception of our product candidates or adversely affect our ability to conduct our business or obtain marketing approvals for our product candidates.

Public perception may be influenced by claims that gene therapy is unsafe, and gene therapy may not gain the acceptance of the public or the medical community. The risk of cancer remains a concern for gene therapy, and we cannot assure that it will not occur in any of our planned or future clinical studies. In addition, there is the potential risk of delayed adverse events following exposure to gene therapy products due to persistent biological activity of the genetic material or other components of products used to carry the genetic material.

Table of Contents

A small number of patients have experienced serious adverse events during our clinical trials of either AMT-060 (our first-generation hemophilia B gene therapy) or etranacogene dezaparvovec. However, adverse events in our clinical trials or those conducted by other parties (even if not ultimately attributable to our product candidates), and the resulting publicity, could result in delay, a hold or termination of our clinical trials, increased governmental regulation, unfavorable public perception, failure of the medical community to accept and prescribe gene therapy treatments, potential regulatory delays in the testing or approval of our product candidates, stricter labeling requirements for those product candidates that are approved and a decrease in demand for any such product candidates. If any of these events should occur, it may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Certain of our product candidates may require medical devices for product administration and/or diagnostics, resulting in our product candidates being deemed combination products. This may result in the need to comply with additional regulatory requirements. If we are unable to meet these regulatory requirements, we may be delayed or not be able to obtain product approval.

Certain of our product candidates, such as AMT-130, require medical devices, such as a stereotactic, magnetic resonance imaging guided catheter, for product administration. Other of our product candidates may also require the use of a companion diagnostic device to confirm the presence of specific genetic or other biomarkers. This may result in our product candidates being deemed to be combination products, potentially necessitating compliance with the FDA’s investigational device regulations, separate marketing application submissions for the medical device component, a demonstration that our product candidates are safe and effective when used in combination with the medical devices, cross labeling with the medical device, and compliance with certain of the FDA’s device regulations. If we are not able to comply with the FDA’s device regulations, if we are not able to effectively partner with the applicable medical device manufacturers, if we or any partners are not able to obtain any required FDA clearances or approvals of the applicable medical devices, or if we are not able to demonstrate that our product candidates are safe and efficacious when used with the applicable medical devices, we may be delayed in or may never obtain FDA approval for our product candidates, which would materially harm our business.

Moreover, certain of our delivery modalities, such as direct delivery of product candidates to the brain, may require significant physician ability and skill. If physicians are not able to effectively deliver our product candidates to the applicable site of action or if delivery modalities are too difficult, we may never be able to obtain approval for our product candidates, may be delayed in obtaining approval, or, following approval, physicians may not adopt our product candidates, any of which may materially harm our business.

Risks Related to Our Manufacturing

Our manufacturing facility is subject to significant government regulations and approvals. If we fail to comply with these regulations or maintain these approvals our business could be materially harmed.

Our manufacturing facility in Lexington is subject to ongoing regulation and periodic inspection by the FDA, EU member state, and other regulatory bodies to ensure compliance with current cGMP requirements. Moreover, before approving a BLA for any product candidate, the FDA will inspect our manufacturing facility and processes. Any failure to follow and document our adherence to such cGMP regulations or other regulatory requirements may lead to significant delays in the availability of products for commercial sale or clinical study, may result in the termination of or a hold on a clinical study, or may delay or prevent filing or approval of marketing applications for our products.

Failure to comply with applicable regulations could also result in the FDA, EU member state, or other applicable authorities taking various actions, including levying fines and other civil penalties; imposing consent decrees or injunctions; requiring us to suspend or put on hold one or more of our clinical trials; suspending or withdrawing regulatory approvals; delaying or refusing to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications; requiring us to suspend manufacturing activities or product sales, imports or exports; requiring us to communicate with physicians and other customers about concerns related to actual or potential safety, efficacy, and other issues involving our products; mandating or recommending product recalls or seizing products; imposing operating restrictions; and seeking criminal prosecutions, among other outcomes. Poor control of production processes can also lead to the introduction of adventitious agents or other contaminants, or to inadvertent changes in the properties or stability of a product candidate that may not be detectable in final product testing and that could have an adverse effect on clinical studies, or patient safety or efficacy. Moreover, if our manufacturing facility is not able to follow regulatory requirements, we may need to implement costly and time-consuming remedial actions. Any of the foregoing could materially harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Table of Contents

Moreover, if we are not able to manufacture a sufficient amount of our product candidates for clinical studies or eventual commercialization, our development program and eventual commercial prospects will be harmed. If we cannot produce an adequate amount of our product candidates in compliance with the applicable regulatory requirements, we may need to contract with a third party to do so, in which case third party manufacturers may not be available or available on favorable terms. The addition of a new manufacturer may also require FDA, EMA, EU and other regulatory authority approvals, which we may not be able to obtain.

Gene therapies are complex and difficult to manufacture. We could experience capacity, production or technology transfer problems that result in delays in our development or commercialization schedules or otherwise adversely affect our business.

The insect-cell based manufacturing process we use to produce our products and product candidates is highly complex and in the normal course is subject to variation or production difficulties. Issues with any of our manufacturing processes, even minor deviations from the normal process, could result in insufficient yield, product deficiencies or manufacturing failures that result in adverse patient reactions, lot failures, insufficient inventory, product recalls and product liability claims. Additionally, we may not be able to scale up some or all of our manufacturing processes, that may result in delays in regulatory approvals or otherwise adversely affect our ability to manufacture sufficient amounts of our products.

Many factors common to the manufacturing of most biologics and drugs could also cause production interruptions, including raw materials shortages, raw material failures, growth media failures, equipment malfunctions, facility contamination, labor problems, natural disasters, disruption in utility services, terrorist activities, or cases of force majeure and acts of god (including the effects of the Covid pandemic) beyond our control. We also may encounter problems in hiring and retaining the experienced specialized personnel needed to operate our manufacturing process, which could result in delays in our production or difficulties in maintaining compliance with applicable regulatory requirements.

Any problems in our manufacturing processes or facilities could make us a less attractive collaborator for academic research institutions and other parties, which could limit our access to additional attractive development programs, result in delays in our clinical development or marketing schedules and materially harm our business.

Our use of viruses, chemicals and other hazardous materials requires us to comply with regulatory requirements and exposes us to significant potential liabilities.

Our development and manufacturing processes involve the use of viruses, chemicals, other (potentially) hazardous materials and produce waste products. Accordingly, we are subject to national, federal, state, and local laws and regulations in the United States and the Netherlands governing the use, manufacture, distribution, storage, handling, treatment, and disposal of these materials. In addition to ensuring the safe handling of these materials, applicable requirements require increased safeguards and security measures for many of these agents, including controlling access and screening of entities and personnel who have access to them, and establishing a comprehensive national database of registered entities. In the event of an accident or failure to comply with environmental, occupational health and safety and export control laws and regulations, we could be held liable for damages that result, and any such liability could exceed our assets and resources, and could result in material harm to our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Table of Contents

Our resources might be adversely affected if we are unable to validate our manufacturing processes or develop new processes to meet our product supply needs and obligations.

The manufacture of our AAV gene therapies, including etranacogene dezaparvovec, is complex and requires significant expertise. Even with the relevant experience and expertise, manufacturers of gene therapy products often encounter difficulties in production, particularly in scaling out and validating initial production, and ensuring that the product meets required specifications. These problems include difficulties with production costs and yields, quality control, including stability and potency of the product, quality assurance testing, operator error, shortages of qualified personnel, as well as compliance with strictly enforced federal, state and foreign regulations. In the past, we have manufactured certain batches of product candidates, intended for nonclinical, clinical and process validation purposes that have not met all of our pre-specified quality parameters. To meet our expected future production needs and our regulatory filing timelines for gene therapy product candidates we will need to complete the validation of our manufacturing processes, and we may need to develop and validate new or larger scale manufacturing processes. If we are unable to consistently manufacture our gene therapy product candidates or any approved products in accordance with our pre-specified quality parameters and applicable regulatory standards, it could adversely impact our ability to validate our manufacturing processes, to meet our production needs, to file a BLA or other regulatory submissions, to develop our other proprietary programs, to conserve our cash, or to receive financial payments pursuant to our agreements with third parties.

Risks Related to Regulatory Approval of Our Products

We cannot predict when or if we will obtain marketing approval to commercialize a product candidate.

The development and commercialization of our product candidates, including their design, testing, manufacture, safety, efficacy, purity, recordkeeping, labeling, storage, approval, advertising, promotion, sale, and distribution, are subject to comprehensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory agencies in the United States, the EMA, and other regulatory agencies of the member states of the European Union, and similar regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions. Failure to obtain marketing approval for a product candidate in a specific jurisdiction will prevent us from commercializing the product candidate in that jurisdiction.

The process of obtaining marketing approval for our product candidates in the United States, the European Union, and other countries is expensive and may take many years, if approval is obtained at all. Changes in marketing approval policies during the development period, changes in or the enactment of additional statutes or regulations, or changes in regulatory review for each submitted product application, may cause delays in the approval or rejection of an application. Regulatory authorities may also be delayed in completing their review of any marketing applications submitted by us or our partners.  By example, due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, regulatory authorities may not be able to complete the pre-approval inspections that are required for approval of a marketing application. Regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process and may refuse to accept any application, may decide that our data are insufficient for approval, may require additional preclinical, clinical, or other studies and may not complete their review in a timely manner. Further, any marketing approval we ultimately obtain may be for only limited indications or be subject to stringent labeling or other restrictions or post-approval commitments that render the approved product not commercially viable.

If we experience delays in obtaining marketing approval for any of our product candidates in the United States, the European Union, or other countries, the commercial prospects of our other product candidates may be harmed and our ability to generate revenues will be materially impaired.

The risks associated with the marketing approval process are heightened by the status of our products as gene therapies.

We believe that all our current product candidates will be viewed as gene therapy products by the applicable regulatory authorities. While there are a number of gene therapy product candidates under development, in the United States, the FDA has only approved a limited number of gene therapy products, to date. Accordingly, regulators, like the FDA, may have limited experience with the review and approval of marketing applications for gene therapy products.

Table of Contents

Both the FDA and the EMA have demonstrated caution in their regulation of gene therapy treatments, and ethical and legal concerns about gene therapy and genetic testing may result in additional regulations or restrictions on the development and commercialization of our product candidates that are difficult to predict. The FDA and the EMA have issued various guidance documents pertaining to gene therapy products, with which we likely must comply to gain regulatory approval of any of our product candidates in the United States or European Union, respectively. The close regulatory scrutiny of gene therapy products may result in delays and increased costs and may ultimately lead to the failure to obtain approval for any gene therapy product.

Regulatory requirements affecting gene therapy have changed frequently and continue to evolve, and agencies at both the U.S. federal and state level, as well as congressional committees and foreign governments, have sometimes expressed interest in further regulating biotechnology. In the United States, there have been a number of recent changes relating to gene therapy development. By example, FDA issued a number of new guidance documents, and continues to issue guidance documents, on human gene therapy development, one of which was specific to human gene therapy for hemophilia, one that was specific to neurodegenerative diseases, and another of which was specific to rare diseases. Moreover, the European Commission conducted a public consultation in early 2013 on the application of EU legislation that governs advanced therapy medicinal products, including gene therapy products, which could result in changes in the data we need to submit to the EMA for our product candidates to gain regulatory approval or change the requirements for tracking, handling and distribution of the products which may be associated with increased costs. In addition, divergent scientific opinions among the various bodies involved in the review process may result in delays, require additional resources, and ultimately result in rejection. The FDA, EMA, and other regulatory authorities will likely continue to revise and further update their approaches to gene therapies in the coming years. These regulatory agencies, committees and advisory groups and the new regulations and guidelines they promulgate may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional studies, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of our product candidates or lead to significant post-approval limitations or restrictions. Delay or failure to obtain, or unexpected costs in obtaining, the regulatory approval necessary to bring a potential product to market could decrease our ability to generate sufficient product revenues to maintain our business.

Our failure to obtain or maintain orphan product exclusivity for any of our product candidates for which we seek this status could limit our commercial opportunity, and if our competitors are able to obtain orphan product exclusivity before we do, we may not be able to obtain approval for our competing products for a significant period.

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States and the European Union, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. While certain of our product candidates have received orphan drug designation, there is no guarantee that we will be able to receive such designations in the future. The FDA may grant orphan designation to multiple sponsors for the same compound or active molecule and for the same indication. If another sponsor receives FDA approval for such product before we do, we would be prevented from launching our product in the United States for the orphan indication for a period of at least seven years unless we can demonstrate clinical superiority.

Moreover, while orphan drug designation neither shortens the development or regulatory review time, nor gives the product candidate advantages in the regulatory review or approval process, generally, if a product with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the relevant indication, the product is entitled to a period of market exclusivity, which precludes the FDA or the EMA from approving another marketing application for the same drug for the same indication for that period. The FDA and the EMA, however, may subsequently approve a similar drug or same drug, in the case of the United States, for the same indication during the first product's market exclusivity period if the FDA or the EMA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer or more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. Orphan exclusivity in the United States also does not prevent the FDA from approving another product that is considered to be the same as our product candidates for a different indication or a different product for the same orphan indication. If another product that is the same as ours is approved for a different indication, it is possible that third-party payors will reimburse for products off-label even if not indicated for the orphan condition.

Orphan drug exclusivity may be lost if the FDA or the EMA determines that the request for designation was materially defective, or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition or if the incidence and prevalence of patients who are eligible to receive the drug in these markets materially increase. The inability to obtain or failure to maintain adequate product exclusivity for our product candidates could have a material adverse effect on our business prospects, results of operations and financial condition.

Table of Contents

Additionally, regulatory criteria with respect to orphan products is evolving, especially in the area of gene therapy. By example, in the United States, whether two gene therapies are considered to be the same for the purpose of determining clinical superiority was recently updated via a final guidance document specific to gene therapies, and depends on a number of factors, including the expressed transgene, the vector, and other product or product candidate features. Depending on the products, whether two products are ultimately considered to be the same may be determined by FDA on a case by case basis, making it difficult to make predictions regarding when FDA might be able to make an approval of a product effective and whether periods of exclusivity will effectively block competitors seeking to market products that are the same or similar to ours for the same intended use. Accordingly, whether any of our product candidates will be deemed to be the same as another product or product candidate is uncertain.

As appropriate, we intend to seek all available periods of regulatory exclusivity for our product candidates. However, there is no guarantee that we will be granted these periods of regulatory exclusivity or that we will be able to maintain these periods of exclusivity.

The FDA grants product sponsors certain periods of regulatory exclusivity, during which the agency may not approve, and in certain instances, may not accept, certain marketing applications for competing drugs. For example, biologic product sponsors may be eligible for twelve years of exclusivity from the date of approval, seven years of exclusivity for drugs that are designated to be orphan drugs, and/or a six-month period of exclusivity added to any existing exclusivity period for the submission of FDA requested pediatric data. While we intend to apply for all periods of market exclusivity that we may be eligible for, there is no guarantee that we will be granted any such periods of market exclusivity. By example, regulatory authorities may determine that our product candidates are not eligible for periods of regulatory exclusivity for various reasons, including a determination by the FDA that a BLA approval does not constitute a first licensure of the product. Additionally, under certain circumstances, the FDA may revoke the period of market exclusivity. Thus, there is no guarantee that we will be able to maintain a period of market exclusivity, even if granted. In the case of orphan designation, other benefits, such as tax credits and exemption from user fees may be available. If we are not able to obtain or maintain orphan drug designation or any period of market exclusivity to which we may be entitled, we could be materially harmed, as we will potentially be subject to greater market competition and may lose the benefits associated with programs. It is also possible that periods of exclusivity will not adequately protect our product candidates from competition. For instance, even if we receive twelve years of exclusivity from the FDA, other applicants will still be able to submit and receive approvals for versions of our product candidates through a full BLA.

If we do not obtain or maintain periods of market exclusivity, we may face competition sooner than otherwise anticipated. For instance, in the United States, this could mean that a competing biosimilar product may be able to submit an application to the FDA and obtain approval either as a biosimilar to one of our products or even as an interchangeable product. This may require that we undertake costly and time-consuming patent litigation, to the extent available, or defend actions brought by the biosimilar applicant for declaratory judgment. If a biosimilar product does enter the market, it is possible that it could be substituted for one of our product candidates, especially if it is available at a lower price.

It is also possible that, at the time we obtain approval of our product candidates, regulatory laws and policies around exclusivities may have changed. For instance, there have been efforts to decrease the United States period of exclusivity to a shorter timeframe. Future proposed budgets, international trade agreements and other arrangements or proposals may affect periods of exclusivity.

If any of our product candidates receive regulatory approval, we and/or our partners will be subject to extensive regulatory requirements. Failure to fulfill and comply with the applicable regulatory requirements could result in regulatory enforcement actions that would be detrimental to our business.

Following any regulatory approval, the FDA and the EMA may impose certain post-approval requirements related to a product. Specifically, any approved products will be subject to continuing and comprehensive regulation concerning the product’s design, testing, manufacture, safety, efficacy, recordkeeping, labeling, storage, approval, advertising, promotion, sale and distribution.  Regulatory authorities may also require post-marketing testing, known as Phase 4 testing, a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, and surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved product or place conditions on an approval that could restrict the distribution or use of the product. Failure to comply with any of these requirements could result in regulatory, administrative, or other enforcement action, that would be detrimental to our business.

​

Table of Contents

For instance, the FDA and other government agencies closely regulate the post-approval marketing and promotion of approved products, including off-label promotion, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, and the Internet and social media.  Approved products may be marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. Failure to comply with regulatory promotional standards could result in actions being brought against us by these agencies.

Moreover, if a company obtains FDA approval for a product via the accelerated approval pathway, the company would be required to conduct a post-marketing confirmatory trial to verify and describe the clinical benefit in support of full approval. An unsuccessful post-marketing study or failure to complete such a study could result in the expedited withdrawal of the FDA’s marketing approval for a product.

Changes to some of the conditions established in an approved application, including changes in labeling, indications, manufacturing processes or facilities, may require a submission to and approval by the FDA or the EMA, as applicable, before the change can be implemented. A New Drug Application (“NDA”)/BLA or MAA supplement for a new indication typically requires clinical data similar to that in the original application. The applicable regulatory authorities would review such supplement using similar procedures and actions as in reviewing NDAs/BLAs and MAAs.  

Adverse event reporting and submission of periodic reports is required following marketing approval. Regulatory authorities may withdraw product approvals or request product recalls, as well as impose other enforcement actions, if a company fails to comply with regulatory standards, if it encounters problems following initial marketing, or if previously unrecognized problems are subsequently discovered.

In addition, the manufacture, testing, packaging, labeling, and distribution of products after approval will need to continue to conform to cGMPs. Drug and biological product manufacturers and certain of their subcontractors are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA or the EMA for compliance with cGMPs. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the areas of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMPs. In addition, prescription drug manufacturers in the U.S. must comply with applicable provisions of the Drug Supply Chain Security Act and provide and receive product tracing information, maintain appropriate licenses, ensure they only work with other properly licensed entities and have procedures in place to identify and properly handle suspect and illegitimate products.

Where we partner with third parties for the development, approval, and marketing of a product, such third parties will be subject to the same regulatory obligations as we will.  However, as we will not control the actions of the applicable third parties, we will be reliant on them to meet their contractual and regulatory obligations.  By example, the decisions associated with regulatory approvals and filings for AMT-061 will largely be controlled by CSL Behring, and we will not have final decision making authority in that regard.  Accordingly, actions taken by any of our partners could materially and adversely impact our business.

Risks Related to Commercialization

If we are unable to successfully commercialize our product candidates or experience significant delays in doing so, our business could be materially harmed.

Our ability to generate product revenues will depend on the successful development and eventual commercialization of our product candidates. The success of our product candidates will depend on many factors, including:

Table of Contents

By example, even if our product candidates are approved, they may be subject to limitations that make commercialization difficult. There may be limitations on the indicated uses and populations for which the products may be marketed. They may also be subject to other conditions of approval, may contain significant safety warnings, including boxed warnings, contraindications, and precautions, may not be approved with label statements necessary or desirable for successful commercialization, or may contain requirements for costly post-market testing and surveillance, or other requirements, including the submission of a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, to monitor the safety or efficacy of the products. Failure to achieve or implement any of the above elements could result in significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, which could materially harm our business.

The affected populations for our gene therapies may be smaller than we or third parties currently project, which may affect the size of our addressable markets.

Our projections of the number of people who have the diseases we are seeking to treat, as well as the subset of people with these diseases who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our therapies, are estimates based on our knowledge and understanding of these diseases. The total addressable market opportunities for these therapies will ultimately depend upon many factors, including the diagnosis and treatment criteria included in the final label, if approved for sale in specified indications, acceptance by the medical community, patient consent, patient access and product pricing and reimbursement.

Prevalence estimates are frequently based on information and assumptions that are not exact and may not be appropriate, and the methodology is forward-looking and speculative. The use of such data involves risks and uncertainties and is subject to change based on various factors. Our estimates may prove to be incorrect and new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of the diseases we seek to address. The number of patients with the diseases we are targeting may turn out to be lower than expected or may not be otherwise amenable to treatment with our products, reimbursement may not be sufficient to sustain a viable business for all sub populations being studied, or new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or access, any of which could adversely affect our results of operations and our business.

The addressable markets for AAV-based gene therapies may be impacted by the prevalence of neutralizing antibodies to the capsids, which are an integral component of our gene therapy constructs. Patients that have pre-existing antibodies to a particular capsid may not be eligible for administration of a gene therapy that includes this particular capsid. For example, etranacogene dezaparvovec, our gene therapy candidate for hemophilia B patients, incorporates an AAV5 capsid. In our Phase I/II clinical study of AMT-060, we screened patients for pre-existing anti-AAV5 antibodies to determine their eligibility for the trial. Three of the ten patients screened for the study tested positive for anti-AAV5 antibodies on reanalysis. Although we did not observe any ill-effects or correlation between the level of anti-AAV5 antibodies and clinical outcomes in these three patients, suggesting that patients who have anti-AAV5 antibodies may still be eligible for AAV5-based gene therapies, since we only have been able to test a limited number of patients and have limited clinical and pre-clinical data, we do not know if future clinical studies will confirm these results. This may limit the addressable market for etranacogene dezaparvovec and any future revenues derived from the sale of the product, if approved.

Table of Contents

Any approved gene therapy we seek to offer may fail to achieve the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third party payers and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success.

Doctors may be reluctant to accept a gene therapy as a treatment option or, where available, choose to continue to rely on existing treatments. The degree of market acceptance of any of our product candidates that receive marketing approval in the future will depend on many factors, including:

A failure to gain market acceptance for any of the above reasons, or any reasons at all, by a gene therapy for which we receive regulatory approval would likely hinder our ability to recapture our substantial investments in that and other gene therapies and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operation.

​

If we are unable to expand our commercialization capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell any of our product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval, we may be unable to generate any product revenue.

To successfully commercialize any products that may result from our development programs, we need to continue to expand our commercialization capabilities, either on our own or with others. The development of our own market development effort is, and will continue to be, expensive and time-consuming and could delay any product launch. Moreover, we cannot be certain that we will be able to successfully develop this capability.

We may enter into collaborations regarding our other product candidates with other entities to utilize their established marketing and distribution capabilities, but we may be unable to enter into such agreements on favorable terms, if at all. If any current or future collaborators do not commit sufficient resources to commercialize our products, or we are unable to develop the necessary capabilities on our own, we will be unable to generate sufficient product revenue to sustain our business. We compete with many companies that currently have extensive, experienced and well-funded medical affairs, marketing, and sales operations to recruit, hire, train and retain marketing and sales personnel. We also may face competition in any search for third parties to assist us with the sales and marketing efforts of our product candidates. Without an internal team or the support of a third party to perform marketing and sales functions, we may be unable to compete successfully against these more established companies.

If the market opportunities for our product candidates are smaller than we believe they are, our product revenues may be adversely affected, and our business may suffer.

We focus our research and product development on treatments for severe genetic and orphan diseases. Our understanding of both the number of people who have these diseases, as well as the subset of people with these diseases who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates, are based on estimates. These estimates may prove to be incorrect and new studies may reduce the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The number of patients in the United States, the EU and elsewhere may turn out to be lower than expected, may not be otherwise amenable to treatment with our products or patients may become increasingly difficult to identify and access, any of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Table of Contents

Further, there are several factors that could contribute to making the actual number of patients who receive other potential products less than the potentially addressable market. These include the lack of widespread availability of, and limited reimbursement for, new therapies in many underdeveloped markets. Further, the severity of the progression of a disease up to the time of treatment, especially in certain degenerative conditions, could diminish the therapeutic benefit conferred by a gene therapy. Lastly, certain patients’ immune systems might prohibit the successful delivery of certain gene therapy products to the target tissue, thereby limiting the treatment outcomes.

Our gene therapy approach utilizes vectors derived from viruses, which may be perceived as unsafe or may result in unforeseen adverse events. Negative public opinion and increased regulatory scrutiny of gene therapy may damage public perception of the safety of our product and product candidates and adversely affect our ability to conduct our business or obtain regulatory approvals for our product candidates.

Gene therapy remains a novel technology. Public perception may be influenced by claims that gene therapy is unsafe, and gene therapy may not gain the acceptance of the public or the medical community. Public and medical community adoption of any of our gene therapies will also depend on factors including the ease of administration in comparison to other therapeutics.  By example, the need for complex surgeries for the administration of a product candidate may impact the acceptance of a product.

In particular, our success will depend upon physicians who specialize in the treatment of genetic diseases targeted by our product and product candidates, prescribing treatments that involve the use of our product and product candidates, in lieu of, or in addition to, existing treatments with which they are familiar and for which greater clinical data may be available. More restrictive government regulations or negative public opinion would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects and may delay or impair the development and commercialization of our product candidates or demand for any products we may develop. For example, earlier gene therapy trials led to several well-publicized adverse events, including cases of leukemia and death seen in other trials using other vectors. Serious adverse events in our clinical trials, or other clinical trials involving gene therapy products or our competitors’ products, even if not ultimately attributable to the relevant product candidates, and the resulting publicity, could result in increased government regulation, unfavorable public perception, potential regulatory delays in the testing or approval of our product candidates, stricter labeling requirements for those product candidates that are approved and a decrease in demand for any products for which we obtain marketing approval.

Ethical, legal, and social issues may reduce demand for any gene therapy products for which we obtain marketing approval.

Prior to receiving certain gene therapies, patients may be required to undergo genetic testing. Genetic testing has raised concerns regarding the appropriate utilization and the confidentiality of information provided by genetic testing. Genetic tests for assessing a person’s likelihood of developing a chronic disease have focused public attention on the need to protect the privacy of genetic information. For example, concerns have been expressed that insurance carriers and employers may use these tests to discriminate on the basis of genetic information, resulting in barriers to the acceptance of genetic tests by consumers. This could lead to governmental authorities restricting genetic testing or calling for limits on or regulating the use of genetic testing, particularly for diseases for which there is no known cure. Any of these scenarios could decrease demand for any products for which we obtain marketing approval.

If we obtain approval to commercialize any of our product candidates outside of the United States, a variety of risks associated with international operations could materially adversely affect our business.

We expect that we will be subject to additional risks in commercializing any of our product candidates outside the United States, including:

Table of Contents

We face substantial competition, and others may discover, develop, or commercialize competing products before or more successfully than we do.

The development and commercialization of new biotechnology and biopharmaceutical products, including gene therapies, is highly competitive. We may face intense competition with respect to our product candidates, as well as with respect to any product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future, from large and specialty pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies worldwide, who currently market and sell products or are pursuing the development of products for the treatment of many of the disease indications for which we are developing our product candidates. Potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, seek patent protection, and establish collaborative arrangements for research, development, manufacturing, and commercialization. In recent years, there has been a significant increase in commercial and scientific interest and financial investment in gene therapy as a therapeutic approach, which has intensified the competition in this area.

We face worldwide competition from larger pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology firms, universities and other research institutions and government agencies that are developing and commercializing pharmaceutical products. Our key competitors focused on developing therapies in various indications, include among others, Pfizer, Freeline Therapeutics, Intellia Therapeutics, Sangamo Biosciences, Voyager Therapeutics, Passage Bio, Roche, PTC Therapeutics, Prilenia Therapeutics, Triplet Therapeutics, CombiGene, AvroBio, Caritas Therapeutics, and 4D Molecular Therapeutics.

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than the products that we develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA, EMA, or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we do, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. A competitor approval may also prevent us from entering the market if the competitor receives any regulatory exclusivities that block our product candidates. Because we expect that gene therapy patients may generally require only a single administration, we believe that the first gene therapy product to enter the market for a particular indication will likely enjoy a significant commercial advantage and may also obtain market exclusivity under applicable orphan drug regimes.

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

If we do not achieve our projected development goals in the timeframes we announce and expect, the commercialization of our product candidates may be delayed and, as a result, our stock price may decline.

For planning purposes, we estimate the timing of the accomplishment of various scientific, clinical, regulatory, and other product development goals, or development milestones. These development milestones may include the commencement or completion of scientific studies, clinical trials, the submission of regulatory filings, and approval for commercial sale. From time to time, we publicly announce the expected timing of some of these milestones. All these milestones are based on a variety of assumptions. The actual timing of these milestones can vary dramatically compared to our estimates, in many cases for reasons beyond our control. If we do not meet these milestones, including those that are publicly announced, the commercialization of our products may be delayed and, as a result, our stock price may decline.

Table of Contents

Risks Related to Our Dependence on Third Parties

We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties to conduct, supervise, and monitor our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and those third parties may not perform satisfactorily, including failing to meet deadlines for the completion of such trials or failing to comply with regulatory requirements.

We rely on third parties, study sites, and others to conduct, supervise, and monitor our preclinical and clinical trials for our product candidates and do not currently plan to independently conduct clinical or preclinical trials of any other potential product candidates. We expect to continue to rely on third parties, such as CROs, clinical data management organizations, medical and scientific institutions, and clinical and preclinical investigators, to conduct our preclinical studies and clinical trials.

While we have agreements governing the activities of such third parties, we have limited influence and control over their actual performance and activities. For instance, our third-party service providers 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 clinical, non-clinical, 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 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 trials may be repeated, extended, delayed, or terminated, we may not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, marketing approvals for our product candidates, we may not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize our 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 our product 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 may be materially and adversely affected. Our third-party service providers 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.

Our reliance on these third-parties for development activities will reduce 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 trials is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial. We must also ensure that our preclinical trials are conducted in accordance with GLPs, 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 assure 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 and preclinical investigators, and trial sites. If we or any of our third-party service providers 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 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 that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our trials complies with the applicable regulatory requirements. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product candidates that were produced under GMP conditions. 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, ClinicalTrials.gov, within specified timeframes. Failure to do so can result in enforcement actions and adverse publicity.

Table of Contents

Agreements with third parties conducting or otherwise assisting with our clinical or preclinical studies might terminate for a variety of reasons, including a failure to perform by the third parties. 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 time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new third party commences work. As a result, if we need to enter into alternative arrangements, it could delay our product development activities and adversely affect our business. Though we carefully manage our relationships with our third parties, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and prospects, and results of operations.

We also rely on other third parties to store and distribute our products for the clinical and preclinical trials that we conduct. Any performance failure on the part of our distributors could delay development, marketing approval, or commercialization of our product candidates, producing additional losses and depriving us of potential product revenue.

We rely on third parties for important aspects of our development programs. If these parties do not perform successfully or if we are unable to enter into or maintain key collaboration or other contractual arrangements, our business could be adversely affected.

We have in the past entered into, and expect in the future to enter into, collaborations with other companies and academic research institutions with respect to important elements of our development programs.

Any collaboration may pose several risks, including the following:

Table of Contents

If any collaboration does not result in the successful development and commercialization of products or if a collaborator were to terminate an agreement with us, we may not receive future research funding or milestone or royalty payments under that collaboration, and we may lose access to important technologies and capabilities of the collaboration. All the risks relating to product development, regulatory approval and commercialization described herein also apply to the activities of any development collaborators.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

We rely on licenses of intellectual property from third parties, and such licenses may not provide adequate rights or may not be available in the future on commercially reasonable terms or at all, and our licensors may be unable to obtain and maintain patent protection for the technology or products that we license from them.

We currently are heavily reliant upon licenses of proprietary technology from third parties that is important or necessary to the development of our technology and products, including technology related to our manufacturing process, our vector platform, our gene cassettes and the therapeutic genes of interest we are using. These and other licenses may not provide adequate rights to use such technology in all relevant fields of use. Licenses to additional third-party technology that may be required for our development programs may not be available in the future or may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

In some circumstances, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain the patents, covering technology that we license from third parties. In addition, some of our agreements with our licensors require us to obtain consent from the licensor before we can enforce patent rights, and our licensor may withhold such consent or may not provide it on a timely basis. Therefore, we cannot be certain that these patents and applications will be prosecuted and enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. In addition, if third parties who license patents to us fail to maintain such patents, or lose rights to those patents, the rights we have licensed may be reduced or eliminated.

Our intellectual property licenses with third parties may be subject to disagreements over contract interpretation, which could narrow the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology or increase our financial or other obligations to our licensors.

The agreements under which we license intellectual property or technology from third parties are complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

If we fail to comply with our obligations in our intellectual property licenses with third parties, we could lose rights that are important to our business.

Our licensing arrangements with third parties may impose diligence, development and commercialization timelines, milestone payment, royalty, insurance, and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with these obligations, our counterparties may have the right to terminate these agreements either in part or in whole, in which case we might not be able to develop, manufacture or market any product that is covered by these agreements or may face other penalties under the agreements. Such an occurrence could materially adversely affect the value of the product candidate being developed under any such agreement. Termination of these agreements or reduction or elimination of our rights under these agreements may result in our having to negotiate new or amended agreements with less favorable terms or cause us to lose our rights under these agreements, including our rights to important intellectual property or technology.

Table of Contents

If we are unable to obtain and maintain patent protection for our technology and products, or if the scope of the patent protection is not sufficiently broad, our ability to successfully commercialize our products may be impaired.

We rely, in part, upon a combination of forms of intellectual property, including in-licensed and owned patents to protect our intellectual property. Our success depends in a large part on our ability to obtain and maintain this protection in the United States, the European Union, and other countries, in part by filing patent applications related to our novel technologies and product candidates. Our patents may not provide us with any meaningful commercial protection, prevent competitors from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. For example, patents we own currently are and may become subject to future patent opposition or similar proceedings, which may result in loss of scope of some claims or the entire patent. Our competitors may be able to circumvent our owned or licensed patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner.

Successful challenges to our patents may result in loss of exclusivity or freedom to operate or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology and products.

The patent prosecution process is expensive, time-consuming, and uncertain, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. Additionally, given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and has in recent years been the subject of much litigation. In addition, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. For example, EU patent law with respect to the patentability of methods of treatment of the human body is more limited than U.S. law. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after their priority date, or in some cases at all. Therefore, we cannot know with certainty whether we were the first to make the inventions or that we were the first to file for patent protection of the inventions claimed in our owned or licensed patents or pending patent applications. 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 that protect our technology or products, in whole or in part, or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and products. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the European Union, the United States or other countries may diminish the value of our patents or narrow the scope of our patent protection. Our inability to obtain and maintain appropriate patent protection for any one of our products could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property, or third parties may assert their intellectual property rights against us, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

Competitors may infringe our owned or licensed patents or other intellectual property. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time consuming. An adverse result in any litigation proceeding could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated, maintained in more narrowly amended form or interpreted narrowly.

Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur significant expenses, increase our operating losses, reduce available resources, and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments, which could have an adverse effect on the price of our ordinary shares.

Table of Contents

Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing their intellectual property rights, the outcome of which would be uncertain and could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business. For example, outside of the United States two of the patents we own are subject to patent opposition. If these or future oppositions are successful or if we are found to otherwise infringe a third party's intellectual property rights, we could be required to obtain a license from such third party to continue developing and marketing our products and technology. We may not be able to obtain the required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we could obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. We could be forced, including by court order, to cease commercializing the infringing technology or product or otherwise to cease using the relevant intellectual property. In addition, we could be found liable for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys' fees if we are found to have willfully infringed a patent. A finding of infringement could prevent us from commercializing our product candidates or force us to cease or materially modify some of our business operations, which could materially harm our business. Claims that we have misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business.

For example, we are aware of patents owned by third parties that relate to some aspects of our programs that are still in development. In some cases, because we have not determined the final methods of manufacture, the method of administration or the therapeutic compositions for these programs, we cannot determine whether rights under such third-party patents will be needed. In addition, in some cases, we believe that the claims of these patents are invalid or not infringed or will expire before commercialization. However, if such patents are needed and found to be valid and infringed, we could be required to obtain licenses, which might not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or to cease or delay commercializing certain product candidates, or to change our programs to avoid infringement.

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our proprietary information and know-how, the value of our technology and products could be adversely affected.

In addition to seeking patent protection, we also rely on other proprietary rights, including protection of trade secrets, know-how and confidential and proprietary information. To maintain the confidentiality of our trade secrets and proprietary information, we enter into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, collaborators and other third parties who have access to our trade secrets. Our agreements with employees also provide that any inventions conceived by the individual while rendering services to us will be our exclusive property. However, we may not obtain these agreements in all circumstances, and individuals with whom we have these agreements may not comply with their terms. 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. In addition, in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure of our trade secrets or proprietary information, these agreements, even if obtained, may not provide meaningful protection, particularly for our trade secrets or other confidential information. To the extent that our employees, consultants, or contractors use technology or know-how owned by third parties in their work for us, disputes may arise between us and those third parties as to the rights in related inventions.

Adequate remedies may not exist in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure of our confidential information including a breach of our confidentiality agreements. 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 in and outside of the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor or other third party, we would have no right to prevent them from using that technology or information to compete with us. The disclosure of our trade secrets or the independent development of our trade secrets by a competitor or other third party would impair our competitive position and may materially harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, stock price and prospects.

Table of Contents

Our reliance on third parties may require us to share our trade secrets, which could increase the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secrets will be misappropriated or disclosed.

Because we collaborate from time to time with various organizations and academic research institutions on the advancement of our gene therapy platform, we must, at times, share trade secrets with them. We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, materials transfer agreements, collaborative research agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our collaborators, advisors, and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, such as 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 inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others, or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how and trade secrets, a competitor's discovery of our trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business.

In addition, these agreements typically restrict the ability of our collaborators, advisors, and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our trade secrets. Our academic collaborators typically have rights to publish data, if we are notified in advance and may delay publication for a specified time to secure our intellectual property rights arising from the collaboration. In other cases, publication rights are controlled exclusively by us, although in some cases we may share these rights with other parties. We also conduct joint research and development programs that may require us to share trade secrets under the terms of our research and development partnerships or similar agreements.

Some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to prevent them, or those with whom they communicate, from using that technology or information to compete with us.

Risks Related to Acquisitions

Our acquisition strategy may not produce the cash flows expected or could result in additional costs and challenges.

Any acquisition, including the recent acquisition of Corlieve Therapeutics, could expose us to unknown liabilities and risks, and we may incur additional costs and expenses necessary to address an acquired company’s failure to comply with laws and governmental rules and regulations. We could incur additional costs related to resources to align our business practices and operations. Moreover, we cannot assure that the anticipated benefits of any acquisition would be realized in a timely manner, if at all.

In addition, the finalization of the valuation of the identifiable assets acquired in connection with the Corlieve Transaction could require us to expense all identifiable intangible assets without an alternative future use if we would determine that substantially all of the gross value of the assets is concentrated in a single identifiable asset or group of similar identifiable assets.

Additionally, the product candidate and intellectual property rights that we acquired in the Corlieve Transaction were developed and owned by Corlieve and its licensors and we have not yet demonstrated an ability to develop, advance, or run clinical trials with this product candidate. As a result, we cannot ensure that we will be able to successfully advance this product candidate going forward.

Risks Related to Pricing and Reimbursement

We face uncertainty related to insurance coverage of, and pricing and reimbursement for product candidates for which we may receive marketing approval.

We anticipate that the cost of treatment using our product candidates will be significant. We expect that most patients and their families will not be capable of paying for our products themselves. There will be no commercially viable market for our product candidates without reimbursement from third party payers, such as government health administration authorities, private health insurers and other organizations. Even if there is a commercially viable market, if the level of third-party reimbursement is below our expectations, most patients may not be able to afford treatment with our products and our revenues and gross margins will be adversely affected, and our business will be harmed.

Table of Contents

Government authorities and other third-party payers, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide for which medications they will pay and, subsequently, establish reimbursement levels. Reimbursement systems vary significantly by country and by region, and reimbursement approvals must be obtained on a country-by-country basis. Government authorities and third-party payers have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications and procedures and negotiating or requiring payment of manufacturer rebates. Increasingly, third party payers require drug companies to provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices, are exerting influence on decisions regarding the use of particular treatments and are limiting covered indications. Additionally, in the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, pending or potential legislative and regulatory changes regarding the healthcare system and insurance coverage could result in more rigorous coverage criteria and downward pressure on drug prices, and may affect our ability to profitably sell any products for which we obtain marketing approval. For example, on November 27, 2020, CMS issued an interim final rule implementing a Most Favored Nation (“MFN”) payment model under which reimbursement for certain Medicare Part B drugs and biologicals will be based on a price that reflects the lowest per capita GDP-adjusted price of any non-U.S. member country of the OECD with a GDP per capita that is at least sixty percent of the U.S. GDP per capita. While this rule now has been rescinded, government negotiation of certain Medicare drug pricing continues to be the focus of recent proposed legislation.

The pricing review period and pricing negotiations for new medicines take considerable time and have uncertain results. Pricing review and negotiation usually begins only after the receipt of regulatory marketing approval, and some authorities require approval of the sale price of a product before it can be marketed. In some markets, particularly the countries of the European Union, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing direct governmental control and to drug reimbursement programs even after initial approval is granted and price reductions may be imposed. Prices of medical products may also be subject to varying price control mechanisms or limitations as part of national health systems if products are considered not cost-effective or where a drug company's profits are deemed excessive. In addition, pricing and reimbursement decisions in certain countries can lead to mandatory price reductions or additional reimbursement restrictions in other countries. Because of these restrictions, any product candidates for which we may obtain marketing approval may be subject to price regulations that delay or prohibit our or our partners' commercial launch of the product in a particular jurisdiction. In addition, we or any collaborator may elect to reduce the price of our products to increase the likelihood of obtaining reimbursement approvals. If countries impose prices, which are not sufficient to allow us or any collaborator to generate a profit, we or any collaborator may refuse to launch the product in such countries or withdraw the product from the market. If pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, or if the price decreases, our business could be harmed, possibly materially. If we fail to obtain and sustain an adequate level of coverage and reimbursement for our products by third party payers, our ability to market and sell our products could be adversely affected and our business could be harmed.

Due to the generally limited addressable market for our target orphan indications and the potential for our therapies to offer therapeutic benefit in a single administration, we face uncertainty related to pricing and reimbursement for these product candidates.

The relatively small market size for orphan indications and the potential for long-term therapeutic benefit from a single administration present challenges to pricing review and negotiation of our product candidates for which we may obtain marketing authorization. Most of our product candidates target rare diseases with relatively small patient populations. If we are unable to obtain adequate levels of reimbursement relative to these small markets, our ability to support our development and commercial infrastructure and to successfully market and sell our product candidates for which we may obtain marketing approval could be adversely affected.

We also anticipate that many or all our gene therapy product candidates may provide long-term, and potentially curative benefit, with a single administration. This is a different paradigm than that of other pharmaceutical therapies, which often require an extended course of treatment or frequent administration. As a result, governments and other payers may be reluctant to provide the significant level of reimbursement that we seek at the time of administration of our gene therapies or may seek to tie reimbursement to clinical evidence of continuing therapeutic benefit over time. Additionally, there may be situations in which our product candidates will need to be administered more than once, which may further complicate the pricing and reimbursement for these treatments. In addition, considering the anticipated cost of these therapies, governments and other payers may be particularly restrictive in making coverage decisions. These factors could limit our commercial success and materially harm our business.

Table of Contents

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital

We had a gain in the current year and incurred significant losses in prior years and expect to incur losses over the next several years and may never achieve or maintain profitability.

We had a gain of $329.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2021, and incurred losses of $125.0 million in 2020 and $124.2 million in 2019. As of December 31, 2021, we had an accumulated deficit of $455.1 million. In the past, we have financed our operations primarily through the sale of equity securities and convertible debt, venture loans, upfront payments from our collaboration partners and, to a lesser extent, subsidies and grants from governmental agencies and fees for services. We expect to finance our operations in 2022 primarily from the $462.4 million payments we collected from CSL Behring in May 2021 as well as the $55.0 million we expect to collect from CSL Behring in 2022. We have devoted substantially all our financial resources and efforts to research and development, including preclinical studies and clinical trials. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and losses over the next several years, and our net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year. Our gain was materially impacted by the amount of license revenue that we recognized as a result of the Closing of the transaction under the CSL Behring Agreement.

We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially as we:

We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, may never generate revenues that are sufficient to achieve or sustain profitability. Our failure to become and remain profitable would depress the value of our company and could impair our ability to expand our business, maintain our research and development efforts, diversify our product offerings, or even continue our operations.

We will likely need to raise additional funding, which may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Failure to obtain capital when needed may force us to delay, limit or terminate our product development efforts or other operations which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

We expect to incur significant expenses in connection with our on-going activities and that we will likely need to obtain substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations. In addition, we have based our estimate of our financing requirements on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our capital resources sooner than we currently expect.

Adequate capital may not be available to us when needed or may not be available on acceptable terms. Our ability to obtain debt financing may be limited by covenants we have made under our 2021 Restated Facility with Hercules and our pledge to Hercules of substantially all our assets as collateral. If we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, our shareholders' ownership interest could be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of holders of our ordinary shares.

If we raise additional funds through collaborations, strategic alliances, or marketing, distribution, or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to issue additional equity, relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams, products, or product candidates, or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on attractive terms, we could be forced to delay, reduce, or eliminate our research and development programs or any future commercialization efforts, which would have a negative impact on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Table of Contents

Our existing and any future indebtedness could adversely affect our ability to operate our business.

As of December 31, 2021, we had $100.0 million of outstanding principal of borrowings under the 2021 Restated Facility, which we are required to repay in equal installments between December 2024 and December 2025 or in full in December 2025 if, prior to June 30, 2024, either (a) the BLA for AMT-061 is approved by the FDA or (b) AMT-130 is advanced into a pivotal trial. We could in the future incur additional debt obligations beyond our borrowings from Hercules. Our existing loan obligations, together with other similar obligations that we may incur in the future, could have significant adverse consequences, including:

We may not have sufficient funds, and may be unable to arrange for additional financing, to pay the amounts due under our existing loan obligations. Failure to make payments or comply with other covenants under our existing debt could result in an event of default and acceleration of amounts due. Under the 2021 Restated Facility, the occurrence of an event that would reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on our business, operations, assets, or condition is an event of default. If an event of default occurs and the lender accelerates the amounts due, we may not be able to make accelerated payments, and the lender could seek to enforce security interests in the collateral securing such indebtedness, which includes substantially all our assets.

Risks Related to Other Legal Compliance Matters

Our relationships with customers and third-party payers will be subject to applicable anti-kickback, anti-bribery, fraud and abuse and other laws and regulations, which, if we are found in violation thereof, could expose us to criminal sanctions, civil and administrative penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm and diminished profits and future earnings.

Healthcare providers, physicians, other practitioners, and third-party payers will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any products for which we obtain marketing approval. Our future arrangements with third party payers and customers may expose us to broadly applicable anti-bribery laws, including the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, as well as fraud and abuse and other US and international healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we would be able to market, sell and distribute any products for which we obtain marketing approval.

Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable laws and regulations could involve substantial costs. If our operations, or the activities of our collaborators, distributors or other third-party agents are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal, and administrative penalties, damages, fines, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government funded healthcare programs and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. The costs associated with any of these actions could be substantial and could cause irreparable harm to our reputation or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Table of Contents

We are subject to laws governing data protection in the different jurisdictions in which we operate. The implementation of such data protection regimes is complex, and should we fail to fully comply, we may be subject to penalties that may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Many national and state laws govern the privacy and security of health information and other personal and private information. They often differ from each other in significant ways. For instance, the EU has adopted a comprehensive data protection law called the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) that took effect in May 2018. The GDPR, together with the national legislation of the EU member states governing the processing of personal data, impose strict obligations and restrictions on the ability to collect, analyze and transfer personal data, including health data from clinical trials and adverse event reporting. In particular, these obligations and restrictions concern the consent of the individuals to whom the personal data relates, the information provided to the individuals, the transfer of personal data out of the EU, security breach notifications, security and confidentiality of the personal data, and imposition of substantial potential fines for breaches of the data protection obligations. The GDPR imposes penalties for non-compliance of up to the greater of EUR 20.0 million or 4% of worldwide revenue. Data protection authorities from the different EU member states may interpret the GDPR and national laws differently and impose additional requirements, which add to the complexity of processing personal data in the EU. Guidance on implementation and compliance practices are often updated or otherwise revised. The significant costs of compliance with risk of regulatory enforcement actions under, and other burdens imposed by the GDPR as well as under other regulatory schemes throughout the world related to privacy and security of health information and other personal and private data could have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Product liability lawsuits could cause us to incur substantial liabilities and to limit commercialization of our therapies.

We face an inherent risk of product liability related to the testing of our product candidates in human clinical trials and in connection with product sales. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against claims that our product candidates or products caused injuries, we will incur substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

Dependent upon the country where the clinical trial is conducted, we currently hold coverages ranging from EUR 500,000 to EUR 6,500,000 per occurrence and per clinical trial. Such coverage may not be adequate to cover all liabilities that we may incur. We may need to increase our insurance coverage as we expand our clinical trials. In addition, insurance coverage is increasingly expensive. We may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in an amount adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise. In the event insurance coverage is insufficient to cover liabilities that we may incur, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Healthcare legislative and regulatory reform measures may have a material adverse effect on our financial operations.

Our industry is highly regulated and changes in law may adversely impact our business, operations, or financial results. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or the PPACA, is a sweeping measure intended to, among other things, expand healthcare coverage within the United States, primarily through the imposition of health insurance mandates on employers and individuals and expansion of the Medicaid program. Several provisions of the law may affect us and increase certain of our costs.

Table of Contents

In addition, other legislative changes have been adopted since the PPACA was enacted. These changes include aggregate reductions in Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013, Congress subsequently has extended the period over which these reductions are in effect. While President Biden previously signed legislation temporarily to eliminate this reduction through the end of 2021, recent legislation will restart the reductions, which will thereafter remain in effect through 2031 unless additional congressional action is taken. In January 2013, President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which could have a material adverse effect on our customers and, accordingly, our financial operations.

We anticipate that the PPACA, as well as other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and additional downward pressure on pricing and the reimbursement our customers may receive for our products, and increased manufacturer rebates. Further, there have been, and there may continue to be, judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the PPACA. For example, the U.S. Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 includes a provision repealing, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the Affordable Care Act on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the "individual mandate". Additional legislative and regulatory changes to the PPACA, its implementing regulations and guidance and its policies, remain possible in the 117th U.S. Congress and under the Biden Administration. However, it remains unclear how any new legislation or regulation might affect the prices we may obtain for any of our product candidates for which regulatory approval is obtained. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare and other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payers. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our products.

Our internal computer systems, or those of our collaborators or other contractors or consultants, may fail or suffer security breaches, which could result in a material disruption of our product development programs.

Our internal computer systems and those of our current and any future collaborators and other contractors or consultants are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. The size and complexity of our information technology systems, and those of our collaborators, contractors and consultants, and the large amounts of confidential information stored on those systems, make such systems vulnerable to service interruptions or to security breaches from inadvertent or intentional actions by our employees, third-party vendors and/or business partners, or from cyber-attacks by malicious third parties. Cyber-attacks are increasing in their frequency, sophistication, and intensity, and have become increasingly difficult to detect. Cyber-attacks could include the deployment of harmful malware, ransomware, denial-of-service attacks, social engineering, and other means to affect service reliability and threaten the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information. Cyber-attacks also could include phishing attempts or e-mail fraud to cause payments or information to be transmitted to an unintended recipient. The increased number of employees working remotely due to Covid might increase our vulnerability to the above risk.

While we have experienced and addressed system failures, cyber-attacks, and security breaches in the past, we have not experienced a system failure, accident, cyber-attack, or security breach that has resulted in a material interruption in our operations to date. In the future, such events could result in a material disruption of our development programs and our business operations, whether due to a loss of our trade secrets, data, or other proprietary information or other similar disruptions. Additionally, any such event that leads to unauthorized access, use or disclosure of personal information, including personal information regarding our patients or employees, could harm our reputation, cause us not to comply with federal and/or state breach notification laws and foreign law equivalents and otherwise subject us to liability under laws and regulations that protect the privacy and security of personal information. Security breaches and other inappropriate access can be difficult to detect, and any delay in identifying them may lead to increased harm of the type described above. While we have implemented security measures to protect our information technology systems and infrastructure, there can be no assurance that such measures will prevent service interruptions or security breaches that could adversely affect our business and the further development and commercialization of our product and product candidates could be delayed.

Table of Contents

Risks Related to Employee Matters and Managing Growth

Our future success depends on our ability to retain key executives, technical staff, and other employees and to attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel.

Our future growth and success will depend in large part on our continued ability to attract, retain, manage and motivate our employees. The loss of the services of any member of our senior management or the inability to hire or retain experienced management personnel could adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan and harm our operating results. We are highly dependent on hiring, training, retaining and motivating key personnel to lead our research and development, clinical operations, and manufacturing efforts. Although we have entered into employment agreements with our key personnel, each of them may terminate their employment on short notice. We do not maintain key person insurance for any of our senior management or employees.

The loss of the services of our key employees could impede the achievement of our research and development objectives and seriously harm our ability to successfully implement our business strategy. Furthermore, replacing senior management and key employees may be difficult and may take an extended period because of the limited number of individuals in our industry with the breadth and depth of skills and experience required to successfully develop gene therapy products. Competition to hire from this limited pool is intense, and we may be unable to hire, train, retain or motivate these key personnel on acceptable terms.

The competition for qualified personnel in the pharmaceutical field is intense, and there is a limited pool of qualified potential employees to recruit. Due to this intense competition, we may be unable to continue to attract and retain qualified personnel necessary for the development of our business or to recruit suitable replacement personnel. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high quality personnel, our ability to pursue our business may be harmed and our growth strategy may be limited.

Additionally, we are reliant on our employees, contractors, consultants, vendors and other parties with whom we have relationships to behave ethically and within the requirements of the law.  The failure of any employee or other such third parties to act within the bounds of the applicable laws, regulations, agreements, codes and other requirements, or any misconduct or illegal actions or omissions by such persons, could materially damage our business.

Risks Related to Our Ordinary Shares

The price of our ordinary shares has been and may in the future be volatile and fluctuate substantially.

Our share price has been and may in the future be volatile. From the start of trading of our ordinary shares on the Nasdaq Global Select Market on February 4, 2014 through February 23, 2022, the sale price of our ordinary shares ranged from a high of $82.49 to a low of $4.72. The closing price on February 23, 2022, was $15.70 per ordinary share. The stock market in general and the market for smaller 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 ordinary shares may be influenced by many factors, including:

Table of Contents

Our directors, executive officers, and major shareholders, if they choose to act together, will continue to have a significant degree of control with respect to matters submitted to shareholders for approval.

Our directors, executive officers and major shareholders holding more than 5% of our outstanding ordinary shares, in the aggregate, beneficially own approximately 50.4% of our issued shares (including such shares to be issued in relation to exercisable options to purchase ordinary shares) as at December 31, 2021. As a result, if these shareholders were to choose to act together, they may be able, as a practical matter, to control many matters submitted to our shareholders for approval, as well as our management and affairs. For example, these persons, if they choose to act together, could control the election of the board directors and the approval of any merger, consolidation, or sale of all or substantially all our assets. These shareholders may have interests that differ from those of other of our shareholders and conflicts of interest may arise.

Provisions of our articles of association or Dutch corporate law might deter acquisition bids for us that might be considered favorable and prevent or frustrate any attempt to replace our board.

Certain provisions of our articles of association may make it more difficult for a third party to acquire control of us or effect a change in our board. These provisions include:

We do not expect to pay dividends in the foreseeable future.

We have not paid any dividends since our incorporation. Even if future operations lead to significant levels of distributable profits, we currently intend that earnings, if any, will be reinvested in our business and that dividends will not be paid until we have an established revenue stream to support continuing dividends. Accordingly, shareholders cannot rely on dividend income from our ordinary shares and any returns on an investment in our ordinary shares will likely depend entirely upon any future appreciation in the price of our ordinary shares.

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may be unable to accurately report our results of operations or prevent fraud or fail to meet our reporting obligations, and investor confidence and the market price of our ordinary shares may be materially and adversely affected.

If we fail to maintain the adequacy of our internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to conclude on an ongoing basis that we have effective internal control over financial reporting. If we fail to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting, we could experience material misstatements in our financial statements and fail to meet our reporting obligations, which would likely cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information. This could in turn limit our access to capital markets, harm our results of operations, and lead to a decline in the trading price of our ordinary shares. Additionally, ineffective internal control over financial reporting could expose us to increased risk of fraud or misuse of corporate assets and subject us to potential delisting from The Nasdaq Global Select Market, regulatory investigations and civil or criminal sanctions. Our reporting and compliance obligations may place a significant strain on our management, operational and financial resources and systems for the foreseeable future.

Table of Contents

Risks for U.S. Holders

We have in the past qualified and in the future may qualify as a passive foreign investment company, which may result in adverse U.S. federal income tax consequence to U.S. holders.

​

Based on our average value of our gross assets, our cash and cash equivalents as well as the price of our shares we qualified as a passive foreign investment company (“PFIC”) for U.S. federal income tax for 2016 but not for 2017 through 2021. A corporation organized outside the United States generally will be classified as a PFIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes in any taxable year in which at least 75% of its gross income is passive income or on average at least 50% of the gross value of its assets is attributable to assets that produce passive income or are held to produce passive income. Passive income for this purpose generally includes dividends, interest, royalties, rents and gains from commodities and securities transactions. Our status in any taxable year will depend on our assets and activities in each year, and because this is a factual determination made annually after the end of each taxable year, there can be no assurance that we will continue to qualify as a PFIC in future taxable years. The market value of our assets may be determined in large part by reference to the market price of our ordinary shares, which is likely to fluctuate, and may fluctuate considerably given that market prices of biotechnology companies have been especially volatile. If we were considered a PFIC for the current taxable year or any future taxable year, a U.S. holder would be required to file annual information returns for such year, whether the U.S. holder disposed of any ordinary shares or received any distributions in respect of ordinary shares during such year. In certain circumstances a U.S. holder may be able to make certain tax elections that would lessen the adverse impact of PFIC status; however, to make such elections the U.S. holder will usually have to have been provided information about the company by us, and we do not intend to provide such information.

The U.S. federal income tax rules relating to PFICs are complex. U.S. holders are urged to consult their tax advisors with respect to the purchase, ownership and disposition of our shares, the possible implications to them of us being treated as a PFIC (including the availability of applicable election, whether making any such election would be advisable in their particular circumstances) as well as the federal, state, local and foreign tax considerations applicable to such holders in connection with the purchase, ownership, and disposition of our shares.

Any U.S. or other foreign judgments may be difficult to enforce against us in the Netherlands.

Although we now report as a U.S. domestic filer for SEC reporting purposes, we are incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands. Some of the members of our board and senior management reside outside the United States. As a result, it may not be possible for shareholders to effect service of process within the United States upon such persons or to enforce judgments against them or us in U.S. courts, including judgments predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the federal securities laws of the United States. In addition, it is not clear whether a Dutch court would impose civil liability on us or any of our Board members in an original action based solely upon the federal securities laws of the United States brought in a court of competent jurisdiction in the Netherlands.

The United States and the Netherlands currently do not have a treaty providing for the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments, other than arbitration awards, in civil and commercial matters. Consequently, a final judgment for payment given by a court in the United States, whether or not predicated solely upon U.S. securities laws, would not automatically be recognized or enforceable in the Netherlands. To obtain a judgment which is enforceable in the Netherlands, the party in whose favor a final and conclusive judgment of the U.S. court has been rendered will be required to file its claim with a court of competent jurisdiction in the Netherlands. Such party may submit to the Dutch court the final judgment rendered by the U.S. court. If and to the extent that the Dutch court finds that the jurisdiction of the U.S. court has been based on grounds which are internationally acceptable and that proper legal procedures have been observed, the Dutch court will, in principle, give binding effect to the judgment of the U.S. court, unless such judgment contravenes principles of public policy of the Netherlands. Dutch courts may deny the recognition and enforcement of punitive damages or other awards. Moreover, a Dutch court may reduce the amount of damages granted by a U.S. court and recognize damages only to the extent that they are necessary to compensate actual losses or damages. Enforcement and recognition of judgments of U.S. courts in the Netherlands are solely governed by the provisions of the Dutch Civil Procedure Code.

Therefore U.S. shareholders may not be able to enforce against us or our board members or senior management who are residents of the Netherlands or countries other than the United States any judgments obtained in U.S. courts in civil and commercial matters, including judgments under the U.S. federal securities laws.

Table of Contents

The rights and responsibilities of our shareholders and directors are governed by Dutch law and differ in some important respects from the rights and responsibilities of shareholders under U.S. law.

Although we now report as a U.S. domestic filer for SEC purposes, our corporate affairs are governed by our articles of association and by the laws governing companies incorporated in the Netherlands. The rights of our shareholders and the responsibilities of members of our board under Dutch law are different than under the laws of some U.S. jurisdictions. In the performance of their duties, our board members are required by Dutch law to consider the interests of uniQure, its shareholders, its employees, and other stakeholders and not only those of our shareholders (as would be required under the law of most U.S. jurisdictions). As a result of these considerations our directors may take action that would be different than those that would be taken by a company organized under the law of some U.S. jurisdictions.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

​

None.

​

Item 2. Properties.

​

Lexington, Massachusetts / United States

​

We operate an 83,998 square feet GMP qualified manufacturing facility that we lease in Lexington, Massachusetts. In November 2018, we extended and expanded the facility by leasing an additional 30,655 square feet (as from June 1, 2019 onwards) of the same building. The expanded and extended lease for the facility terminates in June 2029, and subject to the provisions of the lease, may be renewed for two subsequent five-year terms.

​

In December 2021, we entered into a new lease for an additional facility in Lexington, Massachusetts, United States of approximately 13,501 square feet of space. The lease is expected to commence in the second half of 2022, is set for seven years starting from the rent commencement date and is non-cancellable. The lease is renewable for one five-year term.

​

In February 2022, we also entered into a new lease for an additional facility in Lexington, Massachusetts, United States of approximately 12,716 square feet. The lease is expected to commence in the second half of 2022 and is set for a non-cancellable period of seven years and four months. The lease is renewable for one five-year term.

​

Amsterdam / The Netherlands

​

In 2016, we entered into leases for a total of approximately 111,000 square feet facility in Amsterdam. The lease for this facility terminates in 2032, with an option to extend in increments of five-year periods.

​

In December 2017, we entered into an agreement to sub-lease three of the seven floors of our Amsterdam facility for a ten-year term ending on December 31, 2027, with an option for the sub-lessee to extend until December 31, 2031 as well as an option that has expired to break the lease prior to December 31, 2020 subject to the lessee paying a penalty and breaking certain financial covenants. In February 2020, we amended the sub-lease agreement to take back one of the three floors effective March 1, 2020.

​

In February 2021, we commenced the expansion of our Amsterdam site to build additional laboratories to support the expansions of our research and development activities as well the construction of a cleanroom designed to be capable of manufacturing cGMP materials at a 500-liter scale.

​

In May 2021, we entered into a sublease agreement to let an additional approximately 1,080 square meters of office space to accommodate the hiring of additional full-time employees. The lease expires in October 2028 and includes an option to break the lease on October 31, 2023.

​

We believe that our existing facilities, combined with the new facilities in Lexington, are adequate to meet current needs and that suitable alternative spaces will be available in the future on commercially reasonable terms.

​

Table of Contents

Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

​

On or about February 22, 2021, Dr. Konstantinova, VectorY B.V., and Forbion International Management B.V. commenced a summary proceeding in the Netherlands primarily seeking an order: (i) allowing VectorY and Dr. Konstantinova to continue their employment relationship; (ii) suspending the non-competition agreement between uniQure biopharma B.V. and Dr. Konstantinova; and (iii) precluding any monetary penalties pursuant to that non-competition agreement. The complaint also sought payment of the costs of legal proceedings and a monetary monthly payment to Dr. Konstantinova in lieu of a promise by uniQure biopharma B.V. to release Dr. Konstantinova from her obligations under the non-competition agreement.

​

On April 16, 2021, we settled all matters related to the dispute described above (the “Settlement”). In connection with the Settlement, we received, among other things, preference shares in VectorY representing 5% of the fully diluted share capital in VectorY. In addition, we and certain related Forbion entities entered into a Cooperation Agreement.

​

Under the terms of the Cooperation Agreement, we and the Forbion entities agreed to certain non-disparagement provisions, and the Forbion entities agreed, among other things, for a period of two years from April 16, 2021:

​

4.Not to take certain other specified actions aimed at changing or influencing the Board, management, or

control of the uniQure N.V.

​

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.

​

Not applicable.

​

​

Table of Contents

Part II

​

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

​

Our ordinary shares are listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “QURE”. We have never paid any cash dividends on our ordinary shares, and we do not anticipate paying cash dividends in the foreseeable future. We anticipate that we will retain all earnings, if any, to support operations and to finance the growth and development of our business for the foreseeable future.

​

Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities

​

During the period covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we have not issued any securities that were not registered under the Securities Act.

​

Issuer Share Repurchases

​

We did not make any purchases of our ordinary shares during the year ended December 31, 2021. Our affiliates made purchases of our ordinary shares as described in “Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities” above.

​

Holders

​

As of February 23, 2022, there were approximately seven holders of record of our ordinary shares. The actual number of shareholders is greater than this number of record holders, and includes shareholders who are beneficial owners, but whose shares are held in street name by brokers and other nominees. This number of holders of record also does not include shareholders whose shares may be held in trust by other entities.

​

Share Performance Graph

​

The following graph compares the performance of our ordinary shares (“QURE”) for the periods indicated with the performance of the NASDAQ Composite Index (“^˄IXIC”) and the Nasdaq biotechnology index (“^˄NBI”). This graph assumes an investment of $100 after market close on December 31, 2016 in each of our ordinary shares, the NASDAQ Composite Index, and the NASDAQ Biotechnology Index, and assumes reinvestment of dividends, if any. The performance of our ordinary shares shown on the graph below is not necessarily indicative of the future performance of our ordinary shares. This graph is not “soliciting material”, is not deemed “filed” with the SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference into any of our filings under the Securities Act, or the Exchange Act, whether made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation language in any such filing.

​

​

Table of Contents

Item 6. Reserved

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

​

The following Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (“MD&A”) is intended to help the reader understand our results of operations and financial condition. This MD&A is provided as a supplement to, and should be read in conjunction with, our audited consolidated financial statements and the accompanying notes thereto and other disclosures included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including the disclosures under “Risk Factors”. Our consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”) and unless otherwise indicated are presented in U.S. dollars.

​

Except for the historical information contained herein, the matters discussed in this MD&A may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statement are only predictions based on management’s current views and assumptions and involve risks and uncertainties, and actual results could differ materially from those projected or implied. We make such forward-looking statements pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and other federal securities laws. Words such as “may,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “intend,” and similar expressions (as well as other words or expressions referencing future events, conditions or circumstances) are intended to identify forward-looking statements.

​

Our actual results and the timing of certain events may differ materially from the results discussed, projected, anticipated, or indicated in any forward-looking statements. We caution you that forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and that our actual results of operations, financial condition and liquidity, and the development of the industry in which we operate may differ materially from the forward-looking statements contained in this MD&A. In addition, even if our results of operations, financial condition and liquidity, and the development of the industry in which we operate are consistent with the forward-looking statements contained in this MD&A, they may not be predictive of results or developments in future periods.

​

We caution readers not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements made by us, which speak only as of the date they are made. We disclaim any obligation, except as specifically required by law and the rules of the SEC, to publicly update or revise any such statements to reflect any change in our expectations or in events, conditions, or circumstances on which any such statements may be based, or that may affect the likelihood that actual results will differ from those set forth in the forward-looking statements.

​

Overview

​

We are a leader in the field of gene therapy and seek to deliver to patients suffering from rare and other devastating diseases single treatments with potentially curative results. We are advancing a focused pipeline of innovative gene therapies, including product candidates for the treatment of hemophilia B, which effective May 6, 2021, we licensed to CSL Behring pursuant to the CSL Behring Agreement (as defined below), and Huntington’s disease. We believe our technology platform and manufacturing capabilities provide us distinct competitive advantages, including the potential to reduce development risk, cost, and time to market. We produce our AAV-based gene therapies in our own facilities with a proprietary, commercial-scale, cGMP-compliant, manufacturing process. We believe our Lexington, Massachusetts-based facility is one of the world’s most versatile gene therapy manufacturing facilities.

​

Business developments

​

Below is a summary of our recent significant business developments:

Acquisition of Corlieve Therapeutics

On June 21, 2021, we entered into a SPA to acquire all of outstanding ordinary shares of Corlieve. The transaction closed on July 30, 2021. On the Acquisition Date, we acquired 97.7% of the outstanding ordinary shares of Corlieve in return for EUR 44.9 million ($53.3 million as of the Acquisition Date). As contractually required in the SPA, we acquired the remaining outstanding ordinary shares on February 9 2022. We recorded a liability related to these Mandatorily Redeemable Shares for an amount of EUR 0.7 million ($0.9 million) as of the Acquisition Date. We financed the Corlieve Transaction from cash on hand.

​

Table of Contents

In addition to the payments to acquire 100% of the outstanding ordinary shares Corlieve’s former and remaining shareholders are eligible to receive up to EUR 35.8 million (or $40.6 million as of December 31, 2021) upon the achievement of development milestones through Phase I/II and EUR 143.1 million (or $162.3 million as of December 31, 2021) upon the achievement of milestones associated with Phase III development and obtaining approval to commercialize AMT-260 in the United States of America and the European Union. We may elect to pay up to 25% of such milestone payments through the issuance of our ordinary shares. We recorded a EUR 20.2 million ($24.0 million) liability related to these contingent consideration payments as of the Acquisition Date.

​

Total consideration of EUR 65.8 million ($78.1 million), which consisted of the cash paid upon the Acquisition Date, the payment for the Mandatorily Redeemable Shares and the contingent consideration payments, was allocated to identifiable intangible assets related to the IPR&D Intangible Asset. The IPR&D Intangible Asset’s fair value has been determined at EUR 53.6 million ($63.6 million) as of the Acquisition Date. We also recognized a EUR 13.4 million ($15.9 million as of the Acquisition Date) deferred tax liability in relation to this IPR&D Intangible Asset. The total consideration in excess of the net assets acquired was EUR 23.9 million ($28.4 million as of the Acquisition Date) and was allocated to goodwill.

​

CSL Behring commercialization and license agreement

On June 24, 2020, uniQure biopharma B.V., a wholly owned subsidiary of uniQure N.V., entered into the CSL Behring Agreement with CSL Behring pursuant to which CSL Behring will receive exclusive global rights to etranacogene dezaparvovec, the Product.

​

The transaction became fully effective on May 6, 2021, one day after the waiting period under the HSR Act expired on May 5, 2021.

CSL Behring is responsible for the development and commercialization of the Product. We agreed to complete the validation of the current manufacturing process as well as to the development and validation of a next generation manufacturing process. We will be entitled to receive a development milestone payment if we complete these activities in accordance with an agreed development plan and timeline. CSL Behring is responsible for global regulatory submissions and commercialization requirements for the Product.  Certain clinical development and regulatory activities performed by us are reimbursed by CSL Behring.

On the Signing Date, we and CSL Behring also entered into a development and commercial supply agreement, pursuant to which, among other things, we will supply the Product to CSL Behring at an agreed-upon price commensurate with the SSP. We will be responsible to supply the Product until such time that these capabilities may be transferred to CSL Behring or its designated contract manufacturing organization.

Following the closing of the CSL Behring Agreement, we recorded $462.4 million, including a $450.0 million upfront cash payment, as license revenue. Upon closing, we contractually owed to our licensors $15.5 million of the upfront payment received from CSL Behring.  

We are eligible to receive more than $0.3 billion in regulatory, development, and first commercial sale milestones, $1.3 billion in additional commercial milestones, and tiered double-digit royalties of up to a low-twenties percentage of net product sales arising from the collaboration. As of December 31, 2021, we accrued revenue of $55.0 million related to milestone payments we expect to receive under the CSL Behring Agreement following the submissions of a BLA to the FDA and a MAA to the EMA, which are expected to be submitted during the first half of 2022.

Hemophilia B program – Etranacogene dezaparvovec (AMT-061)

​

In June 2018, we initiated our Phase III HOPE-B pivotal trial of etranacogene dezaparvovec. The trial is a multinational, multi-center, open-label, single-arm study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of etranacogene dezaparvovec.

In March 2020, we completed dosing of the 54 patients in the HOPE-B trial. Following a pre-BLA submission meeting with the FDA on June 4, 2021, the primary endpoint has been determined as a non-inferiority analysis of ABR at 18-months after the administration (approximately 52 weeks after steady-state is achieved).

Table of Contents

On December 9, 2021, we announced the achievement of the pre-specified primary endpoint of non-inferiority in annualized bleeding rate (“ABR”) 18-months following administration compared to baseline Factor IX (“FIX”) prophylactic therapy in the HOPE-B Study. The study also successfully achieved a secondary endpoint demonstrating statistical superiority in reduction of ABR compared to baseline FIX prophylactic therapy. ABR for all bleeds after stable FIX expression, assessed at 18 months, was 1.51 compared with the ABR of 4.19 for the lead-in period of at least six months, achieving the primary non-inferiority endpoint and a secondary superiority endpoint (p=0.0002) in the HOPE-B Study. ABR for investigator-adjudicated FIX-treated bleeds was 0.83 compared with lead-in ABR of 3.65 (p<0.0001).  All participants continued to demonstrate durable, sustained increases in FIX activity at 18-months post-infusion with a mean FIX activity of 36.9 percent of normal, as measured by a one-stage activated partial thromboplastin time-based (“aPTT-based”) clotting assay, compared to a mean FIX activity of  39.0 percent of normal at 26-weeks of follow-up. Etranacogene dezaparvovec was generally well-tolerated with over 80% of adverse events considered mild.

Huntington’s disease program (AMT-130)

AMT-130 is our novel gene therapy candidate for the treatment of Huntington’s disease. AMT-130 utilizes our proprietary, gene-silencing miQURE platform and incorporates an AAV vector carrying a miRNA specifically designed to silence the huntingtin gene and the potentially highly toxic exon 1 protein fragment. We are currently conducting a Phase I/II clinical trial for AMT-130 in the U.S. and a Phase Ib/II study in the EU. Together, these studies are intended to establish safety, proof of concept, and the optimal dose of AMT-130 to take forward into Phase III development or into a confirmatory study should an accelerated registration pathway be feasible. AMT-130 has received Orphan Drug and Fast Track designations from the FDA and Orphan Medicinal Product Designation from the EMA.

On April 5, 2021, we announced the completion of enrollment of the low-dose cohort of the U.S. Phase I/II study of AMT-130.  The low-dose cohort includes 10 patients, of which six patients received treatment with AMT-130 and four patients received Sham surgery. The U.S. Phase I/II clinical trial is a randomized, controlled, double-blinded, dose-escalation study of AMT-130.

On June 13, 2021, we announced the enrollment of the first two patients in the high-dose cohort of a U.S. Phase I/II study. The high- dose cohort is planned to include 16 patients, of which 10 patients will receive treatment with AMT-130 and six patients will receive Sham surgery. The initiation of patient enrollment in the high-dose cohort followed a meeting of the trial’s independent DSMB that reviewed safety data for the fully enrolled first cohort of 10 patients.

On December 16, 2021, we announced initial 12-month observations on the first four patients enrolled in the low-dose cohort of the U.S. Phase I/II study. Two of the four enrolled patients received AMT-130, and two patients received Sham surgery as a control. AMT-130 was generally well tolerated in the treated patients, with no serious adverse events related to AMT-130. NfL, a biomarker of injury in the brain, increased as expected immediately following the surgical procedure and returned to baseline in the treated patients. NfL remained relatively constant in the two untreated control patients. Structural magnetic resonance imaging did not reveal any clinically meaningful safety findings in either treated or control patients at one year of follow-up. Measurements of total and mutant HTT protein in the cerebral spinal fluid of the four patients were highly variable and inconclusive. As of December 31, 2021, 19 patients have been enrolled in the clinical trial to date, including nine of 16 in the high-dose cohort.

Also on December 16, 2021, we announced the initiation of patient screening in our 15 patient, open-label, Phase Ib/II study of AMT-130 in the EU, as well our plans to initiate a third cohort in the ongoing U.S. Phase I/II clinical trial. The third cohort, which will include up to 18 additional randomized patients receiving the higher dose, will explore the use of alternative stereotactic navigation systems to simplify placement of catheters for infusions of AMT-130.

BMS collaboration

We and Bristol-Myers Squibb (“BMS”) entered into a collaboration and license agreement in May 2015 (“BMS CLA”). BMS had initially designated four Collaboration Targets in 2015 and in accordance with the terms of the BMS CLA could have designated a fifth to tenth Collaboration Target.

In February 2019, BMS requested a one-year extension of the initial research term. In April 2019, following an assessment of the progress of this collaboration and our expanding proprietary programs, we notified BMS that we did not intend to agree to an extension of the initial research term. Accordingly, the initial four-year research term under the collaboration terminated on May 21, 2019.

Table of Contents

On December 1, 2020, we and BMS amended the BMS CLA (“amended BMS CLA”). For a period of one-year from the effective date of the amended BMS CLA, BMS was able to replace up to two of the four active Collaboration Targets with two new targets in the field of cardiovascular disease. We are entitled to receive up to $217.0 million for each of the four Collaboration Targets if defined milestones are achieved, as well as royalties on net sales associated with any Collaboration Target. On December 17, 2020, BMS designated one of the four Collaboration Targets as a candidate to advance into IND-enabling studies entitling us to receive a $4.4 million research milestone payment. We recorded the $4.4 million as License Revenue in the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2020.

The amended BMS CLA did not extend the initial research term. BMS may place purchase orders to provide limited services primarily related to analytical and development efforts in respect of the four Collaboration Targets. BMS may request such services for a period not to exceed the earlier of (i) the completion of all activities under a Research Plan and (ii) either (A) three years after the last replacement target has been designated by BMS during the one-year replacement period following the amended BMS CLA effective date or (B) three years if no replacement targets are designated during this one-year period and BMS continues to reimburse us for these services.

For as long as any of the four Collaboration Targets are being advanced, BMS may place a purchase order to be supplied with research, clinical and commercial supplies. Subject to the terms of the amended BMS CLA, BMS has the right to terminate the research, clinical and commercial supply relationships, and has certain remedies for failures of supply, up to and including technology transfer for any such failure that otherwise cannot be reasonably resolved. Both we and BMS may agree to a technology transfer of manufacturing capabilities pursuant to the terms of the amended BMS CLA.

We have agreed to certain restrictions on our ability to work independently of the collaboration, either directly or indirectly through any affiliate or third party, on certain programs that would be competitive with a Collaboration Target. We have agreed to indication exclusivity for the current four Collaboration Targets. BMS may add or change the exclusive indications in the process of replacing Collaboration Targets as described above. We can opt out of the indication exclusivity by giving up certain economic rights under the amended BMS CLA for each such indication that is affected by us opting out. If we opt out of an exclusive indication, we could pursue other targets for such indication other than a Collaboration Target.

The amended BMS CLA also terminated two warrants to increase BMS ownership in the Company up to 19.9% through purchasing a specific number of our ordinary shares following the designation of a seventh, and a tenth Collaboration Target, respectively. We and BMS agreed that upon the consummation of a change of control transaction of uniQure that occurs prior to the earlier of (i) December 1, 2026 and (ii) BMS’ delivery of a target cessation notice for all four Collaboration Targets, uniQure (or its third party acquirer) shall pay to BMS a one-time, non-refundable, non-creditable cash payment of $70.0 million, provided that (x) if $70.0 million is greater than five percent of the net proceeds (as contractually defined) from such change of control transaction, the payment shall be an amount equal to five percent of such net proceeds, and (y) if $70.0 million is less than one percent of such net proceeds, the change of control payment shall be an amount equal to one percent of such net proceeds. We have not consummated any change of control transaction as of December 31, 2021 that would obligate us to make a payment to BMS.

The amended BMS CLA did not change any of the provisions of the Investor Agreement with BMS that we entered into in 2015. We have granted BMS certain registration rights that allow BMS to require us to register our securities beneficially held by BMS under the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”). BMS may make up to two such demands for us to register the shares, provided that we may deny such demand if (i) the market value of the shares to be registered is less than $10.0 million (provided however, if BMS holds less than $10.0 million worth of our shares, we must comply with their demand for registration), (ii) we certify to BMS that we plan to effect a registration within 120 days of their demand or we are engaged in a transaction that would be required to be disclosed in a registration statement and that is not reasonably practicable to be disclosed at that time, or (iii) we have already effected one registration statement within the twelve months preceding BMS’s demand for registration. In addition, independent of their demand registration rights, upon the occurrence of certain events, we must also provide BMS the opportunity to include their ordinary shares in any registration statement that we effect.

We also continue to grant BMS certain information rights under the Investor Agreement, although these requirements may be satisfied by our public filings required by U.S. securities laws.

Table of Contents

BMS also continues to be subject to a lock up pursuant to the Investor Agreement for as long as BMS holds more than 4.9% of our ordinary shares (as of December 31, 2021 BMS holds 5.2%). Without our prior consent, BMS may not sell or dispose any of its current ordinary shares.

The Investor Agreement also continues to require BMS to vote all of our ordinary shares it beneficially holds in favor of all items on the agenda for the relevant general meeting of shareholders of our company as proposed on behalf of our company, unless, in the context of a change of control or similar transaction, BMS has itself made an offer to our company or our board in connection with the transaction that is the subject of the vote, in which case it is free to vote its shares at its discretion. This voting provision will terminate upon the later of the date on which BMS no longer beneficially owns at least 4.9% of our outstanding ordinary shares, the closing of a transaction that provides BMS exclusive and absolute discretion to vote our shares it beneficially holds, or the termination of the amended BMS CLA for breach by us.

We have recognized license revenues associated with the amortization of the non-refundable upfront payment and target designation fees we received from BMS in accordance with the BMS CLA. We evaluated our outstanding performance obligation following the amendment of the BMS CLA on December 1, 2020 and determined that our remaining performance obligation related to license revenues is immaterial. We updated our measure of progress accordingly and amortized the remaining balance of unrecognized revenue as of November 30, 2020. We recorded no such license revenue for the year ended December 31, 2021. In accordance with the amended BMS CLA, we continue to be eligible to receive research, development, and regulatory milestone payments as well as sales milestone payments and royalties for each of the four active Collaboration Targets if defined milestones are achieved in relation to the license to our technology and know-how. We will recognize revenue from these payments when earned or as sales occur.

We recognize collaboration revenues associated with Collaboration Target-specific pre-clinical analytical development and process development activities that are reimbursable by BMS under the BMS CLA and the amended BMS CLA as well as other related agreements. Collaboration revenue related to these contracted services is recognized when performance obligations are satisfied.

Financing

​

As of December 31, 2020, a $35.0 million term loan was outstanding in accordance with the Second Amended and Restated Loan and Security Agreement (the “2018 Amended Facility”) between us and Hercules.

​

On January 29, 2021, we and Hercules entered into the 2021 Amended Facility. Pursuant to the 2021 Amended Facility, Hercules agreed to an additional Facility of $100.0 million (“Tranche B”) increasing the aggregate principal amount of the term loan facilities from $35.0 million to up to $135.0 million. On January 29, 2021, we drew down $35.0 million of the Tranche B. Advances under Tranche B bore interest at a rate equal to the greater of (i) 8.25% or (ii) 8.25% plus the prime rate, less 3.25% per annum. The principal balance of $70.0 million and all accrued but unpaid interest on advances under Tranche B was due on June 1, 2023. The back-end fee in respect of advances under the 2021 Amended Facility ranged from 1.65% to 6.85%, depending on the repayment date. In addition to Tranche B, the 2021 Amended Facility also extended the interest only payment period of the previously funded $35.0 million term loan (“Tranche A”) from January 1, 2022 to June l, 2023.

On December 15, 2021, we and Hercules amended and restated the 2021 Amended Facility (“2021 Restated Facility”). Pursuant to the 2021 Restated Facility, Tranche A and Tranche B of the 2021 Amended Facility with a total outstanding balance of $70.0 million were consolidated into one tranche with a total commitment of $100.0 million. We drew down an additional $30.0 million, resulting in total principal outstanding as of December 31, 2021 of $100.0 million. The 2021 Restated Facility extended the loan’s maturity date from June 1, 2023 until December 1, 2025. The interest-only period is extended from January 1, 2023 to December 1, 2024, or December 1, 2025 if, prior to June 30, 2024, either (a) the BLA for AMT-061 is approved by the FDA or (b) AMT-130 is advanced into a pivotal trial. The interest rate is adjustable and is the greater of (i) 7.95% and (ii) 7.95% plus the prime rate less 3.25% per annum. Under the 2021 Restated Facility, we owe a back-end fee of 4.85% of the outstanding debt. We are required to repay the facility in equal monthly installments of principal and interest between the end of the interest-only period and the maturity date. We continue to owe a $2.5 million back-end fee related to the 2021 Amended Facility which is due on June 1, 2023.

​

Table of Contents

On March 1, 2021, we entered into a Sales Agreement with SVB Leerink LLC (“SVB Leerink”) with respect to an at-the-market (“ATM”) offering program, under which we may, from time to time in our sole discretion, offer and sell through SVB Leerink, acting as agent, our ordinary shares, up to an aggregate offering price of $200.0 million. We pay SVB Leerink a commission equal to 3% of the gross proceeds of the sales price of all ordinary shares sold through it as a sales agent under the Sales Agreement.

​

In March and April of 2021, we issued 921,730 ordinary shares at a weighted average price of $33.52 per ordinary share, with net proceeds of $29.6 million, after deducting underwriting discounts and net of offering expenses.

​

Covid pandemic

The coronavirus disease (“Covid”) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (“Sars-CoV 2 virus”) was characterized as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (“WHO”) on March 11, 2020. Since then, various, potentially more infectious, variants of the Sars-CoV 2 virus causing Covid have been identified.

Throughout the pandemic, we have been implementing measures to address the impact of Covid on our business. We have implemented a series of protocols governing the operations of our Lexington facility to comply with the requirements of the various orders and guidance from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and other related orders, guidance, laws, and regulations. We continue to monitor local government rules and recommendations and office protocols will be aligned with these rules and recommendations. Accordingly, we had mandated a work-from-home policy since March 2020 for all non-essential employees at our Amsterdam and Lexington facilities and had implemented additional protocols for our essential employees.

Effective May 29, 2021, Massachusetts lifted all industry restrictions, with the exceptions of remaining face-covering requirements for all public and private transportation systems and facilities housing vulnerable populations, and capacity has been increased to 100% for all industries. Furthermore, the state of emergency was lifted on June 15, 2021. Implementation of adequate cleaning and hygiene protocols are still encouraged. We have implemented a mandatory Covid PCR testing protocol in our Lexington facility effective February 2021 that requires employees to have tested negative for Covid prior to entering the facility. Effective April 2021, we implemented a policy whereby no employee or contractor may enter the Lexington facility unless they are either: (i) fully vaccinated; or (ii) have taken an approved test for Covid and obtained a negative result. All employees that are not essential employees, however, will continue to work remotely until at least June 30, 2022 to reduce the spread of Covid within the facility. As a result, we have been operating our Lexington facility with attendance significantly below 100% capacity.

From November 1, 2021, employees were expected to be required to work on-site at our Amsterdam office at least one day a week under our new remote working policy. However, the Company adjusted the policy for Dutch government updates. Between November 12, 2021 and the filing date of this Form 10-K the Dutch government continuously updated the Covid-related measures to mitigate the impact of the latest Covid variant. We continue to comply with these measures, which amongst others is recommended to work from the office no more than half the time for nonessential employees.

The broader implications of Covid, including the implications from the various variants, on our results of operations and overall financial performance remain uncertain. We have experienced increased lead times in the delivery of equipment and disposables that we use to manufacture materials for our various programs. Currently, these have not materially impacted our development timelines and we continue to adapt to the current environment to minimize the effect to our business. However, we may experience more pronounced disruptions in our operations in the future.

​

Related party transaction

On December 1, 2020, we and BMS entered into the amended BMS CLA. All transactions subsequent to the effective date of the amended BMS CLA are considered to no longer be with a related party.

​

Table of Contents

2021 Financial Highlights

Key components of our results of operations include the following:

​

As of December 31, 2021, we had cash and cash equivalents of $556.3 million (December 31, 2020: $244.9 million). We had a net income of $329.6 million in 2021, and a net loss of $125.0 million in 2020 and a net loss of $124.2 million in 2019. As of December 31, 2021, we had an accumulated deficit of $455.1 million (December 31, 2020: $784.7 million). We recorded net income in the year ended December 31, 2021 as a result of closing the CSL Behring transaction on May 6, 2021.

​

We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially as we:

See “Results of Operations” below for a discussion of the detailed components and analysis of the amounts above.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

​

In preparing our consolidated financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP and pursuant to the rules and regulations promulgated by the SEC we make assumptions, judgments and estimates that can have a significant impact on our net income/loss and affect the reported amounts of certain assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses, and related disclosures. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our assumptions, estimates and judgments, including those related to what we believe to be our critical accounting policies.

We base our assumptions, judgments and estimates on historical experience and various other factors that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not clear from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions, judgments or estimates. We also discuss our critical accounting estimates with the Audit Committee of our Board of Directors.

​

We consider the following to be our critical accounting policies and estimates:

​

​

Table of Contents

Business combination

​

The preparation of our consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2021, required us to analyze the accounting treatment for the Corlieve Transaction.

​

In connection with this analysis, we first applied a screen test to determine if substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired is concentrated in a single identifiable asset or group of similar identifiable assets. We analyzed whether the acquired inputs and processes that have the ability to create outputs would meet the definition of a business and determined that the screen test was not met. In the event the screen test had been met, we would have been required to account for the Corlieve Transaction as an asset acquisition. In this case, among others, we would not have recorded any goodwill and expensed all identifiable intangible assets without alternative future use in accordance with ASC 805, Business Combinations.

​

We identified various licenses that combined with the results of the research and development activities conducted in relation to AMT-260 since formation of Corlieve in 2019 constitute an IPR&D Intangible Asset. The IPR&D Intangible Asset was measured at its fair value as of the Acquisition Date. The fair value of EUR 53.6 million ($63.6 million) of the IPR&D Intangible Asset accounted for 83.4% of the identifiable assets included within the screen test as of the Acquisition Date.

​

We calculated the fair value of the IPR&D Intangible Asset using a present value model based on expected cash flows. Estimating the amounts and timing of cash flows required to complete the development of AMT-260 as well as net sales, cost of goods sold, and sales and marketing costs involved considerable judgment and uncertainty. The expected cash flows are materially impacted by the probability of successfully completing the various stages of development (i.e., dosing of first patient in clinical trial, advancing into late-stage clinical development and obtaining approval to commercialize the product candidate) as well as the weighted average cost of capital of 10.4% used to discount the expected cash flows.

We developed the estimated probabilities of successfully completing the various stages of development using data from external studies regarding average likelihoods of completing these stages of development. We increased the probability for the TLE-program to advance into clinical development derived from such external studies from 33% to 40%. Following the completion of certain studies management in late October 2021 designated a lead candidate for the program and based on data from external studies subsequently increased the likelihood to advance into clinical development to 55%. Application of this probability as of the Acquisition Date would have changed the outcome of the screen test and we would have been required to treat the Corlieve Transaction as an asset acquisition. If all other assumptions and estimates remained unchanged this would have required us to expense any identifiable intangible assets without alternative future use. However, the outcome of the screen test would not have been altered for as long as the probability of advancing into clinical development remained below 43%.

​

We derived the weighted average cost of capital of 10.4% from external market data for a selected peer group of companies. We included a 0.2% country risk premium related to the European markets in our weighted average cost of capital. Not including this risk premium would not have changed the outcome of the screen test. Changing the outcome of the screen test would have required a reduction of the weighted average cost of capital by 0.5%. This would have required us to expense all identifiable intangible assets without an alternative future use.

The determination of the fair values of assets acquired and liabilities assumed has been completed as of December 31, 2021. The IPR&D Intangible Asset is accounted for as indefinite-lived intangible asset and is measured at the fair value of the incomplete research project acquired as of the Acquisition Date. The IPR&D Intangible Asset is considered to be indefinite-lived until the completion or abandonment of the associated research and development efforts and is not amortized. If and when development is complete, which generally occurs when regulatory approval to market a product is obtained, the associated assets would be deemed finite-lived and would then be amortized based on an estimate of its remaining useful life. In case of abandonment, the IPR&D Intangible Asset would be written-off.

As of the Acquisition Date we recorded contingent consideration related to amounts potentially payable to Corlieve’s former shareholders. The amounts payable in accordance with the SPA are contingent upon realization of certain milestones associated with the TLE research program. Contingent consideration was measured at fair value at the Acquisition Date with changes in fair value recognized in the consolidated statements of operations in research and development expenses.

Table of Contents

Changes in contingent consideration can result from changes in the assumed achievement and timing of estimated milestones and the discount rate used to estimate the fair value of the liability:

Revenue recognition related to CSL Behring milestones

On June 24, 2020 (the “Signing Date”) we entered into the CSL Behring Agreement. The transaction became effective on May 6, 2021 (“Closing”).

As of Closing, we identified two material performance obligations related to the CSL Behring Agreement:

We determined that the fixed upfront payment of $450.0 million and the $12.4 million that we received in relation to the Additional Covenants should be allocated to the License Sale. In addition, we concluded that variable milestone payments, sales milestone payments and royalties should be allocated to the License Sale performance obligation as well. We determined that the License Sale was completed on May 6, 2021, when we transferred the license and CSL Behring assumed full responsibility for the development and commercialization of the Product. Upon the Closing, we evaluated the amounts of potential payments and the likelihood that the payments will be received. We utilized the most likely amount method to estimate the variable consideration to be included in the transaction price. Since we cannot control the achievement of regulatory and first commercial sales milestones, we concluded that all potential payments were constrained as of Closing. We determined that we would recognize revenue related to these payments, only to the extent that it becomes probable that no significant reversal of recognized cumulative revenue will occur thereafter. We will include payments related to sales milestones in the transaction price when their achievement becomes probable, and we will include royalties on the sale of Product once these have been earned.

Table of Contents

We determined that achievement of a total of $55.0 million of milestone payments related to the submissions of a BLA and MAA is probable as of the time of filing this Annual Report on Form 10-K and hence recorded these as license revenue in the year ended December 31, 2021. In making this determination we considered that after Closing we believe to successfully have completed the validation of our manufacturing process for the Product in December 2021 and that CLS Behring announced the accomplishment of the primary clinical endpoint for the Product in December 2021.

We continue to believe that the achievement of first-sales milestones of $175.0 million are not probable as of the date of the filing of this Annual Report on Form 10-K as these milestones require regulatory approvals, as well as a sale of Product by CSL Behring. Additionally, the first sale milestone in a major European country needs to be achieved prior to a contractually agreed date.

Valuation allowance related to Dutch and U.S. deferred tax assets

​

We are subject to corporate taxes in the Netherlands. We have been incurring net operating losses in accordance with the corporate tax laws in almost all years since we founded our business. As of December 31, 2020, the total amount of net operating losses carried forward under the Dutch tax regime was $588.2 million.

As of December 31, 2020 we reassessed the need for a full valuation allowance in conjunction with entering into the CSL Behring Agreement. The effectiveness of the transactions contemplated by the CSL Behring Agreement was contingent on completion of review under antitrust laws in the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom. Regulatory approval in the United States had not occurred at the time of filing our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2020. At that time we weighed all available positive and negative evidence, including future income projections from the CSL Behring Agreement, and concluded that it was not more likely than not that the deferred tax assets will not be realized. Accordingly, we continued to record a full valuation allowance as of December 31, 2020 in the Netherlands. As of December 31, 2020, our valuation allowance amounted to $150.1 million (2019: $109.9 million). If we had determined that it had been more likely than not that the deferred tax asset would be realized, then we could have recorded up to $61.9 million of deferred tax income in the year ended December 31, 2020 from releasing our valuation allowance and would have recorded deferred tax income for the same amount in the year ended December 31, 2021 from utilizing the deferred tax asset on closing of the CSL Behring transaction in May 2021.

We are also subject to corporate taxes in the United States. While our operations in the United States had initially been incurring net operating tax losses, our subsidiary in the United States generated taxable income in the fiscal years 2018, 2019 and 2020. Based on the design of our worldwide operations, we determined as of December 31, 2020 that we expect to continue to generate taxable income in the United States. during the foreseeable future and therefore determined that it had become more likely than not that our United States deferred tax assets will be realized. Accordingly, we recorded $16.4 million of deferred tax income in the year ended December 31, 2020 from releasing the full valuation allowance against our net deferred tax assets in the United States. We generated taxable income in the United States during the year ended December 31, 2021 and therefore continue to expect that it is more likely than not that our United States deferred tax assets will be realized. We would be required to record deferred tax expense to recognize a valuation allowance on a portion of or possibly even our full U.S. deferred tax asset of $19.9 million as of December 31, 2021 if we would expect not to meet the above threshold.

Revenue recognition in accordance with the amended BMS CLA

In May 2015, we entered into a collaboration and license agreement and various related agreements with BMS, which we collectively refer to as the BMS CLA, which provided BMS with exclusive access to our gene therapy technology platform for the research, development and commercialization of therapeutics aimed at up to ten targets in cardiovascular and other diseases.

On December 1, 2020, we and BMS amended the BMS CLA. For a period of one-year from the effective date of the amended BMS CLA, BMS was able to replace up to two of the four then active Collaboration Targets with two new targets in the field of cardiovascular disease. However, BMS was no longer entitled to add up to six additional Collaboration Targets.

​

Table of Contents

During the year ended December 31, 2020 we evaluated the impact the amendment of the BMS CLA had in relation to our performance obligation related to:

​

​

We did not identify any new distinct performance obligations and determined the amended BMS CLA did not represent a separate contract in accordance with ASC 606. We evaluated the effect the modification had on our measure of progress towards the completion of our performance obligation in relation to License Revenue and recognized the remaining unrecognized License Revenue as of November 30, 2020.

​

The amount of services we expected to provide was significantly impacted by the number of Collaboration Targets that we estimated BMS would pursue. Based on this we concluded that our remaining performance obligation was immaterial as of December 1, 2020 and adjusted our measure of progress accordingly. As such we recognized the remaining balance of unrecognized License Revenue as of November 30, 2020 of $27.8 million in profit and loss during the year ended December 31, 2020 as License Revenue from a related party.

​

Recent Accounting Pronouncement Not Yet Effective

​

ASU 2021-10: Government Assistance

​

In November 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2021-10, Government Assistance (Topic 832) which discusses the requirements for disclosures related to transactions with a government. ASU 2021-10 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2021. The new disclosure requirements will require disclosures around 1) information about the nature of the transactions and the related accounting policy used to account for the transactions, 2) the line items on the balance sheet and income statement that are affected by the transactions, and the amounts applicable to each financial statement line item, and 3) significant terms and conditions of the transactions, including commitments and contingencies. An entity should apply the updates prospectively or retrospectively. We currently include information on government grants and do not expect this amendment to have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

​

Results of Operations

​

The following table presents a comparison of the twelve months ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019.

​