rcus-10q_20190930.htm

Large accelerated filer

Accelerated filer

Non-accelerated filer

Smaller reporting company

Emerging growth company

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 is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☒

As of October 30, 2019, the registrant had 45,858,976 shares of common stock, $0.0001 par value per share, outstanding.

	September 30,			December 31,
	2019			2018*
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	78,992		$	71,064
Short-term investments		111,997			185,480
Receivable from collaboration partners		5,276			—
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		4,223			2,321
Amounts owed by a related party		—			83
Total current assets		200,488			258,948
Long-term investments		5,992			3,181
Property and equipment, net		10,011			11,107
Equity investment in related party		—			1,202
Restricted cash		203			203
Other long-term assets		263			284
Total assets	$	216,957		$	274,925
LIABILITIES
Current liabilities
Accounts payable	$	2,905		$	3,102
Accrued liabilities		9,662			6,023
Deferred revenue, current		7,000			6,250
Other current liabilities		1,490			1,560
Total current liabilities		21,057			16,935
Deferred revenue, noncurrent		13,772			16,984
Deferred rent		3,875			4,272
Other long-term liabilities		1,026			1,792
Total liabilities		39,730			39,983
Stockholders’ equity:
Preferred stock, $0.0001 par value, 10,000,000 shares authorized as of September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018; no shares issued and outstanding as of September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018		—			—
Common stock, $0.0001 par value, 400,000,000 shares authorized as of September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively; 45,842,966 and 44,537,946 shares issued and outstanding as of September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018 respectively		4			4
Additional paid-in capital		365,898			357,873
Accumulated deficit		(188,728	)		(122,828	)
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)		53			(107	)
Total stockholders’ equity		177,227			234,942
Total liabilities, convertible preferred stock and stockholders’ equity	$	216,957		$	274,925

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.

	Three Months Ended						Nine Months Ended
	September 30,						September 30,
	2019			2018			2019			2018
Collaboration and license revenue	$	1,750		$	4,291		$	5,250		$	6,791
Operation expenses:
Research and development		17,241			12,859			57,795			38,210
General and administrative		7,758			3,577			18,637			9,956
Total operating expenses		24,999			16,436			76,432			48,166
Loss from operations		(23,249	)		(12,145	)		(71,182	)		(41,375	)
Non-operating income (expense):
Interest and other income, net		1,254			1,519			4,272			3,410
Gain on deemed sale from equity method investee		—			—			—			1,229
Share of loss from equity method investee		(357	)		(186	)		(1,202	)		(563	)
Total non-operating income, net		897			1,333			3,070			4,076
Net loss		(22,352	)		(10,812	)		(68,112	)		(37,299	)
Other comprehensive income (loss)		(59	)		(25	)		160			(66	)
Comprehensive loss	$	(22,411	)	$	(10,837	)	$	(67,952	)	$	(37,365	)
Net loss per share, basic and diluted	$	(0.51	)	$	(0.25	)	$	(1.56	)	$	(1.16	)
Weighted-average number of shares used to compute basic and diluted net loss per share		43,939,281			42,838,098			43,750,154			32,056,675

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.

Consolidated Statements of Convertible Preferred Stock and Stockholders’ Equity


	Convertible Preferred Stock					Common stock				Additional Paid-In		Accumulated			Accumulated Other Comprehensive			Total Stockholders’
	Shares		Amount			Shares		Amount		Capital		Deficit			Loss			Equity
Balance at December 31, 2018 *		—	$	—			43,610,823	$	4	$	357,873	$	(122,828	)	$	(107	)	$	234,942
Cumulative effect adjustment upon adoption of ASC 606		—		—			—		—		—		2,212			—			2,212
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of stock options		—		—			69		—				—			—			—
Vesting of early exercised stock options and restricted stock		—		—			114,934		—		273		—			—			273
Stock-based compensation		—		—			—		—		1,674		—			—			1,674
Other comprehensive loss		—		—			—		—		—		—			136			136
Net loss		—		—			—		—		—		(17,670	)					(17,670	)
Balance at March 31, 2019		—		—			43,725,826		4		359,820		(138,286	)		29			221,567
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of stock options		—		—			17,649		—		99		—			—			99
Vesting of early exercised stock options and restricted stock		—		—			107,952		—		260		—			—			260
Issuance of common stock under Employee Stock Purchase Plan		—		—			82,681		—		596		—			—			596
Stock-based compensation		—		—			—		—		2,130		—			—			2,130
Other comprehensive income		—		—			—		—		—		—			84			84
Net loss		—		—			—		—		—		(28,090	)		—			(28,090	)
Balance at June 30, 2019		—		—			43,934,108		4		362,905		(166,376	)		113			196,646
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of stock options		—		—			1,052		—		1		—			—			1
Vesting of early exercised stock options and restricted stock		—		—			100,397		—		252		—			—			252
Issuance of common stock under Employee Stock Purchase Plan		—		—			—		—		—		—			—			—
Stock-based compensation		—		—			—		—		2,740		—			—			2,740
Other comprehensive income		—		—			—		—		—		—			(60	)		(60	)
Net loss		—		—			—		—		—		(22,352	)		—			(22,352	)
Balance at September 30, 2019		—	$	—			44,035,557	$	4	$	365,898	$	(188,728	)	$	53		$	177,227

	Convertible Preferred Stock					Common stock				Additional Paid-In		Accumulated			Accumulated Other Comprehensive			Total Stockholders’
	Shares		Amount			Shares		Amount		Capital		Deficit			Loss			Equity
Balance at December 31, 2017 *		30,459,574	$	226,196			3,278,129	$	—	$	948	$	(73,234	)	$	(42	)	$	(72,328	)
Conversion of preferred stock to common stock				(226,196	)		30,459,574		3		226,195		—			—			226,198
Issuance of common stock upon IPO		—		—			9,200,000		1		124,715		—			—			124,716
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of stock options, net of amounts related to unvested shares		—		—			60,524		—		80		—			—			80
Vesting of early exercised stock options and restricted stock		—		—			129,152		—		278		—			—			278
Stock-based compensation		—		—			—		—		656		—			—			656
Other comprehensive loss		—		—			—		—		—		—			(55	)		(55	)
Net loss		—		—			—		—		—		(12,955	)		—			(12,955	)
Balance at March 31, 2018		30,459,574		—			43,127,379		4		352,872		(86,189	)		(97	)		266,590
Vesting of early exercised stock options and restricted stock		—		—			149,338		—		387		—			—			387
Stock-based compensation		—		—			—		—		1,116		—			—			1,116
Other comprehensive income		—		—			—		—		—		—			14			14
Net loss		—		—			—		—		—		(13,533	)		—			(13,533	)
Balance at June 30, 2018		—		—			43,276,717		4		354,375		(99,722	)		(83	)		254,574
Vesting of early exercised stock options and restricted stock		—		—			128,956		—		335		—			—			335
Stock-based compensation		—		—			—		—		1,048		—			—			1,048
Other comprehensive income		—		—			—		—		—		—			(25	)		(25	)
Net loss		—		—			—		—		—		(10,812	)		—			(10,812	)
Balance at September 30, 2018		—	$	—			43,405,673	$	4	$	355,758	$	(110,534	)	$	(108	)	$	245,120

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.

	Nine Months Ended
	September 30,
	2019			2018
Cash flow from operating activities
Net loss	$	(68,112	)	$	(37,299	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:
Stock-based compensation expense		6,544			2,820
Depreciation and amortization		2,722			2,717
Share of loss from equity method investee		1,202			563
Gain on deemed sale from equity method investee		—			(1,229	)
Amortization of premiums on investments		(2,213	)		(1,017	)
Other non-operating income		—			(177	)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Receivable from collaboration partners		(5,276	)		(5,000	)
Amounts owed by a related party		83			(89	)
Other long-term assets		21			—
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		(1,902	)		(1,188	)
Accounts payable		(94	)		(1,029	)
Accrued liabilities		3,639			4,141
Other current liabilities		42			33
Deferred revenue		(250	)		1,209
Deferred rent		(397	)		(344	)
Net cash used in operating activities		(63,991	)		(35,889	)
Cash flow from investing activities
Purchases of short-term and long-term investments		(180,245	)		(222,067	)
Proceeds from maturities of short-term and long-term investments		253,290			109,601
Purchases of property and equipment		(1,729	)		(3,485	)
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities		71,316			(115,951	)
Cash flow from financing activities
Repurchase of unvested shares of stock		(94	)		—
Proceeds from initial public offering, net of issuance costs		—			125,111
Proceeds from issuance of common stock upon exercise of stock options, net of repurchases		697			3,327
Payment of preferred stock issuance costs		—			(135	)
Net cash provided by financing activities		603			128,303
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents		7,928			(23,537	)
Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash at beginning of period		71,267			98,629
Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash at end of period	$	79,195		$	75,092
Non-cash investing and financing activities:
Unpaid portion of property and equipment purchases included in accounts payable and accrued liabilities	$	33		$	103
Vesting of early exercised stock options and restricted stock	$	784		$	982

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.

Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (Company or the Company) is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on creating innovative cancer immunotherapies by leveraging underexploited biological opportunities. Specifically, the Company targets well-characterized biological pathways with significant scientific data supporting their importance in regulating the immune response against cancer and for which either there are no molecules in development or those that exist have suboptimal profiles. To exploit these pathways, the Company has built a robust and highly efficient discovery and clinical development capability to create and optimize highly differentiated small-molecule immuno-oncology product candidates. Since its inception in 2015, the Company has built a broad portfolio of small molecule and antibody product candidates that it plans to develop together as intra-portfolio combinations.

As of September 30, 2019, the Company had cash and investments of $197.0 million, which are cash, cash equivalents, and investments in marketable securities that the Company believes will be sufficient to fund its planned operations for a period of at least twelve months following the filing date of this report.

The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP) for interim financial information and pursuant to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. GAAP for complete financial statements. In the Company’s opinion, all adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring adjustments) considered necessary for a fair presentation of the results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented have been included.

Operating results for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2019 or for any future period. The balance sheet as of December 31, 2018 has been derived from audited consolidated financial statements at that date but does not include all of the information required by U.S. GAAP for complete financial statements.

The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements and related financial information should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes thereto for the year ended December 31, 2018 included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 5, 2019.

From time to time, new accounting pronouncements are issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), or other standard setting bodies and adopted by the Company as of the specified effective date. Unless otherwise discussed, the impact of recently issued standards that are not yet effective will not have a material impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements upon adoption. Under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, as amended (the JOBS Act), the Company meets the definition of an emerging growth company and has elected the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards pursuant to Section 107(b) of the JOBS Act. The Company will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest of (1) the last day of its first fiscal year (a) following the fifth anniversary of the completion of its initial public offering, (b) in which the Company has a total annual gross revenue of at least $1.07 billion, or (c) in which the Company is deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of the common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700.0 million of the prior June 30th or (2) the date on which the Company has issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt securities during the prior three-year period.

During 2017, the Company established a wholly-owned subsidiary in Australia. The condensed consolidated financial statements include the Company’s accounts and those of its wholly-owned subsidiary. All intercompany accounts, transactions and balances have been eliminated.

The preparation of the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, as well as related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. Estimates were used to determine stock-based awards and other issuances, accruals for research and development costs, useful lives of long-lived assets, and uncertain tax positions. Actual results could differ materially from the Company’s estimates.

Cash equivalents include marketable securities having an original maturity of three months or less at the time of purchase. Short-term investments have maturities of greater than three months and up to twelve months at the time of purchase. Long-term investments have maturities greater than twelve months at the time of purchase. Collectively, cash equivalents, short-term and long-term investments are considered available-for-sale and are recorded at fair value. Unrealized gains and losses are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive loss. Realized gains and losses are included in interest and other income, net in the condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income or loss. The basis on which the cost of a security sold or amount reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income or loss into earnings is determined using the specific identification method.

Restricted cash at September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018 comprises cash balances primarily held as security in connection with the Company’s facility lease agreements and is included in long-term assets in the condensed consolidated balance sheets.

Cash equivalents, short-term and long-term investments are financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk. The Company invests in money market funds, treasury bills and notes, government bonds, commercial paper and corporate notes. The Company limits its credit risk associated with cash equivalents, short-term and long-term investments by placing them with banks and institutions it believes are credit worthy and in highly rated investments.

Research and development costs are expensed as incurred. Research and development expenses consist primarily of personnel costs for the Company’s research and development activities, non-personnel costs such as costs payable to third parties for preclinical and clinical studies and research services, laboratory supplies and equipment maintenance, product licenses, and other consulting costs. The Company estimates preclinical and clinical study and research expenses based on its knowledge of the services performed, pursuant to contracts with research institutions and other service providers that conduct and manage preclinical and clinical studies and research services on its behalf. The Company estimates these expenses based on discussions with internal management personnel and external service providers as to the progress or stage of completion of services and the contracted fees to be paid for such services. If the actual timing of the performance of services or the level of effort varies from the original estimates, the Company will adjust the accrual accordingly. Payments associated with licensing agreements to acquire exclusive licenses to develop, use, manufacture and commercialize products that have not reached technological feasibility and do not have alternative future use are expensed as incurred. Payments made to third parties under these arrangements in advance of the performance of the related services by the third parties are recorded as prepaid expenses until the services are rendered.

Effective January 1, 2019, the Company adopted Accounting Standards Codification Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (ASC 606) using the modified retrospective transition method. This standard applies to all contracts with customers, except for contracts that are within the scope of other standards, such as leases, insurance, collaboration arrangements and financial instruments. Under ASC 606, the Company recognizes revenue when its customer obtains control of promised goods or services, in an amount that reflects the consideration which the Company expects to receive in exchange for those goods or services. To determine revenue recognition for arrangements that the Company determines are within the scope of ASC 606, the Company performs the following five steps: (i) identify the contract(s) with a customer; (ii) identify the performance obligations in the contract; (iii) determine the transaction price; (iv) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract; and (v) recognize revenue when (or as) the Company satisfies a performance obligation. The Company only applies the five-step model to contracts when it is probable that Company will collect the consideration it is entitled to in exchange for the goods or services it transfers to the customer. At contract inception, once the contract is determined to be within the scope of ASC 606, the Company assesses the goods or services promised within each contract and determines those that are performance obligations and assesses whether each promised good or service is distinct. The Company then recognizes as revenue the amount of the transaction price that is allocated to the respective performance obligation when (or as) the performance obligation is satisfied.

The Company enters into collaborative arrangements with partners that fall under the scope of both ASC 606 and Accounting Standards Codification, Topic 808, Collaborative Arrangements (ASC 808), as applicable. The terms of these arrangements typically include one or more of the following: non-refundable upfront research and development fees, option fees to obtain development and commercialization licenses for the Company’s products, milestone payments based on achievement of defined development, regulatory and sales targets, and royalties on sales of commercialized products and are further described below.

As part of the accounting for these arrangements, the Company must develop estimates and assumptions that require judgment to determine the underlying stand-alone selling price for each performance obligation which determines how the transaction price is allocated among the performance obligations. The estimation of the stand-alone selling price may include such estimates as forecasted revenues or costs, development timelines, discount rates, and probabilities of technical and regulatory success. The Company evaluates each performance obligation to determine if they can be satisfied at a point in time or over time, and the Company measures the services delivered to the customer, which are periodically reviewed based on the progress of the related program. The effect of any change made to an estimated input component and, therefore revenue or expense recognized, would be recorded as a change in estimate. In addition, variable consideration (e.g. milestone payments) must be evaluated to determine if it is constrained and, therefore, excluded from the transaction price.

Upfront Research and Development Fees: The Company identifies the performance obligations associated with the upfront research and development fees and determines if any of the promised services are distinct from each other. If a promised service is determined to be distinct, then the Company allocates the transaction price amongst the promised services based on its best judgment of their estimated stand-alone selling prices. If the promised services are not distinct, then all of the services are bundled together, and the Company utilizes judgment to assess the nature of the combined performance obligation to determine whether the combined performance obligation is satisfied over time or at a point in time. If the performance obligation is considered to be satisfied over time, the Company selects the revenue recognition method that it believes most faithfully depicts the Company’s performance in transferring control of the services.

ASC 606 allows entities to choose between two methods to measure progress toward complete satisfaction of a performance obligation over time: input methods or output methods. Input methods recognize revenue on the basis of the entity’s efforts or inputs to the satisfaction of a performance obligation (e.g., resources consumed, labor hours expended, costs incurred, or time elapsed) relative to the total expected inputs to the satisfaction of that performance obligation. Output methods recognize revenue on the basis of direct measurements of the value to the customer of the goods or services transferred to date relative to the remaining goods or services promised under the contract (e.g. surveys of performance completed to date, appraisals of results achieved, milestones reached, time elapsed, and units produced or units delivered). The Company evaluates the measure of progress each reporting period and, if necessary, adjusts the measure of performance and related revenue recognition.

Option Fees: At the inception of each arrangement that includes option exercise fees to obtain development and commercialization licenses for the Company’s products, the Company determines whether or not such option fee is considered a material right. If the option is considered a material right, then that option is considered a separate performance obligation in the contract and the transaction price includes the option fee in the allocation amongst the performance obligations. If the option is not considered a material right, then the option is accounted for as a separate contract.

Milestone Payments: For arrangements that include development milestone payments, the Company consider the milestone payments to be variable consideration under ASC 606 at the inception of the arrangement, evaluates whether the milestones are considered probable of being reached and estimates the amount to be included in the transaction price using the most likely amount method. If it is probable that a significant revenue reversal would not occur, the associated milestone value is included in the transaction price. Milestone payments that are not within the Company’s or the licensee’s control, such as regulatory approvals, are not considered probable of being earned until the uncertainty associated with the approvals has been resolved. The transaction price is then allocated to each performance obligation, on a relative standalone selling price basis, which the Company recognizes as revenue when the performance obligations under the contract are satisfied. At the end of each subsequent reporting period, the Company re-evaluates the probability of earning such development milestones and any related constraint, and if necessary, adjusts the estimate of the overall transaction price. Any such adjustments are recorded on a cumulative catch-up basis, which would affect revenue and earnings in the period of adjustment.

Royalties: For arrangements that include sales-based royalties, including milestone payments based on the level of sales, and the license is deemed to be the predominant item to which the royalties relate, the Company recognizes revenue at the later of (i) when the related sales occur, or (ii) when the performance obligation to which some or all of the royalty has been allocated has been satisfied (or partially satisfied).

Upfront payments and fees are recorded as deferred revenue when due and payable, and may require deferral of revenue recognition to a future period until the Company performs its obligations under these arrangements. Amounts payable to the Company are recorded as accounts receivable when the Company’s right to consideration is unconditional. The Company does not assess whether a contract has a significant financing component if the expectation at contract inception is such that the period between payment by the customer and the transfer of the promised goods or services to the customer will be one year or less.

The Company entered into a license and collaboration agreement (the Taiho Agreement) in September 2017, an agreement that is within the scope of ASC 606, under which it has provided Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd (Taiho) exclusive options, over a five-year period (the Option Period) to obtain an exclusive development and commercialization license to clinical stage product candidates from the Company’s programs. The terms of the arrangement include non-refundable upfront research and development fees, option fees to obtain development and commercialization licenses for the Company’s products, milestone payments based on achievement of defined development, regulatory and sales targets, and royalties on sales of commercialized product.

The Company has applied the five-step model of the new standard to the Taiho Agreement, the only Company contract that has been impacted by the adoption of the new revenue standards. The Company implemented the new revenue standard using the modified retrospective transition method. Results for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019 are presented under Topic 606, while prior period amounts are not adjusted and continue to be reported in accordance with the Company’s historic accounting under previous revenue recognition guidance, Accounting Standards Codification Topic 605: Revenue Recognition (Topic 605).

Upon the adoption, the Company recorded a net reduction of $2.2 million to its opening accumulated deficit as of January 1, 2019, due to the cumulative impact of adopting Topic 606, with the impact primarily relating to an increase in the transaction price recognized for the non-refundable upfront research and development fees over the five-year term.

The impact of the adoption of Topic 606 on contract liabilities and accumulated deficit balances as of January 1, 2019 was as follows (in thousands):

The adjustments due to the adoption of Topic 606 primarily relate to an increase in the transaction price recognized for the non-refundable upfront research and development fees over the five-year term. Under Topic 606, the Company recognized as the transaction price the total amount that the Company expects to receive related to the non-refundable upfront fees. As of December 31, 2018, the Company had received $30.0 million of the $35.0 million in upfront fees, which consisted of payments of $25.0 million in 2017 at the inception of the contract and an anniversary payment of $5.0 million in 2018. Given both the history of successful collection of all payments due and payable to-date and the exercise of an option by Taiho in 2018 on one of the Company’s programs, the Company believes the remaining $5.0 million due in October 2019 will also be received. Under Topic 605, the Company recognized as the initial transaction price only the $25.0 million payment received in 2017. The additional $2.2 million recorded in the adoption adjustment and attributable as revenue through December 31, 2018 under Topic 606 resulted in both a lower accumulated deficit and a lower total amount of deferred revenue as of January 1, 2019.

The impact of the adoption of Topic 606 on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet and Statement of Operations as of and for the period ended September 30, 2019 was as follows (in thousands):

In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-18 (Topic 230), Restricted Cash, Statement of Cash Flows (ASU 2016-18). ASU 2016-18 requires that a statement of cash flows explain the change during the period in the total of cash and, cash equivalents, and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. Therefore, amounts generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents should be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts shown on the condensed consolidated statement of cash flows. The amendments in this ASU should be applied using a retrospective transition method to each period presented. The adoption of this standard changes the presentation in the accompanying consolidated statement of cash flows. The adoption had no material impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements.

The following table provides a reconciliation of cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash reported within the condensed consolidated balance sheets that sum to the total of the same such amount shown on the condensed consolidated statements of cash flows (in thousands):

In June 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-07 (Topic 718), Compensation – Stock Compensation (ASU 2018-07). ASU 2018-07 requires an entity to expand the scope of Topic 718 to include share-based payment transactions for acquiring goods and services from non-employees. The Company adopted ASU No.2018-07 as of January 1, 2019, to simplify the calculation of nonemployee share-based payment transactions. The Company measured the estimated fair value of the unvested portion of the non-employee awards as of January 1, 2019. The fair value of options granted to non-employees was estimated using the Black-Scholes method. The adoption had an no material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01 (Subtopic 825-10), Financial Instruments (ASU 2016-01). ASU 2016-01 requires management to measure equity investments at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income or loss. ASU 2016-01 will impact the disclosure and presentation of financial assets and liabilities. The Company evaluated the pronouncement and determined it is not applicable to the Company.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02 (Topic 842), Leases (ASU 2016-02). ASU 2016-02 requires an entity to recognize assets and liabilities arising from a lease for both financing and operating leases. The ASU will also require new qualitative and quantitative disclosures to help investors and other financial statement users better understand the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. For public entities, ASU 2016-02 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. As a result of the Company having elected the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards pursuant to Section 107(b) of the JOBS Act, ASU 2016-02 is effective for the Company for the year ended December 31, 2020, and all interim periods thereafter. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is assessing the impact of Topic 842 and believes it will likely have a material impact on its condensed consolidated financial statements when adopted.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No.2018-13 (Topic 820), Fair Value Measurement. ASU 2018-13 modifies the disclosure requirements on fair value measurement in Topic 820. For public entities, ASU 2018-013 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. As a result of the Company having elected the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards pursuant to Section 107(b) of the JOBS Act, ASU 2018-13 is effective for the Company for the year ended December 31, 2021, and all interim periods within that fiscal year. Early adoption is permitted. The adoption of this standard is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements.

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No.2018-15 (Subtopic 350-40), Intangible – Goodwill and Other – Internal-Use Software. ASU 2018-15 requires an entity in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract to follow the guidance in Subtopic 350-40 to determine which implementation costs to capitalize as an asset related to internal-use software. For public entities, ASU 2018-15 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. As a result of the Company having elected the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards pursuant to Section 107(b) of the JOBS Act, ASU 2018-15 is effective for the Company for the year ended December 31, 2021, and all interim periods within that fiscal year. Early adoption is permitted. The adoption of this standard is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements.

In November 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-18 (Topic 808), Collaborative Arrangements. ASU 2018-18 clarifies certain transactions between collaborative arrangement participants should be accounted for as revenue under ASC 606 when the collaborative arrangement participant is a customer in the context of a unit of account and precludes recognizing as revenue consideration received from a collaborative arrangement participant if the participant is not a customer. For public entities, ASU 2018-18 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. As a result of the Company having elected the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards pursuant to Section 107(b) of the JOBS Act, ASU 2018-18 is effective for the Company for the year ended December 31, 2021, and all interim periods within that fiscal year. Early adoption is permitted. The adoption of this standard is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements.

Financial assets and liabilities are recorded at fair value. The accounting guidance for fair value provides a framework for measuring fair value, clarifies the definition of fair value and expands disclosures regarding fair value measurements. Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in an orderly transaction between market participants at the reporting date. The accounting guidance establishes a three-tiered hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used in the valuation methodologies in measuring fair value as follows:

Level 1—Inputs are unadjusted, quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities at the measurement date.

Level 2—Inputs (other than quoted market prices included in Level 1) are either directly or indirectly observable for the asset or liability through correlation with market data at the measurement date and for the duration of the instrument’s anticipated life.

Level 3—Inputs reflect management’s best estimate of what market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability at the measurement date. Consideration is given to the risk inherent in the valuation technique and the risk inherent in the inputs to the model.

Assets and liabilities measured at fair value are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The Company’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires management to make judgments and consider factors specific to the asset or liability.

During the periods presented, the Company has not changed the manner in which it values assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value. The Company recognizes transfers between levels of the fair value hierarchy as of the end of the reporting period. There were no transfers within the hierarchy as of September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018. The following tables set forth the Company’s financial instruments that were measured at fair value on a recurring basis by level within the fair value hierarchy (in thousands):

The investments are classified as available-for-sale marketable securities. At September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, the balance in the Company’s accumulated other comprehensive loss comprised activity related to the Company’s available-for-sale marketable securities. There were no realized gains or losses recognized on the sale or maturity of available-for-sale marketable securities as of September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, and as a result, the Company did not reclassify any amounts out of accumulated other comprehensive loss for the periods then ended. The Company has a limited number of available-for-sale marketable securities in loss positions as of September 30, 2019, which the Company does not intend to sell and has concluded it will not be required to sell before recovery of the amortized cost for the investment at maturity (in thousands).

In 2016, the Company purchased approximately 3.6 million shares of common stock of PACT Pharma, Inc. (PACT Pharma), a privately funded, early-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on adoptive cell therapy and 1.0 million shares of Series A preferred stock. The Company determined the fair value of such investment to be insignificant to the Company’s 2016 financial statements given the start-up nature of operations of PACT Pharma, and it was recorded at a nominal amount. The Company also received certain warrants to purchase PACT Pharma common stock exercisable upon PACT Pharma’s achievement of certain valuation thresholds pursuant to a Master Services Agreement between the Company and PACT Pharma (the PACT Agreement), which agreement has since expired. The Company determined PACT Pharma to be a variable interest entity, and that the Company has a variable interest in PACT. However, because the Company is not the primary beneficiary of PACT Pharma, it is not consolidating the results of operations of PACT Pharma in its condensed consolidated financial statements.

The Company’s investment in PACT Pharma is accounted for as an equity method investment, and as a result the Company records its share of PACT Pharma’s operating results in interest and other income, net, in its condensed consolidated statement of operations and comprehensive loss.

During the three months ended September 30, 2019, the Company’s share of PACT Pharma’s losses exceeded the carrying amount of the equity investment. The Company has no obligation to provide cash financing to PACT Pharma and accordingly, no additional losses are being recorded beyond the carrying investment amount. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019 the Company recorded $0.4 million and $1.2 million, respectively, for its share of PACT Pharma’s operating losses. The unrecognized equity method losses in excess of the Company’s investment was $0.1 million as of September 30, 2019. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018, the Company recorded $0.2 million and $0.6 million, respectively, relating to its share of PACT Pharma’s operating losses.

For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019 and for the year ended December 31, 2018, the Company determined the fair value of the warrants to be insignificant to the condensed consolidated financial statements.

In September 2017, the Company and Taiho entered into an option and license agreement (the Taiho Agreement) to collaborate on the potential development and commercialization of certain product candidates from the Company’s portfolio in Japan and certain other territories in Asia (excluding China) (the Taiho Territory). The Taiho Agreement provides Taiho with exclusive options, over a five-year period (the Option Period), to obtain an exclusive development and commercialization license to clinical stage product candidates from the Company’s programs (each, an Arcus Program).

In consideration for the exclusive options and other rights contained in the Taiho Agreement, Taiho agreed to make non-refundable, non-creditable cash payments to the Company totaling $35.0 million, of which the Company received $25.0 million during 2017. An additional $5.0 million was received in October 2018 and the remaining $5.0 million was received in October 2019.

In the event that the Company has not initiated IND enabling studies for at least five Arcus Programs prior to the expiration of the Option Period, Taiho may elect to extend the Option Period, up to a maximum of seven years for the Option Period, subject to an extension fee. If Taiho elects to exercise an option it will be obligated to make an exercise option payment for each option exercise of between $3.0 million to $15.0 million, dependent on the development stage of the applicable Arcus Program for which the option is exercised. In addition, the Taiho Agreement provides that the Company is eligible to receive additional clinical and regulatory milestones totaling up to $130.0 million per Arcus Program, and it will be eligible to receive contingent payments of up to $145.0 million per Arcus Program associated with the achievement of specified levels of Taiho net sales in the Taiho Territory.

In addition, the Company will receive royalties ranging from high single-digits to mid-teens on net sales of licensed products in the Taiho Territory. Royalties will be payable on a licensed product-by-licensed product and country-by-country basis during the period of time commencing on the first commercial sale of a licensed product in a country and ending upon the later of: (a) ten (10) years from the date of first commercial sale of such licensed product in such country; and (b) expiration of the last-to-expire valid claim of the Company’s patents covering the manufacture, use or sale or exploitation of such licensed product in such country (the Royalty Term).

The Company evaluated the Taiho Agreement under ASC 606 and determined that the current performance obligations consist of (1) the research and development services, in which the Company will use commercially reasonable efforts to initiate IND enabling studies for at least five Arcus Programs, as well as further develop such Arcus Programs during the term of the Agreement, and (2) the

obligation to participate on the joint steering committee. These deliverables are non-contingent in nature. The Company determined that the obligation to participate in the joint steering committee does not have stand-alone value to Taiho because the committee’s primary purpose is to monitor and govern the research and development activities and, hence, it is inseparable from the research and development services.

The Company’s assessment of the transaction price included an analysis of amounts it expected to receive, which at contract inception consisted of the upfront cash payment of $20.0 million due upon contract execution in September 2017, a $5.0 million payment due within 30 days of contract execution, an anniversary payment of $5.0 million due in 2018, and a final anniversary payment of $5.0 million due in 2019. All payments were made by Taiho as they became due and payable so given this successful collection history, the Company considers that the entire $35.0 million in non-refundable fees to be the initial transaction price.

The Company determined that the combined performance obligation of the research and development services and the obligation to participate on the joint steering committee are satisfied over time. The Company uses a time-elapsed input method to measure progress toward satisfying its performance obligation, which is the method the Company believes most faithfully depicts the Company’s performance in transferring the promised services during the time period in which Taiho has access to the Company’s research and development activities. Accordingly, the transaction price of $35.0 million will be recognized using this input method over the estimated performance period of five years.

The Company also concluded that, at the inception of the agreement, Taiho’s exclusive options are not considered material rights as the options do not contain a significant and incremental discount. The Company will therefore exclude the exclusive options from the initial transaction price and account for them as separate contracts. In 2018, Taiho exercised its option to the Company’s adenosine receptor antagonist program for a fee of $3.0 million, which was recognized by the Company as revenue during the year ended December 31, 2018 under both Topic 606 and Topic 605. Upon this option exercise, Taiho now has the sole responsibility for the development and commercialization of licensed products from within the program in the Taiho Territory. No options were exercised by Taiho during the nine months ended September 30, 2019.

The Company also determined that the clinical and regulatory milestone payments under the Taiho Agreement are variable consideration under Topic 606 which need to be added to the transaction price when it is probable that a significant revenue reversal will not occur. Based on the nature of the clinical and regulatory milestones, such as the regulatory approvals which are not within the Company’s control, the Company will not consider achievement of such milestones to be probable until the uncertainty associated with the approvals has been resolved. When it is probable that a significant reversal of revenue will not occur, the milestone payment will be added to the transaction price, which will then be allocated to each performance obligation, on a relative standalone selling price basis, for which the Company recognizes revenue. As of September 30, 2019, no clinical and regulatory milestones had been achieved under the Taiho Agreement.

The Company also considers the contingent payments due from Taiho upon the achievement of specified sales volumes to be similar to royalty payments. The Company considers the license to be the predominant item to which the royalties relate. The Company will recognize revenue at the later of (i) when the related sales occur, or (ii) when the performance obligation to which some or all of the royalty has been allocated has been satisfied (or partially satisfied). As of September 30, 2019, no sales milestone or royalty revenue has been recognized.

The Taiho Agreement shall remain in effect until (a) expiration of the last exercise period if Taiho has not exercised any of its exclusive options prior to such expiration or (b) if Taiho has exercised any of its exclusive options prior to the expiration of the applicable exercise period, expiry of all Royalty Terms for the licensed products, in each case subject to certain exceptions.

During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019, the Company recognized a total of $1.8 million and $5.3 million, respectively, of revenue under the Taiho Agreement in accordance with Topic 606, consisting of revenue recognized for the non-refundable upfront research and development fees. As of September 30, 2019, the Company recorded deferred revenue, current and deferred revenue, noncurrent of $7.0 million and $13.7 million, respectively, in its condensed consolidated balance sheet.

The Company recognized the following revenue as a result of changes in the deferred revenue balance during the period below (in thousands):

The Company entered into a license agreement (the WuXi Agreement) with WuXi Biologics (Cayman) Inc. (WuXi Biologics) in August 2017, as subsequently amended in June 2019, in which it obtained an exclusive license to develop, use, manufacture, and commercialize products including an anti-PD-1 antibody worldwide except for Greater China and Thailand. The Company paid upfront and milestone payments of $18.5 million during the second half of 2017 which were recorded within research and development expenses, as the products had not reached technological feasibility and did not have alternative future use. The Company made a milestone payment of $7.5 million in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019 which was recorded within research and development expenses. No milestones payments were made during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018. The WuXi Agreement also provides for clinical and regulatory milestone payments, commercialization milestone payments of up to $375.0 million, and tiered royalty payments to be made to WuXi Biologics that range from the high single-digits to low teens of net sales by the Company of licensed products.

In December 2016, the Company entered into a license agreement (the Abmuno Agreement) with Abmuno Therapeutics LLC (Abmuno) in which it obtained a worldwide exclusive license to develop, use, manufacture, and commercialize products that include an anti-TIGIT antibody. No milestone payments were made during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019. The Company made upfront and milestone payments of $2.0 million and $2.8 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018, respectively, which were recorded within research and development expenses, as the products have not reached technological feasibility and do not have alternative future use and therefore were expensed as incurred. The Abmuno Agreement also provides for additional clinical, regulatory and commercialization milestone remaining payments of up to $101.0 million as of September 30, 2019.

On April 30, 2019, the Company and Strata Oncology, Inc. (Strata) entered into a Co-Development and Collaboration Agreement (the Co-Development and Collaboration Agreement) to pursue a clinical development collaboration utilizing Strata’s precision drug development platform and proprietary biomarkers to evaluate AB122, the Company’s clinical-stage anti-PD-1 antibody, in patients in a tumor-agnostic fashion.

Under the terms of the Co-Development and Collaboration Agreement, the parties will share a portion of development costs for the clinical collaboration. Strata is eligible to receive $2.5 million upon the achievement of a development milestone, as well as regulatory and commercial milestones of up to $125.0 million and up to double-digit royalties on U.S. net sales of AB122 in the biomarker-identified indication. As of September 30, 2019, the Company incurred expenses of $0.3 million net of development cost sharing that was recorded within research and development expenses. As further consideration in connection with the Co-Development and Collaboration Agreement, the Company issued to Strata 1,257,651 restricted shares of its common stock with an initial measured fair value of $15.0 million, which are subject to vesting based upon the achievement of specified regulatory milestones within certain timelines, unless such vesting is modified at the acquiror’s option pursuant to a change of control of the Company. Expense relating to the restricted shares subject to these milestones is recognized if it is considered probable that the associated shares will vest. The probability of achievement is assessed at the end of each quarterly period. As of September 30, 2019, the Company determined that none of the restricted shares were probable of vesting and, as a result, no compensation expense related to the restricted shares has been recognized to date.

In March 2018, the Company adopted the 2018 Equity Incentive Plan (2018 Plan). The 2018 Plan replaced the Company’s 2015 Stock Plan (2015 Plan) and 3,570,000 shares were reserved under the 2018 Plan, along with any shares remaining available for issuance

under the Company’s 2015 Plan or outstanding awards under its 2015 Plan that subsequently expire, lapse unexercised or are forfeited to or repurchased by the Company.

Total stock-based compensation expense was recognized in the condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss as follows (in thousands):

The Company granted 300,846 and 3,388,496 stock options during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019, respectively and 130,000 and 1,526,989 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018, respectively. These options had a weighted average grant-date fair value of $5.49 and $6.53 per share for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019, respectively, and $9.10 and $7.45 for the three and nine months ended September 30,2018, respectively.

Under the Company’s stock plans, 1,052 and 18,770 stock options were exercised during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019, respectively, and zero and 713,931 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018, respectively.

As a result of early exercises under the 2015 Plan, approximately 552,364 and 927,123 shares had not vested and were subject to repurchase as of September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively. The Company treats cash received from the exercise of unvested options as a refundable deposit and classifies such amounts as a liability in its condensed consolidated balance sheets. As of September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, the Company included cash received from the early exercise of unvested options of $2.0 million and $2.8 million, in its other current and long-term liabilities, respectively based on the timing of their expected vesting. Amounts included in liabilities are transferred into common stock and additional paid-in capital as the shares vest, which is generally over a period of 48 months.

Depreciation and amortization expense was $0.8 million and $2.7 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019, respectively and $0.9 million and $2.7 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018, respectively.

The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted net loss per share (in thousands, except share and per share data):

The following outstanding potentially dilutive securities were excluded from the computation of diluted net loss per share for the periods presented because including them would have been antidilutive:

Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

You should read the following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations together with our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and notes thereto in Part I, Item 1 of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and with our audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto for the year ended December 31, 2018, included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on March 5, 2019. This discussion and other parts of this report contain forward-looking statements that involve risk and uncertainties, such as statements of our plans, objectives, expectations, and intentions. Our actual results could differ materially from those discussed in these forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed in the section of this report entitled “Risk Factors.”

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on creating innovative cancer immunotherapies by leveraging underexploited biological opportunities. Specifically, we target well-characterized biological pathways with significant scientific data supporting their importance in regulating the immune response against cancer and for which either there are no molecules in development or those that exist have suboptimal profiles. To exploit these pathways, we have built a robust and highly efficient discovery and clinical development capability to create and optimize highly differentiated small-molecule immuno-oncology product candidates. Since our inception in 2015, we have built a broad portfolio of small-molecule and antibody product candidates that we plan to develop together as intra-portfolio combinations. Our most advanced small-molecule product candidate, AB928, is in several Phase 1b clinical trials in combination with our anti-PD-1 antibody, AB122 and other standard of care chemotherapy combinations. We have also initiated clinical trials for our two antibody product candidates, AB122 and AB154 (our anti-TIGIT antibody), as well as a Phase 1/1b trial with our small molecule CD73 inhibitor, AB680, bringing us to four product candidates currently in clinical trials.

We recognize revenue from our option and license agreement (Taiho Agreement) with Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (Taiho) for research and development services provided pursuant to our collaboration with Taiho on the development of certain product candidates.

Our research and development expenses consist of expenses incurred in connection with the research and development of our research programs. These expenses include payroll and personnel expenses, including stock-based compensation for our research and product development employees, laboratory supplies, product licenses, consulting costs, contract research, pre-clinical and clinical expenses, and depreciation. We expense both internal and external research and development costs as they are incurred. Non-refundable advance payments for services that will be used or rendered for future research and development activities are recorded as prepaid expenses and recognized as an expense as the related services are performed.

We do not allocate our costs by product candidates, as a significant amount of research and development expenses include internal costs, such as payroll and other personnel expenses, and external costs neither of which are tracked by product candidate. In particular, with respect to internal costs several of our departments support multiple product candidate research and development programs, and we do not allocate those costs by product candidate.

We expect our research and development expenses to increase substantially during the next few years as we seek to complete existing and initiate additional clinical trials, pursue regulatory approval for our product candidates, and advance other programs into the clinic. Over the next few years, we expect our preclinical, clinical, and contract manufacturing expenses to increase significantly relative to what we have incurred to date. In addition, under our license agreements with WuXi Biologics (Cayman) Inc. (WuXi Biologics) and, Abmuno Therapeutics LLC (Abmuno) and our co-development and collaboration agreement with Strata Oncology, Inc. (Strata), we may be required to pay additional clinical and regulatory milestone payments based on the development progress of AB122 and AB154, which could cause significant quarterly fluctuations in our research and development expenses. Predicting the timing or the final cost to complete our clinical program or validation of our manufacturing and supply processes is difficult and delays may occur due to numerous factors. Factors that could cause or contribute to delays or additional costs include, but are not limited to, those discussed in “Risk Factors.”

General and administrative expenses consist principally of personnel-related costs including payroll and stock-based compensation for personnel in executive, finance, human resources, business and corporate development, and other administrative functions, professional fees for legal, consulting, and accounting services, rent and other facilities costs, depreciation, and other general operating expenses not otherwise classified as research and development expenses.

We anticipate that our general and administrative expenses will increase substantially during the next few years as a result of staff expansion and additional occupancy costs, as well as costs associated with being a public company, including higher legal and accounting fees, investor relations costs, higher insurance premiums and other compliance costs associated with being a public company.

Interest and other income, net consists primarily of interest earned on our investments including marketable fixed income securities, corporate notes and government agency notes.

Share of loss from equity method investee consists of our share of loss recorded in conjunction with our equity method investment in PACT Pharma, Inc. (PACT Pharma).

Our condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The preparation of these condensed consolidated financial statements requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the condensed consolidated financial statements, as well as the reported revenue and expenses incurred during the reporting periods. Our estimates are based on our historical experience and on various other factors that we believe are reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. We believe that the accounting policies relating to revenue recognition, clinical trial accruals and stock-based compensation reflect the more significant estimates and assumptions used in the preparation of our condensed consolidated financial statements.

Other than changes in our revenue recognition policy upon adoption of ASC No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customer, (Topic 606), there have been no significant changes in our critical accounting policies and estimates during the nine months ended September 30, 2019, as compared to the critical accounting policies and estimates disclosed in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018 and more fully described in Note 2 of the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements.

The following table summarizes our results of operations for the periods indicated (in thousands)

As described in Note 2 of the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements, in January 1, 2019, we adopted ASC 606. ASC 606 supersedes the guidance in ASC 605, Revenue Recognition. We adopted ASC 606 on a modified retrospective basis under which we recognized the $2.2 million cumulative effect of adoption as a reduction to opening accumulated deficit. Revenue for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018 was recorded under ASC 605, while revenue for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019 was recorded under ASC 606. If we had continued to use ASC 605 during 2019, revenue would have been $1.6 million and $4.7 million in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019, respectively as compared to the $1.8 million and $5.3 million recorded for the three and nine months ended, respectively.

Collaboration and license revenue decreased $2.5 million, or 59%, from $4.3 million for the three months ended September 30, 2018 to $1.8 million for the three months ended September 30, 2019. The decrease in collaboration and license revenue was due to $3.0 million recognized from Taiho’s exercise of its option to our adenosine receptor antagonist program in 2018, partially offset by an increase of $0.5 million recognized from the adoption of ASC 606 during 2019.

Research and development expenses increased $4.4 million, or 34%, from $12.9 million for the three months ended September 30, 2018 to $17.2 million for the three months ended September 30, 2019. The increase in research and development expenses was due to an increase of $2.5 million in clinical costs for our ongoing clinical trials, an increase of $1.3 million in employee compensation costs due to additional headcount, an increase of $0.7 million in consulting expenses and an increase of $0.3 million in stock-based compensation expense. Those increases were partially offset by a decrease of $0.5 million in manufacturing costs primarily due to the completion of certain manufacturing activities for AB154 in 2018.

General and administrative expenses increased $4.2 million, from $3.6 million for the three months ended September 30, 2018 to $7.8 million for the three months ended September 30, 2019. The increase in general and administrative expenses was primarily due to an increase of $1.4 million in stock-based compensation, an increase of $1.3 million in employee compensation costs due to additional headcount, an increase of $0.8 million in facilities and office related expenses and an increase of $0.2 million in legal fees.

Interest and other income, net decreased $0.3 million or 17%, from $1.5 million for the three months ended September 30, 2018 to $1.3 million for the three months ended September 30, 2019. The decrease was primarily due to a decrease of $0.2 million in interest income resulting from lower investment yields on our portfolio of marketable fixed-income securities and lower average cash and investment balances.

Share of loss from equity method investee increased $0.2 million, from $0.2 million for the three months ended September 30, 2018 to $0.4 million for the three months ended September 30, 2019. The increase was primarily due to increasing operating losses at PACT Pharma.

Collaboration and license revenue decreased $1.5 million, or 23%, from $6.8 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2018 to $5.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2019. The decrease in collaboration and license revenue was due to $3.0 million recognized from Taiho’s exercise of its option to our adenosine receptor antagonist program in 2018 partially offset by an increase of $1.5 million recognized from the adoption of ASC 606 resulting in 2019.

Research and development expenses increased $19.6 million, or 51%, from $38.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2018 to $57.8 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2019. The increase in research and development expenses was primarily due an increase of $9.8 million in clinical costs for our ongoing clinical trials, the achievement of a development milestone which resulted in a $7.5 million product licensing expense pursuant to the terms of our WuXi Agreement compared to a $2.0 million product licensing expense pursuant our Abmuno Agreement that was recorded in the same period of the prior year, an increase of $3.6 million in employee compensation costs due to additional headcount, an increase of $1.6 million in clinical lab supplies, and an increase of $1.0 million in stock-based compensation expense. Those increases were partially offset by a decrease of $3.4 million in manufacturing costs primarily due to the completion of certain manufacturing activities for AB154 in 2018.

General and administrative expenses increased $8.7 million, or 87%, from $10.0 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2018 to $18.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2019. The increase in general and administrative expenses was primarily due to an increase of $2.8 million in employee compensation costs due to additional headcount, an increase of $2.7 million in stock-based compensation expense, an increase of $1.5 million in facilities and office related expenses, an increase of $0.7 million in legal and accounting fees and an increase of $0.7 million in consulting expenses. Overall, the increase in our general and administrative expenses is due to support for expansion of our research and development activities and on-going regulatory compliance costs related to operating as a public company.

Interest and other income, net increased $0.9 million, or 25%, from $3.4 million for the months ended September 30, 2018 to $4.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2019. The increase was primarily due to an increase of $0.9 million in interest income resulting from higher average cash and investment balances and higher yields on our portfolio of marketable fixed-income securities.

Gain on deemed sale from equity method investee was $1.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2018 due to a gain recorded in conjunction with PACT Pharma’s Series B convertible preferred financing in May 2018 in which we did not participate.

Share of loss from equity method investee increased $0.6 million, from $0.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2018 to $1.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2019. The increase was primarily due to increasing operating losses at PACT Pharma.

To date, we have financed our operations primarily through net proceeds of $226.2 million from private placements of convertible preferred stock, $30.0 million in proceeds from the Taiho Agreement, and net proceeds of $124.7 million from our IPO in March 2018, pursuant to which we issued 9,200,000 shares of our common stock. As of September 30, 2019, we had $197.0 million of cash and investments, which are cash, cash equivalents, short-term and long-term investments. Our cash and investments are held in a variety of interest-bearing instruments, including money market funds, and investments in corporate securities and government agency obligations.

Based on our existing business plan, we believe that our existing cash, cash investments, and short-term investments will be sufficient to fund our anticipated level of operations through at least the next 12 months following the filing date of this report.

We will continue to require additional capital to develop our product candidates and fund operations for the foreseeable future. We may seek to raise capital through private or public equity or debt financings, collaborative or other arrangements with other companies, or through other sources of financing. Adequate additional funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. Our failure to raise capital as and when needed could have a negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to pursue our business strategies. We anticipate that we will need to raise substantial additional capital, the requirements of which will depend on many factors, including:

If we raise additional funds by issuing equity securities, our stockholders may experience dilution. Any future debt financing into which we enter may impose upon us additional covenants that restrict our operations, including limitations on our ability to incur liens or additional debt, pay dividends, repurchase our common stock, make certain investments and engage in certain merger, consolidation or asset sale transactions. Any debt financing or additional equity that we raise may contain terms that are not favorable to us or our stockholders. If we are unable to raise additional funds when needed, we may be required to delay, reduce, or terminate some or all of our development programs and clinical trials. We may also be required to sell or license to others rights to our product candidates in certain territories or indications that we would prefer to develop and commercialize ourselves.

See “Risk Factors” for additional risks associated with our substantial capital requirements.

The following table sets forth the primary sources and uses of cash and cash equivalents for each of the periods presented below (in thousands):

Net cash used in operating activities was $64.0 million and $ 35.9 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018, respectively.

Cash used in operating activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 was primarily due to our net loss for the period of $68.1 million, and a non-cash gain of $2.2 million relating to accretion of discount in our investments, offset in part by a non-cash charge of $1.2 million relating to our share in loss from our equity investment and non-cash charges relating to depreciation and amortization and stock-based compensation expense of $9.3 million. Cash used in operating activities was also affected by changes in operating assets and liabilities, including an increase in receivables from collaboration partners of $5.2 million, accounts payable and accrued liabilities of $3.5 million, and an increase in prepaid expenses of $1.9 million.

Cash used in operating activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2018 was primarily due to our net loss for the period of $37.3 million, a non-cash gain of $1.2 million relating to our equity method investee, and a non-cash gain of $1.0 million relating to accretion of discount in our investments, offset in part by a non-cash charges relating to depreciation and amortization and stock-based compensation expense of $5.5 million. Cash used in operating activities was also affected by changes in operating assets and liabilities, including an increase in receivables from collaboration partners of $5.0 million, an increase in accounts payable and accrued liabilities of $3.1 million, an increase in deferred revenue of $1.2 million, and an increase in prepaid expenses of $1.2 million.

Cash provided by investing activities was $71.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2019, primarily related to the net sale of investments of $73.0 million and purchases of property and equipment of $1.7 million.

Cash used in investing activities was $116.0 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2018, primarily related to the net purchase of investments of $112.5 million and purchases of property and equipment of $3.5 million.

Cash provided by financing activities was $0.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 primarily related to net proceeds of $0.7 million from issuance of common stock under our Employee Stock Purchase Plan, partially offset by $0.1 million from the repurchase of unvested shares of our common stock.

Cash provided by financing activities was $128.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2018, which consisted primarily of net proceeds of $125.1 million from our IPO (approximately $0.4 million of IPO costs were paid in 2017) and net proceeds of $3.3 million from the exercise of common stock options.

There have been no material changes outside the ordinary course of business to our contractual obligations during the nine months ended September 30, 2019, as compared to those disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018.

The Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 (the JOBS Act), permits an “emerging growth company” such as us to take advantage of an extended transition period to comply with new or revised accounting standards applicable to public companies. We are choosing to elect the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards pursuant to Section 107(b) of the JOBS Act until the earlier of the date we (i) are no longer an emerging growth company or (ii) affirmatively and irrevocably opt out of the extended transition period provided in the JOBS Act. As a result, our financial statements may not be comparable to companies that comply with new or revised accounting pronouncements as of public company effective dates.

We will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest of (1) the last day of our first fiscal year (a) following the fifth anniversary of the completion of our initial public offering, (b) in which we have total annual gross revenue of at least $1.07 billion, or (c) in which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of our common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700.0 million as of the prior June 30th and (2) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt securities during the prior three-year period.

Since our inception, we have not engaged in any off-balance sheet arrangements, as defined in the rules and regulations of the SEC.

The market risk inherent in our financial instruments and in our financial position represents the potential loss arising from adverse changes in interest rates or exchange rates. Our market risks have not changed materially from those discussed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 5, 2019. We do not believe that inflation, interest rate changes, or exchange rate fluctuations had a significant impact on our results of operations for any periods presented herein.

We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) reports is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. Because of inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues, if any, within an organization have been detected. Accordingly, our disclosure controls and procedures are designed to provide reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of our disclosure control system are met.

As of the end of the period covered by this report, we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 13a-15. Based upon, and as of the date of this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective at the reasonable assurance level.

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended September 30, 2019 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

We are not currently a party to any material legal proceedings. From time to time, we may become involved in legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of our business. Regardless of outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on us due to defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources, negative publicity, reputational harm and other factors.

You should consider carefully the following risk factors, together with all the other information in this report, including our condensed consolidated financial statements and notes thereto, and in our other public filings with the SEC, including our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 5, 2019. The occurrence of any of the following risks could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or growth prospects or cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements we have made in this report and those we may make from time to time. You should consider all of the risk factors described when evaluating our business.

Risks Related to our Limited Operating History, Financial Position and Capital Requirements

We are an early-stage immuno-oncology company with a very limited operating history. We have incurred net losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future. We have never generated any revenue from product sales and may never be profitable.

We are an early-stage immuno-oncology company with a very limited operating history that may make it difficult to evaluate the success of our business to date and to assess our future viability. Our operations have been limited to organizing and staffing our company, business planning, raising capital, identifying potential product candidates, establishing licensing arrangements and/or acquiring any necessary technology, and undertaking research and preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates. All of our product candidates are in early development, and none have been approved for commercial sale. We have never generated any revenue from product sales and have incurred net losses each year since we commenced operations. For the nine months ended September 30, 2019 and year ended December 31, 2018, our net losses were $68.1 million and $49.6 million, respectively. As of September 30, 2019, we had an accumulated deficit of $188.7 million. We expect that it will be several years, if ever, before we have a product candidate ready for commercialization. We expect to incur increasing levels of operating losses over the next several years and for the foreseeable future as we advance our product candidates. Our prior losses, combined with expected future losses, have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity (deficit) and working capital.

To become and remain profitable, we must develop and eventually commercialize a product with significant market potential. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including completing preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates, obtaining marketing approval for these product candidates, manufacturing, marketing and selling those products for which we may obtain marketing approval and satisfying any post-marketing requirements. We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we succeed in commercializing one or more of our product candidates, we may never generate revenues that are significant or large enough to achieve profitability. In addition, as a young business, we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other known and unknown challenges. If we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis and we will continue to incur substantial research and development and other expenditures to develop and market additional product candidates. Our failure to become and remain profitable would decrease the value of the company and could impair our ability to raise capital, maintain our research and development efforts, expand our business or continue our operations. A decline in the value of our company could also cause our stockholders to lose all or part of their investment.

We will need to obtain substantial additional funding to complete the development and any commercialization of our product candidates. If we are unable to raise this capital when needed, we may be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our product development programs or other operations.

Since our inception, we have used substantial amounts of cash to fund our operations and expect our expenses to increase substantially during the next few years. The development of biopharmaceutical product candidates is capital intensive. As our product candidates enter and advance through preclinical studies and clinical trials, we will need substantial additional funds to expand our clinical, regulatory, quality and manufacturing capabilities. In addition, if we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to marketing, sales, manufacturing and distribution.

As of September 30, 2019, we had $197.0 million in cash and investments, which are cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments. Based on our current operating plan, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments will be sufficient to fund the clinical development of AB928 and AB122, including cohort expansion studies, into 2021, but not through regulatory approval. Accordingly, we will need to raise substantial additional capital to complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates.

We have based these estimates on assumptions that may prove to be incorrect or require adjustment as a result of business decisions, and we could utilize our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:

Identifying potential product candidates and conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials is a time consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete, and we may never generate the necessary data or results required to obtain marketing approval. In addition, our product candidates, if approved, may not achieve product sales or commercial success. We do not expect to have any products commercially available for sale for many years, if at all. Accordingly, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on attractive terms, we would be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development programs or future commercialization efforts.

The amount of our future losses is uncertain and our quarterly operating results may fluctuate significantly or may fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts, each of which may cause our stock price to fluctuate or decline.

Our quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate significantly in the future due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control and may be difficult to predict, including the following:

The cumulative effects of these factors could result in large fluctuations and unpredictability in our quarterly and annual operating results. As a result, comparing our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. This variability and unpredictability could also result in our failing to meet the expectations of industry or financial analysts or investors for any period. If our revenue or operating results fall below the expectations of analysts or investors or below any forecasts we may provide to the market, or if the forecasts we provide to the market are below the expectations of analysts or investors, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Such a stock price decline could occur even when we have met any previously publicly stated guidance we may provide.

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

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenue, we expect to finance our cash needs through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations, strategic alliances and licensing arrangements. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, our stockholders’ ownership interests will be diluted and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect their rights as common stockholders. Debt financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends. If we raise funds through collaborations, strategic alliances or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams, research programs or product candidates or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. If we are unable to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves.

Our product candidates are in the early stages of development. We only recently began clinical trials to test some of our product candidates in humans and, as a company, we have limited experience in this area.

We are early in our development efforts and our operations to date have been limited to drug discovery, preclinical studies and Phase 1 clinical trials. While most of our initial clinical trial activity has been outside the United States, we have initiated several trials in the United States. As a result, we will need to expand our clinical operations, quality and regulatory capabilities to support these activities.

Our interactions with the FDA have been limited to the initiation of our Phase 1 trials. Because of these limited interactions, we may subsequently learn of certain information or data that the FDA may request, which may necessitate conducting additional preclinical studies or generating such information at significant cost in terms of both time and expense, including under a clinical hold imposed on an investigational new drug application (IND). Even if we conducted the additional studies or generated the additional information requested, the FDA could disagree that we have satisfied their requirements, all of which will cause significant delays to our programs.

In part because of our limited infrastructure, experience conducting clinical trials as a company and regulatory interactions, we cannot be certain that our clinical trials will be completed on time, that our planned clinical trials will be initiated on time, if at all, that our planned development programs would be acceptable to the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, or that, if approval is obtained, such product candidates can be successfully commercialized.

Our ability to generate product revenue, which we do not expect will occur for many years, if ever, will depend heavily on our ability to successfully complete the above activities and any other activities required for the successful development and eventual commercialization of one or more of our product candidates. The success of our product candidates will further depend on factors such as:

If we do not achieve one or more of these factors in a timely manner, we could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, which would materially harm our business.

Clinical drug development is a lengthy, expensive and uncertain process. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials are not always predictive of future results. Any product candidate that we advance into clinical trials may not achieve favorable results in later clinical trials, if any, or receive marketing approval.

The research and development of drugs and biological products is an extremely risky industry. Only a small percentage of product candidates that enter the development process ever receive marketing approval. Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of any product candidate, we must complete preclinical development and then conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates in humans. Clinical testing is expensive, can take many years to complete and its outcome is uncertain.

The results of preclinical and early clinical trials of our product candidates and other products with the same mechanism of action may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Clinical trial failure may result from a multitude of factors including flaws in study design, dose selection, placebo effect, patient enrollment criteria and failure to demonstrate favorable safety or efficacy traits. As such, failure in clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered setbacks in the advancement of clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. Based upon negative or inconclusive results, we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical trials or preclinical studies. In addition, data obtained from clinical trials are susceptible to varying interpretations, and regulators may not interpret our data as favorably as we do, which may further delay, limit or prevent marketing approval. In particular, results from uncontrolled trials, meaning trials in which there is no control group such as a placebo group, are inherently difficult to interpret. Clinical trials evaluating two or more investigational product candidates in combination that have not yet been approved can compound these difficulties. As a key element of our strategy is the development of intra-portfolio combinations, many of our clinical trials will test more than one investigational product candidates in uncontrolled studies, such as the clinical trials in our Phase 1/1b program for AB928 where we are evaluating AB928 in combination with AB122, and the Phase 1 trial for AB154 which will evaluate AB154 in combination with AB122. Furthermore, as more product candidates within a particular class of drugs proceed through clinical development to regulatory review and approval, the amount and type of clinical data that may be required by regulatory authorities may increase or change.

We currently have four product candidates in clinical development and their risk of failure is high. We are unable to predict if these product candidates or any of our future product candidates that advance into clinical trials will prove safe or effective in humans or will obtain marketing approval. If we are unable to complete preclinical or clinical trials of current or future product candidates, due to safety concerns, or if the results of these trials are not satisfactory to convince regulatory authorities of their safety or efficacy, we will not be able to obtain marketing approval for commercialization. Even if we are able to obtain marketing approvals for any of our product candidates, those approvals may be for indications that are not as broad as desired or may contain other limitations that would adversely affect our ability to generate revenue from sales of those products. Moreover, if we are not able to differentiate our product against other approved products within the same class of drugs, or if any of the other circumstances described above occur, our business would be materially harmed and our ability to generate revenue from that class of drugs would be severely impaired.

Preliminary and interim data from our clinical studies that we announce or publish from time to time are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data and may change as more patient data become available.

From time to time, we publish preliminary or interim data from our clinical studies. Preliminary data remain subject to audit confirmation and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. Interim data are also subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. As a result, preliminary and interim data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Material adverse changes in the final data could significantly harm our business prospects.

A key element of our strategy is the development of intra-portfolio combinations. If we are not successful in discovering, developing and commercializing product candidates that take advantage of different mechanisms of action to achieve superior outcomes relative to the use of single agents or other combination therapies, our ability to achieve our strategic objectives would be impaired.

A key element of our strategy is to build a broad portfolio of product candidates that will allow for the development of intra-portfolio combinations. We believe that by developing or licensing these product candidates, we can control the combinations we pursue and, if and when approved, maximize the commercial potential of these combinations.

However, these combinations have not been tested before and may fail to demonstrate synergistic activity against immunological targets, may fail to achieve superior outcomes relative to the use of single agents or other combination therapies, may exacerbate adverse events associated with one of the product candidates when used as monotherapy, or may fail to demonstrate sufficient safety or efficacy traits in clinical trials to enable us to complete those clinical trials or obtain marketing approval for the combination therapy. In addition, it may be difficult to interpret the results of any uncontrolled trials we conduct with our intra-portfolio combinations, such as the clinical trials in our Phase 1/1b program for AB928 where we are evaluating AB928 in combination with AB122, and the Phase 1 trial for AB154 which will evaluate AB154 in combination with AB122.

We expect that our anti-PD-1 antibody, AB122, will form the backbone of many of our intra-portfolio combinations. In the event that AB122, which is currently in a Phase 1 trial, were to fail to demonstrate sufficient safety and efficacy, we would need to identify alternatives for accessing an anti-PD-1 antibody. In the event we are unable to do so or are unable to do so on commercially reasonable terms, our business and prospects would be materially harmed. All of our product candidates are targeting mechanisms that other companies are pursuing as either monotherapy or combination products. As such, even if we are successful in developing combination therapies, competition from other product candidates in the same class which are either already approved or further along in development than ours may prevent us from realizing the commercial potential of our combination therapies and prevent us from achieving our strategic objectives.

Our intra-portfolio combination strategy relies on discovering, developing and commercializing highly differentiated small molecules. If we are not able to differentiate our small molecules from other products which are approved or in development, our business prospects would be materially adversely affected.

Our combination therapy strategy relies on discovering and developing differentiated small molecules with ideal pharmacologic properties for the targeted pathway to complement our antibody product candidates, which we believe will form the backbone of our combination therapies. We conduct in our laboratories those activities that we consider to be critical for creating a development candidate with optimal properties. These activities include medicinal chemistry, assay development, assessment of compound potency and selectivity, in vitro and in vivo pharmacokinetic profile evaluation, in vivo pharmacology and exploratory safety evaluation, among others. As such, we have invested heavily in these internal capabilities and over 75% of our current workforce is dedicated to research and development. If the small molecules that we discover and design do not have ideal pharmacologic properties, or are not

differentiated from other product candidates in development, either through their efficacy or toxicity profile, our product development activities, business and prospects would be materially harmed.

Serious adverse events, undesirable side effects or other unexpected properties of our product candidates may be identified during development or after approval, which could lead to the discontinuation of our clinical development programs, refusal by regulatory authorities to approve our product candidates or, if discovered following marketing approval, revocation of marketing authorizations or limitations on the use of our product candidates thereby limiting the commercial potential of such product candidate.

To date, we have only tested our clinical-stage product candidates in a limited number of oncology subjects. As we continue our development of these product candidates and initiate clinical trials of our additional product candidates, serious adverse events, undesirable side effects or unexpected characteristics may emerge causing us to abandon these product candidates or limit their development to more narrow uses or subpopulations in which the serious adverse events, undesirable side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a risk-benefit perspective. Even if our product candidates initially show promise in these early clinical trials, the side effects of drugs are frequently only detectable after they are tested in large, Phase 3 clinical trials or, in some cases, after they are made available to patients on a commercial scale after approval. Sometimes, it can be difficult to determine if the serious adverse or unexpected side effects were caused by the product candidate or another factor, especially in oncology subjects who may suffer from other medical conditions and be taking other medications. If serious adverse or unexpected side effects are identified during development and are determined to be attributed to our product candidate, we may be required to develop a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) to mitigate those serious safety risks, which could impose significant distribution and use restrictions on our products.

Drug-related side effects could also affect subject recruitment or the ability of enrolled subjects to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

In addition, if one or more of our product candidates receives marketing approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such products, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular product candidate, if approved, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

Lack of efficacy, adverse events or undesirable side effects may emerge in clinical trials conducted by third parties investigating the same product candidates as us in different territories. For example, we and Guangzhou Gloria Biosciences, Co. (Gloria Biosciences, formerly known as Harbin Gloria Pharmaceuticals Co. Ltd.) each licensed our rights to the same anti-PD-1 antibody (which we refer to as AB122) from WuXi Biologics (Cayman) Inc. (WuXi Biologics). Gloria Biosciences refers to this antibody as GLS-010 and is conducting clinical trials with GLS-010 in China. We have no control over their clinical trials or development program, and lack of efficacy, adverse events or undesirable side effects experienced by subjects in their clinical trials could adversely affect our development of AB122 or even the viability of AB122 as a product candidate. We may be required to report Gloria Biosciences’ adverse events or unexpected side effects to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, which could, among other things, order us to cease further development of AB122. We may face similar risks if Taiho exercises its option to license development rights to any of our programs under the Taiho Agreement.

Enrollment and retention of subjects in clinical trials is expensive and time consuming, can be made more difficult or rendered impossible by competing treatments or clinical trials of competing product candidates in the same or other indications, and could result in significant delays and additional costs in our product development activities, or in the failure of such activities.

We may encounter delays in enrolling, or be unable to enroll and maintain, a sufficient number of subjects to complete any of our clinical trials. Patient enrollment and retention in clinical trials is a significant factor in the timing of clinical trials and depends on many factors, including the size of the patient population required for analysis of the trial’s primary endpoints, the nature of the trial protocol, our ability to recruit clinical trial investigators with the appropriate competencies and experience, the existing body of safety

and efficacy data with respect to the product candidate, the number and nature of competing products or product candidates and ongoing clinical trials of competing product candidates for the same indication, the proximity of subjects to clinical trial sites, the eligibility criteria for the clinical trial and our ability to obtain and maintain subject consents.

For example, enrollment of oncology subjects in our AB122 clinical trial may be hampered by nivolumab from Bristol-Myers Squibb and pembrolizumab from Merck, both of which are approved and on the market. Subjects may opt to be treated with an approved product with substantially more safety and efficacy data than is currently available for our anti-PD-1 antibody product candidate. Bristol-Myers Squibb and Merck may also be conducting clinical trials of these products in additional indications, and some of those clinical sites may also participate in our clinical trials, which could reduce the number of subjects available for our clinical trials at those sites.

Furthermore, any negative results that we may report in clinical trials of our product candidates may make it difficult or impossible to recruit and retain subjects in other clinical trials of that same product candidate. Delays in patient enrollment may result in increased costs or may affect the timing or outcome of the planned clinical trials, which could prevent completion of these trials and adversely affect our ability to advance the development of our product candidates. Failures in planned subject enrollment or retention may result in increased costs or program delays and could render further development impossible.

Certain of our product candidates may require companion diagnostics in certain indications. Failure to successfully develop, validate and obtain regulatory clearance or approval for such tests could harm our product development strategy or prevent us from realizing the full commercial potential of our product candidates.

Certain of our product candidates may require companion diagnostics to identify appropriate patients for those product candidates in certain indications. Companion diagnostics are subject to regulation by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities as a medical device and may require separate regulatory authorization prior to commercialization. We may rely on third parties for the design, development, testing and manufacturing of these companion diagnostics, the application for and receipt of any required regulatory authorization, and the commercial supply of these companion diagnostics. If these parties are unable to successfully develop companion diagnostics for these product candidates, or experience delays in doing so, the development of our product candidates may be adversely affected and we may not be able to obtain marketing authorization for these product candidates. Furthermore, our ability to market and sell, as well as the commercial success, of any of our product candidates that require a companion diagnostic will be tied to, and dependent upon, the receipt of required regulatory authorization and the continued ability of such third parties to make the companion diagnostic commercially available on reasonable terms in the relevant geographies. Any failure to develop, validate, obtain and maintain marketing authorization for a companion diagnostic and supply such companion diagnostic will harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.

The design or our execution of our ongoing and future clinical trials may not support marketing approval.

The design or execution of a clinical trial can determine whether its results will support marketing approval, and flaws in the design or execution of a clinical trial may not become apparent until the clinical trial is well advanced. In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety or efficacy results between different trials with the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including differences in trial protocols, size and type of the patient populations, variable adherence to the dosing regimen or other protocol requirements and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. Furthermore, while we have significant efforts directed to identifying changes in various cells and proteins to understand their relationship, if any, to the clinical activity observed in our clinical trials and to assess if such cells and/or proteins could be used as predictive biomarkers to select for patients more likely to respond to our product candidates, we cannot be certain that we will be able to identify or validate any such biomarkers, or that such biomarkers will result in us identifying the appropriate patients for our product candidates. We do not know whether any clinical trials we conduct will demonstrate consistent or adequate efficacy and safety to obtain marketing approval to market our product candidates.

The FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process and in determining when or whether marketing approval will be obtained for any of our product candidates. Our product candidates may not be approved even if they achieve their primary endpoints in future Phase 3 clinical trials or registrational trials. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our trial designs and our interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials. In addition, any of these regulatory authorities may change requirements for the approval of a product candidate even after reviewing and providing comments or advice on a protocol for a pivotal Phase 3 or registrational clinical trial that has the potential to result in FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ approval. In addition, any of these regulatory authorities may also approve a product candidate for fewer or more limited indications than we request or may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not approve the labeling claims that we believe would be necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of our product candidates, if approved.

To date, most of our initial clinical trial activity has been outside the United States, and the FDA may not accept data from trials conducted in foreign locations.

To date, most of our initial clinical trial activity has been outside the United States and we expect to continue to conduct portions of our clinical trials outside the United States. Although the FDA may accept data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States, acceptance of these data is subject to certain conditions imposed by the FDA. For example, the clinical trial must be well designed and conducted and performed by qualified investigators in accordance with ethical principles. The trial population must also adequately represent the U.S. population, and the data must be applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice in ways that the FDA deems clinically meaningful. In general, the patient population for any clinical trials conducted outside the United States must be representative of the population for whom we intend to label the product in the United States. In addition, while these clinical trials are subject to the applicable local laws, FDA acceptance of the data will be dependent upon its determination that the trials also complied with all applicable U.S. laws and regulations. We cannot assure you that the FDA will accept data from trials conducted outside the United States. If the FDA does not accept the data from such clinical trials, it would likely result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay or permanently halt our development of our product candidates.

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

Because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we must prioritize our research programs and will need to focus our product candidates on the potential treatment of certain indications. As a result, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or for other indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may also relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate.

Any termination or suspension of, or delays in the commencement or completion of, our planned clinical trials could result in increased costs to us, delay or limit our ability to generate revenue and adversely affect our commercial prospects.

Before we can initiate clinical trials in the United States for our product candidates, we must submit the results of preclinical testing to the FDA along with other information, including information about product candidate chemistry, manufacturing and controls (CMC) and our proposed clinical trial protocol, as part of an IND. We do not know whether our planned trials will begin on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. The commencement and completion of clinical trials can be delayed for a number of reasons, including delays related to:

Any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize the commercial prospects of our product candidates and our ability to commence product sales and generate revenue.

In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, termination or suspension of, or a delay in the commencement or completion of, clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of a product candidate. For example, if we make manufacturing or formulation changes to our product candidates, we may need to conduct additional studies to bridge our modified product candidates to earlier versions. Further, if one or more clinical trials are delayed, our competitors may be able to bring products to market before we do, and the commercial viability of our product candidates could be significantly reduced. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly. Any termination of any clinical trial of our product candidates will harm our commercial prospects and our ability to generate revenue.

We may not be successful in our efforts to identify or discover additional product candidates in the future.

Our research programs may initially show promise in identifying potential product candidates, yet fail to yield product candidates for clinical development for a number of reasons, including:

Research programs to identify new product candidates require substantial technical, financial and human resources. If we are unable to identify suitable compounds for preclinical and clinical development, we will not be able to obtain product revenue in future periods, which likely would result in significant harm to our financial position and adversely impact our stock price.

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

Drug development is inherently risky and uncertain. We cannot be certain that we will be able to:

The actual timing of our development milestones can vary significantly compared to our estimates, in some cases for reasons beyond our control. If we are unable to achieve our goals within the timeframes we announce, the commercialization of our product candidates may be delayed and, as a result, the stock price of our common stock could fall and our stockholders’ may lose all of their investment.

Even if any of our product candidates receive marketing approval, they may fail to achieve the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, hospitals, cancer treatment centers, healthcare payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success.

If any of our product candidates receive marketing approval, they may nonetheless fail to gain sufficient market acceptance by physicians, patients, healthcare payors and others in the medical community. For example, current cancer treatments like chemotherapy and radiation therapy are well established in the medical community, and physicians may continue to rely on these treatments. Most of our product candidates currently target mechanisms for which there are no currently approved products. If our product candidates do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant product revenue and we may not become profitable. The degree of market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including:

We rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials and perform some of our research and preclinical studies. If these third parties do not satisfactorily carry out their contractual duties or fail to meet expected deadlines, our development programs may be delayed or subject to increased costs, each of which may have an adverse effect on our business and prospects.

We do not have the ability to conduct all aspects of our preclinical testing or clinical trials ourselves. As a result, we are and expect to remain dependent on third parties to conduct our ongoing Phase 1 clinical trials and any future clinical trials of our product candidates. The timing of the initiation and completion of these trials will therefore be partially controlled by such third parties and may result in delays to our development programs. Specifically, we expect CROs, clinical investigators, and consultants to play a significant role in the conduct of these trials and the subsequent collection and analysis of data. However, we will not be able to control all aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol and legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on the CROs and other third parties does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our CROs are required to comply with GCP requirements, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA, the Competent Authorities of the Member States of the European Economic Area, Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for all of our product candidates in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCP requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, clinical trial investigators and clinical trial sites. If we or any of our CROs or clinical trial sites fail to comply with applicable GCP requirements, the data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable, and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under cGMP regulations. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to stop and/or repeat clinical trials, which would delay the marketing approval process.

There is no guarantee that any such CROs, clinical trial investigators or other third parties on which we rely will devote adequate time and resources to our development activities or perform as contractually required. If any of these third parties fail to meet expected deadlines, adhere to our clinical protocols or meet regulatory requirements, otherwise performs in a substandard manner, or terminates its engagement with us, the timelines for our development programs may be extended or delayed or our development activities may be suspended or terminated. If any of our clinical trial sites terminates for any reason, we may experience the loss of follow-up information on subjects enrolled in such clinical trials unless we are able to transfer those subjects to another qualified clinical trial site, which may be difficult or impossible. In addition, clinical trial investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and may receive cash or equity compensation in connection with such services. If these relationships and any related compensation result in perceived or actual conflicts of interest, or the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities concludes that the financial relationship may have affected the interpretation of the trial, the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site may be questioned and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized, which could result in the delay or rejection of any marketing application we submit by the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority. Any such delay or rejection could prevent us from commercializing our product candidates.

Furthermore, these third parties may also have relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct our clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols, we will not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, marketing approvals for our product candidates and will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize our products.

We contract with third parties for the manufacturing and supply of product candidates for use in preclinical testing and clinical trials, which supply may become limited or interrupted or may not be of satisfactory quality and quantity.

We do not have any manufacturing facilities. We produce in our laboratory relatively small quantities of compounds for evaluation in our research programs. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates for preclinical and clinical testing, as well as for commercial manufacture if any of our product candidates are approved. We currently have limited manufacturing arrangements and expect that each of our product candidates will only be covered by single source suppliers for the foreseeable future. This reliance increases the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of our product candidates or products, if approved, or such quantities at an acceptable cost or quality, which could delay, prevent or impair our development or commercialization efforts.

Furthermore, all entities involved in the preparation of therapeutics for clinical trials or commercial sale, including our existing contract manufacturers for our product candidates, are subject to extensive regulation. Components of a finished therapeutic product approved for commercial sale or used in clinical trials must be manufactured in accordance with cGMP requirements. These regulations govern manufacturing processes and procedures, including record keeping, and the implementation and operation of quality systems to control and assure the quality of investigational products and products approved for sale. Poor control of production processes can lead to the introduction of contaminants, or to inadvertent changes in the properties or stability of our product candidates that may not be detectable in final product testing. We or our contract manufacturers must supply all necessary documentation in support of a New Drug Application (NDA) or Biologics License Application (BLA) on a timely basis and must adhere to the FDA’s Good Laboratory Practice regulations and cGMP regulations enforced by the FDA through its facilities inspection program. Comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require compliance with similar requirements. The facilities and quality systems of our third-party contractor manufacturers must pass a pre-approval inspection for compliance with the applicable regulations as a condition of marketing approval of our product candidates. We do not control the manufacturing process of, and are completely dependent on, our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with cGMP regulations.

In the event that any of our manufacturers fails to comply with such requirements or to perform its obligations to us in relation to quality, timing or otherwise, or if our supply of components or other materials becomes limited or interrupted for other reasons, we may be forced to manufacture the materials ourselves, for which we currently do not have the capabilities or resources, or enter into an agreement with another third party, which we may not be able to do on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. In particular, any replacement of our manufacturers could require significant effort and expertise because there may be a limited number of qualified replacements. In some cases, the technical skills or technology required to manufacture our product candidates may be unique or proprietary to the original manufacturer and we may have difficulty transferring such skills or technology to another third party and a feasible alternative may not exist. These factors would increase our reliance on such manufacturer or require us to obtain a license from such manufacturer in order to have another third party manufacture our product candidates. If we are required to change manufacturers for any reason, we will be required to verify that the new manufacturer maintains facilities and procedures that comply with quality standards and with all applicable regulations and guidelines. The delays associated with the verification of a new manufacturer could negatively affect our ability to develop product candidates in a timely manner or within budget. Our or a third party’s failure to execute on our manufacturing requirements, to do so on commercially reasonable terms and comply with cGMP could adversely affect our business in a number of ways, including:

We, or our third-party manufacturers, may be unable to successfully scale-up manufacturing of our product candidates in sufficient quality and quantity, which would delay or prevent us from conducting clinical trials and developing our product candidates.

In order to conduct clinical trials of our product candidates, we will need to manufacture them in large quantities. We, or our manufacturing partners, may be unable to successfully increase the manufacturing capacity for any of our product candidates in a timely or cost-effective manner, or at all. In addition, quality issues may arise during scale-up activities. If we or our manufacturing partners are unable to successfully scale up the manufacture of our product candidates in sufficient quality and quantity, the development, testing and clinical trials of that product candidate may be delayed or become infeasible, and marketing approval or commercial launch of any resulting product may be delayed or not obtained, which could significantly harm our business.

Changes in methods of product candidate manufacturing or formulation may result in additional costs or delay.

As product candidates progress through preclinical to late stage clinical trials to marketing approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as the product candidate’s specifications, manufacturing methods and formulation, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize yield, manufacturing batch size, minimize costs and achieve consistent quality and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives. Any of these changes could cause our product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials conducted with the altered materials. This could delay completion of clinical trials, require the conduct of bridging clinical trials or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate revenue.

The manufacture of biologics is complex and our third-party manufacturers may encounter difficulties in production. If any of our third-party manufacturers encounter such difficulties, our ability to provide supply of our product candidates for clinical trials or our products for patients, if approved, could be delayed or prevented.

Manufacturing biologics, especially in large quantities, is often complex and may require the use of innovative technologies to handle living cells. Each lot of an approved biologic must undergo thorough testing for identity, strength, quality, purity and potency. Manufacturing biologics requires facilities specifically designed for and validated for this purpose, and sophisticated quality assurance and quality control procedures are necessary. Slight deviations anywhere in the manufacturing process, including filling, labeling, packaging, storage and shipping and quality control and testing, may result in lot failures, product recalls or spoilage. When changes are made to the manufacturing process, we may be required to provide preclinical and clinical data showing the comparable identity, strength, quality, purity or potency of the products before and after such changes. If microbial, viral or other contaminations are discovered at the facilities of our manufacturer, such facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination, which could delay clinical trials and adversely harm our business. The use of biologically derived ingredients can also lead to allegations of harm, including infections or allergic reactions, or closure of product facilities due to possible contamination.

In addition, there are risks associated with large scale manufacturing for clinical trials or commercial scale including, among others, cost overruns, potential problems with process scale-up, process reproducibility, stability issues, compliance with good manufacturing practices, lot consistency and timely availability of raw materials. Even if we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates, there is no assurance that our manufacturers will be able to manufacture the approved product to specifications acceptable to the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, to produce it in sufficient quantities to meet the requirements for the potential commercial launch of the product or to meet potential future demand. If our manufacturers are unable to produce sufficient quantities for clinical trials or for commercialization, our development and commercialization efforts would be impaired, which would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

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

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until twelve years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed. During this twelve-year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a full BLA for the competing product containing the sponsor’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of its product. The law is complex and is still being interpreted and implemented by the FDA. As a result, any such processes could have a material adverse effect on the future commercial prospects for our biological products.

AB122 and AB154 are biological products and we may develop additional biological products in the future. We believe that any of our current and future product candidates approved as a biological product under a BLA should qualify for the twelve-year period of exclusivity. However, there is a risk that this exclusivity could be shortened due to Congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider our product candidates to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for biosimilar competition sooner than anticipated. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, could be substituted for any one of our reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biological products will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing.

Even if we receive marketing approval, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates due to unfavorable pricing regulations or third-party coverage and reimbursement policies, which could make it difficult for us to sell our product candidates profitably.

Obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval for a product from a government or other third-party payor is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us to provide supporting scientific, clinical and cost effectiveness data for the use of our products to the payor. There may be significant delays in obtaining such coverage and reimbursement for newly approved products, and coverage may be more limited than the purposes for which the product is approved by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Moreover, eligibility for coverage and reimbursement does not imply that a product will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including research, development, intellectual property, manufacture, sale and distribution expenses. Interim reimbursement levels for new products, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover our costs and may not be made permanent. Reimbursement rates may vary according to the use of the product and the clinical setting in which it is used, may be based on reimbursement levels already set for lower cost products and may be incorporated into existing payments for other services. Net prices for products may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors, by any future laws limiting drug prices and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of product from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States.

There is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. Third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting reimbursement policies, but also have their own methods and approval process apart from Medicare coverage and reimbursement determinations.

Coverage and reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including the third-party payor’s determination that use of a product is:

We cannot be sure that reimbursement will be available for any product that we commercialize and, if coverage and reimbursement are available, what the level of reimbursement will be. Obtaining reimbursement for our products may be particularly difficult because of the higher prices often associated with branded therapeutics and therapeutics administered under the supervision of a physician. Our inability to promptly obtain coverage and adequate reimbursement rates from both government-funded and private payors for any approved products that we develop could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, our ability to raise capital needed to commercialize products and our overall financial condition.

Reimbursement may impact the demand for, and the price of, any product for which we obtain marketing approval. Assuming we obtain coverage for a given product by a third-party payor, the resulting reimbursement payment rates may not be adequate or may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. Patients who are prescribed medications for the treatment of their conditions, and their prescribing physicians, generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the costs associated with those medications. Patients are unlikely to use our products unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover all or a significant portion of the cost of our products. Therefore, coverage and adequate reimbursement is critical to new product acceptance. Coverage decisions may depend upon clinical and economic standards that disfavor new products when more established or lower cost therapeutic alternatives are already available or subsequently become available.

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

Outside the United States, many countries require approval of the sale price of a product before it can be marketed and the pricing review period only begins after marketing or product licensing approval is granted. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some of these countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product candidate to other available therapies. In some foreign markets, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. As a result, we might obtain marketing approval for a product candidate in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations that delay our commercial launch of the product, possibly for lengthy time periods, and negatively impact the revenue, if any, we are able to generate from the sale of the product in that country. Adverse pricing limitations may hinder our ability to recoup our investment in one or more product candidates, even if such product candidates obtain marketing approval.

If the market opportunities for any product that we or our strategic partners develop are smaller than we believe they are, our revenue may be adversely affected and our business may suffer.

We are focused on the development of treatments for cancer. Our projections of addressable patient populations that have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates are based on estimates. If any of our estimates are inaccurate, the market opportunities for any of our product candidates could be significantly diminished and have an adverse material impact on our business.

Our employees, clinical trial investigators, CROs, consultants, vendors and any potential commercial partners may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including non-compliance with regulatory standards and requirements and insider trading.

We are exposed to the risk of fraud or other misconduct by our employees, clinical trial investigators, CROs, consultants, vendors and any potential commercial partners. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct or disclosure of unauthorized activities to us that violates: (i) FDA laws and regulations or those of comparable foreign regulatory authorities, including those laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate information, (ii) manufacturing standards, (iii) federal and state health and data privacy, security, fraud and abuse, government price reporting, transparency reporting requirements, and other healthcare laws and regulations in the United States and abroad, or (iv) laws that require the true, complete and accurate reporting of financial information or data. Such misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. We have adopted a code of conduct applicable to all of our employees, as well as a disclosure program and other applicable policies and procedures, but it is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with these laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions.

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

Because we rely on third parties to research and develop and to manufacture our product candidates, we must share trade secrets with them. We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our advisors, employees, third-party contractors 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, including our 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 independent 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 advisors, employees, third-party contractors and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our trade secrets, although our agreements may contain certain limited publication rights. For example, any academic institution that we may collaborate with will likely expect to be granted rights to publish data arising out of such collaboration and any joint research and development programs may require us to share trade secrets under the terms of our research and development or similar agreements. Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, our competitors may discover our trade secrets, either through breach of our agreements with third parties, independent development or publication of information by any of our third-party collaborators. A competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets would impair our competitive position and have an adverse impact on our business.

If we are unable to establish sales and marketing capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to sell and market our product candidates, we will be unable to successfully commercialize our product candidates if and when they are approved.

We have no sales, marketing or distribution capabilities or experience. To achieve commercial success for any approved product for which we retain sales and marketing responsibilities, we must either develop a sales and marketing organization, which would be expensive and time consuming, or outsource these functions to other third parties. In the future, we may choose to build a focused sales and marketing infrastructure to sell, or participate in sales activities with our collaborators for, some of our product candidates if and when they are approved.

There are risks involved with both establishing our own sales and marketing capabilities and entering into arrangements with third parties to perform these services. For example, recruiting and training a sales force is expensive and time consuming and could delay any product launch. If the commercial launch of a product candidate for which we recruit a sales force and establish marketing capabilities is delayed or does not occur for any reason, we would have prematurely or unnecessarily incurred these commercialization expenses. This may be costly, and our investment would be lost if we cannot retain or reposition our sales and marketing personnel.

Factors that may inhibit our efforts to commercialize our medicines on our own include:

If we enter into arrangements with third parties to perform sales, marketing and distribution services, our product revenue or the profitability of these product revenue to us are likely to be lower than if we were to market and sell any medicines that we develop ourselves. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into arrangements with third parties to sell and market our product candidates or may be unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us. In entering into third-party marketing or distribution arrangements, any revenue we receive will depend upon the efforts of the third parties, and we cannot assure you that such third parties will establish adequate sales and distribution capabilities or devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our medicines effectively. If we do not establish sales and marketing capabilities successfully, either on our own or in collaboration with third parties, we will not be successful in commercializing our product candidates.

Even if we obtain FDA approval of any of our product candidates, we may never obtain approval or commercialize such products outside the United States, which would limit our ability to realize their full market potential.

In order to market any products outside the United States, we must establish and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries regarding safety and efficacy. Clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and regulatory approval in one country does not mean that regulatory approval will be obtained in any other country. Approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and validation and additional administrative review periods. Seeking foreign regulatory approvals could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and may require additional preclinical studies or clinical trials which would be costly and time consuming. Regulatory requirements can vary widely from country to country and could delay or prevent the introduction of our products in those countries. Satisfying these and other regulatory requirements is costly, time consuming, uncertain and subject to unanticipated delays. In addition, our failure to obtain regulatory approval in any country may delay or have negative effects on the process for regulatory approval in other countries. We do not have any product candidates approved for sale in any jurisdiction, including international markets, and we do not have experience in obtaining regulatory approval in international markets. If we fail to comply with regulatory requirements in international markets or to obtain and maintain required approvals, our ability to realize the full market potential of our products will be harmed.

We are currently party to several in-license agreements under which we acquired rights to use, develop, manufacture and/or commercialize certain of our product candidates. If we breach our obligations under these agreements, we may be required to pay damages, lose our rights to these product candidates or both, which would adversely affect our business and prospects.

We rely, in part, on license and other strategic agreements, which subject us to various obligations, including diligence obligations with respect to development and commercialization activities, payment obligations for achievement of certain milestones and royalties on product sales, negative covenants and other material obligations. If we fail to comply with the obligations under our license agreements or use the intellectual property licensed to us in an unauthorized manner, we may be required to pay damages and our licensors may have the right to terminate the license. If our license agreements are terminated, we may not be able to develop, manufacture, market or sell the products covered by our agreements and those being tested or approved in combination with such products. Such an occurrence could materially adversely affect the value of the product candidate being developed under any such agreement and any other product candidates being developed or tested in combination. For example, we intend to test many of our small-molecule product candidates with AB122, which we in-licensed from WuXi Biologics. In the event we breach our license agreement with WuXi Biologics, and WuXi Biologics terminates our license agreement, we would be unable to test those combinations, or we would have to negotiate a new or reinstated agreement, which may not be available to us on equally favorable terms, or at all.

In addition, the agreements under which we license intellectual property or technology to or 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, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates.

If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights or maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to abandon development of the relevant research program or product candidate and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could suffer.

We may not realize the benefits of any acquisitions, in-license or other collaborations or strategic alliances that we enter into.

We have entered into in-license agreements with multiple licensors and an option agreement to out-license certain of our product candidates in select markets and in the future may seek and form strategic alliances, create joint ventures or collaborations, or enter into acquisitions or additional licensing arrangements with third parties that we believe will complement or augment our development and commercialization efforts with respect to our product candidates and any future product candidates that we may develop.

These transactions can entail numerous operational and financial risks, including exposure to unknown liabilities, disruption of our business and diversion of our management’s time and attention in order to manage a collaboration or develop acquired products, product candidates or technologies, incurrence of substantial debt or dilutive issuances of equity securities to pay transaction consideration or costs, higher than expected collaboration, acquisition or integration costs, write-downs of assets or goodwill or impairment charges, increased amortization expenses, difficulty and cost in facilitating the collaboration or combining the operations and personnel of any acquired business, impairment of relationships with key suppliers, manufacturers or customers of any acquired business due to changes in management and ownership and the inability to retain key employees of any acquired business. As a result, if we enter into collaboration agreements, strategic partnerships or license our products, we may not be able to realize the benefit of such transactions if we are unable to successfully integrate them with our existing operations and company culture, which could delay our timelines or otherwise adversely affect our business.

We also cannot be certain that, following a strategic transaction or license, we will achieve the revenue or specific net income that justifies such transaction or such other benefits that led us to enter into the arrangement. For example, the Taiho Agreement provides us with non-dilutive capital to fund our operations and a strategic development and commercialization partner for our product candidates in Japan and certain other territories in Asia (excluding China). If Taiho does not exercise its option to develop a program, our capital requirements relating to that development program will significantly increase and we may need to seek a new partner in order to develop and commercialize our product candidates from that program in the territories optioned by Taiho. Failure to realize the benefits of any collaborations or strategic alliances may further cause us to curtail the development of a product candidate, reduce or delay its development program or one or more of our other development programs, delay its potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any planned sales or marketing activities, or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to fund and undertake development or commercialization activities on our own, we will need to obtain additional expertise and additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we fail to enter into collaborations and do not have sufficient funds or expertise to undertake the necessary development and commercialization activities, we may not be able to further develop our product candidates or bring them to market and generate product sales revenue, which would harm our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

We may wish to acquire rights to future assets through in-licensing or may attempt to form collaborations in the future with respect to our product candidates, but may not be able to do so, which may cause us to alter or delay our development and commercialization plans.

The development and potential commercialization of our product candidates will require substantial additional capital to fund expenses. We have entered into an option and license agreement with Taiho for the potential development and commercialization of our product candidates in Japan and certain other territories in Asia (excluding China). We may, in the future, decide to collaborate with other biopharmaceutical companies for the development and potential commercialization of those product candidates in other countries or territories of the world. We will face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators. We may not be successful in our efforts to establish a strategic partnership or other alternative arrangements for our product candidates because they may be deemed to be at too early of a stage of development for collaborative effort and third parties may not view our product candidates as having the requisite potential to demonstrate safety and efficacy. If and when we collaborate with a third party for development and commercialization of a product candidate, we can expect to relinquish some or all of the control over the future success of that product candidate to the third party. Our ability to reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. Those factors may include the following:

The collaborator may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us for our product candidate. We may also be restricted under any license agreements from entering into agreements on certain terms or at all with potential collaborators. Collaborations are complex and time-consuming to negotiate and document. In addition, there have been a significant number of recent business combinations among large pharmaceutical companies that have resulted in a reduced number of potential future collaborators and changes to the strategies of the combined company. As a result, we may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to do so, we may have to curtail the development of such product candidate, reduce or delay one or more of our other development programs, delay the potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any planned sales or marketing activities for such product candidate, or increase our expenditures and undertake development, manufacturing or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development, manufacturing or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we do not have sufficient funds, we may not be able to further develop our product candidates or bring them to market and generate product revenue.

Managing our obligations under our in-license agreements and our option agreement may divert management time and attention, causing delays or disruptions to our business.

We have entered into and may in the future enter into in-license agreements with multiple licensors and a strategic option agreement, which subject us to various obligations, including diligence obligations, reporting and notification obligations, payment obligations for achievement of certain milestone as well as other material obligations. We may need to devote substantial time and attention to ensuring that we successfully integrate these transactions into our existing operations and are compliant with our obligations under these agreements, which may divert management’s time and attention away from our research and development programs or other day-to-day activities.

Our in-license and strategic agreements are also complex and certain provisions in those agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. In the event of any disagreement about the interpretation of these provisions, our management may need to devote a disproportionate amount of its attention to resolving these disagreements. Such disruptions may cause delays in our research and development programs and other business objectives.

Our operating activities may be restricted by certain covenants in our license and other strategic agreements, which could limit our development and commercial opportunities.

In connection with certain of our acquisitions, in-license or other collaborations or strategic alliances, we may agree to and be bound by negative covenants which may limit our development and commercial opportunities. For example, pursuant to our in-license of anti-PD-1 antibodies from WuXi Biologics, we made certain covenants to not commercialize any anti-PD-1 antibody licensed or obtained by us after the date of the license agreement with WuXi Biologics other than anti-PD-1 antibodies licensed from WuXi Biologics, subject to certain exceptions as set forth in our license agreement with WuXi Biologics. Furthermore, we agreed in our license agreement that WuXi Biologics would be our exclusive manufacturer of anti-PD-1 antibodies licensed thereunder until a certain number of years has elapsed following commercialization of such an anti-PD-1 antibody and that we would utilize WuXi Biologics as our exclusive provider of CMC development services for our biologic product candidates for three years from the date of our license agreement, subject to certain exceptions in each case. These exclusivity provisions may inhibit our development efforts, prevent us from forming strategic collaborations to develop and potentially commercialize any other anti-PD-1 antibody product candidates and may materially harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

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

Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection in the United States and other countries with respect to our product candidates and research programs. We seek to protect our proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and abroad related to our novel discoveries and technologies that are important to our business. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued which protect our product candidates or their intended uses or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies, products or product candidates.

Obtaining and enforcing patents is expensive and time-consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications, or maintain and/or enforce patents that may issue based on our 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 results before it is too late to obtain patent protection. Although we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, contract research organizations, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach these agreements and disclose such results before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection.

The patent position of biopharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and has in recent years been the subject of much litigation, resulting in court decisions, including Supreme Court decisions, that have increased uncertainties as to the ability to enforce patent rights in the future. In addition, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States, or vice versa.

Further, we may not be aware of all third-party intellectual property rights potentially relating to our product candidates or their intended uses, and as a result the impact of such third-party intellectual property rights upon the patentability of our own patents and patent applications, as well as the impact of such third-party intellectual property upon our freedom to operate, is highly uncertain. Patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing or, in some cases, not at all. Therefore, we cannot know with certainty whether we were the first to make the inventions claimed in our patents or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Our patents or pending patent applications may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. For example, we may be subject to a third party pre-issuance submission of prior art to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or become involved in post-grant review procedures, oppositions, derivations, reexaminations, or inter partes review proceedings, in the United States or elsewhere, challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. An adverse determination in any such challenges may result in loss of exclusivity or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology and products. In addition, given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized.

We may not identify relevant third-party patents or may incorrectly interpret the relevance, scope or expiration of a third party patent which might adversely affect our ability to develop and market our products.

We cannot guarantee that any of our patent searches or analyses, including the identification of relevant patents, the scope of patent claims or the expiration of relevant patents, are complete or thorough, nor can we be certain that we have identified each and every third party patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of our product candidates in any jurisdiction.

The scope of a patent claim is determined by an interpretation of the law, the written disclosure in a patent and the patent’s prosecution history. Our interpretation of the relevance or the scope of a patent or a pending application may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to market our products. We may incorrectly determine that our products are not covered by a third party patent or may incorrectly predict whether a third party’s pending application will issue with claims of relevant scope. Our determination of the expiration date of any patent in the United States or abroad that we consider relevant may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our product candidates. Our failure to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our products.

In the future, we may need to obtain additional licenses of third-party technology that may not be available to us or are available only on commercially unreasonable terms, and which may cause us to operate our business in a more costly or otherwise adverse manner that was not anticipated.

From time to time we may be required to license technology from additional third parties to further develop or commercialize our product candidates. Should we be required to obtain licenses to any third-party technology, including any such patents required to manufacture, use or sell our product candidates, such licenses may not be available to us on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. The inability to obtain any third-party license required to develop or commercialize any of our product candidates could cause us to abandon any related efforts, which could seriously harm our business and operations.

We cannot ensure that patent rights relating to inventions described and claimed in our pending patent applications will issue or that patents based on our patent applications will not be challenged and rendered invalid and/or unenforceable.

We have pending U.S. and foreign patent applications in our portfolio, however, we cannot predict:

We cannot be certain that the claims in our pending patent applications directed to our product candidates and/or technologies will be considered patentable by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or by patent offices in foreign countries. One aspect of the determination of patentability of our inventions depends on the scope and content of the “prior art,” information that was or is deemed available to a person of skill in the relevant art prior to the priority date of the claimed invention. There may be prior art of which we are not aware that may affect the patentability of our patent claims or, if issued, affect the validity or enforceability of a patent claim. Even if the patents do issue based on our patent applications, third parties may challenge the validity, enforceability or scope thereof, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, patents in our portfolio may not adequately exclude third parties from practicing relevant technology or prevent others from designing around our claims. If the breadth or strength of our intellectual property position with respect to our product candidates is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to develop and threaten our ability to commercialize our product candidates. In the event of litigation or administrative proceedings, we cannot be certain that the claims in any of our issued patents will be considered valid by courts in the United States or foreign countries.

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

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

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

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

Our commercial success depends, in part, on our ability to develop, manufacture, market and sell our product candidates without infringing the intellectual property and other proprietary rights of third parties. Third parties may allege that we have infringed or misappropriated their intellectual property. Litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims, with or without merit, is unpredictable and generally expensive and time consuming and, even if resolved in our favor, is likely to divert significant resources from our core business, including distracting 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 and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the market price of our common stock. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to adequately conduct such litigation or proceedings. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources and more mature and developed intellectual property portfolios. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace.

There is a substantial amount of intellectual property litigation in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, and we may become party to, or threatened with, litigation or other adversarial proceedings regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our products candidates. Third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on existing or future intellectual property rights. For example, we are aware of certain patents owned or exclusively licensed by Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) having claims directed broadly to treating cancer with anti-PD-1 antibodies (the BMS Patents), which expire in 2023 and 2024. The BMS Patents are currently the subject of litigation between BMS and several other parties. If the validity of the BMS Patents is upheld following all such challenges, and if we receive regulatory approval for AB122 prior to expiration of the BMS Patents, then we may need to delay our commercialization of AB122 or we may need to obtain a license from BMS, which license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have produced a significant number of patents, and it may not always be clear to industry participants, including us, which patents cover various types of products or methods of use. The coverage of patents is subject to interpretation by the courts, and the interpretation is not always uniform. If we were sued for patent infringement, we would need to demonstrate that our product candidates, products or methods either do not infringe the patent claims of the relevant patent or that the patent claims are invalid or unenforceable, and we may not be able to do this. Proving invalidity may be difficult. For example, in the United States, proving invalidity in court requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence to

overcome the presumption of validity enjoyed by issued patents. Even if we are successful in these proceedings, we may incur substantial costs and the time and attention of our management and scientific personnel could be diverted in pursuing these proceedings, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and operations. In addition, we may not have sufficient resources to bring these actions to a successful conclusion. If we are found to infringe a third party’s intellectual property rights, we could be forced, including by court order, to cease developing, manufacturing or commercializing the infringing product candidate or product. Alternatively, we may be required to obtain a license from such third party in order to use the infringing technology and continue developing, manufacturing or marketing the infringing product candidate. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. 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 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.

We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

Competitors may infringe our patents, trademarks, copyrights 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 and divert the time and attention of our management and scientific personnel. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe their patents, in addition to counterclaims asserting that our patents are invalid or unenforceable, or both. In any patent infringement proceeding, there is a risk that a court will decide that a patent of ours is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, and that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue. There is also a risk that, even if the validity of such patents is upheld, the court will construe the patent’s claims narrowly or decide that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue on the grounds that our patent claims do not cover the invention. An adverse outcome in a litigation or proceeding involving our patents could limit our ability to assert our patents against those parties or other competitors, and may curtail or preclude our ability to exclude third parties from making and selling similar or competitive products. Any of these occurrences could adversely affect our competitive business position, business prospects and financial condition. Similarly, if we assert trademark infringement claims, a court may determine that the marks we have asserted are invalid or unenforceable, or that the party against whom we have asserted trademark infringement has superior rights to the marks in question. In this case, we could ultimately be forced to cease use of such trademarks.

Even if we establish infringement, the court may decide not to grant an injunction against further infringing activity and instead award only monetary damages, which may or may not be an adequate remedy. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of shares of our common stock. Moreover, we cannot assure you that we will have sufficient financial or other resources to file and pursue such infringement claims, which typically last for years before they are concluded. Even if we ultimately prevail in such claims, the monetary cost of such litigation and the diversion of the attention of our management and scientific personnel could outweigh any benefit we receive as a result of the proceedings.

Because of the expense and uncertainty of litigation, we may not be in a position to enforce our intellectual property rights against third parties.

Because of the expense and uncertainty of litigation, we may conclude that even if a third party is infringing our issued patent, any patents that may be issued as a result of our pending or future patent applications or other intellectual property rights, the risk-adjusted cost of bringing and enforcing such a claim or action may be too high or not in the best interest of our company or our stockholders. In such cases, we may decide that the more prudent course of action is to simply monitor the situation or initiate or seek some other non-litigious action or solution.

We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties.

We could in the future be subject to claims that we or our employees have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed alleged trade secrets or other confidential information of former employers or competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees and consultants do not use the intellectual property, proprietary information, know-how or trade secrets of others in their work for us, we may become subject to claims that we caused an employee to breach the terms of his or her non-competition or non-solicitation agreement, or that we or these individuals have, inadvertently or otherwise, used or disclosed the alleged trade secrets or other proprietary information of a former employer or competitor.

While we may litigate to defend ourselves against these claims, even if we are successful, litigation could result in substantial costs and could be a distraction to management. If our defenses to these claims fail, in addition to requiring us to pay monetary damages, a court could prohibit us from using technologies or features that are essential to our product candidates, if such technologies or features are found to incorporate or be derived from the trade secrets or other proprietary information of the former employers. Moreover, any such litigation or the threat thereof may adversely affect our reputation, our ability to form strategic alliances or sublicense our rights to collaborators, engage with scientific advisors or hire employees or consultants, each of which would have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

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

Patents are of national or regional effect, and filing, prosecuting and defending patents on all of our product candidates throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. As such, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Further, the legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to pharmaceuticals or biologics, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. In addition, certain developing countries, including China and India, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In those countries, we and our licensors may have limited remedies if patents are infringed or if we or our licensors are compelled to grant a license to a third party, which could materially diminish the value of those patents. This could limit our potential revenue opportunities. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

Changes in patent law in the United States and other jurisdictions could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our product candidates.

As is the case with other biopharmaceutical companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biopharmaceutical industry involves both technological and legal complexity and is therefore costly, time consuming and inherently uncertain. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States could increase the uncertainties and costs. Patent reform legislation in the United States and other countries could increase those uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents. For example, in September 2011 the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the Leahy-Smith Act) was signed into law and included a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law as then existed. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art and provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents. These include allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that the other statutory requirements are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third party was the first to invent the claimed invention. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. courts, the USPTO and the relevant law-making bodies in other countries, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future.

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

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuities fees and various other governmental fees on patents and/or patent applications are due to be paid to the USPTO and foreign patent agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patent and/or patent application. The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies also require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Non-compliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. If we fail to maintain the patents and patent applications covering our product candidates, our competitive position would be adversely affected.

We may rely on trade secret and proprietary know-how which can be difficult to trace and enforce and, if we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed.

In addition to seeking patents for some of our technology and product candidates, we may also rely on trade secrets, including unpatented know-how, technology and other proprietary information, to maintain our competitive position. Elements of our product candidate, including processes for their preparation and manufacture, may involve proprietary know-how, information, or technology that is not covered by patents, and thus for these aspects we may consider trade secrets and know-how to be our primary intellectual property. Any disclosure, either intentional or unintentional, by our employees, the employees of third parties with whom we share our facilities or third party consultants and vendors that we engage to perform research, clinical trials or manufacturing activities, or misappropriation by third parties (such as through a cybersecurity breach) of our trade secrets or proprietary information could enable competitors to duplicate or surpass our technological achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market.

Trade secrets and know-how can be difficult to protect. We require our employees to enter into written employment agreements containing provisions of confidentiality and obligations to assign to us any inventions generated in the course of their employment. We and any third parties with whom we share facilities enter into written agreements that include confidentiality and intellectual property obligations to protect each party’s property, potential trade secrets, proprietary know-how, and information. We further seek to protect our potential trade secrets, proprietary know-how, and information in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who are given access to them, such as our corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, contract research organizations, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties. With our consultants, contractors, and outside scientific collaborators, these agreements typically include invention assignment obligations. Despite these efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. 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. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor or other third party, our competitive position would be harmed.

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

We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our patents or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. The failure to name the proper inventors on a patent application can result in the patents issuing thereon being unenforceable. Inventorship disputes may arise from conflicting views regarding the contributions of different individuals named as inventors, the effects of foreign laws where foreign nationals are involved in the development of the subject matter of the patent, conflicting obligations of third parties involved in developing our product candidates or as a result of questions regarding co-ownership of potential joint inventions. Litigation may be necessary to resolve these and other claims challenging inventorship and/or ownership. Alternatively, or additionally, we may enter into agreements to clarify the scope of our rights in such intellectual property. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

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

Patent rights are of limited duration. 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 product candidates are commercialized. Even if patents covering our product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired for a product, we may be open to competition from biosimilar or generic products. A patent term extension based on regulatory delay may be available in the United States. However, only a single patent can be extended for each marketing approval, and any patent can be extended only once, for a single product. Moreover, the scope of protection during the period of the patent term extension does not extend to the full scope of the claim, but instead only to the scope of the product as approved. Laws governing analogous patent term extensions in foreign jurisdictions vary widely, as do laws governing the ability to obtain multiple patents from a single patent family. Additionally, we may not receive an extension if we fail to apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or restoration, or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we will have the right to exclusively market our product will be shortened and our competitors may obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration, and our revenue could be reduced, possibly materially.

We are highly dependent on the services of our founders, Terry Rosen, Ph.D., who serves as our Chief Executive Officer, and Juan Jaen, Ph.D., who serves as our President.

We are highly dependent on the services of our founders, Terry Rosen, Ph.D., who serves as our Chief Executive Officer, and Juan Jaen, Ph.D., who serves as our President. Although we have entered into employment agreements with them, they are not for a specific term and each of them may terminate their employment with us at any time, though we are not aware of any present intention of either of these individuals to leave us.

Drs. Rosen and Jaen have significant experience identifying and developing biopharmaceuticals. Drs. Rosen and Jaen were previously the founders of Flexus Biosciences, Inc., which was acquired by Bristol-Myers Squibb approximately 18 months after it was founded to access its IDO-1 enzyme inhibitor. Previously, Dr. Rosen was Vice President of Therapeutic Discovery at Amgen, overseeing large- and small-molecule drug discovery efforts, and Dr. Jaen was Senior Vice President, Drug Discovery and Chief Scientific Officer at ChemoCentryx, having built a track record of efficiently moving quality product candidates from discovery into clinical development across a wide range of therapeutic areas, including oncology. We believe that their drug discovery and development experience, and overall biopharmaceutical company management experience, would be difficult to replace. However, the historical results, past performance and/or acquisitions of companies with which they were affiliated, including Flexus, do not necessarily predict or guarantee similar results for our company.

Drs. Rosen and Jaen have certain other business and personal commitments outside of serving as the Chief Executive Officer and President of Arcus, including serving on the boards of other companies and foundations.

We expect to expand our development, regulatory and operational capabilities and, as a result, we may encounter difficulties in managing our growth, which could disrupt our operations.

As we advance our research and development programs, we expect to experience significant growth in the number of our employees and the scope of our operations, particularly in the areas of clinical development, quality, regulatory affairs and, if any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, sales, marketing and distribution. To manage our anticipated future growth, we must:

Our future financial performance and our ability to develop, manufacture and commercialize our product candidates will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth, and our management may also have to divert financial and other resources, and a disproportionate amount of its attention away from day-to-day activities in order to devote a substantial amount of time, to managing these growth activities.

We currently rely, and for the foreseeable future will continue to rely, in substantial part on certain third party contract organizations, advisors and consultants to provide certain services, including assuming substantial responsibilities for the conduct of our clinical trials and the manufacture of our product candidates. We cannot assure you that the services of such third party contract organizations, advisors and consultants will continue to be available to us on a timely basis when needed, or that we can find qualified replacements. In addition, if we are unable to effectively manage our outsourced activities or if the quality or accuracy of the services provided by our vendors or consultants is compromised for any reason, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain marketing approval of our product candidates or otherwise advance our business. We cannot assure you that we will be able to properly manage our existing vendors or consultants or find other competent outside vendors and consultants on economically reasonable terms, or at all.

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

Our future success depends on our ability to retain key employees, consultants and advisors and to attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel.

Our industry has experienced a high rate of turnover in recent years. Our ability to compete in the highly competitive biopharmaceuticals industry depends upon our ability to attract, retain and motivate highly skilled and experienced personnel with scientific, medical, regulatory, manufacturing and management skills and experience. We conduct our operations in the San Francisco Bay Area, a region that is home to many other biopharmaceutical companies as well as many academic and research institutions, resulting in fierce competition for qualified personnel. We may not be able to attract or retain qualified personnel in the future due to the intense competition for a limited number of qualified personnel among biopharmaceutical companies. Many of the other biopharmaceutical companies against which we compete have greater financial and other resources, different risk profiles and a longer history in the industry than we do. Our competitors may provide higher compensation, more diverse opportunities and/or better opportunities for career advancement. Any or all of these competing factors may limit our ability to continue to attract and retain high quality personnel, which could negatively affect our ability to successfully develop and commercialize our product candidates and to grow our business and operations as currently contemplated.

Our future growth may depend, in part, on our ability to operate in foreign markets, where we would be subject to additional regulatory burdens and other risks and uncertainties.

Our future profitability may depend, in part, on our ability to commercialize our product candidates in foreign markets for which we may rely on collaboration with third parties. We are not permitted to market or promote any of our product candidates before we receive marketing approval from the applicable regulatory authority in that foreign market, and we may never receive such marketing approval for any of our product candidates. To obtain marketing approval in many foreign countries, we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of such countries regarding safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials and commercial sales, pricing and distribution of our product candidates, and we cannot predict success in these jurisdictions. If we obtain approval of our product candidates and ultimately commercialize our product candidates in foreign markets, we would be subject to additional risks and uncertainties, including:

Foreign sales of our product candidates could also be adversely affected by the imposition of governmental controls, political and economic instability, trade restrictions and changes in tariffs.

We face substantial competition, which may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing products more quickly or marketing them more successfully than us. If their product candidates are shown to be safer or more effective than ours, then our commercial opportunity will be reduced or eliminated.

We compete in the segments of the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other related markets that develop immunotherapies for the treatment of cancer, which is highly competitive with rapidly changing standards of care. As such, our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient, or are less expensive than any products that we may develop or that would render any products that we may develop obsolete or non-competitive. Our competitors also may obtain marketing approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market.

Some of the other products in the same class as our product candidates have already been approved or are further along in development. With respect to our dual adenosine receptor antagonist, AB928, we are aware of several other clinical-stage selective adenosine A_2aR antagonists being developed by AstraZeneca, Corvus, iTeos Therapeutics and Novartis and a clinical-stage selective adenosine A_2bR antagonist being developed by Palobiofarma. For our small-molecule CD73 inhibitor, AB680, we are aware of several pharmaceutical companies developing antibodies against this target, including AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Corvus, Novartis and Tracon, all of whom have advanced their CD73 antibodies into clinical development. Other pharmaceutical companies, such as Boehringer Ingelheim, Calithera and Peloton Therapeutics, have small-molecule programs against this target. To our knowledge, AB680 is the only small molecule CD73 inhibitor in clinical development. Regarding our anti-PD-1 antibody, AB122, multiple large pharmaceutical companies have already received regulatory approvals for their anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies, including AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Pfizer in partnership with Merck KGaA, Regeneron in partnership with Sanofi Genzyme and Roche/Genentech, and there are also many other anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 antibodies in clinical development. With respect to our anti-TIGIT antibody, AB154, we are aware of several pharmaceutical companies developing antibodies against this target, including Astellas, Beigene, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Compugen, Genentech, Merck and Mereo/OncoMed.

As more product candidates within a particular class of drugs proceed through clinical development to regulatory review and approval, the amount and type of clinical data that may be required by regulatory authorities may increase or change. Consequently, the results of our clinical trials for product candidates in those class will likely need to show a risk benefit profile that is competitive with or more favorable than those products and product candidates in order to obtain marketing approval or, if approved, a product label that is favorable for commercialization. If the risk benefit profile is not competitive with those products or product candidates, or if the approval of other agents for an indication or patient population significantly alters the standard of care with which we tested our product candidates, we may have developed a product that is not commercially viable, that we are not able to sell profitably or that is unable to achieve favorable pricing or reimbursement. In such circumstances, our future product revenue and financial condition would be materially and adversely affected.

Many of our competitors, such as large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies like AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Novartis and Roche/Genentech, have longer operating histories and significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical studies, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller and other early stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These third parties compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and subject enrollment 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 of our programs are likely to be their efficacy, safety, convenience, and availability of reimbursement. If we are not successful in developing, commercializing and achieving higher levels of reimbursement than our competitors, we will not be able to compete against them and our business would be materially harmed.

The development and commercialization of AB122 may face strong competition from other anti-PD-1 antibodies that have already received marketing approval by larger companies with substantial resources and more experience developing, manufacturing and commercializing biologic compounds.

As discussed above, some companies, such as AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Pfizer in partnership with Merck KGaA, Regeneron in partnership with Sanofi Genzyme and Roche/Genentech, have anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies that are approved and on the market, and other companies are developing anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies for various oncology indications that are further along in development than AB122. This competitive environment could limit our development opportunities for AB122 or compromise our ability to successfully enroll our ongoing and future clinical trials with AB122 by limiting the availability of clinical trial investigators, sites and/or subjects which could slow, delay or limit the progress of AB122’s development. As a result of these or other problems and risks, we may never receive marketing approval for AB122, may not realize the full commercial potential of AB122 as monotherapy or in combination with our other product candidates, may never recoup our financial investment or may never generate significant value or revenue from this asset.

Our internal information technology systems, or those of our third-party CROs or other contractors or consultants, are subject to failure, security breaches, loss or leakage of data, and other disruptions, which could result in a material disruption of our product candidates’ development programs, compromise sensitive information related to our business or prevent us from accessing critical information, potentially exposing us to notification obligations, liability or reputational damage and otherwise adversely affecting our business.

We are increasingly dependent upon information technology systems, infrastructure and data to operate our business. In the ordinary course of business, we collect, store and transmit confidential information, including but not limited to intellectual property, proprietary business information and personal information. It is critical that we do so in a secure manner to maintain the

confidentiality and integrity of such confidential information. We also have outsourced elements of our operations to third parties, and as a result we manage a number of third party contractors who have access to our confidential information.

Despite the implementation of security measures, given their size and complexity and the increasing amounts of confidential information that they maintain, our internal information technology systems and those of our third-party CROs and other contractors and consultants are vulnerable to breakdown or other damage or interruption from service interruptions, system malfunction, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures, as well as security breaches from inadvertent or intentional actions by our employees, contractors, consultants, business partners, and/or other third parties, or from cyber-attacks by malicious third parties (including 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), which may compromise our system infrastructure or lead to data leakage. We have experienced at least one intrusion into our computer systems, and, although our investigation indicates that it did not have a material adverse effect on our operations, there can be no assurance of a similar result in the future. We cannot assure you that our data protection efforts and our investment in information technology will prevent other breakdowns, data leakages, breaches in our systems or other cyber incidents that could have a material adverse effect upon our reputation, business, operations or financial condition. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and reputational damage and the further development and commercialization of our drug candidates could be delayed. In addition, the loss of clinical trial data for our product candidates could result in delays in our marketing approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. Furthermore, significant disruptions of our internal information technology systems or security breaches could result in the loss, misappropriation, and/or unauthorized access, use, or disclosure of, or the prevention of access to, confidential information (including trade secrets or other intellectual property, proprietary business information, and personal information), which could result in financial, legal, business, and reputational harm to us. In particular, any such event that leads to unauthorized access, use, or disclosure of personal information, including personal information regarding our clinical trial subjects or employees, could harm our reputation directly, compel us to comply with federal and/or state breach notification laws and foreign law equivalents, subject us to mandatory corrective action, and otherwise subject us to liability under laws and regulations that protect the privacy and security of personal information, which could result in significant legal and financial exposure and reputational damages that could potentially have an adverse effect on our business.

We or the third parties upon whom we depend may be adversely affected by earthquakes, fires or other natural disasters and our business continuity and disaster recovery plans may not adequately protect us from a serious disaster.

Our headquarters and main research facility are located in the San Francisco Bay Area, which in the past has experienced severe earthquakes and fires. If these earthquakes, fires, other natural disasters, terrorism and similar unforeseen events beyond our control prevented us from using all or a significant portion of our headquarters or research facility, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible for us to continue our business for a substantial period of time. We do not have a disaster recovery or business continuity plan in place and may incur substantial expenses as a result of the absence or limited nature of our internal or third party service provider disaster recovery and business continuity plans, which, particularly when taken together with our lack of earthquake insurance, could have a material adverse effect on our business. Furthermore, integral parties in our supply chain are operating from single sites, increasing their vulnerability to natural disasters or other sudden, unforeseen and severe adverse events. If such an event were to affect our supply chain, it could have a material adverse effect on our ability to conduct our clinical trials, our development plans and business.

Unfavorable global economic and trade conditions could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Our results of operations could be adversely affected by general conditions in the global economy and in the global financial markets and global trade. To date, most of our initial clinical trial activity has been outside the United States and we expect to continue to conduct portions of our clinical trials outside the United States, and unfavorable economic conditions resulting in the weakening of the U.S. dollar would make those clinical trials more costly to operate. Furthermore, the most recent global financial crisis caused extreme volatility and disruptions in the capital and credit markets. A severe or prolonged economic downturn could result in a variety of risks to our business, including a reduced ability to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. A weak or declining economy could also strain our suppliers, possibly resulting in supply disruption. In addition, proposed tariffs by the Trump administration have included a 25% tariff on raw ingredients for pharmaceuticals, such as the active pharmaceutical ingredients for our product candidates. Given our exclusive relationship with WuXi Biologics, located in China, for the manufacture of AB122 and AB154 and for biologics CMC development, these additional tariffs, if they were to be imposed, would have an adverse impact on our operating results and financial condition. Any of the foregoing could harm our business and we cannot anticipate all of the ways in which the current economic climate and financial market conditions could adversely impact our business.

We conduct clinical development operations through our Australian wholly-owned subsidiary. If we do not effectively manage our operations in Australia, our business and results of operations may suffer.

In 2017, we formed a wholly-owned Australian subsidiary, Arcus Biosciences Australia Pty Ltd, to develop our product candidates in Australia. Due to the geographical distance and lack of employees currently in Australia, as well as our lack of

experience operating in Australia, we may not be able to efficiently or successfully monitor any clinical trials we conduct in Australia nor the development of our product candidates in Australia.

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

We have incurred substantial losses during our history and do not expect to become profitable in the near future, and we may never achieve profitability. Unused losses for the tax year ended December 31, 2017 and prior tax years will carry forward to offset future taxable income, if any, until such unused losses expire. Unused losses generated after December 31, 2017, under new tax legislation will not expire and may be carried forward indefinitely but will be only deductible to the extent of 80% of current year taxable income in any given year. In addition, both our current and our future unused losses may be subject to limitation under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (IRC), if we undergo an “ownership change,” generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in its equity ownership by certain stockholders over a three-year period. We performed an analysis under IRC Section 382 through December 31, 2018 with respect to our net operating loss and credit carryforwards. We concluded that, while an ownership change occurred in previous years as defined under IRC Section 382, we do not expect such ownership changes to result in the expiration of our net operating loss carryforwards prior to utilization.

However, future equity issuances may result in an additional ownership change. As a result, our pre-2018 net operating loss carryforwards may expire prior to being used, or our ability to use all of our pre-change net operating loss carryforwards (NOLs) and other pre-change tax attributes (such as research tax credits) to offset our post-change income or taxes may be subject to limitations. Similar provisions of state tax law may also apply to limit our use of accumulated state tax attributes. In addition, at the state level, there may be periods during which the use of NOLs is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed. Therefore, even if we attain profitability, we may be unable to use all or a material portion of our NOLs and other tax attributes, which could adversely affect our future cash flows.

In December 2017, legislation significantly revised the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. This legislation, among other things, contains significant changes to corporate taxation, including reduction of the corporate tax rate from a top marginal rate of 35% to a flat rate of 21%, limitation of the tax deduction for interest expense to 30% of adjusted earnings (except for certain small businesses), limitation of the deduction for net operating losses to 80% of current year taxable income and elimination of net operating loss carrybacks, one time taxation of offshore earnings at reduced rates regardless of whether they are repatriated, elimination of U.S. tax on foreign earnings (subject to certain important exceptions), immediate deductions for certain new investments instead of deductions for depreciation expense over time, and modifying or repealing many business deductions and credits. We do not expect this tax legislation to have a material impact to our current projection of minimal cash taxes for the near future. However, we continue to examine the impact that this tax legislation may have on our business in the longer term. Accordingly, notwithstanding the reduction in the corporate income tax rate, the overall impact of the new federal tax law is uncertain and our business and financial condition could be adversely affected. In addition, it is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to the newly enacted federal tax law. The impact of this tax legislation on holders of our common stock is also uncertain and could be adverse. We urge prospective investors to consult with their legal and tax advisors with respect to this legislation and the potential tax consequences of investing in or holding our common stock.

Product liability lawsuits against us could cause us to incur substantial liabilities and could limit our commercialization of any product candidates that we may develop.

We face an inherent risk of product liability exposure related to the testing of our product candidates in human clinical trials and will face an even greater risk if we commercially sell any products that we may develop. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against claims that our product candidates or products caused injuries, we could incur substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

Although we maintain product liability insurance coverage, it may not be adequate to cover all liabilities that we may incur. We anticipate that we will need to increase our insurance coverage as our product candidates advance through clinical trials and if we successfully commercialize any products. 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.

Our industry is highly regulated by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory agencies. We must comply with extensive, strictly enforced regulatory requirements to develop, obtain, and maintain marketing approval for any of our product candidates.

Securing FDA or comparable foreign regulatory approval requires the submission of extensive preclinical and clinical data and supporting information for each therapeutic indication to establish the product candidate’s safety and efficacy for its intended use. It takes years to complete the testing of a new drug or biologic and development delays and/or failure can occur at any stage of testing. Any of our present and future clinical trials may be delayed, halted, not authorized, or approval of any of our products may be delayed or may not be obtained due to any of the following:

In addition, information generated during the clinical trial process is susceptible to varying interpretations that could delay, limit, or prevent marketing approval at any stage of the approval process. For example, results from uncontrolled trials, meaning trials in which there is no control group such as a placebo group, are inherently difficult to interpret and may be made more difficult where a clinical trial is evaluating two or more investigational product candidates in combination that have not yet been approved. As a key element of our strategy is the development of intra-portfolio combinations, many of our clinical trials will test multiple investigational product candidates in uncontrolled studies, such as the clinical trials in our Phase 1/1b program for AB928 where we are evaluating AB928 in combination with AB122, and the Phase 1 trial for AB154 which will evaluate AB154 in combination with AB122. Moreover, early positive preclinical or clinical trial results may not be replicated in later clinical trials. As more product candidates within a particular class of drugs proceed through clinical development to regulatory review and approval, the amount and type of clinical data that may be required by regulatory authorities may increase or change. Failure to demonstrate adequately the quality, safety and efficacy of any of our product candidates would delay or prevent marketing approval of the applicable product candidate. We cannot assure you that if clinical trials are completed, either we or our potential collaborators will submit applications for required authorizations to manufacture or market potential products or that any such application will be reviewed and approved by appropriate regulatory authorities in a timely manner, if at all.

Even if we receive marketing approval for a product candidate, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense and subject us to restrictions, withdrawal from the market, or penalties if we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements or if we experience unanticipated problems with our product candidates, when and if approved.

Once marketing approval has been granted by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, the approved product and those entities within the product’s supply chain are subject to continual review by the applicable regulatory authorities. Any marketing approval that we receive for our product candidates may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing follow-up trials or surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product. In addition, if the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities approve any of our product candidates, we will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements with regard to labeling, packaging, adverse event reporting, storage, distribution, advertising, promotion, recordkeeping and submission of safety and other post-market information.

Manufacturers of our products and manufacturers’ facilities are required to comply with cGMP regulations, which include requirements related to quality control and quality assurance as well as the corresponding maintenance of records and documentation.

Further, regulatory authorities must approve these manufacturing facilities before they can be used to manufacture our products, and these facilities are subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP regulations. Accordingly, we and others with whom we work must continue to expend time, money and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production and quality control. We will also be required to report certain adverse reactions and production problems, if any, to the FDA and other comparable regulatory authorities and to comply with requirements concerning advertising and promotion for our products. If we, any future collaboration partner or a regulatory authority discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, a regulatory authority may impose restrictions on that product, the collaboration partner, the manufacturer or us, including requiring withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing.

The FDA as well as other comparable regulatory authorities closely regulate the post-approval marketing and promotion of therapeutic products to ensure they are marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling and regulatory requirements. The FDA and other comparable regulatory authorities also impose stringent restrictions on communications regarding off-label use and if we do not restrict the marketing of our products only to their approved indications, we may be subject to enforcement action for off-label marketing. If we, our product candidates or the manufacturing facilities for our product candidates are not found to be in compliance with regulatory requirements of the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, we could be subject to administrative or judicially imposed sanctions, including:

Widely publicized events concerning the safety risk of certain products have resulted in their withdrawal from the market, revisions to product labeling that further limit use of the products and the imposition by the FDA of REMS to ensure that the benefits of the product outweigh its risks. In addition, because of the serious public health risks of high profile adverse safety events with certain products, the FDA may require, as a condition of approval, costly REMS programs.

The regulatory requirements and policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted for which we may also be required to comply. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or in other countries. If we or any future collaboration partner are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we or such collaboration partner, as applicable, will not be permitted to market our future products and our business will suffer.

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

We and any potential collaborators may be subject to federal, state, and foreign data protection laws and regulations (i.e., laws and regulations that address privacy and data security). In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including federal health information privacy laws, state data breach notification laws, state health information privacy laws, and federal and state consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the FTC Act), that govern the collection, use, disclosure, and protection of health-related and other personal information could apply to our operations or the operations of our collaborators. In addition, we may obtain health information from third parties (including research institutions from which we obtain clinical trial data) that are subject to privacy and security requirements under federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009 (HITECH). Depending on the facts and circumstances, we could be subject to criminal penalties if we knowingly obtain, use, or disclose individually identifiable health information maintained by a HIPAA-covered entity in a manner that is not authorized or permitted by HIPAA.

The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data security continues to evolve, and we expect that there will continue to be new proposed laws, regulations and industry standards relating to privacy and data security in the United States, the EU and other jurisdictions. This increased focus on privacy and data security issues may negatively affect our operating results and our business. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA), which takes effect on January 1, 2020, gives California residents expanded rights to access and require deletion of their personal information, opt out of certain personal information sharing, and receive detailed information about how their personal information is used. In addition, the CCPA authorizes private lawsuits to recover statutory damages for certain data breaches. While it exempts some data regulated by HIPAA and certain clinical trials data, the CCPA may increase our compliance costs and potential liability with respect to other personal information we collect about California residents. Some observers note that the CCPA could mark the beginning of a trend toward more stringent privacy legislation in the U.S., which could increase our potential liability and adversely affect our business.

International data protection laws also apply to health-related and other personal data obtained outside the United States. In the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation) took effect in May 2018 and imposes, in some cases, stricter obligations than data protection laws in the United States on the use of health-related and other personal data. These requirements include the obligation to appoint data protection officers in certain circumstances, rights for individuals to be “forgotten” and to data portability, and the obligation to make public notification of significant data breaches. Under the General Data Protection Regulation, data protection authorities can also impose administrative fines of up to 4% of our total worldwide turnover or up to €20 million (whichever is higher). In addition, the General Data Protection Regulation only permits the transfer of personal data outside the European Economic Area (EEA) to countries that offer a level of data protection deemed adequate by the European Commission, unless an approved data transfer mechanism is in place. Some of the approved data transfer mechanisms face legal challenges in the EU, which adds to the complexity of transferring personal data outside the EEA. The General Data Protection Regulation increases our responsibility and liability in relation to personal data that we process, and we must put in place additional mechanisms to ensure compliance with the new EU data protection rules.

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

Changes in healthcare law and implementing regulations, as well as changes in healthcare policy, may impact our business in ways that we cannot currently predict, and may have a significant adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

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

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or collectively the Affordable Care Act, substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both the government and private insurers, and significantly impacts the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. The Affordable Care Act, among other things: (i) introduced a new average manufacturer price definition for drugs and biologics that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected and not generally dispensed through retail community pharmacies; (ii) increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and expanded rebate liability from fee-for-service Medicaid utilization to include the utilization of Medicaid managed care organizations as well; (iii) established a branded prescription drug fee that pharmaceutical manufacturers of branded prescription drugs must pay to the federal government; (iv) expanded the list of covered entities eligible to participate in the 340B drug pricing program by adding new entities to the program; (v) established a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must now agree to offer 70% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D; (vi) extended manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability to covered drugs dispensed to individuals who are enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations; (vii) expanded eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs by, among other things, allowing states to offer Medicaid coverage to additional individuals and by adding new mandatory eligibility categories for individuals with income at or below 133% of the federal poverty level, thereby potentially increasing manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability; (viii) created a licensure framework for follow on biologic products; and (ix) established a Center for Medicare Innovation at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending.

Since its enactment, there have been judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act, as well as recent efforts by the Trump administration to repeal or replace certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. Since January 2017, President Trump has signed two Executive Orders designed to delay the implementation of certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act or otherwise circumvent some of the requirements for health insurance mandated by the Affordable Care Act. The Trump administration also discontinued the payment of cost-sharing reduction (CSR) payments to insurance companies, as Congress has not approved the appropriation of funds for the CSR payments. In addition, CMS issued a final rule, effective for plan year 2020 that gives states greater flexibility in setting benchmarks for insurers in the individual and small group marketplaces, which may have the effect of relaxing the essential health benefits required under the Affordable Care Act for plans sold through such marketplaces. While Congress has not passed repeal legislation, the newly enacted federal income tax law 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.” Certain other changes to the Affordable Care Act, such as the delay in the implementation of certain Affordable Care Act-mandated fees, and changes to close the coverage gap in most Medicare drug plans, commonly referred to as the “donut hole”, were recently enacted or implemented, and the effect of these changes is unknown. Congress may consider other legislation to repeal and replace elements of the Affordable Care Act. Further, on December 14, 2018, a U.S. District Court Judge in Texas ruled that Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress as part of the recent federal income tax law. While such U.S. District Court Judge, as well as the Trump administration and CMS, have stated that the ruling will have no immediate effect pending appeal of the decision, it is unclear how this decision, subsequent appeals, and other efforts to repeal and replace Affordable Care Act will impact Affordable Care Act and our business.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. These changes include aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year pursuant to the Budget Control Act of 2011 and subsequent laws, which began in 2013 and will remain in effect through 2027 unless additional Congressional action is taken. New laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which may materially adversely affect customer demand and affordability for our products and, accordingly, the results of our financial operations. Additional changes that may affect our business include the expansion of new programs such as Medicare payment for performance initiatives for physicians under the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) which will first affect physician payment in 2019. At this time, it is unclear how the introduction of the Medicare quality payment program will impact overall physician reimbursement.

Also, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over the manner in which drug manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which have resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed bills, as well as state efforts, designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. At the federal level, the Trump administration released a “Blueprint” to lower drug prices and reduce out of pocket costs of drugs that contains additional proposals to increase drug manufacturer competition, increase the negotiating power of certain federal healthcare programs, incentivize manufacturers to lower the list price of their products, and reduce the out of pocket costs of drug products paid by consumers. Although a number of these measures and other potential proposals, may require additional authorization to become effective, Congress and the Trump administration have each indicated that it will continue to seek new legislative and/or administrative measures to control drug costs. Individual states in the United States have become increasingly aggressive in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures. For example, in 2017, the California State Assembly approved SB17, which requires pharmaceutical companies to notify health insurers and government health plans at least 60 days before any scheduled increases in the prices of their products if they exceed 16% over a two-year period, and further requiring pharmaceutical companies to explain the reasons for such increase. Effective in 2016, Vermont passed a law requiring certain manufacturer identified by the state to justify their price increases.

We expect that these and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and lower reimbursement, and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government-funded programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our drugs, once marketing approval is obtained.

In the European Union, coverage and reimbursement status of any product candidates for which we obtain regulatory approval are provided for by the national laws of EU Member States. The requirements may differ across the EU Member States. Also at national level, actions have been taken to enact transparency laws regarding payments between pharmaceutical companies and health care professionals.

We will be subject to applicable fraud and abuse, transparency, government price reporting, and other healthcare laws and regulations. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face substantial penalties.

Healthcare providers, physicians and third-party payors will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any future product candidates we may develop and any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our arrangements with third-party payors and customers may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may affect the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we would market, sell and distribute our products. Even though we do not and will not control referrals of healthcare services or bill directly to Medicare, Medicaid or other third-party payors, federal and state healthcare laws and regulations pertaining to fraud and abuse and patients’ rights are and will be applicable to our business. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include, but are not limited to:

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

The scope and enforcement of each of these laws is uncertain and subject to rapid change in the current environment of healthcare reform, especially in light of the lack of applicable precedent and regulations. Federal and state enforcement bodies have recently increased their scrutiny of interactions between healthcare companies and healthcare providers, which has led to a number of investigations, prosecutions, convictions and settlements in the healthcare industry. Responding to investigations can be time-and resource-consuming and can divert management’s attention from the business. Any such investigation or settlement could increase our costs or otherwise have an adverse effect on our business.

Ensuring that our business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will likely be costly. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other current or future governmental laws and regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, additional reporting obligations and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could substantially disrupt our operations. If any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs.

We are subject to certain U.S. and foreign anti-corruption, anti-money laundering, export control, sanctions, and other trade laws and regulations. We can face serious consequences for violations.

U.S. and foreign anti-corruption, anti-money laundering, export control, sanctions, and other trade laws and regulations (collectively, Trade Laws) prohibit, among other things, companies and their employees, agents, clinical research organizations, legal counsel, accountants, consultants, contractors, and other partners from authorizing, promising, offering, providing, soliciting, or receiving directly or indirectly, corrupt or improper payments or anything else of value to or from recipients in the public or private sector. Violations of Trade Laws can result in substantial criminal fines and civil penalties, imprisonment, the loss of trade privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm, and other consequences. We have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or government-affiliated hospitals, universities, and other organizations. We also expect our non-U.S. activities to increase over time. We expect to rely on third parties for research, preclinical studies, and clinical trials and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, patent registrations, and other marketing approvals. We can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of our personnel, agents, or partners, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have prior knowledge of such activities.

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

We, and the third parties with whom we share our facilities, are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures and the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. Each of our operations involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological and radioactive materials. Each of our operations also produce hazardous waste products. We generally contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and wastes. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials. We could be held liable for any resulting damages in the event of contamination or injury resulting from the use of hazardous materials by us or the third parties with whom we share our facilities, and any liability could exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties.

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

In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. These current or future laws and regulations may impair our research and development. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.

The stock price of our common stock has been and may continue to be volatile or may decline regardless of our operating performance.

The market price of our common stock has fluctuated and may fluctuate significantly in response to numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control, including:

In addition, the stock markets have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have affected and continue to affect the market prices of equity securities of many immuno-oncology companies. Stock prices of many immuno-oncology companies have fluctuated in a manner unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of those companies. In the past, stockholders have filed securities class action litigation following periods of market volatility. If we were to become involved in securities litigation, it could subject us to substantial costs, divert resources and the attention of management from our business and adversely affect our business.

Sales of substantial amounts of our outstanding shares may cause the price of our common stock to decline.

The price of our common stock could decline if there are substantial sales of our common stock, particularly sales by our directors, executive officers and significant stockholders, or if there is a large number of shares of our common stock available for sale and the market perceives that sales will occur. Certain of our stockholders have rights, subject to some conditions, to require us to file registration statements covering their shares or to include their shares in registration statements that we may file for ourselves or our stockholders, subject to market standoff and lockup agreements. We have also registered shares of common stock that we have issued and may issue under our employee equity incentive plans. These shares can be sold freely in the public market upon issuance, subject to vesting conditions and, in the case of our affiliates, volume limitations under Rule 144 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

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

The trading price of our common stock will depend in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. To date, only a few securities analysts have published research on our company and if they were to downgrade our common stock or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our common stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts were to cease coverage of us or fail to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our common stock could decrease, which might cause our common stock price and trading volume to decline.

If we fail to maintain proper and effective internal controls, our ability to produce accurate and timely financial statements could be impaired, which could result in sanctions or other penalties that would harm our business.

We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the rules and regulations of the New York Stock Exchange. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls over financial reporting. Commencing with our fiscal year ending December 31, 2019, we must perform system and process design evaluation and testing of the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting to allow management to report on the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting in our Form 10-K filing for that year, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. This will require that we incur substantial additional professional fees and internal costs to expand our accounting and finance functions and that we expend significant management efforts. We have never been required to test our internal controls within a specified period and, as a result, we may experience difficulty in meeting these reporting requirements in a timely manner.

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

If we are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, or if we are unable to maintain proper and effective internal controls over financial reporting, we may not be able to produce timely and accurate financial statements. If that were to happen, our investors could lose confidence in our reported financial information, the market price of our stock could decline and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the SEC or other regulatory authorities.

Our disclosure controls and procedures may not prevent or detect all errors or acts of fraud.

We are subject to the periodic reporting requirements of the Exchange Act. We designed our disclosure controls and procedures to reasonably assure that information we must disclose in reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to management, and recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. We believe that any disclosure controls and procedures or internal controls and procedures, no matter how well-conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.

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

We are an “emerging growth company,” and we cannot be certain if the reduced reporting requirements applicable to emerging growth companies will make our common stock less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, as amended (the JOBS Act) and we intend to take advantage of some of the exemptions from reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including:

In addition, as an “emerging growth company” the JOBS Act allows us to delay adoption of new or revised accounting pronouncements applicable to public companies until such pronouncements are made applicable to private companies. We have elected to use this extended transition period under the JOBS Act. As a result, our consolidated financial statements may not be comparable to the financial statements of issuers who are required to comply with the effective dates for new or revised accounting standards that are applicable to public companies, which may make comparison of our financials to those of other public companies more difficult.

We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we will rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be more volatile. We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions until we are no longer an emerging growth company. We will remain an emerging growth company until the earlier of (1) the last day of the fiscal year (a) ending December 31, 2023, (b) in which we have total annual gross revenue of at least $1.07 billion or (c) in which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of our common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the prior June 30th and (2) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period.

We have never declared nor paid cash dividends on our capital stock. We currently intend to retain any future earnings to finance the operation and expansion of our business, and we do not expect to declare or pay any dividends in the foreseeable future. Consequently, stockholders must rely on sales of their common stock after price appreciation, which may never occur, as the only way to realize any future gains on their investment.

The concentration of our stock ownership will likely limit our stockholders’ ability to influence corporate matters, including the ability to influence the outcome of director elections and other matters requiring stockholder approval.

Based upon shares outstanding as of September 30, 2019, our executive officers, directors and the holders of more than 5% of our outstanding common stock, in the aggregate, beneficially owned approximately 56.0% of our common stock. As a result, these stockholders, acting together, will have significant influence over all matters that require approval by our stockholders, including the election of directors and approval of significant corporate transactions. Corporate actions might be taken even if other stockholders oppose them. This concentration of ownership might also have the effect of delaying or preventing a change of control of our company that other stockholders may view as beneficial.

Delaware law and provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws could make a merger, tender offer or proxy contest difficult, thereby depressing the trading price of our common stock.

Our status as a Delaware corporation and the anti-takeover provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law may discourage, delay or prevent a change in control by prohibiting us from engaging in a business combination with an interested stockholder for a period of three years after the person becomes an interested stockholder, even if a change of control would be beneficial to our existing stockholders. In addition, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws contain provisions that may make the acquisition of our company more difficult, including the following:

In addition, as a Delaware corporation, we are subject to Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. These provisions may prohibit large stockholders, in particular those owning 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock, from merging or combining with us for a certain period of time. A Delaware corporation may opt out of this provision by express provision in its original certificate of incorporation or by amendment to its certificate of incorporation or bylaws approved by its stockholders. However, we have not opted out of this provision.

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

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

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation will provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, any action asserting a breach of fiduciary duty, any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to the Delaware General Corporation Law, our certificate of incorporation or our bylaws or any action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. This choice of forum provision may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees and may discourage these types of lawsuits. Alternatively, if a court were to find the choice of forum provision contained in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions.

On March 14, 2018, our Registration Statements on Form S-1 (File Nos. 333-223086 and 333-223670) were declared effective by the SEC for our initial public offering of common stock, pursuant to which we sold an aggregate of 9,200,000 shares of our common stock at an initial public offering price of $15.00 per share. There has been no material change in the planned use of proceeds from our initial public offering as described in our Prospectus.

The following table summarizes repurchases of our common stock during the third quarter of fiscal 2019:

All of the shares repurchased, as reflected in the table above, were repurchases of unvested shares of our common stock that had been issued upon early exercise of stock options. Upon termination of employment of a person holding unvested shares, we are entitled to repurchase the unvested shares.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

Delaware	47-3898435
( State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)	(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
3928 Point Eden Way Hayward, CA 94545
(Address of principal executive offices)

Titles of Each Class		Trading Symbol(s)		Name of Each Exchange on which Registered
Common Stock, Par Value $0.0001 Per Share		RCUS		The New York Stock Exchange

		Page
PART I.	FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1.	Financial Statements	1
	Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets	1
	Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss	2
	Condensed Consolidated Statement of Convertible Preferred Stock and Stockholder's Equity	3
	Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows	4
	Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements	5
Item 2.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	17
Item 3.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	23
Item 4.	Controls and Procedures	23
PART II.	OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1.	Legal Proceedings	24
Item 1A.	Risk Factors	24
Item 2.	Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds	62
Item 3.	Defaults Upon Senior Securities	62
Item 4.	Mine Safety Disclosures	62
Item 5.	Other Information	62
Item 6.	Exhibits	63
Signatures		64

	As of September 30, 2019
	As Reported		Balances without the Adoption of Topic 606		Effect of Adoption Higher/ (Lower)
Current portion of deferred revenue	$	7,000	$	7,917	$	(917	)
Long-term portion of deferred revenue		13,772		15,574		(1,802	)
Accumulated deficit	$	—	$	—	$	(2,399	)

	Three Months Ended September 30, 2019
	As Reported			Without the Adoption of Topic 606			Effect of Adoption Higher/ (Lower)
Collaboration revenues	$	1,750		$	1,618		$	132
Net loss		(22,352	)		(22,484	)	$	132
Net loss per share, basic and diluted	$	(0.51	)	$	(0.51	)	$	—

	Nine Months Ended September 30, 2019
	As Reported			Without the Adoption of Topic 606			Effect of Adoption Higher/ (Lower)
Collaboration revenues	$	5,250		$	4,743		$	507
Net loss		(68,112	)		(68,619	)	$	507
Net loss per share, basic and diluted	$	(1.56	)	$	(1.57	)	$	—

	December 31, 2018			Adjustment Due to the Adoption of Topic 606			January 1, 2019
Current portion of deferred revenue	$	6,250		$	750		$	7,000
Long-term portion of deferred revenue		16,984			(2,962	)		14,022
Accumulated deficit	$	(122,828	)	$	2,212		$	(120,616	)

	September 30, 2019		December 31, 2018		September 30, 2018		December 31, 2017
Cash and cash equivalents	$	78,992	$	71,064	$	74,889	$	98,426
Restricted cash		203		203		203		203
Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash	$	79,195	$	71,267	$	75,092	$	98,629

	Fair Value Measurements at September 30, 2019
	Total		Level 1		Level 2		Level 3
Assets
Money market funds	$	64,611	$	64,611	$	—	$	—
Corporate securities and commercial paper		51,630		—		51,630		—
U.S. government treasury and agency securities		80,740		—		80,740		—
	$	196,981	$	64,611	$	132,370	$	—

	Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2018
	Total		Level 1		Level 2		Level 3
Assets
Money market funds	$	45,017	$	45,017	$	—	$	—
U.S. government treasury and agency securities		103,940		—		103,940		—
Corporate securities and commercial paper		110,768		—		110,768		—
	$	259,725	$	45,017	$	214,708	$	—

	Fair Value Measurements at September 30, 2019
	Amortized Cost		Unrealized Gain		Unrealized Loss		Fair Value
Money market funds	$	64,611	$	—	$	—	$	64,611
Corporate securities and commercial paper		51,618		12		—		51,630
U.S. government treasury and agency securities		80,698		42		—		80,740
	$	196,927	$	54	$	—	$	196,981

	Three months ended September 30,		Nine months ended September 30,
Revenue recognized in the period from:	2019		2019
Amounts included in deferred revenue at the beginning of the period	$	1,750	$	5,250
Performance obligations satisfied in previous period	$	—	$	—

	Three months ended September 30,				Nine months ended September 30,
	2019		2018		2019		2018
Research and development		978	$	638		2,693	$	1,679
General and administrative		1,762		410		3,851		1,141
Total stock-based compensation	$	2,740	$	1,048	$	6,544	$	2,820

	As of September 30, 2019			As of December 31, 2018
Scientific equipment	$	8,036		$	6,628
Furniture and equipment		1,120			813
Capitalized software		146			146
Leasehold improvements		10,834			10,828
Construction in progress		240			335
Total		20,376			18,750
Less: Accumulated depreciation and amortization		(10,365	)		(7,643	)
Property and equipment, net	$	10,011		$	11,107

	As of September 30, 2019		As of December 31, 2018
Accrued personnel expenses	$	3,455	$	2,833
Accrued research and development expenses		5,805		2,816
Professional fees		281		211
Other		121		163
Total	$	9,662	$	6,023

	Three Months Ended September 30,						Change
	2019			2018			$			%
Collaboration and license revenue	$	1,750		$	4,291		$	(2,541	)		(59	)%
Operating expenses:
Research and development		17,241			12,859			4,382			34	%
General and administrative		7,758			3,577			4,181			117	%
Loss from operations		(23,249	)		(12,145	)		(11,104	)		91	%
Non-operating income (expense):
Interest and other income, net		1,254			1,519			(265	)		(17	)%
Share of loss from equity method investee		(357	)		(186	)		(171	)		92	%
Total non-operating income, net		897			1,333			(436	)		(33	)%
Net loss	$	(22,352	)	$	(10,812	)	$	(11,540	)		107	%

	Nine Months Ended September 30,
Net cash (used in) provided by:	2019			2018
Operating activities	$	(63,991	)	$	(35,889	)
Investing activities		71,316			(115,951	)
Financing activities		603			128,303
Net increase in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash	$	7,928		$	(23,537	)

Period	Total Number of Shares Purchased		Average Price Paid Per Share		Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs		Maximum Number of Shares that May Yet be Repurchased Under the Plans or Programs
July 1, 2019, to July 31, 2019		6,076	$	2.76		—	$	—
August 1, 2019 to August 31, 2019		—		—		—		—
September 1, 2019 to September 30, 2019		6,223		4.14		—		—
Total		12,299				—	$	—

Exhibit Number	Exhibit Description	Incorporated by Reference
Exhibit Number	Exhibit Description	Form	File No.	Exhibit	Filing Date

3.1	Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation	10-Q	001-38419	3.1	May 9, 2018

3.2	Amended and Restated Bylaws	10-Q	001-38419	3.2	May 9, 2018

10.1*	Offer Letter, dated May 20, 2019, between the Company and Jason Barker

10.2*	Separation Agreement, dated August 29, 2019, between the Company and Rekha Hemrajani

31.1*	Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

31.2*	Certification of Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

32.1†	Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

32.2†	Certification of Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

101.INS	XBRL Instance Document

101.SCH	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document

101.CAL	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document

101.DEF	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document

101.LAB	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document

101.PRE	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document

		ARCUS BIOSCIENCES, INC.

Date:	November 5, 2019	By:	/s/ Terry Rosen
			Terry Rosen, Ph.D.
			Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)

Date:	November 5, 2019	By:	/s/ Jason Barker
			Jason Barker
			Vice President, Finance (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)