UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017

2020

OR

TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from to

Commission File Number: 001-35966

bluebird bio, Inc.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

Charter

Delaware

13-3680878

Delaware

13-3680878
(State or Other Jurisdiction of


Incorporation or Organization)

(IRS Employer


Identification No.)

60 Binney Street

Cambridge, Massachusetts

02142

Cambridge, Massachusetts
02142
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)

(Zip Code)

(339) 499-9300

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)


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

Title of each classTrading Symbol(s)Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock, $0.01 par value per shareBLUEThe NASDAQ Stock Market LLC

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    YesNo

¨

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

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

¨

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

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  

¨

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

Large accelerated filer

Accelerated filer

Non-accelerated filer

  (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Smaller reporting company

Emerging growth company

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attested to its management's assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report.  
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).    Yes    No

The aggregate market value of common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant based on the closing price of the registrant’s common stock as reported on the Nasdaq Global Select Market on June 30, 2017,2020, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second quarter, was $4,746,861,154.

$4,040,592,242.

As of February 16, 2018,18, 2021, there were 49,983,51467,141,044 shares of the registrant’s common stock, par value $0.01 per share, outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement relating to its 20182021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K where indicated. Such Proxy Statement will be filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year to which this report relates.




Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Page

PART I.

Page

Item 1.

Business

1

43

73

73

73

73

74

76

77

93

93

93

93

95

96

96

96

96

96

97

97




Table of Contents
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties, as well as assumptions that, if they never materialize or prove incorrect, could cause our results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. We make such forward-looking statements pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and other federal securities laws. All statements other than statements of historical facts contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “contemplate,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” “seek,” “should,” “target,” “would,” or the negative of these words or other comparable terminology. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about:

the initiation, timing, progress and results of our preclinical and clinical studies, and our research and development programs;

our ability to advance product candidates into, and successfully complete, clinical studies;

the initiation, timing, progress and results of our preclinical and clinical studies, and our research and development programs;

our ability to advance our viral vector and drug product manufacturing capabilities;

our ability to advance product candidates into, and successfully complete, clinical studies;

the timing or likelihood of regulatory filings and approvals for our product candidates;

our ability to advance our viral vector and drug product manufacturing capabilities, and to ensure adequate supply of our viral vectors and drug products;

the timing or success of commercialization of our product candidates, if approved;

the timing or likelihood of regulatory filings and approvals for our product candidates;

the pricing and reimbursement of our product candidates, if approved;

the timing or success of commercialization of our approved product, and any future approved products;

the implementation of our business model, strategic plans for our business, product candidates and technology;

our ability to obtain adequate pricing and reimbursement of our approved product, and any future approved products;

the scope of protection we are able to establish and maintain for intellectual property rights covering our product candidates and technology;

the implementation of our business model, strategic plans for our business, product candidates and technology;

estimates of our expenses, future revenues, capital requirements and our needs for additional financing;

the scope of protection we are able to establish and maintain for intellectual property rights covering our approved product, product candidates and technology;

the potential benefits of strategic collaboration agreements and our ability to enter into strategic arrangements;

estimates of our expenses, future revenues, capital requirements and our needs for additional financing;

our ability to maintain and establish collaborations and licenses;

the potential benefits of strategic collaboration agreements and our ability to enter into strategic arrangements;

developments relating to our competitors and our industry; and

our ability to maintain and establish collaborations and licenses;

other risks and uncertainties, including those listed under Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors.

developments relating to our competitors and our industry;

the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic;
the timing and results of our investigation into the cause of recent safety events in our HGB-206 clinical study, and whether there is a relationship with the use of our lentiviral vector in the manufacture of LentiGlobin for SCD;
the timing, effects, costs, and benefits, including the tax treatment of the planned separation of our portfolio of products and programs into two independent, publicly-traded companies; and
other risks and uncertainties, including those listed under Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors.
Any forward-looking statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K reflect our current views with respect to future events or to our future financial performance and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations include, among other things, those listed under Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Given these uncertainties, you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Except as required by law, we assume no obligation to update or revise these forward-looking statements for any reason, even if new information becomes available in the future.

This Annual Report on Form 10-K also contains estimates, projections and other information concerning our industry, our business, and the markets for certain diseases, including data regarding the estimated size of those markets, and the incidence and prevalence of certain medical conditions. Information that is based on estimates, forecasts, projections, market research or similar methodologies is inherently subject to uncertainties and actual events or circumstances may differ materially from events and circumstances reflected in this information. Unless otherwise expressly stated, we obtained this industry, business, market and other data from reports, research surveys, studies and similar data prepared by market research firms and other third parties, industry, medical and general publications, government data and similar sources.




Table of Contents

Summary of the Material and Other Risks Associated with Our Business
Below is a summary of the material risks to our business, operations and the investment in our common stock. This summary does not address all of the risks that we face. Risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we presently deem less significant may also impair our business operations. Additional discussion of the risks summarized in this risk factor summary, and other risks that we face, can be found below under the heading “Risk Factors” and should be carefully considered, together with other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K in its entirety before making investment decisions regarding our common stock.

The EMA has paused the renewal procedure for ZYNTEGLO's conditional marketing authorization while the EMA's pharmacovigilance risk assessment committee reviews the risk-benefit assessment for ZYNTEGLO and determines whether any additional pharmacovigilance measures are necessary, and we have no assurance as to what the EMA may require, or the timing, if ever, of when ZYNTEGLO may return to the market in Europe.
The FDA has placed our HGB-206 and HGB-210 clinical studies of LentiGlobin for SCD on clinical hold, and we have no assurance as to what the FDA may require, or the timing, if ever, of when the clinical hold may be lifted.
We have limited experience as a commercial company and the marketing and sale of ZYNTEGLO or future products may be unsuccessful or less successful than anticipated.
The commercial success of ZYNTEGLO, and of any future products, will depend upon the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payers and others in the medical community. If we fail to obtain sufficient pricing or reimbursement approval for ZYNTEGLO or any future products, our revenues may be adversely affected and our business may suffer.
If the market opportunities for our product or any future products are smaller than we believe they are, and if we are not able to successfully identify patients and achieve significant market share, our revenues may be adversely affected and our business may suffer.
We rely on a complex supply chain for ZYNTEGLO and our product candidates. The manufacture and delivery of our lentiviral vector and drug products present significant challenges for us, and we may not be able to produce our vector and drug products at the quality, quantities, locations or timing needed to support commercialization and clinical programs. In addition, we may encounter challenges with engaging or coordinating with qualified treatment centers needed to support commercialization.
We cannot predict when or if we will obtain marketing approval to commercialize our product candidates, and the marketing approval of our product and any future products may ultimately be for more narrow indications than we expect.
We face intense competition and rapid technological change and the possibility that our competitors may develop therapies that are more advanced or effective than ours, which may adversely affect our financial condition and our ability to successfully commercialize our product and any future products. If our competitors obtain orphan drug exclusivity for products that regulatory authorities determine constitute the same drug and treat the same indications as our product or any future products, we may not be able to have competing products approved by the applicable regulatory authority for a significant period of time.
We may not be successful in our efforts to identify or discover additional product candidates.
We are dependent on BMS for the successful development and commercialization of ide-cel and bb21217. If BMS does not devote sufficient resources to the development of ide-cel and bb21217, is unsuccessful in its efforts, or chooses to terminate its agreements with us, our business will be materially harmed.
We have incurred significant losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future.
From time to time, we will need to raise additional funding, which may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Failure to obtain this necessary capital when needed may force us to delay, limit or terminate our product development efforts or other operations.
Our business may be materially and adversely affected by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic has had, and will likely continue to have, an impact on various aspects of our business and that of third parties on which we rely. The extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic impacts our business will depend in part on future developments, which are uncertain and unpredictable in nature.



PART I

Item 1. Business

Overview

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company committed to researching, developing, and commercializing potentially transformative gene therapies for severe genetic diseases and cancer. With our lentiviral-based gene therapy and gene editing capabilities, weWe have built an integrated product platform with broad therapeutic potential in a variety of indications.indications based on our lentiviral gene addition platform, gene editing and cancer immunotherapy capabilities. We believe that gene therapy for severe genetic diseases has the potential to change the way patients living with these patientsdiseases are treated by correctingaddressing the underlying genetic defect that is the cause of their disease, rather than offering treatments that only address their symptoms. Our clinical programs in severe genetic diseasesdisease include ourbetibeglogene autotemcel (beti-cel; formerly LentiGlobin® product candidate as a treatment gene therapy for transfusion-dependent β-thalassemia, or TDT, and severeβ-thalassemia); LentiGlobin gene therapy for sickle cell disease, or severe SCD,SCD; and ourelivaldogene autotemcel (eli-cel; formerly Lenti-D product candidate as a treatment gene therapy for cerebral adrenoleukodystrophy, or CALD, a rare hereditary neurological disorder.CALD). Our programs in oncology are built upon our leadership in lentiviral gene delivery and T cell engineering, with a focusfocused on developing novel T cell-based immunotherapies, including chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) and T cell receptor (TCR) T cell therapies. bb2121Idecabtagene vicleucel, or ide-cel, and bb21217 our lead product candidates in oncology, are CAR TCAR-T cell product candidates for the treatment of multiple myeloma and partnered under our collaboration arrangement with Bristol-Myers Squibb, or BMS.
In January 2021, we announced our intent to separate our severe genetic disease and oncology programs into two separate, independent publicly traded companies, bluebird bio, Inc. and a new company, which we refer to as Oncology NewCo in this annual report on Form 10-K. bluebird bio, Inc. intends to retain focus on our severe genetic disease programs and Oncology NewCo is expected to focus on our oncology programs. The transaction is expected to be completed in late 2021 and is anticipated to be tax-free, subject to receipt of a favorable Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, ruling.
In June 2019, we received conditional marketing approval from the European Commission for beti-cel as a treatment for patients 12 years and older with transfusion-dependent β-thalassemia, or TDT, who do not have exclusively licensed to Celgene Corporation,a β00 genotype, for whom hematopoietic stem cell, or Celgene.

HSC, transplantation is appropriate, but a human leukocyte antigen-matched, or HLA, related HSC donor is not available. We have begun commercializing beti-cel as ZYNTEGLO in the European Union, or EU, however in February 2021 we temporarily suspended marketing of ZYNTEGLO in light of a suspected unexpected serious adverse reaction, or SUSAR, of acute myeloid leukemia, and a SUSAR of myelodysplastic syndrome in our HGB-206 study of LentiGlobin gene therapy for SCD which is manufactured using the same vector as ZYNTEGLO. Additionally, the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, has paused the renewal procedure for ZYNTEGLO's conditional marketing authorization while the EMA's pharmacovigilance risk assessment committee reviews the risk-benefit assessment for ZYNTEGLO and determines whether any additional pharmacovigilance measures are necessary. We are developing our LentiGlobin product candidate with a goal of filing for regulatory approvalengaged in the US and EU for different genotypes of TDT and for severe SCD.  Both TDT and severe SCD are rare, hereditary blood disorders that often lead to severe anemia and shortened lifespans.  We are currently conducting five clinical studies of our LentiGlobin product candidate: a Phase I/II study in the United States, Australia, and Thailand for the treatment of subjects with TDT, called the Northstar Study (HGB-204); a multi-site, international, Phase III study for the treatment of subjects with TDT and non-β00 genotypes, called the Northstar-2 Study (HGB-207); a multi-site, international, Phase III study for the treatment of subjects with TDT and a β00 genotype, called the Northstar 3 Study (HGB-212); a single-center Phase I/II study in France for the treatment of subjects with TDT or severe SCD (HGB-205); and a multi-site Phase I study in the United States for the treatment of subjects with severe SCD (HGB-206).  We have achieved our enrollment target of 18 patients in the Northstar Study, and we have achieved our enrollment target for the adult and adolescent cohort in the Northstar 2 Study.  We are currently planning to file a marketing authorization application in the EU for LentiGlobin for the treatment of adult and adolescent patients with TDT and a non-β00 genotype during the second half of 2018, with a future biologics licensing application, or BLA, planned in the United States.  We are also engageddiscussions with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, andfor regulatory approval of beti-cel in the United States regarding our proposed development plans for beti-cel as a treatment for patients with TDT. Contingent upon successful resolution of the FDA's concerns arising out of the safety events in our SCD program, we currently expect to complete our biologics license application, or BLA, submission for beti-cel in mid-2021 for the treatment of all patients with TDT across all genotypes. We are engaged with the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, in discussions regarding our proposed development plans for ZYNTEGLO in patients with TDT and β00 genotypes and patients with TDT who are less than 12 years of age.

Based on our prior discussions with the FDA, we believe that we may be able to seek accelerated approval for LentiGlobin in severe SCD.

We are developing our Lenti-D product candidate for CALD, a rare, hereditary neurological disorder that is often fatal.  We are currently conducting a multi-site, international, Phase II/III clinical study of our Lenti-D product candidate, called the Starbeam Study (ALD-102), for the treatment of subjects with CALD.  Seventeen subjects were treated with our Lenti-D product candidateSCD in the initial cohort of the Starbeam Study, and we are enrolling up to thirteen additional subjects in an expansion cohort of this study for a total target enrollment of thirty subjects. We are also conducting an observational study of subjects with CALD treated by allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplant referred to as the ALD-103 study. If our Lenti-D product candidate shows a sufficiently compelling treatment effect, and pending further discussion with regulatory authorities, the results from the Starbeam study could potentially formUnited States on the basis of clinical data from Group C of our HGB-206 clinical study, with our HGB-210 clinical study providing confirmatory data for full approval. However, in light of a Biologics License Application, or BLA,SUSAR of acute myeloid leukemia and a SUSAR of myelodysplastic syndrome in our HGB-206 clinical study reported to us in February 2021, the FDA has placed our clinical studies of LentiGlobin for SCD on clinical hold. We are investigating these events and plan to continue to work closely with the FDA in their review of these events. In addition, we are also engaged with the EMA in discussions regarding our proposed development plans for LentiGlobin for SCD in Europe.

In October 2020, the EMA accepted our Marketing Authorization Application, or MAA, submissionin the EU for eli-cel for the treatment of patients with CALD. Based on our discussions with the FDA, we believe that we may be able to seek approval from the FDA for eli-cel for the treatment of patients with CALD on the basis of our clinical data from our ongoing Starbeam study, safety data from our ongoing ALD-104 study, and the completed ALD-103 observational study. We currently expect to submit the BLA for eli-cel for the treatment of patients with CALD to the FDA in mid-2021.
In collaboration with BMS, we are developing the ide-cel and bb21217 product candidates as treatments for multiple myeloma. We are co-developing and co-promoting ide-cel in the United States with BMS and European Union, respectively. We are planningwe have exclusively licensed to submit our first filing for regulatory approval of Lenti-D in 2019.

We are developing, in collaboration with Celgene, our bb2121 and bb21217 product candidates withBMS the goal of filing for regulatory approval in multiple myeloma on a global basis, a hematologic malignancy that develops in the bone marrow that is fatal if untreated.  We are conducting a multi-site Phase I clinical study in the United States of our bb2121 product candidate for the treatment of subjects with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (CRB-401), and the final patient enrolled in the CRB-401 study was treated in February 2018. bb2121 is the lead product candidate arising from our multi-year collaboration with Celgene for the discovery, development and commercialization rights for ide-cel outside of CAR T cell therapies targeting B-cell maturation antigen, or BCMA.the United States. In September 2020, the FDA accepted for Priority Review the BLA submitted by BMS for ide-cel as a treatment for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. We have exclusively licensed to Celgene the right to developdevelopment and commercialize our bb2121commercialization rights for the bb21217 product candidate and we expect to exercise ourBMS, with an option for us to elect to co-develop and co-promote this product candidate inbb21217 within the United States. In February 2018, Celgene treated the first subjectaddition, we are independently pursuing next-generation BCMA-targeting CAR-T approaches for treating multiple myeloma.

1

Table of Contents
Our other programs in a multi-site Phase II clinical study in the United Statesoncology include programs to discover and Europe of our bb2121develop T cell product candidate for the treatment of subjects with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.  Celgene has announced plans to initiate an international Phase III study of bb2121 in third line multiple myeloma in 2018 and plans to file a BLA with the FDA in 2019 for bb2121candidates to treat relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.  

In September 2017, we initiated a Phase I clinical study of bb21217, the second anti-BCMA product candidate arising from our collaboration with Celgene,other hematologic and Celgene exercised its option to obtain an exclusive worldwide license to developsolid tumor malignancies, including: non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, acute myeloid leukemia, MAGE-A4 positive solid tumors, and commercialize bb21217.

Merkel cell carcinoma.

Our gene therapyPlatform

Our platform is based on lentiviral vectors. Our lentiviral vectors which are used to introduce a functional copy of a gene to the patient’s own isolated hematopoietic stem cells, or HSCs, in the case of our LentiGlobin and Lenti-D product candidates,programs in severe genetic diseases, or the patient’s own isolated white blood cells which include T cells, in the case of our bb2121 and bb21217 product candidates. Additionally, we have developed a proprietary cell-based vector manufacturing process that is both reproducible and scalable. We believe our innovationsprograms in viral vector design and related manufacturing processes are important steps towards advancing the field of gene therapy and in realizing its full potential on a commercial scale.

Utilizing our gene therapy platform, we are developing product candidates comprising the patient’s own gene-modified HSCs and T cells. Clinical proof-of-concept already exists for allogeneiconcology. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant, or allogeneic HSCT, is an existing approach of treating a patient withusing HSCs contributed by a donor other than the patient that contain the properly functioning copy of the gene whose mutation has caused the underlying disease. However, this approach has significant limitations in the treatment of severe genetic diseases, including difficulties in finding appropriate genetically-matchedHLA-matched donors and carries the risk of transplant-related rejection, graft-versus-host disease, or GVHD, and mortality, and is therefore typically only available on a limited basis.death. Our approach is intended to address the significant limitations of allogeneic HSCT while utilizing existing stem cell transplant infrastructure and processes. Also, because our approach has the potential to drive sustained expression of the functional protein encoded by the gene insert after potentially a single-administration,single administration, we believe the value proposition offered by our product candidates for patients, families, health care providers and payorspayers would be significant.

Although our initial focus for severe genetic diseases is

Our Programs in TDT, severe SCD and CALD, and for cancer is in multiple myeloma, we believe our gene therapy platform has broad therapeutic potential in a variety of indications. We believe that our lentiviral vectors can be used to introduce virtually any gene into a cell and have the potential to be manufactured on a commercial scale reproducibly and reliably, as each new vector is produced using substantially the same process.

We also have discovery research programs utilizing our cell signaling technology and gene editing technology platform across our pipeline. For instance, we are exploring applications of our CAR and TCR T cell technologies in combination with novel proteins based on synthetic biology. These technologies may potentially allow our future T cell-based product candidates to detect the tumor microenvironment or, in the case of future CAR T cell product candidates, to be regulated by small molecules. In addition, we are focused on utilizing homing endonuclease and megaTAL gene editing technologies in a variety of potential applications and disease areas, including for oncology, hematology and other diseases.  Homing endonucleases and MegaTALs are novel enzymes that provide a highly specific and efficient way to modify DNA sequences to edit or insert genetic components to potentially treat a variety of diseases.

Our gene therapy platform and proprietary lentiviral vectors

Our gene therapy product candidates for severe genetic diseases are being developed based on a simple notion: to genetically modify a patient’s own cells to fundamentally correct or address the genetic basis underlying a disease. Although the notion of gene transfer to a patient’s own cells is simple, the processes of developing viral vectors capable of delivering the genetic material and inserting gene sequences safely into a patient’s target cells is highly technical and demands significant expertise, experience and know-how.  Leveraging our extensive expertise in viral vector design and manufacturing and transduction, we have developed a gene therapy platform that we believe is broadly applicable in a variety of indications with significant unmet medical need.

The success of a gene therapy platform is highly dependent on the type of delivery system used. Our platform is based upon an ex vivo viral delivery system whereby a certain type of virus delivers the DNA that it is carrying into a cell and inserts this DNA into the cell’s genome. We have developed significant expertise in designing a particular type of vector delivery system employing a lentivirus for use in gene therapy and have also developed and in-licensed relevant intellectual property, including know-how, related to lentiviral vectors.

Our gene therapy platform takes advantage of lentiviral vectors’ ability to stably integrate into the target cell’s genome by focusing on diseases we can treat through genetic modification of HSCs, which when reintroduced back into the patient will differentiate into numerous other cell lineages. We believe our initial clinical indications in severe genetic diseases (CALD, TDT and severe SCD) can all be treated by introducing a specific functional gene into HSCs taken from the patient to correct the gene defect responsible for the disease.

HSCs are dividing stem cells that are permanently found in a patient’s bone marrow and are an ongoing replacement source of mature cell types as they die off. HSCs produce progeny cells, called progenitors, that differentiate into all of the cellular elements that compose the blood, including red blood cells (useful for TDT and severe SCD), and microglia (useful for CALD).  As such, all progenitors derived from a single gene therapy-modified HSC will carry the same corrective genetic modification, which we believe gives our approach the potential to deliver life-long clinical benefits based on a single therapeutic administration.


Our therapeutic approach in severe genetic diseases

The delivery of a gene therapy product in HSCs for the treatment of severe genetic diseases requires several steps. Importantly, our approach seeks to leverage cell transplant procedures and infrastructure already widely used in the clinic for allogeneic HSCT.

1.

We produce our lentiviral vector by co-transfecting a packaging cell line with multiple plasmids that separately encode the various components of the virus as well as the functional gene sequence the viral vector will carry. The use of multiple plasmids is an important safety step designed to further prevent the resulting lentiviral vectors from being able to replicate and cause infection on their own.

Severe Genetic Disease

2.

A sample of HSCs is extracted from the patient through a standard process known as apheresis, where HSCs are first mobilized into the blood stream from the bone marrow using a routinely-used pharmaceutical agent and then isolated and collected from the patient’s blood. HSCs may also be extracted directly from the patient’s bone marrow.

Betibeglogene autotemcel

3.

The lentiviral vector is mixed with the patient’s isolated HSCs ex vivo. This leads to the insertion of the functional gene into the HSCs’ existing DNA, thus creating a pool of the patient’s own, or autologous, gene-modified cells. The cells are then washed to remove any remnants of the viral vector or culture media. These gene-modified cells are the therapeutic drug product that is delivered back into the patient.

4.

Prior to administering our drug product, the patient undergoes a standard myeloablation procedure (also used in allogeneic HSCT) to remove endogenous bone marrow cells. The modified HSCs are then re-infused back into the patient (approximately one to two months after initial extraction of the patient’s HSCs) and begin re-populating a portion of the bone marrow as permanently modified HSCs in a process known as engraftment. The engrafted HSCs will give rise to differentiated cells with the functional gene.

Our therapeutic approach in oncology

The delivery of modified T cell products in oncology requires several steps that are similar to our therapeutic approach in severe genetic diseases with HSCs. Importantly, our approach seeks to leverage cell transplant procedures and infrastructure already widely used in the clinic for autologous and allogeneic bone marrow transplant.

1.

We produce our lentiviral vector by co-transfecting a packaging cell line with multiple plasmids that separately encode the various components of the virus as well as a tumor-targeting protein the viral vector will carry.

2.

For the treatment of cancer, a sample of the patient’s white blood cells is extracted and isolated through a standard process known as leukapheresis, in which white blood cells are separated from the remaining fractions of the patient’s blood.

3.

The lentiviral vector is mixed with the patient’s white blood cells, which include T cells, ex vivo. This leads to the insertion of the gene encoding a tumor-targeting receptor protein into the T cells’ existing DNA.  The two most widely studied examples of tumor-targeting receptors are antibody-based chimeric antigen receptors (CAR) and natural T cell receptors (TCR). The cells are then washed to remove any remnants of the viral vector or culture media and expanded to increase the number of modified T cells to the required dosage.  These modified T cells are the therapeutic drug product that is delivered back into the patient.

4.

Prior to administering our drug product, the patient undergoes a standard lymphodepletion procedure to reduce the number of T cells that may compete with the modified T cells. The modified T cells are then re-infused back into the patient.

Our product candidate pipeline

We are developing our LentiGlobin product candidate to treat patients with TDT and severe SCD, with the goal of filingcommercializing beti-cel as a one-time treatment for regulatory approval in the US and EU for different genotypes of TDT and for severe SCD.  We are conducting five clinical studies of our LentiGlobin product candidate: a Phase I/II study in the United States, Australia, and Thailand to evaluate its safety and efficacy in the treatment of subjects with TDT, called the Northstar Study (HGB-204); a multi-site, international, Phase III study to evaluate its safety and efficacy in the treatment of subjects with TDT and a non-β00 genotype, called the Northstar-2 Study (HGB-207); a multi-site, international, Phase III study for the treatment of subjects with TDT and a β00 genotype, called the Northstar 3 Study (HGB-212);  a single-center Phase I/II study in France to evaluate its safety and efficacy in the treatment of subjects with TDT or with severe SCD (HGB-205); and a multi-site Phase I study in the United States to evaluate its safety and efficacy in the treatment of subjects with severe SCD (HGB-206).  We are currently planning to file a marketing authorization application in the EU for LentiGlobin for the treatment of adult and adolescent patients with TDT and a non-β00 genotype during the second half of 2018, with a future BLA filing planned in the United States.  We are also engaged with the FDA and EMA in discussions regarding our proposed development plans for LentiGlobin in severe SCD.

We are developing our Lenti-D product candidate to treat patients with CALD with the goal of filing for regulatory approval in the US and EU for CALD, with the first filing for regulatory approval planned in 2019. We are currently conducting a Phase II/III clinical


study of our Lenti-D product candidate in the United States, United Kingdom, and France, which we refer to as the Starbeam Study (ALD-102), to examine the safety and efficacy of our Lenti-D product candidate in subjects with CALD.

We are also pursuing opportunities to apply our gene therapy platform technologies in cancer by genetically modifying a patient’s own T cells to target and destroy cancer cells. Our collaboration with Celgene focuses on CAR T cell product candidates directed against BCMA, a protein expressed on the surface of multiple myeloma cells, plasma cells and some mature B cells. We are developing, in collaboration with Celgene, our bb2121 and bb21217 product candidates with the goal of filing for regulatory approval in multiple myeloma on a global basis.  We are conducting a multi-site Phase I clinical study in the United States to evaluate the safety and efficacy of our bb2121 product candidate, the lead product candidate from this collaboration, in the treatment of subjects with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (CRB-401), and the final patient enrolled in the CRB-401 study was treated in February 2018. We have exclusively licensed to Celgene the right to develop and commercialize our bb2121 product candidate, while we have retained an option to co-develop and co-promote this product candidate in the United States.  In February 2018, Celgene treated the first patient in a Phase 2 clinical trial of bb2121 in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, and Celgene plans to conduct additional clinical studies of bb2121 in earlier lines of treatment, including a planned international Phase III study of bb2121 in third line multiple myeloma.  Celgene has announced plans to file a BLA with the FDA in 2019 for bb2121 to treat relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.  

In September 2017, we initiated a Phase I clinical study of bb21217, the second anti-BCMA cell product candidate arising from our collaboration with Celgene, and Celgene exercised its option to obtain an exclusive worldwide license to develop and commercialize bb21217. We are also collaborating with Medigene AG, through its subsidiary Medigene Immunotherapies GmbH, in the research and development of TCR product candidates directed against up to four antigens for the treatment of cancer indications, and with TC BioPharm Limited in the research and development of gamma delta CAR T cells directed at hematologic and solid tumor targets.

Our LentiGlobin product candidate opportunity

β-thalassemia

Overview

In the United States and Europe,transfusion-dependent β-thalassemia, is a rare genetic disease caused by a mutation in the β-globin gene resulting in the production of defective red blood cells, or RBCs. Genetic mutations causecells. The disease is characterized by severe anemia, and the absence or reduced production of the beta chains of hemoglobin, or β-globin, thereby preventing the proper formation of hemoglobin A, which normally accounts for greater than 95% of the hemoglobin in the blood of adults. Hemoglobin is an iron-containing protein in the blood that carries oxygen from the respiratory organs to the rest of the body. Hemoglobin A consists of four chains—two chains each of a-globin and β-globin. Genetic mutations that impair the production of β-globin can lead to a relative excess of a-globin, leading to premature death of RBCs. The clinical implications of the a-globin/ β-globin imbalance are two-fold: first, patients lack sufficient RBCs and hemoglobin to effectively transport oxygen throughout the body and can become severely anemic; and second, the shortened life span and ineffective production of RBCsred blood cells can lead to a range of multi-systemic complications, including but not limited to splenomegaly, marrow expansion, bone deformities, and iron overload in major organs.

The clinical course of β-thalassemia correlates with the degree of globin chain imbalance. Nearly 350 different mutations have been described in patients with β-thalassemia. Mutations can be categorized as those that result in no functional β-globin production (β0) and those that result in decreased functional β-globin production (β+). TDT refers to any mutation pairing that results in the need for chronic transfusions due to severe anemia, and is the clinical finding in most patients with β0/ β0 genotypes as well as many patients with other genotypes resulting in abnormal β-globin production, such as the β0+ and β++genotypes. Affected patients produce as little as one to seven g/dL of hemoglobin (in contrast, a normal adult produces 12-18 g/dL of hemoglobin). Hemoglobin E (βE), which is another β-globin mutation and is usually asymptomatic, can also result in TDT when paired with β0 or β+ mutations.

Limitations of current treatment options

In geographies where treatment is available, patients with TDT receive chronic blood transfusions to survive. These regimens consist of regular infusions with units of packed RBC, or pRBC, usually every three to five weeks, which are intended to maintain hemoglobin levels and control symptoms of the disease. While chronic blood transfusions can be effective at minimizing the symptoms of TDT, they often lead to unavoidable iron overload, which over time may lead to significant morbidity and mortality through iron-associated heart and liver toxicity. To help reduce iron overload-associated risks and resulting complications, patients must adhere to therapeutic iron chelation regimens to reduce the iron overload. Despite improvements in supportive care with transfusion and chelation, the overall life expectancy for a patient with TDT is significantly reduced compared to the general population. In addition, patient and caregiver quality of life can be significantly affected by complications associated with TDT and chronic disease management.


The only potentially curative therapy for β-thalassemia today is allogeneic HSCT with best outcomes observed in pediatric patients with a matched sibling donor.  However, allogeneic HSCT is associated with serious risks, some of which can be life threatening and result in death.  Potential complications of allogeneic HSCT include a risk of engraftment failure in unrelated human-leukocyte-antigen, or HLA, matched patients, a risk of life-threatening infection, and a risk of GVHD, a common complication in which donor immune cells (white blood cells in the graft) recognize the cells of the recipient (the host) as “foreign” and attack them.  Asorgans (as a result of these safety challenges, allogeneic HSCT can lead to significant mortality rates, particularly for patients treated with cells from a donor who is not a matched sibling, and in patients >11 years old. Consequently, transplants are offered primarily to pediatric patients with a matched sibling donor, which occurs in only a fraction of all cases.There is a need for an option that can address the underlying genetic cause of TDT for more patients. Overall, TDT remains a life shortening disease with a significant unmet medical need.

Sickle cell disease

Overview

Sickle cell disease, or SCD, is a hereditary blood disorder resulting from a mutation in the β-globin gene that causes polymerization of hemoglobin proteins and abnormal red blood cell function. The disease is characterized by anemia, vaso-occlusive pain crisis (a common complication of SCD in which there is severe pain due to obstructed blood flow in the small blood vessels of the body), cumulative damage to multiple organs, infections, stroke, overall poor quality of life and early death in a large subset of patients. Under low-oxygen conditions, which are exacerbated by the RBC abnormalities, the mutant hemoglobin polymerizes causing the RBCs to take on a sickle shape (sickle cells), which causes them to aggregate and obstruct small blood vessels, thereby restricting blood flow to organs resulting in pain, cell death and organ damage. If oxygen levels are restored, the hemoglobin can depolymerize and the RBCs will return to their normal shape, but over time, the sickling damages the cell membrane and the cells fail to return to the normal shape even in high-oxygen conditions.

Limitations of current treatment options

Where adequate medical care is available, common treatments for patients with SCD largely revolve around management and prevention of acute sickling episodes. Chronic management may include hydroxyurea and, in certain cases, chronic transfusions. Hydroxyurea is currently one of two medications approved for the treatment of SCD and is recommended for patients with recurrent episodes of acute pain or specific frequencies of painful crises. Not all SCD patients respond to hydroxyurea however, or are able to tolerate the cytotoxic effect of reduced white blood cell and platelet counts. A significant number of patients with severe SCD find it difficult to adhere to hydroxyurea treatment, and for most patients there is no effective long-term treatment.

RBC transfusion therapy can be utilized to maintain the level of sickle hemoglobin below 30% to 50%, which decreases sickling of RBCs, reduces the risk of recurrent stroke, and decreases the incidence of associated co-morbidities. While transfusion therapy can be critical in the management of acute disease, and can be vital in preventing some of the chronic manifestations of severe SCD, it does not provide equal benefit to all patients.  Furthermore, in patients with SCD, chronic blood transfusions can leadneeded to allo-sensitization that render continued transfusions difficult.  Additional complications of chronic transfusion include iron overload.

Similar to TDT,treat the only potentially curative therapy currently available for severe SCD is allogeneic HSCT, however because of the significant risk of transplant-related morbidity and mortality, this option is usually offered primarily to pediatric patients with available sibling-matched donors. It is particularly difficult to find suitable donors for individuals of African descent, and it is estimated that only a fraction of eligible patients undergo transplant. In light of these factors, we believe that severe SCD is a seriously debilitating and life threatening disease with a significant unmet medical need.

Our LentiGlobin product candidate

We are developing our LentiGlobin product candidate as a potential one-time treatment for both TDT and severe SCD.disease). Our approach involves the ex vivo insertion ofusing a single codon variant oflentiviral vector to insert the normal β-globin gene usingwith a lentiviral vectorsingle amino acid substitution into the patient’s own HSCs ex vivo, to enable formation of normally functioning hemoglobin A and normal red blood cells, or RBCs, in patients. Importantly, this codon variant, referredBeti-cel refers to as T87Q, also serves as a distinct biomarker used to quantify expression levels of the functional β-globin protein in patients with TDT and severe SCD, while also providing anti-sickling properties in the context of severe SCD. We refer to thepatients' own cells that have undergone our ex vivo manufacturing process resulting in genetically modified HSCsHSCs.

In June 2019, the European Commission granted conditional marketing authorization for beti-cel, marketed as the final LentiGlobin drug product, or our LentiGlobin product candidate.

We are conducting four clinical studies of our LentiGlobin product candidate to evaluate its safety and efficacy in the treatment of subjects with TDT. In December 2013, we announced that the first subject with TDT had been treated in our HGB-205 study, which also enrolled subjects with severe SCD. In March 2014, we announced that the first subject with TDT had been treated in our


Northstar Study (HGB-204). We announced in December 2016 that the first subject had been treated in our Northstar-2 Study (HGB-207), which evaluates the safety and efficacy of our LentiGlobin product candidate in the treatment of subjects with TDT and non-β00 genotypes. In addition, we initiated in 2017 our planned Phase III study of our LentiGlobin product candidateZYNTEGLO gene therapy, for the treatment of subjectspatients 12 years and older with TDT andwho do not have a β00 genotypes, called the Northstar-3 Study (HGB-212). genotype, for whom HSCT is appropriate but an HLA-matched related HSC donor is not available. In November 2017,February 2021, we announced that the first patient has been treated in this study.  We are using our refined drug product manufacturing process with the objectivetemporarily suspended marketing of increasing the vector copy numberZYNTEGLO and the percentage of transduced cells inEMA has paused the LentiGlobin drug product in our ongoing Northstar-2 and Northstar-3 Studies.  We presented clinical data from our Northstar Study, Northstar 2 Study and our HGB-205 study at the American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting in December 2017.

We are currently planning to file arenewal procedure for ZYNTEGLO's conditional marketing authorization applicationwhile the EMA's pharmacovigilance risk assessment committee reviews the risk-benefit assessment for ZYNTEGLO and determines whether any additional pharmacovigilance measures are necessary. In addition, the FDA has placed a clinical hold on our HGB-207 and HGB-212 clinical studies. Patient dosing is complete in each of these two studies, and there is no plan to enroll or treat additional patients in these studies. No cases of hematologic malignancy have been reported in any patient who has received treatment with beti-cel, however it is manufactured using the EUsame BB305 lentiviral vector used in LentiGlobin gene therapy for LentiGlobin forSCD.

In the treatmentfourth quarter of adult and adolescent patients with TDT and2019, we initiated a non-β00 genotype during the second halfrolling submission of 2018.  If successful, we also believe that data from the ongoing Northstar Study and Northstar-2 Study could form the basis for a biologics licensing application, or BLA submission for our LentiGlobin product candidate in the United States for thebeti-cel as a treatment of patients with TDT across all ages and non-β00 genotypes.all genotypes, which will be based on data from the Northstar study, the Northstar-2 study, and the Northstar-3 study. Contingent upon successful resolution of the FDA's concerns arising out of the safety events in our SCD program, we currently expect to complete our BLA submission for beti-cel in mid-2021. In addition, if successful, we believe the data from our Northstar-3 Study,study, together with data from our ongoing Northstar Study,study and Northstar-2 Studystudy and HGB-205 study, could be sufficient to form the basis for a BLA supplementMAA variation submission for our LentiGlobin product candidatein the EU, for the treatment of patients with TDT and β00 genotypes.

We genotypes and patients with TDT who are conducting two clinical studiesless than 12 years of our LentiGlobin product candidate to evaluate its safety and efficacy in the treatment of subjects with severe SCD. In October 2014, we announced that the first subject with severe SCD had been treated in our HGB-205 study. We are also conducting our HGB-206 study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of our LentiGlobin product candidate in the treatment of subjects with severe SCD. In 2016, we amended the protocol of our HGB-206 study to expand enrollment and to incorporate several process changes, including using refined drug product manufacturing process. In February 2017, we announced that the first subject has been treated under this amended protocol.  We are engaged with FDA and EMA in discussions regarding our proposed development plans for LentiGlobin in severe SCD. We presented clinical data from our HGB-205 and HGB-206 studies at the American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting in December 2017.

Our LentiGlobin product candidateage.

Beti-cel has been granted Orphan Drug status by the FDA and EMA for both β-thalassemia and SCD. Our LentiGlobin product candidate was granted Fast-Track designation by the FDA for the treatment of β-thalassemia major and for the treatment of certain patients with severe SCD.  The FDA has also granted Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy (RMAT) designation to our LentiGlobin product candidate for the treatment of severe SCD.major. The FDA has granted Breakthrough Therapy designation to our LentiGlobin product candidatebeti-cel for the treatment of transfusion-dependent patients with β-thalassemia major.major, and rare pediatric disease designation for the treatment of TDT. We are participatingparticipated in the EMA’s Adaptive Pathways pilot program (formerly referred to as Adaptive Licensing), which is part of the EMA’s effort to improve timely access for patients to new medicines. Based on our discussions involving the EMA, European Health Technology Assessment agencies and patient advocacy organizations as part of this program, we believe that it is possible to seek conditional approval for LentiGlobin for the treatment of adults and adolescents with TDT on the basis of the totality of the clinical data from our ongoing Northstar Study and HGB-205 study, with available data from our Northstar 2 Study, assuming these studies demonstrate acceptable efficacy and safety, respectively, and in particular, transfusion independence.  We believe that conversion to full approval would be subject to the successful completion of our ongoing Northstar-2 and Northstar-3 Studies, supportive long-term follow-up data and “real-world” post-approval monitoring data. Whether or not our clinical data are sufficient to support conditional, and ultimately full, approval will be a review decision by the EMA. In addition, the EMA has granted Priority Medicines (PRIME) eligibility for our LentiGlobin product candidatebeti-cel.
We are conducting the following clinical studies to evaluate the efficacy and safety of beti-cel in the treatment of TDT.

Clinical development of our LentiGlobin product candidate

The Northstar Study (HGB-204) – Phase I/II clinical study in subjectspatients with TDT

Our Northstar Study is a single-dose, open-label, non-randomized, multi-site Phase I/II clinical study in the United States, Australia and Thailand to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the LentiGlobin product candidate in increasing hemoglobin production and eliminating or reducing transfusion dependence following treatment. In March 2014, we announced that the first subject with TDT had been treated in our Northstar Study.

Eighteen adults and adolescents have been enrolled in the study. To be eligible for enrollment in this study, subjects were between 12 and 35 years of age with a diagnosis of TDT and receive at least 100 mL/kg/year of pRBCs or greater than or equal to eight transfusions of pRBCs per year in each of the two years preceding enrollment. The subjects were also eligible for allogeneic HSCT. In September 2016, we announced that our Northstar Study has been fully enrolled.

Efficacy will be evaluated primarily by the production of 2.0 g/dL of hemoglobin A containing βA-T87Q-globin for the six-month period between 18 and 24 months post-transplant. In order to allow for endogenous hemoglobin production following transplant, subjects will be transfused with RBCs only when total hemoglobin decreases below 7.0 g/dL. The rationale for this endpoint is that

TDT:

production of 2.0 g/dL of hemoglobin A containing βA-T87Q-globin represents a clinically meaningful increase in endogenous hemoglobin production that would be expected to diminish transfusion requirements, and could result in transfusion independence in TDT subjects.

Exploratory efficacy endpoints include RBC transfusion requirements (measured in milliliters per kilogram) per month and per year, post-transplant. Safety evaluations to be performed during the study include success and kinetics of HSC engraftment, incidence of transplant-related mortality post-treatment, overall survival, detection of vector-derived replication-competent lentivirus in any subject and characterization of events of insertional mutagenesis leading to clonal dominance or leukemia. Subjects will be monitored by regular screening. Each subject will remain on study for approximately 26 months from time of consent and then will be enrolled in a long-term follow-up protocol that will assess safety and efficacy beyond 24 months.

The Northstar-2 Studystudy (HGB-207) – Phase III study in subjects with TDT and a non-β0/ β0 genotype

Our Northstar-2 Study is an ongoing single-dose, open-label, non-randomized, international, multi-site Phase IIIphase 3 clinical study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the LentiGlobin product candidatebeti-cel to treat subjectspatients with TDT and non-β00

2

Table of Contents
genotypes.

Approximately 23 subjects will be Twenty-three patients have been enrolled in the study, consisting of at least 15 adolescent and adult subjectspatients between 12 and 50 years of age at enrollment, and at least eight pediatric subjectspatients less than 12 years of age at enrollment. Age at enrollment ranged from four to 34 years old. To be enrolled, subjectspatients with TDT and non-β00 genotypes must have received at least 100 mL/kg/year of pRBCsRBCs or at least eight transfusions per year for the past two years. All subjectspatients must be eligible for allogeneic HSCT, but without a matched sibling allogeneicfamily HSCT donor.

The primary endpoint of this study is the proportion of treated subjectspatients who achieve transfusion independence, defined as weighted average hemoglobin levels ≥9.0≥9.0 g/dL without any pRBCRBC transfusions for a continuous period of at least 12 months at any time during the study after treatment. The secondary endpoints of this study are to quantify gene transfer efficiency and expression, and to measure the effects of treatment with the LentiGlobin drug productbeti-cel on transfusion requirements post-transplant and clinical events. Each subject will remain on study for approximately 24 months from time of consent.

Safety evaluations to be performed during the study include success and kinetics of HSCplatelet and neutrophil engraftment, incidence of transplant-related mortality post-treatment, overall survival, detection of vector-derived replication-competent lentivirus in any subjectpatient and characterization of events of insertional mutagenesis leading to clonal dominance or leukemia.

Subjects in our Northstar-2 Study Each patient will remain on study for approximately 24 months post-treatment and then will be treated with our LentiGlobin product candidate manufactured using our refined drug product manufacturing process withenrolled in a long-term follow-up protocol that will assess safety and efficacy beyond the objective of increasing the vector copy number and the percentage of transduced cells. In December 2016, we announced the first subject in the Northstar-2 Study had received treatment with our LentiGlobin product candidate.

study protocol’s follow-up period.

The HGB-205Northstar-3 study – Phase I/II clinical study in subjects with TDT or with severe SCD

Our HGB-205 study(HGB-212) is aan ongoing single-dose, open-label, non-randomized, Phase I/IIinternational, multi-site phase 3 clinical study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of beti-cel to treat patients with TDT who have either a β00, β0/IVS-I-110, or IVS-I-110/IVS-I-110 genotypes. As of March 3, 2020, 15 patients have been treated, and median age at a single site in France to examine the safety and efficacy of our LentiGlobin product candidate in up to seven subjects with a diagnosis of TDT or severe SCD. Study subjects must be between five and 35enrollment was 15 years of age with a diagnosis of TDT or severe SCD. In December 2013, we announced that the first subject with TDT had been treated in our HGB-205 study and in October 2014 we announced that the first subject with severe SCD had been treated in our HGB-205 study.(ranging from four to 33 years). To be enrolled, subjects with TDTeligible, patients must have received at least 100 mL/kg/year of pRBCs per year for the past two years. Those with severe SCD must have failed to achieve clinical benefit from treatment with hydroxyurea and have an additional poor prognostic risk factor (e.g., recurrent vaso-occlusive crisesRBCs or acute chest syndromes). All subjects must be eligible for allogeneic HSCT, but without a matched sibling allogeneic HSCT donor. This study is fully enrolled, with four subjects with TDT and three subjects with SCD enrolled in this study.

The primary objective of our HGB-205 study is to determine the safety, tolerability and success of engraftment of the LentiGlobin drug product. The secondary objectives of the study are to quantify gene transfer efficiency and expression, and to measure the effects of treatment with the LentiGlobin drug product on disease-specific biological parameters and clinical events. In the case of subjects with TDT and SCD, this means the volume of pRBC transfusions, and for subjects with SCD, it also means the number of vaso-occlusive crises and acute chest syndrome events in each subject, compared with the two-year period prior to treatment.

Safety evaluations to be performed during the study include success and kinetics of HSC engraftment, incidence of transplant-related mortality post-treatment, overall survival, detection of vector-derived replication-competent lentivirus in any subject and characterization of events of insertional mutagenesis leading to clonal dominance or leukemia.


Northstar-3 Study (HGB-212) – Phase III Study for TDT in subjects with TDT and β0/ β0 genotypes

Our Northstar-3 Study is an ongoing single-dose, open-label, non-randomized, international, multi-site Phase III clinical study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the LentiGlobin product candidate to treat subjects with TDT and β00 genotypes.

Approximately 15 subjects who are less than 50 years of age at enrollment will be enrolled in the study. To be eligible, subjects with TDT and a β00 genotype must have received at least 100 mL/kg/year of pRBCs or ≥8eight transfusions of pRBCs per year for the past two years. All subjectspatients must be clinically stable and eligible to undergo HSCT, as well as having been treated and followed for at least the last two years in a specialized center that maintained detailed medical records, including transfusion history.

The primary endpoint of this study is the proportion of treated subjectspatients who meet the definition of “transfusion reduction”,independence.” The secondary endpoints of this study are to measure the proportion of patients who meet the definition of “transfusion reduction,” which is defined as demonstration of reduction in volume of RBC transfusion requirements (in mL/kg) in the post-treatment time period of Monthsmonths 12 to 24 compared to the average annual transfusion requirement in the 24 months prior to enrollment.  The secondary endpoints of this study areenrollment, to measure the proportion of subjects who meet the definition of “transfusion independence” and also quantify gene transfer efficiency and expression, and to measure the effects of treatment with the LentiGlobin drug productbeti-cel on transfusion requirements post-transplantpost-treatment and clinical events. Each subjectpatient will remain on study for approximately 24 months post-treatment and then will be enrolled in a long-term follow-up protocol that will assess safety and efficacy beyond the study protocol’s follow-up period.

In June 2020, we presented the following updated clinical data from our Northstar-2 and Northstar-3 studies at the 25th European Hematology Association (EHA) Annual Congress. All data presented at the EHA Annual Congress and summarized below are as of the data cut-off date of March 3, 2020:
Efficacy results from Northstar-2 study (HGB-207):
All 23 patients enrolled in the study had been treated, with a median follow up period of 19.4 months.
Of the 19 patients with sufficient follow-up duration to be evaluable for the primary endpoint of transfusion independence, 89 percent of patients (17 out of 19) had achieved transfusion independence, with median weighted average total hemoglobin levels of 11.9 g/dL (ranging from 9.4 to 12.9 g/dL) over a median of 19.4 months of follow-up to date (ranging from 12.3 to 31.4 months). The 17 patients reaching transfusion independence previously required a median of 17.5 transfusions per year (ranging from 11.5 to 37 transfusions per year).
Improved iron levels, as measured by serum ferritin and hepcidin levels (proteins involved in iron storage and homeostasis), were observed and trends toward improved iron management were seen. Over half of patients stopped iron chelation therapy, which is needed to reduce excess iron caused by chronic blood transfusions. Seven out of 23 patients began using phlebotomy for iron reduction.
Efficacy results from Northstar-3 study (HGB-212):
Fifteen patients (nine β00, three β0+IVS1-110, three homozygous IVS-I-110 mutation) had been treated, with a median follow up period of 14.4 months (ranging from 1.1 to 24.0 months).
Six of eight evaluable patients achieved transfusion independence, with median weighted average total Hb levels of 11.5 g/dL (ranging from 9.5 to 13.5 g/dL), and continued to maintain transfusion independence for a median duration of 13.6 months (ranging from 12.2 to 21.2 months) as of the data cutoff.
Eighty-five percent of patients (11 out of 13) with at least seven months of follow-up had not received a transfusion in more than seven months at time of data cutoff. These eleven patients previously required a median of 18.5 transfusions per year (ranging from 11.0 to 39.5 transfusions per year). In these patients, gene therapy-derived HbAT87Q supported total Hb levels ranging from 8.8 to 14.0 g/dL at last visit.
3

Table of Contents
Safety results from Northstar-2 (HGB-207) and Northstar-3 (HGB-212) studies: Non-serious adverse events (AEs) observed during the HGB-207 and HGB-212 trials that were considered related or possibly related to beti-cel were tachycardia, abdominal pain, pain in extremities, leukopenia, neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. One serious adverse event of thrombocytopenia was considered possibly related to beti-cel. In HGB-207, serious events post-infusion in more than two patients included three events of veno-occlusive liver disease and two events of thrombocytopenia. In HGB-212, serious events post-infusion in more than two patients included two events of pyrexia. Additional adverse events observed in clinical studies were consistent with the known side effects of HSC collection and bone marrow ablation with busulfan, including serious adverse events of veno-occlusive disease. In both Phase 3 studies, there have been no deaths, no graft failure, no cases of vector-mediated replication competent lentivirus or clonal dominance, no leukemia and no lymphoma as of the data cut-off date.
In addition, we have conducted the following clinical studies of beti-cel:
The Northstar study (HGB-204) is a completed, single-dose, open-label, non-randomized, multi-site phase 1/2 clinical study in the United States, Australia and Thailand to evaluate the safety and efficacy of beti-cel in increasing hemoglobin production and eliminating or reducing transfusion dependence following treatment. This study was completed in February 2018, and patients in this study were enrolled in a long-term follow-up protocol to assess safety and efficacy beyond the Northstar study follow-up period. Eighteen adults and adolescents were treated in the study. To be eligible for enrollment in this study, patients were between 12 and 35 years of age with a diagnosis of TDT and received at least 100 mL/kg/year of RBCs or at least eight transfusions per year in each of the two years preceding enrollment. The patients were also medically eligible for allogeneic HSCT. Efficacy was evaluated primarily by the production of ≥2.0 g/dL of hemoglobin A containing βA-T87Q-globin for the six-month period between 18 and 24 months post-treatment. Exploratory efficacy endpoints included RBC transfusion requirements per month and per year, post-treatment. Safety evaluations performed during the study include success and kinetics of HSC engraftment, incidence of transplant-related mortality post-treatment, overall survival, detection of vector-derived replication-competent lentivirus in any patient and characterization of events of insertional mutagenesis leading to clonal dominance or leukemia. Subjects were monitored by regular screening. Each patient remained on study for approximately 24 months from time of consent.

Subjectsconsent and then were enrolled in a long-term follow-up protocol that is assessing safety and efficacy beyond the study protocol’s follow-up period.

The HGB-205 study is a completed, single-dose, open-label, non-randomized, phase 1/2 clinical study at a single site in France to examine the safety and efficacy of beti-cel in four patients with TDT and of LentiGlobin for SCD in three patients with SCD. Patients were required to be between five and 35 years of age with a diagnosis of TDT or SCD at the time of enrollment. To be enrolled, patients with TDT must have received at least 100 mL/kg/year of RBCs per year for the past two years. Those with SCD must have failed to achieve clinical benefit from treatment with hydroxyurea and have an additional poor prognostic risk factor (e.g., recurrent vaso-occlusive crises, or VOCs, or acute chest sydrome, or ACS). All patients must have been eligible for allogeneic HSCT, but without a matched sibling allogeneic HSCT donor. The primary objective of our HGB-205 study was to determine the safety, tolerability and success of engraftment of beti-cel/ LentiGlobin for SCD. The secondary objectives of the study were to quantify gene transfer efficiency and expression, and to measure the effects of treatment with beti-cel/ LentiGlobin for SCD on disease-specific biological parameters and clinical events. In the case of patients with TDT and SCD, this meant the volume of RBC transfusions, and for patients with SCD, it also meant the number of VOCs and ACS in each patient, compared with the two-year period prior to treatment. Safety evaluations to be performed during the study include success and kinetics of HSC engraftment, incidence of transplant-related mortality post-treatment, overall survival, detection of vector-derived replication-competent lentivirus in any patient and characterization of events of clonal dominance or leukemia/ lymphoma.
As described above, patients participating in and completing the two years of follow up in either of the Phase 1/2 studies (HGB-204 and HGB-205) or the Phase 3 studies (HGB-207 and HGB-212) were invited to enroll in the 13-year long-term follow-up study LTF-303. In December 2020, we presented updated clinical data from LTF-303 study at the ASH Annual Meeting. All data presented at the ASH Annual Meeting and summarized below are as of the data cut-off date as of March 3, 2020:
Thirty-two patients were enrolled in LTF-303 (22 treated in Phase 1/2 studies, ten treated in Phase 3 studies) with a median post-infusion follow-up of 49.1 months (ranging from 23.3 to 71.8 months). Of the 32 patients enrolled in LTF-303, transfusion independence was achieved in 64 percent of patients (14 out of 22) treated in Phase 1/2 and in 90 percent of patients (nine out of ten) treated in Phase 3. All patients who achieved transfusion independence remained free from transfusions. The median duration of ongoing transfusion independence was 39.4 months (ranging from 19.4 to 69.4 months). Weighted average Hb in patients who achieved transfusion independence in the Phase 1/2 studies was 10.4 g/dL (ranging from 9.4 to 13.3 g/dL) and 12.5 g/dL (ranging from 11.9 to 13.5 g/dL) in patients who achieved transfusion independence in the Phase 3 studies.
4

Table of Contents
Median gene therapy-derived hemoglobin (HbAT87Q) in all patients treated in the Phase 1/2 studies was stable over time: with a median of 6.4 g/dL (ranging from 0.5 to 10.1 g/dL) in 22 patients at Month 24, a median of 6.7 g/dL (ranging from 0.4 to 10.1 g/dL) in 22 patients at Month 36, a median of 6.6 g/dL (ranging from 0.5 to 10.7 g/dL) in 22 patients at Month 48, and a median of 7.1 g/dL (ranging from 2.8 to 11.2 g/dL) in ten patients at Month 60. Median HbAT87Q at Month 24 in all ten patients treated in the Phase 3 studies was 9.5 g/dL (ranging from 0.9 to 12.4 g/dL).
Following an initial increase in liver iron concentration (LIC) after infusion, LIC in patients who achieved transfusion independence decreased, particularly in patients with a high iron burden at baseline. Two patients with severe iron burden (LIC >15 mg/g) and the five patients with significant iron burden (LIC ≥7 – 15 mg/g) at baseline had a median reduction of 59% and 38%, respectively, from baseline to Month 48.
Prior to beti-cel infusion, all patients were on iron chelation, which is needed to reduce excess iron caused by chronic blood transfusions. Fifteen of the 23 patients (65%) who achieved transfusion independence following treatment with beti-cel discontinued iron chelation. Seven of the 23 (30%) were able to receive phlebotomy (blood removal), which is a preferred method for iron reduction.
No cases of death, graft-versus-host disease, and replication-competent lentivirus, clonal dominance or leukemia/ lymphoma were observed as of data cut-off. No drug-related adverse events were reported >2 years post-infusion. Serious adverse events during LTF-303 unrelated to beti-cel included gonadotropic insufficiency, ectopic pregnancy, gall bladder wall thickening/polyp, bacteremia, neutropenia and major depression (with one case of each).
LentiGlobin for Sickle Cell Disease
We are developing LentiGlobin for SCD as a one-time treatment for patients with SCD, a hereditary blood disorder resulting from a mutation in the β-globin gene that causes polymerization of hemoglobin proteins, resulting in abnormal red blood cell function. The disease is characterized by hemolytic anemia, vaso-occlusive events (or VOEs, repeated acute painful episodes of vaso-occlusion due to sickle cell crises, acute chest syndrome, priapism, or chronic organ damage), cumulative damage to multiple organs, infections, stroke, overall poor quality of life and early death in a large subset of patients. As in our Northstar-3 Study willapproach with beti-cel in TDT, our approach in SCD involves the ex vivo insertion of the normal β-globin gene with the T87Q amino acid substitution using a lentiviral vector into the patient’s own HSCs to enable formation of normally functioning hemoglobin A and normal RBCs in patients. In LentiGlobin for SCD, T87Q serves as a distinct biomarker used to quantify expression levels of the functional β-globin protein in patients with SCD, while also providing anti-sickling properties. We refer to the cells that have undergone our ex vivo manufacturing process resulting in genetically modified HSCs as LentiGlobin for SCD.
Based on our prior discussions with the FDA, we believe that we may be treatedable to seek accelerated approval for LentiGlobin for SCD in the United States on the basis of clinical data from Group C of our HGB-206 clinical study, with our HGB-210 clinical study providing confirmatory data for full approval. However, in light of a SUSAR of acute myeloid leukemia and a SUSAR of myelodysplastic syndrome in our HGB-206 clinical study reported to us in February 2021, the FDA has placed our clinical studies of LentiGlobin product candidate manufactured using our refined drug product manufacturing processfor SCD on clinical hold. We are investigating these events and plan to continue to work closely with the objectiveFDA in their review of increasingthese events. In addition, we are also engaged with the vector copy numberEMA in discussions regarding our proposed development plans for LentiGlobin for SCD in Europe. LentiGlobin for SCD has been granted Orphan Drug status by the FDA and EMA and Fast-Track designation by the percentageFDA for the treatment of transduced cells.

In November 2017, we announced thatcertain patients with SCD. The FDA has also granted Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy, or RMAT, designation to LentiGlobin for SCD.

We are conducting, or have conducted, the first subjectfollowing clinical studies to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LentiGlobin for SCD in the Northstar-3 Study had received treatment of patients with our LentiGlobin product candidate.

SCD:

The HGB-206 study – Phase I clinical study in subjects with severe SCD

Our HGB-206 study is a single-dose, open-label, non-randomized, multi-site Phase Iphase 1/2 clinical study in the United States to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the LentiGlobin product candidate to treat severefor SCD.

Up to 29 adults will beApproximately fifty adult and adolescent patients are enrolled in the study. Study subjectsPatients must be ≥18at least twelve years of age with a diagnosis of sickle cell disease, with either βSS, βS+ or βS0 genotype. The sickle cell disease must be severe, as defined by recurrent severe vaso-occlusive events, acute chest syndrome, history of an overt stroke, or echocardiographic evidence of an elevated tricuspid regurgitation jet velocity, an indicator of pulmonary hypertension,VOEs, and subjectspatients must have failed to achieve clinical benefit from treatment with hydroxyurea. We refer to the 32 patients treated under the amended study protocol utilizing HSCs from peripheral blood after mobilization with plerixafor as patients in “Group C.” The subjects must also be eligibleprimary efficacy endpoint for HSCT.

Efficacy endpoints include changes in the frequencythis study is complete resolution of severe vaso-occlusive crises, acute chest syndrome,VOEs, between six and strokes or ischemic attacks.  Pharmacodynamic endpoints include measurements of transgene persistence18 months post-treatment, and transgene expression.the secondary efficacy endpoint for this study is globin response based on βA-T87Q expression and total hemoglobin. Safety endpoints include monitoring for laboratory parameters and frequency and severity of adverse events; the success and kinetics of HSC engraftment; the incidence of treatment related mortality and overall survival; the detection of vector-derived replication-competent lentivirus in any subject;patient; and the characterization of events of insertional mutagenesis leading to clonal dominance or leukemia.

Each subjectpatient will remain on study for approximately 2624 months from time of consentpost-treatment and then will be enrolled in a long-term follow-up protocol that will assess safety and efficacy beyond 24 months.

In October 2016, we announced that we have amended the protocol for our HGB-206 study to incorporate several changes with the goalprotocol’s follow-up period.

5

Table of increasing production of anti-sickling β-globin, such as increasing the percentage of transduced cells through manufacturing improvements, increasing target busulfan area under the curve, introducing a minimum period of regular blood transfusions prior to stem cell collection, and collecting HSCs from peripheral blood after mobilization with plerixafor rather than via bone marrow harvest. In February 2017, we treated the first subject under this amended protocol for the HGB-206 study.

Updated Clinical Data for the LentiGlobin product candidate in subjects with TDT or severe SCD

Updated clinical data from the Northstar Study in subjects with TDT

Contents

In December 2017,2020, we presented updated clinical data from our Northstar Study at the ASH Annual Meeting. All data presented at ASH Annual Meeting and summarized below from our Northstar Study are as of the data cut-off date of September 21, 2017. As of the data cut-off date, ten subjects with non-β00 genotypes and eight subjects with β00 genotypes have undergone infusion with LentiGlobin drug product in our Northstar Study.


For the 18 subjects, the median LentiGlobin drug product vector copy number was 0.7 (min. max: 0.3-1.5) copies per diploid genome, the median cell dose was 8.1 (range: 5.2-18.1) x 106 CD34+ cells/kg, and the proportion of transduced CD34+ cells was 17 to 58 percent. Vector copy number, or VCN, is a measurement of the mean number of viral vectors in a population of cells, or vector copies per diploid genome.

As of the data cut-off date, all 18 subjects have ≥18 months follow up, with ten having completed the two-year follow up analysis. Three subjects have had three years of follow up, for a median of 27.4 (range: 17.5-36.5) months of follow up.

Nine of ten subjects with non-β00 genotypes were free from chronic transfusions, for a median of 29 (range: 14.7-33.1) months. These nine subjects had HbAT87Q concentrations of 3.6-9.3 (g/dL). The one subject with a non-β00 genotype who still required periodic transfusions was treated with LentiGlobin drug product having a VCN in the lower range (0.3 copies per diploid genome).

Two of eight subjects with β00 genotypes have not received a transfusion in more than a year (16.7 months and 15.7 months). At the subjects’ lastHGB-206 study visits (Month 36 and Month 18, respectively), total hemoglobin levels were 10.2 and 10.3 g/dL and HbAT87Q levels were 9.7 and 7.0 g/dL, respectively. Clinically meaningful reductions in transfusion volume and frequency were observed in five of the six subjects with β00 genotypes who have continued to receive transfusions.

The safety profile of LentiGlobin drug product continues to be consistent with myeloablative conditioning with single-agent busulfan. No Grade 3 or higher drug product-related adverse events have been observed. All subjects remain enrolled in the study and there have been no reports of graft versus host disease.

It should be noted that these data presented above are current as of the data cut-off date, are preliminary in nature and our Northstar Study is not complete. There is limited data concerning long-term safety and efficacy following treatment with our LentiGlobin product candidate. These data may not continue for these subjects or be repeated or observed in ongoing or future studies involving our LentiGlobin product candidate in subjects with TDT, including this study, our HGB-205 study, our Northstar-2 Study, or our Northstar-3 Study. It is possible that subjects for whom transfusion support has been reduced or eliminated may receive transfusion support in the future.

Updated clinical data from the Northstar-2 Study in subjects with TDT and a non-β0/β0 genotype

In December 2017, we presented updated clinical data from our Northstar-2 Study at the ASH Annual Meeting.  As of December 1, 2017, drug product had been manufactured for ten subjects, using our updated refined drug product manufacturing process. The median LentiGlobin drug product VCN for these subjects was 3.3 (range: 2.4-5.4) copies per diploid genome.  

As of October 13, 2017, seven subjects, with ages of 15-24 years, had been infused with LentiGlobin drug product. The median follow-up period was 3 (range 1-9) months. Three subjects who had ≥6 months of follow-up as of October 13, 2017 are transfusion-free, and of the three subjects, two have achieved or are approaching a normal total hemoglobin level (up to 12.5 g/dL total Hb; range in three subjects: 8.4 – 12.5 g/dL) without transfusions (up to 10.2 g/dL vector-derived HbAT87Q). Five of six subjects treated in the study with ≥3 months of follow-up available as of December 1, 2017 are making at least 6 g/dL of HbAT87Q.

The safety profile of LentiGlobin drug product to date is similar to that observed in the Northstar Study, and consistent with myeloablative conditioning with single-agent busulfan. No drug product-related adverse events have been observed. All subjects remain enrolled in the study and there have been no reports of graft versus host disease.

It should be noted that these data presented above are current as of the data cut-off date, are preliminary in nature and our Northstar Study-2 is not complete. There is limited data concerning long-term safety and efficacy following treatment with our LentiGlobin product candidate. These data may not continue for these subjects or be repeated or observed in ongoing or future studies involving our LentiGlobin product candidate in subjects with TDT, including this study, our Northstar Study, or our Northstar-3 Study, or our HGB-205 study. It is possible that subjects for whom transfusion support has been reduced or eliminated may receive transfusion support in the future.

Updated clinical data from the HGB-205 study in subjects with TDT or severe SCD

In December 2017, we presented updated clinical data from our HGB-205 study in subjects with SCD or TDT at the ASH Annual Meeting. All data presented at the ASH Annual Meeting and summarized below from our HGB-205 study are as of the data cut-off date as of SeptemberAugust 20, 2017. As2020:

A total of the data cut-off date, the study had enrolled three subjects with severe SCD and four subjects with TDT.


All three subjects with severe SCD32 patients were infusedtreated with LentiGlobin drug productfor SCD gene therapy in Group C of HGB-206 and showed risinghad up to 30.9 months of follow-up with a median of 13.0 months (ranging from 1.1 to 30.9 months).

In the 22 patients with six or more months of follow-up whose hemoglobin fractions were available, median levels of gene therapy-derived anti-sickling hemoglobin, HbAT87Q, were maintained with HbAT87Q contributing at least 40% of total hemoglobin at Month 6. Total hemoglobin and HbAT87Q ranged from 9.6 to 15.1 g/dL and 2.7 to 8.9 g/dL, respectively.
At Month 6, the production of HbAT87Q was associated with a reduction in the first six months following infusion. Subject 1204proportion of HbS in total hemoglobin; median HbS was 13 years old50% and remained less than 60% at study enrollment. At 30 months post-drug product infusion, this subject had a total hemoglobin level of 12.4 g/dL, of which 6.1 g/dL was HbAT87Q and 52 percent was anti-sickling hemoglobin. HbAT87Q concentrationall follow-up timepoints. All patients in this subject has remained stable since approximately nine months post-infusion. The subject continuesGroup C were able to show marked clinical improvement. Subject 1207 was 16 years old at study enrollment. At 9 months following drug product infusion, this subject had a total hemoglobin of 10.0 g/dL, of which 0.7 g/dL was HbAT87Q and 14 percent was anti-sickling hemoglobin). This subject had a pre-treatment history of frequent episodes of vaso-occlusive crisis (VOC) and acute chest syndrome (ACS) despite hydroxyurea prior to beginningstop regular transfusions. Subject 1207 had episodes of ACS and hospitalization at six and eightblood transfusions by three months post-treatment and was treated with exchange transfusions.  Subject 1208 was 21 years old at study enrollment. At last follow-up (6.0 months), this subject had a total hemoglobin of 10.6 g/dL, of which 2.7 g/dL was HbAT87Q and 46 percent was anti-sickling hemoglobin). This subject had a pre-treatment history of frequent episodes of VOCs and ACS prior to beginning regularremain off transfusions and was still symptomatic while receiving regular transfusions. Following LentiGlobin treatment, Subject 1208 has had no episodes of VOCs or ACS (with six months follow-up).

All four subjects with TDT have remained free of chronic transfusions since shortly after receiving LentiGlobin drug product. Subject 1201 (β0E genotype) has been free of transfusions for 45.2 months with total hemoglobin of 10.1 g/dL at month 42, of which 6.7 g/dL was HbAT87Q. Subject 1202 (β0E genotype) has been free of transfusions for 40.1 months with total hemoglobin of 12.9 g/dLat month 42, of which 10.1 g/dL was HbAT87Q. Subject 1206 (β0E genotype) has been free of transfusions for 23.8 months with total hemoglobin of 11.1 g/dL at month 21, of which 8.0 g/dL was HbAT87Q. Subject 1203, who is homozygous for the severe β+ mutation IVS1-110, has been free of transfusions for 20.9 months with total hemoglobin of 8.7 g/dL at month 24, of which 6.7 g/dL was HbAT87Q. Three of four subjects (1201, 1202 and 1206) were able to begin therapeutic phlebotomy. Subject 1202 subsequently discontinued iron chelation and phlebotomy.

The safety profile of LentiGlobin drug product continues to be consistent with myeloablative conditioning with single-agent busulfan. No drug-product related adverse events have been observed.

It should be noted that these data presented above are current as of the data cut-off date, are preliminarycut-off.

Nineteen patients treated in nature Group C had a history of severe VOEs, defined as at least four severe VOEs in the 24 months prior to informed consent (annualized rate of severe VOE ranging from 2.0 to10.5 events)and our HGB-205at least six months follow-up after treatment with LentiGlobin for SCD. There have been no reports of severe VOEs in these Group C patients following treatment with LentiGlobin for SCD. In addition, all 19 patients had a complete resolution of VOEs after Month 6.
The safety data from Group C patients in HGB-206 remain generally consistent with the known side effects of HSC collection and myeloablative single-agent busulfan conditioning, as well as underlying SCD. One non-serious, Grade 2 adverse event (AE) of febrile neutropenia was considered related to LentiGlobin for SCD. There were no serious AEs related to LentiGlobin for SCD. One patient with significant baseline SCD-related and cardiopulmonary disease died 20 months post-treatment; the treating physician and an independent monitoring committee agreed his death was unlikely related to LentiGlobin for SCD and that SCD-related cardiac and pulmonary disease contributed.
HGB-210 is a single-dose, open-label, non-randomized, multi-site, international phase 3 clinical study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LentiGlobin for SCD in the treatment of patients with SCD and a history of vaso-occlusive events, or VOEs, with a target enrollment of 35 pediatric, adolescent and adult patients. Patients must be at least two years of age at enrollment with a diagnosis of sickle cell disease, with βSS, βS+ or βS0 genotype. The sickle cell disease must be severe, as defined by recurrent severe VOEs, and patients must have failed to achieve clinical benefit from treatment with hydroxyurea. The patients must also be eligible for HSCT. The primary efficacy endpoint for this study is not complete. Thereglobin response based on βA-T87Q expression and total hemoglobin, and the secondary efficacy endpoint for this study is limited data concerning75% reduction in annualized severe VOEs. Safety endpoints include monitoring for laboratory parameters and frequency and severity of adverse events; the success and kinetics of HSC engraftment; the incidence of treatment related mortality and overall survival; the detection of vector-derived replication-competent lentivirus in any patient; and the characterization of events of insertional mutagenesis leading to clonal dominance or leukemia. Each patient will remain on study for approximately 24 months post-treatment and then will be enrolled in a long-term follow-up protocol that will assess safety and efficacy following treatment with our LentiGlobin product candidate. These data may not continue for these subjects or be repeated or observed in ongoing or future studies involving our LentiGlobin product candidate in subjects with TDT or SCD, including thisbeyond the study our Northstar Study, our Northstar-2 Study, or our Northstar-3 Study. Itprotocol’s follow-up period.
HGB-205 is possible that subjects for whom transfusion support has been reduced or eliminated may receive transfusion support in the future. Furthermore, the LentiGlobin drug product used for the HGB-205 study is manufactured at the clinical trial site in Paris, and is not manufactured at our third-party manufacturing locations, and does not use our updated drug product manufacturing process that is being utilized in our Northstar-2 Study.


Updated clinical data from the HGB-206a completed single-center phase 1/2 study in subjectsFrance of patients with SCD which also enrolled patients with TDT.

Elivaldogene autotemcel
We are developing eli-cel as a one-time treatment for CALD, the most severe SCD

Also in December 2017 at the ASH Annual Meeting, we presented updated clinical data from our HGB-206 studyform of subjects with severe SCD.  All data presented at the ASH Annual Meeting and summarized below from our HGB-206 study are as of the data cut-off date of October 26, 2017 for Group A and November 30, 2017 for Group B. Subjects in this study are divided into three cohorts: A, B and C. Subjects in Group A were treated under the original study protocol. Subjects in Group B were treated under an amended study protocol that included changes intended to increase drug product VCN and to improve engraftment of gene-modified stem cells. Subjects in both Group A and B had drug product made from stem cells collected using bone marrow harvest. Subjects in Group C are also treated under the amended study protocol, but received LentiGlobin made from stem cells collected from peripheral blood after mobilization with plerixafor, rather than via bone marrow harvest. As of the data cut-off date, ten subjects had been treated in the study and follow‑up data were available on nine subjects from groups A and B, with a median of 21 (6-27) months since transplantation.  The updated clinical data from our HGB-206 study presented at the ASH Annual Meeting are summarized below.

 

Group A

N=7

Median (min-max)

Group B

N=2

 

Subject 1312

Subject 1313

Transduced CD34+ cells (%)

25 (8-42)

951, 901

46, 831

Drug product Cell Dose (x106 CD34+ cells)

2.1 (1.6-5.1)

3.2

2.2

Drug product VCN (copies per diploid genome)

0.6 (0.3-1.3)

2.91, 5.01

1.4, 3.31

VCN in peripheral blood (copies per diploid genome at last measurement)

0.1 (0.1-0.2)

2.5 (month 6)

0.5 (month 9)

HbAT87Q (g/dL at last measurement)

0.7 (0.5-2.0)

6.4 (month 6)

3.0 (month 9)

HbAT87Q (% of total, at last measurement)

7.9 (5.3-18.2)

51% (month 6)

28% (month 9)

1

LentiGlobin drug product manufactured using refined process. Both subjects in Group B received drug product from two manufacturing lots. Data regarding each of these LentiGlobin drug product lots for these two subjects are reflected in the table above. Further, Subject 1313 received LentiGlobin drug product manufactured using a combination of the original and the updated manufacturing process. Subject 1312 received LentiGlobin drug product manufactured entirely using the updated manufacturing process.

As of November 30, 2017, LentiGlobin drug product has been manufactured for four subjects enrolled in Group C of this study, for which the median transduced CD34+ cells was 80 percent, the median drug product cell dose was 6.9 x106 CD34+ cells, and the median drug product VCN was 3.3 copies per diploid genome. The first subject treated with LentiGlobin in Group C of this study had VCN of 2.5 copies per diploid genome in peripheral blood one month following infusion.

The safety profile of LentiGlobin drug product observed from drug product infusion to latest follow-up was generally consistent with myeloablative conditioning with single-agent busulfan.

It should be noted that these data presented above are current as of the respective data cut-off dates, are preliminary in nature and our HGB-206 study is not complete. There is limited data concerning long-term safety and efficacy following treatment with our LentiGlobin drug product. These data may not continue for these subjects or be repeated or observed in ongoing or future studies involving our LentiGlobin product candidate in subjects with severe SCD, including this study and our HGB-205 study. It is possible that subjects for whom complications of severe SCD have been reduced or eliminated may experience complications of severe SCD in the future. Furthermore, the LentiGlobin drug product used in the HGB-206 study under the original protocol and presented above did not utilize our refined drug product manufacturing process that is being utilized under the amended protocol for the HGB-206 study.


Clinical data for plerixafor-mediated peripheral HSC collection in subjects with severe SCD

Also in December 2017, we presented clinical data on the feasibility and potential benefits of plerixafor-mediated peripheral HSC collection and LentiGlobin drug product manufacturing subjects with severe SCD at the ASH Annual Meeting. The results of the study, as of the November 30, 2017 data cut-off, suggest that plerixafor mobilization is generally tolerable for severe SCD subjects, and may enable the collection of a greater quantity of higher quality cells that may be used in the manufacture of LentiGlobin drug product, as summarized below:

Number of Subjects

Bone Marrow Harvest

9 (26 BMHs)

Plerixafor-Mediated Peripheral Blood HSC Collection

7 (10 mobilization cycles)

Adverse Events

17 Grade >3 AEs following BMH in 5 subjects,

4 were SAEs (1 procedural pain, 3 SCD pain crisis)

5 Grade 3 events included 2 non-serious (hypomagnesemia and non-cardiac chest pain),

3 were SAEs (1 subject each) of SCD pain crisis

CD34+ cells collected per harvest

median (min-max) cells/kg

5.0 (0.3-10.8) x 106

10.4 (5.1-20.0) x 106

Our Lenti-D product candidate opportunity

Adrenoleukodystrophy

Adrenoleukodystrophy isadrenololeukodystrophy, a rare X-linked metabolic disorder caused by mutations in the ABCD1 gene, which results in a deficiency in adrenoleukodystrophy protein, or ALDP, and subsequent accumulation of very long-chain fatty acids or VLCFA. VLCFA accumulation occurs in plasma and all tissue types, but primarily affects the adrenal cortex and white matter of the brain and spinal cord,tissues, leading to a range of clinical outcomes. The most severe form of ALD, the inflammatory cerebral phenotype, referred to as CALD involves a progressive destruction of myelin, the protective sheath of the nerve cells in the brain that are responsible for thinking and muscle control. Symptoms of CALD usually occur in early childhood and progress rapidly if untreated, leading to severe loss of neurological function and eventual death in most patients. We estimate that approximately 35%  to 40% of boys with ALD will develop CALD.

Limitations of current treatment options

There is a clear unmet medical need for patients with CALD. Currently, the only effective treatment option is allogeneic HSCT. In this procedure, the patient is treated with HSCs containing a functioning copy of the gene contributed by a donor other than the patient.

Allogeneic HSCT is an effective treatment option for patients in the earliest stages of cerebral disease, ideally using an unaffected matched sibling HSC donor to minimize complications. However, the majority of allogeneic HSCT procedures for CALD are carried out with non-sibling matched donor cells or partially matched related or unrelated donor cells including umbilical cord blood cells because a matched sibling donor is not available. The difficulty of finding a suitable donor is one of the primary limitations of this approach. Complications of allogeneic HSCT include a significant risk of morbidity and mortality related to graft failure, GVHD and opportunistic infections, particularly in patients who undergo non-sibling-matched allogeneic HSCT.

As the outcome of HSCT varies with clinical stage of the disease at the time of transplant, early diagnosis of CALD is important. In the United States, newborn screening for ALD was added to the Recommended Universal Screening Panel, or RUSP, in February 2016. The RUSP is a list of disorders that are screened at birth and recommended by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for states to screen as part of their state universal newborn screening program. Disorders are chosen based on evidence that supports the potential net benefit of screening, among other factors. A small number of states in the United States have added ALD to their newborn screening programs. Newborn screening may have a profound impact on early identification and treatment of boys with CALD.

Our Lenti-D product candidate

We are developing our Lenti-D product candidate as an autologous treatment with the potential to provide the effectiveness seen with allogeneic-HSCT, but without the immunologic risk. Our approach involves the ex vivo insertion of a functional copy of the ABCD1 gene via an HIV-1 baseda lentiviral vector into the patient’s own HSCs. Following engraftment, we expect the transduced HSCs to correctdifferentiate into other cell types, including macrophages and cerebral microglia, which produce functional ALDP. We believe that the aberrant expressionfunctional ALDP can then enable the local degradation of ALDPVLCFAs in the brain, which in turn can stabilize the disease by preventing further cerebral inflammation and demyelination that are characteristics of CALD.

In October 2020, the EMA accepted our Marketing Authorization Application in the EU for eli-cel for the treatment of patients with CALD. Based on our discussions with the FDA, we believe that we may be able to seek approval for eli-cel for the treatment of patients with CALD on the basis of safety and efficacy data from our ongoing Starbeam study, safety data from our ongoing ALD-104 study, and the completed ALD-103 observational study. For the assessment of efficacy, we expect that the clinical results of the Starbeam study will be compared to a clinically meaningful benchmark based on the medical literature
6

Table of Contents
and data collected in ALD-101, a retrospective analysis that assessed the natural history of CALD, as well as outcomes of patients with CALD who had received allogeneic HSCT. For the assessment of safety, we expect that the clinical results of the Starbeam study will be compared to data collected from the ALD-103 study, a multinational, multi-site, prospective and retrospective observational study designed to evaluate outcomes of allogeneic HSCT in patients with CALD. Upon successful engraftment of our Lenti-D product candidate, weWe currently expect that microglia into submit the brain derived fromBLA for eli-cel for the transduced HSCs will express functional ALDP and stabilize the demyelination and cerebral inflammation characteristics of CALD.


We treated the first subject in the Starbeam Study in the United States in 2013. In October 2017, interim data was published in the New England Journal of Medicine along with a poster presentation at the Child Neurology Society Annual Meeting. In January 2018, we announced that we intend to expand the Starbeam Study to enroll a total of 30 patients in an effort to enable the manufacture of our Lenti-D product candidate in Europe, the subsequent treatment of subjectspatients with CALD in Europe, and to bolster our overall clinical data package for potential future regulatory filings in the United States and Europe. We are currently enrolling the additional subjects in the Starbeam Study.

If successful, and pending further discussion with the regulatory authorities, the results from the Starbeam Study could potentially form the basis of a BLA submission to the FDA and an MAA to the EMA for Lenti-D.  We are planning to submit our first filing for regulatory approval of Lenti-D in 2019.  However, there can be no assurance that the FDA and the EMA will not require additional studies before the approval of a BLA or MAA, respectively. The FDAmid-2021. Eli-cel has advised us that the Starbeam Study may not be deemed to be a pivotal study or may not provide sufficient support for a BLA submission. The FDA normally requires two pivotal clinical studies to approve a drug or biologic product, and thus the FDA may require that we conduct additional clinical studies of Lenti-D prior to a BLA submission. Lenti-D has beenbeen granted Orphan Drug status by the FDA and EMA for adrenoleukodystrophy.

Clinical development of our Lenti-D product candidate

Completed non-interventional retrospective study (the ALD-101 Study)

CALD is a rare disease The FDA has granted Breakthrough Therapy designation and as such, data on the natural history ofEMA has granted PRIME eligibility to eli-cel.

We are conducting the disease, as well as the efficacy and safety profile of allogeneic HSCT is limited in the scientific literature. In order to further characterize the natural history of CALD, describe outcomes after HSCT, and identify predictors of positive treatment outcomes, we performed a large, multicenter, retrospective chart review and collected data on 72 untreated CALD patients, and 65 CALD patients who received allogeneic HSCT.  In the study, we collected survival, functional and neuropsychological assessments and neuroimaging data for both treated and untreated patients, as available; however, given the retrospective nature of the study, we were not able to collect comprehensive data for all subjects.  Additional analyses were conducted to gain further insight into ongoing risks and determinants of successful outcomes after HSCT, identify appropriate populations for treatment, and define endpoints that could be useful for future clinical studies.

Starbeam Study (ALD-102) – Phase II/III clinical study in subjects with CALD

In October 2013, we treated the first subject in a Phase II/III clinical study, called the Starbeam Study, of our Lenti-D product candidate,following studies to evaluate itsthe safety and efficacy of eli-cel in subjectsthe treatment of patients with CALD.  CALD:

TheStarbeam study (ALD-102)is designed as a single-dose, open-label, non-randomized, international, multi-site Phase II/IIIphase 2/3 study to testevaluate the safety and efficacy of our Lenti-D product candidateeli-cel in preserving neurologicalmales with CALD ≤ 17 years of age. Thirty-two patients have been enrolled in this study. Key inclusion criteria included: male and, at time of enrollment, ≤ 17 years of age and with a neurologic function score (NFS) of ≤ 1, with active CALD as defined by elevated very long chain fatty acids (VLCFA) levels, and stabilizing cerebral demyelination in subjectsbrain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) demonstrating Loes score between 0.5 and ≤ 9 (inclusive) and evidence of gadolinium enhancement (GdE+). Patients with CALD. Subjects will be followed for 24 months post-infusion under this protocol. In accordance with applicable guidancea willing, unaffected 10/10 HLA-matched sibling HSC donor were excluded from the FDA and EMA, we will be monitoring study subjects in a separate long-term follow up protocol to evaluate safety for up to 15 years, and will also monitor efficacy endpoints to demonstrate a sustained treatment effect.

study. The primary efficacy endpoint of the study is the proportion of patients who are alive and free of six major functional disabilities, (MFD)or MFD, at 24 months post-treatment.  MFDs are 6 of the most severe functional disabilities typical of CALD that are thought to be of the greatest clinical significance because they most severely impair a patient’s ability to functional independently. They arewere defined as loss of communication, nocomplete loss of voluntary movement, cortical blindness, tube feeding, wheelchair dependence, and total incontinence. These six MFDs were selected as they are considered to have the most significant impact on the ability of patients with CALD to function independently, representing unambiguous and profound neurologic degeneration. Secondary and exploratory endpoints included monitoring over time of the following: NFS, a 25-point scale used to evaluate the severity of gross neurologic dysfunction by scoring 15 neurological abnormalities across multiple domains; Loes score, a 34-pont scale designed to objectively measure the extent of demyelination and atrophy in CALD patients, based on brain magnetic resonance imagining, or MRI, studies; and gadolinium enhancement status, associated with inflammation and disruption of the blood brain barrier on brain MRI.

The primary safety endpoint is the proportion of patients who experience either ≥ Grade 2 acute GVHD or chronic GVHD by 2 years post-treatment.

Secondary and exploratory endpoints Some additional safety evaluations include change in Neurologic Function Score (NFS), change in Loes score, resolution of gadolinium enhancement on MRI, evidence of graft failure, and occurrence of AEs and SAEs.


The NFS is a 25-point score used to evaluate the severity of gross neurologic dysfunction by scoring 15 neurological abnormalities across multiple domains. These neurological abnormalities are listed below. Among the 15 functional domains in the NFS scale, we consider six to be of particular clinical importance because when these neurological abnormalities occur, a potential subject’s ability to function independently is severely compromised. These particular deficiencies, which we define as major functional disabilities, or MFDs, are loss of communication, complete loss of voluntary movement, cortical blindness, requirement for tube feeding, wheelchair dependence and total incontinence.

Symptoms

Score

Loss of communication

3

No voluntary movement

3

Cortical blindness

2

Tube feeding

2

Wheelchair required

2

Total incontinence

2

Swallowing/other CNS dysfunctions

2

Spastic gait (needs assistance)

2

Hearing/auditory processing problems

1

Aphasia/apraxia

1

Visual impairment/fields cut

1

Running difficulties/hyperreflexia

1

Walking difficulties/spasticity/spastic gait (no assistance)

1

Episodes of incontinency

1

Nonfebrile seizures

1

Total

25

The Loes score is a 34-point scale specifically designed to objectively measure the extent of demyelination and atrophy in CALD based on brain magnetic resonance imaging, or MRI, studies. Increasing Loes scores indicate worsening disease. A Loes score of one-half or more (i.e., the presence of any such abnormalities) indicates the cerebral form of the disease, and patients with a Loes score of 10 or more generally are not considered to be good candidates for allogeneic HSCT due to the advanced stage of the disease. CALD can progress rapidly and is associated with severe inflammation and disruption of the blood brain barrier which can be detected by gadolinium enhancement on brain MRI. Evidence of gadolinium enhancement, referred to by clinicians as a gadolinium positive result, is highly predictive of rapid neurologic decline. However, while pre-transplant gadolinium status is clearly correlated with rapid disease progression, the kinetics of gadolinium enhancement after clinically successful HCST are not well understood.

In the study, subjects must be age seventeen years or younger with a confirmed diagnosis of active CALD, including elevated levels of plasma VLCFA, a brain MRI Loes score of 0.5 to nine, inclusive, evidence of gadolinium enhancement and an NFS one. Subjects with a willing, unaffected 10/10 HLA matched sibling HSCT donor will be excluded from the study. In December 2016, we amended the protocol of the Starbeam Study to enroll up to eight additional patients in an effort to enable the first manufacture of our Lenti-D product candidate in Europe and the subsequent treatment of subjects in Europe, and to bolster our overall clinical data package for potential future regulatory filings in the United States and Europe.

The sample size for this study was not determined by formal statistical methods, but we believe it may be sufficient to demonstrate a robust effect on the binary response endpoint, where a responder is defined as a subject with no MFD at 24 months (±two months) following treatment with Lenti-D drug product. Thus, we expect the FDA and EMA will make a qualitative assessment of the efficacy and safety data from this study to evaluate whether the results are sufficient to support a BLA or MAA filing.

Safety evaluations will be performed during the study and will include evaluation of the following: success and kinetics of HSC engraftment;engraftment, incidence of transplant-related mortality; detection of vector-derived replication of thereplication-competent lentivirus; and characterization and quantification of events related to the location of insertion of the functional ABCD1gene in target cells.

If successful, we believe that the results Patients will be followed for 24 months post-treatment under this protocol. In accordance with applicable guidance from the Starbeam Study could formFDA and EMA, we will be monitoring patients in a separate long-term follow up protocol (LTF-304) to evaluate safety for up to 15 years, and will also monitor efficacy endpoints to demonstrate a sustained treatment effect.

In August 2020, we presented updated clinical data at the basis of a BLA and an MAA. However, given the current number of subjects and design46th Annual Meeting of the studyEuropean Society for Blood and the qualitative/subjective assessment of the data, there can be no assurance the FDA or EMA will not require one or more additional clinical studies as a precursor to a BLA application or an MAA, respectively. The FDA has advised us that the Starbeam Study may not be deemed to be a pivotal study or may not provide sufficient support for a BLA submission. The FDA normally requires two pivotal clinical studies to approve a drug or biologic product, and thus the FDA may require that we conduct additional clinical studies of our Lenti-D product candidate prior to a BLA submission.


Interim Clinical Data from the Starbeam Study

In October 2017, we presented interim clinical data from the Starbeam Study at the Child Neurology Society (CNS) Annual Meeting.Marrow Transplantation (EBMT). All data presented at the CNS Annual Meeting and summarized below from the Starbeam Study are as of January 2020, except as otherwise indicated:

The data reflect a total patient population of 32 patients in the data cut-off datestudy, with a median follow-up time of August 25, 2017. 30.0 months and a range of 9.1 to 70.7 months. Of the 32 patients who have received eli-cel, 20 had completed ALD-102 and were enrolled in LTF-304, while nine continued to be followed in ALD-102 not having reached 24 months post-treatment, and three were no longer on-study. Of the three patients who are no longer on the study, two withdrew from the study at investigator discretion, and one experienced rapid disease progression early in the study, resulting in MFDs and death.
Of the 23 patients who have or would have reached 24 months of follow-up and completed the study, 87 percent (20 out of 23) have met the primary endpoint and continue to be alive and MFD-free in LTF-304. Fourteen patients have at least four years of follow-up, including ten patients who have reached at least their Year 5 follow-up visit. The nine patients from ALD-102 that have not reached Month 24 have shown no evidence of MFDs.
Of the 32 patients who have received eli-cel, 31 had stable NFS (NFS ≤ 4, without a change of >3 from baseline) and 24 patients maintained an NFS of 0 following treatment.
As of the data cut-off date, eachno acute or chronic GvHD have been reported post- treatment and there have been no reports of graft failure or graft rejection. The treatment regimen, comprising mobilization/apheresis, conditioning, and eli-cel infusion, had a safety and tolerability profile primarily reflective of the initial cohortknown effects of mobilization/apheresis and conditioning. In ALD-102, as previously reported, three adverse events were considered possibly related to eli-cel and include one serious adverse event (Grade 3 BK viral cystitis),
7

Table of Contents
and two non-serious adverse events (Grade 1 vomiting). All three adverse events resolved using standard measures.
There have been no cases of replication competent lentivirus or insertional oncogenesis as of the data-cutoff date. Integration site analysis was conducted to determine the pattern of proviral integration post-eli-cel treatment and assess whether dominant or expanding clones were present. In one patient, now enrolled in LTF-304 for long-term follow up, a case of benign clonal expansion was observed with three separate integrations in the DNA of the cell at ACER3, RFX3, and MECOM. As of the patient’s Month 62 visit in March 2020, the patient remained clinically stable. Bone marrow analyses showed no dysplasia (abnormal cell growth) or molecular abnormalities.
The ALD-104 study is an open-label, non-randomized, international, multi-site phase 3 study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of eli-cel in males with CALD ≤ 17 subjects had achieved 24 monthsyears of post-treatment follow-up. Fifteenage after myeloablative conditioning using busulfan and fludarabine, a different chemotherapy conditioning regimen than what is used in ALD-102 (busulfan and cyclophosphamide). Target enrollment in ALD-104 is 35 patients. Key inclusion criteria included: male and, at time of these initialenrollment, ≤ 17 subjects remain aliveyears of age and freewith a neurolgoci function score (NFS) of MFDs, the≤ 1, with active CALD as defined by elevated very long chain fatty acids (VLCFA) levels, and brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) demonstrating Loes score between 0.5 and ≤ 9 (inclusive) and evidence of gadolinium enhancement (GdE+). The primary efficacy endpoint of the trial. These 15 subjects also maintained NFS ≤ 1study is the proportion of patients who are alive and free of six MFDs at 24 months of follow-up. Twelvepost-treatment. Secondary and exploratory endpoints included monitoring over time of the 17 subjects had a stablefollowing: NFS, Loes score, and gadolinium enhancement status, associated with inflammation and disruption of the blood brain barrier on brain MRIThe primary safety endpoint is the proportion of patients with neutrophil engraftment after eli-cel infusion (time frame: 42 days post drug-product infusion).
In August 2020, we presented updated clinical data at 24the 46th Annual Meeting of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT). All data presented and summarized below are as of February 2020:
13 patients were on study with a median of 6.1 months of follow-up defined(ranging from 2.2 to 10.3 months). All 13 patients achieved neutrophil engraftment and 12 out of 13 evaluable patients had platelet engraftment (platelet engraftment pending in one patient as maintaining a Loes score of ≤ 9data cut date).
No events of acute or not increasing by ≥ 6 from baseline. Fourteen of these initial 17 subjects showed resolution of gadolinium enhancement at their last follow-up.

As of August 25, 2017, an additional four subjects in the expansion cohortchronic GvHD had been infusedreported and received Lenti-D drug product withthere have been no reports of graft failure, graft rejection, cases of insertional oncogenesis, or replication competent lentivirus.

The treatment regimen, comprising mobilization/apheresis, conditioning, and eli-cel infusion had a median drug product VCNsafety and tolerability profile primarily reflective of 1.4 (range: 1.2 – 1.9) copies per diploid genome.  Mostthe known effects of mobilization/apheresis and conditioning. Two adverse events for the entire cohort occurred during the 2 weeks post-transplant and mostof pancytopenia were associated with myeloablative chemotherapy. There were three adverse events deemed related orconsidered possibly related to Lenti-D drug product:eli-cel. These two ongoing adverse events were deemed as suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions by the principal investigator and were diagnosed approximately two months post-eli-cel treatment in two patients (one Grade 2 and one Grade 3). An additional serious adverse event was ongoing as of February 2020, a Grade 3 BK-mediated viral cystitis, one adverse event of Grade 1 tachycardia, and one adverse event of Grade 1 vomiting.  All resolved with standard measures.  Theretransverse myelitis that was no engraftment failure or GVHD. There was no evidence of insertional oncogenesis.

It should be noted that the data presented above are current as of August 25, 2017, are preliminary in nature and the Starbeam Study is not complete. There are limited data concerning long-term safety and efficacy following treatment with our Lenti-D product candidate. These responses may not continue for these subjects or be repeated or observed in our ongoing Starbeam Study or future studies involving our Lenti-D product candidate. It is possible that subjects who exhibit NFS stabilization, a stable Loes score, or resolution of gadolinium enhancement as of the data cut-off date may experience disease progressiondiagnosed in the future.

presence of viral infection (adenovirus and rhinovirus/enterovirus positivity) approximately six months after eli-cel treatment and deemed unrelated to eli-cel.

The ALD-103 study – Observational study

We are also conducting the ALD-103 study, anis a completed observational prospective andprospective/ partially retrospective data collection study of 60 subjects59 patients with CALD ≤17 years of age who received allogeneic HSCT. This study is ongoing andwas designed to collect efficacy and safety outcomes data in subjectspatients who havehad undergone allogeneic HSCT in a period that is contemporaneous with the Starbeam Study.study. The study measured CALD disease-related outcomes in four patient cohorts: early disease 1 (N=21; Loes ≤4 and NFS ≤1); early disease 2 (N=9; Loes >4 to 9 and NFS ≤1); all early disease (N=30; Loes ≤9 and NFS ≤1); and advanced disease (N=10; Loes >9 or NFS >1). Transplant-related outcomes were assessed by donor stem cell source, by donor match, and by conditioning regimen. We anticipate that our Lenti-D product candidateeli-cel safety and efficacy will be evaluated by the FDA and EMA in light of the data collected in the Starbeam Studystudy in conjunction with our retrospective observational ALD-101 study and our retrospective and prospective observational ALD-103 study.

Our collaboration with Boston Children’s Hospital in severe SCD

We are collaborating with investigators at Boston Children’s Hospital, or BCH, to advance a product candidate that utilizes a lentiviral vector delivering a short hairpin RNA, or shRNA, embedded in a microRNA, or miRNA, which is knownstudy, as a shRNAmiR, to suppress the genetic target BCL11a to upregulate fetal hemoglobin to treat patients with severe SCD.  An IND to investigate this product candidate in a Phase I clinical study is now open, andwell as safety results from our collaborators at BCH plan to initiate the clinical study in the first half of 2018.  We have an exclusive license to this program and the related intellectual property from BCH.

Our preclinical research opportunitiesongoing ALD-104 study.

Strategic collaborations in severe genetic diseases

disease

We believehave formed and intend to seek other opportunities to form strategic collaborations with third parties who can augment our currentindustry-leading gene therapy platform will enable usand expertise, and to access the substantial funding and other resources required to develop and test new vectors basedcommercialize gene therapy products. To date, we have focused on similar viral vector backbones that carry different gene sequences for other severe genetic diseases. In this way, we believe that we can advance products efficiently through preclinical into clinical development. We may considerforging a limited number of significant strategic collaborations with leading pharmaceutical companies and academic research and development programs targeting other monogenic, genetic diseases that involve cells derived from HSCs for use in the ex vivo setting. These programs may involve severe genetic and rare diseases that could be developed and potentially commercialized on our own.

In addition, we believe ourcenters where both parties contribute expertise in gene editing and cell transduction also provides an opportunity to develop new products for use in the in vivo setting. In this case, homing endonucleases and MegaTALs that provide a highly specific and efficient way to modify DNA sequences to edit or insert genetic components would be delivered directly to the disease site (e.g., to the brain, liver or eye) or into the bloodstream of the patient and, in vivo deliver the genetic material to or modify those target cells. We believe in vivo gene editing opens up additional rare disease and large market indications where this approach is more appropriate for the disease and targeted cells.

Our Opportunity in T Cell-Based Therapies for Cancer

We are engaging inenable the discovery and development of novel, disease-alteringpotential product candidates. Currently, our strategic collaborations in severe genetic disease include those with:

8

Table of Contents
Magenta Therapeutics, Inc., to evaluate the utility of MGTA-145 in combination with plerixafor for mobilization and collection of stem cells in adults and adolescents with SCD, through a proof-of-concept clinical trial;
Novo Nordisk A/S, to jointly develop next-generation in vivo genomeediting treatments for genetic diseases, including hemophilia; and
Forty Seven, Inc., a subsidiary of Gilead Sciences, Inc., to pursue clinical proof-of-concept for an antibody-based conditioning regimen in combination with our ex vivo lentiviral gene therapiestherapy platform.
Manufacturing in oncology. severe genetic disease
We have entered into multi-year agreements with external manufacturing partners in the United States and Europe to support our clinical and commercial programs in severe genetic disease. We have multi-year agreements with SAFC Carlsbad, Inc., or SAFC (a subsidiary of MilliporeSigma), and Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc. (previously Novasep) in the production of lentiviral vector. In addition, we have entered into multi-year agreements with Lonza Houston, Inc. and Minaris Regenerative Medicine, or Minaris, to produce drug product. Currently to support the commercialization of beti-cel in Europe, SAFC is our sole manufacturer of lentiviral vector, and Minaris is our sole manufacturer of drug product. In our manufacturing agreement with SAFC, we are required to provide rolling forecasts for products on a quarterly basis, a portion of which will be considered a binding, firm order, subject to a purchase commitment. In our manufacturing agreement with Minaris, we reserve production capacity for the manufacture of our drug product. In addition, we rely on specialized third-party testing organizations to confirm the quality of vector and drug product prior to their use in clinical trials and in the commercial context.
We believe that our gene therapy platform can be applied to genetically modify a patient’s own T cells to targetteam of technical personnel has extensive manufacturing, analytical and destroy cancer cells by recognizing specific


cell surface proteins, in the case of chimeric antigen receptors, or CARs, or by recognizing specific protein fragments derived from either intracellular or extracellular protein, in the case of T cell receptors, or TCRs.

Immune System and T Cells

The immune system recognizes danger signals and responds to threats at a cellular level. It is often described as having two arms. The first arm is known as the innate immune system, which recognizes non-specific signals of infection or abnormalities as a first line of defense. The innate immune system is the initial response to an infection, and the response is the same every time regardless of prior exposure to the infectious agent. The second arm is known as the adaptive immune system, which is composed of highly specific, targeted cells and provides long-term recognition and protection from infectious agents and abnormal processes such as cancer. The adaptive immune response is further subdivided into humoral, or antibody based, and cellular, which includes T cell-based immune responses.

The most significant components of the cellular aspect of the adaptive immune response are T cells, so called because they generally mature in the thymus. T cells are involved in both sensing and killing infected or abnormal cells,quality experience as well as coordinatingstrong project management discipline to effectively oversee these contract manufacturing activities, and to compile manufacturing and quality information for our regulatory submissions and commercialization efforts. For the activationtreatment of other cellspatients with our drug product in an immune response. These cells canthe commercial setting, we are partnering with participating apheresis centers, which we refer to as qualified treatment centers, to be classifiedcenters for collection of HSCs from the patient and for infusion of drug product to the patient.

Commercial operations
We are commercializing ZYNTEGLO in the European Union and the United Kingdom, following our receipt of conditional marketing approval by the European Commission in June 2019. In February 2021, we temporarily suspended marketing of ZYNTEGLO and the EMA has paused the renewal procedure for ZYNTEGLO's conditional marketing authorization while the EMA's pharmacovigilance risk assessment committee reviews the risk-benefit assessment for ZYNTEGLO and determines whether any additional pharmacovigilance measures are necessary. As we transition into two major subsets, CD4+ T cellsa commercial-stage company, we have established commercial operations in Europe, and CD8+ T cells, based on cell surface expressionhave begun to build commercial operations in the United States, with a goal of the CD4 or CD8 glycoproteins. Both subsets of T cells have specific functions in mounting an immune response capable of clearing an infection or eliminating cancerous cells. CD4+ T cells, or helper T cells, are generally involved in coordinating the immune response by enhancing the activation, expansion, migration, and effector functions of other types of immune cells. CD8+ T cells, or cytotoxic T cells, can directly attack and kill cells they recognize as infected or otherwise abnormal, and are aided by CD4+ T cells. Both types of T cells are activated when their T cell receptor recognizes and binds to a specific protein structure expressed on the surface of another cell. This protein structure is composed of the major histocompatibility complex, or MHC, and a small protein fragment, or peptide, derived from either proteins inside the cell or on the cell surface. Circulating CD4+ and CD8+ T cells survey the body differentiating between MHC/peptide structures containing “foreign” peptides and those containing “self” peptides. A foreign peptide may signal the presence of an immune threat, such as an infection or cancer, causing the T cell to activate, recruit other immune cells, and eliminate the targeted cell.

Although the immune system is designed to identify foreign or abnormal proteins expressed on tumor cells, this process is either ineffective or defective in cancer patients. The defective process sometimes occurs when cancer cells closely resemble healthy cells and go unnoticed ordelivering our gene therapies, if tumors lose their MHC protein expression. Additionally, cancer cells employ a number of mechanisms to escape immune detection to suppress the effect of the immune response. Some tumors also encourage the production of cells that suppress the immune response, such as regulatory T cells that block cytotoxic T cells that would normally attack the cancer.

History of Cancer Immunotherapy

Cancer has historically been treated with surgery, radiation, chemotherapy and hormone therapy. More recently, advances in understanding of the immune system’s role in cancer have led to immunotherapy becoming an important treatment approach. Cancer immunotherapy began with treatments that nonspecifically activated the immune system and had limited efficacy and/or significant toxicity. In contrast, new immunotherapy treatments can activate specific, important immune cells, leading to improved targeting of cancer cells, efficacy, and safety. Within the immunotherapy category, treatments have included cytokine therapies, antibody therapies, and adoptive cell transfer therapies.

In 1986, interferon-a became the first cytokine approved for cancer patients. In 1992, interleukin-2, or IL-2, was the second approved cytokine in cancer treatment, showing efficacy in melanoma and renal cell cancer. IL-2 does not kill cancer cells directly, but instead nonspecifically activates and stimulates the growth of the body’s own T cells which then combat the tumor. Although interferon-a, IL-2, and subsequent cytokine therapies represent important advances in cancer treatment, they are generally limited by toxicity and can only be used in a limited number of cancers and patients.

Cytokine-based therapies set the stage for immunotherapy, and antibody therapies represented the next significant advance, with targeted specificity and a generally better-tolerated side effect profile. Monoclonal antibodies, or mAbs, are designed to attach to proteins on cancer cells, and once attached,approved, to patients through qualified treatment centers. In the mAbs cancourse of preparing to treat our first commercial patients, we have established commercial capabilities across the European Union, and in the United States and United Kingdom by adding employees with broad experience in quality assurance and compliance, medical education, marketing, supply chain, sales, public policy, patient services, market access and product reimbursement. Our commercialization activities include active engagement with stakeholders across the healthcare system, including those with public and private payers, patient advocates and organizations, professional societies, and healthcare providers, to explore new payment models that we hope will enable access for more patients. Ultimately, we intend to leverage our commercial infrastructure to support the potential for multiple product launches sequentially across multiple geographies. For many territories and countries, we may also elect to utilize strategic collaborators, including distributors, or contract field-based teams to assist in the commercialization of our product and potential future products.

While we have largely established the appropriate quality systems, compliance policies, systems and procedures, as well as internal systems and infrastructure necessary for supporting our complex supply chain and commercialization activities, we expect that we may make cancer cells more visibleadditional targeted investments as we continue our efforts in adding sites to our network of qualified treatment centers, establishing patient-focused programs, educating healthcare professionals, and securing reimbursement.
The timing and conduct of our commercialization activities will be dependent upon regulatory interactions, marketing approvals received for our product and potential future products, and on agreements we have made or may make in the immune system, block growth signalsfuture with strategic collaborators.
Our Programs in Oncology
We are pursuing multiple programs that leverage the unique properties of cancer cells, stop new blood vessels from forming, or deliver radiation or chemotherapylentiviral vectors to cancer cells. The first FDA-approved mAb specifically for cancer was rituximab in 1997, and since then, many other antibodies have received approval, including trastuzumab, bevacizumab, alemtuzumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab. More recently, antibodies have been conjugated with cytotoxic drugs to increase activity. The first approved antibody drug conjugate was gemtuzumab ozogamicin in 2000, followed by brentuximab vedotin in 2011 and trastuzumab emtansine in 2013.

The next important advance has been the development of antibodies that target T cell checkpoint pathways, which are means by which cancer cells are able to inhibit or turn down the body’s immune response to cancer. These treatments have shown an ability to


activate T cells, shrink tumors, and improve patient survival. In 2011, ipilimumab became the first checkpoint inhibitor approved by the FDA. Recent clinical data from new checkpoint inhibitors such as nivolumab and pembrolizumab led to their approval by FDA (in 2015 and 2016) as treatments in multiple cancers and confirmed both the approach and the importance of T cells as promising toolsa therapy for the treatmentvarious cancers. This represents a direct application of cancer.

Despite these many advances, a significant unmet needour expertise in cancer still persists. We believe that the use of human cells as therapeutic entities to re-energize the immune system will be the next significant advancement in the treatment of cancer. These cellular therapies may avoid the long-term side effectsgene therapy and our capabilities, know-how and patents associated with current treatmentslentiviral gene therapy and have the potential to be effective regardless of the type of previous treatments patients have experienced.  We are developing CAR and TCR-based approaches using our lentiviral vector gene transfer technology and experience in order to specifically and directly deliver a payload of potent anti-cancer agents to T cells, which may give them the ability to kill the cancer cells.

editing for ex vivo applications. Our CAR and TCR T Cell Technologies

Like ouroncology programs for HSCs, our T cell-based immunotherapies use a customized

9

Table of Contents
lentiviral vector to alter T cells, ex vivo, or outside the body,rather than HSCs, so that the T cells can recognize specific proteins or protein fragments on the surface of cancer cells in order to kill these diseased cells.  T cells that have been genetically-engineeredex vivo to make CAR or TCRs are designed to help a patient’s immune system overcome survival mechanisms employed by cancer cells. CAR T cell technology directs T cells to recognize cancer cells based on expression of specific cell surface antigens, whereas TCR T cell technology provides the T cells with a specific T cell receptor that recognizes protein fragments derived from either intracellular or extracellular proteins.

With both our CAR and TCR T cell technologies, we harvest a patient’s white blood cells in a process called leukapheresis, activate certain T cells to grow and then the gene sequences for the CAR or TCR constructproteins which are transferred into the T cell DNA using a lentiviral vector. The number of cells is expanded until it reaches the desired dose. These genetically engineered cells, which will express the receptors that can recognize the specific proteins that are characteristic of specific cancers, are then infused back into the patient. Our T cell engineering process is rapid (complete in approximately ten days) and manufactures modified T cells in a sterile closed system. When the engineered T cell is returned to the cancer patient, it engages the target proteindisplayed on the cancer cell, triggers a series of signals that result in tumor cell killing, the production of anti-cancer cytokines, and undergoes multiple rounds of cell division to greatly expand the number of these anti-cancer T cells. These engineered T cells have the natural “auto-regulatory” capability of normal T cells and once the tumor cells containing the target antigen are destroyed, the engineered T cells decrease in number, but with the potential to leave a smaller number of memory T cells in the body as a form of immune surveillance against potential tumor regrowth.surface. The genetically-engineered T cells are designed to supplement a patient’s immune system and canmay be further engineered to overcome immune evasion mechanisms employed by cancer cells.

Our CAR and TCR T cell technologies also bring genomic engineering tools to the immunotherapy field. For instance, we are exploring applications of our CAR and TCR T cell technologies in combination with novel proteins based on synthetic biology. These technologies may potentially allow our future T cell-based product candidates to detect the tumor microenvironment or in the case of future CAR T cell product candidates, to be regulated by small molecules. In addition, using our gene editing technology, we potentially have a number of additional options to manipulate the genome of the cancer patient’s T cells to further increase the specificity of the anti-tumor activity and to potentially make these cells even more potent. SpecificityAll of the gene-editing technologies currently being explored by the pharmaceutical industry, including zinc finger nucleases, CRISPR/Cas9, and potencyTALENs, share common features of a DNA binding domain and a DNA cleavage domain.  They differ in specificity, size, ease of delivery and as naturally occurring versus engineered nucleases.  Our gene editing platform is based on homing endonucleases and megaTALs, based on a naturally-occurring class of DNA cleaving enzymes that function as monomeric proteins able to bind DNA in a sequence-specific manner and cleave their target site. We believe there are essentialmultiple advantages of homing endonucleases and megaTALs compared to the development of Tother gene editing technologies, most notably: they are highly specific and efficient in cutting DNA and their compact size simplifies delivery to therapeutically relevant cell therapies that can effectively treat solid tumor cancers such as breast, lungtypes.  We are using our gene editing platform, along with collaborations with multiple academic institutions, to potentially discover and colon cancer.  develop next-generation gene therapy and oncology product candidates.

Our cancer immunotherapy research group is staffed by scientists drawn from both industryprograms in oncology include ide-cel and academic research centers that have pioneered the field of T cell therapy.  This team is focused on the next generation of T cell engineeringbb21217 in multiple myeloma, which we are developing in collaboration with BMS, and preclinical programs to discover and develop T cell product candidates to treat a variety ofother hematologic and solid tumor malignancies. 

Ourmalignancies, including: non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, acute myeloid leukemia (in collaboration with Seattle Children's Research Institute), MAGE-A4 positive solid tumors (in collaboration with Regeneron), and Merkel cell carcinoma (in collaboration with Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center). We are also independently researching and developing other CAR T cell product candidates – bb2121against a variety of cancer targets, including next-generation anti-BCMA CAR-T cell products for the treatment of multiple myeloma.

Ide-cel and bb21217

We

In collaboration with BMS, we are developing in collaboration with Celgene, bb2121ide-cel and bb21217, our CAR T cell product candidates, with the goal forof filing for regulatory approval infor the treatment of multiple myeloma on a global basis.  bb2121Ide-cel and bb21217 both bind to BCMA, a cell surface protein expressed on cancer cells. Multiple myeloma is a hematologic malignancy that develops in the bone marrow in which normal antibody-producing plasma cells transform into myeloma. The growth of the cancer cells in the bone marrow blocks production of normal blood cells and antibodies, and also causes lesions that weaken the bone. BCMA is expressed on normal plasma cells, some mature B cells, and on malignant multiple myeloma cells, but is absentnot on other cells. Ide-cel and bb21217 arose from other normal tissues.our multi-year collaboration with Celgene Corporation, or Celgene, which was acquired by BMS in November 2019. We believe BCMA presentsco-develop and co-commercialize ide-cel in the United States with BMS, in which we share equally in costs and any profits. BMS has the exclusive license to develop and commercialize ide-cel outside of the United States. BMS has the exclusive worldwide license to develop and commercialize bb21217, and we retain an attractive immunotherapeutic target for our technology for a number of reasons. In December 2015, researchers from the NIH announced promising clinical data in multiple myeloma with an anti-BCMA CAR T cell therapy that established clinical proof-of-concept for the BCMA target using a gamma-retroviral vector.

We are conducting a Phase I clinical study of our bb2121option to co-develop and co-commercialize this product candidate in the United States. The terms of our arrangements with BMS are described more fully below under “Strategic collaborations in oncology—Our product candidate bb2121 isstrategic alliance with BMS.”

In September 2020, the lead product candidate from our multi-year collaboration with Celgene. Since our collaboration arrangement with Celgene was


announced in March 2013, we have worked collaboratively to discover, developFDA accepted for Priority Review the BLA submitted by BMS for ide-cel as a treatment for relapsed and commercialize CAR T cell product candidates in oncology.refractory multiple myeloma. The FDA and EMA have granted Orphan Drug status to both the bb2121 product candidateide-cel and bb21217 for the treatment of patients with relapsed/relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.  The FDA has granted Breakthrough Therapy designation and the EMA has granted PRIME eligibility to the bb2121 product candidateide-cel for relapsed/relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.

Our collaboration arrangement

For the development of ide-cel, BMS is conducting, or is planning to conduct, the following clinical studies in multiple myeloma:
The KarMMa study, a pivotal open-label, single arm, multicenter, phase 2 study evaluating the safety and efficacy of ide-cel in adult patients with Celgene was amended in June 2015 to focus on CAR T cell product candidates targeting BCMA. In February 2016, we exclusively licensed to Celgene the right to developrelapsed and commercialize our bb2121 product candidate and we expect to exercise our option to co-develop and co-promote this product candidate in the United States.  In February 2018, Celgene treated the first patient in a Phase 2 clinical trial of bb2121 in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in North America and Celgene plansEurope. All enrolled patients had received at least three prior regimens, including an immunomodulatory (IMiD) agent, a proteasome inhibitor (PI) and an anti-CD38 antibody, and all were refractory to conduct additional clinical studiestheir last regimen, defined as progression during or within 60 days of bb2121 in earlier linestheir last therapy. Ninety-four percent of treatment for multiple myeloma, including a planned international Phase IIIpatients were refractory to an anti-CD38 antibody and 84% percent were triple refractory (refractory to an IMiD agent, PI and anti-CD38 antibody).
The primary endpoint of the study of bb2121 in third line multiple myeloma.  Celgene has announced plans to file a BLA with the FDA in 2019 for bb2121 to treat relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.  We retainis overall response rate (ORR) as assessed by an option to co-develop and co-commercialize this product candidate, as described more fully below under “Strategic collaborations—Our strategic alliance with Celgene.”

In September 2017, we initiated a Phase I clinical study of bb21217, the second anti-BCMA cell product candidate arising from our collaboration with Celgene, and Celgene exercised its option to obtain an exclusive worldwide license to develop and commercialize bb21217. The FDA has also granted Orphan Drug statusindependent review committee (IRC) according to the bb21217 product candidateInternational Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria. Complete response rate (CR) is the key secondary endpoint. Other efficacy endpoints include time to response, duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival and minimal residual disease (MRD) evaluated by next-generation sequencing assay. The study enrolled 140 patients, of whom 128 patients were treated with ide-cel across the target dose levels of

10

Table of Contents
150-450 x 106 CAR+ T cells after receiving lymphodepleting chemotherapy. In May 2020, we and BMS presented the results at the American Society of Clinical Oncology 2020 Virtual Scientific Program, as summarized below:
128 patients were treated with ide-cel across target dose levels of 150 to 450 x 106 CAR+ T cells. Patients had a median of six prior regimens; 84% were refractory to all three classes of commonly used treatments including an IMiD, a PI and an anti-CD38 antibody, and 94% were refractory to anti-CD38 antibodies. Median duration of follow-up was 13.3 months.
Results for the treatmentprimary endpoint (ORR) and key secondary endpoint (CR), as well as median duration of response (DoR) and median progression-free survival (PFS) across the target dose levels and at each of the three target doses explored in the study were as follows:

CAR+ T cell dose level
150 x 106
300 x 106
450 x 106
150-450 x 106
N47054128
Measures:
Overall response rate, n (%)2 (50)48 (69)44 (82)94 (73)
Complete response (CR)/ Stringent CR, n (%)1 (25)20 (29)21 (39)42 (33)
Median DoR, months9.911.310.7
Median DoR by best response (CR/sCR), months††††19.0
Median PFS, months2.85.812.18.8
Median PFS by best response (CR/sCR), months††††20.2
Not reported due to small n
††Data not reported
The overall response rate (ORR) was 73% across all dose levels, including 33% of patients who had a complete response (CR) or stringent CR (sCR). Median duration of response (DoR) was 10.7 months, with 19.0 month median DoR for patients who had a CR or sCR. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.8 months, with 20.2 month median PFS for patients who had a CR or sCR. All patients who had CR or sCR and were evaluable for minimal residual disease (MRD), were MRD-negative. Clinically meaningful benefit was consistently observed across subgroups, and nearly all subgroups had an ORR of 50% or greater, including older and high-risk patients. The overall survival (OS) data continue to mature, with an estimated median OS of 19.4 months across all dose levels and 78% of patients alive at 12 months. Results support a favorable benefit-risk profile for ide-cel across the target dose levels of 150 to 450 × 106 CAR+ T cells.
The most frequently reported adverse events were cytopenia and cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Cytopenias were common and not dose related. Overall, CRS of any grade was reported in 84% (107/128) of patients. Grade 3 or higher CRS occurred in <6% (7/128) of patients, with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

one fatal CRS event. Investigator identified neurotoxicity events (iiNT) were reported in 18% (23/128) of patients, including Grade 3 iiNT reported in 3% (4/128) of patients. There were no Grade 4 or Grade 5 iiNT events reported.

The CRB-401 study, – Phase I clinical study in subjects with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

Our CRB-401 study is a single-dose, open-label, non-randomized, multi-site Phase Iphase 1 dose escalation/ dose expansion clinical study in the United States to examine the safety and efficacy of our bb2121 product candidateide-cel in up to 50 subjects67 patients with relapsed/relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. In order to be eligible for CRB-401, subjectspatients must have received three prior regimens, including a proteasome inhibitor (PI; bortezomib or carfilzomib) and an immunomodulatory agent (IMiD;lenalidomide or pomalidomide), or be “double-refractory” to both a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent.  In the expansion cohort, subjectspatients must have received at least a PI, andan IMiD and daratumumab, and be refractory to their last timeline of therapy.

Following screening, enrolled subjects undergo a leukapheresis procedure to collect autologous T cells for manufacturing our bb2121 drug product. The bb2121 drug product is produced from each subject’s own blood cells, which are modified using a lentiviral vector encoding the anti-BCMA CAR. Following manufacture of the bb2121 drug product, subjects Patients receive one cycle of lymphodepletion ofwith cyclophosphamide and fludarabine prior to infusion of the bb2121 drug product.

The primary endpoint of the study is the incidence of adverse events and abnormal laboratory test results, including dose-limiting toxicities. The study also seeks to assess disease-specific response including: complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR), and partial response (PR) according to the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response Criteria for Multiple Myeloma. The study also seeks to determine the maximally tolerated dose and recommended dose for further clinical trials.

Each subjectpatient is followed for up to 60 months post-treatment, and then is enrolled in a long-term follow-up protocol that will assess safety and efficacy beyond the 60-month period.  In September 2017, we announced that the expansion cohort

11

Table of the study has been initiated with first subject treated, and the final patient enrolled in the CRB-401 study was treated in February 2018.

Updated Clinical Data from the CRB-401 Study

Contents

In December 2017,2020, we and Celgene Corporation presented updated results from ourthe CRB-401 study at the ASH Annual Meeting. All data presented atMeeting as summarized below:
62 patients were treated with ide-cel across dose levels of 50, 150, 450, or 800 × 106 CAR positive T cells. Among the 62 patients treated with ide-cel in this meetingstudy, the overall response rate (ORR) was 76%, including 24 patients (39%) who achieved a complete response (CR). The median duration of response (DoR) was 10.3 months. Median PFS was 8.8 months and summarized below from our CRB-401 study are as of the data cut-off date of October 2, 2017. As of the data cut-off date, 21 subjects had been enrolled and dosed in the dose-escalation phase of the study, in four dose cohorts: 50 x 106, 150 x 106, 450 x 106 and 800 x 106 CAR-T cells. Subjects on study were heavily pre-treated, with a median of seven prior therapies, ranging from three to 14 prior lines of therapy. Eighteen subjects were enrolled and dosed in the active dose cohorts (150 x 106, 450 x 106 and 800 x 106 CAR-T cells),OS was 34.2 months, with a median follow-up of 40 weeks (range: 6.6-69 weeks). Seventeen of these subjects achieved an objective response, of which 16 subjects achieved at least a very good partial response (VGPR)14.7 months.
Safety remained consistent with previously reported results from CRB-401. Among all infused patients , of which 10 subjects achieved a complete response or unconfirmed complete response.  Nine of the ten subjects whomost frequent adverse events were evaluable for minimal residual disease status were found to be MRD-negative, one MRD positive patient did no obtain a response. Median progression-free survival has not been reached in the active dose cohorts. The progression-free survival at 6 months and 9 months was 81% and 71%neutropenia (92%), respectively. Three subjects of the 21 subjects in the dose-escalation phase of the study who initially responded to therapy subsequently experienced disease progression.

In the dose-escalation phase, 15/21 (71%) of subjects had cytokine release syndrome (CRS)(CRS; 76%), mostly Grade 1 & 2, with 2 subjects experiencing Grade 3 CRS (9%anemia (76%), and thrombocytopenia (74%). Four subjects received tocilizumab, 1 (Grade 2 CRS) received steroids and in each case the CRS


resolved within 24 hours. The most common treatment-emergentfrequent Grade 3-43/4 adverse event in 21 infused subjectsevents were cytopenias commonly associated with lymphodepleting chemotherapy including neutropenia (86%(89%), leukopenia (61%), anemia (57%), and thrombocytopenia (43%(57%). ThereMost CRS events were two deaths in the active cohorts at 22 and 69 weeks following infusion, respectively. The first was due to cardiac arrest and the second was due to myelodysplastic syndrome; both subjectsGrade 1 or 2. Four patients (7%) had Grade 3 CRS; there were in a myeloma complete response at their last study assessment prior to death. Based on the findings during dose escalation, a dose expansion phase of 20 subjects has started testing doses between 150-450 x 106 CAR-T cells. In the dose expansion phase, one subject treated at the 450 x 106 CAR-T cells dose experiencedno Grade 4 neurotoxicity including focal cerebral edemaor 5 CRS events reported.

the KarMMa-2 study, an open-label, multi-cohort, multi-center phase 2 study of patients with relapsed and subarachnoid hemorrhage. This subject had a high tumor burden,refractory multiple myeloma and a historyin high-risk multiple myeloma.
the KarMMa-3 study, an open-label, randomized, multi-center, phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of subarachnoid hemorrhage. The event was successfully managed,ide-cel versus standard triplet regimens in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.
the subject remainsKarMMa-4 study, an open label, single-arm, multi-center, phase 1 study intended to determine the optimal target dose and safety of ide-cel in patients with high-risk newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma.
For the response group. No other Grade 3/4 neurotoxicity was observed indevelopment of the escalation or expansion cohort.

It should be noted that these data presented abovebb21217 product candidate, we are current as of data cut-off date and are preliminary in nature, and that our CRB-401 study is not complete. There is limited data concerning long-term safety and efficacy following treatment with our bb2121 drug product. These data may not continue for these subjects or be repeated or observed in this ongoing study or future studies involving our bb2121 product candidate. It is possible that subjects who initially respond to treatment with our bb2121 drug product may experience disease progression.

Theconducting the CRB-402 study, – Phase I clinical study in subjects with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

Our CRB-402 study is a single-dose, open-label, non-randomized, multi-site Phase Iopen label, single-arm, multi-center, phase 1 dose escalation/ dose expansion clinical study in the United States to examine the safety and efficacy of our bb21217 product candidate in up to 50 subjects74 patients with relapsed/relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. In order to be eligible for CRB-402, subjectspatients must have received three prior regimens, including a proteasome inhibitor (PI: bortezomib or carfilzomib) and immunomodulatory agent (IMid:(IMiD: lenalidomide or pomalidomide), or be “double-refractory” to both a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent.  In the expansion cohort, subjectspatients must have received at least a PI, and IMiD and daratumumab, and be refractory to their last line of therapy.

Following screening, enrolled subjects undergo a leukapheresis procedure to collect autologous T cells for manufacturing our bb21217 drug product. The bb21217 drug product is produced from each subject’s own blood cells, which are modified using a lentiviral vector encoding the anti-BCMA CAR. Following manufacture of the bb21217 drug product, subjects Patients receive one cycle of lymphodepletion ofwith cyclophosphamide and fludarabine prior to infusion of the bb21217 drug product.

The primary endpoint of the study is the incidence of adverse events and abnormal laboratory test results, including dose-limiting toxicities. The study also seeks to assess disease-specific response including: complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR), and partial response (PR) according to the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response Criteria for Multiple Myeloma. The study also seeks to determine the maximally tolerated dose and recommended dose for further clinical trials.

Each subjectpatient will be followed for up to 2460 months post-treatment, and then will be enrolled in a long-term follow-up protocol that will assess safety and efficacy beyond the 24-month60-month period.

In September 2017,December 2020, we announcedpresented updated clinical data from the treatmentCRB-402 study at the ASH Annual Meeting. All data presented at the ASH Annual Meeting and summarized here are as of the first patient with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.  

Our other preclinical research opportunities in cancer

We are pursuing multiple programs that leveragedata cut-off date of September 1, 2020. Sixty-nine patients received treatment as of the unique propertiesdata cut-off. Patients had a median of lentiviral vectors to target T cells as a therapy for various cancers. This represents a direct applicationsix prior lines of our expertise in gene therapy and our capabilities, know-how78 percent of patients received at least one prior autologous stem cell transplant.

CAR+ T cell dose level
150 x 106 (n=12)
300 x 106 (n=14)
450 x 106 (n=43)
150-450 x 106 (n=69)
Median follow-up (min, max), months20 (4, 35)11 (3, 21)4 (<1, 17)6 (<1, 35)
Tumor repsonse, n/N(%)
     ORR10/12 (83)6/14 (43)24/33 (73)40/59 (68)
          sCR/CR5 (42)2 (14)10 (30)17 (29)
          VGPR5 (42)3 (21)7 (21)15 (25)
          PR01 (7)7 (21)8 (14)
Median time to first response (min,max), months
     ≥PR1 (1, 2)1 (1, 1)1 (1, 2)1 (1, 2)
     ≥CR6 (1, 24)12 (6, 18)1 (1, 13)2 (1, 24)

12

Table of Contents
CAR-T cell persistence was observed in 27 of 30 patients with ongoing response and patents associatedevaluable at three months, 20 of 23 patients with lentiviral gene therapyongoing response and gene editing for ex vivo applications.

We are collaboratingevaluable at six months, six of eleven patients with Medigene AG, through its subsidiary Medigene Immunotherapies GmbH, to jointly discoverongoing response and develop TCR product candidates directed against up to four antigensevaluable at twelve months, three of six patients with ongoing response and evaluable at 18 months, and two of two patients with ongoing response and evaluable at 24 months.

The adverse events observed with bb21217 were consistent with known toxicities of BCMA CAR T-cell therapies, with low rates of Grade ≥3 CRS and neurotoxicity. Of the 69 patients, 48 patients developed bb21217-related CRS: 45 with Grade 1/2, one with Grade 3, and two with Grade 5 (death). Eleven of 69 (16%) patients developed neurotoxicity; eight Grade 1/2, two Grade 3 (one with vertigo/dizziness and one with encephalopathy), and one Grade 4 (encephalopathy). One additional death occurred from infection within 6 months in the fieldabsence of cancer. We are collaborating with TC BioPharm LimitedMM progression. Cytopenias were common and not dose related. Grade ≥3 infections were reported in the research and development of gamma delta CAR T cells directed at hematologic and solid tumors targets.   We are also independently researching and developing other CAR T cell product candidates against a variety of targets relevant to both hematologic and solid tumors.

Our Gene Editing Opportunity

In June 2014, we acquired Pregenen, a privately-held biotechnology company headquartered in Seattle, Washington. Through the acquisition, we obtained rights to Pregenen’s gene editing technology platform and cell signaling technology, and have integrated these technologies and research team and expanded its research efforts.  We are focused on utilizing homing endonuclease and megaTAL gene editing technologies in a variety of potential applications and disease areas, including for oncology and hematology.  


Homing endonucleases and MegaTALs are novel enzymes that provide a highly specific and efficient way to modify the genome of a target cell to potentially treat a variety of diseases.

All of the gene-editing technologies currently being explored by the pharmaceutical industry, including zinc finger nucleases, CRISPR/Cas9, and TALENs, share common features of a DNA binding domain and a DNA cleavage domain.  They all differ in specificity, size, ease of delivery and as naturally occurring versus engineered nucleases.  Homing endonucleases and megaTALs are based on a naturally-occurring class of DNA cleaving enzymes that function as monomeric proteins able to bind DNA in a sequence-specific manner and cleave their target site. We believe there are multiple advantages of homing endonucleases and MegaTALs compared to other gene editing technologies, most notably: they are highly specific and efficient in cutting DNA and their compact size simplifies delivery to therapeutically relevant cell types.  We are using our gene editing platform, along with collaborations with multiple academic institutions, to potentially discover and develop next generation versions of our current ex vivo gene therapy product candidates, and to potentially expand into new disease indications.

Manufacturing

Our gene therapy platform has two main components: lentiviral vector production and the target cell transduction process, which results in drug product.

Our lentiviral manufacturing process

Our lentiviral vectors are assembled using a human cell line called HEK293T. The HEK293T cells are maintained in disposable flasks until sufficient cell mass has been generated to fill approximately 40 ten tray cell factories, or TTCFs, then transferred and allowed to adhere to the bottom of the trays.  Adherent cells are transfected with multiple plasmids encoding all the genetic material required to assemble the lentiviral vector carrying the functional gene of interest.  The transfected HEK293T cells then assemble our lentiviral vectors packaged with the functional gene of interest, which bud off into the cell culture media. The media containing the assembled vectors is harvested, purified, concentrated and formulated prior to freezing for storage. These finished lentiviral vectors are what is ultimately used to transduce the targeted cells isolated from the patient.

We believe that our lentiviral vectors have broad applicability, since the majority of the viral production system can remain the same, while we change only the therapeutic gene “cassette” depending on the disease. In other words, the vector “backbone” stays the same, while only the therapeutic gene and related sequences are changed. If we were to undertake drug development in an additional indication, we believe we could rapidly move forward using this lentiviral vector backbone and associated assays, simply by switching the therapeutic gene insert and associated control elements.

Although we intend to continue manufacturing our Lenti-D vectors in TTCFs, we are adapting our LentiGlobin, bb2121 and bb21217 vector production technology to scalable production systems with the potential to satisfy an increased number26 % of patients per manufacturing cycle. So far, we have demonstrated successful production(18 of LentiGlobin, bb2121 and bb21217 vectors at pilot scale and are transferring the new process to a contract manufacturer to accommodate future demand for our drug candidates, if approved,69).

Strategic collaborations in their current indications as well as those beyond our initial focus.  


Our HSC transduction process—creating the gene-modified HSCs (our drug product)

The ultimate product of our manufacturing processes is the patient’s own gene-modified HSC cells, which we refer to as our drug product. The process for producing drug product for our HSC-based product candidates is as follows:

1.

Selection: We extract HSCs from peripheral blood mononuclear cells obtained from the patient’s blood by apheresis following mobilization via a colony stimulating factor (or alternatively, by bone marrow harvest). The process is carried out using existing hospital infrastructure and standard protocols currently in place for stem cell transplant procedures, with enhanced controls for extracting the cells to be used for making our drug product.

oncology

2.

Pre-stimulation: The isolated HSCs are treated with a mixture of growth factors that help enable an efficient transduction process.

3.

Transduction: The isolated, purified and pre-treated HSCs are exposed to our lentiviral vectors containing the appropriate functional gene and additional proprietary elements for a period of time to facilitate transduction and insertion of the therapeutic DNA into the genome of the target cells.

4.

Final harvest: Once transduction is complete, the gene-modified HSCs are washed and re-suspended into cell culture media to remove any residual impurities. A portion of the harvested cells is removed for quality control release testing, which includes ensuring that transduction was successful and the functional gene delivered by the vector is adequately expressed by the target cells.

5.

Formulation and freeze: The remaining cells are appropriately formulated and cryopreserved.

The final step is to return the gene-modified HSCs to the patient. We are e using our updated drug product manufacturing process with the objective of increasing the vector copy number and the percentage of transduced cells in the LentiGlobin drug product in our ongoing Northstar-2 and Northstar-3 Studies and our HGB-206 study under the amended protocol.

Our T cell transduction process—creating the gene-modified T cells (our drug product)

The ultimate product of our manufacturing processes is the patient’s own gene-modified T cells, which we refer to as our drug product. The process for producing drug product for our T cell-based product candidates is as follows:

1.

Leukapheresis: We collect white blood cells from the patient’s blood through a process called leukapheresis. The process is carried out using existing hospital infrastructure and standard protocols currently in place for blood donation procedures, with enhanced controls for extracting the cells to be used for making our drug product.

2.

Activation: The white blood cell mixture, which includes T cells, are treated with proprietary processes to enable an efficient transduction process.

3.

Transduction: The isolated, purified and pre-treated T cells are exposed to our lentiviral vectors containing the appropriate functional gene for a period of time to facilitate transduction and insertion of the therapeutic DNA into the genome of the target cells.

4.

Expansion: The transduced T cells are then expanded for a period of approximately one week to increase the number of gene-modified T cells.

5.

Final harvest: The gene-modified T cells are washed and re-suspended into cell culture media to remove any residual impurities. A portion of the harvested cells is removed for quality control release testing, which includes ensuring that transduction was successful and the functional gene delivered by the vector is adequately expressed by the target cells.

6.

Formulation and freeze: The remaining cells are appropriately formulated and cryopreserved.

The final step is to return the gene-modified T cells to the patient.  

Manufacturing Arrangements  

In November 2017, we purchased a partially completed manufacturing facility located in Durham, North Carolina for $11.5 million. We acquired this 125,000 square foot facility to provide manufacturing capacity for our lentiviral vectors in support of


our current and planned gene and cell therapy product candidates. We have also entered into multi-year agreements with manufacturing partners in the United States and Europe (Brammer Bio, Novasep and MilliporeSigma), which are partnering with us on production of lentiviral vector across all of our programs. In addition, we have entered into multi-year agreements with Lonza Houston, Inc. and apceth Biopharma to produce drug product for Lenti-D, LentiGlobin and bb21217.  Celgene manufactures drug product for bb2121.  We believe our team of technical personnel has extensive manufacturing, analytical and quality experience as well as strong project management discipline to effectively oversee these contract manufacturing and testing activities, and to compile manufacturing and quality information for our regulatory submissions and potential commercial launch.

Strategic collaborations

Our objective is to develop and commercialize products based on the transformative potential of gene therapy to treat patients with severe genetic and rare diseases and cancer. To access the substantial funding and other resources required to develop and commercialize gene therapy products in these diseases, we have formed and intend to seek other opportunities to form strategic collaborations with third parties who can augment our industry leading gene therapy, T cell immunotherapy, lentiviral vector and gene-editing expertise.expertise, and to access the substantial funding and other resources required to develop and commercialize T cell immunotherapy products. To date, we have focused on forging a limited number of significant strategic collaborations with leading pharmaceutical companies and academic research centers where both parties contribute expertise to enable the discovery and development of potential product candidates.

Currently, our strategic collaborations in oncology include relationships with:

BMS, in the development of ide-cel and bb21217 product candidates in multiple myeloma;
Regeneron, in the discovery, development, and commercialization of novel cell therapies for cancer;
Medigene AG, to discover TCR product candidates in the field of cancer; and
Gritstone Oncology, Inc., to validate targets and discover TCR product candidates in the field of cancer.
We also have academic collaborations at various stages or research and preclinical development at the Seattle Children's Research Institute, University of North Carolina, and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center.
Our collaboration with Celgene

BMS

In March 2013, we announcedbegan a strategic collaboration with Celgene, now BMS, to discover, develop and commercialize chimeric antigen receptor modifiedreceptor-modified T cells, or CAR T cells, as potentially disease-altering gene therapies in oncology, which was amended and restated in June 2015, and amended again in February 2016 and in September 2017. The multi-year research and development collaboration focused on applying our expertise in gene therapy technology to CAR T cell-based therapies, to target and destroy cancer cells. OurThe research collaboration now focuses exclusively on anti-BCMA CAR Tterm ended in June 2018, with ide-cel and bb21217 product candidates. We advanced our development of our bb2121candidates arising from the collaboration.
In February 2016, BMS exercised its option with respect to the ide-cel product candidate, the first CAR product candidate from our collaboration with Celgene, into clinical trials in February 2016. In February 2016,and we exclusively licensed to CelgeneBMS the rightworldwide rights to develop and commercialize our bb2121the ide-cel product candidate, pursuant to Celgene’s exercise of its exclusive option under the collaboration arrangement. We have the obligation to continue conducting our ongoing CRB-401 study, but Celgene has the responsibility for the costs of further development and of commercialization. We retainwhile retaining an option to co-develop and co-promote the bb2121ide-cel product candidate in the United States. In September 2017, we initiated a Phase I clinical studyconnection with its exercise of bb21217, the second anti-BCMA cell product candidate arising from our collaboration with Celgene, and Celgene exercised its option to obtain an exclusive worldwide license, BMS paid to developus an option fee in the amount of $10.0 million. In March 2018, we exercised our option to co-develop and commercialize bb21217.

co-promote the ide-cel product candidate in the United States. Under the terms of the collaboration,co-development and co-promotion agreement that we have with BMS for the development and commercialization of ide-cel, we share equally in all costs relating to developing, commercializing and manufacturing the product candidate within the United States and we would share equally in the United States profits. In 2019, BMS paid us a $10.0 million clinical milestone payment.

In September 2017, BMS exercised its option with respect to the bb21217 product candidate, and we exclusively licensed to BMS the worldwide rights to develop and commercialize the bb21217 product candidate, while retaining an option to co-develop and co-promote the bb21217 product candidate in the United States on terms substantially similar to the co-development and co-promotion arrangement for the ide-cel product candidate. In connection with its exercise of its option to obtain an exclusive license, BMS paid to us an option fee in the amount of $15.0 million. Under the terms of the license agreement with BMS for the exclusive rights to the development and commercialization of bb21217, we are and will be responsible for conducting and funding all research and development activities performed up through completion of the initial Phase I clinical study forCRB-402 study. In 2019, the bb2121protocol was amended to enroll additional patients and the bb21217 product candidates. CelgeneBMS has agreed to reimburse us a specified amount per patient in the event we and Celgene mutually agree to expand any Phase I clinical trial for any product candidate under the collaboration beyond a specified number of patients per clinical trial. This collaboration is governed by a joint steering committee, or JSC, formed by representatives from us and Celgene. The JSC, among other activities, reviews the collaboration program, reviews and evaluates product candidates and approves regulatory plans. On a product candidate-by-product candidate basis, up through a specified period following enrollment for the first patient in an initial Phase I clinical study for such product candidate,additional patients.
In May 2020, we have granted Celgene an option to obtain an exclusive worldwide license to developamended the co-development and commercialize such product candidate pursuant to a writtenco-promotion agreement the form of which we have already agreed upon. Effective as of February 2016, Celgene has exercised its option with respect to ide-cel and the bb2121 product candidate, and we have exclusively licensed to Celgene the worldwide rights to develop and commercialize the bb2121 product candidate. Effective as of September 2017, Celgene has exercised its optionlicense agreement with respect to bb21217. Under these amended agreements, BMS was relieved of its obligations to pay us future ex-U.S. milestones and royalties on ex-U.S. sales for each of ide-cel and bb21217 in exchange for an up-front, non-refundable, non-creditable payment of $200.0 million. In connection with these amendments, BMS assumed the bb21217 product candidate, and we have exclusively licensedcontract manufacturing
13

Table of Contents
agreements relating to Celgeneide-cel adherent lentiviral vector. Over time, BMS is assuming responsibility for manufacturing ide-cel suspension lentiviral vector outside of the worldwide rights to develop and commercialize the bb21217 product candidate.  We may elect to co-develop and co-promote the bb2121 product candidate and the bb21217 candidateU.S., with bluebird responsible for manufacturing ide-cel suspension lentiviral vector in the United States, provided that,States. In addition, under these amended agreements, the parties are released from future exclusivity related to BCMA-directed T cell therapies. In addition, if we do not exercise our option to co-develop and co-promote the bb2121bb21217 product candidate then we will not be permitted to exercise our option to co-develop and co-promote any future product candidates under the collaboration.

Celgene is solely responsible for all costs and expenses of manufacturing and supplying the bb2121 and the bb21217 product candidates, and for any other product candidates arising from the collaboration that it exclusively licenses. Subject to customary “back-up” supply rights granted to Celgene, we have the sole right to manufacture or have manufactured supplies of vectors and associated payloads manufactured for incorporation into the optioned product candidates. Celgene will reimburse us for our costs to manufacture and supply such vectors and associated payloads, plus a modest mark-up.

In connection with its exercise of the option to exclusively in-license the bb2121 and the bb21217 product candidates, Celgene paid to us an option fee in the amount of $10.0 million and $15.0 million, respectively. In addition, for each product candidate that is in-licensed by Celgene, including bb2121 and bb21217,United States, we will beare also eligible to receive up to $10.0 million in clinical milestone payments,


up to $117.0$67.5 million in regulatory milestone payments and up to $78.0$45.0 million in commercial milestone payments, if we do not exercise our option to co-develop and co-promote in the United States. We will also be eligible to receiveas well as a percentage of net sales as a royalty in a range from the mid-single digits to low-teens. The royalties payable to us are subject to certain reductions, including for any royalty payments required to be made by CelgeneBMS to acquire patent rights, with an aggregate minimum floor. CelgeneBMS will assume certain development obligations and must report on their progress in achieving these milestones on a quarterly basis.

If we do elect to co-develop

Our collaboration with BMS is governed by a joint governance committee, or JGC, formed by representatives from us and co-promote the product candidate within the United States, we would share equally in all costs relating to developing, commercializingBMS. The JGC, among other activities, reviews and manufacturing the product candidate within the United Statesapproves development and we would share equallycommercialization plans and budgets for activities in the United States profits. Additionally, if we elect to co-develop and co-promote a product candidate, then the milestones and royalties would decrease compared to those described above. Under this scenario, we would receive per product candidate up to $10.0 million in clinical milestone payments and outside of the United States, up to $54.0 million in regulatory milestone payments and up to $36.0 million in commercial milestone payments. In addition, to the extent any of the product candidates licensed by Celgene and co-developed and co-promoted by us are commercialized, we would be entitled to receive tiered royalty payments ranging from the mid-single digits to low-teens based on a percentage of net sales generated outside of the United States. The royalties payable to us are subject to certain reductions, including any royalty payments required to be made by Celgene to acquire patent rights, with an aggregate minimum floor.

If Celgene does not exercise its option with respect to any product candidate prior to expiration of the applicable option period, then we have the right to develop that product candidate outside the scope of the collaboration.

We received an initial up-front payment of $75.0 million from Celgene in connection with the collaboration, plus an additional $25.0 million in connection with the amendment in June 2015. The collaboration term ends in June 2018. Either party may terminate the agreementagreements upon written notice to the other party in the event of the other party’s uncured material breach. CelgeneBMS may terminate the agreement for any reason upon prior written notice to us. If the agreement isagreements are terminated, rights to product candidates in development at the time of such termination will be allocated to the parties through a mechanism included in the agreement.agreements. In addition, if Celgene terminatesBMS has the right to terminate any co-development and co-promotion agreement or license agreement for our breach, any then- existing co-development and co-promotionBMS may elect to continue such agreement will be automatically terminated and replaced with a license agreement for such product candidate andhowever, any amounts payable by CelgeneBMS to us under any then-existing product license agreementssuch agreement will be reduced.

Manufacturing in Oncology
In November 2017, we purchased a partially completed manufacturing facility located in Durham, North Carolina for $11.5 million. We acquired this 125,000 square foot facility to provide manufacturing capacity for our lentiviral vectors in support of our current and planned gene and cell therapy product candidates. In March of 2019, we announced the official opening of this facility, of which a portion has been placed into service and the remainder is in the process of construction. We currently expect that it will begin to produce lentiviral vector in 2021 in support of our oncology programs, including for ide-cel commercialization, if and when approval is obtained. In addition, we have entered into multi-year agreements with external manufacturing partners in the United States and Europe to support our various preclinical and clinical programs in oncology.
Intellectual property

We strive to protect and enhance the proprietary technology, inventions, and improvements that are commercially important to the development of our business, including seeking, maintaining, and defending patent rights, whether developed internally or licensed from third parties. We also rely on trade secrets relating to our proprietary technology platform and on know-how, continuing technological innovation and in-licensing opportunities to develop, strengthen and maintain our proprietary position in the field of gene therapy that may be important for the development of our business. We additionally rely on regulatory protection afforded through orphan drug designations, data exclusivity, market exclusivity, and patent term extensions where available.

Our commercial success may depend in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other proprietary protection for commercially important technology, inventions and know-how related to our business; defend and enforce our patents; preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets; and operate without infringing the valid enforceable patents and proprietary rights of third parties. Our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing our products may depend on the extent to which we have rights under valid and enforceable patents or trade secrets that cover these activities. With respect to both licensed and company-owned intellectual property, we cannot be sure that patents will be granted with respect to any of our pending patent applications or with respect to any patent applications filed by us in the future, nor can we be sure that any of our existing patents or any patents that may be granted to us in the future will be commercially useful in protecting our commercial products and methods of manufacturing the same.

We have developed or in-licensed numerous patents and patent applications and possess substantial know-how and trade secrets relating to the development and commercialization of gene therapy products. Our proprietary intellectual property, including patent and non-patent intellectual property, is generally directed to, for example, certain genes, transgenes, methods of transferring genetic material into cells, genetically modified cells, processes to manufacture our lentivirus-based product candidates and other proprietary technologies and processes related to our lead product development candidates. As of January 31, 2018,2021, our patent portfolio includes the following:

approximately 222182 patents or patent applications that we own or have exclusively in-licensed from third parties related to lentiviral vectors and vector systems;

approximately 6940 patents or patent applications that we have non-exclusively in-licensed from third parties related to lentiviral vectors and vector systems;

14

Table of Contents

approximately 49 patents or patent applications that we own or have exclusively in-licensed from third parties, including eight that are co-owned with MIT, related to vector manufacturing or production;

approximately seven97 patents or patent applications that we own or have been non-exclusivelyexclusively in-licensed from third parties, including 13 that are co-owned with MIT, related to vector manufacturing or production;

approximately 67194 patents or patent applications that we own or have exclusively or co-exclusively in-licensed from third parties related to therapeutic cellular product candidates;

approximately 273465 patents or patent applications that we own or have exclusively in-licensed or optioned from third parties related to oncology product candidates, including CAR T cell vector systems and manufacturing, T cell manufacturing, and therapeutic T cells;

approximately 160201 patents or patent applications that we own or have exclusively or co-exclusively in-licensed from third parties related to gene editing compositions and methods; and

approximately 2243 patent applications that we have non-exclusively in-licensed from third parties related to gene editing compositions and methods.

Our objective is to continue to expand our portfolio of patents and patent applications in order to protect our gene therapy product candidates manufacturing processes. Examples of the products and technology areas covered by our intellectual property portfolio are described below. See also “—License agreements.” From time to time, we also evaluate opportunities to sublicense our portfolio of patents and patent applications that we own or exclusively license, and we may enter into such licenses from time to time.

β-thalassemia/

Beti-cel and LentiGlobin for SCD

The β-thalassemia/beti-cel and LentiGlobin for SCD program includes threeprograms include the following patent portfolios described below.

Pasteur Institute. The Pasteur patent portfolio contains patent applications directed to FLAP/cPPT elements and lentiviral vectors utilized to produce ourbeti-cel and LentiGlobin product candidate for β-thalassemia and SCD. As of January 31, 2018,2021, we had an exclusive license to 10two issued U.S. patents. We expect the issued composition of matter patents to expire in 2022 and 2023 in the United States (excluding possible patent term extensions).

RDF. The in-licensed patent portfolio from Research Development Foundation, or RDF, in part, contains patents and patent applications directed to aspects of our lentiviral vectors that may be utilized to produce beti-cel and LentiGlobin for SCD. As of January 31, 2021, we had an exclusive license (from RDF) to eight issued U.S. patents and onetwo pending U.S. patent application.applications related to our lentiviral vector platform.  Corresponding foreign patents and patent applications related to our lentiviral vector platform include pending applications or issued patents in Australia, Canada, China, Europe, Hong Kong, Israel, and Japan.Israel.  We expect the issued composition of matter patents to expire from 2019-20232021-2027 in the United States, and from 2019-2020in 2022 in the rest of the world (excluding possible patent term extensions).  Further, we expect composition of matter patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2019-2020 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio other than composition of matter patents, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2019-2020 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).

RDF. The in-licensed patent portfolio from Research Development Foundation, or RDF, in part, contains patents and patent applications directed to aspects of our lentiviral vectors utilized to produce our LentiGlobin product candidate for β-thalassemia and SCD. As of January 31, 2018, we had an exclusive license (from RDF) to eight issued U.S. patents related to our lentiviral vector platform.  Corresponding foreign patents and patent applications related to our lentiviral vector platform include pending applications or issued patents in Canada, Europe, and Israel.  We expect the issued composition of matter patents to expire from 2021-2027 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  Further, we expect composition of matter patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2021-2022 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio other than composition of matter patents, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire infrom 2021-2022 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).

MIT/bluebird bio.  This co-owned patent portfolio contains patents and patent applications directed to certain specific compositions of matter for lentiviral β-globin expression vectors.  As of January 31, 2018,2021, we co-owned twofour issued U.S. patents and one pending U.S. patent application, as well as corresponding foreign patents issued in Europe and Hong Kong.  We expect the issued composition of matter patents to expire in 2023 (excluding possible patent term extensions). Further, we expect composition of matter patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2023 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2023 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).  We note that we have an exclusive license to MIT’s interest in this co-owned intellectual property.

Children’s Medical Center Corporation (CMCC)/bluebird bio.  This co-owned patent portfolio contains patent applications directed to certain specific compositions of matter for treating β-thalassemia and SCD.  As of January 31, 2021, we co-owned one pending U.S. patent application, as well as nine corresponding foreign patent applications. We expect any composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from the pending patent applications, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2038 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2038 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). We note that we have an option to exclusively license CMCC’s interest in this co-owned intellectual property.
15


Children’s Medical Center Corporation (CMCC)/bluebird bio.  This co-owned patent portfolio contains patent applications directed to certain specific compositions of matter for treating β-thalassemia/SCD.  As of January 31, 2018, we co-owned two U.S. provisional patent applications.  We expect any composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from a corresponding nonprovisional application or national stage application, or corresponding foreign applications, if applicable,Our β-thalassemia and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2038 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2038 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).  We note that we have an option to exclusively license to CMCC’s interest in this co-owned intellectual property.

Our β-thalassemia/SCD research programprograms also includes the additional patent portfolio described below.

β-thalassemia/SCD Product Candidate Licenses. We haveinclude in-licensed patents and patent applications that are directed to certain specific compositions of matter and methods for treating β-thalassemia/SCD.  As of January 31, 2018,2021, we had an exclusive license to two issued U.S. patents andonepending U.S. patent application and 22as well as 25 corresponding foreign patents and 15 pending corresponding foreign applications. We expect the issued composition of matter patents to expire in 2035 in the United States and in the rest of the world (excluding possible patent term extensions). Further, we expect any composition of matter or method patents, if issued from the pending patent applications, if applicable, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2035 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2035 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).   In addition, as of January 31, 2018,2021, we had a non-exclusive license to twofive issued U.S. patents, one pending U.S. patent application, and 9three pending corresponding foreign patent applications and 1932 issued foreign patents. We expect the issued composition of matter and method patents to expire in 2029 in the United States and in the rest of the world (excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any composition of matter or method patents, if issued from the pending patent applications, if applicable, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2029 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire fromin 2029 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions.

Eli-cel

Cerebral Adrenoleukodystrophy (CALD)

The CALDeli-cel program includes threethe following patent portfolios described below.

Pasteur Institute.Institute.  The in-licensed Pasteur patent portfolio contains the patents and patent applications described above directed towards aspects of our lentiviral vectors utilized to produce our Lenti-D product candidate for CALD.

eli-cel.

RDF. The in-licensed RDF patent portfolio contains the patents and patent applications described above directed towards aspects of our lentiviral vectors utilized to produce our Lenti-D product candidate for CALD.

eli-cel.

bluebird bio. The bluebird bio patent portfolio contains patents and patent applications directed to compositions of matter for CALD gene therapyeli-cel vectors and compositions and methods of using the vectors and compositions in cell-based gene therapy of adrenoleukodystrophy or adrenomyeloneuropathy.  As of January 31, 2018,2021, we owned three U.S. patents and six pending corresponding foreign applications and five26 issued foreign patents.  We expect the issued composition of matter patents for CALD gene therapyeli-cel vectors to expire in 2032 (excluding possible patent term extensions). Further, we expect composition of matter or method patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2032 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect any other patents in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2032 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).


Ide-cel, bb21217, and independent multiple myeloma program

Multiple Myeloma

The multiple myeloma program includes fiveprograms include the following patent portfolios described below.

Pasteur Institute.  The in-licensed Pasteur patent portfolio contains patents and patent applications described above that are directed towards aspects of our lentiviral vectors utilized to produce our bb2121 product candidatecandidates for multiple myleoma.

myeloma.

RDF. The in-licensed RDF patent portfolio contains the patents and patent applications described above directed towards aspects of our lentiviral vectors utilized to produce our bb2121 product candidatecandidates for multiple myleoma.myeloma. In addition, the RDF portfolio contains additional patent applications directed to aspects of our oncology program.  As of January 31, 2018,2021, we had an exclusive license (from RDF) to fourfive issued patents and two pending U.S. patent applications related to our oncology platform.  We expect the issued patentpatents to expire in 2021from 2021-2022 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  Further, we expect composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire infrom 2021-2022 (excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire infrom 2021-2022 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).

Biogen.Biogen. The in-licensed patent portfolio from Biogen Inc., formerly Biogen Idec MA Inc. and referred to herein as Biogen, contains patents and patent applications directed towards aspects of T cell-based products that target BCMA. As of January 31, 2018,2021, we had a co-exclusive license to ninefive issued U.S. patents and twoone pending U.S. patent applicationsapplication and sixone pending corresponding foreign applicationsapplication and 10449 issued corresponding foreign patents related to bb2121.  We expect the issued patents to expire from 2020-20322024-2032 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  Further, we expect composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2020-20322024-2030 (excluding

16

possible patent term extensions).  We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2020-2032from 2024-2030 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).

NIH. The in-licensed patent portfolio from NIH contains patents and patent applications directed towards aspects of T cell-based products that target BCMA. As of January 31, 2018,2021, we had an exclusive license to one13 issued U.S. Patent, onepatents, 3 pending U.S. patent applicationapplications and 1820 corresponding foreign patent applications and two19 issued corresponding foreign patents related to bb2121.ide-cel.  We expect the issued composition of matter patents to expire in 2034from 2033-2034 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect any other composition of matter and methods patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2033 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2033 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).

bluebird bio. The bluebird bio patent portfolio contains patents and patent applications directed to certain specific compositions of matter for generating CAR T cells. As of January 31, 2018,2021, we owned fiveseven issued U.S. patents, ten pending U.S. patent applications, one pending U.S. provisional patent application, 86104 corresponding pending foreign patent applications, 181 foreign patents and twoone pending PCT applications.application.  We expect the issued composition of matter and methods patents to expire in 2035 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect any composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from a corresponding nonprovisional application or national stage application, or corresponding foreign applications, if applicable, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2035-20382035-2040 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2035-20382035-2040 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).

Lentiviral platform (e.g., vectors, manufacturing, and cell therapy products)

The lentiviral platform, which is potentially applicable toacross our programs in severe genetic disease and oncology, includes the β-thalassemia, SCD, CALD, oncology and other potential programs, includes threefollowing patent portfolios described below.

Pasteur Institute. The Pasteur patent portfolio contains the patents and patent applications described above.

RDF. The in-licensed RDF patent portfolio contains the patents and patent applications described above.

bluebird bio.  Another component of the bluebird bioSIRION. The in-licensed patent portfolio includes the vector manufacturing platform and is potentially applicable to the CALD, β-thalassemia, SCD, oncology, and other programs.  This portion of the portfoliofrom SIRION Biotech GmbH, or SIRION, contains patents and patent applications directed to improved methods for transfection and transduction of therapeutic cells.manufacturing ex vivo gene therapy products with a lentiviral vector. As of January 31, 2018,2021, we ownedhad an exclusive license to two PCT applications,issued U.S. patents, one pending U.S. patent applicationsapplication and 20two corresponding foreign patent applications and 18 issued corresponding foreign patents.patents in Europe, Israel, and Japan.  We expect the issued method patents to expire in 2033 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect any other composition of matter and methodmethods patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2032-2037in 2033 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2032-20372033 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).


bluebird bio.  Another component of the bluebird bio patent portfolio includes the vector manufacturing platform and is potentially applicable across our severe genetic disease and oncology programs.  This portion of the portfolio contains patents and patent applications directed to improved methods for transfection and transduction of therapeutic cells. As of January 31, 2021, we owned three issued U.S. patents, four pending U.S. patent applications and 40 corresponding foreign patent applications and 55 issued corresponding foreign patents.  We expect the issued method patents to expire in 2032 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect composition of matter and method patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2032-2038 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2032-2038 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).

Oncology platform (e.g., vectors, manufacturing, and T cell-based products)

Our T cell-based oncology platform and oncology research program, which is applicable to our multiple myeloma programprograms and other potential programs in cancer, includes fourthe following patent portfolios described below.

Pasteur Institute. The Pasteur patent portfolio contains the patents and patent applications described above.

17

RDF. The in-licensed RDF patent portfolio described above contains patents and patent applications that are also applicable to our oncology platform.  In addition, the RDF portfolio contains additional patent applications directed to aspects of our oncology program.  As of January 31, 2018,2021, we had an exclusive license (from RDF) to fourfive issued patents and two pending U.S. patent applications related to our oncology platform.  We expect the issued patentpatents to expire in 2021from 2021-2022 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  Further, we expect composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire infrom 2021-2022 (excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire infrom 2021-2022 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).

bluebird bio. One aspect of the bluebird bio patent portfolio contains patent applications directed to certain specific compositions of matter for generating CAR T cells directed against various cancers and improved CAR T cell compositions.  As of January 31, 2018,2021, we owned fourthree issued U.S. patents, 13 pending U.S. patent applications and seven74 corresponding pending foreign patent applications; sevenapplications and three foreign patents; six families of pending U.S. provisional applications; and fivenine pending PCT applications.  We expect the issued composition of matter patent to expire in 2034 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect any composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from a corresponding nonprovisional application or national stage application, or corresponding foreign applications, if applicable, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2033-2037from 2034-2041 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2033-2037(worldwide,2034-2041 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).  

T Cell Manufacturing Methods License.  We have in-licensed patents and patent applications that are directed to certain specific methods for generating CAR T cells.  As of January 31, 2018,2021, we had a nonexclusive license to onetwo issued U.S. patent,patents, onepending U.S. patent application, and 30 corresponding issued foreign patents.  We expect the issued method patents to expire in 2026 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  Further, we expect methods patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2026 (excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire fromin 2026 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).

T Cell Immunotherapy Product Candidate Licenses. We have in-licensed patents and patent applications that are directed to certain specific compositions of matter for generating CAR T cells directed against various cancers and related methods of treatment.  As of January 31, 2018,2021, we have an exclusive license to one issued U.S. patent and ten corresponding foreign patents and co-own a pending PCTUS application and seven corresponding foreign patent applications to a particular target antigen (due for national stage conversion in March 2018). antigen. We expect the issued composition of matter patent to expire in 2025 (excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from a corresponding nonprovisional application or national stage application, or corresponding foreign applications, if applicable, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2036 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire fromin 2036 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).   In addition, as of January 31, 2018,2021, we have an exclusive license to two issuedthree families of U.S. patents, one pending U.S. patent applicationnon-provisional applications and ten corresponding foreign patentsPCT applications directed to anothercompositions and methods for treating cancers that express particular target antigen.  We expect the issued method of use patents to expire in 2029 (excluding possible patent term extensions).antigens. We expect any composition of matter or methodsmethod of use patents, if issued from a corresponding nonprovisional application or corresponding foreign applications, if applicable, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2039 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2039 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). Also as of January 31, 2021, we co-own a PCT application directed to compositions and methods for treating cancers that express a particular antigen. We expect any composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from 2029a corresponding nonprovisional applications or foreign applications, if applicable, and if the appropriate, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2040 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2040 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). Also as of January 31, 2021, we co-own three families of PCT applications directed to compositions and methods for treating cancers that express a particular antigen. We expect any composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from a corresponding nonprovisional application or foreign applications, if applicable, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2040 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity,

18

or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2040 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). Also as of January 31, 2021, we have an option to exclusively license two U.S. patent applications and 7 corresponding foreign patent applications that are directed to compositions and methods for treating cancers that express a particular antigen. We expect any composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from corresponding nonprovisional applications or foreign applications, if applicable, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2037-2039 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 20292037-2039 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).


Gene editing platform (e.g., homing endonucleases, chimeric endonucleases, megaTALs, genetically modified cells)

The gene editing platform includes fivethe following patent portfolios described below.

Pasteur Institute. The Pasteur patent portfolio described above may contain patents and patent applications that are potentially applicable to our gene editing platform.

RDF. The in-licensed RDF patent portfolio described above may contain patents and patent applications that are potentially applicable to our gene editing platform.

Gene Editing License. We in-licensed patent portfolios that contain patents and patent applications directed to aspects of our gene editing platform to produce genome modifying enzymes and genetically modified cells that are potentially applicable to our β-thalassemia, SCD, oncology and other programs.  As of January 31, 2018,2021, we had an exclusive/co-exclusive license to sixseven issued U.S. patents and one pending U.S. patent application and 6127 corresponding foreign patents and sixthree corresponding patent applications related to our gene editing platform. We expect the issued composition of matter patents to expire in 2030 (excluding possible patent term extensions). Further, we expect composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2030 (excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2030 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). In addition, as of January 31, 2018,2021, we had an exclusive license to two issued U.S. patents and six corresponding foreign patents related to our gene editing platform. We expect the issued composition of matter patent to expire in 2031from 2027-2031 in the United States (excluding possible patent term extensions) and in 2027 in the rest of the world.  Further, we expect composition of matter and methods patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2027 (excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2027 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).

Academic Gene Editing Licenses. We in-licensed patent portfolios from multiple academic medical centers, each portfolio containing patents and patent applications directed to aspects of our gene editing platform to produce genome modifying enzymes and genetically modified cells that are potentially applicable to our β-thalassemia, SCD, oncology and other programs.As of January 31, 2018,2021, we had an exclusive license to onefour issued U.S. patentpatents and seventhree pending U.S. patent applications and four15 corresponding foreign patents and fourtwo corresponding patent applications related to our gene editing platform. We expect the issued patent to expire in 20322027 (excluding possible patent term extensions) in the U.S. and from 2027-3032 in the rest of the world. We expect composition of matter or method patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2027-2032 (excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire infrom 2027-2032 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). As of January 31, 2018,2021, we also had a non-exclusive license to one issued U.S. patent and one pending U.S. patent application related to our gene editing platform. We expect the issued composition of matter patent to expire in 2035 (excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from a corresponding nonprovisional applicationapplications or national stage application, or corresponding foreign applications, if applicable, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 20362035 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 20362035 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). In addition, as of January 31, 2018,2021, we had an exclusive license to two pendingone issued U.S. applicationspatent, and 1420 corresponding issued foreign patents and 15 pending7 corresponding foreign patent applications related to our gene editing platform. We expect the issued composition of matter patenspatents to expire in 2033 (excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect other composition of matter or method patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2031-20332033 (excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2031-20332033 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).  As of January 31, 2018,2021, we also had a non-exclusive license

19

to onetwo issued U.S. patent,patents, one pending U.S. application, and 1925 corresponding foreign patent applications, and 13 corresponding foreign patents related to our gene editing platform. We expect the issued composition of matter patents to expire in 2033 (excluding possible patent term extensions). Further, we expect composition of matter or method patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2033 (excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2033 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).


bluebird bio. One aspect of the bluebird bio patent portfolio contains patent applications that are potentially applicable to certain aspects of our gene editing platform to produce genome modifying enzymes and genetically modified cells that are potentially applicable to our oncology and other programs.  As of January 31, 2021, we owned 11 patent families that include one issued U.S. patent, 14 pending U.S. patent applications and 58 corresponding foreign patent applications related to our gene editing platform. We expect any composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from a corresponding nonprovisional application or national stage application, or corresponding foreign applications, if applicable, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2037-2038 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2037-2038 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).   As of January 31, 2021, we owned three PCT applications related to our gene editing platform. We expect any composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from a corresponding nonprovisional application or national stage application, or corresponding foreign applications, if applicable, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2038-2039 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2038-2039 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). As of January 31, 2021, we also owned one provisional application related to our gene editing platform. We expect any composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from a corresponding nonprovisional application or national stage application, or corresponding foreign applications, if applicable, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2041 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2041 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).  As of January 31, 2021, we co-owned (with Cellectis SA) two issued U.S. patents, two corresponding foreign patent applications, and 17 corresponding foreign patents related to our gene editing platform. We expect composition of matter or method patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2034 (excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect the other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2034 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).   

bluebird bio. One aspect of the bluebird bio patent portfolio contains patent applications that are potentially applicable to certain aspects of our gene editing platform to produce genome modifying enzymes and genetically modified cells that are potentially applicable to our oncology and other programs.  As of January 31, 2018, we owned seven families of PCT applications related to our gene editing platform.  We expect any composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from a corresponding nonprovisional application or national stage application, or corresponding foreign applications, if applicable, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2037 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2037 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).  As of January 31, 2018, we also owned five families of provisional applications related to our gene editing platform.  We expect any composition of matter or methods patents, if issued from a corresponding nonprovisional application or national stage application, or corresponding foreign applications, if applicable, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2038 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).  We expect any other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2038 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).  As of January 31, 2018, we co-owned (with Cellectis) two pending U.S. applications and 12 corresponding pending foreign patent applications related to our gene editing platform.  We expect composition of matter or method patents, if issued from the pending patent applications and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees are paid, to expire from 2034 (excluding possible patent term extensions). We expect the other patents and patent applications in this portfolio, if issued, and if the appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity, or other governmental fees are paid, to expire in 2034 (worldwide, excluding possible patent term extensions).  

The term of individual patents depends upon the legal term of the patents in the countries in which they are obtained. In most countries in which we file, the patent term is 20 years from the date of filing the non-provisional application. In the United States, a patent’s term may be lengthened by patent term adjustment, which compensates a patentee for administrative delays by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in granting a patent, or may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over an earlier-filed patent.

The term of a patent that covers an FDA-approved drug may also be eligible for patent term extension, which permits patent term restoration of a U.S. patent as compensation for the patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. The Hatch-Waxman Act permits a patent term extension of up to five years beyond the expiration of the patent. The length of the patent term extension is related to the length of time the drug is under regulatory review. A patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval and only one patent applicable to an approved drug may be extended. Moreover, a patent can only be extended once, and thus, if a single patent is applicable to multiple products, it can only be extended based on one product. Similar provisions are available in Europe and other foreign jurisdictions to extend the term of a patent that covers an approved drug. When possible, depending upon the length of clinical trials and other factors involved in the filing of a BLA, we expect to apply for patent term extensions for patents covering our product candidates and their methods of use.

We may rely, in some circumstances, on trade secrets to protect our technology. However, trade secrets can be difficult to protect. We seek to protect our proprietary technology and processes, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, scientific advisors and third parties. We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data and trade secrets by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. While we have confidence in these individuals, organizations and systems, agreements or security measures may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. In addition, our trade secrets may
20

otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors. To the extent that our consultants or collaborators use intellectual property owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the rights in related or resulting know-how and inventions.

License agreements

Inserm-Transfert

In May 2009, we entered into an exclusive license with Inserm-Transfert, which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale, for use of certain patents and know-how related to the ABCD1 gene and corresponding protein, for use in the field of human ALD therapy. Inserm-Transfert is referred to herein as Inserm. The last patent in the Inserm licensed patent portfolio expired in February of 2016.  Inserm retains the right to practice the intellectual property licensed under the agreement for educational, clinical and preclinical studies purposes.

Upon commercialization of our products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property, which we expect would include our Lenti-D product candidate,eli-cel, we will be obligated to pay Inserm a percentage of net sales as a royalty for the longer of the life of any patents covering the product or 10 years from first commercial sale. This royalty is in the low single digits. The royalties payable to Inserm are subject to reduction for any third partythird-party payments required to be made, with a minimum floor in the low single digits.


We are required to use all commercially reasonable efforts to develop licensed products and introduce them into the commercial market as soon as practical, consistent with our reasonable business practices and judgment in compliance with an agreed upon development plan. We have assumed certain development, regulatory and commercial milestone obligations and must report on our progress in achieving these milestones on an annual basis.

We may unilaterally terminate the license agreement at any time. Either party may terminate the agreement in the event of the other party’s material breach which remains uncured after 60 days of receiving written notice of such breach or in the event the other party becomebecomes the subject of a voluntary or involuntary petition in bankruptcy and such petition is not dismissed with prejudice within 120 days after filing. In addition, Inserm may terminate the license agreement in the event that we cannot prove within 60 days of written notice from Inserm that we have been diligent in developing the licensed products and introducing them into the commercial market.

Absent early termination, the agreement will automatically terminate upon the expiration of all issued patents and filed patent applications within the patent rights covered by the agreement or 10 years from the date of first commercial sale of a licensed product, whichever is later. The license grant ceases in connection with any such termination. The longest lived patent rights licensed to us under the agreement are currently expected to expireexpired in 2016.

Institut Pasteur

We have entered into a license with Institut Pasteur for certain patents relating to the use of DNA sequences, lentiviral vectors and recombinant cells in the field of ex vivo gene therapy and CAR T cell-based therapy in a range of indications, excluding vaccinations. This agreement was amended twice in 2012, again in 2013 and most recently in 2015. The Institut Pasteur licensed patent portfolio includes at least 107two U.S. and foreignpatents. The issued patents and patent applications. Any patents within this portfolio that have issued or may yet issue would have a statutory expiration dates between 2019in 2022 and 2023. The license is exclusive for products containing human and non-human lentiviral vectors. Institut Pasteur retains the right, on behalf of itself, its licensees and research partners, to conduct research using the licensed intellectual property.

We have the right to grant sublicenses outright to third parties under the agreement. For the first sublicense including a product targeting β-hemoglobinopathies (including TDTβ-thalassemia and severe SCD) or ALD (including CALD and AMN)adrenomyeloneuropathy), we must pay Institut Pasteur an additional payment of €3.0 million. If we receive any income (cash or non-cash) in connection with sublicenses for products targeting indications other than β-hemoglobinopathies (including TDTβ-thalassemia and severe SCD) or ALD (including CALD and AMN),adrenomyeloneuropathy ), we must pay Institut Pasteur a percentage of such income varying from low single digits if the sublicense also includes licenses to intellectual property controlled by us, and a percentage of sublicense income in the mid-range double digits if the sublicense does not include licenses to intellectual property controlled by us.

Upon commercialization of our products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property, which we expect would include ourbeti-cel, LentiGlobin for SCD, eli-cel, ide-cel and Lenti-D product candidates,bb21217, we will be obligated to pay Institut Pasteur a percentage of net sales as a royalty. This royalty varies depending on the indication of the product but in any event is in the low single digits. In addition, starting in 2016 we must make under this agreement an annual maintenance payment which is creditable against royalty payments on a year-by-year basis. If the combined royalties we would be required to pay to Institut Pasteur and third parties is higher than a pre-specified percentage, we may ask Institut Pasteur to re-negotiate our royalty rates under this relationship.

21

Table of Contents
We are required to use all reasonable commercial efforts (as compared to a company of similar size and scope) to develop and commercialize one or more products in the license field and to obtain any necessary governmental approvals in respect of, and market the products in license field, if any. Additionally, we have assumed certain development and regulatory milestone obligations. We must report on our progress towards achieving these milestones on an annual basis. We may unilaterally terminate the license agreement at any time by sending Institut Pasteur 90 days prior written notice. Either party may terminate the license in the event of the other party’s substantial breach which remains uncured after 60 days of receiving written notice of such breach. Institut Pasteur may also terminate the agreement in the event bankruptcy proceedings are opened against us and not dismissed within 60 days.

Absent early termination, the agreement will automatically terminate upon the expiration of the last licensed patents or five years after first market authorization of the first product, whichever occurs later. In the event the agreement is terminated, while the license grant would cease, we would retain the right to manufacture, import, use and sell licensed products for a certain period of time post-termination. In addition, our ownership stake in certain jointly made improvements covered by the licensed patents would survive termination of the agreement. The longest lived patent rights licensed to us under the agreement are currently expected to expire in 2023.


Stanford University

In July 2002, we entered into a non-exclusive license agreement with the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University, referred to herein as Stanford, which we amended and restated in April 2012. Under this agreement, we are granted a license to use the HEK293T cell line for any commercial or non-commercial use for research, nonclinical and clinical development purpose and human and animal gene therapy products.

We have the right to grant sublicenses outright to third parties under the agreement. For each such sublicense we grant, we must pay Stanford a fee (unless the sublicense is to a collaborating partner, contract manufacturer or contract research organization).

Upon commercialization of our products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property, which we expect would include our Lenti-D product candidate,beti-cel, LentiGlobin for SCD, eli-cel, ide-cel and bb21217, we will be obligated to pay Stanford a percentage of net sales as a royalty. This royalty varies with net sales but in any event is in the low single digits and is reduced for each third-party license that requires payments by us with respect to a licensed product, provided that the royalty to Stanford is not less than a specified percentage which is less than one percent. Since April 2013, we have been paying Stanford an annual maintenance fee, which will be creditable against our royalty payments.

We may unilaterally terminate the agreement by giving Stanford 30 days’ written notice. Stanford may also terminate the license agreement if after 30 days of providing notice we are delinquent on any report or payment, are not using commercially reasonable efforts to develop, manufacture and/or commercialize one or more licensed products, are in material breach of any provision or provide any false report. Termination of this agreement may require us to utilize different cell types for vector manufacturing, which could lead to delays.

Absent early termination, the license will expire in April 2037. We may elect to extend the term for an additional 25 years so long as we have a commercial product on the market at that time and we are in material compliance with the license agreement.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In December 1996, we entered into an exclusive license with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, referred to herein as MIT, for use of certain patents in any field. This license agreement was amended in December 2003, May 2004 and June 2011. The licensed patent portfolio includes at least 1813 U.S. and foreign patents and patent applications. Any patents within this portfolio that have issued or may yet issue would have a statutory expiration date from 2017-2023.in 2023. This license also has been amended to include a case jointly owned by MIT and us wherein we received the exclusive license to MIT’s rights in this case. MIT retains the right to practice the intellectual property licensed under the agreement for noncommercial research purposes.

We have the right to grant sublicenses outright to third parties under the agreement. In the event we sublicense the patent rights, we must pay MIT a percentage of all payments we receive from by the sublicensee. This percentage varies from mid-single digits to low double digits.

Upon commercialization of our products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property, which we expect would include ourbeti-cel and LentiGlobin product candidate,for SCD, we will be obligated to pay MIT a percentage of net sales by us or our sublicensees as a royalty. This royalty is in the low single digits and is reduced for royalties payable to third parties, provided that the royalty to MIT is not less than a specified percentage that is less than one-percent. In addition, we make under this agreement an annual maintenance payment which may be credited against the royalty payments.

22

Table of Contents
We are required to use diligent efforts to market licensed products and to continue active, diligent development and marketing efforts for licensed products during the term of the agreement. We have assumed certain milestones with respect to raising capital investment and regulatory progress. We must report on our progress on achieving these milestones on an annual basis.

We may unilaterally terminate the license agreement upon six months’ notice to MIT. MIT may terminate the agreement if we cease to carry on our business, or in the event of our material breach which remains uncured after 90 days of receiving written notice of such breach (30 days in the case of nonpayment). In the event the agreement is terminated, while the license grant would cease, we would retain a right to complete manufacture of any licensed products in process and sell then-existing inventory. In addition, MIT would grant our sublicensees a direct license following such termination. With respect to jointly owned intellectual property, any termination would allow MIT to grant licenses to any third partythird-party to such intellectual property, without our approval, unless a sublicensee was already in place, in which case, MIT would grant our sublicensees a direct license.


Research Development Foundation

In December 2011, we entered into an exclusive license with RDF to use certain patents that involve lentiviral vectors. The RDF licensed patent portfolio includes at least 2931 U.S. and foreign patents and patent applications. Any patents within this portfolio that have issued or may yet issue would have an expected statutory expiration date between 2021 and 2027. RDF retains the right, on behalf of itself and other nonprofit academic research institutions, to practice and use the licensed patents for any academic, non-clinical research and educational purposes. We have the right to grant sublicenses outright to third parties under the agreement.

Upon commercialization of our products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property, which we expect would include both our Lenti-Dbeti-cel, LentiGlobin for SCD, eli-cel, ide-cel and LentiGlobin product candidates,bb21217 , we are obligated to pay RDF a percentage of net sales as a royalty. This royalty is in the low single digits and is reduced by half if during the following ten years from the first marketing approval the last valid claim within the licensed patent that covers the licensed product expires or ends.

We are required to use commercially reasonable and diligent efforts for a company of our size and resources to develop or commercialize one or more licensed products, including our first licensed product by 2016 and a second licensed product by 2018. These diligence efforts include minimum annual royalty payments to RDF, which are creditable against earned royalties otherwise due to RDF, and payments upon regulatory milestones.

RDF may terminate the agreement in the event of our material breach which remains uncured after 90 days of receiving written notice of such breach (30 days in the case of nonpayment) or in the event we become bankrupt, our business or assets or property are placed in the hands of a receiver, assignee or trustee, we institute or suffer to be instituted any procedure in bankruptcy court for reorganization or rearrangement of our financial affairs, make a general assignment for the benefit of creditors, or if we or an affiliate or a sublicensee institutes any procedure challenging the validity or patentability of any patent or patent application within the licensed patents, the agreement will immediately terminate.

Absent early termination, the agreement will continue until its expiration upon the later of there being no more valid claims within the licensed patents or the expiration of our royalty obligations on licensed products that are subject to an earned royalty, if such earned royalty is based on the minimum 10-year royalty period described above. In the event the agreement is terminated, while the license grant would cease, RDF will grant our sublicensees a direct license. The longest lived patent rights licensed to us under the agreement are in one U.S. patent currently expected to expire in 2027.

Biogen

In August 2014, we entered into a license agreement with Biogen, pursuant to which we co-exclusively licensed certain patents and patent applications directed towards aspects of T cell-based products that target BCMA. Any patents within this portfolio that have issued or may yet issue would have an expected statutory expiration date between 20202024 and 2032. Biogen retains the right to practice and use the licensed patents in the licensed field and territory.  We have the right to grant sublicenses to third parties, subject to certain conditions. Upon commercialization of our products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property, which we expect would include our bb2121 product candidate,ide-cel and bb21217, we will be obligated to pay Biogen a percentage of net sales as a royalty in the low single digits. We are required to use commercially reasonable efforts to research and develop one or more licensed products in the license field during the term of the agreement. Additionally, we have assumed certain development and regulatory milestone obligations and must report on our progress in achieving those milestones on a periodic basis. We may be obligated to pay up to $24.0 million in the aggregate for each licensed product upon the achievement of these milestones. We may unilaterally terminate the license agreement at any time with prior written notice to Biogen. Either party may terminate the license in the event of the other party’s material breach upon notice and an opportunity for the breaching party to cure. Either party may also terminate the agreement in the event bankruptcy proceedings are opened against the other party and are not dismissed within a specified period of time.  Absent early termination, the agreement will automatically
23

Table of Contents
terminate upon the expiration of all patent rights covered by the agreement or ten years from the date of first commercial sale of a licensed product, whichever is later. The license grant ceases in connection with any such termination. The longest lived patent rights licensed to us under the Agreement are in a U.S. patent, currently expected to expire in 2032.

NIH

In August 2015, we entered into a license agreement with the NIH, pursuant to which we exclusively licensed certain patents and patent applications directed towards aspects of T cell-based products that target BCMA. Any patents within this portfolio that have issued or may yet issue would have an expected statutory expiration date in 2033.2033-2034. NIH retains the right to practice the intellectual property licensed under the agreement on behalf of the government of the United States. We have the right to grant sublicenses to third parties, subject to certain conditions. For each such sublicense we grant we must pay the NIH a fee. Upon commercialization of our products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property, which we expect would include our bb2121 product candidate,ide-cel and bb21217, we will be obligated to pay the NIH a percentage of net sales as a royalty in the low single digits. We are required to use commercially


reasonable efforts to research and develop one or more licensed products in the license field during the term of the agreement. Additionally, we have assumed certain development and regulatory milestone obligations and must report on our progress in achieving those milestones on a periodic basis. We may be obligated to pay up to $9.7 million in the aggregate for a licensed product upon the achievement of these milestones. We may unilaterally terminate the license agreement at any time with prior written notice to the NIH. The NIH may terminate the license in the event of our material breach upon notice and following an opportunity for us to cure the material breach. The NIH may also terminate the agreement in the event bankruptcy proceedings are opened against us and are not dismissed within a specified period of time.  Absent early termination, the agreement will automatically terminate upon the expiration of the patent rights covered by the agreement. The longest lived patent rights licensed to us under the Agreement are currently expected to expire in 2034.

SIRION
In December 2015, we entered into a license agreement with SIRION, pursuant to which we exclusively licensed certain patents and patent applications directed towards aspects of manufacturing gene therapy products. Any patents within this portfolio that have issued or may yet issue would have an expected statutory expiration date in 2033. We have the right to grant ceasessublicenses to third parties, subject to certain conditions. Upon commercialization of our products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property, which we expect would include beti-cel and LentiGlobin for SCD, we will be obligated to pay SIRION a percentage of net sales as a royalty in connectionthe low single digits. We are required to use commercially reasonable efforts to research and develop one or more licensed products in the license field during the term of the agreement, and we must report on our progress in achieving those milestones on a periodic basis. We may be obligated to pay up to $13.4 million in the aggregate upon the achievement of certain development and regulatory milestones. We may unilaterally terminate the license agreement at any time with any such termination.prior written notice to SIRION. SIRION may terminate the license in the event of our material breach upon notice and following an opportunity for us to cure the material breach. SIRION may also terminate the agreement in the event bankruptcy proceedings are opened against us and are not dismissed within a specified period of time. Absent early termination, the agreement will automatically terminate upon the expiration of the patent rights covered by the agreement. The longest lived patent rights licensed to us under the Agreement are currently expected to expire in 2033.

GlaxoSmithKline

Orchard Therapeutics Limited
In April 2017, we entered into a license agreement with GlaxoSmithKline Intellectual Property Development Limited, or GSK, pursuant to which GSK non-exclusively licensed certain of our patent rights related to lentiviral vector technology to develop and commercialize gene therapies for Wiscott-Aldrich syndrome and metachromatic leukodystrophy, two rare genetic diseases. Effective April 2018, this license agreement was assigned by GSK to Orchard Therapeutics Limited, or Orchard. Financial terms of the agreement includeincluded an upfront payment to us as well as potential development and regulatory milestone payments and low single digit royalties on net sales of covered products.

Novartis Pharma AG

In April 2017, we entered into a license agreement with Novartis Pharma AG, or Novartis, pursuant to which Novartis non-exclusively licensed certain of our patent rights related to lentiviral vector technology to develop and commercialize chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR T) therapies for oncology, including Novartis’ approved CAR-T therapy Kymriah.  Financial terms of the agreement include an upfront payment to us as well as potential development and regulatory milestone payments and low single digit royalties on net sales of covered products.

Competition

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by intense and rapidly changing competition to develop new technologies and proprietary products. We face potential competition from many different sources, including larger and better-funded pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. Not only must we compete with other companies that are focused on gene therapy products but any products that we may commercialize will have to compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future.


There are other organizations working to improve existing therapies or to develop new therapies for our initially selected indications. Depending on how successful these efforts are, it is possible they may increase the barriers to adoption and success for our LentiGlobin, Lenti-D, bb2121 and bb21217 product candidates, and our preclinical T cell-based cancer immunotherapy product candidates. These efforts include the following:

β-thalassemia: The current standard of care for the treatment of β-thalassemia in the developed world is chronic blood transfusions to address the patient’s anemia. In addition, such patients often receive iron chelation therapy to help manage the iron overload associated with their chronic blood transfusions. Novartis and ApoPharma Inc., who provide the leading iron chelation therapy, are seeking to develop improvements to their product profile and accessibility. A number of different approaches are under investigation that seek to improve the current standard of care treatment options, including, a protein that aims to improve red blood cell production and fetal hemoglobin regulators. Acceleron Pharma, Inc. (in collaboration with Celgene) is investigating Luspatercept (ACE-536), a subcutaneously-delivered protein therapeutic that targets molecules in the TGF-β superfamily, which is currently in two Phase III clinical trials in subjects with transfusion dependent β-thalassemia (TDT) and non-transfusion dependent β-thalassemia. Results of Luspatercept’s Phase III clinical trial in TDT are expected in 2018. In addition, some patients with β-thalassemia receive HSCT treatment, particularly if a sufficiently well-matched source of donor cells is identified. In addition, there are a number of academic and industry-sponsored research and development programs to improve the outcomes of allogeneic HSCT, or the tolerability and safety of haploidentical HSCT, while increasing the availability of suitable donors. These programs include a modified donor T cell therapy to be used in conjunction with haploidentical HSCT that is in an ongoing Phase I/II study supported by Bellicum Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; and an adjunctive T cell immunotherapy treatment in conjunction with allogeneic HSCT that is in an ongoing Phase I/II study supported by Kiadis Pharma. There are also several different groups developing other approaches for β-thalassemia, one that uses a similar ex vivo autologous gene therapy approach, but uses a different vector and different cell processing techniques and two that use gene editing approaches These include: the San Raffaele Telethon Institute for Gene Therapy (in collaboration with GSK) is currently investigating its gene therapy in a Phase 2 study of adults and pediatric patients with in transfusion dependent β-thalassemia (TDT) ; Sangamo BioSciences Inc. (in collaboration with Bioverativ) has announced that the FDA has accepted Sangamo’s IND for ST-400, using a zinc finger nuclease-mediated gene-editing approach, which enables anticipated initiation of Phase I/II trials in adults with TDT in the first half of 2018; and CRISPR Therapeutics, AG (in collaboration with Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated) is investigating its CRISPR Cas9 gene editing platform in TDT and recently completed its GLP/toxicology studies and filed a CTA in December 2017, indicating plans to initiate a Phase I/II clinical trial in TDT during 2018.

Sickle cell disease: The current standard of care for the treatment of SCD in the developed world is chronic blood transfusions or hydroxyurea (a generic drug). In addition, patients treated with chronic blood transfusions often receive iron chelation therapy to help manage the iron overload.  Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. recently received FDA approval for and have launched Endari (L-glutamine). We are aware of ongoing studies that continue to evaluate the efficacy and safety of hydroxyurea in various populations.  In addition, a limited number of patients with SCD receive allogeneic HSCT treatment, particularly if a sufficiently well-matched source of donor cells is identified. In addition, there are a number of academic and industry-sponsored research and development programs to improve the tolerability and safety of allogeneic HSCT with less well-matched sources of donor cells, while increasing the availability of suitable donors. These programs include a modified donor T cell therapy to be used in conjunction with haploidentical HSCT that is in an ongoing Phase I/II study supported by Bellicum Pharmaceuticals, Inc. A number of different therapeutic approaches are under investigation targeting the various aspects of SCD pathophysiology, including: antibodies to p-selectin including crizanlizumab which recently completed a Phase II study supported by Novartis; hemoglobin modifiers to prevent the sickling of RBC, including GBT440 in a Phase III study supported by Global Blood Therapeutics, Inc.; pan-selectin inhibitors, including GMI-1070 in Phase III studies supported by GlycoMimetics Inc. (in 2011, Pfizer Inc. and GlycoMimetics Inc. entered a global collaboration to advance this compound); and also gene editing approaches being supported by Intellia Therapeutics, Inc. (in collaboration with Novartis), Editas Medicine, Inc. and CRISPR Therapeutics, AG (in collaboration with Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated); and Sangamo BioSciences Inc. (in collaboration  with Bioverativ, Inc.) which has announced plans to investigate the use of zinc finger nuclease-mediated gene-editing techniques in hemoglobinopothies including SCD, although to our knowledge no clinical studies have been initiated in SCD.  There are also several different groups developing gene therapy approaches for SCD. Some of these groups use a similar ex vivo autologous approach, but make use of different vectors and different cell processing techniques. These include: UCLA, which has received funding from the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine to pursue a Phase I gene therapy study for SCD; and Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, which is conducting a Phase I/II gene therapy study for SCD.

CALD: The current standard of care for the treatment of CALD is allogeneic HSCT. We understand that various academic centers around the world are seeking to develop improvements to allogeneic HSCT. In addition, some physicians recommend glyceryl trierucate—better known as Lorenzo’s Oil—to patients diagnosed with ALD or AMN. However, Lorenzo’s Oil has not been clinically proven to address the cerebral symptoms of ALD, and has not been approved by any major regulatory agency as a prescription drug. There are efforts underway to obtain FDA approval for Lorenzo’s Oil as a prescription drug.


Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: The current standard of care for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma includes IMIDs (e.g., thalidomide, lenalidomide, pomalidomide), proteasome inhibitors (e.g., bortezomib, carfilzomib, ixazomib), monoclonal antibodies (e.g., daratumamab, elotumuzumab), cytotoxic agents, and in some cases, HSCT. There are several groups developing autologous T cell therapies for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma that use a similar autologous ex vivo approach, but a different target antigen, BCMA single-chain variable fragment or, we believe, cell processing techniques. These programs include:an anti-BCMA CAR T cell therapy that is currently in a single-center Phase I study by the University of Pennsylvania (in collaboration with Novartis AG); an anti-BCMA CAR T cell therapy that is in Phase I/II study in China and may soon be in clinical trials in the United States (Nanjing Legend in collaboration with Janssen Biotech); an anti-BCMA and TACI CAR T cell therapy that is currently in a Phase I/II study (Autolus); an anti-BCMA CAR T cell therapy that is in Phase I study (Poseida); and other anti-BCMA CAR T cell therapies in early clinical development (Phase I) are being sponsored by Gilead Sciences, Inc., and Juno Therapeutics, Inc. In addition to these autologous T cell-based approaches, Cellectis SA (in collaboration with Pfizer Inc.) has disclosed a preclinical program for an allogeneic BCMA CAR T cell therapy. There are also antibody-based therapies being developed by several groups, including a bispecific antibody therapy currently in a Phase I study supported by Amgen Inc., an antibody drug conjugate therapy currently in a Phase I study supported by GSK, and those being developed in preclinical programs.

T cell-based immunotherapies in oncology: A number of pharmaceutical companies and academic collaborators are researching and developing T cell-based immunotherapies in oncology, in addition to the multiple myeloma programs described above. These include: Novartis AG (in collaboration with the University of Pennsylvania), Adaptimmune Inc., Juno Therapeutics, Inc. (in collaboration with Celgene, Memorial Sloan Kettering and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center), Gilead Sciences, Inc. (in collaboration with Amgen, Inc. and the National Institutes of Health), Pfizer Inc. (through their collaboration with Cellectis SA and Servier), among others.  Many of the T cell-based immunotherapy programs being developed by these companies are already in Phase I/II clinical trials for multiple indications.

Many of our competitors, either alone or with their strategic partners, have substantially greater financial, technical and human resources than we do and significantly greater experience in the discovery and development of product candidates, obtaining FDA and other regulatory approvals of treatments and the commercialization of those treatments. Accordingly, our competitors may be more successful than us in obtaining approval for treatments and achieving widespread market acceptance. Our competitors’ treatments may be more effective, or more effectively marketed and sold, than any

24

Table of Contents
treatment we may commercialize and may render our treatments obsolete or non-competitive before we can recover the expenses of developing and commercializing any of our treatments.

These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical study sites and patient registration for clinical studies, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.

We anticipate that we will face intense and increasing competition as new drugs enter the market and advanced technologies become available. We expect any treatments that we develop and commercialize to compete on the basis of, among other things, efficacy, safety, convenience of administration and delivery, price, the level of generic competition and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payors.

payers.

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. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. In addition, our ability to compete may be affected in many cases by insurers or other third-party payorspayers seeking to encourage the use of generic products. If our therapeutic product candidates are approved, we expect that they will be priced at a significant premium over competitive generic products.

Depending on how successful these competitive efforts are, it is possible they may increase the barriers to adoption and success for our product candidates, and our preclinical T cell-based cancer immunotherapy product candidates. These efforts include the following:

β-thalassemia — The current standard of care for the treatment of β-thalassemia in the developed world is chronic blood transfusions to address the patient’s anemia. In addition, such patients often receive iron chelation therapy to help manage the iron overload associated with their chronic blood transfusions. Novartis and Chiesi, who provide the leading iron chelation therapies, are seeking to develop improvements to their product profile and accessibility. A number of different approaches are under investigation that seek to improve the current standard of care treatment options, including a protein that aims to improve red blood cell production and small molecule that aims to improve red blood cell metabolism. Reblozyl (luspatercept), a subcutaneously-delivered protein therapeutic marketed by Acceleron Pharma, Inc. and BMS that targets molecules in the TGF-β superfamily, has been approved in the United States for the treatment of anemia in adult patients with beta thalassemia who require regular red blood cell (RBC) transfusions, and was recently approved in the EU for the treatment of adult patients with transfusion-dependent anaemia associated with beta-thalassemia. Additionally, Agios has announced that mitapivat, an oral pyruvate kinase receptor activator, will be entering phase 3 evaluations in 2H 2021. Some patients with β-thalassemia receive HSCT treatment, particularly if a sufficiently well-matched source of donor cells is identified. In addition, there are a number of academic and industry-sponsored research and development programs to improve the outcomes of allogeneic HSCT, or the tolerability and safety of haploidentical HSCT, while increasing the availability of suitable donors. There are also several different groups developing gene therapy options for β-thalassemia. These include: CRISPR Therapeutics AG (in collaboration with Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated) is conducting an ongoing phase 1/2 study for its CTX-001, which leverages the CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing platform to disrupt the BCL11A erythroid enhancer; Sangamo BioSciences Inc. (in collaboration with Bioverativ Inc., a Sanofi company) is investigating ST-400, using a zinc finger nuclease-mediated gene-editing approach currently in an ongoing phase 1/2 study; and the San Raffaele Telethon Institute for Gene Therapy (in collaboration with Orchard Therapeutics) is currently investigating its gene therapy in a phase 2 study of adults and pediatric patients with transfusion dependent β-thalassemia (TDT), though Orchard Therapeutics has announced that this program has been deprioritized as of May 2020.
Sickle cell disease — The current standard of care for the treatment of SCD in the developed world is chronic blood transfusions or hydroxyurea (a generic drug). In addition, patients treated with chronic blood transfusions often receive iron chelation therapy to help manage the iron overload. We are aware of ongoing studies that continue to evaluate the efficacy and safety of hydroxyurea in various populations. In addition, a limited number of patients with SCD receive allogeneic HSCT treatment, particularly if a sufficiently well-matched source of donor cells is identified. There are a number of academic and industry-sponsored research and development programs to improve the tolerability and safety of allogeneic HSCT with less well-matched sources of donor cells, while increasing the availability of suitable donors. Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. received FDA approval for and have launched Endari (L-glutamine) for the treatment of SCD. In addition to the FDA approved hemoglobin S (HbS) polymerization inhibitor (voxelotor, Global Blood Therapeutics, Inc.) and the FDA / EMA approved antibody to p-selectin (crizanlizumab, Novartis), a number of different therapeutic approaches for the chronic treatment of SCD are under investigation targeting the various aspects of SCD pathophysiology, including: Pyruvate Kinase-R (PKR) activator, FT-4202, in a phase 1 study supported by Forma Therapeutics, a PDE9 inhibitor, IMR-687, in a phase 2 study supported by IMARA Inc., a pyruvate kinase receptor activator, mitapivat, in a phase 1 study supported by Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. There are also several different groups developing gene therapy options for Sickle Cell Disease. These include: CRISPR Therapeutics AG’s (in collaboration with Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated) ongoing phase 1/2 study for its CTX-001, which leverages the CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing platform to disrupt the BCL11A erythroid enhancer, Aruvant Sciences, Inc.’s
25

Table of Contents
ongoing phase 1/2 study for its ARU-1801, which leverages a lentiviral vector encoding γ-globin,, Editas Medicine, Inc.’s ongoing phase 1/2 study for its EDIT-301, which leverages the CRISPR/Cas12a gene editing platform to target the HBG1/2 promoter to upregulate HbF, and Graphite Bio’s ongoing phase 1/2 study for its GPH101, which leverages a gene correction platform (CRISPR / homology directed repair (HDR)) to restore normal hemoglobin production . There are several other groups developing gene therapy approaches for SCD in early phases of development, including Beam Therapeutics, CSL Behring, Intellia Therapeutics, Inc. (in collaboration with Novartis), and Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP).
CALD — The current standard of care for the treatment of CALD is allogeneic HSCT. We understand that various academic centers around the world are seeking to develop improvements to allogeneic HSCT, such as Magenta Therapeutic, Inc.’s cord blood expansion technology which is currently being investigated in a phase 2 clinical trial for the treatment of inherited metabolic disorders, including adrenoleukodystrophy. Other possible treatments being investigated include Orpheris, Inc.’s OP-101, Minoryx Therapeutics’ MIN-102 (leriglitazone), and Viking Therapeutics’ VK0214.
Multiple Myeloma — The current standard of care for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma includes IMIDs (e.g., thalidomide, lenalidomide, pomalidomide), proteasome inhibitors (e.g., bortezomib, carfilzomib, ixazomib), monoclonal antibodies (e.g., daratumamab, elotuzumab), cytotoxic agents, and HSCT. There are several groups developing autologous T cell therapies for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma that use a similar autologous ex vivo approach, but a different target antigen, BCMA single-chain variable fragment or, we believe, cell processing techniques. These programs include: an anti-BCMA CAR T cell therapy that is in a phase 1b/2 study in the United States (Nanjing Legend in collaboration with Janssen Biotech); an anti-BCMA CAR T cell therapy that is in phase 1 study (Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.); an anti-BCMA CAR T cell therapy in clinical development (phase 1/2) sponsored by BMS following the completion of its acquisition of Juno Therapeutics, Inc and an anti-BCMA CAR T cell therapy that is in phase I study (Innovent Biologics Inc). In addition to these autologous T cell-based approaches, Allogene Therapeutics, Inc., Poseida, and CRISPR Therapeutics have disclosed preclinical programs for allogeneic BCMA CAR T cell therapies. There are also therapies using other modalities being developed by several groups, including multiple bispecific T cell engagers, including programs currently in clinical studies supported by Amgen Inc., Regeneron, Janssen Research and Development, LLC, BMS, as well as a specific antibody therapy currently in a phase 1 study supported by Pfizer, Inc., and an antibody drug conjugate therapy supported by GSK that underwent a BLA submission, and those being developed in preclinical programs.
T cell-based immunotherapies in oncology — Hundreds of academic laboratories, biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies are researching and developing T cell-based immunotherapies in oncology, in addition to the multiple myeloma programs described above. These include and are not limited to Novartis AG, Adaptimmune Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb Inc., Gilead Sciences, Inc., Pfizer Inc., Amgen, Inc., Sanofi and Takeda among others. Many of the T cell-based immunotherapy programs being developed by these companies are in phase 1/2 clinical trials for multiple indications. Cancer therapies in other modalities, such as bispecific antibodies, antibody-drug conjugates, and dendritic cell vaccines, as well as combinatorial approaches are also in development across a wide range of targets.
Government regulation

In the United States, biological products, including gene therapy products, are subject to regulation under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FD&C Act, and the Public Health Service Act, or PHS Act, and other federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations. Both the FD&C Act and the PHS Act and their corresponding regulations govern, among other things, the testing, manufacturing, safety, efficacy, labeling, packaging, storage, record keeping, distribution, reporting, advertising and other promotional practices involving biological products. FDA approval must be obtained before clinical testing of biological products, and each clinical study protocol for a gene therapy product is reviewed by the FDA and, in some instances, the NIH, through its RAC.FDA. FDA approval also must be obtained before marketing of biological products. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the


subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources and we may not be able to obtain the required regulatory approvals.

Within the FDA, the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, or the CBER, regulates gene therapy products. The CBER works closely with the NIH and its RAC, which makes recommendations to the NIH on gene therapy issues and engages in a public discussion of scientific, safety, ethical and societal issues related to proposed and ongoing gene therapy protocols.NIH. The FDA and the NIH have published guidance documents with respect to the development and submission of gene therapy protocols. The FDA also has published guidance documents related to, among other things, gene therapy products in general, their preclinical assessment, observing subjects involved in gene therapy studies for delayed adverse events, potency testing, and chemistry, manufacturing and control information in gene therapy INDs.

Ethical, social and legal concerns about gene therapy, genetic testing and genetic research could result in additional regulations restricting or prohibiting the processes we may use. Federal and state agencies, congressional committees and foreign governments have expressed interest in further regulating biotechnology. More restrictive regulations or claims that our products are unsafe or pose a hazard could prevent us from successfully commercializing our product or any future products. New government requirements may be established that could delay or prevent regulatory approval of our product candidates under development. It is impossible to predict whether legislative changes will be enacted, regulations, policies or guidance changed, or interpretations by agencies or courts changed, or what the impact of such changes, if any, may be.

26

Table of Contents
U.S. biological products development process

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

completion of nonclinical laboratory tests and animal studies according to good laboratory practices, or GLPs, and applicable requirements for the humane use of laboratory animals or other applicable regulations;

submission to the FDA of an application for an IND, which must become effective before human clinical studies may begin;

performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical studies according to the FDA’s regulations commonly referred to as good clinical practices, or GCPs, and any additional requirements for the protection of human research subjects and their health information, to establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed biological product for its intended use;

submission to the FDA of a Biologics License Application, or BLA, for marketing approval that includes substantive evidence of safety, purity, and potency from results of nonclinical testing and clinical studies;

satisfactory completion of an FDA inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities where the biological product is produced to assess compliance with GMP, to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve the biological product’s identity, strength, quality and purity and, if applicable, the FDA’s current good tissue practices, or GTPs, for the use of human cellular and tissue products;

potential FDA audit of the nonclinical and clinical study sites that generated the data in support of the BLA; and

FDA review and approval, or licensure, of the BLA.

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

Where a gene therapy study is conducted at, or sponsored by, institutions receiving NIH funding for recombinant DNA research, prior to the submission of an IND to the FDA, in the past, a protocol and related documentation iswas submitted to and the study iswas registered with the NIH Office of Biotechnology Activities, or OBA, pursuant to the NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules, or NIH Guidelines. Pursuant to the current NIH Guidelines, research involving recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecules must be approved by an institutional biosafety committee, or IBC, a local institutional committee that reviews and oversees basic and clinical research conducted at that institution. The IBC assesses the safety of the research and identifies any potential risk to public health or the environment. Compliance with the NIH Guidelines is mandatory for investigators at institutions receiving NIH funds for research involving recombinant DNA, however many companies and other institutions not otherwise subject to the NIH Guidelines voluntarily follow them. The NIH is responsible for convening the RAC, a federal advisory committee that discussesSuch trials remain subject to FDA and other clinical trial regulations, and only after FDA, IBC, and other relevant approvals are in place can these protocols that raise novel or particularly important scientific, safety or ethical considerations, at one of its quarterly public meetings. The OBA will notify the FDA of the RAC’s decision regarding the necessity for full public review of a gene therapy protocol. RAC proceedings and reports are posted to the OBA web site and may be accessed by the public.

proceed.

The clinical study sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature and a proposed clinical protocol, to the FDA as part of the IND. Some preclinical testing may continue even after the IND is submitted. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA


places the clinical study on a clinical hold within that 30-day time period. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical study can begin. With gene therapy protocols, if the FDA allows the IND to proceed, but the RAC decides that full public review of the protocol is warranted, the FDA will request at the completion of its IND review that sponsors delay initiation of the protocol until after completion of the RAC review process. The FDA may also impose clinical holds on a biological product candidate at any time before or during clinical studies due to safety concerns or non-compliance. If the FDA imposes a clinical hold, studies may not recommence without FDA authorization and then only under terms authorized by the FDA. Accordingly, we cannot be sure that submission of an IND will result in the FDA allowing clinical studies to begin, or that, once begun, issues will not arise that suspend or terminate such studies.

Clinical studies involve the administration of the biological product candidate to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of qualified investigators, generally physicians not employed by or under the study sponsor’s control. Clinical studies are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the clinical study, dosing procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria, and the parameters to be used to monitor subject safety, including stopping rules that assure a clinical study will be stopped if certain adverse events should occur. Each protocol and any amendments to the protocol must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Clinical studies must be conducted and monitored in accordance with the FDA’s regulations comprising the GCP requirements, including the requirement that all research subjects provide informed consent. Further, each clinical study must be reviewed and approved by an independent institutional review board, or IRB at or servicing each institution at which the clinical study will be conducted. An IRB is charged with protecting the welfare and rights of study participants and considers such items as whether the risks to individuals participating in the clinical studies are minimized and are reasonable in
27

Table of Contents
relation to anticipated benefits. The IRB also approves the form and content of the informed consent that must be signed by each clinical study subject or his or her legal representative and must monitor the clinical study until completed. Clinical studies also must be reviewed by an institutional biosafety committee, or IBC, a local institutional committee that reviews and oversees basic and clinical research conducted at that institution. The IBC assesses the safety of the research and identifies any potential risk to public health or the environment.

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

Phase Iphase 1. The biological product is initially introduced into healthy human subjects and tested for safety. In the case of some products for severe or life-threatening diseases, especially when the product may be too inherently toxic to ethically administer to healthy volunteers, the initial human testing is often conducted in patients.

Phase IIphase 2. The biological product is evaluated in a limited patient population to identify possible adverse effects and safety risks, to preliminarily evaluate the efficacy of the product for specific targeted diseases and to determine dosage tolerance, optimal dosage and dosing schedule.

Phase IIIphase 3. Clinical studies are undertaken to further evaluate dosage, clinical efficacy, potency, and safety in an expanded patient population at geographically dispersed clinical study sites. These clinical studies are intended to establish the overall risk/benefit ratio of the product and provide an adequate basis for product labeling.

Post-approval clinical studies, sometimes referred to as Phase IVphase 4 clinical studies, may be conducted after initial marketing approval. These clinical studies are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication, particularly for long-term safety follow-up. The FDA recommends that sponsors observe subjects for potential gene therapy-related delayed adverse events for a 15-year period, including a minimum of five years of annual examinations followed by ten years of annual queries, either in person or by questionnaire, of study subjects.

During all phases of clinical development, regulatory agencies require extensive monitoring and auditing of all clinical activities, clinical data, and clinical study investigators. Annual progress reports detailing the results of the clinical studies must be submitted to the FDA. Written IND safety reports must be promptly submitted to the FDA, the NIH and the investigators for serious and unexpected adverse events, any findings from other studies, tests in laboratory animals or in vitro testing that suggest a significant risk for human subjects, or any clinically important increase in the rate of a serious suspected adverse reaction over that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure. The sponsor must submit an IND safety report within 15 calendar days after the sponsor determines that the information qualifies for reporting. The sponsor also must notify the FDA of any unexpected fatal or life-threatening suspected adverse reaction within seven calendar days after the sponsor’s initial receipt of the information. Phase I, Phase II1, phase 2 and Phase IIIphase 3 clinical studies may not be completed successfully within any specified period, if at all. The FDA or the sponsor or its data safety monitoring board may suspend a clinical study at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical study at its institution if the clinical study is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the biological product has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients.

Human gene therapy products are a new category of therapeutics. Because this is a relatively new and expanding area of novel therapeutic interventions, there can be no assurance as to the length of the study period, the number of patients the FDA will require to


be enrolled in the studies in order to establish the safety, efficacy, purity and potency of human gene therapy products, or that the data generated in these studies will be acceptable to the FDA to support marketing approval. The NIH has a publicly accessible database, the Genetic Modification Clinical Research Information System which includes information on gene transfer studies and serves as an electronic tool to facilitate the reporting and analysis of adverse events on these studies.

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

U.S. review and approval processes

After the completion of clinical studies of a biological product, FDA approval of a BLA must be obtained before commercial marketing of the biological product. The BLA must include results of product development, laboratory and animal studies, human studies, information on the manufacture and composition of the product, proposed labeling and other relevant information. In addition, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, as amended, a BLA or supplement to a BLA must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the biological product for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and
28

Table of Contents
effective. The FDA may grant deferrals for submission of data or full or partial waivers. Unless otherwise required by regulation, PREA does not apply to any biological product for an indication for which orphan designation has been granted. The testing and approval processes require substantial time and effort and there can be no assurance that the FDA will accept the BLA for filing and, even if filed, that any approval will be granted on a timely basis, if at all.

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

Before approving a BLA, the FDA will inspect the facilities at which the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve the product unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with GMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. For a gene therapy product, the FDA also will not approve the product if the manufacturer is not in compliance with the GTPs. These are FDA regulations that govern the methods used in, and the facilities and controls used for, the manufacture of human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue based products, or HCT/Ps, which are human cells or tissue intended for implantation, transplant, infusion, or transfer into a human recipient. The primary intent of the GTP requirements is to ensure that cell and tissue based products are manufactured in a manner designed to prevent the introduction, transmission and spread of communicable disease. FDA regulations also require tissue establishments to register and list their HCT/Ps with the FDA and, when applicable, to evaluate donors through screening and testing. Additionally, before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure that the clinical studies were conducted in compliance with IND study requirements and GCP requirements. To assure GMP, GTP and GCP compliance, an applicant must incur significant expenditure of time, money and effort in the areas of training, record keeping, production, and quality control.

Notwithstanding the submission of relevant data and information, the FDA may ultimately decide that the BLA does not satisfy its regulatory criteria for approval and deny approval. Data obtained from clinical studies are not always conclusive and the FDA may interpret data differently than we interpret the same data. If the agency decides not to approve the BLA in its present form, the FDA will issue a complete response letter that usually describes all of the specific deficiencies in the BLA identified by the FDA. The


deficiencies identified may be minor, for example, requiring labeling changes, or major, for example, requiring additional clinical studies. Additionally, the complete response letter may include recommended actions that the applicant might take to place the application in a condition for approval. If a complete response letter is issued, the applicant may either resubmit the BLA, addressing all of the deficiencies identified in the letter, or withdraw the application.

application, or request a hearing.

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

One of the performance goals agreed to by the FDA under the PDUFA is to review 90% of standard BLAs in 10 months and 90% of priority BLAs in six months, whereupon a review decision is to be made. The FDA does not always meet its PDUFA goal dates for standard and priority BLAs and its review goals are subject to change from time to time. The review process and the PDUFA goal date may be extended by three months if the FDA requests or the BLA sponsor otherwise provides additional information or clarification regarding information already provided in the submission within the last three months before the PDUFA goal date.

Orphan drug designation

29

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

If a product that has orphan designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same drug or biological product for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan exclusivity. Competitors, however, may receive approval of different products for the indication for which the orphan product has exclusivity or obtain approval for the same product but for a different indication for which the orphan product has exclusivity. Orphan product exclusivity also could block the approval of one of our products for seven years if a competitor obtains approval of the same biological product as defined by the FDA or if our product candidate is determined to be contained within the competitor’s product for the same indication or disease. If a drug or biological product designated as an orphan product receives marketing approval for an indication broader than what is designated, it may not be entitled to orphan product exclusivity. Orphan drug status in the European Union has similar, but not identical, benefits.

Expedited development and review programs

The FDA has a Fast Track program that is intended to expedite or facilitate the process for reviewing new drugs and biological products that meet certain criteria. Specifically, new drugs and biological products are eligible for Fast Track designation if they are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the condition. Fast Track designation applies to the combination of the product and the specific indication for which it is being studied. The sponsor of a new drug or biologic may request the FDA to designate the drug or biologic as a Fast Track product at any time during the clinical development of the product. Unique to a Fast Track product, the FDA may consider for review sections of the marketing application on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the application, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the application and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the application.

Any product submitted to the FDA for marketing, including under a Fast Track program, may be eligible for other types of FDA programs intended to expedite development and review, such as priority review and accelerated approval. Under the Breakthrough Therapy program, products intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition may be eligible for the benefits of the Fast Track program when preliminary clinical evidence demonstrates that such product may have substantial improvement on one or more clinically significant endpoints over existing therapies. Additionally, FDA will seek to ensure the sponsor of a breakthrough therapy product receives timely advice and interactive communications to help the sponsor design and conduct a development program as efficiently as possible. Any product is eligible for priority review if it has the potential to provide safe and effective


therapy where no satisfactory alternative therapy exists or a significant improvement in the treatment, diagnosis or prevention of a disease compared to marketed products. The FDA will attempt to direct additional resources to the evaluation of an application for a new drug or biological product designated for priority review in an effort to facilitate the review. Additionally, a product may be eligible for accelerated approval. Drug or biological products studied for their safety and effectiveness in treating serious or life-threatening illnesses and that provide meaningful therapeutic benefit over existing treatments may receive accelerated approval, which means that they may be approved on the basis of adequate and well-controlled clinical studies establishing that the product has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict a clinical benefit, or on the basis of an effect on a clinical endpoint other than survival or irreversible morbidity. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require that a sponsor of a drug or biological product receiving accelerated approval perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing clinical studies. In addition, the FDA currently requires as a condition for accelerated approval pre-approval of promotional materials, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product. Fast Track designation, Breakthrough Therapy designation, priority review and accelerated approval do not change the standards for approval but may expedite the development or approval process.

Regenerative medicine advanced therapies (RMAT) designation

As part of the 21st Century Cures Act, Congress amended the FD&C Act to facilitate an efficient development program for, and expedite review of regenerative medicine advanced therapies, which include cell and gene therapies, therapeutic tissue engineering products, human cell and tissue products, and combination products using any such therapies or products.  Regenerative medicine advanced therapies do not include those human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue based
30

Table of Contents
products regulated solely under section 361 of the Public Health Service Act and 21 CFR Part 1271.  This program is intended to facilitate efficient development and expedite review of regenerative medicine therapies, which are intended to treat, modify, reverse, or cure a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and qualify for RMAT designation.  A drug sponsor may request that FDA designate a drug as a RMAT concurrently with or at any time after submission of an IND.  FDA has 60 calendar days to determine whether the drug meets the criteria, including whether there is preliminary clinical evidence indicating that the drug has the potential to address unmet medical needs for a serious or life-threatening disease or condition.  A BLA for a regenerative medicine therapy that has received RMAT designation may be eligible for priority review or accelerated approval through use of surrogate or intermediate endpoints reasonably likely to predict long-term clinical benefit, or reliance upon data obtained from a meaningful number of sites.  Benefits of RMAT designation also include early interactions with FDA to discuss any potential surrogate or intermediate endpoint to be used to support accelerated approval.  A regenerative medicine therapy with RMAT designation that is granted accelerated approval and is subject to post-approval requirements may fulfill such requirements through the submission of clinical evidence from clinical studies, patient registries, or other sources of real world evidence, such as electronic health records; the collection of larger confirmatory data sets; or post-approval monitoring of all patients treated with such therapy prior to its approval.

Post-approval requirements

Maintaining substantial compliance with applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Rigorous and extensive FDA regulation of biological products continues after approval, particularly with respect to GMP. We will rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the production of clinical and commercial quantities of ZYNTEGLO and any future products that we may commercialize. Manufacturers of our products are required to comply with applicable requirements in the GMP regulations, including quality control and quality assurance and maintenance of records and documentation. Other post-approval requirements applicable to biological products, include reporting of GMP deviations that may affect the identity, potency, purity and overall safety of a distributed product, record-keeping requirements, reporting of adverse effects, reporting updated safety and efficacy information, and complying with electronic record and signature requirements. After a BLA is approved, the product also may be subject to official lot release. As part of the manufacturing process, the manufacturer is required to perform certain tests on each lot of the product before it is released for distribution. If the product is subject to official release by the FDA, the manufacturer submits samples of each lot of product to the FDA together with a release protocol showing a summary of the history of manufacture of the lot and the results of all of the manufacturer’s tests performed on the lot. The FDA also may perform certain confirmatory tests on lots of some products, such as viral vaccines, before releasing the lots for distribution by the manufacturer. In addition, the FDA conducts laboratory research related to the regulatory standards on the safety, purity, potency, and effectiveness of biological products.

We also must comply with the FDA’s advertising and promotion requirements, such as those related to direct-to-consumer advertising, the prohibition on promoting products for uses or in patient populations that are not described in the product’s approved labeling (known as “off-label use”), industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, and promotional activities involving the internet. Discovery of previously unknown problems or the failure to comply with the applicable regulatory requirements may result in restrictions on the marketing of a product or withdrawal of the product from the market as well as possible civil or criminal sanctions. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or after approval, may subject an applicant or manufacturer to administrative or judicial civil or criminal sanctions and adverse publicity. FDA sanctions could include refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, clinical hold, warning or


untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, mandated corrective advertising or communications with doctors, debarment, restitution, disgorgement of profits, or civil or criminal penalties. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect on us.

Biological product manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved biological products are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with GMPs and other laws. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain GMP compliance. Discovery of problems with a product after approval may result in restrictions on a product, manufacturer, or holder of an approved BLA, including withdrawal of the product from the market. In addition, changes to the manufacturing process or facility generally require prior FDA approval before being implemented and other types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications and additional labeling claims, are also subject to further FDA review and approval.

In addition, companies that manufacture or distribute drug or biological products or that hold approved BLAs must comply with other regulatory requirements, including submitting annual reports, reporting information about adverse drug experiences, and maintaining certain records. Newly discovered or developed safety or effectiveness data may require changes to a drug’s approved labeling, including the addition of new warnings and contraindications, and also may require the implementation of other risk management measures, including a REMS or the conduct of post-marketing studies to assess a newly-discovered safety issue.

We also must comply with the FDA’s and other jursidictions’ advertising and promotion requirements, such as those related to direct-to-consumer advertising and advertising to healthcare professionals, the prohibition on promoting products for uses or in patient populations that are not described in the product’s approved labeling (known as “off-label use”), industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, and promotional activities involving the internet. Discovery of previously unknown problems or the failure to comply with the applicable regulatory requirements may result in restrictions on the marketing of a product or withdrawal of the product from the market as well as possible civil or criminal sanctions. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or after approval, may subject an applicant or manufacturer to administrative or judicial civil or criminal sanctions and adverse publicity. Consequences could include refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, clinical hold, warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, mandated corrective advertising or communications with healthcare
31

Table of Contents
professionals, debarment, restitution, disgorgement of profits, or civil or criminal penalties. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect on us.
U.S. patent term restoration and marketing exclusivity

Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of the FDA approval of the use of our product candidates, some of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, commonly referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent restoration term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. However, patent term restoration cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date. The patent term restoration period is generally one-half the time between the effective date of an IND and the submission date of a BLA plus the time between the submission date of a BLA and the approval of that application. Only one patent applicable to an approved biological product is eligible for the extension and the application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent. The U.S. PTO, in consultation with the FDA, reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration. In the future, we may intend to apply for restoration of patent term for one of our currently owned or licensed patents to add patent life beyond its current expiration date, depending on the expected length of the clinical studies and other factors involved in the filing of the relevant BLA.

A biological product can obtain pediatric market exclusivity in the United States. Pediatric exclusivity, if granted, adds six months to existing exclusivity periods and patent terms. This six-month exclusivity, which runs from the end of other exclusivity protection or patent term, may be granted based on the voluntary completion of a pediatric study in accordance with an FDA-issued “Written Request” for such a study.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or Affordable Care Act, signed into law on March 23, 2010, includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products shown to be similar to, or interchangeable with, an FDA-licensed reference biological product. This amendment to the PHS Act attempts to minimize duplicative testing. Biosimilarity, which requires that there be no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of safety, purity, and potency, can be shown through analytical studies, animal studies, and a clinical study or studies. Interchangeability requires that a product is biosimilar to the reference product and the product must demonstrate that it can be expected to produce the same clinical results as the reference product and, for products administered multiple times, the biologic and the reference biologic may be switched after one has been previously administered without increasing safety risks or risks of diminished efficacy relative to exclusive use of the reference biologic. However, complexities associated with the larger, and often more complex, structure of biological products, as well as the process by which such products are manufactured, pose significant hurdles to implementation that are still being worked out by the FDA.

A reference biologic is granted twelve years of exclusivity from the time of first licensure of the reference product. The first biologic product submitted under the abbreviated approval pathway that is determined to be interchangeable with the reference product has exclusivity against other biologics submitting under the abbreviated approval pathway for the lesser of (i) one year after the first commercial marketing, (ii) 18 months after approval if there is no legal challenge, (iii) 18 months after the resolution in the applicant’s favor of a lawsuit challenging the biologics’ patents if an application has been submitted, or (iv) 42 months after the application has been approved if a lawsuit is ongoing within the 42-month period.

Additional regulation

Healthcare and Privacy Laws
In addition to the foregoing, state andrestrictions on marketing of pharmaceutical products, several other types of state/ federal laws regarding environmentaland trade association membership codes of conduct have been applied to restrict certain marketing practices in the pharmaceutical industry in recent years. These laws include Anti-Kickback and false claims statutes. The U.S. federal healthcare program Anti-Kickback statute prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving remuneration, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for or recommending the purchase, lease or order of any healthcare item or service reimbursable, in whole or in part, under Medicare, Medicaid or other federally financed healthcare programs. This statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, and formulary managers on the other. A person or entity need not have actual knowledge of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. Violations are subject to civil and criminal fines and penalties for each violation, plus up to three times the remuneration involved, imprisonment, and exclusion from government healthcare programs. Although there are a number of statutory exemptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting certain common activities from prosecution, the exemptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly and practices that involve remuneration to those who prescribe, purchase, or recommend pharmaceutical and biological products, including certain discounts, or engaging healthcare professionals or patients as speakers or consultants, may be subject to scrutiny if they do not fit squarely within the exemption or safe harbor.
32

Table of Contents
Our practices may not in all cases meet all of the criteria for safe harbor protection from anti-kickback liability. Moreover, there are no safe harbors for many common practices, such as educational and hazardous substances, includingresearch grants or patient assistance programs.
The U.S. federal civil False Claims Act prohibits, among other things, any person from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment of government funds, or knowingly making, using, or causing to be made or used, a false record or statement material to an obligation to pay money to the Occupational Safetygovernment or knowingly concealing or knowingly and Healthimproperly avoiding, decreasing, or concealing an obligation to pay money to the federal government. Manufacturers can be held liable under the False Claims Act even when they do not submit claims directly to government payers if they are deemed to “cause” the Resource Conservancy and Recoverysubmission of false or fraudulent claims. The False Claims Act also permits a private individual acting as a “whistleblower” to bring actions on behalf of the federal government alleging violations of the False Claims Act and the Toxic Substances Control Act, affect our business. Theseto share in any monetary recovery. In recent years, several pharmaceutical and other laws govern our use, handlinghealthcare companies have faced enforcement actions under the federal False Claims Act for, among other things, allegedly submitting false or misleading pricing information to government health care programs and disposalproviding free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. Other companies have faced enforcement actions for causing false claims to be submitted because of variousthe company’s marketing the product for unapproved, and thus non-reimbursable, uses. Federal enforcement agencies also have showed increased interest in pharmaceutical companies’ product and patient assistance programs, including reimbursement and co-pay support services, and a number of investigations into these programs have resulted in significant civil and criminal settlements. In addition, the Affordable Care Act amended federal law to provide that the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal civil False Claims Act. Criminal prosecution is possible for making or presenting a false or fictitious or fraudulent claim to the federal government.
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, also created several new federal crimes, including healthcare fraud and false statements relating to healthcare matters. The healthcare fraud statute prohibits knowingly and willfully executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payers. The false statements statute prohibits knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation.
The U.S. federal Physician Payment Sunshine Act, being implemented as the Open Payments Program, requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies to engage in extensive tracking of payments and other transfers of value to prescribers and teaching hospitals, including physician ownership and investment interests, and public reporting of such data. Effective January 1, 2022, these reporting obligations will extend to include transfers of value made to certain non-physician providers such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners. Pharmaceutical and biological chemicalmanufacturers with products for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children’s Health Insurance Program are required to track such payments, and radioactive substances usedmust submit a report on or before the 90th day of each calendar year disclosing reportable payments made in the previous calendar year. A number of other countries, states and wastes generated by, our operations. If our operationsmunicipalities have also implemented additional payment tracking and reporting requirements, which if not done correctly may result in contamination ofadditional penalties.
In addition, the environment or expose individuals to hazardous substances, we could be liable for damages and governmental fines. We believe that we are in material compliance with


applicable environmental laws and that continued compliance therewith will not have a material adverse effect on our business. We cannot predict, however, how changes in these laws may affect our future operations.

U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

The U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, to which we are subject,or the FCPA, prohibits corporations and individuals from engaging in certain activities to obtain or retain business or to influence a person working in an official capacity. It is illegal to pay, offer to pay or authorize the payment of anything of value to any foreign government official of another country, government staff member, political party or political candidate in an attempt to obtain or retain business or to otherwise influence a person working in that capacity. In many other countries, healthcare professionals who prescribe pharmaceuticals are employed by government entities, and the purchasers of pharmaceuticals are government entities. Our dealings with these prescribers and purchasers may be subject to the FCPA.

Other countries, including a number of EU member states, have laws of similar application, including anti-bribery or anti-corruption laws such as the UK Bribery Act. The UK Bribery Act prohibits giving, offering, or promising bribes to any person, as well as requesting, agreeing to receive, or accepting bribes from any person. Under the UK Bribery Act, a company that carries on a business or part of a business in the United Kingdom may be held liable for bribes given, offered or promised to any person in any country by employees or other persons associated with the company in order to obtain or retain business or a business advantage for the company. Liability under the UK Bribery Act is strict, but a defense of having in place adequate procedures designed to prevent bribery is available.
HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, or HITECH and their respective implementing regulations, including the Final Omnibus Rule published in January 2013, impose requirements on certain covered healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses as well as their respective business associates that perform services for them that involve the use, or disclosure of, individually identifiable health information, relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. HITECH also created new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to
33

Table of Contents
business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In California the California Consumer Protection Act (“CCPA”), which went into effect on January 1, 2020, establishes a new privacy framework for covered businesses by creating an official capacity.

expanded definition of personal information, establishing new data privacy rights for consumers in the State of California, imposing special rules on the collection of consumer data from minors, and creating a new and potentially severe statutory damages framework for violations of the CCPA and for businesses that fail to implement reasonable security procedures and practices to prevent data breaches. While clinical trial data and information governed by HIPAA are currently exempt from the current version of the CCPA, other personal information may be applicable and possible changes to the CCPA may broaden its scope.

The majority of states also have statutes or regulations similar to the federal anti-kickback and false claims laws, which apply to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payer. Several states now require pharmaceutical companies to report expenses relating to the marketing and promotion of pharmaceutical products in those states and to report gifts and payments to individual health care providers in those states. Some of these states also prohibit certain marketing-related activities including the provision of gifts, meals, or other items to certain health care providers. In addition, some state laws require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government in addition to requiring manufacturers to report information related to payments to physicians and other healthcare providers, marketing expenditures, and drug pricing information. Certain state and local laws require the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives. State and foreign laws, including for example the European Union General Data Protection Regulation, also govern the privacy and security of health information in some circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.
Because of the breadth of these various healthcare and privacy laws, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. Such a challenge could have material adverse effects on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In the event governmental authorities conclude that our business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare and privacy laws and regulations, they may impose sanctions under these laws, which are potentially significant and may include civil monetary penalties, damages, exclusion of an entity or individual from participation in government health care programs, criminal fines and imprisonment, as well as the potential curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Even if we are not determined to have violated these laws, government investigations into these issues typically require the expenditure of significant resources and generate negative publicity, which could harm our financial condition and divert the attention of our management from operating our business.
Government regulation outside of the United States

In addition to regulations in the United States, we will be subject to a variety of regulations in other jurisdictions governing, among other things, clinical studies and any commercial sales and distribution of our products. Because biologically sourced raw materials are subject to unique contamination risks, their use may be restricted in some countries.

Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we must obtain the requisite approvals from regulatory authorities in foreign countries prior to the commencement of clinical studies or marketing of the product in those countries. Certain countries outside of the United States have a similar process that requires the submission of a clinical studytrial application, or CTA, much like the IND prior to the commencement of human clinical studies. In the European Union, for example, a CTA must be submitted for each clinical trial to each country’s national health authority and an independent ethics committee, much like the FDA and the IRB, respectively. Once the CTA is approved in accordance with a country’s requirements, the corresponding clinical study may proceed.

The requirements and process governing the conduct of clinical studies, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary from country to country. In all cases, the clinical studies are conducted in accordance with GCP and the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki.

To obtain regulatory approval of an investigational product under European Union regulatory systems, we must submit a marketing authorization application. The application used to file the BLA in the United States is similar to that required in the European Union, with the exception of, among other things, region-specific document requirements. The EMA has established the Adaptive Pathways pilot program intended to expedite or facilitate either an initial approval of a medicinal product in a well-defined patient subgroup with a high medical need and subsequent iterative expansion of the indication to a larger patient population, or an early regulatory approval (e.g., conditional approval), which is prospectively planned, and where uncertainty is reduced through the collection of post-approval data on a medicinal product’s use in patients. The approach builds in regulatory processes already in place within the existing EU legal framework.
34

Table of Contents
The European Union also provides opportunities for market exclusivity. For example, in the European Union, upon receiving marketing authorization, innovative medicinal products generally receive eight years of data exclusivity and an additional two years of market exclusivity. If granted, data exclusivity prevents regulatory authorities in the European Union from referencing the innovator’s data to assess a generic or biosimilar application.application during such eight-year period starting from the date of grant of the innovative medicinal product's marketing authorization. During the additional two-year period of market exclusivity, a generic or biosimilar marketing authorization application can be submitted, and the innovator’s data may be referenced, but no generic or biosimilar product can be marketed until the expiration of the market exclusivity.exclusivity (and the grant of the relevant generic or biosimilar marketing authorization). However, there is no guarantee that a product will be considered by the European Union’s regulatory authorities to be an innovative medicinal product, and products may not qualify for data exclusivity. Products receiving orphan designation in the European Union and being granted a marketing authorization for an orphan medicinal product can receive ten years of market exclusivity, during which time no similar medicinal product for the same indication may be placed on the market. An orphan product can also obtain an additional two years of market exclusivity in the European Union where the application for a marketing authorization includes the results of all studies conducted in accordance with an agreed pediatric investigation plan for pediatric studies. No extension to any supplementary protection certificate can be granted on the basis of pediatric studies for orphan indications.

The criteria for designating an “orphan medicinal product” in the European Union are similar in principle to those in the United States. Under Article 3 of Regulation (EC) 141/2000, a medicinal product may be designated as orphan if (1) it is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition; (2) either (a) such condition affects no more than five in 10,000 persons in the European Union when the application is made, or (b) the product, without the benefits derived from orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the European Union to justify investment; and (3) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of such condition authorized for marketing in the European Union, or if such a method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition, as defined in Regulation (EC) 847/2000. Orphan medicinal products are eligible for financial incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers and are, upon grant of a marketing authorization, entitled to ten years of market exclusivity for the approved therapeutic indication. The application for orphan drug designation must be submitted before the application for marketing authorization. The applicant will receive a fee reduction for the marketing authorization application if the orphan drug designation has been granted, but not if the designation is still pending at the time the marketing authorization is submitted. Orphan drug designation itself does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process.


The 10-year market exclusivity may be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the product no longer meets the criteria for orphan designation, for example, if the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity. Additionally, marketing authorization may be granted to a similar product for the same indication at any time if:

The second applicant can establish that its product, although similar, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior;

The applicant consents to a second orphan medicinal product application; or

The applicant cannot supply enough orphan medicinal product.

In the EU, the advertising and promotion of our products will also be subject to EU member states’ laws concerning promotion of medicinal products, interactions with physicians, misleading and comparative advertising and unfair commercial practices, as well as other EU member state legislation that may apply to the advertising and promotion of medicinal products.  These laws require that promotional materials and advertising in relation to medicinal products comply with the product’s approved labeling. The off-label promotion of medicinal products is prohibited in the EU.  The applicable laws at the EU level and in the individual EU member states also prohibit the direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription-only medicinal products.  Violations of the rules governing the promotion of medicinal products in the EU could be penalized by administrative measures, fines and imprisonment.  These laws may further limit or restrict communications concerning the advertising and promotion of our products to the general public and may also impose limitations on our promotional activities with healthcare professionals.
Failure to comply with the EU member state laws implementing the Community Code on medicinal products, and EU rules governing the promotion of medicinal products, interactions with physicians, misleading and comparative advertising and unfair commercial practices, with the EU member state laws that apply to the promotion of medicinal products, statutory health insurance, bribery and anti-corruption or with other applicable regulatory requirements can result in enforcement action by the EU member state authorities (or in addition, in some member states, enforcement action from industry bodies or legal action from competitors), which may include any of the following: fines, imprisonment, orders forfeiting products or prohibiting or suspending their supply to the market, or requiring the manufacturer to issue public warnings, or to conduct a product recall.
35


Table of Contents
The national laws of certain EU member states require payments made to physicians to be publicly disclosed.  Moreover, the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations, or EFPIA, Code on disclosure of transfers of value from pharmaceutical companies to healthcare professionals and healthcare organizations imposes a general obligation on members of the EFPIA or related national industry bodies to disclose transfers of value to healthcare professionals.  In addition, agreements with physicians must often be the subject of prior notification and approval by the physician’s employer, his/her competent professional organization, and/or the competent authorities of the individual EU member states.  These requirements are provided in the national laws, industry codes, or professional codes of conduct, applicable in the EU member states.
For other countries outside of the European Union,EU, such as countries in Eastern Europe, LatinCentral and South America or Asia, the requirements governing the conduct of clinical studies,trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary from country to country.  This act could have implications for our interactions with physicians in and outside the UK.  In all cases, again, the clinical studiestrials are conducted in accordance with GCP, and the applicable regulatory requirements, and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki.

The EMA has established the Adaptive Pathways pilot program intended to expedite or facilitate either an initial approval of a medicinal product in a well-defined patient subgroup with a high medical need and subsequent iterative expansion of the indication to a larger patient population, or an early regulatory approval (e.g., conditional approval), which is prospectively planned, and where uncertainty is reduced through the collection of post-approval data on a medicinal product’s use in patients. The approach builds in regulatory processes already in place within the existing EU legal framework.

If we fail to comply with applicable foreign regulatory requirements, we may be subject to, among other things, warning letters or untitled letters, injunctions, civil, administrative, or criminal penalties, monetary fines or imprisonment, suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals, suspension of ongoing clinical studies, refusal to approve pending applications or supplements to applications filed by us, suspension or the imposition of restrictions on operations, product recalls, the refusal to permit the import or export of our products or the seizure or detention of products.
Pricing, Coverage and Reimbursement
Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any drug products operatingfor which we obtain regulatory approval. In the United States, sales of any products for which we may receive regulatory approval for commercial sale will depend in part on the availability of reimbursement from third-party payers, including governments. In the United States, no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for drug products exists among third-party payers. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for drug products can differ significantly from payer to payer. Third-party payers can include government healthcare systems, managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations. The process for determining whether a payer will provide coverage for a drug product may be separate from the process for setting the price or reimbursement rate that the payer will pay for the drug product. Third-party payers may limit coverage to specific drug products on an approved list, or formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved drugs for a particular indication. Third-party payers may provide coverage, but place stringent limitations on such coverage, such as requiring alternative treatments to be tried first. These third-party payers are increasingly challenging the price and examining the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of medical products and services, in addition to their safety, efficacy, and overall value. In addition, significant uncertainty exists as to the reimbursement status of newly approved healthcare products. We may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of our products, in addition to incurring the costs required to obtain FDA approvals. Our product candidates may not be considered medically reasonable or necessary or cost-effective. Even if a drug product is covered, a payer’s decision to provide coverage for a drug product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development.
Federal, state and local governments in the United States and foreign governments continue to consider legislation to limit the growth of healthcare costs, including the cost of prescription drugs. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs.  On January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. Future legislation could limit payments for pharmaceuticals such as the drug candidates that we are developing.
Different pricing and reimbursement schemes exist in other countries. In the EU, governments influence the price of drug products through their pricing and reimbursement rules and control of national health care systems that fund a large part of the cost of those products to consumers. Some jurisdictions operate systems under which products may be marketed only after a reimbursement price has been agreed. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval, some of these countries may require the completion of studies or analyses of clinical trials that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies. Other member states allow companies to set their own prices for medicines, but exert cost controls in other ways, including but not limited to, placing revenue caps on product sales, providing reimbursement for only a subset of eligible patients, mandating price negotiations after a set period of time, or mandating that prices not exceed an average basket of prices in other countries. The downward pressure on health care costs in general, particularly treatments, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. In addition, European
36

Table of Contents
governments may periodically review and decrease prices based on factors, including but not limited to, years-on-market, price in other countries, competitive entry, new clinical data, lack of supporting clinical data, or other factors.
The marketability of any products for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale may suffer if the government and third-party payers fail to provide adequate coverage and reimbursement. In addition, the emphasis on managed care in the United States has increased and we expect will continue to exert downward pressure on pharmaceutical pricing. Coverage policies, third-party reimbursement rates and pharmaceutical pricing regulations may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products for which we receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.
We have proposed novel payment models, including outcomes-based arrangements with payments over time, to assist with realizing the value and sharing the risk of a potential one-time treatment, such as for ZYNTEGLO. While we are engaged in discussions with potential payers, there is no assurance that these payment models will be widely adopted by payers. Even with these payment models, there may be substantial resistance to the cost of our products by payers and the public generally. These payment models may not be sufficient for payers to grant coverage, and if we are unable to obtain adequate coverage for our products, the adoption of our products and access for patients may be limited. In addition, to the extent reimbursement for our products is subject to outcomes-based arrangements, our future revenues from product sales will be more at risk. These factors could affect our ability to successfully commercialize our products and adversely impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
COVID-19
Beginning in late 2019, the outbreak of a novel strain of coronavirus (COVID-19) has evolved into a global pandemic. As a result, we continue to experience disruptions and increased risk in our operations and those of third parties upon whom we rely, which may materially and adversely affect our business. These include disruptions and risks related to the conduct of our clinical trials, manufacturing, and commercialization efforts, as policies at various clinical sites and federal, state, local and foreign laws, rules and regulations continue to evolve, including quarantines, travel restrictions, and criminal prosecution.

Employees

direction of healthcare resources toward pandemic response efforts. We continue to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 global pandemic on patients, healthcare providers and our employees, as well as our operations and the operations of our business partners and healthcare communities. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we have implemented policies at our locations to mitigate the risk of exposure to COVID-19 by our personnel, including restrictions on the number of staff in any given research and development laboratory or manufacturing facility, a work-from-home policy applicable to the majority of our personnel, and a phased approach to bringing personnel back to our locations over time. Given the importance of supporting our patients, we are diligently working with our suppliers, healthcare providers and partners to provide patients with access to ZYNTEGLO, while taking into account regulatory, institutional, and government guidance, policies and protocols. Further, we are working with our clinical study sites to understand the duration and scope of the impact on enrollment, develop protocols to help mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and other activities for our ongoing clinical studies. Refer to Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (Part II, Item 7 of this Form 10-K) for further discussion regarding the impact of COVID-19 on our fiscal year 2020 financial results.

The extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic impacts our business going forward will depend on numerous evolving factors we cannot reliably predict, including the duration and scope of the pandemic; governmental, business, and individuals' actions in response to the pandemic; and the impact on economic activity including the possibility of recession or financial market instability. Refer to Risk Factors (Part I, Item 1A of this Form 10-K) for a discussion of these factors and other risks.
Human capital
As of January 31, 2018,2021, we had 4791,213 full-time employees, 113223 of whom have Ph.D., M.D. or Pharm.D. degrees. Of these full-time employees, 360750 employees are engaged in research and development activities and 119463 employees are engaged in commercial, finance, legal, business development, human resources, information technology, facilities and other general administrative functions. We have no collective bargaining agreements with our employees and we have not experienced any work stoppages. We consider our relations with our employees to be good.

Compensation and benefits programs
Our compensation programs are designed to align our employees' interests with the drivers of growth and stockholder returns by supporting the Company's achievement of its primary business goals. The Company's goal is to attract and retain employees whose talents, expertise, leadership, and contributions are expected to sustain growth and drive long-term stockholder value. Consequently, we provide employee wages that are competitive within our industry, and we engage a nationally-recognized outside compensation and benefits consulting firm to independently evaluate the effectiveness of our compensation and benefit programs and to provide benchmarking against our peers within the industry. We seek to align our
37

Table of Contents
employees' interests with those of stockholders by linking annual changes in compensation to overall Company performance, as well as each individual’s contribution to the results achieved. The emphasis on overall Company performance is intended to align the employee’s financial interests with the interests of shareholders. We are also committed to providing comprehensive benefit options and it is our intention to offer benefits that will allow our employees and their families to live healthier and more secure lives. All employees are eligible for medical, dental, and vision insurance, paid and unpaid leaves, employee stock purchase plan, 401(k) plan, and group life and disability coverage.
Employee development and training
The development, recruitment and retention of our employees is a critical success factor for our company. To ensure we provide a meaningful experience for our employees, we regularly measure organizational culture and engagement to build on the competencies that are important for our future success. We have a robust talent and succession planning process and have established programs to support the talent pipeline for critical roles throughout our organization, to help us identify, foster, and retain high performing employees. To empower our employees to realize their potential at bluebird, we provide a range of development programs, opportunities and resources they need to be successful, including leveraging formal leadership training and coaching to improve performance and retention, increase our organizational learning and support the promotion of our current employees.
Diversity
We are committed to taking action to help address racial injustice and inequality. With significant input from employees and leaders at bluebird, our senior leadership team and board of directors has developed a set of commitments to help improve representation and culture of inclusion by pledging to accomplish the following by 2025:
Double our Black, Indigenous, and Latino employee population;
Balance our executive leadership and board of directors to ensure 50% representation of women and people of color; and
Sustain 100% pay equity and increase representation of women and people of color across all levels.
Corporate Information

We were incorporated in Delaware in April 1992 under the name Genetix Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and subsequently changed our name to bluebird bio, Inc. in September 2010.  Our mailing address and executive offices are located at 60 Binney Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts and our telephone number at that address is (339) 499-9300. We maintain an Internet website at the following address: www.bluebirdbio.com. The information on our website is not incorporated by reference in this annual report on Form 10-K or in any other filings we make with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC.

We make available on or through our website certain reports and amendments to those reports that we file with or furnish to the SEC in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These include our annual reports on Form 10-K, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, and our current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act. We make this information available on or through our website free of charge as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file the information with, or furnish it to, the SEC.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

An investment in shares of our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the following information about these risks, together with the other information appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including our financial statements and related notes hereto, before deciding to invest in our common stock. The occurrence of any of the following risks could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth prospects. In these circumstances, the market price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment.


Risks relatedOur business may be materially and adversely affected by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic has had, and will likely continue to the discovery and developmenthave, an impact on various aspects of our product candidates

Our gene therapy product candidatesbusiness and that of third parties on which we rely. The extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic impacts our business will depend in part on future developments, which are based onuncertain and unpredictable in nature.

In December 2019, a novel technology,strain of coronavirus (COVID-19) was reported and in March 2020, the World Health Organization characterized COVID-19 as a pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic, which makes it difficulthas continued to spread, and the related adverse public health developments, including orders to shelter-in-place, travel restrictions, and the imposition of additional requirements on businesses, have adversely affected workforces, organizations, healthcare communities, economies,
38

Table of Contents
and financial markets globally, leading to an economic downturn and increased market volatility. It has also disrupted the normal operations of businesses across industries, including ours. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, we are experiencing disruptions in our operations and business, and those of third parties upon whom we rely. For instance, we are experiencing disruptions in the conduct of our clinical trials, manufacturing and commercialization efforts, including the treatment of patients in the commercial context. We cannot reasonably assess or predict at this time the full extent of the negative impact that the COVID-19 pandemic and related effects may have on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. We expect to continue experiencing these disruptions in our operations and those of our third parties for an unknown period of time, as the trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic remains uncertain and cost of product candidate development and subsequently obtaining regulatory approval.  Only a few gene therapy products have been approvedcontinues to evolve in the United States and European Union, or EU.

globally. These impacts, which may materially and adversely affect our business, include the following:

We are conducting a number of clinical studies across our programs in geographies which are affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic has had, and will likely continue to have, concentratedan impact on various aspects of our therapeutic product researchclinical studies. Policies at various clinical sites and development effortsfederal, state, local and foreign laws, rules and regulations are continuing to evolve, including through the implementation of quarantines and travel restrictions, and direction of healthcare resources toward pandemic response efforts. For instance, the availability of intensive care unit beds and related healthcare resources available to support activities unrelated to COVID-19 response have fluctuated with the incidence of severe cases of COVID-19 in the surrounding communities, and we anticipate that the availability of healthcare resources will continue to fluctuate and may become significantly constrained, with variability across geographies. The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the conduct of our ongoing clinical studies, with the result of slower patient enrollment and treatment as well as delays in post-treatment patient follow-up visits, the impact of which has varied by clinical study, with the most significant impacts being on our gene therapy platform,ongoing HGB-210 study for LentiGlobin for SCD. It is possible that these delays may impact the timing of our regulatory submissions. It is unknown how long these disruptions could continue. Moreover, we are commercializing ZYNTEGLO in Europe, and our future success dependsability to generate meaningful product revenue may be delayed. In addition to the constraints on the successful development of this therapeutic approach. There can be no assurance that any development problems we experiencehealthcare systems and resources described above, which are also applicable in the future relatedcommercial treatment context, we may experience decreased patient demand for our approved product during this period of disruption and increased uncertainty because potential patients may choose not to undergo treatment, or to delay treatment, with ZYNTEGLO.
We currently rely on third parties to manufacture, perform quality testing, and ship our gene therapy platform will not cause significant delays or unanticipated costs, or that suchlentiviral vectors and drug products for our clinical studies and support commercialization efforts. The third parties in our supply chain are subject to restrictions in operations arising from the COVID-19 pandemic, and in addition, a number of these third parties have experienced operational disruptions, which have affected activities necessary for our research, development, problems can be solved. We mayand commercialization efforts. These restrictions and disruptions in operations have also experience delays in developing a sustainable, reproducible and commercial-scale manufacturing process or transferring that processgiven rise to commercial partners,staffing shortages from time to time, which may prevent us from completingresult in production slowdowns and/or disruptions in delivery systems, potentially interrupting our supply chain and limiting our ability to manufacture our lentiviral vectors and drug products for our clinical studies and for commercial use. At this time, it is unknown how long these disruptions may continue, or the full extent of their impacts.
Health regulatory agencies globally may experience disruptions in their operations as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The FDA and comparable foreign regulatory agencies may have slower response times or lack resources to continue to monitor our clinical studies or commercializingto engage in other activities related to review of regulatory submissions in drug development. As a result, review, inspection, and other timelines may be materially delayed for an unknown period of time. Any de-prioritization of our clinical studies or delay in regulatory review resulting from such disruptions could materially affect the development of our product candidates. In addition, we have been engaging in reimbursement discussions with governmental health programs as part of our commercial preparation activities. It is not clear to what extent shifting priorities of the local health authorities and healthcare systems due to the COVID-19 pandemic will impact our ability to achieve market access and reimbursement for ZYNTEGLO across Europe.
We have implemented policies at our locations to mitigate the risk of exposure to COVID-19 by our personnel, including restrictions on the number of staff in any given research and development laboratory or manufacturing facility, a work-from-home policy applicable to the majority of our personnel, and a phased approach to bringing personnel back to our locations over time. Our increased reliance on personnel working from home may negatively impact productivity, or disrupt, delay, or otherwise adversely impact our business. In addition, this could increase our cyber security risk, create data accessibility concerns, and make us more susceptible to communication disruptions, any of which could adversely impact our business operations or delay necessary interactions with local and federal regulators, ethics committees, manufacturing sites, research or clinical study sites and other important agencies and contractors. Furthermore, since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, our employees and contractors conducting research and development activities have been limited in the activities that they may conduct, and will continue to be subject to policies restricting access to our laboratories for an extended period of time. As a result, this could delay timely completion of preclinical activities, including completing Investigational New Drug-enabling studies or our
39

Table of Contents
ability to select future development candidates, and initiation of additional clinical trials for our development programs.
The trading prices for our shares of common stock and other biopharmaceutical companies have been highly volatile as a result of the economic volatility and uncertainty caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, we may face difficulties raising capital through sales of shares of our common stock or such sales may be on unfavorable terms. In addition, a recession, depression or other sustained adverse market event resulting from the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic will materially and adversely affect our business, the value of our common stock, and our ability to operate under our operating plan and execute our strategy. Our business and operating plan have already been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, the associated governmental restrictions, and the resulting economic conditions, leading us to reduce and defer costs, adjust our priorities, timelines and expectations, and implement a revised operating plan in the first half of 2020 with the intention that it would enable us to advance our corporate strategy and pipeline during this period of uncertainty.
The extent of the impacts described above will depend on numerous evolving factors that we may not be able to accurately predict, including:
the duration, severity, and scope of the pandemic in the United States and globally;
the effectiveness of governmental, business and individuals’ protocols and actions that have been and continue to be taken in response to the pandemic;
the impact of the pandemic on economic activity and actions taken in response;
the effect on patients, healthcare providers and business partners;
demand for our products, onincluding as a timely or profitable basis, if at all.

In addition, theresult of reduced patient visits to healthcare providers, travel restrictions, social distancing, quarantines and other containment measures;

uncertainty as to when we will be able to resume normal clinical study requirementsenrollment and patient treatment activities, particularly at clinical study sites and qualified treatment centers located in highly impacted geographies as a result of disruptions at these sites;
the ability to obtain or deliver sufficient and timely supplies, given the disruptions to the production capabilities of our manufacturers and suppliers, particularly with respect to the priority given to the development, regulatory approval, and manufacture of COVID-19 vaccines;
our access to the debt and equity markets on satisfactory terms, or at all;
disruptions in regulatory oversight and actions, as a result of significant and unexpected resources expended to address the COVID-19 by regulators and industry professionals; and
any closures of our and our partners’ offices, operations and facilities.
The ultimate impact of the U.S. FoodCOVID-19 pandemic on our business operations is highly uncertain and Drug Administration,subject to change and will depend on future developments which are difficult to predict, including the duration of the pandemic, the ultimate geographic spread of the disease, additional or FDA,modified government actions, new information that will emerge concerning the European Medicines Agency, or EMA,severity and impact of COVID-19 and other regulatory agenciesactions taken to contain or address its impact in the short and long term, among others. We do not yet know the full extent of potential delays or impacts on our business, our commercialization efforts, our clinical studies, our research programs, healthcare systems or the global economy, and if the ultimate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the criteria these regulators useresulting uncertain economic and healthcare environment is more severe than we anticipated, we may not be able to determineexecute on our current operating plan or on our strategy. If the safety and efficacy of a product candidate vary substantially according to the type, complexity, novelty and intended use and marketduration of the potential products. TheCOVID-19 pandemic and the associated period of business and social restrictions and economic uncertainty is longer than we anticipated, our cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities may not be sufficient to fund the activities under our operating plan for the time period that we anticipated, and we may be required to revise our operating plan further. To the extent the COVID-19 pandemic adversely affects our business and financial results, it may also have the effect of heightening many of the other risks described in this “Risk Factors” section.
Risks related to commercialization
We have limited experience as a commercial company and the marketing and sale of ZYNTEGLO or future products may be unsuccessful or less successful than anticipated.
We have limited experience as a commercial company. Consequently, there is limited information about our ability to overcome many of the risks and uncertainties encountered by companies commercializing products in the biopharmaceutical
40

Table of Contents
industry. We also have several programs in late-stage clinical development. To execute our business plan, in addition to successfully marketing and selling ZYNTEGLO and any future products, we will need to successfully:
gain regulatory approval processacceptance for novelthe development and commercialization of the product candidates suchin our pipeline;
obtain adequate pricing and reimbursement for ZYNTEGLO and any future products in each of the jurisdictions in which we plan to commercialize approved products;
establish and maintain, in the geographies where we hope to treat patients, relationships with qualified treatment centers who will be treating the patients who receive ZYNTEGLO and any future products;
manage our spending as ours cancosts and expenses increase due to clinical trials, marketing approvals, and commercialization, including for any extension of marketing approval of ZYNTEGLO, and for any future products; and
develop and maintain successful strategic alliances.
If we are not successful in accomplishing these objectives, we may not be more expensiveable to develop product candidates, commercialize ZYNTEGLO or any future products, raise capital, expand our business, or continue our operations.
The commercial success of ZYNTEGLO, and take longer than for other, better knownof any future products, will depend upon the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payers and others in the medical community.
The commercial success of ZYNTEGLO and of any future products will depend in part on the medical community, patients, and third-party or more extensively studied pharmaceutical or other product candidates. Currently, only a fewgovernmental payers accepting gene therapy products in general, and ZYNTEGLO and any future products in particular, as medically useful, cost-effective, and safe. ZYNTEGLO and any other products that we may bring to the market may not gain market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payers and others in the medical community. If these products do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant product revenue and may not become profitable. The degree of market acceptance of ZYNTEGLO and of any future products will depend on a number of factors, including:
the potential efficacy and potential advantages over alternative treatments;
the prevalence and severity of any side effects, including any limitations or warnings contained in a product’s approved labeling;
the prevalence and severity of any side effects resulting from the chemotherapy and myeloablative treatments associated with the procedure by which our product and any future products are administered;
relative convenience and ease of administration;
the willingness of the target patient population to try new therapies and of physicians to prescribe these therapies;
the strength of marketing and distribution support and timing of market introduction of competitive products;
the pricing of our product and of any future products;
publicity concerning our product, any future products, or competing products and treatments; and
sufficient third-party insurance coverage or reimbursement.
Even if a potential product displays a favorable efficacy and safety profile in preclinical and clinical studies, market acceptance of the product will not be known until after it is launched. Our efforts to educate the medical community and payers on the benefits of our products may require significant resources and may never be successful. Our efforts to educate the marketplace may require more resources than are required by the conventional technologies marketed by our competitors. Any of these factors may cause ZYNTEGLO, or any future products, to be unsuccessful or less successful than anticipated.
If the market opportunities for our product or any future products are smaller than we believe they are, and if we are not able to successfully identify patients and achieve significant market share, our revenues may be adversely affected and our business may suffer.
We focus our research and product development on treatments for severe genetic diseases and cancer. Our projections of both the number of people who have these diseases, as well as the subset of people with these diseases who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product or any future products, are based on estimates. These estimates have been approvedderived from a variety of sources, including scientific literature, surveys of clinics, patient foundations, or market research, and may prove to
41

Table of Contents
be incorrect. Further, new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The number of patients may turn out to be lower or more difficult to identify than expected. Additionally, the potentially addressable patient population for our product and any future products may be limited or may not be amenable to treatment with our products. For instance, in our HGB-206 clinical study of LentiGlobin for SCD, we have received notice of safety events of acute myeloid leukemia and of myelodysplastic syndrome. If these safety events are shown to be related to the use of our lentiviral vector in the Western world, including Spark’smanufacture of the gene therapy or the use of myeloablative regimens prior to treatment, the market opportunity for our gene therapies may be negatively impacted even if our gene therapies ultimately receive marketing approval.
Even if we obtain significant market share for a product whichwithin an approved indication, because the potential target populations for our product and for the product candidates in our pipeline are small, we may never achieve profitability without obtaining marketing approval for additional indications. For instance, we received conditional marketing approval in Europe of ZYNTEGLO for the treatment of adult and adolescent patients with TDT who do not have a β00 genotype. We do not have any assurance of whether or when ZYNTEGLO may be commercially available to pediatric patients less than 12 years of age, or to patients with all genotypes of TDT, or in markets outside of Europe. In the field of cancer, the FDA often approves new therapies initially only for use in patients with relapsed or refractory advanced disease. We expect to initially seek approval of our T cell-based product candidates in cancer in this context. Subsequently, for those products that prove to be sufficiently beneficial, if any, we would expect to seek approval in earlier lines of treatment and potentially as a first line therapy, but there is no guarantee that our product candidates, even if approved, would be approved for earlier lines of therapy, and, prior to any such approvals, we may have to conduct additional clinical trials. For example, BMS has submitted a BLA seeking approval from the FDA for ide-cel as a treatment for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. BMS is conducting the KarMMa-2, KarMMa-3, and KarMMa-4 studies with the intention to generate data to support marketing approvals for earlier lines of therapy in 2017, GlaxoSmithKline’s Strimvelis,multiple myeloma, but there is no assurance that such studies will be successful or be sufficient.
Any of these factors may negatively affect our ability to generate revenues from sales of our product and Novartis’sany future products and Gilead’s CAR-T therapies, which received approvalour ability to achieve and maintain profitability and, as a consequence, our business may suffer.
We rely on a complex supply chain for ZYNTEGLO and our product candidates. The manufacture and delivery of our lentiviral vector and drug products present significant challenges for us, and we may not be able to produce our vector and drug products at the quality, quantities, locations or timing needed to support commercialization and our clinical programs. In addition, we may encounter challenges with engaging or coordinating with qualified treatment centers needed to support commercialization.
In order to commercialize ZYNTEGLO and any future products, we will need to develop, contract for, or otherwise arrange for the necessary manufacturing capabilities. We currently rely on third parties to manufacture the vector and the drug product in the commercial setting and for any clinical trials that we initiate. Currently, SAFC is the sole manufacturer of the lentiviral vector and Minaris Regenerative Medicine is the sole manufacturer of the drug product to support commercialization of ZYNTEGLO in Europe. Although we intend to eventually rely on a mix of internal and third-party manufacturers to support our commercialization efforts, we are still in the process of completing construction and qualification of our internal capacity and we have not secured commercial-scale manufacturing capacity in all of the regions where we intend to commercialize ZYNTEGLO or our late-stage product candidates, if they receive marketing approval. By building our own internal manufacturing facility, we have incurred substantial expenditures and expect to incur significant additional expenditures in the future. In addition, there are many risks inherent in the construction of a new facility that could result in delays and additional costs, including the need to obtain access to necessary equipment and third-party technology, if any. Also, we have had to, and will continue to, hire and train qualified employees to staff our manufacturing facility. We may not be able to timely or successfully build out our internal capacity or negotiate binding agreements with third-party manufacturers at commercially reasonable terms.If we fail to secure adequate capacity to manufacture our drug products or lentiviral vectors used in the manufacture of our drug products, we may be unable to execute on our development and commercialization plans on the timing that we expect.
The manufacture of our lentiviral vector and drug product is complex and requires significant expertise. Even with the relevant experience and expertise, manufacturers of cell therapy products often encounter difficulties in production, particularly in scaling out and validating initial production, managing the transition from clinical manufacturing to manufacturing in the commercial setting, and ensuring that the product meets required specifications. These problems include difficulties with production costs and yields, quality control, including stability of the product, quality assurance testing, operator error, shortages of qualified personnel, as well as compliance with strictly enforced federal, state and foreign regulations. We cannot make any assurances that these problems will not occur in the future, or that we will be able to resolve or address in a timely manner or with available funds problems that occur. Because of the complexity of manufacturing our product and product candidates, transitioning production of either lentiviral vector or drug products to backup or second source manufacturing, or to internal manufacturing capacity, requires a lengthy technology transfer process and may require additional significant financial expenditures. Furthermore, our cost of goods development is at an early stage. The actual cost to manufacture our lentiviral
42

Table of Contents
vector and drug product could be greater than we expect and could materially and adversely affect the commercial viability of our product and any future products. If we or such third-party manufacturers are unable to produce the necessary quantities of lentiviral vector and our drug product, or in compliance with GMP or other pertinent regulatory requirements, and within our planned time frame and cost parameters, the development and commercialization of our product and any future products may be materially harmed. Furthermore, if we or our third-party manufacturers are unable to produce our lentiviral vectors or our drug product in quantities, in accordance with regulatory requirements, including quality requirements, or within the time frames that we need to support our development and commercialization activities, it may result in delays in our plans or increased capital expenditures.
In addition, any significant disruption in our supplier relationships could harm our business. We source key materials from third parties, either directly through agreements with suppliers or indirectly through our manufacturers who have agreements with suppliers. There are a small number of suppliers for certain key materials that are used to manufacture our product and product candidates. Such suppliers may not sell these key materials to us or to our manufacturers at the times we need them or on commercially reasonable terms. We do not have any control over the process or timing of the acquisition of these key materials by our manufacturers. Moreover, we currently do not have agreements for the commercial supply for all of these key materials.
Additionally, since the HSCs and T cells used as starting material for our drug product have a limited window of stability following procurement from a patient, we must establish transduction facilities in the regions where we wish to commercialize our product and any future products. Currently, we rely on third-party contract manufacturers in the United States and Europe to produce drug product for commercialization and for our clinical studies. Since a portion of our target patient populations will be outside the United States and Europe, we will need to establish additional transduction facilities that can replicate our transduction process in order to address those patient populations. Establishment of such facilities may be financially impractical or impeded by technical, quality, or regulatory issues related to these new sites and we may also run into technical or scientific issues related to transfer of our transduction process or other developmental issues that we may be unable to resolve in a timely manner or with available funds.
Our commercial strategy is to engage apheresis and transplant centers in our key launch regions as qualified treatment centers for the collection of patient HSCs and infusion of the drug product once manufactured. To ensure that the qualified treatment centers are prepared to collect patient HSCs and to ship them to our transduction facilities in accordance with our specifications and regulatory requirements, we train and conduct quality assessments of each center as part of engagement. These qualified treatment centers are the first and last points on our complex supply chain to reach patients in the commercial setting. We may not be able to engage qualified treatment centers in all of the regions in our commercial launch strategy, or we may encounter other challenges or delays in engaging qualified treatment centers. We may fail to manage the logistics of collecting and shipping patient material to the manufacturing site and shipping the drug product back to the patient. Logistical and shipment delays and problems caused by us, our third-party vendors, and other factors not in our control, such as weather, could prevent or delay the delivery of product to patients. If our qualified treatment centers fail to perform satisfactorily, we may suffer reputational, operational, and business harm. We are required to maintain a complex chain of identity and chain of custody with respect to patient material as it moves through the manufacturing process, from the FDAqualified treatment center to the transduction facility, and back to the patient. Failure to maintain chain of identity and chain of custody could result in 2017. Givenadverse patient outcomes, loss of product or regulatory action.

43

Table of Contents
Although we are continuing to build out our commercial capabilities, we have no prior sales or distribution experience and limited capabilities for marketing and market access. We expect to invest significant financial and management resources to establish these capabilities and infrastructure to support commercial operations. If we are unable to establish these commercial capabilities and infrastructure or to enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our product or any future products, we may be unable to generate sufficient revenue to sustain our business.
Although we are continuing to build out our field team as part of our commercial launch in Europe, we have no prior sales or distribution experience and limited capabilities for marketing and market access. To successfully commercialize ZYNTEGLO and any other products that may result from our development programs, we will need to further develop these capabilities and expand our infrastructure to support commercial operations in the few precedents of approvedUnited States, Europe and other regions, either on our own or with others. Commercializing an autologous gene therapy such as ZYNTEGLO is resource-intensive and has required, and will continue to require, substantial investment in commercial capabilities. We are competing with companies that currently have extensive and well-funded marketing and sales operations. Without significant commercial experience as a company or the support of a third-party to perform these functions, including marketing and sales functions, we may be unable to compete successfully against these more established companies. Furthermore, a significant proportion of the patient populations for ZYNTEGLO and our potential products itlies outside of the United States and Europe. We may not be able to establish our global capabilities and infrastructure in a timely manner or at all. The cost of establishing such capabilities and infrastructure may not be justifiable in light of the potential revenues generated by any particular product and/or in any specific geographic region. We currently expect to rely heavily on third parties to launch and market ZYNTEGLO and our potential products in certain geographies, if approved. We may enter into collaborations with third parties to utilize their mature marketing and distribution capabilities, but we may be unable to enter into agreements on favorable terms, if at all. If our future collaborative partners do not commit sufficient resources to commercialize ZYNTEGLO or our future products, if any, and we are unable to develop the necessary commercial and manufacturing capabilities on our own, we may be unable to generate sufficient product revenue to sustain our business.
The insurance coverage and reimbursement status of newly-approved products is uncertain. Due to the novel nature of our technology and the potential for our product to offer lifetime therapeutic benefit in a single administration, we face additional uncertainty related to pricing and reimbursement for our product. Failure to obtain or maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for any new or current product could limit our ability to market those products and decrease our ability to generate revenue.
The availability and extent of reimbursement by governmental and private payers is essential for most patients to be able to afford expensive treatments, such as gene therapy products. Sales of our product and any future products will depend substantially, both domestically and abroad, on the extent to which the costs of our product and any future products will be paid by health maintenance, managed care, pharmacy benefit and similar healthcare management organizations, or reimbursed by government health administration authorities, private health coverage insurers and other payers. In addition, because our therapies represent new treatment approaches, the estimation of potential revenues will be complex.
There is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products, including gene therapies that are potential one-time treatments. In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement for new medicines are typically made by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, as CMS decides whether and to what extent a new medicine will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare. Private payers tend to follow CMS to a substantial degree. It is difficult to determine how longpredict what CMS will decide with respect to reimbursement for fundamentally novel products such as ours, as there is no body of established practices and precedents for these new products. Reimbursement agencies in Europe may be more conservative than CMS. A number of cancer drugs have been approved for reimbursement in the United States and have not been approved for reimbursement in certain European countries. In addition, costs or difficulties with the reimbursement experienced by the initial gene therapies to receive marketing authorization may create an adverse environment for reimbursement of other gene therapies.
Outside the United States, certain countries, including a number of member states of the European Union, set prices and reimbursement for pharmaceutical products, or medicinal products, as they are commonly referred to in the European Union, with limited participation from the marketing authorization holders. We cannot be sure that such prices and reimbursement will be acceptable to us or our collaborators. If the regulatory authorities in these foreign jurisdictions set prices or reimbursement levels that are not commercially attractive for us or our collaborators, the revenues from sales by us or our collaborators, and the potential profitability of our product and any future products, in those countries would be negatively affected. An increasing number of countries are taking initiatives to attempt to reduce large budget deficits by focusing cost-cutting efforts on pharmaceuticals for their state-run health care systems. These international price control efforts have impacted all regions of the world, but have been most drastic in the European Union. Additionally, some countries require approval of the sale price of a product before it can be marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or product licensing approval is granted. As a result, we might obtain marketing approval for a product in a particular country, but then may experience delays in the reimbursement approval of our product or be subject to price regulations that would delay our
44

Table of Contents
commercial launch of the product, possibly for lengthy time periods, which could negatively impact the revenues we are able to generate or recognize from the sale of the product in that particular country. For instance, although we have received conditional marketing approval for ZYNTEGLO in the European Union and the United Kingdom, we are still in the process of negotiating pricing and reimbursement approval in the jurisdictions where we are commercializing ZYNTEGLO, and there is no assurance that the approved prices or reimbursement levels that payers will takebe willing to pay will be acceptable to us.
Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payers, in the United States and abroad, to cap or how much it will costreduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and level of reimbursement for new products approved and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our product or any future products. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of our product and any future products, due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes. Net prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government or private payers and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products.
Furthermore, because our target patient populations are relatively small, the pricing and reimbursement of our product and any future products must be adequate to cover the costs to treat and support the treatment of patients. If we are unable to obtain regulatory approvalsadequate levels of reimbursement, our ability to successfully market and sell our product and any future products will be adversely affected. Even if coverage is provided, the approved reimbursement amount may not be high enough to allow us to establish or maintain pricing sufficient to realize a sufficient return on our investment.
In addition, the administration of autologous drug products requires procedures for the collection of HSCs or T cells from the patient, followed by chemotherapy and myeloablative treatments, before infusion of the engineered cell therapy product. The manner and level at which reimbursement is provided for these services is also important. Inadequate reimbursement for such services may lead to physician resistance and adversely affect our ability to market or sell our product.
We have proposed novel payment models, including outcomes-based arrangements with payments over time, to assist with realizing the value and sharing the risk of a potential one-time treatment, such as ZYNTEGLO. While we are engaged in discussions with payers, there is no assurance that there will be widespread adoption of these payment models by payers. These payment models may not be sufficient for payers to grant coverage, and if we are unable to obtain adequate coverage for our product or any future products, the adoption of our product or any future products may be limited, or our ability to recognize revenue from product sales may be delayed. In addition, to the extent reimbursement for our product is subject to outcomes-based arrangements, the total payments received from product sales may vary, our cash collection of future payments and revenue assumptions from product sales will be at risk, and the timing of revenue recognition may not correspond to the timing of cash collection. We plan on commercializing our product candidates in the United States once approved, and will be subject to price reporting obligations set forth by CMS. To the EUextent reimbursement for our product or other jurisdictions. Approvalsany future products by U.S. governmental payers is subject to outcomes-based arrangements, the EMAincreased complexity increases the risk that CMS may disagree with the assumptions and the European Commissionjudgments that we use in our price reporting calculations, which may not be indicative of what the FDA may require for approval.

Regulatory requirements governing generesult in significant fines and cell therapy products have evolvedliability.

Collectively, these factors could affect our ability to successfully commercialize our product and may continue to change in the future. For example, the FDA has established the Office of Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies within its Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, or CBER, to consolidate the review of gene therapy and relatedany future products and generate or recognize revenues, which would adversely impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Risks related to the Cellular, Tissueresearch and Gene Therapies Advisory Committee to advise CBER on its review. Gene therapy clinical studies conducted at institutions that receive funding for recombinant DNA research from the U.S. National Institutes of Health, or NIH, are also subject to review by the NIH Office of Biotechnology Activities’ Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee, or RAC. Although the FDA decides whether individual gene therapy protocols may proceed, the RAC review process can impede the initiation of a clinical study, even if the FDA has reviewed the study and approved its initiation. Clinical trial sites in the United States that receive NIH funding for research involving recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecules are required to follow RAC recommendations, or risk losing NIH funding for such research or needing NIH pre-approval before conducting such research. In addition, the FDA can put an investigational new drug application, or IND, on clinical hold if the information in an IND is not sufficient to assess the risks in pediatric patients. Before a clinical study can begin at any institution, that institution’s institutional review board, or IRB, and its Institutional Biosafety Committee will have to review the proposed clinical study to assess the safety of the study. Moreover, serious adverse events or developments in clinical trials of gene therapy product candidates conducted by others may cause the FDA or other regulatory bodies to initiate a clinical hold on our clinical trials or otherwise change the requirements for approval of any of our product candidates.

These regulatory review agencies, committees and advisory groups and the new requirements and guidelines they promulgate may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional or larger studies, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of these treatment candidates or lead to significant post-approval studies, limitations or restrictions. As we advance our product candidates, we will be required to consult with these regulatory and advisory groups and comply with applicable requirements and guidelines. If we fail to do so, we may be required to delay or discontinue development of our product candidates. Delaycandidates

We cannot predict when or failureif we will obtain marketing approval to obtain, or unexpected costs in obtaining,commercialize our product candidates, and the regulatorymarketing approval necessary to bring a potential product to market could decrease our ability to generate sufficient product revenue to maintain our business.

We may find it difficult to enroll patients in our clinical studies, which could delay or prevent clinical studies of our product candidates.

Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in clinical studies ofany future products may ultimately be for more narrow indications than we expect. If our product candidates is critical to our success. The timing of our clinical studies depends on the speed at which we can recruit eligible patients to participate in testing our product candidates. We have experienced delays in some of our clinical studies, and we may experience similar delays in the future. If patients are unwilling to participate in our gene therapy studies because of negative publicity from adverse events in the biotechnology or gene therapy industries or for other reasons, including competitive clinical studies for similar patient populations, the timeline for recruiting patients, conducting studies and obtaining regulatory approval of potential products may be delayed. These delays could result in increased costs, delays in advancing our product development, delays in testing the effectiveness of our technology or termination of the clinical studies altogether.


We may not be able to identify, recruit and enroll a sufficient number of patients, or those with required or desired characteristics to achieve diversity in a study, to complete our clinical studiesapproved in a timely manner. Patient enrollment is affected by factors including:

severitymanner or at all for any reason, our business prospects, results of the disease under investigation;

operations, and financial condition would be adversely affected.

design of the study protocol;

size of the patient population;

eligibility criteria for the study in question;

perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under study, including as a result of adverse effects observed in similar or competing therapies;

proximity and availability of clinical study sites for prospective patients;

availability of competing therapies and clinical studies;

efforts to facilitate timely enrollment in clinical studies;

patient referral practices of physicians; and

ability to monitor patients adequately during and after treatment.

In particular, each of the conditions for which we plan to evaluate our current hematopoietic stem cell, or HSC, product candidates are rare genetic disorders with limited patient pools from which to draw for clinical studies. Further, because newborn screening for CALD is not widely adopted, and it can be difficult to diagnose CALD in the absence of a genetic screen, we may have difficulty finding patients who are eligible to participate in our study. The eligibility criteria of our clinical studies will further limit the pool of available study participants. Additionally, the process of finding and diagnosing patients may prove costly. Finally, our treatment process requires that the procurement of autologous cells from subjects be conducted where the cells can be shipped to a transduction facility within the required timelines, as the HSCs and T cells, in the case of our oncology product candidate, have limited viability following harvest.

Our current product candidates are being developed to treat severe genetic diseases and certain cancers. We plan to seek initial marketing approval in the United States and the European Union. We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical studies if we cannot enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in the clinical studies required by the FDA or the EMA or other regulatory agencies. Our ability to successfully initiate, enroll and complete a clinical study in any foreign country is subject to numerous risks unique to conducting business in foreign countries, including:

difficulty in establishing or managing relationships with contract research organizations, or CROs, and physicians;

different standards for the conduct of clinical studies;

our inability to locate qualified local consultants, physicians and partners; and

the potential burden of complying with a variety of foreign laws, medical standards and regulatory requirements, including the regulation of pharmaceutical and biotechnology products and treatment.

If we have difficulty enrolling a sufficient number of patients to conduct our clinical studies as planned, we may need to delay, limit or terminate ongoing or planned clinical studies, any of which would have an adverse effect on our business.

We may encounter substantial delays in our clinical studies or we may fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of applicable regulatory authorities.

Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the salecommercialization of our product candidates, we must conduct extensive clinical studies to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency, orand efficacy, of the product candidates in humans. Clinical testing is expensive, time-consuming and uncertain as to outcome. There is a high failure rate for drugs and biologics proceeding through clinical studies. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in later stage clinical studies even after achieving promising results in earlier stage clinical studies. We cannot guarantee that any clinical studies will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. A failure of one or more clinical studies can occur at any stage of testing. Events that may prevent successful or timely completion of clinical development include:

45

Table of Contents
delays in reaching a consensus with regulatory agencies on study design;

delays in obtaining required IRB or Institutional Ethics Committee approval at eachimposition of a clinical hold by regulatory agencies, after an inspection of our clinical study site;

operations or study sites or due to unforeseen safety issues;

delays in recruiting suitable patients to participate in our clinical studies;


imposition of a clinical hold by regulatory agencies, after an inspection of our clinical study operations or study sites or due to unforeseen safety issues;

failure by our CROs, other third parties or us to adhere to clinical study requirements;

failure to perform in accordance with the FDA’s good clinical practices, or GCP, or applicable regulatory requirements in other countries;

delays in the testing, validation, manufacturing and delivery of our product candidates to the clinical sites;

failure to obtain sufficient cells from patients to manufacture enough drug product or achieve target cell doses;

delays in having patients complete participation in a study or return for post-treatment follow-up;

clinical study sites or patients dropping out of a study;

occurrence of serious adverse events associated with the product candidate that are viewed to outweigh its potential benefits; or

changes in regulatory requirements and guidance that require amending or submitting new clinical protocols.

Any inability to successfully complete preclinical and clinical development could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to generate revenues from product sales, regulatory and commercialization milestones and royalties. In addition, if we make manufacturing or formulation changes to our product candidates, we may need to conduct additional studies to demonstrate comparability of our modified product candidates to earlier versions. Clinical study delays could also shorten any periods during which we may have

Furthermore, the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, which could impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business and results of operations.

If the resultstiming of our clinical studies are inconclusive or if there are safety concerns or adverse events associated withdepends on the speed at which we can recruit eligible patients to participate in testing our product candidates,candidates. The conditions for which we may:

be delayed in obtaining regulatory approval forplan to evaluate our current product candidates if at all;

obtain approvalin severe genetic diseases are rare disorders with limited patient pools from which to draw for indications or patient populations that are not as broad as intended or desired;

obtain approval with labeling that includes significant use or distribution restrictions or safety warnings;

be required to perform additional clinical studies or clinical studies of longer duration to support approval or be subject to additional post-marketing testing requirements;

have regulatory authorities withdraw their approval of the product or impose restrictions on its use;

be subject to the addition of labeling statements, such as warnings or contraindications;

be sued; or

experience damage to our reputation.

Treatment with our gene therapy product candidates involves chemotherapy and myeloablative treatments, which can cause side effects or adverse events that are unrelated to our product candidates, but may still impact the successstudies. The eligibility criteria of our clinical studies. Additionally,studies will further limit the pool of available study participants, and the process of finding and diagnosing patients may prove costly. Patients may be unwilling to participate in our product candidates could potentially cause otherstudies because of negative publicity from adverse events that havein the biotechnology or gene therapy industries or for other reasons, including competitive clinical studies for similar patient populations. We may not yet been predicted. The inclusionbe able to identify, recruit and enroll a sufficient number of critically ill patients, or those with required or desired characteristics to achieve diversity in a study, to complete our clinical studies may result in deaths or other adverse medical events due to other therapies or medications that such patients may be using, or the progression of their disease. As described above, any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptancea timely manner. We have experienced delays in some of our product candidates and impair our ability to commercialize our products.

We have not completed any clinical studies of our current product candidates. Initial success in our ongoing clinical studies may not be indicative of results obtained when these studies are completed. Furthermore, success in early clinical studies may not be indicative of results obtained in later studies.

Our product candidates first initiated evaluation in human clinical studies in 2013,the past, and we may experience unexpected resultssimilar delays in the future.

Results from previous or ongoing studies are not necessarily predictive of our future clinical study results, and initial or interim results may not continue or be confirmed upon completion of the study. There is limited data concerning long-term safety and efficacy following treatment with our gene therapy and T cell-based product candidates. These data, or other positive data, may not continue or occur for these subjectspatients or for any future subjectspatients in our ongoing or future clinical studies, and may not be repeated or observed in ongoing or future studies involving our product candidates. For instance, while patients with TDT or severe SCD who have been


treated with our LentiGlobin product candidate may experience a reduction or temporary elimination of transfusion support, there can be no assurance that they will not require transfusion support in the future. Similarly, patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma who have been treated with the bb2121 or the bb21217 product candidate may experience disease progression. Furthermore, our product candidates may also fail to show the desired safety and efficacy in later stages of clinical development despite having successfully advanced through initial clinical studies. There can be no assurance that any of these studies will ultimately be successful or support further clinical advancement or regulatorymarketing approval of our product candidates.

There iscandidates. For instance, while patients with SCD who have been treated with LentiGlobin may experience a high failure rate for drugs and biologics proceeding through clinical studies. A numberreduction of companiesvaso-occlusive events following successful engraftment, there can be no assurance that they will not experience vaso-occlusive events in the pharmaceuticalfuture. Similarly, patients with relapsed and biotechnology industriesrefractory multiple myeloma who have suffered significant setbacksbeen treated with ide-cel or the bb21217 product candidate may experience disease progression. We have experienced unexpected results in later stagethe past, and we may experience unexpected results in the future. For instance, initial results from our clinical studies even after achieving promising resultsof ZYNTEGLO suggested that patients with TDT who do not have a β00 genotype experienced better outcomes from treatment than patients with TDT who have a β00 genotype. Consequently, we received conditional approval in earlier stagethe European Union initially for the treatment of patients with TDT who do not have a β00 genotype. In order to support an application for marketing approval of ZYNTEGLO in patients with TDT who have a β00 genotype, we are conducting the HGB-212 study, but we do not know if or when ZYNTEGLO may be commercially available to all genotypes of TDT or types of β-thalassemia in Europe.

Even if our product candidates demonstrate safety and efficacy in clinical studies. Data obtained from preclinical and clinical activities are subject to varying interpretations, which may delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. In addition,studies, regulatory delays or rejections may be encountered as a result of many factors, including changes in regulatory policy during the period of product development.

Patients with different genotypes of TDT We may experience different outcomesdelays or rejections based upon additional government regulation from future legislation or administrative action, changes in regulatory agency policy, or additional regulatory feedback or guidance during the period of product development, clinical studies and the review process. The field of cell and gene therapy is evolving, and as more products are reviewed by regulatory authorities, regulatory authorities may impose additional requirements that were not previously anticipated. Regulatory agencies also may approve a treatment withcandidate for fewer or more limited indications than requested or may grant approval subject to the performance of post-marketing studies. In addition, regulatory agencies may not approve the labeling claims that are necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of our treatment candidates. For example, the development of our product candidates which may result in the delayfor pediatric use is an important part of our clinical developmentcurrent business strategy, and commercialization plans.

Initial results from our ongoing clinical studies suggest that patients with TDT and a non-β00 genotype experienced better outcomesif we are unable to treatment with our LentiGlobin product candidate than patients with TDT and a β00 genotype. Consequently, we expect to seek FDAobtain marketing approval of our LentiGlobin product candidate initially for the treatment of patients with TDTdesired age ranges, our business may suffer. Furthermore, approvals by the EMA and a non-β00 genotype. In order to support an application for FDA approval of our LentiGlobin product candidate in patients with TDT and a β00 genotype, we initiated the HGB-212 study, but we do not know if or when our LentiGlobin product candidate may be commercially available to patients with all genotypes.

The results from our Starbeam StudyEuropean Commission may not be sufficiently robust to support the submissionindicative of marketing approval for our Lenti-D product candidate. Before we submit our Lenti-D product candidate for marketing approval, the FDA and the EMA may require us to enroll additional subjects, conduct additional clinical studies, or evaluate subjects for an additional follow-up period.

The FDA has advised us that our Starbeam Study, which is a single-arm, open-label study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of our Lenti-D product candidate to halt the progression of CALD, may not be deemed to be a pivotal study or may not provide sufficient support for a Biologics License Application, or BLA, submission. The FDA normally requires two pivotal clinical studies to approve a drug or biologic product, and thuswhat the FDA may require that we conduct larger or additional clinical studies of our Lenti-D product candidate prior to a BLA submission. The FDA typically does not consider a single clinical study to be adequate to serve as a pivotal study unless it is, among other things, well-controlled and demonstrates a clinically meaningful effect on mortality, irreversible morbidity, or prevention of a disease with potentially serious outcome, and a confirmatory study would be practically or ethically impossible. Due to the nature of CALD and the limited number of patients with this condition, we believe a placebo-controlled and blinded study is not practicable for ethical and other reasons. However, it is still possible that, even if we achieve favorable results in the Starbeam Study, the FDA may require us to enroll additional subjects or conduct additional clinical studies, possibly involving a larger sample size or a different clinical study design, particularly if the FDA does not find the results from the Starbeam Study to be sufficiently persuasive to support a BLA submission. The FDA may also require that we conduct a longer follow-up period of subjects treated with our Lenti-D product candidate prior to accepting our BLA submission.

In addition, the Starbeam Study was not designed to achieve a statistically significant efficacy determination. Rather, we anticipate that the safety and efficacy of our Lenti-D product candidate will be evaluated in light of the data collected in our retrospective ALD-101 study and our observational ALD-103 study. However, due to the retrospective nature of the ALD-101 study, and the limited number of patients with this condition, the FDA has advised us that the ALD-101 study is not sufficiently robust to serve as a conventional historical control group and as a basis of comparison against the results of the Starbeam Study. Thus, we expect that the FDA will assess the totality of the safety and efficacy data from our CALD clinical studies in reviewing any future BLA submission for our Lenti-D product candidate. Based on this assessment, the FDA may require that we conduct additional preclinical or clinical studies prior to submitting or approving a BLA for this indication.

It is possible that the FDA or the EMA may not consider the results of this study to be sufficient for approval of our Lenti-D product candidate for this indication. If the FDA or the EMA requires additional studies, we would incur increased costs and delays in the marketing approval process, which may require us to expend more resources than we have available. In addition, it is possible that the FDA and the EMA may have divergent opinions on the elements necessary for a successful BLA and Marketing Authorization Application, or MAA, respectively, which may cause us to alter our development, regulatory and/or commercialization strategies.

approval.

We cannot be certain that our Northstar-2 Study in patients with TDT and a non-β00 genotype, or our Northstar-3 Study in patients with TDT and a β00 genotype, together with data from our Northstar Study and HGB-205 study, will be sufficient to form the basis for a BLA submission for our LentiGlobin product candidate.

In general, the FDA requires the successful completion of two pivotal trials to support approval of a biologics licensing application, or BLA, but in certain circumstances, will approve a BLA based on only one pivotal trial. If successful,Because beti-cel has

46

Table of Contents
been granted the FDA’s Fast Track and Breakthrough Therapy designations, we are engaged in discussions with the FDA regarding the development plans for beti-cel to enable a submission of a BLA prior to the completion of our ongoing studies. Based on these discussions, we believe the results from our ongoing Northstar-2 Study,and Northstar-3 clinical studies, together with data from our ongoing Northstar Studystudy, the LTF-303 long-term follow up protocol, and completed HGB-205 study, could be sufficient to form the basis for a BLA submission for our LentiGlobin product candidate to treat adult and adoleschent patients with TDT and a non-β00 genotype. In addition, if successful, we believe the results from our Northstar-3 Study, together with data from our ongoing Northstar Study and Northstar-2 Study, could be sufficient to form the basis for a BLA supplement submission for our LentiGlobin product candidatebeti-cel to treat patients with TDT and a β00 genotype.TDT. However, it should be noted that our ability to submit and obtain approval of a BLA is ultimately an FDA review decision, which will be dependent upon the data available at such time, and the available data may not be sufficiently robust from a safety and/or efficacy perspective to support the submission or approval of a BLA. Depending on the outcome of these ongoing clinical studies, the FDA may require that we conduct additional or larger pivotal trials before we can submit or obtain approval forof a BLA for our LentiGlobin product candidatebeti-cel for the treatment of patients with TDT.

There can be no assurance that Furthermore, we will ultimately receiveare required to submit data relating to certain release assays designed to confirm the quality, purity and strength (including potency) of beti-cel as a condition for completing the BLA submission, which has the potential for further delaying the completion of our BLA submission, with the potential consequence of delaying any approval and commercial launch of beti-cel in the United States. In addition, in February 2021 we temporarily suspended marketing of ZYNTEGLO and the EMA has paused the renewal procedure for ZYNTEGLO's conditional marketing authorization while the EMA's pharmacovigilance risk assessment committee reviews the risk-benefit assessment for ZYNTEGLO and determines whether any additional pharmacovigilance measures are necessary, in light of safety events arising from our HGB-206 clinical study of LentiGlobin gene therapy for SCD. We cannot make any assurances as to what the EMA may require for ZYNTEGLO to return to the market in Europe, or what the FDA may require for approval of our LentiGlobin product candidatebeti-cel in the European Union, orUnited States.

In September 2020, we submitted a MAA to the nature of the conditions that would be imposed on us if conditionally approved.

The EMA Adaptive Pathways pilot program in which we are participating is intended to facilitate either an initialseek approval in a well-defined patient subgroupEurope for eli-cel for the treatment of patients with a high medical need and subsequent widening of the indication to a larger patient population through iterative extension of the indication, or an early regulatory approval (e.g. conditional approval), which is prospectively planned, and where uncertainty is reduced through the collection of post-approval data on the use in of medicinal product in patients.CALD. Based on our discussions with the EMA,FDA, we believe that we may be able to seek conditional approval for our LentiGlobin product candidate, with our refined manufacturing process,eli-cel for the treatment of adult and adolescent subjectspatients with TDT and a non- β00 genotypeCALD in the United States on the basis of the totality of the clinicalsafety and efficacy data from our ongoing studies with LentiGlobin.  For efficacy, we believe that the Northstar Study and supportive ongoing HGB-205Starbeam study, together with thesafety data available from our ongoing Northstar-2 StudyALD-104 study, and our long-term follow-up study LTF-303, could support the filing of a marketing authorization application in the European Union. This plan is contingent upon all of the studies conducted in patients with TDT with the LentiGlobin product candidate demonstrating sufficient efficacy and safety, and in particular, transfusion independence and reduction in transfusion requirements, for efficacy analyses in the Northstar, HGB-205 and Northstar-2 studies.

However, it should be noted that the EMA Adaptive Pathways program is a pilot program, and as such there is limited information and precedent regarding the potential outcomes for sponsors that participate in this program.completed ALD-103 observational study. Whether our LentiGlobin product candidateeli-cel is eligible for conditional approval will ultimately be determined at the discretion of the FDA and EMA, and will be dependent upon the data available at such time, and the available data may not be sufficiently robust from a safety and/or efficacy perspective to support conditional approval. Depending on the outcome of our plannedongoing studies, the FDA in the United States and ongoingEMA and European Commission in the European Union may require that we conduct additional or larger clinical trials before eli-cel is eligible for approval.

Based on our discussions with the FDA, we believe that we may be able to seek accelerated approval for our LentiGlobin for SCD product candidate in the United States on the basis of clinical data from Group C of our ongoing HGB-206 clinical study, with our ongoing HGB-210 clinical study providing confirmatory data for full approval. We cannot be certain that data from our HGB-206 or HGB-210 clinical studies will be sufficiently robust from a safety and/or efficacy perspective to support either conditional approval or full approval. We are also engaged with the EMA in discussions regarding our proposed development plans for LentiGlobin for SCD in Europe. Our development plan in the United States is contingent upon LentiGlobin for SCD demonstrating complete resolution of severe vaso-occlusive events, with globin response as a key secondary endpoint, and an acceptable safety profile in the study participants. Depending on the outcome of our ongoing and planned studies, the FDA may require that we conduct additional or larger clinical trials before our LentiGlobin product candidate is eligible for conditional approval. Evenapproval for the treatment of patients with SCD. In our discussions with FDA regarding the transition of manufacturing to the commercial setting from the clinical context, we are finalizing our plans for validating our commercial manufacturing processes and for providing the FDA with the comparability data that it requires. The FDA may not agree with these plans, or may require additional validation or comparability data as a condition for completing the BLA submission and filing. Any of these may result in delays in our ability to submit a BLA for regulatory approval of LentiGlobin for SCD. Furthermore, in light of a SUSAR of acute myeloid leukemia and a SUSAR of myelodysplastic syndrome in our HGB-206 clinical study reported to us in February 2021, the FDA has placed our clinical studies of LentiGlobin for SCD on clinical hold. We are investigating these events and plan to continue to work closely with the FDA in their review of these events, and we cannot make any assurances as to what the FDA may require to lift the clinical hold, if conditionalever, or the timing for us to complete our investigation as to the relationship between the use of our lentiviral vector in manufacturing and these safety events. Taken together, these factors are likely to result in delays in our ability to submit a BLA for regulatory approval is obtained,of LentiGlobin for SCD. In addition, we are engaged with the conditions toEMA in discussions regarding our proposed development plans for LentiGlobin in SCD in Europe, and we cannot be imposed on us under this program are unknowncertain that our HGB-206 study and HGB-210 study will be imposed atsufficient to form the timebasis for an initial MAA submission in Europe for the treatment of patients with SCD.
In September 2020, the FDA accepted for Priority Review the BLA submitted by BMS for ide-cel as a treatment for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. There is no guarantee that the FDA will conclude that the information in the BLA will be sufficient to support approval and we may fail to obtain regulatory approval in the United States for ide-cel. Additionally, certain factors beyond our and BMS’ control may impact the timeliness of the regulatory reviews of our submissions or any such conditionalapplications for approval.

If our product candidates are ultimately not approved for any reason, our business, prospects, results of operations and financial condition would be adversely affected.
47

Table of Contents
Changes in our manufacturing processes may cause delays in our clinical development and commercialization plans.

The manufacturing processes for our lentiviral vectors and our product candidatesdrug products are complex. We have developed and have implemented an improved manufacturing process of our LentiGlobin drug product that will be administered in our Northstar-2 Study in patients with TDT and a non-β00 genotype, our amended ongoing HGB-206 study in patients with severe SCD, and our Northstar-3 Study in patients with TDT and a β00 genotype. There can be no assurances that LentiGlobin drug product manufactured using the improved manufacturing process will lead to similar or improved efficacy or safety results in subjects, as compared to the LentiGlobin drug product used in the ongoing Northstar Study, the ongoing HGB-205 study, or the HGB-206 study under the original protocol.

As we develop a commercial-scale manufacturing process for our LentiGlobin and Lenti-D product candidates, we are implementingexplore improvements to theour manufacturing process for both producing our lentiviral vectors and for our product candidatesprocesses on a continual basis.basis, as we evaluate clinical and manufacturing data and based on discussions with regulatory authorities. In some circumstances, changes in the manufacturing process may require us to perform additional comparability studies, or to collect additional clinical data from patients, prior to undertakingsubmit additional clinical studiesregulatory filings, or filing for regulatory approval. Thesecomply with additional requirements, which may lead to delays in our clinical development and commercialization plans.


In previous clinical studies involving viral vectors for gene therapy, For instance, following the conditional approval of ZYNTEGLO by the European Commission, we continued to refine our commercial drug product manufacturing process to narrow some subjects experienced serious adverse events, includingof the developmentmanufacturing process parameters and to tighten the range of leukemia due to vector-related insertional oncogenesis.  If our vectors demonstrate a similar effect, we may be required to halt or delay further clinical development of ourcommercial drug product candidates.

A significant risk in any gene therapy productrelease specifications, based on viral vectors is that the vector will insert in or near cancer-causing oncogenes leading to uncontrolled clonal proliferation of mature cancer cells in the patient.  For example, in 2003, 20 subjects treated for X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency in two gene therapy studies using a murine, or mouse-derived, gamma-retroviral vector showed correction of the disease, but the studies were terminated after five subjects developed leukemia (four of whom were subsequently cured). The cause of these adverse events was shown to be insertional oncogenesis, which is the process whereby the corrected gene inserts in or near a gene that is important in a critical cellular process like growth or division, and this insertion results in the development of a cancer (often leukemia). Using molecular diagnostic techniques, it was determined that clones from these subjects showed retrovirus insertion in proximity to the promoter of the LMO2 proto-oncogene. Earlier generation retroviruses like the one used in these two studies have been shown to preferentially integrate in regulatory regions of genes that control cell growth.

These well-publicized adverse events led to the development of new viral vectors, such as lentiviral vectors, with improved safety profiles and also the requirement of enhanced safety monitoring in gene therapy clinical trials, including periodic analyses of the therapy’s genetic insertion sites. In published studies, lentiviral vectors have demonstrated an improved safety profile over gamma-retroviral vectors, with no disclosed events of gene therapy-related adverse events, which we believe is due to a number of factors including the tendency of these vectors to integrate within genes rather than in areas that control gene expression, as well as their lack of strong viral enhancers. However, it should be noted that in our Phase I/II study (the LG001 Study) of autologous HSCs transduced ex vivo using an earlier generation of our LentiGlobin vector, called HPV569, we initially observed in one subject that a disproportionate number of the cells expressing our functional gene had the same insertion site. Tests showed that this partial clonal dominance contained an insertion of the functional gene in the HMGA2 gene that persisted for a period of two to three years. Although there was some initial concern that the observed clonal dominance might represent a pre-leukemic event, there have been no adverse clinical consequences of this event, or any signs of cancer, in over seven years since the observation was made. The presence of the HMGA2 clone has steadily declined in this subject over time to the point that it is no longer the most common clone observed in this subject.

Notwithstanding the historical data regarding the potential safety improvements of lentiviral vectors, the risk of insertional oncogenesis remains a significant concern for gene therapy and we cannot assure that it will not occur in any of our ongoing or planned clinical studies. There is also the potential risk of delayed adverse events following exposure to gene therapy products due to persistent biological activity of the genetic material or other components of products used to carry the genetic material. The FDA has stated that lentiviral vectors possess characteristics that may pose high risks of delayed adverse events. If any such adverse events occur, further advancement of our clinical studies could be halted or delayed, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and operations.

In previous clinical studies involving T cell-based immunotherapies, some subjects experienced serious adverse events. Our T cell-based immunotherapy product candidates may demonstrate a similar effect or have other properties that could halt their clinical development, prevent their regulatory approval, limit their commercial potential, or result in significant negative consequences.

The bb2121 and bb21217 product candidates are chimeric antigen receptor, or CAR, T cell-based immunotherapy. In previous and ongoing clinical studies involving CAR T cell products, many subjects experienced side effects such as neurotoxicity and cytokine release syndrome, which have in some cases resulted in clinical holds in ongoing clinical trials of CAR T product candidates. There have been life threatening events related to severe neurotoxicity and cytokine release syndrome, requiring intense medical intervention such as intubation or pressor support, and in several cases, resulted in death. Severe neurotoxicity is a condition that is currently defined clinically by cerebral edema, confusion, drowsiness, speech impairment, tremors, seizures, or other central nervous system side effects, when such side effects are serious enough to lead to intensive care. In some cases, severe neurotoxicity was thought to be associateddiscussion with the use of certain lymphodepletion regimens used prior to the administration of the CAR T cell products. Cytokine release syndrome is a condition that is currently defined clinically by certain symptoms related to the release of cytokines, which can include fever, chills, low blood pressure, when such side effects are serious enough to lead to intensive care with mechanical ventilation or significant vasopressor support. The exact cause or causes of cytokine release syndromeEMA and severe neurotoxicity in connection with treatment of CAR T cell products is not fully understood at this time. In addition, subjects have experienced other adverse events inevolving clinical data. Implementing these studies, such as a reduction in the number of blood cells (in the form of neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia or other cytopenias), febrile neutropenia, chemical laboratory abnormalities (including elevated liver enzymes), and renal failure.

Undesirable side effects caused by the bb2121 or bb21217 product candidate, other CAR T product candidates targeting BCMA, or our other T cell-based immunotherapy product candidates, could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical studies and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other comparable


foreign regulatory authorities. Results of our studies could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects or unexpected characteristics. Treatment-related side effects could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled subjects to complete the studies or result in potential product liability claims. In addition, these side effects may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff, as toxicities resulting from T cell-based immunotherapies are not normally encountered in the general patient population and by medical personnel. We expect to have to train medical personnel regarding our T cell-based immunotherapy product candidates to understand their side effects for both our planned clinical trials and upon any commercialization of any T cell-based immunotherapy product candidates. Inadequate training in recognizing or managing the potential side effects of T cell-based immunotherapy product candidates could result in patient deaths. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.  

Even if we complete the necessary preclinical and clinical studies, we cannot predict when or if we will obtain regulatory approval to commercialize a product candidate or the approval may be for a more narrow indication than we expect.

We cannot commercialize a product until the appropriate regulatory authorities have reviewed and approved the product candidate. Even if our product candidates demonstrate safety and efficacy in clinical studies, the regulatory agencies may not complete their review processes in a timely manner, or we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval. Additional delays may result if an FDA Advisory Committee or other regulatory advisory group or authority recommends non-approval or restrictions on approval. In addition, we may experience delays or rejections based upon additional government regulation from future legislation or administrative action, or changes in regulatory agency policy during the period of product development, clinical studies and the review process. Regulatory agencies also may approve a treatment candidate for fewer or more limited indications than requested or may grant approval subject to the performance of post-marketing studies. In addition, regulatory agencies may not approve the labeling claims that are necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of our treatment candidates. For example, the development of our product candidates for pediatric use is an important part of our current business strategy, and if we are unable to obtain regulatory approval for the desired age ranges, our business may suffer.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval for a product candidate, our products will remain subject to regulatory scrutiny.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval in a jurisdiction, the regulatory authority may still impose significant restrictions on the indicated uses or marketing of our product candidates, or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies, post-market surveillance or patient or drug restrictions. For example, the FDA typically advises that patients treated with gene therapy undergo follow-up observations for potential adverse events for a 15-year period. Additionally, the holder of an approved BLA is obligated to monitor and report adverse events and any failure of a product to meet the specifications in the BLA. The holder of an approved BLA must also submit new or supplemental applications and obtain FDA approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling orZYNTEGLO commercial manufacturing process. Advertising and promotional materials must comply with FDA rules and are subject to FDA review, in addition to other potentially applicable federal and state laws.

In addition, product manufacturers and their facilities are subject to paymentprocess had the effect of user fees and continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with good manufacturing practices, or GMP, and adherence to commitments made in the BLA. If we or a regulatory agency 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 agency may impose restrictions relative to that product or the manufacturing facility, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing.

If we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements following approval of any of our product candidates, a regulatory agency may:

issue a warning letter asserting that we are in violation of the law;

seek an injunction or impose civil or criminal penalties or monetary fines;

suspend or withdraw regulatory approval;

suspend any ongoing clinical studies;

refuse to approve a pending marketing application, such as a BLA or supplements to a BLA submitted by us;

seize product; or

refuse to allow us to enter into supply contracts, including government contracts.


Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibitdelaying our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate revenues.

Risks related to our reliance on third parties

We expect to rely on third parties to conduct some or all aspects of our viral vector production, drug product manufacturing, research and preclinical and clinical testing, and these third parties may not perform satisfactorily.

We do not expect to independently conduct all aspects of our viral vector production, drug product manufacturing, research and preclinical and clinical testing. We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties with respect to these items. In some cases these third parties are academic, research or similar institutions that may not applytreat the same quality control protocols utilized in certain commercial settings.

Our reliance on these third parties for research and development activities will reduce our control over these activities but will not relieve us of our responsibility to ensure compliance with all required regulations and study protocols. For example, for product candidates that we develop and commercialize on our own, we will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our IND-enabling studies and clinical studies are conducted in accordance with the study plan and protocols, and that our viral vectors and drug products are manufactured in accordance with GMP as appliedfirst patient in the relevant jurisdictions.

If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines, conduct our studiescommercial context in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated study plans and protocols, or manufacture our viral vectors and drug products in accordance with GMP,Europe. In LentiGlobin for SCD, we will not be able to complete, or may be delayed in completing, the preclinical and clinical studies and manufacturing process validation activities required to support future IND, MAA  and BLA submissions and approval of our product candidates.

Any of these third parties may terminate their engagements with us at any time. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements, it could delay our product development activities.

Reliance on third-party manufacturers entails risks to which we would not be subject if we manufactured the product candidates ourselves, including:

the inability to negotiate manufacturing agreements with third parties under commercially reasonable terms;

reduced control as a result of using third-party manufacturers for all aspects of manufacturing activities;

the risk that these activities are not conducted in accordance with our study plans and protocols;

termination or nonrenewal of manufacturing agreements with third parties in a manner or at a time that is costly or damaging to us; and

disruptions to the operations of our third-party manufacturers or suppliers caused by conditions unrelated to our business or operations, including the bankruptcy of the manufacturer or supplier.

Any of these events could lead to clinical study delays or failure to obtain regulatory approval, or impact our ability to successfully commercialize future products. Some of these events could be the basis for FDA action, including injunction, recall, seizure or total or partial suspension of production.

We and our contract manufacturers are subject to significant regulation with respect to manufacturing our products. The manufacturing facilities on which we rely may not continue to meet regulatory requirements and have limited capacity.

We currently have relationships with a limited number of suppliers for the manufacturing of our viral vectors and product candidates. Each supplier may require licenses to manufacture such components if such processes are not owned by the supplier or in the public domain and we may be unable to transfer or sublicense the intellectual property rights we may have with respect to such activities.

All entities involved in the preparation of therapeutics for clinical studies or commercial sale, including our existing contract manufacturers for our product candidates, are subject to extensive regulation. Some components of a finished therapeutic product approved for commercial sale or used in late-stage clinical studies must be manufactured in accordance with GMP. 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 adventitious agents or other 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 BLA or MAA on a timely basis and where required, must adhere to the FDA’s or other regulator’s good laboratory practices, or GLP, and GMP regulations enforced by the FDA or other regulator through facilities inspection programs. Some of our contract manufacturers have not produced a commercially-approved product and therefore have not obtained the requisite FDA or other regulatory approvals to do so. Our facilities and quality systems and the facilities and quality systems of some or all of our third-party contractors must pass a pre-approval inspection for compliance with the applicable regulations as a condition of regulatory approval of our product candidates or any of our other potential products. In addition, the regulatory authorities may, at any time, audit or inspect a manufacturing facility involved with the preparation of our product candidates or our other potential products or the associated quality systems for compliance with the regulations applicable to the activities being conducted. If these facilities do not pass a pre-approval plant inspection, FDA or other regulatory approval of the products will not be granted.

The regulatory authorities also may, at any time following approval of a product for sale, audit the manufacturing facilities of our third-party contractors. If any such inspection or audit identifies a failure to comply with applicable regulations or if a violation of our product specifications or applicable regulations occurs independent of such an inspection or audit, we or the relevant regulatory authority may require remedial measures that may be costly and/or time-consuming for us or a third party to implement and that may include the temporary or permanent suspension of a clinical study or commercial sales or the temporary or permanent closure of a facility. Any such remedial measures imposed upon us or third parties with whom we contract could materially harm our business.

If we or any of our third-party manufacturers fail to maintain regulatory compliance, the FDA or other regulators can impose regulatory sanctions including, among other things, refusal to approve a pending application for a biologic product, or revocation of a pre-existing approval. As a result, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially harmed.

Additionally, if supply from one approved manufacturer is interrupted, there could be a significant disruption in commercial supply. The number of manufacturers with the necessary manufacturing capabilities is limited. In addition, an alternative manufacturer would need to be qualified through a BLA supplement or similar regulatory submission which could result in further delay. The regulatory agencies may also require additional studies if a new manufacturer is relied upon for commercial production. Switching manufacturers may involve substantial costs and is likely to result in a delay in our desired clinical and commercial timelines.

These factors could cause the delay of clinical studies, regulatory submissions, required approvals or commercialization of our product candidates, cause us to incur higher costs and prevent us from commercializing our products successfully. Furthermore, if our suppliers fail to meet contractual requirements, and we are unable to secure one or more replacement suppliers capable of production at a substantially equivalent cost, our clinical studies may be delayed or we could lose potential revenue.

We are dependent on Celgene for the successful development and commercialization of bb2121 and bb21217. If Celgene does not devote sufficient resources to the development of bb2121 and bb21217, is unsuccessful in its efforts, or chooses to terminate its agreements with us, our business will be materially harmed.

We have exclusively licensed to Celgene the right to develop and commercialize the bb2121 and bb21217 product candidates, and we retain an option to co-develop and co-promote bb2121 and bb21217 in the United States under our license agreement and collaboration agreement with Celgene. With respect to bb2121, we are responsible for completing the ongoing CRB-401 study, but Celgene is responsible for further clinical development and commercialization costs, unless we choose to exercise our option to co-develop and co-promote bb2121 in the United States. If we exercise our option to co-develop and co-promote bb2121 in the United States, we and Celgene will share the obligation to develop and commercialize bb2121 in the United States, and we will be solely dependent on Celgene to develop and commercialize bb2121 outside of the United States.  With respect to bb21217, we are responsible for completing the ongoing CRB-402 study, but Celgene is responsible for further clinical development and commercialization costs, unless we choose to exercise our option to co-develop and co-promote bb21217 in the United States. If we exercise our option to co-develop and co-promote bb21217 in the United States, we and Celgene will share the obligation to develop and commercialize bb21217 in the United States, and we will be solely dependent on Celgene to develop and commercialize bb21217 outside of the United States. 

Celgene is obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize bb2121 and bb21217. Celgene may determine however, that it is commercially reasonable to develop and commercialize a next-generation product candidate, rather than continue the development of bb2121 and bb21217. Alternatively, Celgene may determine that it is not commercially reasonable to continue development of any product candidates that arise from our collaboration. These outcomes may occur for many reasons, including internal business reasons or because of unfavorable regulatory feedback. Further, on review of the safety and efficacy data, the FDA may impose requirements on the clinical trial program that render such a program commercially nonviable. In addition, under our license agreement, Celgene may determine the development plan and activities for that product candidate. We may disagree with Celgene about the development strategy it employs, but we will have limited rights to impose our development strategy on


Celgene. Similarly, Celgene may decide to seek regulatory approval for drug product utilizing lentiviral vector manufactured using the scalable suspension manufacturing process, rather than the adherent manufacturing process. The FDA and limit commercialization of, bb2121 or bb21217 to narrower indications than we would pursue. More broadly, if Celgene elects to discontinue the development of bb2121 or bb21217, we may be unable to advance the product candidate ourselves. We would also be prevented from developing or commercializing another CAR T cell-based product candidate that targets BCMA outside of our collaboration with Celgene.

This partnershipEMA may not be scientifically or commercially successfulagree with our proposed plans for us due to a number of important factors, includingdemonstrating the following:

Celgene has wide discretion in determining the efforts and resources that it will apply to its partnership with us. The timing and amount of any development milestones, and downstream commercial milestones and royalties that we may receive under such partnership will depend on, among other things, Celgene’s efforts, allocation of resources and successful development and commercialization of bb2121, bb21217 and other product candidates that are the subject of its collaboration with us.

Celgene may develop and commercialize, either alone or with others, products that are similar to or competitive with bb2121, bb21217 and other product candidates that are the subject of its collaboration with us. For example, Celgene is currently commercializing certain of its existing products, including lenalidomide and pomalidomide, for certain patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Celgene may terminate its partnership with us without cause and for circumstances outside of our control, which could make it difficult for us to attract new strategic partners or adversely affect how we are perceived in scientific and financial communities.

Celgene may develop or commercialize our product candidates in such a way as to elicit litigation that could jeopardize or invalidate our intellectual property rights or expose us to potential liability.

Celgene may not comply with all applicable regulatory requirements, or may fail to report safety data in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements.

If Celgene were to breach its arrangements with us, we may need to enforce our right to terminate the agreement in legal proceedings, which could be costly and cause delay in our ability to receive rights back to the relevant product candidates. If we were to terminate an agreement with Celgene due to Celgene's breach or Celgene terminated the agreement without cause, the development and commercialization of bb2121, bb21217 and other product candidates that are the subject of its collaboration with us could be delayed, curtailed or terminated because we may not have sufficient financial resources or capabilities to continue development and commercialization of these product candidates on our own if we choose not to, or are unable to, enter into a new collaboration for these product candidates.

Celgene may enter into one or more transactions with third parties, including a merger, consolidation, reorganization, sale of substantial assets, sale of substantial stock or other change in control, which could divert the attention of its management and adversely affect Celgene's ability to retain and motivate key personnel who are important to the continued developmentcomparability of the programs under the strategic partnership with us. In addition, the third-party to any such transaction could determine to reprioritize Celgene's development programs such that Celgene ceases to diligently pursue the development of our programs and/or cause the respective collaboration with us to terminate.

We expect to rely on third parties to conduct, supervisetwo processes, and monitor our clinical studies, and if these third parties perform in an unsatisfactory manner, it may harm our business.

We expect to rely on CROs and clinical study sites to ensure our clinical studies are conducted properly and on time. While we will have agreements governing their activities, we will have limited influence over their actual performance. We will control only certain aspects of our CROs’ activities. Nevertheless, we will be responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities.

We and our CROs are required to comply with the FDA’s GCPs for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical studies to assure that the data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of clinical study participants are protected. The FDA enforces these GCPs through periodic inspections of study sponsors, principal investigators and clinical study sites. If we or our CROs fail to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our future clinical studies may be deemed unreliable and the FDA may require us to performconduct additional clinical studies, before approving any marketing applications. Upon inspection, the FDAcollect additional data, develop additional assays, or modify release specifications, which may determine that our clinical studies did not comply with GCPs. In addition, our future clinical studies will require a sufficient number of test subjects to evaluate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates. Accordingly, if our CROs fail to comply with these regulations or fail to recruit a sufficient number of patients, we may be required to repeat such clinical studies, which would delay the regulatory approval process.


Employees of our CROs are not our employees, and we are therefore unable to directly monitor whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our clinical and nonclinical programs, which must be conducted in accordance with GCPs and GLPs, respectively. These CROs may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical studies or other drug development activities that could harm our competitive position. If our CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations, fail to meet expected deadlines, or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements, or for any other reasons, our clinical studies may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for, or successfully commercialize our product candidates. As a result, our financial results and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase, and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed.

We also expect to rely on other third parties to store and distribute our vectors and productssubmit a BLA or MAA for any clinical studies that we may conduct, as well as on third parties to administer our products to patients when and if our products are introduced into market. Any performance failure on the part of these third parties could delay clinical development or marketingregulatory approval of our product candidates or commercialization of our products, if approved, producing additional lossesLentiGlobin for SCD. Over time, we also intend to transition the lentiviral vector manufacturing process for ZYNTEGLO in the European Union, and depriving us of potential product revenue.

Our reliance on third parties requires usbeti-cel in the United States, to share our trade secrets,the suspension manufacturing process, and the timing in which increaseswe are able to make the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secretstransition will be misappropriated or disclosed.

Because we rely on third parties to manufacture our vectors and our product candidates, and because we collaboratedependent upon reaching agreement with various organizations and academic institutions on the advancement of our gene therapy platform, we must, at times, share trade secrets with them. We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, collaborative research agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our collaborators, advisors, employees and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, such as trade secrets. Despite the contractual provisions employed when working with third parties, the need to share trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by our competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others, or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how and trade secrets, a competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business.

In addition, these agreements typically restrict the ability of our collaborators, advisors, employees and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our trade secrets. Our academic collaborators typically have rights to publish data, provided that we are notified in advance and may delay publication for a specified time in order to secure our intellectual property rights arising from the collaboration. In other cases, publication rights are controlled exclusively by us, although in some cases we may share these rights with other parties. We also conduct joint research and development programs thatregulatory authorities, which may require us to share trade secrets under the terms of our research and development partnershipsconduct additional studies, collect additional data, develop additional assays, or similar agreements. Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, our competitors may discover our trade secrets, either through breach of these agreements, independent development or publication of information including our trade secrets in cases where we do not have proprietary or otherwise protected rights at the time of publication. A competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets would impair our competitive position and have an adverse impact on our business.

Risks related to our financial condition and capital requirements

We have incurred significant losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future.

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company, and we have not yet generated significant revenues. We have incurred net losses in each year since our inception in 1992, including net losses of $335.6 million and $263.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. As of December 31, 2017, we had an accumulated deficit of $913.8 million.

We have devoted most of our financial resources to research and development, including our clinical and preclinical development activities. To date, we have financed our operations primarily through the sale of equity securities and, to a lesser extent, through collaboration agreements and grants from governmental agencies and charitable foundations. The amount of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of our future expenditures and our ability to obtain funding through equity or debt financings, strategic collaborations or additional grants. We have not completed pivotal clinical studies for any product candidate and it will be several years, if ever, before we have a product candidate ready for commercialization. Even if we obtain regulatory approval to market a product candidate, our future revenues will depend upon the size of any markets in which our product candidates have received approval, and our ability to achieve sufficient market acceptance, reimbursement from third-party payors and adequate market share for our product candidates in those markets.


We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for the foreseeable future. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if and as we:

continue our research and preclinical and clinical development of our product candidates;

modify release specifications.

expand the scope of our current clinical studies for our product candidates;

initiate additional preclinical, clinical or other studies for our oncology product candidates;

further develop the manufacturing process for our vectors or our product candidates;

change or add additional manufacturers or suppliers;

seek regulatory and marketing approvals for our product candidates that successfully complete clinical studies;

seek to identify and validate additional product candidates;

acquire or in-license other product candidates and technologies;

make milestone or other payments under any license agreements or our stock purchase agreement with the former equityholders of Pregenen;

maintain, protect and expand our intellectual property portfolio;

establish a sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure in the United States and Europe to commercialize any products for which we may obtain marketing approval;

attract and retain skilled personnel;

build additional infrastructure to support our operations as a public company and our product development and planned future commercialization efforts, including manufacturing capacity at third-party manufacturers or potentially our own manufacturing facility; and

experience any delays or encounter issues with any of the above.

The net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year, such that a period-to-period comparison of our results of operations may not be a good indication of our future performance. In any particular quarter or quarters, our operating results could be below the expectations of securities analysts or investors, which could cause our stock price to decline.

We have never generated any revenue from product sales and may never be profitable.

Our ability to generate revenue and achieve profitability depends on our ability, alone or with strategic collaboration partners, to successfully complete the development of, and obtain the regulatory, pricing and reimbursement approvals necessary to commercialize our product candidates. We do not anticipate generating revenues from product sales for the foreseeable future, if ever. Our ability to generate future revenues from product sales depends heavily on our success in:

completing research and preclinical and clinical development of our product candidates;

seeking and obtaining regulatory and marketing approvals for product candidates for which we complete clinical studies;

developing a sustainable, commercial-scale, reproducible, and transferable manufacturing process for our vectors and product candidates;

establishing and maintaining supply and manufacturing relationships with third parties that can provide adequate (in amount and quality) products and services to support clinical development and the market demand for our product candidates, if approved;

launching and commercializing product candidates for which we obtain regulatory and marketing approval, either by collaborating with a partner or, if launched independently, by establishing a sales force, marketing and distribution infrastructure;

obtaining sufficient pricing and reimbursement for our product candidates from private and governmental payors;

obtaining market acceptance and adoption of our product candidates and gene therapy as a viable treatment option;

addressing any competing technological and market developments;

identifying and validating new gene therapy product candidates;


negotiating favorable terms in any collaboration, licensing or other arrangements into which we may enter; and

maintaining, protecting and expanding our portfolio of intellectual property rights, including patents, trade secrets and know-how.

We expect to continue to incur significant expenditures for the foreseeable future, and we expect these expenditures to increase as we prepare for any potential commercial launch. Our expenses could increase beyond expectations if we are required by the FDA, the EMA, or other regulatory agencies, domestic or foreign, to perform clinical and other studies in addition to those that we currently anticipate. Even if one or more of the product candidates that we develop is approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate, which costs may increase with any increased competition. Even if we are able to generate revenues from the sale of any approved products, we may not become profitable and may need to obtain additional funding to continue operations.

From time to time, we will need to raise additional funding, which may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Failure to obtain this necessary capital when needed may force us to delay, limit or terminate our product development efforts or other operations.

We are currently advancing our LentiGlobin, Lenti-D, bb2121 and bb21217 product candidates through clinical development and other product candidates through preclinical development. Developing gene therapy products is expensive, and we expect our research and development expenses to increase substantially in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we advance our product candidates in clinical studies.

As of December 31, 2017, our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities were $1.6 billion. We expect that our existing cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities will be sufficient to fund our current operations into 2021. However, our operating plan may change as a result of many factors currently unknown to us, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned, through public or private equity or debt financings, government or other third-party funding, marketing and distribution arrangements and other collaborations, strategic alliances and licensing arrangements or a combination of these approaches. In any event, we will require additional capital to obtain regulatory approval for, and to commercialize, our product candidates. Even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans, we may seek additional capital if market conditions are favorable or if we have specific strategic objectives.

Any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates. In addition, we cannot guarantee that future financing will be available in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, if at all. Moreover, the terms of any financing may adversely affect the holdings or the rights of our stockholders and the issuance of additional securities, whether equity or debt, by us, or the possibility of such issuance, may cause the market price of our shares to decline. The sale of additional equity or convertible securities would dilute all of our stockholders. The incurrence of indebtedness would result in increased fixed payment obligations and we may be required to agree to certain restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt, limitations on our ability to acquire, sell or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. We could also be required to seek funds through arrangements with collaborative partners or otherwise at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable and we may be required to relinquish rights to some of our technologies or product candidates or otherwise agree to terms unfavorable to us, any of which may have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and prospects.

If we are unable to obtain funding on a timely basis, we may be required to significantly curtail, delay or discontinue one or more of our research or development programs or the commercialization of any product candidates or be unable to expand our operations or otherwise capitalize on our business opportunities, as desired, which could materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks related to commercialization of our product candidates

We intend to rely on a mix of internal and third-party manufacturers to produce our vector, product candidates and other key materials, but we are still in the process of building out our internal capacity and also have not entered into binding agreements with all of the manufacturers needed to support commercialization. Additionally, neither we nor these manufacturers have experience producing our vectors and product candidates at commercial levels and may not achieve the necessary regulatory approvals or produce our vectors and products at the quality, quantities, locations and timing needed to support commercialization.

We have not yet secured reliable manufacturing capabilities for commercial quantities of our viral vectors or established transduction facilities in all of the desired commercialization regions to support commercialization of our products. Although we intend to rely on a mix of internal and third-party manufacturers for commercialization, we are still in the process of building out our internal capacity and also have not entered into binding agreements with all of the manufacturers needed to support our planned commercialization activities,


and may not be able to timely or successfully build out our internal capacity, or negotiate binding agreements at commercially reasonable terms.

No manufacturer currently has the experience or ability to produce our vectors or drug product candidates at commercial levels. We are currently developing a commercial-scale manufacturing process for our LentiGlobin and Lenti-D product candidates, which we are transferring to one or more contract manufacturers. We may run into technical or scientific issues related to manufacturing or development that we may be unable to resolve in a timely manner or with available funds. Although we have been able to produce our Lenti-D vector at commercial scale, we have not completed the characterization and validation activities necessary for commercial and regulatory approvals. If we or our manufacturing partners do not obtain such regulatory approvals, our commercialization efforts will be harmed.

Additionally, since the HSCs and T cells have a limited window of stability following procurement from the subject, we must set up transduction facilities in the regions where we wish to commercialize our product. Currently, we rely on third-party contract manufacturers in the United States and Europe to produce our product candidates for our clinical studies. Since a portion of our target patient populations will be outside the United States and Europe, we will need to set up additional transduction facilities that can replicate our transduction process. Establishment of such facilities may be financially impractical or impeded by technical, quality, or regulatory issues related to these new sites and we may also run into technical or scientific issues related to transfer of our transduction process or other developmental issues that we may be unable to resolve in a timely manner or with available funds.

Even if we timely develop a manufacturing process and successfully transfer it to the third-party vector and product manufacturers or successfully and timely develop our internal capacity, if we or such third-party manufacturers are unable to produce the necessary quantities of viral vectors and our product candidates, or in compliance with GMP or other pertinent regulatory requirements, and within our planned time frame and cost parameters, the development and sales of our products, if approved, may be materially harmed. Furthermore, if we or our third-party manufacturers are unable to produce the necessary quantities of viral vectors or our product candidates in quantities, quality requirements, or within the time frames that we need to support our commercialization activities, it may result in delays in our development plans or increased capital expenditures.

In addition, any significant disruption in our supplier relationships could harm our business. We source key materials from third parties, either directly through agreements with suppliers or indirectly through our manufacturers who have agreements with suppliers. There are a small number of suppliers for certain key materials that are used to manufacture our product candidates. Such suppliers may not sell these key materials to us or to our manufacturers at the times we need them or on commercially reasonable terms. We do not have any control over the process or timing of the acquisition of these key materials by our manufacturers. Moreover, we currently do not have any agreements for the commercial production of these key materials.

Although we expect to begin building out our field team, we have no sales or distribution experience and only early capabilities for marketing and market access, and expect to invest significant financial and management resources to establish these capabilities. If we are unable to establish sales and distribution capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our product candidates, we may be unable to generate any revenues.

Although we expect to begin building out our field team, we have no sales or distribution experience and only early capabilities for marketing and market access. To successfully commercialize any products that may result from our development programs, we will need to develop these capabilities in the United States, Europe and other regions, either on our own or with others. We may enter into collaborations with other entities to utilize their mature marketing and distribution capabilities, but we may be unable to enter into marketing agreements on favorable terms, if at all. If our future collaborative partners do not commit sufficient resources to commercialize our future products, if any, and we are unable to develop the necessary marketing capabilities on our own, we will be unable to generate sufficient product revenue to sustain our business. We will be competing with many companies that currently have extensive and well-funded marketing and sales operations. Without a significant internal team or the support of a third party to perform marketing and sales functions, we may be unable to compete successfully against these more established companies.

We face intense competition and rapid technological change and the possibility that our competitors may develop therapies that are more advanced or effective than ours, which may adversely affect our financial condition and our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates.

and any future products. If our competitors obtain orphan drug exclusivity for products that regulatory authorities determine constitute the same drug and treat the same indications as our product or any future products, we may not be able to have competing products approved by the applicable regulatory authority for a significant period of time.

We are engaged in the development of gene therapytherapies for severe genetic and rare diseases and in the field of T cell-based immunotherapy,cancer, and both of whichfields are competitive and rapidly changing fields.changing. We have competitors both in the United States and internationally, including major multinational pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies and universities and other research institutions. Some of the pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies we expect to compete with include Bellicum Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Acceleron Pharma, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline plc through their collaboration with TIGET/MolMed, Sangamo BioSciences Inc. through their collaboration with Bioverativ Inc., Novartis AG, Global Blood Therapeutics, Inc., GlycoMimetics Inc., Gilead Sciences, Inc. Pfizer Inc. through


their collaboration with Cellectis SA, Adaptimmune Inc., Juno Therapeutics, Inc., including after their proposed acquisition by Celgene Corporation, and Acceleron Pharma Inc. through their collaboration with Celgene Corporation. In addition, many universities and private and public research institutes are active in our target disease areas.

Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial, technical and other resources, such as larger research and development staff, more experienced manufacturing capabilities, experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations.or more established commercial infrastructure. Competition may increase further as a result of advances in the commercial applicability of technologies and greater availability of capital for investment in these industries. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing on an exclusive basis, products that are more effective, safer, or less costly than any product candidateproducts that we may develop, or achieve earlier patent protection, regulatorymarketing approval, product commercialization and market penetration earlier than us. Additionally, technologies developed by our competitors may render our potential product candidatesproducts uneconomical or obsolete, and we may not be successful in marketing our product candidates against competitors.

For additional information regarding our competition, see “Item 1. Business—Competition” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Even if we are successful in achieving regulatorymarketing approval to commercialize a product candidate faster than our competitors, we may face competition from biosimilars due to the changing regulatory environment. In the United States, the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are demonstrated to be “highly similar,” or biosimilar, to or “interchangeable” with an FDA-approved biological product. This pathway could allow competitors to reference data from biological products already approved after 12 years from the time of approval. In Europe, the European Commission has granted marketing authorizations for several biosimilars pursuant to a set of general and product class-specific guidelines for biosimilar approvals issued over the past few years. In Europe, a competitor may reference data from biological products already approved, but will not be able to get on the market until 10 years after the time of approval. This 10-year period will be extended to 11 years if, during the first eight of those 10 years, the marketing authorization holder obtains an approval for one or more new therapeutic indications that bring significant clinical benefits compared with existing therapies. In addition, companies may be developing biosimilars in other countries that could compete with our products. If competitors are able to obtain marketing approval for biosimilars referencing our products, our products may become subject to competition from such biosimilars, with the attendant competitive pressure and consequences. Expiration or successful challenge of our applicable patent rights could also trigger competition from other products, assuming any relevant exclusivity period has expired.

In addition, although ZYNTEGLO and our product candidates have been granted orphan drug status by the FDA and EMA, there are limitations to the exclusivity. In the United States, the exclusivity period for orphan drugs is seven years, while pediatric exclusivity adds six months to any existing patents or exclusivity periods. In Europe, orphan drugs may be able to obtain 10 years of marketing exclusivity and up to an additional two years on the basis of qualifying pediatric studies. However,
48

Table of Contents
orphan exclusivity may be reduced to six years if the drug no longer satisfies the original designation criteria. Additionally, a marketing authorization holder may lose its orphan exclusivity if it consents to a second orphan drug application or cannot supply enough drug. Orphan drug exclusivity also can be lost when a second applicant demonstrates its drug is “clinically superior” to the original orphan drug.

Generally, if a product with an orphan drug designation receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA or the European Commission from approving another marketing application for a product that constitutes the same drug treating the same indication for that marketing exclusivity period, except in limited circumstances. If another sponsor receives such approval before we do (regardless of our orphan drug designation), we will be precluded from receiving marketing approval for our product for the exclusivity period for the applicable indication.

Finally, as a result of the expiration or successful challenge of our patent rights, we could face more litigation with respect to the validity and/or scope of patents relating to our competitors’ products. The availability of our competitors’ products could limit the demand, and the price we are able to charge, for any products that we may develop and commercialize.

We may not be successful in our efforts to identify or discover additional product candidates.
The commercial success of our business depends primarily upon our ability to identify, develop and commercialize products based on our platform technologies, including our gene editing technology and cancer immunotherapy capabilities. Our research programs in oncology and severe genetic diseases may fail to identify other potential product candidates for clinical development for a number of reasons. We may be unsuccessful in identifying potential product candidates or our potential product candidates may be shown to have harmful side effects or may have other characteristics that may make the products unmarketable or unlikely to receive marketing approval. Research programs to identify new product candidates require substantial technical, financial and human resources. We may focus our efforts and resources on potential programs or product candidates that ultimately prove to be unsuccessful. If any currentof these events occur, we may be forced to abandon our research, development or commercialization efforts for a program or programs, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and could potentially cause us to cease operations.
Insertional oncogenesis is a risk of gene therapies using viral vectors. If the vectors for our product or product candidates are shown to lead to insertional oncogenesis, we may be required to halt or delay further clinical development of our product candidates, and cease the commercialization of our approved product, which may materially and negatively impact the commercial potential of our product and any future products.
A significant risk in any gene therapy product using viral vectors is that the vector will insert in or near cancer-causing oncogenes leading to uncontrolled clonal proliferation of mature cancer cells in the patient, known as insertional oncogenesis. In published studies, lentiviral vectors have demonstrated an improved safety profile over gamma-retroviral vectors used in early gene therapy studies, which we believe is due to a number of factors including the tendency of the lentiviral vectors to integrate within genes rather than in areas that control gene expression, as well as their lack of strong viral enhancers. Notwithstanding the historical data regarding the potential safety improvements of lentiviral vectors, the risk of insertional oncogenesis remains a significant concern for gene therapy and we cannot make any assurances that it will not occur in any of our clinical studies or in the commercial setting. Insertional oncogenesis leading to leukemia or lymphoma remains a risk. For instance, clonal predominance without a known clinical correlation has been detected in some patients treated with eli-cel including vector insertions into or near genes previously associated with cancer in the general population. In February 2021, a SUSAR of acute myeloid leukemia and a SUSAR of myelodysplastic syndrome in our HGB-206 clinical study resulted in the FDA placing our clinical studies of LentiGlobin for SCD and beti-cel on clinical hold, and caused us to temporarily suspend marketing of ZYNTEGLO in the European Union. An investigation into the causes of any safety events, including these safety events, may not be conclusive or may not be definitive in eliminating the lentiviral vector as a cause. As a result, safety events such as leukemia, lymphoma, or myelodysplastic syndrome may result in delays or halt further advancement of our clinical studies, and even if a product is approved, may result in the product being removed from the market or its market opportunity being significantly reduced.
There is also the potential risk of delayed adverse events following exposure to gene therapy products due to persistent biological activity of the genetic material or other components of products used to carry the genetic material. The FDA has stated that lentiviral vectors possess characteristics that may pose high risks of delayed adverse events. If any such adverse events occur, further advancement of our clinical studies could be halted or delayed, and we may be unable to continue to commercialize our approved product.
Furthermore, treatment with our gene therapy product and product candidates involve chemotherapy or myeloablative treatments, which can cause side effects or adverse events that are unrelated to our product and product candidates but may still impact the perception of the potential benefits of our product and any future products. For instance, myelodysplastic syndrome is a known risk of certain myeloablative regimens, and we have previously reported that in our ongoing HGB-206 study of LentiGlobin for SCD, a patient developed myelodysplastic syndrome several years after myeloablation and infusion with drug
49

Table of Contents
product, which progressed to acute myeloid leukemia, leading to the patient’s death. Other patients receiving our product or product candidates may develop myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukemia in the future, which may negatively impact the commercial prospects of our product or product candidates. Additionally, our product and any future products, or procedures associated with the administration of our product or collection of patients' cells, could potentially cause other adverse events that have not yet been predicted. The inclusion of critically ill patients in our clinical studies may result in deaths or other adverse medical events due to other therapies or medications that such patients may be using, or the progression of their disease. Any of these events could impair our ability to commercialize our product and any future products and the commercial potential of our products will be materially and negatively impacted.
Patients receiving T cell-based immunotherapies, such as ide-cel and the bb21217 product candidate, may experience serious adverse events, including neurotoxicity and cytokine release syndrome. If our product candidates are revealed to have high and unacceptable severity and/or prevalence of side effects or unexpected characteristics, their clinical development, marketing approval, and commercial potential will depend uponbe negatively impacted, which will significantly harm our business, financial condition and prospects.
Ide-cel and the degreebb21217 product candidate are chimeric antigen receptor, or CAR, T cell-based immunotherapies. In previous and ongoing clinical studies involving CAR T cell products, including those involving ide-cel and the bb21217 product candidate, patients experienced side effects such as neurotoxicity and cytokine release syndrome. There have been life-threatening events related to severe neurotoxicity and cytokine release syndrome, requiring intense medical intervention such as intubation or pressor support, and in several cases, resulted in death. Severe neurotoxicity is a condition that is currently defined clinically by cerebral edema, confusion, drowsiness, speech impairment, tremors, seizures, or other central nervous system side effects, when such side effects are serious enough to lead to intensive care. In some cases, severe neurotoxicity was thought to be associated with the use of market acceptancecertain lymphodepletion regimens used prior to the administration of the CAR T cell products. Cytokine release syndrome is a condition that is currently defined clinically by physicians,certain symptoms related to the release of cytokines, which can include fever, chills, low blood pressure, when such side effects are serious enough to lead to intensive care with mechanical ventilation or significant vasopressor support. The exact cause or causes of cytokine release syndrome and severe neurotoxicity in connection with treatment of CAR T cell products is not fully understood at this time. In addition, patients third-party payors and othershave experienced other adverse events in these studies, such as a reduction in the number of blood cells (in the form of neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia or other cytopenias), febrile neutropenia, chemical laboratory abnormalities (including elevated liver enzymes), and renal failure.
Undesirable side effects caused by ide-cel or the bb21217 product candidate, other CAR T product candidates targeting BCMA, or our other T cell-based immunotherapy product candidates, could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical studies and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of marketing approval by the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities. In some cases, side effects such as neurotoxicity or cytokine release syndrome have resulted in clinical holds of ongoing clinical trials and/or discontinuation of the development of the product candidate. Results of our studies could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects or unexpected characteristics. Treatment-related side effects could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the studies or result in potential product liability claims. In addition, these side effects may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical community.

Ethical, socialstaff, as toxicities resulting from T cell-based immunotherapies are not normally encountered in the general patient population and legal concerns aboutby medical personnel. Medical personnel may need additional training regarding T cell-based immunotherapy product candidates to understand their side effects. Inadequate training in recognizing or failure to effectively manage the potential side effects of T cell-based immunotherapy product candidates could result in patient deaths. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Negative public opinion and increased regulatory scrutiny of gene therapy and genetic research may damage public perception of our product and any future products or adversely affect our ability to conduct our business or obtain and maintain marketing approvals for our product and product candidates.
Public perception may be influenced by claims that gene therapy, including gene editing technologies, is unsafe or unethical, and research activities and adverse events in the field, even if not ultimately attributable to us or our product or product candidates, could result in additionalincreased governmental regulation, unfavorable public perception, challenges in recruiting patients to participate in our clinical studies, potential regulatory delays in the testing or approval of our potential products, stricter labeling requirements for those product candidates that are approved, and a decrease in demand for any such product. More restrictive government regulations restricting or prohibitingnegative public opinion would have a negative effect on our business or financial condition and may delay or impair the productsdevelopment and processes we may use. Even with the requisite approvals, the commercial successcommercialization of our product candidates or demand for any approved products.
Risks related to our reliance on third parties
50

Table of Contents
We are dependent on BMS for the successful development and commercialization of ide-cel and bb21217. If BMS does not devote sufficient resources to the development of ide-cel and bb21217, is unsuccessful in its efforts, or chooses to terminate its agreements with us, our business will be materially harmed.
We are co-developing and co-promoting ide-cel in the United States with BMS under our amended and restated co-development and co-promotion agreement with BMS, or the Ide-cel CCPS. Under the Ide-cel CCPS, we and BMS share the obligation to develop and commercialize ide-cel in the United States. In addition, we have exclusively licensed to BMS the right to develop and commercialize the bb21217 product candidate, and we retain an option to co-develop and co-promote bb21217 in the United States under our license agreement with BMS. With respect to bb21217, we are responsible for completing the ongoing CRB-402 study, but BMS is responsible for further clinical development and commercialization costs, unless we choose to exercise our option to co-develop and co-promote bb21217 in the United States. If we exercise our option to co-develop and co-promote bb21217 in the United States, we and BMS will share the obligation to develop and commercialize bb21217 in the United States.
In our partnership with BMS, BMS is obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize ide-cel and bb21217. BMS may determine however, that it is commercially reasonable to de-prioritize or discontinue the development of ide-cel and bb21217. These decisions may occur for many reasons, including internal business reasons (including due to the existence of other BMS programs that are potentially competitive with ide-cel and bb21217), results from clinical trials or because of unfavorable regulatory feedback. Further, on review of the safety and efficacy data, the FDA may impose requirements on one or both of the programs that render them commercially nonviable. In addition, under our agreements with BMS, BMS has certain decision-making rights in determining the development and commercialization plans and activities for the programs. We may disagree with BMS about the development strategy it employs, but we will have limited rights to impose our development strategy on BMS. Similarly, BMS may decide to seek marketing approval for, and limit commercialization of, ide-cel or bb21217 to narrower indications than we would pursue. More broadly, if BMS elects to discontinue the development of ide-cel or bb21217, we may be unable to advance the product candidate ourselves.
This partnership may not be scientifically or commercially successful for us due to a number of important factors, including the following:
BMS has wide discretion in determining the efforts and resources that it will apply to its partnership with us. The timing and amount of any development milestones, and downstream commercial profits, milestones and royalties that we may receive under such partnership will depend on, among other things, BMS’s efforts, allocation of resources and successful development and commercialization of ide-cel, bb21217 and other product candidates that are the subject of its collaboration with us.
BMS may develop and commercialize, either alone or with others, products that are similar to or competitive with ide-cel, bb21217 and other product candidates that are the subject of its collaboration with us. For example, BMS is currently commercializing a number of its existing products, including lenalidomide and pomalidomide, for certain patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma and is also developing orvacabtagene autoleucel, another CAR-T product candidate targeting BCMA that it obtained through its acquisition of Juno Therapeutics, Inc. in March 2018.
BMS may terminate its partnership with us without cause and for circumstances outside of our control, which could make it difficult for us to attract new strategic partners or adversely affect how we are perceived in scientific and financial communities.
BMS may develop or commercialize our product candidates in such a way as to elicit litigation that could jeopardize or invalidate our intellectual property rights or expose us to potential liability.
BMS may not comply with all applicable regulatory requirements, or may fail to report safety data in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements.
If BMS were to breach its arrangements with us, we may need to enforce our right to terminate the agreement in legal proceedings, which could be costly and cause delay in our ability to receive rights back to the relevant product candidates. If we were to terminate an agreement with BMS due to BMS's breach or BMS terminated the agreement without cause, the development and commercialization of ide-cel or bb21217 product candidates that are the subject of its collaboration with us could be delayed, curtailed or terminated because we may not have sufficient financial resources or capabilities to continue development and commercialization of these product candidates on our own if we choose not to, or are unable to, enter into a new collaboration for these product candidates.
BMS may enter into one or more transactions with third parties, including a merger, consolidation, reorganization, sale of substantial assets, sale of substantial stock or other change in control, which could divert the attention of its management and adversely affect BMS’s ability to retain and motivate key personnel who are important to the continued development of the programs under the strategic partnership with us. In addition, the third-party to any such transaction could determine to re-
51

Table of Contents
prioritize BMS’s development programs such that BMS ceases to diligently pursue the development of our programs and/or cause the respective collaboration with us to terminate.
We rely on third parties to conduct some or all aspects of our lentiviral vector production, drug product manufacturing, and testing, and these third parties may not perform satisfactorily.
We do not independently conduct all aspects of our lentiviral vector production, drug product manufacturing, and testing. We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties with respect to these items, including manufacturing and testing in the commercial context.
Our reliance on these third parties for manufacturing, testing, research and development activities reduce our control over these activities but will not relieve us of our responsibility to ensure compliance with all required regulations and study protocols. For example, for products that we develop and commercialize on our own, we will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our IND-enabling studies and clinical studies are conducted in accordance with the study plan and protocols, and that our lentiviral vectors and drug products are manufactured in accordance with GMP as applied in the relevant jurisdictions.
If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines, conduct our studies in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated study plans and protocols, or manufacture our lentiviral vectors and drug products in accordance with GMP, whether due to the impacts of COVID-19 or otherwise, we will not be able to complete, or may be delayed in completing, the preclinical and clinical studies and manufacturing process validation activities required to support future IND, MAA and BLA submissions and approval of our product candidates, or to support commercialization of our products, if approved. Many of our agreements with these third parties contain termination provisions that allow these third parties to terminate their relationships with us at any time. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements, our product development and commercialization activities could be delayed.
Reliance on third-party manufacturers entails risks to which we would not be subject if we manufactured the products ourselves, including:
the inability to negotiate manufacturing agreements with third parties under commercially reasonable terms;
reduced control as a result of using third-party manufacturers for all aspects of manufacturing activities;
the risk that these activities are not conducted in accordance with our study plans and protocols;
termination or nonrenewal of manufacturing agreements with third parties in a manner or at a time that is costly or damaging to us; and
disruptions to the operations of our third-party manufacturers or suppliers caused by conditions unrelated to our business or operations, including the bankruptcy of the manufacturer or supplier.
We may be forced to manufacture lentiviral vector and drug product ourselves, for which we may not have the capabilities or resources, or enter into an agreement with a different manufacturer, which we may not be able to do on reasonable terms, if at all. In some cases, the technical skills required to manufacture our lentiviral vector or drug product candidates may be unique or proprietary to the original manufacturer, and we may have difficulty or there may be contractual restrictions prohibiting us from, transferring such skills to a back-up or alternate supplier, or we may be unable to transfer such skills at all. Any of these events could lead to clinical study delays or failure to obtain marketing approval, or impact our ability to successfully commercialize our product or any future products. Some of these events could be the basis for FDA action, including injunction, recall, seizure or total or partial suspension of production.
We and our contract manufacturers are subject to significant regulation with respect to manufacturing our product and product candidates. The manufacturing facilities on which we rely may not continue to meet regulatory requirements and have limited capacity.
All entities involved in the preparation of therapeutics for clinical studies or commercial sale, including our existing contract manufacturers for our product and product candidates, are subject to extensive regulation. Some components of a finished therapeutic product approved for commercial sale or used in late-stage clinical studies must be manufactured in accordance with GMP. 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 adventitious agents or other contaminants, or to inadvertent changes in the properties or stability of our product and 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 BLA or MAA on a timely basis and where required, must adhere to the FDA’s or other regulator’s good laboratory practices, or GLP, and GMP regulations enforced by the FDA or other regulator through facilities inspection programs. Some of our contract
52

Table of Contents
manufacturers have not produced a commercially-approved product and therefore have not obtained the requisite FDA or other marketing approvals to do so. Our facilities and quality systems and the facilities and quality systems of some or all of our third-party contractors must pass a pre-approval inspection for compliance with the applicable regulations as a condition of marketing approval of our product and potential products. In addition, the regulatory authorities may, at any time, audit or inspect a manufacturing facility involved with the preparation of our products or the associated quality systems for compliance with the regulations applicable to the activities being conducted. If these facilities do not pass a pre-approval plant inspection, FDA or other marketing approval of the products will not be granted.
The regulatory authorities also may, at any time following approval of a product for sale, audit the manufacturing facilities of our third-party contractors. If any such inspection or audit identifies a failure to comply with applicable regulations or if a violation of our product specifications or applicable regulations occurs independent of such an inspection or audit, we or the relevant regulatory authority may require remedial measures that may be costly and/or time-consuming for us or a third-party to implement and that may include the temporary or permanent suspension of a clinical study or commercial sales or the temporary or permanent closure of a facility. Any such remedial measures imposed upon us or third parties with whom we contract could materially harm our business.
If we or any of our third-party manufacturers fail to maintain regulatory compliance, the FDA or other regulators can impose regulatory sanctions including, among other things, refusal to approve a pending application for a biologic product, or revocation of a pre-existing approval. As a result, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially harmed.
Additionally, if supply from one approved manufacturer is interrupted, there could be a significant disruption in commercial supply. The number of manufacturers with the necessary manufacturing capabilities is limited. In addition, an alternative manufacturer would need to be qualified through a BLA supplement or similar regulatory submission which could result in further delay. The regulatory agencies may also require additional studies if a new manufacturer is relied upon for commercial production. Switching manufacturers may involve substantial costs and is likely to result in a delay in our desired clinical and commercial timelines.
These factors could cause the delay of clinical studies, regulatory submissions, required approvals or commercialization of our product and any future products, cause us to incur higher costs and prevent us from commercializing our products successfully. Furthermore, if our suppliers fail to meet contractual requirements, and we are unable to secure one or more replacement suppliers capable of production at a substantially equivalent cost, our clinical studies may be delayed or we could lose potential revenues.
We expect to rely on third parties to conduct, supervise and monitor our clinical studies, and if these third parties perform in an unsatisfactory manner, it may harm our business.
We expect to rely on CROs and clinical study sites to ensure our clinical studies are conducted properly and on time. While we will have agreements governing their activities, we will have limited influence over their actual performance. We will control only certain aspects of our CROs’ activities. Nevertheless, we will be responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities.
We and our CROs are required to comply with the FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ GCPs for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical studies to assure that the data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of clinical study participants are protected. If we or our CROs fail to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our future clinical studies may be deemed unreliable and the FDA and other regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical studies before approving any marketing applications.
If our CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations, fail to meet expected deadlines, or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements, or for any other reasons, our clinical studies may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain marketing approval for, or successfully commercialize our product candidates. As a result, our financial results and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase, and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed.
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 manufacture our vectors and our drug products, and because we collaborate with various organizations and academic institutions on the advancement of our gene therapy platform, we must, at times, share trade
53

Table of Contents
secrets with them. We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, collaborative research agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our collaborators, advisors, employees and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, such as trade secrets. Despite the contractual provisions employed when working with third parties, the need to share trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by our competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others, or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how and trade secrets, a competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business.
In addition, these agreements typically restrict the ability of our collaborators, advisors, employees and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our trade secrets. Our academic collaborators typically have rights to publish data, provided that we are notified in advance and may delay publication for a specified time in order to secure our intellectual property rights arising from the collaboration. In other cases, publication rights are controlled exclusively by us, although in some cases we may share these rights with other parties. We also conduct joint research and development programs that may require us to share trade secrets under the terms of our research and development partnerships or similar agreements. Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, our competitors may discover our trade secrets, either through breach of these agreements, independent development or publication of information including our trade secrets in cases where we do not have proprietary or otherwise protected rights at the time of publication. A competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets would impair our competitive position and have an adverse impact on our business.
Risks related to our financial condition and capital requirements
We have incurred significant losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future.
We have incurred net losses in each year since our inception in 1992, including net losses of $618.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2020. As of December 31, 2020, we had an accumulated deficit of $2.90 billion. The amount of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the medical community,rate of our future expenditures and our ability to generate revenues. We have devoted significant financial resources to research and development, including our clinical and preclinical development activities, which we expect to continue for the foreseeable future. To date, we have financed our operations primarily through the sale of equity securities and, to a lesser extent, through collaboration agreements and grants from governmental agencies and charitable foundations. We do not expect to generate any product revenues until we recognize revenue from the sale of ZYNTEGLO in the European Union for the treatment of adult and adolescent patients with TDT who do not have a β00 genotype, and we do not expect to generate meaningful product revenues until our conditional marketing approval for ZYNTEGLO is renewed. Following marketing approval, our future revenues will depend upon the size of any markets in which our product and any future products have received approval, and our ability to achieve sufficient market acceptance, reimbursement from third-party or governmental payors accepting gene therapypayers and adequate market share for our product and any future products in general,those markets.
We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for the foreseeable future. We anticipate that our product candidates in particular,expenses will increase substantially if and as medically useful, cost-effective,we:
continue our research and safe. Any product that we bring to the market may not gain market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payorspreclinical and others in the medical community. If these products do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant product revenue and may not become profitable. The degree of market acceptanceclinical development of our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend onincluding ide-cel, which we are co-developing with BMS;
establish capabilities to support our commercialization efforts, including establishing a number of factors, including:

the potential efficacy and potential advantages over alternative treatments;

the prevalence and severity of any side effects, including any limitations or warnings contained in a product’s approved labeling;

the prevalence and severity of any side effects resulting from the chemotherapy and myeloablative treatments associated with the procedure by which our product candidates are administered;

relative convenience and ease of administration;


the willingness of the target patient population to try new therapies and of physicians to prescribe these therapies;

the strength ofsales, marketing and distribution supportinfrastructure in the United States and timingEurope, and to commercialize ZYNTEGLO and any other products for which we may obtain marketing approval;

obtain, build and expand manufacturing capacity, including capacity at third-party manufacturers and our own manufacturing facility;
initiate additional research, preclinical, clinical or other programs as we seek to identify and validate additional product candidates;
acquire or in-license other product candidates and technologies;
maintain, protect and expand our intellectual property portfolio;
attract and retain skilled personnel; and
experience any delays or encounter issues with any of market introductionthe above.
54

the pricingThe net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year, such that a period-to-period comparison of our products;

publicity concerning our products or competing products and treatments; and

sufficient third-party insurance coverage or reimbursement.

Even if a potential product displays a favorable efficacy and safety profile in preclinical and clinical studies, market acceptanceresults of the product willoperations may not be known until after it is launched. Our effortsa good indication of our future performance. In any particular quarter or quarters, our operating results could be below the expectations of securities analysts or investors, which could cause our stock price to educate the medical community and third-party payors on the benefits of thedecline.

We have never generated any revenue from product candidates may require significant resourcessales and may never be successful. For instance, UniQure encountered challenges inprofitable.
Our ability to generate revenues and achieve profitability depends on our ability, alone or with strategic collaboration partners, to successfully complete the development of, and obtain the regulatory, pricing and reimbursement approvals necessary to commercialize our product and any future products. Our ability to generate revenues from product sales depends heavily on our success in:
completing research and preclinical and clinical development of our product candidates;
seeking and obtaining regulatory and marketing approvals for product candidates for which we complete clinical studies;
developing a sustainable, commercial-scale, reproducible, and transferable manufacturing process for our vectors and drug products;
establishing and maintaining supply and manufacturing relationships with third parties that can provide adequate (in amount and quality) products and services to support clinical development for our product candidates and commercial demand for any approved product;
launching and commercializing Glybera, the firstany approved product, either by collaborating with a partner or, if launched independently, by establishing a field-based team, marketing and distribution infrastructure;
obtaining sufficient pricing and reimbursement for any approved product from private and governmental payers;
obtaining market acceptance and adoption of any approved product and gene therapy as a viable treatment option;
addressing any competing technological and market developments;
negotiating favorable terms in Europe,any collaboration, licensing or other arrangements into which we may enter; and announced
maintaining, protecting and expanding our portfolio of intellectual property rights, including patents, trade secrets and know-how.
We expect to continue to incur significant expenditures for the foreseeable future, and we expect these expenditures to increase as we commercialize ZYNTEGLO in 2017 that it will not seek renewal of Glybera’s marketing authorization in Europe when it expired in October 2017, due to limited use since it was approved in 2012, and forecasted patient demand.the European Union, which costs may increase with any increased competition. Our efforts to educate the marketplace may require more resources than expenses could increase beyond expectations if we are required by the conventionalFDA, the EMA, or other regulatory agencies, domestic or foreign, to perform clinical and other studies in addition to those that we currently anticipate. Even if we are able to generate product revenues, we may not become profitable and may need to obtain additional funding to continue operations.
From time to time, we will need to raise additional funding, which may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Failure to obtain this necessary capital when needed may force us to delay, limit or terminate our product development efforts or other operations.
We are currently advancing our programs in β-thalassemia, SCD, CALD, and multiple myeloma through clinical development and other product candidates through preclinical development. Developing and commercializing gene therapy products is expensive, and we expect our research and development expenses and our commercialization expenses to increase substantially in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we advance our product candidates and progress our commercialization efforts.
As of December 31, 2020, our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities were $1.27 billion. In response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and the associated economic conditions, we revised our operating plan to execute on our strategy during this period of uncertainty. Based on our current business plan, we expect our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will be sufficient to fund planned operations for at least the next twelve months from the date of issuance of these financial statements. Our current business plan assumes continued rigorous prioritization and focus on our expenses, real estate optimization, and exploration of additional sources of funding to further strengthen our financial position. However, our operating plan may change further as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the surrounding economic conditions, as well as many other factors currently unknown to us. In addition, we may seek additional funds through public or private equity or debt
55

financings, government or other third-party funding, marketing and distribution arrangements or other collaborations, strategic alliances and licensing arrangements or a combination of these approaches, during this period. In any event, we will require additional capital to obtain marketing approval for, and to commercialize, our product candidates. Even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans, we may seek additional capital if market conditions are favorable or if we have specific strategic objectives.
Any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our approved product and product candidates. In addition, we cannot guarantee thatfinancing will be available in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, if at all. Moreover, the terms of any financing may adversely affect the holdings or the rights of our stockholders and the issuance of additional securities, whether equity or debt, by us, or the possibility of such issuance, may cause the market price of our shares to decline. The sale of additional equity or convertible securities would dilute all of our stockholders. The incurrence of indebtedness would result in increased fixed payment obligations and we may be required to agree to certain restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt, limitations on our ability to acquire, sell or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. We could also be required to seek funds through arrangements with collaborative partners or otherwise at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable and we may be required to relinquish rights to some of our technologies marketedor product candidates or otherwise agree to terms unfavorable to us, any of which may have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and prospects.
If we are unable to obtain funding on a timely basis, or if revenues from collaboration arrangements or product sales are less than we have projected, we may be required to significantly curtail, delay or discontinue one or more of our research or development programs or the commercialization of any product candidates or be unable to expand our operations or otherwise capitalize on our business opportunities, as desired, which could materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
If the estimates we make, or the assumptions on which we rely, in preparing our consolidated financial statements are incorrect, our actual results may vary from those reflected in our projections and accruals.
Our consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, or GAAP. The preparation of these consolidated financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of our assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. We cannot assure you, however, that our estimates, or the assumptions underlying them, will be correct. We may be incorrect in our assumptions regarding the applicability of drug pricing programs and rebates that may be applicable to our product or any future products, which may result in our under- or over-estimating our anticipated product revenues especially as applicable laws and regulations governing pricing evolve over time. In addition, to the extent payment for our product or any future products is subject to outcomes-based arrangements over time, the total payments received from product sales may vary, our cash collection of future payments and revenue assumptions from product sales will be at risk, and the timing of revenue recognition may not correspond to the timing of cash collection.
Further, from time to time we issue financial guidance relating to our expectations for our cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities available for operations, which guidance is based on estimates and the judgment of management. If, for any reason, our expenses differ materially from our guidance or we utilize our cash more quickly than anticipated, we may have to adjust our publicly announced financial guidance. If we fail to meet, or if we are required to change or update any element of, our publicly disclosed financial guidance or other expectations about our business, our stock price could decline.
Our operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes our future operating results difficult to predict and could cause our operating results to fall below expectations or our guidance.
Our operating results are difficult to predict and will likely fluctuate from quarter to quarter and year to year. As we begin to generate product sales of ZYNTEGLO in Europe, we expect that our product sales will be difficult to predict from period to period, given the absence of historical sales data. This uncertainty is heightened by the unpredictable scope of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has adversely affected the operations of third parties upon which we rely in our competitors.

commercialization efforts, patient access to hospitals, physicians’ offices, clinics and other administration sites, and global economic conditions, as well as caused a re-prioritization of healthcare services.

In addition, we have entered into licensing and collaboration agreements with other companies that include research and development funding and milestone payments to us, and we expect that amounts earned from our collaboration agreements will continue to be an important source of our revenues. Accordingly, our revenues will also depend on research and development funding and the achievement of development and clinical milestones under our existing collaboration and license agreements, including, in particular, our collaborations with BMS and Regeneron, as well as entering into potential new collaboration and
56

license agreements. These payments may vary significantly from quarter to quarter and any such variance could cause a significant fluctuation in our operating results from one quarter to the next.
Further, changes in our operations, such as increased development, manufacturing and clinical trial expenses in connection with our expanding pipeline programs, or our undertaking of additional programs, or business activities, or entry into strategic transactions, including potential future acquisitions of products, technologies or businesses may also cause significant fluctuations in our expenses.
The cumulative effects of these factors, further exacerbated by the impacts of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare systems and economic conditions, will likely result in large fluctuations and unpredictability in our quarterly and annual operating results. As a result, comparing our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. Investors should not rely on our past results as an indication of our future performance. This variability and unpredictability could also result in our failing to meet the expectations of industry or financial analysts or investors for any period. If our revenue or operating results fall below the expectations of analysts or investors or below any forecasts we may provide to the market, or if the forecasts we provide to the market are below the expectations of analysts or investors, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Such a stock price decline could occur even when we have met any previously publicly stated revenue or earnings guidance we may provide.
Risks related to our business operations
We intend to market our productsare commercializing ZYNTEGLO outside of the United States, and therefore we will be subject to the risks of doing business outside of the United States.

Because we intend to market our product candidates, if approved,are commercializing ZYNTEGLO outside of the United States, our business is subject to risks associated with doing business outside of the United States. Accordingly, our business and financial results in the future could be adversely affected due to a variety of factors, including:

efforts to develop an international sales, marketingcommercial and distributionsupply chain organization may increase our expenses, divert our management’s attention from the acquisition or development of product candidates or cause us to forgo profitable licensing opportunities in these geographies;

requirements or limitations imposed by a specific country or region on potential qualified treatment centers or other aspects of commercialization applicable to autologous gene therapies such as ours;

changes in a specific country’s or region’s political and cultural climate or economic condition;  

condition, including as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic;

unexpected changes in foreign laws and regulatory requirements;

difficulty of effective enforcement of contractual provisions in local jurisdictions;

inadequate intellectual property protection in foreign countries;

trade-protection measures, import or export licensing requirements such as Export Administration Regulations promulgated by the U.S. Department of Commerce and fines, penalties or suspension or revocation of export privileges;

the effects of applicable foreign tax structures and potentially adverse tax consequences; and

significant adverse changes in foreign currency exchange rates.

rates, including as a result of the United Kingdom's exit from the European Union, or Brexit.

In addition to FDA and related regulatory requirements in the United States and abroad, we are subject to extensive additional federal, state and foreign anti-bribery regulation, which include the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the U.K. Bribery Act, and similar laws in other countries outside of the United States. We have developed and implemented a corporate compliance program based on what we believe are current best practices in the pharmaceutical industry for companies similar to ours, but we cannot guarantee that we, our employees, our consultants or our third-party contractors are or will be in compliance with all federal, state and foreign regulations regarding bribery and corruption. Moreover, our partners and third partythird-party contractors located outside the United States may have inadequate compliance programs or may fail to respect the laws and guidance of the territories in which they operate.Even if we are not determined to have violated these laws, government investigations into these issues typically require the expenditure of significant resources and generate negative publicity, which could also have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations

The insurance coverageoperations.

57

Table of Contents
As we evolve from a U.S.-based company primarily involved in discovery, preclinical research and reimbursement statusclinical development into a company that develops and commercializes multiple drugs with an international presence, we will need to expand our organization and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth, which could disrupt our operations.
We received conditional marketing authorization for our first product in 2019 and have launched ZYNTEGLO in Europe, which we hope will be the first of newly-approveda sequence of marketing approvals and commercial launches for multiple products across multiple geographies. As we advance multiple product candidates through late-stage clinical research and plan submissions for marketing authorizations, we are expanding our operations in the United States and Europe. As of December 31, 2020, we had 1,201 full-time employees. As we pursue our development and commercialization strategy, we expect to expand our full-time employee base and to hire more consultants and contractors in the United States and Europe. This expected growth may place a strain on our administrative and operational infrastructure. As a result, our management may need to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from our day-to-day activities and devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities. Our expected growth could require significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the development of additional product candidates. If our management is uncertain. Failureunable to obtain or maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for new or current products could limiteffectively manage our ability to market those products and decreasegrowth, our expenses may increase more than expected, our ability to generate revenue.

The availabilityand/or grow revenues could be reduced, and extent of reimbursement by governmental and private payors is essential for most patients to be able to afford expensive treatments, such as stem cell transplants or gene therapy. In addition, because our CAR and TCR T cell product candidates represent new approaches to the treatment of cancer, we cannot accurately estimate the potential revenue. Sales of our product candidates will depend substantially, both domestically and abroad, on the extent to which the costs of our product candidates will be paid by health maintenance, managed care, pharmacy benefit and similar healthcare management organizations, or reimbursed by


government health administration authorities, private health coverage insurers and other third-party payors. If reimbursement is not available, or is available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercializeimplement our product candidates. Even if coveragebusiness strategy. Recruiting and retaining qualified employees, consultants and advisors for our business, including scientific and technical personnel, will be critical to our success. Competition for skilled personnel is provided,intense and the approved reimbursement amountturnover rate can be high. We may not be high enoughable to attract and retain personnel on acceptable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for individuals with similar skill sets. We may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations, which may result in weaknesses in our infrastructure, operational mistakes, loss of business opportunities, loss of employees and reduced productivity among remaining employees.

Even if we receive marketing approval for a product candidate, any approved product will remain subject to regulatory scrutiny.
Even if we obtain marketing approval in a jurisdiction, regulatory authorities may still impose significant restrictions on the indicated uses or marketing of any approved products such as ZYNTEGLO, or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies, post-market surveillance or patient or drug restrictions. For example, the FDA typically advises that patients treated with gene therapy undergo follow-up observations for potential adverse events for a 15-year period. In February 2021, we temporarily suspended marketing of ZYNTEGLO and the EMA has paused the renewal procedure for ZYNTEGLO's conditional marketing authorization while the EMA's pharmacovigilance risk assessment committee reviews the risk-benefit assessment for ZYNTEGLO and determines whether any additional pharmacovigilance measures are necessary. Additionally, the holder of an approved BLA is obligated to monitor and report adverse events and any failure of a product to meet the specifications in the BLA. The holder of an approved BLA must also submit new or supplemental applications and obtain FDA approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling or manufacturing process. Advertising and promotional materials must comply with FDA rules and are subject to FDA review, in addition to other potentially applicable federal and state laws.
In addition, product manufacturers and their facilities are subject to payment of user fees and continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with good manufacturing practices, or GMP, and adherence to commitments made in the BLA. If we or a regulatory agency 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 agency may impose restrictions relative to that product or the manufacturing facility, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing.
If we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements following marketing approval for a product, a regulatory agency may:
issue a warning letter asserting that we are in violation of the law;
seek an injunction or impose civil or criminal penalties or monetary fines;
suspend or withdraw marketing approval;
suspend any ongoing clinical studies;
refuse to approve a pending marketing application, such as a BLA or supplements to a BLA submitted by us;
seize product; or
refuse to allow us to establishenter into supply contracts, including government contracts.
58

Table of Contents
Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. The occurrence of any event or maintain pricing sufficientpenalty described above may inhibit our ability to realize a sufficient return on our investment.

There is significant uncertainty relatedcommercialize any approved product and generate revenues.

We are subject, directly or indirectly, to the insurance coveragefederal and reimbursement of newly approved products, including gene therapies. state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws and health information privacy and security laws. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face substantial penalties, reputational harm, and diminished profits and future earnings.
In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement for new medicinesresearch, manufacturing, distribution, sale, and promotion of drugs and biologic products are typically madesubject to regulation by various federal, state, and local authorities in addition to FDA, including CMS, other divisions of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, an agency withinHHS, (e.g., the U.S.Office of Inspector General), the United States Department of HealthJustice offices of the United States Attorney, the Federal Trade Commission and Human Services,state and local governments. Our operations are directly, or indirectly through our prescribers, customers and purchasers, subject to various federal and state fraud and abuse laws and regulations described in more detail under "Item 1. Business--Government regulation" in our Annual Report. These include the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, federal civil and criminal false claims laws and civil monetary penalty laws (including False Claims Laws), HIPAA, transparency requirements created under the Affordable Care Act, as CMS decides whetherwell as analogous state and foreign laws.
These laws apply to, what extent a new medicine willamong other things, our sales, marketing and educational programs. State and federal regulatory and enforcement agencies continue actively to investigate violations of health care laws and regulations, and the United States Congress continues to strengthen the arsenal of enforcement tools. Most recently, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 increased the criminal and civil penalties that can be coveredimposed for violating certain federal health care laws, including the Anti-Kickback Statute. Enforcement agencies also continue to pursue novel theories of liability under these laws. In particular, government agencies have recently increased regulatory scrutiny and reimbursed under Medicare. Private payors tend to follow CMS to a substantial degree. It is difficult to predict what CMS will decideenforcement activity with respect to programs supported or sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, including reimbursement and co-pay support, funding of independent charitable foundations and other programs that offer benefits for fundamentally novel productspatients. Several investigations into these programs have resulted in significant civil and criminal settlements.
Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other government regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from participation in government health care programs, such as ours,Medicare and Medicaid, imprisonment and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations. Even if we are not determined to have violated these laws, government investigations into these issues typically require the expenditure of significant resources and generate negative publicity, which could harm our financial condition and divert the attention of our management from operating our business.
In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy laws by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. For example, HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, or HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, imposes requirements on certain covered healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses as well as their respective business associates that perform services for them that involve the use, or disclosure of, individually identifiable health information, relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. HITECH also created new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions In addition to HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, California recently enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act, or CCPA, which creates new individual privacy rights for California consumers (as defined in the law) and places increased privacy and security obligations on entities handling personal data of consumers or households. The CCPA will require covered companies to provide certain disclosures to consumers about its data collection, use and sharing practices, and to provide affected California residents with ways to opt-out of certain sales or transfers of personal information. The CCPA went into effect on January 1, 2020, and the California Attorney General will commence enforcement actions against violators beginning July 1, 2020. While there is no bodycurrently an exception for protected health information that is subject to HIPAA, as currently written, the CCPA may impact our business activities. The California Attorney General has proposed draft regulations, which have not been finalized to date, that may further impact our business activities if they are adopted. The uncertainty surrounding the implementation of established practicesCCPA exemplifies the vulnerability of our business to the evolving regulatory environment related to personal data and precedentsprotected health information.
In the European Union, interactions between pharmaceutical companies, healthcare professionals, and patients are also governed by strict laws, regulations, industry self-regulation codes of conduct and physicians’ codes of professional conduct in the individual EU member states. The provision of benefits or advantages to healthcare professionals to induce or encourage the
59

Table of Contents
prescription, recommendation, endorsement, purchase, supply, order or use of medicinal products is prohibited in the European Union. Also, direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription-only medicinal products is prohibited at the European Union level and in the individual member states. In addition, the UK Bribery Act applies to any company incorporated in or “carrying on business” in the UK, irrespective of where in the world the alleged bribery activity occurs, which could have implications for our interactions with physicians both in and outside of the UK. Infringement of these new products. Reimbursement agencieslaws could result in Europesubstantial fines and imprisonment.
Payments made to physicians in certain European Union member states must be publicly disclosed. Moreover, agreements with physicians often must be the subject of prior notification and approval by the physician’s employer, his or her competent professional organization and/or the regulatory authorities of the individual European Union member states. These requirements are provided in the national laws, industry codes or professional codes of conduct, applicable in the European Union member states. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in reputational risk, public reprimands, administrative penalties, fines or imprisonment.
EU member states, Switzerland and other countries have also adopted data protection laws and regulations, which impose significant compliance obligations. In the European Union, the collection and use of personal health data is currently governed by the provisions of the General Data Protection Regulation, or the GDPR. The GDPR, together with the national legislation of the individual EU member states governing the processing of personal data, impose strict obligations and restrictions on the ability to collect, analyze and transfer personal data, including health data from clinical trials and adverse event reporting. In particular, these obligations and restrictions concern the consent of the individuals to whom the personal data relates, the information provided to the individuals for the consent to be considered valid, the transfer of personal data out of the European Economic Area, security breach notifications, the use of third-party processors in connection with the processing of the personal data, confidentiality of the personal data, as well as substantial potential fines for breaches of the data protection obligations. Data protection authorities from the different EU member states may be more conservative than CMS. For example, a numberinterpret the GDPR and national laws differently and impose additional requirements, which add to the complexity of cancer drugs have been approved for reimbursementprocessing personal data in the European Union. The GDPR also imposes strict rules on the transfer of personal data to countries outside the European Union, including the United States, and have not been approvedpermits data protection authorities to impose large penalties for reimbursement in certain European countries. In addition, costsviolations of the GDPR, including potential fines of up to €20 million or difficulties associated4% of annual global revenues, whichever is greater. The GDPR also confers a private right of action on data subjects and consumer associations to lodge complaints with supervisory authorities, seek judicial remedies, and obtain compensation for damages resulting from violations of the GDPR. Compliance with the reimbursementGDPR is a rigorous and time-intensive process that may increase our cost of Glybera could create an adverse environment for reimbursementdoing business or require us to change our business practices, and despite those efforts, there is a risk that we may be subject to fines and penalties, litigation, and reputational harm in connection with any activities falling within the scope of other gene therapies.

Outsidethe GDPR. Further, Brexit has created uncertainty with regard to data protection regulation in the United States, certain countries, including a number of member states of the European Union, set pricesKingdom. In particular, it is unclear how data transfers to and reimbursement for pharmaceutical products, or medicinal products, as they are commonly referred to in the European Union, with limited participation from the marketing authorization holders. We cannot be sure that such prices and reimbursementUnited Kingdom will be acceptable toregulated.

We face potential product liability, and, if successful claims are brought against us, or our collaborators.we may incur substantial liability and costs. If the regulatory authorities in these foreign jurisdictions set prices or reimbursement levels that are not commercially attractive for us or our collaborators, our revenues from sales by us or our collaborators, and the potential profitabilityuse of our drug products, in those countries would be negatively affected. An increasing number of countries are taking initiatives to attempt to reduce large budget deficits by focusing cost-cutting efforts on pharmaceuticals for their state-run health care systems. These international price control efforts have impacted all regions of the world, but have been most drastic in the European Union. Additionally, some countries require approval of the sale price of aapproved product before it can be marketed.  In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or product licensing approvalcandidates harms patients, or is granted.  As a result,perceived to harm patients even when such harm is unrelated to our approved product or product candidates, our marketing approvals could be revoked or otherwise negatively impacted and we might obtain marketing approval for acould be subject to costly and damaging product in a particular country, but then may experience delays in the reimbursement approvalliability claims.
The use of our product or be subject to price regulations that would delay our commercial launch of the product, possibly for lengthy time periods, which could negatively impact the revenues we are able to generate from the sale of the productcandidates in that particular country.

Moreover, increasing efforts by governmentalclinical studies and third-party payors, in the United States and abroad, to cap or reduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and level of reimbursement for new products approved and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our product candidates. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of any products for which we obtain marketing approval exposes us to the risk of product liability claims. Product liability claims might be brought against us by patients participating in clinical trials, consumers, healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies or others selling or otherwise coming into contact with our product or product candidates. There is a risk that our product or product candidates may induce adverse events. If we cannot successfully defend against product liability claims, we could incur substantial liability and costs. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

impairment of our business reputation;
withdrawal of clinical study participants;
costs due to related litigation;
distraction of management’s attention from our primary business;
substantial monetary awards to patients or other claimants;
the inability to develop our product candidates or commercialize any approved product; and
decreased demand for any approved product.
60

Table of Contents
We carry product liability insurance and we believe our product liability insurance coverage is sufficient in light of our current clinical programs and approved product; however, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at commercially reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. On occasion, large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs or medical treatments that had unanticipated adverse effects. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our stock price to decline and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could adversely affect our results of operations and business.
Patients with the trend toward managed healthcare,diseases targeted by our approved product and product candidates are often already in severe and advanced stages of disease and have both known and unknown significant pre-existing and potentially life-threatening health risks. During the increasing influencecourse of health maintenance organizationstreatment, patients may suffer adverse events, including death, for reasons that may be related to our approved product or product candidates. Such events could subject us to costly litigation, require us to pay substantial amounts of money to injured patients, delay, negatively impact or end our opportunity to receive or maintain marketing approval for any approved product, or require us to suspend or abandon our commercialization efforts. Even in a circumstance in which we do not believe that an adverse event is related to our products the investigation into the circumstance may be time-consuming or inconclusive. These investigations may interrupt our sales efforts, delay our marketing approval process in other countries, or impact and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become very intense.limit the type of marketing approval our product candidates may receive or any approved product maintains. As a result increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products.

these factors, a product liability claim, even if successfully defended, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Healthcare legislative reform measures may have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

The United States and many foreign jurisdictions have enacted or proposed legislative and regulatory changes affecting the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates or any future product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to profitably sell any product for which we obtain marketing approval. Changes in regulations, statutes or the interpretation of existing regulations could impact our business in the future by requiring, for example: (i) changes to our manufacturing arrangements; (ii) additions or modifications to product labeling; (iii) the recall or discontinuation of our products; or (iv) additional record-keeping requirements. If any such changes were to be imposed, they could adversely affect the operation of our business.
In the United States, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or the Affordable Care Act, was passed, which substantially changeschanged the way health care is financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly impacts the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. The Affordable Care Act, among other things, addressed a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected, increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and extended the rebate program to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations, established annual fees and taxes on manufacturers of certain branded prescription drugs, expanded the types of entities eligible for the 340B drug discount program, and promoted a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program.

program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 70% (increased pursuant to the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, effective as of 2019) 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.

Since its enactment, there have been numerous judicial, administrative, executive, and legislative challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act, and we expect there will be additional challenges and amendments to the Affordable Care Act in the future. Various portions of the Affordable Care Act are currently undergoing legal and constitutional challenges in the Fifth Circuit Court and the United States Supreme Court. It is unclear whether the Affordable Care Act will be overturned, repealed, replaced, or further amended. We cannot predict what effect further changes to the Affordable Care Act would have on our business.
In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. OnIn August 2, 2011, President Obama signed into law the Budget Control Act of 2011, which, among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress. Athe Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction tasked with recommendingto recommend to Congress proposals in spending reductions. The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction did not achieve a targeted deficit reduction, of at least $1.2 trillion for the years 2013 through 2021, was unable to reach required goals, thereby triggeringwhich triggered the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This includes aggregate reductions ofto Medicare payments to providers up toof, on average, 2% per fiscal year. Onyear through 2025 unless Congress takes additional action. These reductions were extended through 2029 through subsequent legislative amendments. In January 2, 2013, then President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, delayedfurther reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for another two monthsthe government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years.
There has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed federal and state legislation
61

Table of Contents
designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. At the federal level, the Trump administration’s budget proposal for fiscal years 2019 and 2020 contain further drug price control measures that could be enacted during the budget cuts mandated by these sequestration provisionsprocess or in other future legislation, including, for example, measures to permit Medicare Part D plans to negotiate the price of certain drugs under Medicare Part B, to allow some states to negotiate drug prices under Medicaid, and to eliminate cost sharing for generic drugs for low-income patients. At the Budget Control Act of 2011. On March 1, 2013, the President signed an executive order implementing sequestration,state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on April 1, 2013, the 2% Medicare payment reductions went into effect. certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.
We expect that additional state and federalthe healthcare reform measures willthat have been adopted and may be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which couldmay result in reduced demandmore rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product and could seriously harm our product candidates or additional pricing pressures. For each state that does not choose to expand its Medicaid program, there may be fewer insured patients overall, which could impact the sales, business and financial condition of


manufacturers of branded prescription drugsfuture revenues. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other therapies. Where patients receive insurance coverage under any of the new options made available through the Affordable Care Act, the possibility exists that manufacturersgovernment programs may be required to pay Medicaid rebates on that resulting drug utilization,result in a decision that could impact manufacturer revenues. Some of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act have yet to be fully implemented, while certain provisions have been subject to judicial and Congressional challenges. In January 2017, Congress voted to adopt a budget resolution for fiscal year 2017, that while not a law, is widely viewed as the first step toward the passage of legislation that would repeal certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. Further, on January 20, 2017, President Trump signed an Executive Order directing federal agencies with authorities and responsibilities under the Affordable Care Act to waive, defer, grant exemptionssimilar reduction in payments from or delay the implementation of any provision of the Affordable Care Act that would impose a fiscal burden on states or a cost, fee, tax, penalty or regulatory burden on individuals, healthcare providers, health insurers, or manufacturers of pharmaceuticals or medical devices. Congress also could consider subsequent legislation to replace elements of the Affordable Care Act that are repealed. With the new Administration and Congress, there will likely be additional administrative or legislative changes, including modification, repeal, or replacement of all, or certain provisions of, the Affordable Care Act.   However, it remains to be seen whether new legislation modifying the Affordable Care Act is enacted and, if so, precisely what the new legislation will provide, when it will be enacted and what impact it will have on the availability of healthcare and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare.The implications of a potential repeal and/or replacement of the Affordable Care Act, for our and our partners’ business and financial condition, if any, are not yet clear.

private third-party payers.

The delivery of healthcare in the European Union, including the establishment and operation of health services and the pricing and reimbursement of medicines, is almost exclusively a matter for national, rather than EU, law and policy. National governments and health service providers have different priorities and approaches to the delivery of health care and the pricing and reimbursement of products in that context. In general, however, the healthcare budgetary constraints in most EU member states have resulted in restrictions on the pricing and reimbursement of medicines by relevant health service providers. Coupled with ever-increasing EU and national regulatory burdens on those wishing to develop and market products, this could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to commercialize ZYNTEGLO and any other products for which we obtain marketing approval.

We cannot predict what healthcare reform initiatives may

There have been, and likely will continue to be, adopted in the future. Further federal, state and foreign legislative and regulatory developments are likely,proposals at the foreign, federal and we expect ongoing initiativesstate levels directed at broadening the availability of healthcare and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to increase pressure on drug pricing.generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize our product. Such reforms could have an adverse effect on anticipated revenuesrevenue from product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatorymarketing approval and may affect our overall financial condition and ability to develop product candidates.

Due to the novel nature

Our computer systems, or those of our third-party collaborators, service providers, contractors or consultants, may fail or suffer security breaches, which could result in a material disruption of our product candidates’ development programs and have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, financial condition or results of operations.
Our computer systems and those of our current or future third-party collaborators, service providers, contractors and consultants may fail and are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. The size and complexity of our information technology systems, and those of our collaborators, service providers, contractors and consultants, and the potentiallarge amounts of information stored on those systems make those systems vulnerable to service interruptions, security breaches, or other failures, resulting from inadvertent or intentional actions by our employees or those of third-party business partners, or from cyber-attacks by malicious third parties. Attacks on information technology systems are increasing in their frequency, levels of persistence, sophistication and intensity, and they are being conducted by increasingly sophisticated and organized groups and individuals with a wide range of motives and expertise. In addition to extracting sensitive information, such attacks could include the deployment of harmful malware, ransomware, denial-of-service attacks, social engineering and other means to affect service reliability and threaten the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information. The prevalent use of mobile devices also increases the risk of data security incidents. If we experience a material system failure, accident or security breach that causes interruptions in our operations or the operations of third-party collaborators, service providers, contractors and consultants, it could result in significant reputational, financial, legal, regulatory, business or operational harm. For example, 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 offer therapeutic benefitrecover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any disruption or security breach results in a single administration,loss of or damage to our data or applications or other data or applications relating to our technology or product candidates, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we face uncertainty related to pricingcould incur liabilities and reimbursement for these product candidates.

Our target patient populations are relatively small, as a result, the pricing and reimbursementfurther development of our product candidates if approved, mustcould be adequatedelayed. In addition, we rely on third-party service providers for management of the manufacture and delivery of drug product to supportpatients in the commercial infrastructure. If we are unablecontext, including for chain of identity and chain of custody. We also rely on third-party service providers for aspects of our internal control over financial reporting and such service providers may experience a material system failure or fail to obtain adequate levels of reimbursement,carry out their obligations in other respects, which may impact our ability to successfully marketproduce accurate and selltimely financial statements, thus harming our product candidates will be adversely affected. The manner and level at which reimbursement is provided for services related to our product candidates (e.g., for administration of our product to patients) is also important. Inadequate reimbursement for such services may lead to physician resistance and adversely affectoperating results, our ability to market or selloperate our products.

If the market opportunities for our product candidates are smaller than we believe they are, our revenues may be adversely affectedbusiness, and our business may suffer. Because the target patient populationsinvestors’ view of us. In addition, our product candidates are small, we must be able to successfully identify patients and achieve a significant market share to maintain profitability and growth.

We focus our research and product development on treatments for severe genetic and rare diseases. Our projections of both the number of people who have these diseases, as well as the subset of people with these diseases who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates, are based on estimates. These estimates may prove to be incorrect and new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The number of patients in the United States, Europe and elsewhere may turn out to be lower than expected,liability insurance may not be otherwise amenablesufficient in type or amount to treatmentcover us against claims related to material failures, security breaches, cyberattacks and other related breaches.

62

Table of Contents
Any failure or perceived failure by us or any third-party collaborators, service providers, contractors or consultants to comply with our products, or new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, all of which would adversely affect our results of operations and our business.

The market opportunities for our T cell-based immunotherapy product candidates may be limited to those patients who are ineligible for or have failed prior treatments and may be small.

The FDA often approves new therapies initially only for use in patients with relapsed or refractory advanced disease. We expect to initially seek approval of our T cell-based product candidates in cancer in this context. Subsequently, for those products that prove to be sufficiently beneficial, if any, we would expect to seek approval in earlier lines of treatment and potentially as a first line therapy,


but there is no guarantee that our product candidates, even if approved, would be approved for earlier lines of therapy, and, prior to any such approvals, we may have to conduct additional clinical trials.

Our projections of both the number of people who have the cancers we may be targeting, as well as the subset of people with these cancers in a position to receive second or third line therapy, and who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates, are based on our beliefs and estimates. These estimates have been derived from a variety of sources, including scientific literature, surveys of clinics, patient foundations, or market research, and may prove to be incorrect. Further, new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these cancers. The number of patients may turn out to be lower than expected. Additionally, the potentially addressable patient population for our product candidates may be limited or may not be amenable to treatment with our product candidates. Even if we obtain significant market share for our product candidates, because the potential target populations are small, we may never achieve profitability without obtaining regulatory approval for additional indications.

Risks related to our business operations

If we undertake business combinations, collaborationsprivacy, confidentiality, data security or similar strategic transactions, they may disrupt our business, divert management’s attention, dilute stockholder value or be difficultobligations to integrate.

On a regular basis, we consider various business combination transactions, collaborations, license agreements and strategic transactions with third parties, or any data security incidents or other security breaches that result in the unauthorized access, release or transfer of sensitive information, including transactions whichpersonally identifiable information, may result in us acquiring,governmental investigations, enforcement actions, regulatory fines, litigation or being acquired by, a third party. The consummation or performance of any future business combination, collaboration or strategic transaction may involve risks, such as:

diversion of managerial resources from day-to-day operations;

challenges associated with integrating acquired technologies and operations of acquired companies;

exposure to unforeseen liabilities;

difficulties in the assimilation of different cultures and practices, as well as in the assimilation and retention of broad and geographically dispersed personnel and operations;

misjudgment with respect to value, return on investment or strategic fit;

higher than expected transaction costs; and

additional dilution to our existing stockholders if we issue equity securities as consideration for any acquisitions.

As a result of these risks, we may not be able to achieve the expected benefits of any such transaction. If we are unsuccessful in completing or integrating any acquisition, we may be required to reevaluate that component of our strategy only after we have incurred substantial expenses and devoted significant management time and resources in seeking to complete and integrate the acquisition.

Future business combinations could involve the acquisition of significant intangible assets. We may need to record write-downs from future impairments of identified intangible assets and goodwill.public statements against us. These accounting charges would increase a reported loss or reduce any future reported earnings. In addition, we could use substantial portions of our available cash to pay the purchase price for company or product candidate acquisitions. Subject to the limitations under our existing indebtedness, it is possible that we could incur additional debt or issue additional equity securities as consideration for these acquisitions, whichevents could cause our stockholdersthird parties to suffer significant dilution.

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

Public perception may be influenced by claims that gene therapy is unsafe, and gene therapy may not gain the acceptance of the public or the medical community. In particular, our success will depend upon physicians specializing in the treatment of those diseases that our product candidates target prescribing treatments that involve the use of our product candidates in lieu of, or in addition to, existing treatments they are already familiar with and for which greater clinical data may be available. More restrictive government regulations or negative public opinion would have a negative effect on our business or financial condition and may delay or impair the development and commercialization of our product candidates or demand for any products we may develop. For example, in 2003, 20 subjects treated for X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency in two gene therapy studies using a murine gamma-retroviral vector showed correction of the disease, but the studies were terminated after five subjects developed leukemia (four of whom were subsequently cured). Although none of our current product candidates utilize these gamma-retroviruses, our product candidates use a viral delivery system. Adverse events in our clinical studies, even if not ultimately attributable to our product candidates (such as the


many adverse events that typically arise from the transplant process) and the resulting publicity could result in increased governmental regulation, unfavorable public perception, potential regulatory delays in the testing or approval of our potential product candidates, stricter labeling requirements for those product candidatesclaims by third parties asserting that are approved and a decrease in demand for any such product candidates.

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

We are highly dependent on principal members of our executive team and key employees, the loss of whose services may adversely impact the achievement of our objectives. While we have entered into employment agreements with each ofbreached our executive officers,privacy, confidentiality, data security or similar obligations, any of them could leave our employment at any time, as all of our employees are “at will” employees. Recruiting and retaining other qualified employees, consultants and advisors for our business, including scientific and technical personnel, will also be critical to our success. There is currently a shortage of skilled executives in our industry, which is likely to continue. As a result, competition for skilled personnel is intense and the turnover rate can be high. We may not be able to attract and retain personnel on acceptable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for individuals with similar skill sets. In addition, failure to succeed in preclinical or clinical studies may make it more challenging to recruit and retain qualified personnel. The inability to recruit or loss of the services of any executive, key employee, consultant or advisor may impede the progress of our research, development and commercialization objectives.

We will need to expand our organization and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth, which could disrupt our operations.

As of January 31, 2018, we had 479 full-time employees. As our business activities expand, we expect to expand our full-time employee base and to hire more consultants and contractors. Our management may need to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from our day-to-day activities and devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities. We may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations, which may result in weaknesses in our infrastructure, operational mistakes, loss of business opportunities, loss of employees and reduced productivity among remaining employees. Our expected growth could require significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the development of additional product candidates. If our management is unable to effectively manage our growth, our expenses may increase more than expected, our ability to generate and/or grow revenues could be reduced, and we may not be able to implement our business strategy.

Our employees, principal investigators, consultants and 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, principal investigators, consultants and commercial partners. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional failures to comply with the regulations of the FDA and non-U.S. regulators, provide accurate information to the FDA and non-U.S. regulators, comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations in the United States and abroad, report financial information or data accurately or disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Such misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical studies, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation or could cause regulatory agencies not to approve our product candidates. We have adopted a code of conduct applicable to all of our employees, 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.


We face potential product liability, and, if successful claims are brought against us, we may incur substantial liability and costs. If the use of our product candidates harms patients, or is perceived to harm patients even when such harm is unrelated to our product candidates, our regulatory approvals could be revoked or otherwise negatively impacted and we could be subject to costly and damaging product liability claims.

The use of our product candidates in clinical studies and the sale of any products for which we obtain marketing approval exposes us to the risk of product liability claims. Product liability claims might be brought against us by subjects participating in clinical trials, consumers, healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies or others selling or otherwise coming into contact with our products. There is a risk that our product candidates may induce adverse events. If we cannot successfully defend against product liability claims, we could incur substantial liability and costs. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

impairment of our business reputation;

withdrawal of clinical study participants;

costs due to related litigation;

distraction of management’s attention from our primary business;

substantial monetary awards to patients or other claimants;

the inability to commercialize our product candidates; and

decreased demand for our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale.

We carry product liability insurance and we believe our product liability insurance coverage is sufficient in light of our current clinical programs; however, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. If and when we obtain marketing approval for product candidates, we intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products; however, we may be unable to obtain product liability insurance on commercially reasonable terms or in adequate amounts. On occasion, large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs or medical treatments that had unanticipated adverse effects. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our stock price to decline and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could adversely affect our results of operations and business.

Patients with the diseases targeted by our product candidates are often already in severe and advanced stages of disease and have both known and unknown significant pre-existing and potentially life-threatening health risks. During the course of treatment, patients may suffer adverse events, including death, for reasons that may be related to our product candidates. Such events could subject us to costly litigation, require us to pay substantial amounts of money to injured patients, delay, negatively impact or end our opportunity to receive or maintain regulatory approval to market our products, or require us to suspend or abandon our commercialization efforts. Even in a circumstance in which we do not believe that an adverse event is related to our products, the investigation into the circumstance may be time-consuming or inconclusive. These investigations may interrupt our sales efforts, delay our regulatory approval process in other countries, or impact and limit the type of regulatory approvals our product candidates receive or maintain. As a result of these factors, a product liability claim, even if successfully defended, could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, financial condition or results of operations.

If Moreover, data security incidents and other security breaches can be difficult to detect, and any delay in identifying them may lead to increased harm. While we failhave implemented data security measures intended to comply with environmental, healthprotect our information technology systems and safety laws and regulations, we could becomeinfrastructure, there can be no assurance that such measures will successfully prevent service interruptions or data security incidents.

Risks related to the proposed separation of our business
The proposed separation of our business into two independent, publicly traded companies is subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could have a material adverse effectvarious risks and uncertainties and may not be completed on the successterms or timeline currently contemplated, if at all, and will involve significant time, effort and expense, which could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.
In January 2021, we announced our business.

We areintent to separate our oncology programs from our severe genetic disease programs, resulting in two independent, publicly traded companies, bluebird bio and a new company, or Oncology NewCo. Following the separation, bluebird bio is expected to focus on the development and commercialization of therapies in β-thalassemia, cerebral adrenoleukodystrophy and sickle cell disease in the United States and Europe. Oncology NewCo is expected to focus on the investigational BCMA directed CAR T cell therapy, ide-cel, in multiple myeloma and continued development of investigational bb21217 product candidate, as well as research and development efforts in our oncology pipeline.

The separation is expected to be completed by the end of 2021, subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory proceduresreceipt of a favorable IRS ruling and the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposalsatisfaction of hazardous materials and wastes. Our operations involvecertain conditions. Unexpected developments, including adverse market conditions or tax consequences or delays or difficulties effecting the useproposed separation, could delay, prevent or otherwise adversely impact the anticipated benefits from the proposed separation. Consummation of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological materials. Our operationsthe separation 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. In the event of contamination or injury resultingwill require final approval from our useboard of hazardous materials,directors. We may not complete the separation on the terms or on the timeline that we could be held liableannounced, or may, for any resulting damages,or no reason and at any liability could exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs associated with civiltime until the proposed separation is complete, abandon the separation 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 frommodify or change its terms. Any of the use of hazardous materials or other work-related injuries, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. 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,


development or production efforts. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations alsoforegoing may result in substantial fines, penalties orour not achieving the operational, financial, strategic and other sanctions.

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

The success of our business depends primarily upon our ability to identify, develop and commercialize products based on our gene therapy and gene editing platforms.  Although our LentiGlobin, Lenti-D, bb2121 and bb21217 product candidates are currently in clinical development, our research programs, including our oncology research programs, may fail to identify other potential product candidates for clinical development for a number of reasons. Our research methodology may be unsuccessful in identifying potential product candidates or our potential product candidates may be shown to have harmful side effects or may have other characteristics that may make the products unmarketable or unlikely to receive marketing approval.

If any of these events occur,benefits we may be forced to abandon our development efforts for a program or programs, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and could potentially cause us to cease operations. Research programs to identify new product candidates require substantial technical, financial and human resources. We may focus our efforts and resources on potential programs or product candidates that ultimately prove to be unsuccessful.

We may use our financial and human resources to pursue a particular research program or product candidate and fail to capitalize on programs or product candidates that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

Because we have limited resources, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with certain programs or product candidates or for 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 for product candidates may not yield any commercially viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through strategic 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, or we may allocate internal resources to a product candidate in a therapeutic area in which it would have been more advantageous to enter into a partnering arrangement.

We incur significant costsanticipate realizing as a result of operating as a public company,the separation, and in each case, our management devotes substantial time to new compliance initiatives.

As a public company, we have incurredbusiness, results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.

We will continue to incur significant legal, accountingexpenses in connection with the proposed separation, and such costs and expenses may be greater than we anticipate. In addition, completion of the separation will require a significant amount of management time and effort, which may disrupt our business or otherwise divert management’s attention from other aspects of our business, including strategic initiatives, discovery, development and commercialization efforts and relationships with our partners and other expenses.third parties. Any of the foregoing could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.
We may fail to realize some or all of the anticipated benefits of the proposed separation.
Even if the separation is completed, the anticipated operational, financial, strategic and other benefits of the separation may not be achieved. The combined value of the common stock of the two publicly-traded companies may not be equal to or greater than what the value of our common stock would have been had the separation not occurred. The combined value of the common stock of the two companies could be lower than anticipated for a variety of reasons, including the failure of either company to operate and compete effectively as an independent company. The common stock price of each company may experience periods of extreme volatility. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as rules subsequently implemented bytwo independent companies will be smaller and less diversified, with a narrower business focus, and may be more vulnerable to changing market conditions. The separation also presents a number of significant risks to our internal processes, including the SEC, and The NASDAQ Global Select Market have imposed various requirements on public companies. In July 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or the Dodd-Frank Act, was enacted, resulting in significant corporate governance and executive compensation-related regulations. Stockholder activism, the current politicalfailure to maintain an adequate control environment and the current high level of government intervention and regulatory reform may leaddue to substantial new regulations and disclosure obligations, which may leadchanges to additional compliance costs and impact the manner in which we operate our business in ways we cannot currently anticipate. Our management and other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, these rules and regulations will increase our legalinfrastructure technology systems and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time-consuming and costly. For example, we expect these rules and regulations to make it more difficult and more expensivereporting processes.
If the distribution of shares of the Oncology Newco, together with certain related transactions, does not qualify as a transaction that is generally tax-free for us to obtain director and officer liability insuranceU.S. federal income tax purposes, our stockholders and we could be subject to significant tax liabilities.
In connection with the distribution of shares in of Oncology Newco, we may be requiredseek a private letter ruling from the IRS (the "IRS Ruling") and an opinion from our tax advisor (the "Tax Opinion") to incur substantial costs to maintain our current levelsthe effect that, among other things, the distribution of such coverage.

Comprehensive Tax Reform Legislation Could Adversely Affect Our Business And Financial Condition.              

On December 22, 2017,shares in Oncology Newco, together with certain related transactions, will generally qualify as tax-free for U.S. federal income tax purposes under Sections 368(a)(1)(D) and 355 of the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” (TCJA) was enacted.  The TCJA significantly reforms theU.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). The TCJA, amongIRS Ruling and the Tax Opinion will rely on certain facts, assumptions, representations, and undertakings from us and Oncology Newco, including those regarding the past and future conduct of the companies' respective businesses and other things, includes changesmatters. Notwithstanding the IRS Ruling and the Tax Opinion, the IRS could determine that the distribution or any such related

63

Table of Contents
transaction is taxable if it determines that any of these facts, assumptions, representations or undertakings are not correct or have been violated, or that the distribution should be taxable for other reasons, including if the IRS were to disagree with the conclusions in the Tax Opinion. The Tax Opinion will not be binding on the IRS or the courts. Accordingly, the IRS or the courts may challenge the conclusions stated in the Tax Opinion and such challenge could prevail.
If the distribution were determined to be taxable for U.S. federal income tax rates, imposes significant additional limitationspurposes, our stockholders that receive shares of Oncology Newco in the distribution would be treated as having received a distribution of property in an amount equal to the fair value of such Oncology Newco shares on the deductibilitydistribution date and could incur significant income tax liabilities. Such distribution would be taxable to our stockholders as a dividend to the extent of interestour current and net operating loss carryforwards, allows for the expensingaccumulated earnings and profits. Any amount that exceeded our current and accumulated earnings and profits would be treated first as a non-taxable return of capital expenditures, and puts into effectto the migration from a “worldwide” system of taxation to a territorial system. Our net deferred tax assets and liabilities have been revalued at the newly enacted U.S. corporate tax rate, and the impactextent of the reductionrelevant stockholder’s tax basis in its shares of stock, with any remaining amount being taxed as capital gain. We would recognize a taxable gain in an amount equal to the excess, if any, of the fair market value of the shares of Oncology Newco common stock held by us on the distribution date over our deferred tax assets and associated valuation allowance was recognizedbasis in the current period.  We continue to examine the impact this tax reform legislation may have on our business. The impact of this tax reform is uncertain and could be adverse.

such shares.

Risks related to our intellectual property

If we are unable to obtain or protect intellectual property rights related to our product candidates, we may not be able to compete effectively in our markets.

We rely upon a combination of patents, trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our product candidates. The strength of patents in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical field involves complex legal and scientific questions and can be uncertain. The patent applications that we own or in-license may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover our product candidates in the United States or in other foreign countries. There is no assurance that all of the potentially relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications has been found, which can invalidate a patent or prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application. Even if patents do successfully issue and even if such patents cover our product candidates, third parties may challenge their validity, enforceability or scope, which may result in such patents being narrowed or invalidated. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, our patents and patent applications may not adequately protect our intellectual property, provide exclusivity for our product candidates or prevent others from designing around our claims. Any of these outcomes could impair our ability to prevent competition from third parties, which may have an adverse impact on our business.

If the patent applications we hold or have in-licensed with respect to our programs or product candidates fail to issue, if their breadth or strength of protection is threatened, or if they fail to provide meaningful exclusivity for our product candidates, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to develop product candidates, and threaten our ability to commercialize, future products. Several patent applications covering our product candidates have been filed recently. We cannot offer any assurances about which, if any, patents will issue, the breadth of any such patent or whether any issued patents will be found invalid and unenforceable or will be threatened by third parties. Any successful opposition to these patents or any other patents owned by or licensed to us could deprive us of rights necessary for the successful commercialization of any product candidates that we may develop. Further, if we encounter delays in regulatory approvals, the period of time during which we could market a product candidate under patent protection could be reduced. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing, and some remain so until issued, we cannot be certain that we were the first to file any patent application related to a product candidate. Furthermore, if third parties have filed such patent applications, an interference proceeding in the United States can be initiated by a third partythird-party to determine who was the first to invent any of the subject matter covered by the patent claims of our applications. In addition, patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years after it is filed. Various extensions may be available however the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. 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 generic medications.

In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable or that we elect not to patent, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our product candidate discovery and development processes that involve proprietary know-how, and information or technology that is not covered by patents. However, trade secrets can be difficult to protect. We seek to protect our proprietary technology and processes, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, scientific advisors and contractors. We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data and trade secrets by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. While we have confidence in these individuals, organizations and systems, agreements or security measures may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors.

Although we expect all of our employees and consultants to assign their inventions to us, and all of our employees, consultants, advisors and any third parties who have access to our proprietary know-how, information or technology to enter into confidentiality agreements, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed or that our
64

Table of Contents
trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. Misappropriation or unauthorized disclosure of our trade secrets could impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business. Additionally, if the steps taken to maintain our trade secrets are deemed inadequate, we may have insufficient recourse against third parties for misappropriating the trade secret. In addition, others may independently discover our trade secrets and proprietary information. For example, the FDA, as part of its Transparency Initiative, is currently considering whether to make additional information publicly available on a routine basis, including information that we may consider to be trade secrets or other proprietary information, and it is not clear at the present time how the FDA’s disclosure policies may change in the future, if at all.

Further, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States. As a result, we may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our intellectual property both in the United States and abroad. If we are unable to prevent material disclosure of the non-patented intellectual property related to our technologies to third parties, and there is no guarantee that we will have any such enforceable trade secret protection, we may not be


able to establish or maintain a competitive advantage in our market, which could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Third-party claims of intellectual property infringement may prevent or delay our development and commercialization efforts.

Our commercial success depends in part on our avoiding infringement of the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. There is a substantial amount of litigation, both within and outside the United States, involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, including patent infringement lawsuits, interferences, oppositions, ex parte reexaminations, post-grant review, and inter partes review proceedings before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or U.S. PTO, and corresponding foreign patent offices. Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we are pursuing development candidates. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidates may be subject to claims of infringement of the patent rights of third parties.

Third parties may assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of our product candidates. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications which may later result in issued patents that our product candidates may infringe. In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies infringes upon these patents. If any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover the manufacturing process of any of our product candidates, any molecules formed during the manufacturing process or any final product itself, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize such product candidate unless we obtained a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire. Similarly, if any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover aspects of our formulations, processes for manufacture or methods of use, including combination therapy, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to develop and commercialize the applicable product candidate unless we obtained a license or until such patent expires. In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all.

Parties making claims against us may obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, pay royalties, redesign our infringing products or obtain one or more licenses from third parties, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure.

We may not be successful in obtaining or maintaining necessary rights to gene therapy product components and processes for our development pipeline through acquisitions and in-licenses.

Presently we have rights to the intellectual property, through licenses from third parties and under patents that we own, to develop our gene therapy product candidates.candidates and commercialize our approved product. Because our programs may involve additional product candidates that may require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business will likely depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license or use these proprietary rights. In addition, our product candidates may require specific formulations to work effectively and efficiently and these rights may be held by others. We may be unable to acquire or in-license any compositions, methods of use, processes or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies are also pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights
65

Table of Contents
that we may consider attractive. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, cash resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities.

For example, we sometimes collaborate with U.S. and foreign academic institutions to accelerate our preclinical research or development under written agreements with these institutions. Typically, these institutions provide us with an option to negotiate a license to any of the institution’s rights in technology resulting from the collaboration. Regardless of such right of first negotiation for intellectual property, we may be unable to negotiate a license within the specified time frame or under terms that are acceptable to us. If we are unable to do so, the institution may offer the intellectual property rights to other parties, potentially blocking our ability to pursue our program.

In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights, our business, financial condition and prospects for growth could suffer.


If we fail to comply with our obligations in the agreements under which we license intellectual property rights from third parties or otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our licensors, we could lose license rights that are important to our business.

We are a party to a number of intellectual property license agreements that are important to our business and expect to enter into additional license agreements in the future. Our existing license agreements impose, and we expect that future license agreements will impose, various diligence, milestone payment, royalty and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with our obligations under these agreements, or we are subject to a bankruptcy, the licensor may have the right to terminate the license, in which event we would not be able to market products covered by the license.

We may need to obtain licenses from third parties to advance the development of our researchproduct candidates or allow commercialization of our approved product, candidates, and we have done so from time to time. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license replacement technology. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected product candidates, which could harm our business significantly. We cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents do not exist which might be enforced against our current product candidates, approved product, or future products, resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our sales, or, with respect to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation to third parties.

In many cases, patent prosecution of our licensed technology is controlled solely by the licensor. If our licensors fail to obtain and maintain patent or other protection for the proprietary intellectual property we license from them, we could lose our rights to the intellectual property or our exclusivity with respect to those rights, and our competitors could market competing products using the intellectual property. In certain cases, we control the prosecution of patents resulting from licensed technology. In the event we breach any of our obligations related to such prosecution, we may incur significant liability to our licensing partners. Licensing of intellectual property is of critical importance to our business and involves complex legal, business and scientific issues and is complicated by the rapid pace of scientific discovery in our industry. Disputes may arise regarding intellectual property subject to a licensing agreement, including:

the scope of rights granted under the license agreement and other interpretation-related issues;

the extent to which our technology and processes infringe on intellectual property of the licensor that is not subject to the licensing agreement;

the sublicensing of patent and other rights under our collaborative development relationships;

our diligence obligations under the license agreement and what activities satisfy those diligence obligations;

the ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by our licensors and us and our partners; and

the priority of invention of patented technology.

If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected approved product or product candidates.

66

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

Competitors may infringe our patents or the patents of our licensors. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours or our licensors is not valid, is unenforceable and/or is not infringed, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in question. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could put ourIn patent applications at risk of not issuing.

Interference proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications or those of our licensors. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms. Our defense of litigation or interference proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. We may not be able to prevent, alone or with our licensors, misappropriation of our intellectual property rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the United States.


Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. 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 our common stock.

Patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents.

On September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law, including provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The U.S. PTO is currently developing regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, and in particular, the first to file provisions, were enacted March 16, 2013. However, it is not clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business. 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 and financial condition.

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

We employ individuals who were previously employed at universities or other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants and independent contractors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or our employees, consultants or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any of our employee’s former employer or other third parties. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, which could adversely impact our business. 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.

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

We may also be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an ownership interest in our patents or other intellectual property. We have had in the past, and we may also have to in the future, ownership disputes arising, for example, from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or ownership. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse 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.

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

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other governmental fees on patents and/or applications will be due to be paid to the U.S. PTO and various governmental patent agencies outside of the United States in several stages over the lifetime of the patents and/or applications. We have systems in place to remind us to pay these fees, and we employ an outside firm and rely on our outside counsel to pay these fees due to non-U.S. patent agencies. The U.S. PTO and various non-U.S. governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. We employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply, and in many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. However, there are situations in which non-compliance 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. In such an event, our competitors might be able to enter the market and this circumstance would have a material adverse effect on our business.

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

If we or one of our licensing partners initiated legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering one of our product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our product candidate is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent


litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including patent eligible subject matter, lack of novelty, obviousness or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the U.S. PTO, or made a misleading statement, during prosecution. Third parties may also raise similar claims before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, post grant review, and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in revocation or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our product candidates. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on our approved product and/or product candidates. Such a loss of patent protection would have a material adverse impact on our business.

Interference proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications or those of our licensors. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms. Our defense of litigation or interference proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. We may not be able to prevent, alone or with our licensors, misappropriation of our intellectual property rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the United States.
Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. 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 our common stock.
We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties or that our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of their former employers.
We employ individuals who were previously employed at universities or other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants and independent contractors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or our employees, consultants or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any of our employee’s former employer or other third parties. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, which could adversely impact our business. 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.
We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our patents and other intellectual property.
We may also be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an ownership interest in our patents or other intellectual property. We have had in the past, and we may also have in the future, ownership disputes arising, for example, from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or ownership. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse 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.
67

Table of Contents
Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.
Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other governmental fees on patents and/or applications will be due to be paid to the U.S. PTO and various governmental patent agencies outside of the United States in several stages over the lifetime of the patents and/or applications. We have systems in place to remind us to pay these fees, and we employ an outside firm and rely on our outside counsel to pay these fees due to non-U.S. patent agencies. The U.S. PTO and various non-U.S. governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. We employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply, and in many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. However, there are situations in which non-compliance 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. In such an event, our competitors might be able to enter the market and this circumstance would have a material adverse effect on our business.
Changes in U.S. patent law could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products.

As is the case with other biotechnology companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biotechnology industry involve both technological and legal complexity, and is therefore obtaining and enforcing biotechnology patents is costly, time-consuming and inherently uncertain. In addition, the United States has recently enacted and is currently implementing wide-ranging patent reform legislation. Recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on decisions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the U.S. PTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future.

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

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, 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. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

Risks related to ownership of our common stock

The market price of our common stock may be highly volatile, and you may not be able to resell your shares at or above the price at which you purchase them.

Companies trading in the stock market in general, and The NASDAQ Global Select Market in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of these companies. Broad market and biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry factors may negatively affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance.


68


Table of Contents
The market price of our common stock has been volatile in the past, and may continue to be volatile.volatile for the foreseable future. Our stock price could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to a variety of factors, including the following:

adverse results or delays in preclinical or clinical studies;

reports of adverse events in our product, product candidates or other gene therapy products, or in clinical studies of such products;

inability to obtain additional funding;

any delay in filing an IND, MAA or BLA for any of our product candidates, and any adverse development or perceived adverse development with respect to the FDA’sregulatory authority's review of that IND, MAA or BLA;

failure to develop successfully and commercializemanage the commercial launch of ZYNTEGLO, or our product candidates;

candidates following marketing approval, including failure to manage our supply chain operations in the coordination and delivery of drug product to patients at qualified treatment centers;
failure to obtain sufficient pricing and reimbursement for ZYNTEGLO or our product candidates from private and governmental payers;

failure to obtain market acceptance and adoption of ZYNTEGLO or any other potential product following marketing approval;

developments concerning the proposed separation of our programs into two independent, publicly-traded companies;
failure to maintain our existing strategic collaborations or enter into new collaborations;

failure by us or our licensors and strategic collaboration partners to prosecute, maintain or enforce our intellectual property rights;

changes in laws or regulations applicable to future products;

inability to obtain adequate product supply for ZYNTEGLO or our product candidates or the inability to do so at acceptable prices;

adverse regulatory decisions;

introduction of new products, services or technologies by our competitors;

failure to meet or exceed financial projections we may provide to the public;

failure to meet or exceed the financial projections of the investment community;

the perception of the pharmaceutical industry by the public, legislatures, regulators and the investment community;

announcements of significant acquisitions, strategic partnerships, joint ventures or capital commitments by us, our strategic collaboration partner or our competitors;

disputes or other developments relating to proprietary rights, including patents, litigation matters and our ability to obtain patent protection for our technologies;

additions or departures of key scientific or management personnel;

significant lawsuits, including patent or stockholder litigation;

changes in the market valuations of similar companies;

sales of our common stock by us or our stockholders in the future; and

trading volume of our common stock.

69


Table of Contents
Actual or potential sales of our common stock by our employees, including our executive officers, pursuant to pre-arranged stock trading plans could cause our stock price to fall or prevent it from increasing for numerous reasons, and actual or potential sales by such persons could be viewed negatively by other investors.

In accordance with the guidelines specified under Rule 10b5-1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and our policies regarding stock transactions, a number of our employees, including executive officers and members of our board of directors, have adopted and may continue to adopt stock trading plans pursuant to which they have arranged to sell shares of our common stock from time to time in the future. Generally, sales under such plans by our executive officers and directors require public filings. Actual or potential sales of our common stock by such persons could cause the price of our common stock to fall or prevent it from increasing for numerous reasons.

Future sales and issuances of our common stock or rights to purchase common stock, including pursuant to our equity incentive plans, could result in additional dilution of the percentage ownership of our stockholders and could cause our stock price to fall.

Additional capital will be needed in the future to continue our planned operations. To the extent we raise additional capital by issuing equity securities, our stockholders may experience substantial dilution. We may sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in one or more transactions at prices and in a manner we determine from time to time. If we sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in more than one transaction, investors may be materially diluted by subsequent sales.


These sales may also result in material dilution to our existing stockholders, and new investors could gain rights superior to our existing stockholders.

Pursuant to our 2013 Stock Option and Incentive Plan, or the 2013 Plan, our management is authorized to grant stock options and other equity-based awards to our employees, directors and consultants. The number of shares available for future grant under the 2013 Plan automatically increases each year by up to 4% of all shares of our capital stock outstanding as of December 31 of the prior calendar year, subject to the ability of our board of directors or compensation committee to take action to reduce the size of the increase in any given year. Currently, we plan to register the increased number of shares available for issuance under the 2013 Plan each year. If our board of directors or compensation committee elects to increase the number of shares available for future grant by the maximum amount each year, our stockholders may experience additional dilution, which could cause our stock price to fall. We also have an Employee Stock Purchase Plan and any shares of common stock purchased pursuant to that plan will also cause dilution.

We could beare subject to securities class action litigation.

litigation, which may result in substantial costs and a diversion of management's attention and resources, which could harm our business.

In the past, securities class action litigation has often been brought against a company following a decline in the market price of its securities.securities, and on February 12, 2021, a class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, Leung v. bluebird bio, Inc., et. al., Case No. 1:21-cv-00777, by a purported stockholder against us and certain of our officers, and we may face additional securities class action litigation in the future. This risk is especially relevant for us because biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies have experienced significant stock price volatility in recent years. Ifyears, and we face suchexpect to experience continued stock price volatility. Defending against the current litigation itand any future litigation could result in substantial costs and a diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could harm our business.

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

Under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” generally defined as a greater than 50% change (by value) in its equity ownership over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change net operating loss carryforwards, or NOLs, and other pre-change tax attributes (such as research tax credits) to offset its post-change income may be limited. We have completed several financings since our inception and prior to our initial public offering in 2013, which we believe have resulted in a change in control as defined by IRC Section 382. We completed a study through September 2019 confirming no ownership changes have occurred since our initial public offering in 2013. We may also experience ownership changes in the future as a result of subsequent shifts in our stock ownership. As a result, if we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our pre-change net operating loss carryforwards to offset U.S. federal taxable income may be subject to limitations, which could potentially result in increased future tax liability to us. The TCJA also reduced the corporate income tax rate to 21%, from a prior rate of 35%. This may cause a reduction in the economic benefit of our NOLs and other deferred tax assets available to us. 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.

70

Table of Contents
We do not intend to pay cash dividends on our common stock so any returns will be limited to the value of our stock.

We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our common stock. We currently anticipate that we will retain future earnings for the development, operation and expansion of our business and do not anticipate declaring or paying any cash dividends for the foreseeable future. Any return to stockholders will therefore be limited to the appreciation of their stock.

Provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and by-laws, as well as provisions of Delaware law, could make it more difficult for a third partythird-party to acquire us or increase the cost of acquiring us, even if doing so would benefit our stockholders or remove our current management.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, amended and restated by-laws and Delaware law contain provisions that may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of us or changes in our management. Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and by-laws, include provisions that:

authorize “blank check” preferred stock, which could be issued by our board of directors without stockholder approval and may contain voting, liquidation, dividend and other rights superior to our common stock;

create a classified board of directors whose members serve staggered three-year terms;

specify that special meetings of our stockholders can be called only by our board of directors, the chairperson of our board of directors, our chief executive officer or our president;

prohibit stockholder action by written consent;

establish an advance notice procedure for stockholder approvals to be brought before an annual meeting of our stockholders, including proposed nominations of persons for election to our board of directors;

provide that our directors may be removed only for cause;


provide that vacancies on our board of directors may be filled only by a majority of directors then in office, even though less than a quorum;

provide that vacancies on our board of directors may be filled only by a majority of directors then in office, even though less than a quorum;

specify that no stockholder is permitted to cumulate votes at any election of directors;

expressly authorize our board of directors to modify, alter or repeal our amended and restated by-laws; and

require supermajority votes of the holders of our common stock to amend specified provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated by-laws.

These provisions, alone or together, could delay or prevent hostile takeovers and changes in control or changes in our management.

In addition, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which limits the ability of stockholders owning in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock to merge or combine with us.

Any provision of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or amended and restated by-laws or Delaware law that has the effect of delaying or deterring a change in control could limit the opportunity for our stockholders to receive a premium for their shares of our common stock, and could also affect the price that some investors are willing to pay for our common stock.

Changes in tax law could adversely affect our business and financial condition.
The rules dealing with U.S. federal, state, and local income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Treasury Department. Changes to tax laws (which changes may have retroactive application) could adversely affect us or holders of our common stock. In recent years, many such changes have been made and changes are likely to continue to occur in the future. For example, on March 27, 2020, President Trump signed into law the “Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act” or the CARES Act, which included certain changes in tax law intended to stimulate the U.S. economy in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, including temporary beneficial changes to the treatment of net operating losses, interest deductibility limitations and payroll tax matters. On December 27, 2020, President Trump signed into law the “Consolidated Appropriations Act”, which included additional stimulus relief for the COVID-19 pandemic in the form of modifications to the refundable employee retention credit under the CARES Act and credit extenders, and spending bill for the 2021 fiscal year. Future changes in tax laws could have a material adverse effect on our
71

Table of Contents
business, cash flow, financial condition or results of operations. We urge investors to consult with their legal and tax advisers regarding the implications of potential changes in tax laws on an investment in our common stock.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

Not applicable.

Item 2. Properties

Below is a summary of our material owned and leased properties as of December 31, 2020:
Massachusetts
Our corporate headquarters are located in Cambridge, Massachusetts.  Our current leased facility encompasses approximately 253,108 square feet of office and laboratory space and is located at 60 Binney Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts. The lease commenced on October 1, 2016 and will continue until March 31, 2027. We have the option to extend the 60 Binney Street lease for two successive five-year terms. We also lease
In April 2019, we entered into a sublease agreement for approximately 7,800267,278 square feet of office space located at 50 Binney Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts. The lease will commence when the space is available for use, which is anticipated to be in the first half of 2022, and is expected to terminate on December 31, 2030.
Washington
We lease office and laboratory space in Seattle, Washington, whichtotaling approximately 58,314 square feet. The lease shall expire upon the effectiveness of a new lease agreement for approximately 18,000 square feet of officecommenced on January 1, 2019 and laboratory space in Seattle, Washington that will take effect upon the landlord’s delivery of the leased premises, which is anticipated to occur in the second quarter of 2018. The new lease will continue untilthrough April 2028. We have the end of the 48th full calendar month following the date we occupy the building or other conditions specified inoption to extend the lease occur.  for one five-year term.
North Carolina
In November 2017, we purchased a 125,000 square foot manufacturing facility located in Durham, North Carolina to provide manufacturing capacity for lentiviral vector in support of our current and planned gene and cell therapies.  We also lease
Switzerland
Our European headquarters encompasses 1,136 square meters of office space and is located in Zug, Switzerland, the location ofSwitzerland. The lease for our European headquarters.  headquarters commenced on January 1, 2019 and will continue for 60 months with the option to renew for 2 successive 60 month terms.
We believe that our existing facilities are adequate for our current needs.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

In the ordinary course of business, we are from time to time involved in lawsuits, claims, investigations, proceedings, and threats of litigation relating to intellectual property, commercial arrangements, employment and other matters. While the outcome of these proceedings and claims cannot be predicted with certainty, as of December 31, 2017,2020, we were not party to any legal or arbitration proceedings that may have, or have had in the recent past, significant effects on our financial position or profitability. NoWe believe no governmental proceedings are pending or, to our knowledge, contemplated against us. We are not a party to any material proceedings in which any director, member of senior management or affiliate of ours is either a party adverse to us or our subsidiaries or has a material interest adverse to us or our subsidiaries.

On February 12, 2021, a class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, Leung v. bluebird bio, Inc., et. al., Case No. 1:21-cv-00777, by a purported stockholder against us and certain of our officers. The complaint alleges violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder against all defendants and violations of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act against the officers and seeks unspecified damages. The allegations relate to our disclosure on November 4, 2020 that we were adjusting the expected timing of submission of a BLA to the FDA for LentiGlobin for sickle cell disease to late 2022.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.


72


Table of Contents
PART II

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

Our common stock has been traded on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “BLUE.”  The following table shows the high and low sale prices per share of our common stock as reported on the Nasdaq Global Select Market for the periods indicated:

 

 

High

 

 

Low

 

2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

First Quarter 2016

 

$

65.00

 

 

$

37.40

 

Second Quarter 2016

 

$

53.38

 

 

$

35.37

 

Third Quarter 2016

 

$

74.95

 

 

$

43.10

 

Fourth Quarter 2016

 

$

79.70

 

 

$

37.05

 

2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

First Quarter 2017

 

$

100.40

 

 

$

60.95

 

Second Quarter 2017

 

$

123.75

 

 

$

74.45

 

Third Quarter 2017

 

$

143.50

 

 

$

85.65

 

Fourth Quarter 2017

 

$

222.03

 

 

$

119.90

 

On February 16, 2018,18, 2021, the last reported sale price for our common stock on the Nasdaq Global Select Market was $213.35$26.95 per share.

Stock Performance Graph

The graph set forth below compares the cumulative total stockholder return on our common stock between June 19, 2013 (the date of our initial public offering)December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2017,2020, with the cumulative total return of (a) the Nasdaq Biotechnology Index and (b) the Nasdaq Composite Index, over the same period. This graph assumes the investment of $100 on June 19, 2013 inDecember 31, 2015 of our common stock, the Nasdaq Biotechnology Index and the Nasdaq Composite Index and assumes the reinvestment of dividends, if any. The graph assumes our closing sales price on June 19, 2013 of $26.91 per share as the initial value of our common stock and not the initial offering price to the public of $17.00 per share.


The comparisons shown in the graph below are based upon historical data. We caution that the stock price performance shown in the graph below is not necessarily indicative of, nor is it intended to forecast, the potential future performance of our common stock.

blue-20201231_g1.jpg
Holders

As of February 16, 2018,18, 2021, there were approximately 89 holders of record of our common stock. The actual number of stockholders is greater than this number of record holders, and includes stockholders who are beneficial owners, but whose shares are held in street name by brokers and other nominees. This number of holders of record also does not include stockholders whose shares may be held in trust by other entities.

Dividends

We have not paid any cash dividends on our common stock since inception and do not anticipate paying cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

73

Table of Contents
Securities authorizedAuthorized for issuance under equity compensation plans

Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans

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


Item 6. Selected Financial Data

The following selected consolidated financial data should be read in conjunction with “Management’sReserved


74

Table of Contents
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”, the consolidated financial statements and related notes, and other financial information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

We derived the consolidated financial data for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015 and as of December 31, 2017 and 2016 from our audited consolidated financial statements, which are included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We derived the consolidated financial data for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 and as of December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 from our audited consolidated financial statements that are not included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.  Historical results are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected in future periods.

Operations

 

 

Year Ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

 

2016

 

 

2015

 

 

2014

 

 

2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(1)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in thousands, except per share amounts)

 

Consolidated statements of operations data:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Revenue:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Collaboration revenue

 

$

22,207

 

 

$

6,155

 

 

$

14,079

 

 

$

25,031

 

 

$

19,792

 

License and royalty revenue

 

 

13,220

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

390

 

 

 

389

 

Total revenues

 

 

35,427

 

 

 

6,155

 

 

 

14,079

 

 

 

25,421

 

 

 

20,181

 

Operating expenses:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Research and development

 

 

273,040

 

 

 

204,775

 

 

 

134,038

 

 

 

62,574

 

 

 

31,002

 

General and administrative

 

 

93,550

 

 

 

65,119

 

 

 

46,209

 

 

 

23,227

 

 

 

14,126

 

Cost of license and royalty revenue

 

 

1,527

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

��

 

 

 

 

 

Change in fair value of contingent consideration

 

 

(525

)

 

 

4,091

 

 

 

2,869

 

 

 

246

 

 

 

 

Total operating expenses

 

 

367,592

 

 

 

273,985

 

 

 

183,116

 

 

 

86,047

 

 

 

45,128

 

Loss from operations

 

 

(332,165

)

 

 

(267,830

)

 

 

(169,037

)

 

 

(60,626

)

 

 

(24,947

)

Interest (expense) income, net

 

 

(2,001

)

 

 

3,782

 

 

 

1,591

 

 

 

290

 

 

 

35

 

Other (expense) income, net

 

 

(1,267

)

 

 

(71

)

 

 

723

 

 

 

(170

)

 

 

(409

)

Income tax (expense) benefit

 

 

(210

)

 

 

612

 

 

 

(60

)

 

 

11,797

 

 

 

 

Net loss

 

$

(335,643

)

 

$

(263,507

)

 

$

(166,783

)

 

$

(48,709

)

 

$

(25,321

)

Net loss per share - basic and diluted

 

$

(7.71

)

 

$

(7.07

)

 

$

(4.81

)

 

$

(1.83

)

 

$

(2.02

)

Weighted-average number of common shares used in net loss per share - basic and diluted

 

 

43,535

 

 

 

37,284

 

 

 

34,669

 

 

 

26,546

 

 

 

12,555

 

 

 

As of December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

 

2016

 

 

2015

 

 

2014

 

 

2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(1)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in thousands)

 

Consolidated balance sheet data:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities

 

$

1,614,302

 

 

$

884,830

 

 

$

865,763

 

 

$

492,003

 

 

$

206,279

 

Total assets

 

 

1,900,567

 

 

 

1,118,122

 

 

 

1,002,337

 

 

 

556,739

 

 

 

224,390

 

Total current liabilities

 

 

95,612

 

 

 

74,533

 

 

 

40,368

 

 

 

42,978

 

 

 

34,874

 

Financing lease obligation, net of current portion

 

 

154,749

 

 

 

120,140

 

 

 

61,901

 

 

 

 

 

Other long-term obligations

 

 

26,774

 

 

 

54,009

 

 

 

49,572

 

 

 

22,504

 

 

 

37,849

 

Total stockholders' equity

 

$

1,623,432

 

 

$

869,440

 

 

$

850,496

 

 

$

491,257

 

 

$

151,667

 

(1) Starting in 2014, the selected financial data includes the impact of the June 2014 acquisition of Pregenen.


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

The following information should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

In addition to historical information, this report contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties which may cause our actual results to differ materially from plans and results discussed in forward-looking statements. We encourage you to review the risks and uncertainties discussed in the sections entitled Item 1A. “Risk Factors” and “Forward-Looking Statements” included at the beginning of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The risks and uncertainties can cause actual results to differ significantly from those forecast in forward-looking statements or implied in historical results and trends.

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

Overview

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company committed to researching, developing, and commercializing potentially transformative gene therapies for severe genetic diseases and cancer. With our lentiviral-based gene therapy and gene editing capabilities, weWe have built an integrated product platform with broad therapeutic potential in a variety of indications. We believe thatindications based on our lentiviral gene addition platform, gene editing and cancer immunotherapy capabilities. Our severe genetic disease ("SGD") programs include beti-cel, LentiGlobin for SCD gene therapy, for severe genetic diseases has the potential to change the way these patients are treated by correcting the underlying genetic defect that is the cause of their disease, rather than offering treatments that only address their symptoms. Our clinical programs in severe genetic diseases include our LentiGlobin® product candidate as a treatment for each of transfusion-dependent β-thalassemia, or TDT, and severe sickle cell disease, or severe SCD, and our Lenti-D product candidate as a treatment for cerebral adrenoleukodystrophy, or CALD, a rare hereditary neurological disorder.eli-cel. Our programs in oncology are built upon our leadership in lentiviral gene delivery and T cell engineering, with a focusfocused on developing novel T cell-based immunotherapies, including chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)CAR and T cell receptor (TCR)TCR T cell therapies. bb2121 (idecabtagene vicleucel, or ide-cel), and bb21217 our lead product candidates in oncology, are CAR TCAR-T cell product candidates for the treatment of multiple myeloma which we have exclusively licensed to Celgene Corporation, or Celgene.

and partnered under our collaboration arrangement with BMS.


We are developing ourcommercializing beti-cel as ZYNTEGLO in the EU and began to treat patients in the commercial context in the first quarter of 2021. However, in February 2021 we temporarily suspended marketing of ZYNTEGLO in light of safety events in the HGB-206 clinical study of LentiGlobin product candidatefor SCD, which is manufactured using the same vector as ZYNTEGLO. Additionally, the EMA has paused the renewal procedure for ZYNTEGLO's conditional marketing authorization while the EMA's pharmacovigilance risk assessment committee reviews the risk-benefit assessment for ZYNTEGLO and determines whether any additional pharmacovigilance measures are necessary. We are engaged with the goalEMA in discussions regarding our proposed development plans for beti-cel as a treatment for patients with TDT who are less than 12 years of filing for regulatory approval in the US and EU for different genotypes of TDTage and for severe SCD.  Both TDT and severe SCD are rare, hereditary blood disorders that often lead to severe anemia and shortened lifespans.patients who have a β00 genotype. We are conducting five clinical studiesengaged with the FDA in discussions regarding our proposed development plans for beti-cel as a treatment for patients with TDT. Contingent upon successful resolution of the FDA's concerns arising out of the safety events in our SCD program, we currently expect to complete our BLA submission for beti-cel in mid-2021 for the treatment of patients with TDT across all genotypes, including non-β00 and β00 genotypes, and patients with TDT who are less than 12 years of age.
Based on our prior discussions with the FDA, we believe that we may be able to seek accelerated approval for LentiGlobin product candidate: a Phase I/II studyfor SCD in the United States Australia, and Thailandon the basis of clinical data from Group C of our HGB-206 clinical study, with our HGB-210 clinical study providing confirmatory data for the treatmentfull approval. However, in light of subjects with TDT, called the Northstar Study (HGB-204); a multi-site, international, Phase III study for the treatmentSUSAR of subjects with TDTacute myeloid leukemia and a non-β00 genotype, calledSUSAR of myelodysplastic syndrome in our HGB-206 clinical study, the Northstar-2 Study (HGB-207); a multi-site, international, Phase III study for the treatmentFDA has placed our clinical studies of subjects with TDT and a β00 genotype, called the Northstar 3 Study (HGB-212); a single-center Phase I/II study in France for the treatment of subjects with TDT or severe SCD (HGB-205); and a multi-site Phase I study in the United States for the treatment of subjects with severe SCD (HGB-206).  We have achieved our enrollment target of 18 patients in the Northstar Study, and we have achieved our enrollment target for the adult and adolescent cohort in the Northstar 2 Study.  We anticipate filing a marketing authorization application in the EU for LentiGlobin for SCD on clinical hold. We are investigating these events and plan to continue to work closely with the treatmentFDA in their review of adult and adolescent patients with TDT and a non-β00 genotype during the second half of 2018, with a future BLA planned in the United States. Wethese events. In addition, we are also engaged with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, and the EMA in discussions regarding our proposed development plans for LentiGlobin for SCD in severe SCD.

We are developingEurope.

In October 2020, the EMA accepted our Lenti-D product candidate with the goal of filing for regulatory approval in the US and EU for CALD, a rare, hereditary neurological disorder that is often fatal.  We are planning to submit our first filing for regulatory approval of Lenti-D in 2019.  We are conducting a multi-site, international, Phase II/III clinical study of our Lenti-D product candidate, called the Starbeam Study (ALD-102), for the treatment of subjects with CALD.  Seventeen subjects were treated with our Lenti-D product candidate in the initial cohort of the Starbeam Study, and we are enrolling up to thirteen additional subjects in an expansion cohort of this study. We are also conducting an observational study of subjects with CALD treated by allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplant referred to as the ALD-103 study. If our Lenti-D product candidate shows a sufficiently compelling treatment effect, and pending further discussion with regulatory authorities, the results from the Starbeam study could potentially form the basis of a Biologics License Application, or BLA, and a Marketing Authorization Application or MAA, submission in the United States and European Union, respectively.

We are developing, in collaboration with Celgene, our bb2121 and bb21217 product candidates with the goal of filingEU for regulatory approval in multiple myeloma on a global basis, a hematologic malignancy that develops in the bone marrow that is fatal if untreated.  We are conducting a multi-site Phase I clinical study in the United States of our bb2121 product candidate for the treatment of subjects with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (CRB-401). bb2121 is the lead product candidate arising from our multi-year


collaboration with Celgene Corporation, or Celgene, for the discovery, development and commercialization of CAR T cell therapies targeting B-cell maturation antigen, or BCMA. We have exclusively licensed to Celgene the right to develop and commercialize our bb2121 product candidate, and we may exercise our option to co-develop and co-promote this product candidate in the United States.  The FDA has granted Breakthrough Therapy designation and the EMA has granted PRIME eligibility to the bb2121 product candidate for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.  In February 2018, Celgene treated the first subject in a multi-site Phase II clinical study in the United States and Europe of our bb2121 product candidate for the treatment of subjects with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.  Celgene has announced plans to initiate an international Phase III study of bb2121 in third line multiple myeloma in 2018 and plans to file a BLA with the FDA in 2019 for bb2121 to treat relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

In September 2017, we initiated a Phase I clinical study of bb21217, the second anti-BCMA product candidate arising from our collaboration with Celgene, and Celgene exercised its option to obtain an exclusive worldwide license to develop and commercialize bb21217. The FDA has granted Orphan Drug status to both bb2121 and bb21217 product candidateseli-cel for the treatment of patients with relapsed/refractoryCALD. Based on our discussions with the FDA, we believe that we may be able to seek approval for eli-cel for the treatment of patients with CALD on the basis of our clinical data from our ongoing Starbeam study, safety data from our ongoing ALD-104 study, and the completed ALD-103 observational study. We currently expect to submit the BLA for eli-cel for the treatment of patients with CALD in mid-2021.

In collaboration with BMS, we are developing ide-cel and the bb21217 product candidates as treatments for multiple myeloma.

Our collaboration now focuses exclusively on anti-BCMA CAR T product candidates. We advanced our development of our bb2121 product candidate,are co-developing and co-promoting ide-cel in the first CAR product candidate from our collaborationUnited States with Celgene, into clinical trials in February 2016. In February 2016,BMS and we have exclusively licensed to CelgeneBMS the right to develop and commercialize our bb2121 product candidate, pursuant to Celgene’s exercise of its exclusive option under the collaboration arrangement. We have the obligation to continue conducting our ongoing CRB-401 study, but Celgene has the responsibility for the costs of further development and commercialization rights for ide-cel outside of commercialization. We retain an option to co-develop and co-promote the bb2121 product candidate in the United States. In September 2017,2020, the FDA accepted for Priority Review the BLA submitted by BMS for ide-cel as a treatment for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. We have exclusively licensed the development and commercialization rights for the bb21217 product candidate to BMS, with an option for us to elect to co-develop and co-promote bb21217 within the United States. In addition, we initiated a Phase I clinical studyare

75

Table of bb21217, the second anti-BCMAContents
independently pursuing next-generation BCMA-targeting CAR-T approaches for treating multiple myeloma. Our other programs in oncology include preclinical programs to discover and develop T cell product candidate arising from our collaboration with Celgene,candidates to treat other hematologic and Celgene exercised its option to obtain an exclusive worldwide license to developsolid tumor malignancies, including: non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, acute myeloid leukemia, MAGE-A4 positive solid tumors, and commercialize bb21217. As of December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, there was $47.4 million and $46.4 million, respectively, of total deferred revenue related to the Company’s collaboration with Celgene.

In June 2014, we acquired Precision Genome Engineering, Inc., or Pregenen, a privately-held biotechnology company headquartered in Seattle, Washington. Through the acquisition, we obtained rights to Pregenen’s gene editing andMerkel cell signaling technology. The agreement provided for up to $135.0 million in future contingent cash payments by us upon the achievement of certain preclinical, clinical and commercial milestones related to the Pregenen technology. As of December 31, 2017, there are $120.0 million in remaining future contingent cash payments, of which $20.1 million relates to clinical milestones and $99.9 million relates to commercial milestones. During each of 2017 and 2016, $5.0 million in preclinical milestones were achieved and paid to the former equityholders of Pregenen. We estimate future contingent cash payments have a fair value of $2.2 million as of December 31, 2017, which is classified as a non-current liability.

As of December 31, 2017, we had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of approximately $1.6 billion. We expect that our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will be sufficient to fund our current operations into 2021.

carcinoma.

Since our inception in 1992, we have devoted substantially all of our resources to our development efforts relating to our product candidates, including activities to manufacture product candidates in compliance with good manufacturing practices, or GMP, to conduct clinical studies of our product candidates, to provide selling, general and administrative support for these operations and to protect our intellectual property. We do not have any products approved for sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales. We have funded our operations primarily through the sale of common stock in our public offerings, private placements of preferred stock and warrants and through collaborations.

As of December 31, 2020, we had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of approximately $1.27 billion. We have never been profitable and have incurred net losses in each year since inception. Our net losses were $335.6$618.7 million for the year ended December 31, 20172020 and our accumulated deficit was $913.8 million$2.90 billion as of December 31, 2017.2020. Substantially all of our net losses resulted from costs incurred in connection with our research and development programs and from selling, general and administrative costs associated with our operations. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for at least the next several years. We expect our expenses will increase substantially in connection with our ongoing and planned activities, as we:

conduct clinical studies for our LentiGlobin and Lenti-D product candidates, as well as for our anti-BCMA product candidates, bb2121 and bb21217, which are partnered with Celgene;

conduct clinical studies for our clinical programs in β-thalassemia, SCD, and ALD, fund our share of the costs of clinical studies for our program in multiple myeloma in collaboration with BMS, and advance our preclinical programs into clinical development;

increase research and development-related activities for the discovery and development of oncology product candidates;

candidates in severe genetic diseases and oncology;

continue our research and development efforts;

manufacture clinical study materials and establish the infrastructure necessary to support and develop large-scale manufacturing capabilities;

capabilities to support commercialization of our product and any future products;

seek regulatory approval for our product candidates;

seek regulatory approval for our product candidates; and

add personnel to support our product development and commercialization efforts.

efforts;

We do not expect

increase activities related to generate revenue fromthe commercialization of ZYNTEGLO in multiple markets in Europe, the potential commercial launch of beti-cel in the United States, and the potential commercial launches of additional late-stage product sales unlesscandidates in the United States and until we successfully complete developmentEurope; and obtain regulatory approval for one or more
incur costs related to the separation of our product candidates, which we expect will take a numberportfolio of yearsprograms and is subject to significant uncertainty. We currently have no commercial-scale manufacturing facilities of our own,products in severe genetic disease and all of our manufacturing activities are contracted out to third parties. Additionally, we currently utilize third-party contract research organizations, or CROs, to carry out our clinical development activities. Ifoncology into two separate, independent publicly traded companies.
As we seek to obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates and begin to commercialize ZYNTEGLO, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses as we prepare for and begin product sales, marketing, commercial manufacturing, and distribution. Accordingly, until we generate significant revenues from product sales, we will seek to fund our operations through public or private equity or debt financings, strategic collaborations, or other sources. However, we may be unable to raise additional funds or enter into such other arrangements when needed on favorable terms or at all. Our failure to raise capital or enter into such other arrangements as and when needed would have a negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to develop our products.

Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with product development and commercialization, we are unable to predict the timing or amount of increased expenses or when or if we will be able to achieve or maintain profitability. Even if we are able to generate revenues from the sale of our products, we may not become profitable. If we fail to become profitable or are unable to sustain profitability on a continuing basis, then we may be unable to continue our operations at planned levels and be forced to reduce our operations.

Business update
Beginning in late 2019, the outbreak of a novel strain of coronavirus (COVID-19) has evolved into a global pandemic. As a result, we continue to experience disruptions and increased risk in our operations and those of third parties upon whom we rely, which may materially and adversely affect our business. These include disruptions and risks related to the conduct of our clinical trials, manufacturing, and commercialization efforts, as policies at various clinical sites and federal, state, local and foreign laws, rules and regulations continue to evolve, including quarantines, travel restrictions, and direction of healthcare resources toward pandemic response efforts. The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the timing of patient treatment in the
76

Table of Contents
commercial context, and the timing of our ongoing clinical studies, with the result of slower patient enrollment and treatment in our clinical studies and delays in post-treatment follow up visits, the impact of which has varied by clinical study and by program. It has also affected our activities with and operations at our third-party manufacturers. It is unknown how long these disruptions could continue. In addition, we expect the COVID-19 pandemic to delay our ability to achieve market access and reimbursement for ZYNTEGLO in Europe due to shifting priorities of the local authorities and healthcare system. As a result of the demands upon healthcare regulatory authorities, review, inspection, and other activities related to review of regulatory submissions in drug development may be impacted, and may result in delays for an unknown period of time.
We continue to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 global pandemic on patients, healthcare providers and our employees, as well as our operations and the operations of our business partners and healthcare communities. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we have implemented policies at our locations to mitigate the risk of exposure to COVID-19 by our personnel, including restrictions on the number of staff in any given research and development laboratory or manufacturing facility, a work-from-home policy applicable to the majority of our personnel, and a phased approach to bringing personnel back to our locations over time. Given the importance of supporting our patients, we are diligently working with our suppliers, healthcare providers and partners to provide patients with access to ZYNTEGLO, while taking into account regulatory, institutional, and government guidance, policies and protocols. Further, we are working with our clinical study sites to understand the duration and scope of the impact on enrollment, develop protocols to help mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and other activities for our ongoing clinical studies. However, the ultimate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our business operations is highly uncertain and subject to change and will depend on future developments which are difficult to predict.
We expect our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of $1.27 billion as of December 31, 2020, will be sufficient to fund planned operations for at least the next twelve months from the date of issuance of these financial statements, though we may pursue additional cash resources through public or private equity or debt financings or by establishing additional collaborations with other companies.
In January 2021, we announced our intent to separate our severe genetic disease and oncology programs into two separate, independent publicly traded companies, bluebird bio, Inc. and a new company, which we refer to as Oncology NewCo in this annual report on Form 10-K. bluebird bio, Inc. intends to retain focus on our severe genetic disease programs and Oncology NewCo is expected to focus on our oncology programs. The transaction is expected to be completed in late 2021 and is anticipated to be tax-free, subject to receipt of a favorable IRS ruling.
Financial operations overview

Revenue

To date, we have not generated any revenues from the sale of products. Our revenues have been derived from collaboration arrangements, out-licensing arrangements, including royalties on net sales of products to licensees or sublicensees, research fees, and grant revenues.

Collaboration

To date, revenue isrecognized under our collaborative arrangements has been primarily generated exclusively from our collaboration arrangement with Celgene, which was amended in 2015.BMS. The terms of this amendedthe arrangement with respect to ide-cel contain multiple deliverables,promised goods or services, which include at inception: (i) research and development services, (ii) participation on the joint steering committee, or JSC, (iii) participation on the patent committee, (iv) a license to bb2121, (v)ide-cel, and (iii) manufacture of vectors and associated payload for incorporation into bb2121ide-cel under the license, and (vi) participation on the joint governance committee, or JGC, under the co-development and co-promotion agreement for bb2121.  license.As of September 2017, the collaboration also includes a license bb21217,included the deliverables as part of which include:following promised goods or services with respect to bb21217: (i) research and development services, (ii) a license to bb21217, and (iii) manufacture of vectors and associated payload for incorporation into bb21217 under the license,license. We entered into an agreement with BMS to co-develop and (iv) participationco-promote ide-cel in March 2018, which was subsequently amended in May 2020, in which both parties will share equally in U.S. costs and profits.  Revenue from our collaborative arrangements is recognized as the underlying performance obligations are satisfied.
We analyze our collaboration arrangements to assess whether they are within the scope of ASC 808, Collaborative Arrangements (“ASC 808”) to determine whether such arrangements involve joint operating activities performed by parties that are both active participants in the activities and exposed to significant risks and rewards dependent on the JGCcommercial success of such activities. This assessment is performed throughout the life of the arrangement based on changes in the responsibilities of all parties in the arrangement. For collaboration arrangements within the scope of ASC 808, we first determine which elements of the collaboration are deemed to be within the scope of ASC 808 and those that are more reflective of a vendor-customer relationship and therefore within the scope of ASC 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (“Topic 606” or "ASC 606"). For elements of collaboration arrangements that are accounted for pursuant to ASC 808, an appropriate recognition method is determined and applied consistently, generally by analogy to Topic 606. Amounts that are owed to collaboration partners are recognized as an offset to collaborative arrangement revenues as such amounts are incurred by the
77

Table of Contents
collaboration partner. Where amounts owed to a collaboration partner exceed our collaborative arrangement revenues in a quarterly period, such amounts in excess are classified as research and development expense. For those elements of the arrangement that are accounted for pursuant to Topic 606, we apply the five-step model prescribed in Topic 606.
Effective January 1, 2020, we adopted Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") No. 2018-18, Collaborative Arrangements (Topic 808): Clarifying the Interaction between Topic 808 and Topic 606 ("ASU 2018-18")on a retrospective basis. As a result, prior periods are presented in accordance with the new standard. Prior to the adoption of ASU 2018-18, we presented all revenue recognized under our collaborative arrangements as collaboration revenue on our consolidated statement of operations and comprehensive loss. However, as we recognize revenue under our collaborative arrangements both within and outside the co-developmentscope of Topic 606, we have revised our presentation of revenue on our consolidated statement of operations and co-promotion agreement for bb21217.

comprehensive loss as follows: service revenue includes revenue from collaborative partners recognized within the scope of Topic 606 and collaborative arrangement revenue includes only revenue from collaborative partners recognized outside the scope of Topic 606.

Nonrefundable license fees are recognized as revenue upon delivery of the license provided there are no undelivered elementsunsatisfied performance obligations in the arrangement.  License revenue ishas historically been generated from our out-license agreements, with Novartis Pharma AG, or Novartis, and GlaxoSmithKline Intellectual Property Development Limited, or GSK.  Under our out-licensing agreementsunder which we may also recognize revenue from potential future milestone payments and royalties.

Royalties are recognized in the period

For arrangements with licenses of sale of the related product(s),intellectual property that include sales-based royalties, including milestone payments based on the underlying contract terms, provided thatlevel of sales, and the reportedlicense is deemed to be the predominant item to which the royalties relate, we recognize revenue at the later of (i) when the related sales are reliably measurable and we have no remainingoccur, or (ii) when the performance obligations, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria are met.

Research fee revenue is primarily generated through research and development agreements with strategic partners and nonprofit organizations forobligation to which the development and commercialization of our product candidates. Research fees are recognized as revenue over the period we perform the associated services or on a straight-line basis if the pattern of performance cannot be more readily determined.

royalty has been allocated has been satisfied.

Research and development expenses

Research and development expenses consist primarily of costs incurred for the development of our product candidates, which include:

employee-related expenses, including salaries, benefits, travel and stock-based compensation expense;

expenses incurred under agreements with CROsclinical research organizations (“CROs”) and clinical sites that conduct our clinical studies;

costs of acquiring, developing, and manufacturing clinical study materials;

inventory;

reimbursable costs to our partners for collaborative activities;

reimbursable costs to our partners for collaborative activities;

facilities, depreciation, and other expenses, which include direct and allocated expenses for rent and maintenance of facilities, information technology, insurance, and other supplies in support of research and development activities;

costs associated with our research platform and preclinical activities;

milestones and upfront license payments;

costs associated with our regulatory, quality assurance and quality control operations; and

amortization of certain intangible assets.

Research and development costs are expensed as incurred. Costs for certain development activities are recognized based on an evaluation of the progress to completion of specific tasks using information and data provided to us by our vendors and our clinical sites. We cannot determine with certainty the duration and completion costs of the current or future clinical studies of our product candidates or if, when, or to what extent we will generate revenues from the commercialization and sale of any of our product candidates that obtain regulatory approval. We may nevernot succeed in achieving regulatory approval for anyall of our product candidates. The duration, costs, and timing of clinical studies and development of our product candidates will depend on a variety of factors, any of which could mean a significant change in the costs and timing associated with the development of our product candidates including:

the scope, rate of progress, and expense of our ongoing as well as any additional clinical studies and other research and development activities we undertake;

future clinical study results;

uncertainties in clinical study enrollment rates;

78

Table of Contents
new manufacturing processes or protocols that we may choose to or be required to implement in the manufacture of our lentiviral vector or drug product;

regulatory feedback on requirements for regulatory approval, as well as changing standards for regulatory approval; and

the timing and receipt of any regulatory approvals.

We plan to increase our research and development expenses for the foreseeable future as we continue to advance the development of our Lenti-D,beti-cel, eli-cel, and LentiGlobin bb2121, and bb21217 product candidates,for SCD, conduct research and development activities in severe genetic diseases and oncology, including underfund our strategicshare of the costs of development of ide-cel and bb21217 (if we exercise our option to co-develop and co-commercialize this product candidate) in collaboration with Celgene,BMS, and continue the research and developmentdiscovery of product candidates using our gene editing technology platform. Our research and development activitiesexpenses include expenses associated with the following:

following activities:

StarbeamNorthstar-2 Study (ALD-102)(HGB-207)We are conducting a Phase II/III clinicalmulti-site, international phase 3 study in the United States, England and France to examine the safety and efficacy of our Lenti-D product candidatebeti-cel in the treatment of subjectspatients with CALD.  In January 2018, we announced that we are amending the protocol for thisTDT and a non-β00 genotype.

Northstar-3 Study (HGB-212) – a multi-site, international phase 3 study to enroll up to a total of 30 subjects.

Northstar Study (HGB-204) – We are conducting a Phase I/II clinical study in the United States, Australia and Thailand to studyexamine the safety and efficacy of our LentiGlobin product candidatebeti-cel in the treatment of subjects with TDT. In March 2014, we announced that the first subject had been treated in this study. In May 2016, we announced that this study has been fully enrolled.

HGB-205 study We are conducting a Phase I/II clinical study in France to study the safety and efficacy of our LentiGlobin product candidate in the treatment of subjectspatients with TDT and of subjects with severe SCD. In December 2013, we announced that the first subject with TDT had been treated in this study and in October 2014, we announced that the first subject with severe SCD had been treated in this study.  In February 2017, we announced that this study has been fully enrolled.

a β00 genotype or an IVS-I-110 mutation.  

HGB-206 study We are conducting a Phase I clinicalmulti-site phase 1/2 study in the United States to study the safety and efficacy of our LentiGlobin product candidate in the treatment of subjectspatients with severe SCD. In June 2015, we announced that the first subject

HGB-210 study – our multi-site, international phase 3 study of LentiGlobin in patients with severe SCD had been treated in this study. In October 2016, we announced that we have amended the protocol for thisand a history of vaso-occlusive events.
Starbeam Study (ALD-102) – a multi-site, international phase 2/3 study to incorporate several process changes and to expand enrollment up to a total of 29 subjects.

Northstar-2 Study (HGB-207) We are conducting a Phase III study at multiple sites internationally to examine the safety and efficacy of our LentiGlobin product candidate in the treatment of subjects with TDT and a non-β00 genotype. In December 2016, we announced that the first subject had been treated in this study.  In August 2017, we announced that the adult and adolescent cohort for this study has been fully enrolled.

Northstar-3 Study (HGB-212) – We are conducting a Phase III study at multiple sites internationally to examine the safety and efficacy of eli-cel in the treatment of patients with CALD.

ALD-104 study – our LentiGlobinmulti-site, international phase 3 study to examine the safety and efficacy of eli-cel after myeloablative conditioning using busulfan and fludarabine in the treatment of patients with CALD. 
CRB-401 study – an open label, single-arm, multi-center, phase 1 study to examine the safety and efficacy of ide-cel in the treatment of patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.
KarMMA study – an open label, single-arm, multi-center phase 2 study to examine the efficacy and safety of ide-cel in the treatment of patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.
KarMMa-2 study – a multi-cohort, open-label, multicenter phase 2 study to examine the safety and efficacy of ide-cel in the treatment of patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma and in high-risk multiple myeloma.
KarMMa-3 study – a multicenter, randomized, open-label phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of ide-cel versus standard triplet regimens in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.
KarMMa-4 study –, a multi-cohort, open-label, multicenter phase 1 study intended to determine the optimal target dose and safety of ide-cel in subjects with newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma.
CRB-402 study – an open label, single-arm, multicenter, phase 1 study to examine the safety and efficacy of the bb21217 product candidate in the treatment of subjectspatients with TDTrelapsed and a β0/β0 genotype.  In November 2017, we announced that the first subject had been treated in this study.

CRB-401 study We are conducting a Phase I clinical study in the United States to study the safety and efficacy of our bb2121 product candidate in the treatment of subjects with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. In February 2016, we announced that the first subject with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma had been treated in this study, and the final patient enrolled in the CRB-401 study was treated in February 2018.


CRB-402 study We are conducting a Phase I clinical study of our bb21217, our next-generation anti-BCMA product candidate in the treatment of subjects with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.  In September 2017, we announced that the first subject with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma had been treated in this study.

We will continue to incur costs related to the manufacture of clinical study materials in support of our clinical studies.

From inception through December 31, 2017, we have incurred $769.9 million

We expect that the timing of investment in research and development expenses.  our ongoing clinical studies will reflect COVID-19 related delays in these studies.
Our direct research and development expenses consist principally of external costs, such as fees paid to investigators, consultants, central laboratories and CROs in connection with our clinical studies, and costs related to acquiring and manufacturing clinical study materials. We allocate salary and benefit costs directly related to specific programs. We do not allocate personnel-related discretionary bonus or stock-based compensation costs, laboratory and related expenses, certain license and other collaboration costs, associated with our general discovery platform improvements, depreciation or other indirect costs that are deployed across multiple projects under development and, as such, the costs are separately classified as other research and development expenses in the table below:

 

 

Year Ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

 

2016

 

 

2015

 

 

 

(in thousands)

 

LentiGlobin

 

$

85,710

 

 

$

67,154

 

 

$

38,515

 

Lenti-D

 

 

16,223

 

 

 

18,612

 

 

 

13,666

 

bb2121

 

 

32,144

 

 

 

12,690

 

 

 

 

bb21217

 

 

7,402

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pre-clinical programs

 

 

40,167

 

 

 

32,771

 

 

 

15,937

 

Total direct research and development expense

 

 

181,646

 

 

 

131,227

 

 

 

68,118

 

Employee- and contractor-related expenses

 

 

23,698

 

 

 

17,047

 

 

 

11,793

 

Stock-based compensation expense

 

 

26,633

 

 

 

19,690

 

 

 

24,854

 

Platform-related expenses

 

 

15,414

 

 

 

15,359

 

 

 

21,217

 

Facility expenses

 

 

24,700

 

 

 

20,301

 

 

 

7,282

 

Other expenses

 

 

949

 

 

 

1,151

 

 

 

774

 

Total other research and development expenses

 

 

91,394

 

 

 

73,548

 

 

 

65,920

 

Total research and development expense

 

$

273,040

 

 

$

204,775

 

 

$

134,038

 

79

The


Table of Contents
Year ended December 31,
202020192018
(in thousands)
beti-cel(1)
$66,141 $73,896 $92,193 
LentiGlobin for SCD58,862 50,796 32,865 
eli-cel48,028 40,352 38,244 
ide-cel105,240 121,182 75,667 
bb2121723,511 19,827 15,624 
Preclinical programs45,888 49,700 50,115 
Total direct research and development expense347,670 355,753 304,708 
Employee- and contractor-related expenses63,840 52,617 35,697 
Stock-based compensation expense72,239 80,139 54,422 
Laboratory and related expenses(2)
16,689 12,208 8,311 
License and other collaboration expenses(2)
15,285 7,021 9,876 
Facility expenses67,464 67,274 32,158 
Other expenses4,769 7,401 3,417 
Total other research and development expenses240,286 226,660 143,881 
Total research and development expense$587,956 $582,413 $448,589 
(1)Following our receipt of conditional approval for the marketing authorization of ZYNTEGLO by the European Commission in June 2019, all manufacturing costs associated with our bb2121 program were included within pre-clinical programsthe production of LentiGlobin for use in the table shown above for the year ended December 31, 2015 and are separately shown for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016.  The costs associated with our bb21217 program were included in pre-clinical programscommercial sale of ZYNTEGLO in the table shown above through June 30, 2017. TheEuropean Union will be evaluated for capitalization as inventory on our consolidated balance sheets.
(2)Prior to 2020, costs associated with our bb21217 program are presented separately in the table above beginning in the third quarter of 2017within these categories were disclosed as we initiated the first clinical study for bb21217 in the third quarter of 2017.

General"platform-related expenses."

Selling, general and administrative expenses

General

Selling, general and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries and related costs for personnel, including stock-based compensation and travel expenses for our employees in executive, operational, finance, legal, business development, commercial, information technology, and human resource functions. Other selling, general and administrative expenses include facility-related costs, professional fees for accounting, tax, and legal and consulting services, directors’ fees and expenses associated with obtaining and maintaining patents.

We anticipate that our selling, general and administrative expenses, including payroll and sales and marketing expenses, will continue to increase in the future relative to current levels as we increaseexecute on our headcount to support our continued researchcommercial launch plans in Europe for ZYNTEGLO, and development andperform commercial readiness activities in the potential commercialization ofUnited States for our product candidates. Additionally, if and when we believe a regulatory approval of the first product candidate appears likely, we anticipate an increase in payroll and related expenses as a result of our preparation for commercial operations, especially as it relates to the sales and marketing of our product candidates.

Cost of licenseroyalty and royaltyother revenue

Cost of licenseroyalty and royaltyother revenue represents expense associated with amounts owed to third partythird-party licensors as a result of revenue recognized under our out-license arrangements with Novartis and GSK.

We anticipate that our cost of license and royalty revenue will increase in the future contingent upon the achievement of regulatory milestones by Novartis or GSK. Additionally, we anticipate that our cost of license and royalty revenue will increase in the future as we expect to continue to recognize royalty revenue related to Novartis’ commercial sale of Kymriah.

arrangements.

Change in fair value of contingent consideration

On June 30, 2014, we acquired Precision Genome Engineering, Inc., or Pregenen. In connection withThe agreement provided for up to $135.0 million in future contingent cash payments by us upon the acquisition, we recorded contingent consideration pertaining to the amounts potentially payable to Pregenen’s former equityholders pursuant to the Stock Purchase Agreement (the “Stock Purchase Agreement”) by and among us, Pregenen and Pregenen’s former equityholders. We assess these estimates on an on-going basis as additional data impacting the assumptions is obtained. Future changes in the fair value of contingent consideration related to updated assumptions and estimates are recognized within the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss.

Contingent consideration may change significantly as development progresses and additional data are obtained, impacting our assumptions regarding probabilities of successful achievement of related milestones used to estimate the fair value of the liability and the timing in which they are expected to be achieved. The significant unobservable inputs used in the measurement of fair value of our contingent consideration are probabilities of successful achievement ofcertain preclinical, clinical and commercial milestones related to the periodPregenen technology.

As of December 31, 2020, there are $120.0 million in future contingent cash payments, of which these$20.1 million relates to clinical milestones are expectedand $99.9 million relates to be achieved and discount rates. Significant increases or decreases in any of the probabilities of success would result incommercial milestones. We estimate future contingent cash payments have a significantly higher or lower fair value measurement, respectively. Significant increases or decreases inof $1.5 million as of December 31, 2020, which are classified within other non-current liabilities on our consolidated balance sheet.
80

Table of Contents
Interest income, net
For the other inputs would result in a significantly lower or higher fair value measurement, respectively.

Interest (expense) income, net

Interest (expense)years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, interest income, net consists primarily of interest income earned on investments. For the year ended December 31, 2018, interest income, net consisted primarily of interest income earned on investments and interest expense on the financing lease obligation for our headquarters at 60 Binney Street in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Upon adoption of ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) (“ASU 2016-02” or “ASC 842”) on January 1, 2019, we de-recognized the financing lease obligation and, as a result, no longer recognize interest income earned on investments.

expense associated with the financing lease obligation.

Other (expense) income, net

Other (expense) income, net consists primarily of a loss on disposal of assets, realized gains and losses on investments,equity securities held by us, gains and losses on disposal of fixed assets, and gains and losses on foreign currency.

currency transactions.

Critical accounting policies and significant judgments and estimates

Our management’s discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based on our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, and expenses and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities in our financial statements. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates and judgments, including expected business and operational changes, sensitivity and volatility associated with the assumptions used in developing estimates, and whether historical trends are expected to be representative of future trends. We base our estimates on historical experience, known trends and events and various other factors that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. In making estimates and judgments, management employs critical accounting policies.

While our significant accounting policies are described in more detail in the notes to our financial statements appearing elsewhere in this annual report, we believe the following accounting policies to be most critical to the judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our financial statements.

Revenue recognition

Revenue recognition
Under Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, an entity recognizes revenue when its customer obtains control of promised goods or services, in an amount that reflects the consideration that the entity expects to receive in exchange for those goods or services. To determine revenue recognition for arrangements that an entity determines are within the scope of Topic 606, the entity 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, including variable consideration, if any; (iv) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract; and (v) recognize revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation. We only apply the five-step model to contracts when it is probable that the entity will collect the consideration to which it is entitled in exchange for the goods or services it transfers to the customer.
Once a contract is determined to be within the scope of Topic 606, we assess the goods or services promised within each contract and determine those that are performance obligations.  Arrangements that include rights to additional goods or services that are exercisable at a customer’s discretion are generally considered options.  We assess if these options provide a material right to the customer and if so, they are considered performance obligations.  The identification of material rights requires judgments related to the determination of the value of the underlying license relative to the option exercise price, including assumptions about technical feasibility and the probability of developing a candidate that would be subject to the option rights. The exercise of a material right is accounted for as a contract modification for accounting purposes.
We assess whether each promised good or service is distinct for the purpose of identifying the performance obligations in the contract. This assessment involves subjective determinations and requires management to make judgments about the individual promised goods or services and whether such are separable from the other aspects of the contractual relationship. Promised goods and services are considered distinct provided that: (i) the customer can benefit from the good or service either on its own or together with other resources that are readily available to the customer (that is, the good or service is capable of being distinct) and (ii) the entity’s promise to transfer the good or service to the customer is separately identifiable from other promises in the contract (that is, the promise to transfer the good or service is distinct within the context of the contract).  In assessing whether a promised good or service is distinct, we consider factors such as the research, manufacturing and
81

Table of Contents
commercialization capabilities of the collaboration partner and the availability of the associated expertise in the general marketplace. We also consider the intended benefit of the contract in assessing whether a promised good or service is separately identifiable from other promises in the contract. If a promised good or service is not distinct, an entity is required to combine that good or service with other promised goods or services until it identifies a bundle of goods or services that is distinct.
The transaction price is then determined and allocated to the identified performance obligations in proportion to their standalone selling prices (“SSP”) on a relative SSP basis. SSP is determined at contract inception and is not updated to reflect changes between contract inception and when the performance obligations are satisfied. Determining the SSP for performance obligations requires significant judgment. In developing the SSP for a performance obligation, we consider applicable market conditions and relevant entity-specific factors, including factors that were contemplated in negotiating the agreement with the customer and estimated costs. We validate the SSP for performance obligations by evaluating whether changes in the key assumptions used to determine the SSP will have a significant effect on the allocation of arrangement consideration between multiple performance obligations.
If the consideration promised in a contract includes a variable amount, we estimate the amount of consideration to which we will be entitled in exchange for transferring the promised goods or services to a customer. We determine the amount of variable consideration by using the expected value method or the most likely amount method. We include the unconstrained amount of estimated variable consideration in the transaction price. The amount included in the transaction price is constrained to the amount for which it is probable that a significant reversal of cumulative revenue recognized will not occur. At the end of each subsequent reporting period, we re-evaluate the estimated variable consideration included in the transaction price and any related constraint, and if necessary, adjust our estimate of the overall transaction price. Any such adjustments are recorded on a cumulative catch-up basis in the period of adjustment.
If an arrangement includes development and regulatory milestone payments, we evaluate whether the milestones are considered probable of being reached and estimate 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 our control or the licensee’s control, such as regulatory approvals, are generally not considered probable of being achieved until those approvals are received.
For arrangements with licenses of intellectual property 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, we recognize royalty revenue and sales-based milestones at the later of (i) when the related sales occur, or (ii) when the performance obligation to which the royalty has been allocated has been satisfied.
In determining the transaction price, we adjust consideration for the effects of the time value of money if the timing of payments provides us with a significant benefit of financing.  We do 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 licensees and the transfer of the promised goods or services to the licensees will be one year or less.  We assessed each of our revenue generating arrangements in order to determine whether a significant financing component exists and concluded that a significant financing component does not exist in any of our arrangements.
We then recognize as revenue the amount of the transaction price that is allocated to the respective performance obligation when (or as) each performance obligation is satisfied, either at a point in time or over time, and if over time recognition is based on the use of an output or input method.
We recognize revenue within the following financial statement captions:
Service revenue
To date, our service revenue has primarily been generated revenue through collaboration arrangements, out-licensing arrangements including royalties on net salesfrom the elements of products to licensees or sublicensees, research fees, and research and development grant revenues.

Collaboration revenue

As of December 31, 2017, our collaboration revenue was generated exclusively from our collaboration arrangement with Celgene,BMS that are accounted for pursuant to Topic 606, using the five-step model described above. As discussed further below, we analyze our collaboration arrangement to assess whether they are within the scope of ASC 808, Collaborative Arrangements (“ASC 808”) or Topic 606. For the elements of the arrangement which was originally entered intoare more reflective of a vendor-customer relationship and therefore within the scope of Topic 606, we record the related revenue as service revenue on the consolidated statement of operations and comprehensive loss. Refer below for additional discussion around our policy for recognizing collaborative arrangement revenue and the determination of whether elements of a collaboration arrangement are within the scope of ASC 808 or Topic 606.

82

Table of Contents
Collaborative arrangement revenue
To date, collaborative arrangement revenue has been primarily generated from our collaboration arrangements with BMS and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("Regeneron"), as further described in March 2013 and was subsequently amendedNote 11, Collaborative arrangements in June 2015.  

the notes to consolidated financial statements.  

We analyze our collaboration arrangements to assess whether they are within the scope of ASC 808 to determine whether such arrangements involve joint operating activities performed by parties that are both active participants in the activities and exposed to significant risks and rewards dependent on the commercial success of such activities.  This assessment is performed throughout the life of the arrangement based on changes in the responsibilities of all parties in the arrangement.  For collaboration arrangements that are deemed to be within the scope of ASC 808 that contain multiple elements, we first determine which elements of the collaboration are deemed to be within the scope of ASC 808 and those that are more reflective of a vendor-customer relationship and therefore within the scope of ASC 605.


For those elementsTopic 606 (refer above for further discussion of the arrangement that are accountedCompany's policy for pursuant to ASC 605, revenue is recognized for each unit of accounting when all of the following criteria are met:

Persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists

Delivery has occurred or services have been rendered

The seller’s price to the buyer is fixed or determinable

Collectability is reasonably assured

When a collaboration arrangement has multiple-elements accounted for under ASC 605, we determine whether the individual deliverables represent separate units of accounting or whether they must be accounted for as a combined unit of accounting. This evaluation involves subjective determinations and requires management to make judgments about the individual deliverables and whether such deliverables are separable from the other aspects of the contractual relationship. Deliverables are considered separate units of accounting provided that: (i) the delivered item(s) has value to the customer on a standalone basis and (ii) if the arrangement includes a general right of return relative to the delivered item(s), delivery or performance of the undelivered item(s) is considered probable and substantially controlled by us. In assessing whether an item has standalone value, we considered factors such as the research, manufacturing and commercialization capabilities of the collaboration partner and the availability of the associated expertise in the general marketplace. In addition, we consider whether the collaboration partner can use the other deliverable(s) for their intended purpose without the receipt of the remaining element(s), whether the value of the deliverable is dependent on the undelivered item(s) and whether there are other vendors that can provide the undelivered element(s).

Arrangement consideration that is fixed or determinable is allocated among the separate units of accounting using the relative selling price method and the applicable revenue recognition criteria are applied to determine the appropriate period and pattern of recognition. We determine the selling price of a unit of accounting following the hierarchy of evidence prescribed by ASC 605-25. Accordingly, we determine the estimated selling price for units of accounting within each arrangement using vendor-specific objective evidence (“VSOE”) of selling price, if available, third-party evidence (“TPE”) of selling price if VSOE is not available, or best estimate of selling price (“BESP”) if neither VSOE nor TPE is available. We typically use BESP to estimate the selling price, since we generally do not have VSOE or TPE of selling price for our units of accounting. Determining the BESP for a unit of accounting requires significant judgment. In developing the BESP for a unit of accounting, we consider applicable market conditions and relevant entity-specific factors, including factors that were contemplated in negotiating the agreement with the customer and estimated costs. We validate the BESP for units of accounting by evaluating whether changes in the key assumptions used to determine the BESP will have a significant effect on the allocation of arrangement consideration between multiple units of accounting.

Options are considered substantive if, at the inception of the arrangement, we are at risk as to whether the collaboration partner will choose to exercise the option. Factors that we consider in evaluating whether an option is substantive include the overall objective of the arrangement, the benefit the collaborator might obtain from the arrangement without exercising the option, the cost to exercise the option and the likelihood that the option will be exercised. For arrangements under which an option is considered substantive, we do not consider the item underlying the option to be a deliverable at the inception of the arrangement and the associated option fees are not included in allocable arrangement consideration, assuming the option is not priced at a significant and incremental discount. Conversely, for arrangements under which an option is not considered substantive or if an option is priced at a significant and incremental discount, we would consider the item underlying the option to be a deliverable at the inception of the arrangement and a corresponding amount would be included in allocable arrangement consideration.

We recognize arrangement consideration allocated to each unit of accounting when all of the revenue recognition criteria are satisfied. We will recognize arrangement consideration attributed to licenses that have standalone value as revenue upon delivery. When arrangement consideration attributed to licenses do not have standalone value, we will recognize revenue over the estimated performance period of the combined deliverable.  For elements of the arrangement that are recognized over time, and there is no discernible pattern of performance and/or objectively measurable performance measures do not exist, we recognize revenue on a straight-line basis over the period we expect to complete our performance obligations. Conversely, if the pattern of performance in which therecognizing service is provided to the customer can be determined and objectively measurable performance measures exist, then we recognize revenue under the arrangement using the proportional performance method.

revenue). For elements of collaboration arrangements that are accounted for pursuant to ASC 808, an appropriate recognition method is determined and applied consistently, generally by analogy to ASC 605.Topic 606.  Amounts that are owed to collaboration partners are recognized as an offset to collaborationcollaborative arrangement revenues as such amounts are incurred by the collaboration partner.  Where amounts owed to a collaboration partner exceed our collaborationcollaborative arrangement revenues in each quarterly period, such amounts are classified as research and development expense.


The recognition of service revenue and collaborative arrangement revenue (expense) require management judgment due to the fact that the terms of our collaboration arrangements are complicated and the nature of the collaborative activities change over time. This process includes the identification of costs that we incur that relate to each particular collaboration arrangement, evaluating the nature of these costs (for example, whether the costs relate to a particular geography or territory or whether the costs relate to clinical or commercial activities), and applying the terms of the respective collaborative arrangement to determine the portion of such costs that are the responsibility of the collaboration partner, which in certain circumstances requires significant judgment.

Leases
Effective January 1, 2019, we adopted ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842), (“ASU 2016-02” or “ASC 842”), using the required modified retrospective approach and utilizing the effective date as the date of initial application. As a result, prior periods are presented in accordance with the previous guidance in ASC 840, Leases (“ASC 840”).
At the inception of an arrangement, that includes milestone payments, we evaluatedetermine whether each milestonethe arrangement is substantive and at risk to both partiesor contains a lease based on the unique facts and circumstances present in the arrangement. Leases with a term greater than one year are recognized on the balance sheet as right-of-use assets and short-term and long-term lease liabilities, as applicable. We do not have material financing leases.
Operating lease liabilities and their corresponding right-of-use assets are initially recorded based on the present value of lease payments over the expected remaining lease term. Certain adjustments to the right-of-use asset may be required for items such as incentives received. The interest rate implicit in lease contracts is typically not readily determinable. As a result, we utilize our incremental borrowing rate to discount lease payments, which reflects the fixed rate at which we could borrow on a collateralized basis the amount of the contingent naturelease payments in the same currency, for a similar term, in a similar economic environment. To estimate our incremental borrowing rate, a credit rating applicable to us is estimated using a synthetic credit rating analysis since we do not currently have a rating agency-based credit rating. Prospectively, we will adjust the right-of-use assets for straight-line rent expense or any incentives received and remeasure the lease liability at the net present value using the same incremental borrowing rate that was in effect as of the milestone. This evaluationlease commencement or transition date.
We have elected not to recognize leases with an original term of one year or less on the balance sheet. We typically only includes an initial lease term in our assessment of whether: (i)a lease arrangement. Options to renew a lease are not included in our assessment unless there is reasonable certainty that we will renew.
Assumptions that we made at the consideration iscommencement date are re-evaluated upon occurrence of certain events, including a lease modification. A lease modification results in a separate contract when the modification grants the lessee an additional right of use not included in the original lease and when lease payments increase commensurate with either our performance to achieve the milestone orstandalone price for the enhancementadditional right of the value of the delivered item(s) asuse. When a result oflease modification results in a specific outcome resulting from our performance to achieve the milestone, (ii) the consideration relates solely to past performance and (iii) the considerationseparate contract, it is reasonable relative to all of the deliverables and payment terms within the arrangement. We evaluate factors such as the scientific, clinical, regulatory, commercial and other risks that must be overcome to achieve the respective milestone and the level of effort and investment required to achieve the respective milestone in making this assessment. There is considerable judgment involved in determining whether a milestone satisfies all of the criteria required to conclude that a milestone is substantive. We have concluded that all of the clinical and regulatory milestones pursuant to our collaboration arrangement are substantive. Accordingly, in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 605-28, Revenue Recognition-Milestone Method, revenue from clinical and regulatory milestone payments will be recognized in its entirety upon successful accomplishment of the milestone, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria are met. Milestones that are not considered substantive would be recognized as revenue over the remaining period of performance, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria are met. All commercial milestones will be accounted for in the same manner as royaltiesa new lease.
83

Table of Contents
ASC 842 transition practical expedients and recordedapplication of transition provisions to leases at the transition date
We elected the following practical expedients, which must be elected as revenue upon achievementa package and applied consistently to all of our leases at the transition date (including those for which we are a lessee or a lessor): i) we did not reassess whether any expired or existing contracts are or contain leases; ii) we did not reassess the lease classification for any expired or existing leases (that is, all existing leases that were classified as operating leases in accordance with ASC 840 are classified as operating leases, and all existing leases that were classified as capital leases in accordance with ASC 840 are classified as finance leases); and iii) we did not reassess initial direct costs for any existing leases.
For leases that existed prior to the date of initial application of ASC 842 (which were previously classified as operating leases), a lessee may elect to use either the total lease term measured at lease inception under ASC 840 or the remaining lease term as of the milestone, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria are met.

We recognize royalty revenue generated under collaboration arrangementsdate of initial application of ASC 842 in determining the period for which to measure its incremental borrowing rate. In transition to ASC 842, we utilized the remaining lease term of saleits leases in determining the appropriate incremental borrowing rates.

Application of theASC 842 policy elections to leases post adoption
We have made certain policy elections to apply to our leases executed post adoption, or subsequent to January 1, 2019, as further described below.
In accordance with ASC 842, components of a lease should be split into three categories: lease components, non-lease components, and non-components. The fixed and in-substance fixed contract consideration (including any consideration related product(s),to non-components) must be allocated based on the respective relative fair values to the lease components and non-lease components.
Entities may elect not to separate lease and non-lease components. Rather, entities would account for each lease component and related non-lease component together as a single lease component. We have elected to account for lease and non-lease components together as a single lease component for all underlying contract terms, provided that the reported sales are reliably measurableassets and we have no remaining performance obligations.

Intangible assets

Intangible assets consist of acquired core technology with finite lives. We amortize intangible assets using the straight-line method over their estimated economic lives. We evaluate the potential impairment of intangible assets if events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amountallocate all of the assets may not be fully recoverable or thatcontract consideration to the useful lives of these assets are no longer appropriate. The impairment test is based on a comparison of the undiscounted cash flows expected to be generated fromlease component only.

ASC 842 allows for the use of judgment in determining whether the assumed lease term is for a major part of the remaining economic life of the underlying asset group and its eventual disposition towhether the carryingpresent value of the asset group. If impairment is indicated, the asset is written down by the amount by which the carrying valuelease payments represents substantially all of the asset exceeds the related fair value of the asset. We have not recognized an impairment charge related to intangible assets.

Financing lease obligation

Beginning in 2015 through construction completion in 2017, we recorded certain estimated construction costs incurred and reported to us by the landlord for our new corporate headquarters building, located at 60 Binney Street in Cambridge, Massachusetts, as an asset and corresponding construction financing lease obligation on our consolidated balance sheets because we were deemed to be the owner of the building during the construction period for accounting purposes.  During construction, the Company periodically met with the landlord and its construction manager to review these estimates and observe construction progress before recording such amounts.  Upon completion of the construction of the building in the first quarter of 2017, the Company evaluated the lease and determined that it did not meet the criteria for “sale-leaseback” treatment. Accordingly, the Company is depreciating the building over 40 years and incurring interest expense in its consolidated statement of operations and comprehensive loss related to the financing lease obligation recorded on its consolidated balance sheet. Any costs incurred by us that have been reimbursed by the landlord or that qualify for reimbursement by the landlord are recorded as an asset and financing lease obligation. Any incremental costs incurred directly by us that do not qualify for reimbursement by the landlord are also capitalized. We began occupying our new corporate headquarters building on March 27, 2017.

Contingent consideration

Each reporting period, we revalue the contingent consideration obligations associated with business combinations to their fair value and record the resulting change in fair value as either contingent consideration expense and or income. Changes in contingent consideration result from changes in the assumptions regarding probabilities of successful achievement of related milestones, the estimated timing in which the milestones are achieved and the discount rate used to estimate the fair value of the liability. Contingent consideration may change significantly as developmentunderlying asset. We apply the bright line thresholds referenced in ASC 842-10-55-2 to assist in evaluating leases for appropriate classification. The aforementioned bright lines are applied consistently to our entire portfolio of our programs progress and additional data are obtained, impacting our assumptions. The assumptions used in estimating fair value require significant judgment and the use of different assumptions and judgments could result in a materially different estimate of fair value.

leases.

Accrued research and development expenses

As part of the process of preparing our financial statements, we are required to estimate our accrued expenses. This process involves reviewing open contracts and purchase orders, communicating with our personnel to identify services that have been performed on our behalf and estimating the level of service performed and the associated cost incurred for the service when we have not yet been invoiced or otherwise notified of the actual cost. The majority of our service providers invoice us monthly in arrears for services performed or when contractual milestones are met. We make estimates of our accrued expenses as of each balance sheet date in our financial statements based on facts and circumstances known to us at that time.  Examples of estimated accrued research and development expenses include fees paid to:

CROs in connection with clinical studies;

investigative sites in connection with clinical studies;

vendors in connection with preclinical development activities; and

vendors related to development, manufacturing, and distribution of clinical trial materials.

We base ourrecognize expenses related to clinical studies based on our estimates of the services received and efforts expended pursuant to contracts with multiple CROs that conduct and manage clinical studies on our behalf. The financial terms of these agreements are subject to negotiation, vary from contract to contract and may result in uneven payment flows. There may be instances in which payments made to our vendors will exceed the level of services provided and result in a prepayment of the clinical expense. Payments under some of these contracts depend on factors such as the successful enrollment of subjects and the completion of clinical study milestones. In accruing service fees, we estimate the time period over which services will be performed and the level of effort to be expended in each period and adjust accordingly.

Other examples of estimated accrued research and development expenses include fees paid to:
investigative sites in connection with clinical studies;
vendors in connection with preclinical development activities; and
vendors related to the development, manufacturing, and distribution of clinical trial materials.
84

Table of Contents
Stock-based compensation

We issue stock-based awards to employees and non-employees, generally in the form of stock options and restricted stock units. We account for our stock-based awards in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718, Compensation—Stock Compensation, or ASC 718. ASC 718 requires all stock-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options and modifications to existing stock options, to be recognized in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss based on their fair values.  We accountPrior to the adoption of Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2018-07, Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting (“ASU 2018-07”),  the measurement date for non-employee awards was generally the date the services are completed, resulting in financial reporting period adjustments to stock-based awards to non-employeescompensation during the vesting terms for changes in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 505-50, Equity-Based Payments to Non-Employees, which requires the fair value of the award to be re-measured atawards.  After the adoption of ASU 2018-07, the measurement date for non-employee awards is the date of grant without changes in the fair value of the award. Stock-based compensation costs for non-employees are recognized as expense over the award vests.

vesting period on a straight-line basis.

Our stock-based awards are subject to either service or performance-based vesting conditions. Compensation expense related to awards to employees, non-employees, and directors, with service-based vesting conditions is recognized on a straight-line basis based on the grant date fair value over the associated service period of the award, which is generally the vesting term. Compensation expense related to awards to employees and non-employees with service-based vesting conditions is recognized on the then-current fair value at each financial reporting date prior to the measurement date over the associated service period of the award, which is generally the vesting term, using the accelerated attribution method. Compensation expense related to awards to employees with performance-based vesting conditions is recognized based on the grant date fair value over the requisite service period using the accelerated attribution method to the extent achievement of the performance condition is probable. CompensationWe estimate the probability that certain performance criteria will be met and do not recognize compensation expense related to awards to non-employees withuntil it is probable that the performance-based vesting conditions is recognized based on the then-current fair value at each financial reporting date prior to the measurement date over the requisite service period using the accelerated attribution method to the extent achievement of the performance condition is probable.

will be achieved.  

We estimate the fair value of our stock-based awards to employees, non-employees, and non-employeesdirectors, using the Black-Scholes option pricing model, which requires the input of highly subjective assumptions, including (i) the expected volatility of our stock, (ii) the expected term of the award, (iii) the risk-free interest rate, and (iv) expected dividends. Due toEffective January 1, 2020, we eliminated the lackuse of company specifica representative peer group and use only our own historical and implied volatility data we basedin our estimate of expected volatility on the estimate and expected volatilities of a representative group of publicly traded companies. For these analyses, we select companies with comparable characteristics to ours including enterprise value, risk profiles, position within the industry, and with historical share price information sufficient to meet the expected life of the stock-based awards. We compute the historical volatility data using the daily closing prices for the selected companies’ shares during the equivalent period of the calculated expected term of our stock-based awards. We will continue to apply this process untilgiven that there is now a sufficient amount of historical information regarding the volatility of our own stock price becomes available.price. We estimate the expected life of our employee stock options using the “simplified” method, whereby, the expected life equals the average of the vesting term and the original contractual term of the option. The risk-free interest rates for periods within the expected life of the option were based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect during the period the options were granted.


As a result of the adoption of the FASB Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2016-09, Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting, effective January 1, 2017, we account for forfeitures as they occur instead of estimating forfeitures at the time of grant and revising those estimates in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from our estimates.

Recent accounting pronouncements

See Note 2, Summary of significant accounting policies and basis of presentation, in the notes to our consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a description of recent accounting pronouncements applicable to our business.


85

Table of Contents
Results of Operations

Comparison of the years ended December 31, 20172020 and 2016:

2019:

 

Year Ended December 31,

 

 

 

 

 

Year ended December 31,

 

2017

 

 

2016

 

 

Change

 

20202019Change

 

(in thousands)

 

(in thousands)

Revenue:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Revenue:

Collaboration revenue

 

$

22,207

 

 

$

6,155

 

 

$

16,052

 

License and royalty revenue

 

 

13,220

 

 

 

 

 

 

13,220

 

Service revenueService revenue$114,064 $30,729 $83,335 
Collaborative arrangement revenueCollaborative arrangement revenue115,594 5,740 109,854 
Royalty and other revenueRoyalty and other revenue21,076 8,205 12,871 

Total revenues

 

 

35,427

 

 

 

6,155

 

 

 

29,272

 

Total revenues250,734 44,674 206,060 

Operating expenses:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Operating expenses:

Research and development

 

 

273,040

 

 

 

204,775

 

 

 

68,265

 

Research and development587,956 582,413 5,543 

General and administrative

 

 

93,550

 

 

 

65,119

 

 

 

28,431

 

Cost of license and royalty revenue

 

 

1,527

 

 

 

 

 

 

1,527

 

Selling, general and administrativeSelling, general and administrative286,896 271,362 15,534 
Cost of royalty and other revenueCost of royalty and other revenue5,396 2,978 2,418 

Change in fair value of contingent consideration

 

 

(525

)

 

 

4,091

 

 

 

(4,616

)

Change in fair value of contingent consideration(6,468)2,747 (9,215)

Total operating expenses

 

 

367,592

 

 

 

273,985

 

 

 

93,607

 

Total operating expenses873,780 859,500 14,280 

Loss from operations

 

 

(332,165

)

 

 

(267,830

)

 

 

64,335

 

Loss from operations(623,046)(814,826)191,780 

Interest (expense) income, net

 

 

(2,001

)

 

 

3,782

 

 

 

5,783

 

Interest income, netInterest income, net11,539 34,761 (23,222)

Other expense, net

 

 

(1,267

)

 

 

(71

)

 

 

1,196

 

Other expense, net(6,502)(10,088)3,586 

Loss before income taxes

 

 

(335,433

)

 

 

(264,119

)

 

 

71,314

 

Loss before income taxes(618,009)(790,153)172,144 

Income tax benefit (expense)

 

 

(210

)

 

 

612

 

 

 

822

 

Income tax (expense) benefitIncome tax (expense) benefit(686)545 (1,231)

Net loss

 

$

(335,643

)

 

$

(263,507

)

 

$

72,136

 

Net loss$(618,695)$(789,608)$170,913 

Revenue.Total revenue was $35.4$250.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2017,2020, compared to $6.2$44.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2016.2019. The increase of $29.3$206.1 million was primarily attributable to collaborationa cumulative catch-up adjustment to revenue recognized associatedrecorded in connection with the bb2121 licenseMay 2020 BMS contract modification, as well as an increase in royalty and manufacturing services which commenced in the first quarter of 2017 andother revenue primarily attributable to revenue recognized under our out-licensing arrangementsan out-license agreement with Novartis and GSK.

Juno Therapeutics, Inc.

Research and development expenses.Research and development expenses were $273.0$588.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2017,2020, compared to $204.8$582.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2016.2019. The increase of $68.3$5.5 million was primarily attributable to the following:

$22.112.8 million of employee compensation and benefits, inclusive of $6.9 million increased stock-based compensation expense, as well as $2.2 million in other headcount relatedcollaboration research funding costs, primarily due to an increase in headcountcollaboration costs incurred by BMS as a result of BMS assuming the contract manufacturing agreements relating to support overall growth;

ide-cel adherent lentiviral vector under the May 2020 contract modification;

$17.78.2 million of manufacturing costs for our ongoing clinical and pre-clinical studies;

$12.1 million of clinical trial-related costs to support the advancement of our clinical programs;

$4.4 million of facility related costs;

$3.5 million of license and milestone fees; and

$3.0 million related to cost reimbursement to Celgene for costs incurred under our collaboration arrangement

General and administrative expenses. General and administrative expenses were $93.6million for the year ended December 31, 2017, compared to $65.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2016. The increase of approximately $28.4 million was primarily due an increase of $14.9 million inincreased net employee compensation, benefit, and benefits, inclusive of $6.6 million increased stock-based compensation expense, $2.3 million in other headcount related costs, increased commercial-related costs of $8.6 millionexpenses, which is primarily attributed to market research costs, and increased facility-related costs of $2.1 million.

Cost of license and royalty revenue. Cost of license and royalty revenue was $1.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2017.   The costs are attributable to expense associated with amounts owed to third party licensors in connection with revenue recognized under our out-license arrangements with Novartis and GSK.

Change in fair value of contingent consideration. The change in fair value of contingent consideration of $4.6 million was primarily related to the successful achievement of one milestone in 2017 compared to the achievement of two milestones in 2016, and a decrease in the probability of successful achievement of future milestones within the next twelve months.

Interest (expense) income, net. The change in interest (expense) income, net was primarily related to interest expense on the 60 Binney financing obligation partially offsetdriven by interest income earned on investments.

Other expense, net. Other expense, net was $1.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2017, compared to $0.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2016. The increase was primarily related to a loss on the disposal of assets.

Comparison of the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015:

 

 

Year Ended December 31,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2016

 

 

2015

 

 

Change

 

 

 

(in thousands)

 

Revenue:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Collaboration revenue

 

$

6,155

 

 

$

14,079

 

 

$

(7,924

)

Total revenue

 

 

6,155

 

 

 

14,079

 

 

 

(7,924

)

Operating expenses:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Research and development

 

 

204,775

 

 

 

134,038

 

 

 

70,737

 

General and administrative

 

 

65,119

 

 

 

46,209

 

 

 

18,910

 

Change in fair value of contingent consideration

 

 

4,091

 

 

 

2,869

 

 

 

1,222

 

Total operating expenses

 

 

273,985

 

 

 

183,116

 

 

 

90,869

 

Loss from operations

 

 

(267,830

)

 

 

(169,037

)

 

 

98,793

 

Interest income, net

 

 

3,782

 

 

 

1,591

 

 

 

(2,191

)

Other (expense) income, net

 

 

(71

)

 

 

723

 

 

 

794

 

Loss before income taxes

 

 

(264,119

)

 

 

(166,723

)

 

 

97,396

 

Income tax (expense) benefit

 

 

612

 

 

 

(60

)

 

 

(672

)

Net loss

 

$

(263,507

)

 

$

(166,783

)

 

$

96,724

 

Revenue. Total revenue was $6.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to $14.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. The decrease of $7.9 million was primarily due to a change in revenue recognition resulting from the amendment to our Celgene collaboration in 2015.


Research and development expenses. Research and development expenses were $204.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2016, compared to $134.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. The increase of $70.7million was primarily due to the increase in headcount, in-licensing costs, clinical trial-related costs, and manufacturing-related expenses necessary to support the advancement of our product candidates and included in the following increases:

$9.2 million of employee compensation and benefits, primarily due to a $14.3 million increase in payroll and payroll-related expense due to an increase in headcount offset byin the quality and manufacturing organizations to support overall growth and includes a $5.2$7.9 million decrease in stock-based compensation expense due to non-recurringthe recognition of expense on performance-based restricted stock units that vested in June 2019. Refer to Note 14, Stock-based compensation, in the notes to consolidated financial statements for discussion of stock-based compensation charges incurred in 2015 and not in 2016 related toexpense recognized on the modification of awards of our former Chief Scientific Officer and a non-employee founder.

performance-based restricted stock units;

$2.2 million of consulting and contractor costs to support our overall growth.

$26.1 million of manufacturing costs for our ongoing clinical and pre-clinical studies.

$6.67.0 million of increased license and milestone fees primarily due to a $15.0 million one-time upfront payment made in 2016 offset by other licensesublicense fee upon execution of the May 2020 BMS contract modification; and milestone fees incurred during 2015 and 2016.

$4.05.3 million of clinical trial-relatedincreased consulting fees primarily related to the quality and manufacturing organizations.

These increased costs to support the advancement of our clinical programs.

were partially offset by:

$5.717.6 million of laboratory supplies relateddecreased material production and other platform costs, primarily due to increased headcount and process development activities.

BMS assuming the contract manufacturing agreements relating to ide-cel adherent lentiviral vector under the May 2020 contract modification;

$13.07.0 million of facilitiesdecreased value-added taxes; and information technology expenses.

$2.1 million of ongoing expenses related to sponsoreddecreased medical research agreements.

costs.
86

General


Table of Contents
Selling, general and administrative expenses. GeneralSelling, general and administrative expenses were $65.1$286.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2016,2020, compared to $46.2$271.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2015.2019. The increase of $18.9$15.5 million was primarily due to the following:
$14.7 million of increased employee compensation, benefit, and other headcount related expenses, which is primarily driven by an increase in headcount in the information technology and human resource organizations to support overall growth, including an increase of $11.1$3.9 million in employee-relatedstock-based compensation expense; and
$10.6 million of increased information technology and facility-related costs primarily due to support our overall growthincreased investment in software applications and technology.
These increased costs were partially offset by:
$8.06.8 million of decreased costs related to commercial readiness activities due to delays in commercial launch activities during 2020 as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic; and
$2.3 million of decreased consulting costsfees primarily related to support our overall growth as well as pre-commercial efforts.

commercial strategy and product marketing.

Cost of royalty and other revenue. Cost of royalty and other revenue was $5.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, compared to $3.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2019.  The increase is attributable to increased royalty revenue in the same periods.
Change in fair value of contingent consideration.The change in fair value of contingent consideration was primarily due to the change in significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of $1.2 millioncontingent consideration, including the probabilities of successful achievement of clinical and commercial milestones and discount rates.
Interest income, net. The decrease in interest income, net was primarily related to the successful achievement of two milestonesdecreased interest income earned on investments due to an overall decrease in 2016 and an increaseinterest rates.
Other expense, net. The decrease in the probability of successful achievement of a future milestone expected to be achieved within the next twelve months.

Interest income, net. Interest income,other expense, net was $3.8primarily related to changes in fair value on equity securities.

Comparison of the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018:
Year ended December 31,
20192018Change
(in thousands)
Revenue:
Service revenue$30,729 $44,533 $(13,804)
Collaborative arrangement revenue5,740 7,820 (2,080)
Royalty and other revenue8,205 2,226 5,979 
Total revenues44,674 54,579 (9,905)
Operating expenses:
Research and development582,413 448,589 133,824 
Selling, general and administrative271,362 174,129 97,233 
Cost of royalty and other revenue2,978 885 2,093 
Change in fair value of contingent consideration2,747 2,999 (252)
Total operating expenses859,500 626,602 232,898 
Loss from operations(814,826)(572,023)(242,803)
Interest income, net34,761 14,624 20,137 
Other (expense) income, net(10,088)1,961 (12,049)
Loss before income taxes(790,153)(555,438)(234,715)
Income tax benefit (expense)545 (187)732 
Net loss$(789,608)$(555,625)$(233,983)
Revenue. Total revenue was $44.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2016,2019, compared to $1.6$54.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2015.2018. The decrease of $9.9 million was primarily attributable to a decrease in service revenue recognized for the ide-cel license and manufacturing services under our agreement with BMS. This decrease was partially offset by an
87

increase in royalty and other revenue and an increase in collaborative arrangement revenue under our agreement with Regeneron.
Research and development expenses. Research and development expenses were $582.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to $448.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase of $133.8 million was primarily attributable to the following:
$66.1 million of increased employee compensation, benefit, and other headcount related expenses, which is primarily driven by an increase in research and development headcount to support overall growth, including an increase of $25.7 million in stock-based compensation expense. Refer to Note 14, Stock-based compensation, in the notes to consolidated financial statements for discussion of stock-based compensation expense recognized on the performance-based restricted stock units;
$34.8 million of increased IT and facility related costs, which includes the impact of adopting ASU 2016-02;
$26.3 million of increased collaboration research funding costs;
$13.1 million of increased laboratory expenses, material production, and other platform costs;
$9.7 million of increased research consulting and medical research costs; and
$3.6 million of increased clinical trial costs.
These increased costs were partially offset by $20.6 million of decreased license and milestone fees.
Selling, general and administrative expenses. Selling, general and administrative expenses were $271.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to $174.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase of approximately $97.2 million was primarily due to the following:
$65.3 million of increased employee compensation, benefit, and other headcount related expenses, which is primarily driven by an increase in selling, general, and administrative headcount to support overall growth, including an increase of $24.1 million in stock-based compensation expense. Refer to Note 14, Stock-based compensation, in the notes to consolidated financial statements for discussion of stock-based compensation expense recognized on the performance-based restricted stock units;
$18.4 million of increased costs related to commercial-readiness activities; and
$13.2 million of increased consulting fees.
Cost of royalty and other revenue. Cost of royalty and other revenue was $3.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to $0.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2018.  The increase is attributable to increased royalty revenue in the same periods.
Change in fair value of contingent consideration. The change in fair value of contingent consideration was primarily due to the change in significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of contingent consideration, including the probabilities of successful achievement of clinical and commercial milestones and discount rates.
Interest income, net. The change in interest income, net was primarily related to increased interest income earned on marketableinvestments, as well as a decrease in interest expense incurred due to the de-recognition of the financing lease obligation associated with our corporate headquarters at 60 Binney Street related to the adoption of ASU 2016-02 on January 1, 2019.
Other (expense) income, net. The change in other (expense) income, net was primarily related to changes in fair value on equity securities.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2017,2020, we had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of approximately $1.6$1.27 billion. We expect our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will be sufficient to fund planned operations into 2021.for at least the next twelve months from the date of issuance of these financial statements, though we may pursue additional cash resources through public or private equity or debt financings or by establishing additional collaborations with other companies. Cash in excess of immediate requirements is invested in accordance with our investment policy, primarily with a view to liquidity and capital preservation. As of December 31, 2017,2020, our funds are primarily held in U.S. Treasury securities, U.S. government agency securities federally insured deposits, certificates of depositand treasuries, equity securities, corporate bonds, commercial paper, and money market accounts.

accounts.

88

Table of Contents
We have incurred losses and cumulative negative cash flows from operations since our inception in April 1992, and as of December 31, 2017,2020, we had an accumulated deficit of $913.8 million. We anticipate that we will continue to incur losses for at least the next several years.$2.90 billion. We expect that our research and development and selling, general and administrative expenses will continue to increase and, as a result, we will need additional capital to fund our operations, which we may raise through public or private equity or debt financings, strategic collaborations, or other sources.

The likelihood of our long-term success must be considered in light of the expenses, difficulties, and potential delays to be encountered in the development and commercialization of new pharmaceutical products, competitive factors in the marketplace and the complex regulatory environment in which we operate. We may never achieve significant revenue or profitable operations.

We have funded our operations principally from the sale of common stock preferred stockin public offerings and through the Celgene collaboration. On June 29, 2015, we sold 2,941,176 shares of common stock through an underwritten public offering at a price of $170.00 per share for aggregate net proceeds to us of $477.2 million.  On December 12, 2016, we sold 3,289,473 shares of common stock through an underwritten public offering at a price of $76.00 per share for aggregate net proceeds to us of $234.7 million.  On June 27, 2017, we sold 4,381,500 shares of common stock (inclusive of 571,500 shares of common stock sold by us pursuant to the full exercise of an overallotment option granted to the underwriters in connectionour collaborations with the offering) through an underwritten public offering at a price of $105.00 per share for aggregate net proceeds to us of $436.8 million. On December 15, 2017, we sold 3,243,244 shares of common stock (excluding any shares sold by us pursuant to an overallotment option granted to the underwriters in connection with the offering) through an underwritten public offering at a price of $185.00 per share for aggregate net proceeds to us of $569.8 million.  BMS and Regeneron as outlined below:
In January 2018, we sold 277,1090.3 million shares of common stock pursuant to the partial exercise of an overallotment option granted to the underwriters


in connection with the December 2017 underwritten public offering at a price of $185.00 per share for aggregate net proceeds of $48.6$48.7 million.

In July 2018, we sold 3.9 million shares of common stock through an underwritten public offering at a price of $162.50 per share for aggregate net proceeds to us of $600.6 million.
In August 2018, we sold 0.4 million shares of common stock to Regeneron in connection with our collaboration arrangement at a price of $238.10 per share for aggregate net proceeds to us of $100.0 million, of which $45.5 million was attributed to a prepayment of joint research activities. See Note 11, Collaborative arrangements, in the notes to consolidated financial statements for more information.
In May 2020, we entered into the First Amendment to the Amended and Restated Co-Development, Co-Promote and Profit Share Agreement (as amended, the “Amended Ide-cel CCPS”) and the Second Amended and Restated bb21217 License Agreement (“Amended bb21217 License Agreement”) with BMS pursuant to which BMS modified its obligations to pay us for future ex-U.S. milestones and royalties on commercial sales by making a one-time up-front payment of $200.0 million. See Note 11, Collaborative arrangements, in the notes to consolidated financial statements for more information.
In May 2020, we sold 10.5 million shares of common stock (inclusive of shares sold pursuant to an option granted to the underwriters in connection with the offering) through an underwritten public offering at a price of $55.00 per share for aggregate net proceeds of $541.5 million.
Sources of Liquidity

Cash Flows

The following table summarizes our cash flow activity:

Year Ended December 31,

 

Year ended December 31,

 

2017

 

 

 

2016

 

 

 

2015

 

202020192018

(in thousands)

 

(in thousands)

Net cash used in operating activities

$

(280,553

)

 

$

(189,647

)

 

$

(98,429

)

Net cash used in operating activities$(470,351)$(564,384)$(413,426)

Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities

 

(316,003

)

 

 

62,731

 

 

 

(571,867

)

Net cash provided by (used in) investing activitiesNet cash provided by (used in) investing activities(84,345)507,807 (679,435)

Net cash provided by financing activities

 

1,076,174

 

 

 

241,534

 

 

 

486,720

 

Net cash provided by financing activities546,715 21,187 737,692 

Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

$

479,618

 

 

$

114,618

 

 

$

(183,576

)

Decrease in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cashDecrease in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash$(7,981)$(35,390)$(355,169)

Operating Activities.The net cash used in operating activities was $280.6$470.4 million for the year ended December 31, 20172020 and primarily consisted of a net loss of $335.6$618.7 million adjusted for non-cash items including stock-based compensation of $53.3$156.6 million and depreciation and amortization of $13.5$19.4 million, and aas well as the change in our net increase in operating assets and liabilities of $12.7 million. The increase in operating assets and liabilities is driven by an increase in prepaid expenses and other current assets of $20.1 million primarily driven by upfront payments to contract manufacturing organizations offset by an increase of $5.9 million in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities and an increase of $1.0 million in deferred revenue.

working capital.

The net cash used in operating activities was $189.6$564.4 million for the year ended December 31, 20162019 and primarily consisted of a net loss of $263.5$789.6 million adjusted for non-cash items including stock-based compensation of $39.8$160.6 million and depreciation and amortization of $9.6$17.4 million, and aas well as the change in our net increase in operating assets and liabilities of $19.0 million. The increase in operating assets and liabilities is driven by an increase in prepaid expenses and other current assets of $14.3 million for upfront payments to contract manufacturing organizations offset by an increase of $20.9 million in accrued expenses and other liabilities related to an increase in manufacturing and clinical-trial related costs for our ongoing clinical and pre-clinical studies.

working capital.

The net cash used in operating activities was $98.4$413.4 million for the year ended December 31, 20152018 and primarily consisted of a net loss of $166.8$555.6 million adjusted for non-cash items including stock-based compensation of $41.1$110.8 million and depreciation and amortization of $7.4 and a$17.2 million, as well as the change in our net increase in operating assets and liabilitiesworking capital.
89

Table of $16.0 million. The significant items in the increase in operating assets and liabilities include an increase in deferred revenue of $11.2 million related to the amendment to our collaboration with Celgene and an increase in accrued expenses of $9.4 million related to an increase in accrued goods and services and an increase in the contingent consideration, offset by a decrease in prepaid expenses and other assets of $6.8 million due to purchases of marketable securities at a premium.

Contents

Investing Activities. Net cash used in investing activities for the year ended December 31, 20172020 was $316.0$84.3 million and was primarily due to the purchase of $686.2 million$1.00 billion of available-for-sale marketable securities and the purchase of $62.2$29.0 million of property, plant and equipment offset by proceeds from the maturities of available-for-sale marketable securities of $431.8$918.3 million.

Net cash provided by investing activities for the year ended December 31, 20162019 was $62.7$507.8 million and was primarily due to proceeds from the maturities of available-for-sale marketable securities of $443.4 million$1.34 billion offset by the purchase of $348.2$756.6 million of available-for-sale marketable securities.

securities and the purchase of $71.0 million of property, plant and equipment.

Net cash used in investing activities for the year ended December 31, 20152018 was $571.9$679.4 million and was primarily due to the purchase of $755.2$1.52 billion of marketable securities and the purchase of $55.7 million of available-for-sale marketable securitiesproperty, plant and equipment offset by $199.2 million in proceeds from the maturities of available-for-sale marketable securities.

securities of $894.3 million.

Financing Activities: Net cash provided by financing activities for the year ended December 31, 20172020 was $1.1 billion$546.7 million and was primarily due to net cash proceeds from our June 2017 and December 2017May 2020 common stock offerings.

offering, as well as employee option exercises and ESPP contributions.

Net cash provided by financing activities for the year ended December 31, 20162019 was $241.5$21.2 million and was primarily due to net cash proceeds from our December 2016 common stock offering.

employee option exercises and ESPP contributions.

Net cash provided by financing activities for the year ended December 31, 20152018 was $486.7$737.7 million and was primarily due to net cash proceeds from our June 2015January 2018 and July 2018 common stock offering and $10.1 million proceeds from theofferings, as well as our issuance of common stock primarily related to the exercise of stock options.

Regeneron and employee option exercises and ESPP contributions.

Contractual Obligations and Commitments

The following table summarizes our contractual obligations at December 31, 2017.  These do not include potential milestone payments and assume non-termination of agreements.

 

Total

 

 

2018

 

 

2019

through

2020

 

 

2021

through

2022

 

 

After

2023

 

 

(in thousands)

 

60 Binney Street lease

$

185,444

 

 

$

18,647

 

 

$

38,279

 

 

$

39,631

 

 

$

88,887

 

Non-cancellable operating leases (1)

 

81,494

 

 

 

13,941

 

 

 

23,012

 

 

 

16,916

 

 

 

27,625

 

License costs (2)

 

6,080

 

 

 

1,171

 

 

 

2,387

 

 

 

2,522

 

 

 

 

Clinical and manufacturing development

 

24,000

 

 

 

12,000

 

 

 

12,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total contractual obligations

$

297,018

 

 

$

45,759

 

 

$

75,678

 

 

$

59,069

 

 

$

116,512

 

(1)

Includes the lease of our lab and office space in Seattle, Washington and rental payments associated with two embedded operating leases at contract manufacturing organizations.

(2)

License costs include annual license maintenance fee payments. We have not included annual license maintenance fees or minimum royalty payments after December 31, 2022, as we cannot estimate if they will occur.

Lease commitments

60 Binney Street Lease

Onlease

In September 21, 2015, we entered into a lease agreement for office and laboratory space located at 60 Binney Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts.  Under the terms of the lease, starting on October 1, 2016, we leased approximately 253,108 square feet of office and laboratory space at $72.50 per square foot per year, or $18.4 million per year in base rent, which is subject to scheduled annual rent increases of 1.75% plus certain operating expenses and taxes. We also executedThe Company currently maintains a $9.2$13.8 million collateralized letter of credit upon signing the lease, which was required to be collateralized with a bank account at a financial institution in accordance with the lease agreement. This letter of credit was increased to $13.8 million during the third quarter of 2016 as required under the terms of the lease. Subjectand, subject to the terms of the lease and certain reduction requirements specified therein, including market capitalization requirements, this amount may decrease back to $9.2 million over time. The lease will continue until March 31, 2027.  Pursuant to a work letter entered into in connection with the lease, the landlord will contributecontributed an aggregate of $42.4 million toward the cost of construction and tenant improvements for the building. The purpose of the lease was to replace our previously leased premises
50 Binney Street sublease
In April 2019, we entered into a sublease agreement for office space located at 150 Second Street and 215 First50 Binney Street in Cambridge, Massachusetts both(the “50 Binney Street Sublease”) to supplement our corporate headquarters located at 60 Binney Street in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Under the terms of the 50 Binney Street Sublease, we will lease 267,278 square feet of office space for $99.95 per square foot, or $26.7 million per year in base rent subject to certain operating expenses, taxes and annual rent increases of approximately 3%. The lease will commence when the space is available for use, which were fully exited duringis anticipated to be in the first half of 2017. We occupied2022, which reflects the building at 60sublessor's exercise of its option to postpone the commencement date of the sublease, and end on December 31, 2030, unless other conditions specified in the 50 Binney Street beginningSublease occur. Upon signing the 50 Binney Street Sublease, we executed a $40.1 million cash-collateralized letter of credit, which may be reduced in the future subject to the terms of the 50 Binney Street Sublease and certain reduction requirements specified therein. The $40.1 million of cash collateralizing the letter of credit is classified as restricted cash and other non-current assets on March 27, 2017.

Operating Leases

On June 3, 2013,our consolidated balance sheets. Payments will commence at the earlier of (i) the date which is 90 days following the commencement date and (ii) the date we take occupancy of all or any portion of the premises. In connection with the execution of the 50 Binney Street Sublease, we also entered into a nine-year buildingPurchase Agreement for furniture and equipment (the “Furniture Purchase Agreement”) located on the premises upon lease for approximately 43,600 square feet of space located at 150 Second Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts, which commenced in December 2013. This lease was amended in June 2014 to add approximately 9,900 additional square feet. The lease originally had monthly lease payments of $0.2 million for the first 12 months, which increased to $0.3 million per month beginning in December 2014 due to the lease amendment, with annual rent escalations thereafter. Rent expense was recognized on a straight-line basis over the termcommencement. Upon execution of the lease through April 2017. The lease provided a contribution from the landlord towards the initial build-outFurniture Purchase Agreement, we made an upfront payment of the space of up to $7.8 million. We capitalized the leasehold improvements as property, plant and equipment and recorded the landlord incentive payments received as deferred rent and amortized these amounts as reductions to rent expense over the lease term. In addition, in accordance with the lease, we entered into a cash-collateralized irrevocable standby letter of credit in the amount of $1.3$7.5 million, naming the landlord as beneficiary, which had a balance of $0.6 million as of December 31, 2016.

On September 30, 2016, we entered into an Assignment and Assumption of Lease (“Assignment”) relating to this lease. Under the Assignment, we assigned all of our rights, interests, obligationswhich was recorded within restricted cash and responsibilities under the lease, effective May 1, 2017.  Accordingly, $8.3 million of tenant improvementother non-current assets were disposed and $8.0 million of non-current deferred rent was removed from theon our consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2017, with the resulting loss2020.

90

Table of $0.3 million recorded within the consolidated statement of operations and comprehensive loss during the year ended December 31, 2017. The $0.6 million letter of credit was also released during the year ended December 31, 2017.

Contents

Seattle, Washington leases

On June 29, 2015,

In July 2018, we entered into a lease agreement for additional office and laboratory space located at 215 First Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts.  Underin a portion of a building in Seattle, Washington. The lease was amended in October 2018 to increase the terms of the lease, we leasedtotal rentable space to approximately 15,12036,126 square feet starting on July 13, 2015 for $0.5 millionat $54.00 per yearsquare foot in base rent per year, which wasis subject to a 3%scheduled annual rent increaseincreases of 2.5% plus certain operating expenses and taxes. The lease term was until August 31, 2020, and included early termination provisions that could allow us to terminate the lease without penalty at the end of the 20th full calendar month following the delivery of the premises if we met certain conditions specified within the lease.  Under the terms of the lease, we also leased an additional 8,075 square feet of office space in the same premises startingcommenced on January 1, 20162019 and the lease term will continue through January 31, 2027. The Company moved into the facility in June 2019. The lease allowed for an additional $0.3a tenant improvement allowance of up to $215.00 per square foot, or approximately $8.0 million. We utilized the $8.0 million tenant improvement allowance and it has been fully reimbursed by the landlord as of December 31, 2020.
In September 2019, we entered into a second amendment to the lease (the “Second Amendment”). The Second Amendment added approximately 22,188 square feet to the existing space and extended the lease term of the entire premises by 16 months, or until April 2028. Fixed monthly rent for the expanded space will be incurred at a rate of $62.80 per square foot per year beginning in base rent, which wasJanuary 2021, subject to annual increases of 2.5%. The Second Amendment includes a 3%five-year option to extend the term. In September 2020, the Company entered into a sublease agreement for the 22,188 square feet added under the Second Amendment at a fixed monthly rent of $62.80 per square foot per year beginning in January 2021, subject to annual rent increase plus certain operating expenses and taxes.increases of 2.5%. The Company terminated this lease effectivesublease term will continue through April 12, 2017.

On2028.

Embedded leases
In June 3, 2016, we entered into a strategic manufacturing agreement for the future commercial production of the our Lenti-Dbeti-cel and LentiGlobin product candidateseli-cel drug products with a contract manufacturing organization. Under this 12 year12-year agreement, the contract manufacturing organization will complete the design, construction, validation and process validation of the leased suites prior to anticipated commercial launch of the product candidates. During construction, we are required to pay $12.5paid $12.0 million upon the achievement of certain contractual milestones, and may pay up to $8.0 million in additional contractual milestones if we elect its option to lease additional suites. milestones. We paid $5.0 million for the achievement of the first and second contractual milestones during 2016 and paid $5.5 million for the third and fourth contractual milestones achieved during 2017.  In March 2018, $1.5 million of the possible $2.0 million related to the fifth contractual milestone of $3.0 million duringwas achieved and was paid in the firstsecond quarter of 2017.  Additionally, the fourth milestone of $2.5 million2018.  Given that construction was achievedcompleted in the fourth quarter of 2017 and is reflected as a component of accrued expenses and other current liabilities within the consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2017. Following construction completion,March 2018, beginning in April 2018 we will pay $5.1 million per year in fixed suite fees as well as certain fixed labor, raw materials, testing and shipping costs for manufacturing services, and may pay additional suite fees if it elects its option to reserve or lease additional suites. We estimate completion will occur in 2018. services.
We may terminate this agreement at any time after upon payment of a one-time termination fee and up to 24 months of fixed suite and labor fees. We concluded that this agreement contains an embedded lease as the suites are designated for our exclusive use during the term of the agreement. We concluded that we are not the deemed owner during construction nor is it a capital lease under ASC 840-10, Leases – Overall.Overall.  As a result, in prior periods we accountaccounted for the agreement as an operating lease under ASC 840 and expensesrecognized straight-line rent expense over the rental paymentsnon-cancellable term of the embedded lease. As part of our adoption of ASC 842, effective January 1, 2019, we carried forward the existing lease classification under ASC 840. Additionally, we recorded a right-of-use asset and lease liability for this operating lease on the effective date and are recognizing rent expense on a straight-line basis overthroughout the remaining term of the embedded lease.

On

In November 18, 2016, we entered into an agreement for future clinical and commercial production of our ZYNTEGLO, LentiGlobin gene therapyfor SCD, and eli-cel drug products with a contract manufacturing organization at an existing facility. The term of the agreement is five years with a three year renewal at the mutual option of each party. Under the agreement, we are required to pay an up-front fee of €3.0 million, €2.0 million of which was paid in the fourth quarter of 2016 and €1.0 million of which is expected to be paid in mid-2018, and annual maintenance and production fees of up to €9.8 million, depending on its production needs. We may terminate this agreement with six months’ notice and a one-time termination fee prior to July 1, 2018, or twelve months’ notice and a one-time termination fee thereafter. We concluded that this agreement contains an embedded operating lease as the clean rooms are designated for our exclusive use during the term of the agreement. The term of the agreement and determined that it is not a capital lease under ASC 840-10, Leases – Overall.five years with subsequent three-year renewals at the mutual option of each party. As a result, we will accountrecorded a right-of-use asset and lease liability for the agreement as anthis operating lease on the effective date of ASC 842, and are recognizing rent expense the rental payments on a straight-line basis overthroughout the estimated remaining term of the embedded lease. In March 2020, we amended this agreement with the contract manufacturing organization, resulting in a lease modification. Under the terms of the amended arrangement, we may be required to pay annual maintenance and production fees of up to €16.5 million, depending on its production needs, and may terminate this agreement with twelve months’ notice and a one-time termination fee. The amendment also provides for an option to reserve an additional clean room for a one-time option fee plus annual maintenance fees. As a result, we increased the right-of-use asset and lease liability related to this embedded operating lease during the first quarter of 2020.
In July 2020, we entered into an agreement reserving manufacturing capacity with a contract manufacturing organization. We concluded that this agreement contains an embedded lease as a controlled environment room at the facility is designated for our exclusive use during the term of the embedded lease.

We also have obligationsagreement, with the option to make future paymentssublease the space if we provide notice that we will not utilize it for a specified duration of time. Under the terms of the agreement, we will be required to third parties that become duepay up to $5.4 million per year in maintenance fees in addition to the cost of any services provided and payable onmay terminate this agreement with eighteen months' notice. The term of the achievement of certain development, regulatoryagreement is five years, with the option to extend, and commercial milestones (such as the start of a clinical trial, filing of a BLA, approval by the FDA or product launch). We have not included these commitments on our balance sheet oris expected to commence in the table above because the achievement and timingfirst half of these milestones is not fixed and determinable.

2021.

91

Table of Contents
Contingent Consideration Related to Business Combinations

In connection with the Pregenen acquisition, we agreed to make contingent cash payments to the former equity holdersequityholders of Pregenen. In accordance with accounting guidance for business combinations, these contingent cash payments are recorded as contingent consideration liabilities on our consolidated balance sheets at fair value. During the second quarter of 2017, a $5.0 million preclinical milestone was achieved, which resulted in a $5.0 million payment to the former equityholders of Pregenen during the third quarter of 2017. The aggregate remaining undiscounted amount of contingent consideration potentially payable is $120.0 million. We have not included these payments in the table above because the achievement and timing of these milestones is not fixed and determinable. As of December 31, 2017, $2.22020, and 2019, $1.5 million and $8.0 million, respectively, is reflected as a non-current liability in the consolidated balance sheet, and as of December 31, 2016, $4.5 million and $3.3 million was reflected as a current and non-current liability, respectively, in the consolidated balance sheet, which represents the fair value of our contingent consideration obligations as of this date.


Contingent Milestone and Royalty Payments

We also have obligations to make future payments to third parties that become due and payable on the achievement of certain development, regulatory and commercial milestones (such as the start of a clinical trial, filing of a BLA, approval by the FDA or product launch). We do not recognize these commitments in our financial statements until they become payable or have been paid.
Based on our development plans as of December 31, 2017,2020, we may be obligated to make future development, regulatory and commercial milestone payments and royalty payments on future sales of specified products associated with our collaboration and license agreements. Payments under these agreements generally become due and payable upon achievement of such milestones or sales. Because the achievement of these milestones or sales had not occurred as of December 31, 2017,2020, such contingencies have not been recorded in our financial statements. Amounts related to contingent milestone payments and sales-based royalties are not yet considered contractual obligations as they are contingent upon success.

Under a license agreement with Inserm-Transfert pursuant to which we license certain patents and know-how for use in adrenoleukodystrophy therapy, we will be required to make payments based upon development, regulatory and commercial milestones for any products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property. The maximum aggregate payments we may be obligated to pay for each of these milestone categories per product is €0.3, €0.2 and €1.6 million, respectively. We will also be required to pay a royalty on net sales of products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property in the low single digits. The royalty is subject to reduction for any third-party payments required to be made, with a minimum floor in the low single digits.

Under a license agreement with Institut Pasteur pursuant to which we license certain patents for use in ex vivo gene therapy, we will be required to make payments per product covered by the in-licensed intellectual property upon the achievement of development and regulatory milestones, depending on the indication and the method of treatment. The maximum aggregate payments we may be obligated to pay for each of these milestone categories per product is €1.5 and €2.0 million, respectively. We will also be required to pay a royalty on net sales of products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property in the low single digits, which varies slightly depending on the indication of the product. We have the right to sublicense our rights under this agreement, and we will be required to pay a percentage of such license income varying from the low single digits to mid-range double digits depending on the nature of the sublicense and stage of development. We are required to make an annual maintenance payment, which is creditable against royalty payments on a year-by-year basis. On April 1, 2015, we amended this license agreement with Institut Pasteur, which resulted in a payment of €3.0 million that was paid during the second quarter of 2015.  During the year ended December 31, 20172020 we paid Institut Pasteur €1.0€7.3 million in connection with amounts owed to us by sublicensees.

Under a license agreement with the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University, or Stanford, pursuant to which we license the HEK293T cell line for use in gene therapy products, we are required to pay a royalty on net sales of products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property in the low single digits that varies with net sales. The royalty is reduced for each third-party license that requires payments by us with respect to a licensed product, provided that the royalty to Stanford is not less than a specified percentage that is less than one percent. We have been paying Stanford an annual maintenance fee, which will be creditable against our royalty payments.

Under a license agreement with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, or MIT, pursuant to which we license various patents, we will be required to make a payment of $0.1 million based upon a regulatory filing milestone. We will also be required to pay a royalty on net sales of products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property by us or our sublicensees. The royalty is in the low single digits and is reduced for royalties payable to third parties, provided that the royalty to MIT is not less than a specified percentage that is less than one percent. We have the right to sublicense our rights under this agreement, and we will be required to pay a percentage of such license income varying
92

Table of Contents

Under a license agreement with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, or MIT, pursuant to which we license various patents, we will be required to make a payment of $0.1 million based upon a regulatory filing milestone. We will also be required to pay a royalty on net sales of products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property by us or our sublicensees. The royalty is in the low single digits and is reduced for royalties payable to third parties, provided that the royalty to MIT is not less than a specified percentage that is less than one percent. We have the right to sublicense our rights under this agreement, and we will be required to pay a percentage of such license income varying from the mid-single digits to low double digits. We are required to pay MIT an annual maintenance fee based on net sales of licensed products, which is creditable against our royalty payments.

Under a license agreement with Research Development Foundation pursuant to which we license patents that involve lentiviral vectors, we will be required to make payments of $1.0 million based upon a regulatory milestone for each product covered by the in-licensed intellectual property. We will also be required to pay a royalty on net sales of products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property in the low single digits, which is reduced by half if during the ten years following first marketing approval the last valid claim within the licensed patent that covers the licensed product expires or ends.  During the year ended December 31, 2017 we paid Research Development Foundation $1.0 million based upon a regulatory milestone for a product covered by the in-licensed intellectual property.

Under a license agreement with Biogen Inc., pursuant to which we license certain patents and patent applications related to our bb2121ide-cel and bb21217 product candidates, we will be required to make certain payments related to certain development milestone obligations and must report on our progress in achieving these milestones on a periodic basis. We may be obligated to pay up to $23.0 million in the aggregate for each licensed product upon the achievement of remaining milestones. Upon commercialization of our products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property, we will be obligated to pay a percentage of net sales as a royalty in the low single digits.  

Under a license agreement with the National Institutes of Health, or NIH, pursuant to which we license certain patent applications related to our ide-cel and bb21217 product candidates, we have agreed to certain development and regulatory milestone obligations and must report on our progress in achieving these milestones on a periodic basis. We may be obligated to pay up to $9.7 million in the aggregate for a licensed product upon the achievement of these milestones. Upon commercialization of our products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property, we will be obligated to pay NIH a percentage of net sales as a royalty in the low single digits. The royalties payable under this license agreement are subject to reduction for any third-party payments required to be made, with a minimum floor in the low single digits. During the year ended December 31, 20172020 we paid BiogenNIH $1.0 million based upon a clinical development milestonemilestones reached for a product covered by the in-licensed intellectual property.


Under a license agreement with the National Institutes of Health, or NIH, pursuant to which we license certain patent applications related to our bb2121 and bb21217 product candidates, we have agreed to certain development and regulatory milestone obligations and must report on our progress in achieving these milestones on a periodic basis. We may be obligated to pay up to $9.7 million in the aggregate for a licensed product upon the achievement of these milestones. Upon commercialization of our products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property, we will be obligated to pay NIH a percentage of net sales as a royalty in the low single digits. The royalties payable under this license agreement are subject to reduction for any third party payments required to be made, with a minimum floor in the low single digits.

Under a license agreement with SIRION Biotech GmbH, or Sirion, pursuant to which we license certain patents directed to manufacturing related to certain aspects of our manufacturing process,LentiGlobin product candidate, we will be required to make certain payments related to certain development milestone obligations and must report on our progress in achieving these milestones on a periodic basis. We may be obligated to pay up to $13.4 million in the aggregate for each product covered by the in-licensed intellectual property. Upon commercialization of our products covered by the in-licensed intellectual property, we will be obligated to pay the third partySirion a percentage of net sales as a royalty in the low single digits. The royalties payable under this license agreement are subject to reduction for any third partythird-party payments required to be made, with a minimum floor in the low single digits.  During the year ended December 31, 2017 we paid the respective party $2.0 million based upon a development milestone for a product covered by the in-licensed intellectual property.

Other Funding Commitments

We enter into contracts in the normal course of business with CROs for preclinical research studies and clinical trials, research supplies and other services and products for operating purposes.  Additionally, we enterWe have also entered into contractsmulti-year agreements with manufacturing partners in the normal courseUnited States and Europe (Brammer Bio, now part of businessThermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., Novasep, now part of Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., and SAFC Carlsbad, Inc., or SAFC, a subsidiary of MilliporeSigma), which are partnering with us on production of lentiviral vector across all of our programs. In addition, we have entered into multi-year agreements with Lonza Houston, Inc. and apceth Biopharma, or apceth, to produce drug product for Lenti-D, LentiGlobin and bb21217.  Currently, SAFC is the sole manufacturer of the lentiviral vector and apceth is the sole manufacturer of the drug product to support commercialization of ZYNTEGLO in Europe for the treatment of TDT. In our manufacturing agreement with SAFC, we are required to provide rolling forecasts for products on a quarterly basis, a portion of which will be considered a binding, firm order, subject to a purchase commitment. In our manufacturing agreement with apceth, we reserve production capacity for the manufacture of our drug product. BMS manufactures drug product for ide-cel.  Our total non-cancelable contractual obligations arising from these manufacturing agreements is $96.5 million, with $83.9 million of these obligations due within the next twelve months. We believe our team of technical personnel has extensive manufacturing, analytical and quality experience as well as strong project management discipline to effectively oversee these contract manufacturers.manufacturing and testing activities, and to compile manufacturing and quality information for our regulatory submissions and potential commercial launch. We are engaging with apheresis and infusion centers, which we refer to as qualified treatment centers, that will be the centers for collection of HSCs from the patient and for infusion of drug product to the patient. For the treatment of patients with our drug product in the commercial setting, we are entering into agreements with participating qualified treatment centers in the jurisdictions where we plan to commercialize our products. These contracts generally provide for termination on notice.  Wherever contracts include stipulated commitment payments, we have included such payments in the table of contractual obligations and commitments.

93

Table of Contents
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

As of December 31, 2017,2020, we did not have any off-balance sheet arrangements as defined in the rules and regulations of the SEC.

94

Table of Contents

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures aboutAbout Market Risks

We are exposed to market risk related to changes in interest rates. As of December 31, 20172020 and 2016,2019, we had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of $1.6$1.27 billion and $884.8 million,$1.24 billion, respectively, primarily invested in U.S. Treasury securities, U.S. government agency securities, federally insured certificates of depositequity securities, corporate bonds, commercial paper and money market mutual funds invested in U.S. Treasuries or U.S. government agency securities.accounts. Our primary exposure to market risk is interest rate sensitivity, which is affected by changes in the general level of U.S. interest rates, particularly because our investments are in short-term securities. Our available for sale securities are subject to interest rate risk and will fall in value if market interest rates increase. If market interest rates were to increase immediately and uniformly by 100 basis points, or one percentage point, from levels at December 31, 2017,2020, the net fair value of our interest-sensitive marketable securities would have resulted in a hypothetical decline of $7.3 $4.4 million.

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

The financial statements required to be filed pursuant to this Item 8 are appended to this report. An index of those financial statements is found in Item 15.

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

None.

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Our management, with the participation of our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-13(a)- 15(e) and 15d-15(d)- 15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)), as of the end of the period covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Based on such evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer have concluded that as of such date, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective.


Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is defined in Rules 13a-15(f)13(a)-15(f) and 15d-15(f)15(d)-15(f) promulgated under the Exchange Act as a process designed by, or under the supervision of, our principal executive and principal financial officers and effected by our board of directors, management and other personnel, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and includes those policies and procedures that:

Pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of our assets;

Provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that our receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations of our management and directors; and

Provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Under the supervision and with the participation of management, including our principal executive and financial officers, we assessed our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017,2020, based on criteria for effective internal control over financial reporting established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013), issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Our management’s assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting included testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of our internal controls.  In our management’s opinion, we have maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017,2020, based on criteria established in the COSO 2013 framework.

The effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 20172020 has been audited by Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which is included herein.

95

Table of Contents
Inherent Limitations of Internal Controls

Our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, does not expect that our disclosure controls and procedures or our internal controls will prevent all errors and all fraud. 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 the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the Companyour company have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of a simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management override of the control. The design of any system of controls also is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f)13(a)-15(f) and 15(d)-15(f) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, during the fourth quarter of 20172020 that have materially affected, or isare reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

96

Table of Contents
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Stockholders and the Board of Directors of bluebird bio, Inc.

Opinion on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

We have audited bluebird bio, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017,2020, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 framework) (the COSO criteria). In our opinion, bluebird bio, Inc. (the Company) maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017,2020, based on the COSO criteria.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the consolidated balance sheets of the Company as of December 31, 20172020 and 2016,2019, the related consolidated statements of


operations and comprehensive loss, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2017,2020, and the related notes and our report dated February 21, 201823, 2021 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

Basis for Opinion

The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the accompanying Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects.

Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Definition and Limitations of Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

February 21, 2018

23, 2021
97

Table of Contents

Item 9B. Other Information

Our policy governing transactions in our securities by our directors, officers, and employees permits our officers, directors and certain other persons to enter into trading plans complying with Rule 10b5-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. We have been advised that certain of our officers (including Jason Cole (Chief Operating and Legal Officer) and David Davidson (Chief Medical Officer), Philip Gregory (Chief Scientific Officer), Jason Cole (Chief Legal Officer) and Susanna High (Chief Operating Officer) and certain of our directors (including Mark Vachon)) have entered into trading plans covering periods after the date of this annual report on Form 10-K in accordance with Rule 10b5-1 and our policy governing transactions in our securities. Generally, under these trading plans, the individual relinquishes control over the transactions once the trading plan is put into place. Accordingly, sales under these plans may occur at any time, including possibly before, simultaneously with, or immediately after significant events involving our company. We do not undertake to report Rule 10b5-1 trading plans that may be adopted by any officers or directors in the future, or to report any modifications or termination of any publicly announced trading plan, except to the extent required by law.


98


Table of Contents
PART III

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

Incorporated by reference from the information in our Proxy Statement for our 20182021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC within 120 days of the end of the fiscal year to which this Annual Report on Form 10-K relates.

Item 11. Executive Compensation

Incorporated by reference from the information in our Proxy Statement for our 20182021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC within 120 days of the end of the fiscal year to which this Annual Report on Form 10-K relates.

Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

Incorporated by reference from the information in our Proxy Statement for our 20182021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC within 120 days of the end of the fiscal year to which this Annual Report on Form 10-K relates.

Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence

Incorporated by reference from the information in our Proxy Statement for our 20182021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC within 120 days of the end of the fiscal year to which this Annual Report on Form 10-K relates.

Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services

Incorporated by reference from the information in our Proxy Statement for our 20182021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC within 120 days of the end of the fiscal year to which this Annual Report on Form 10-K relates.


99


Table of Contents
PART IV

Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

(a)(1) Financial Statements.

The response to this portion of Item 15 is set forth under Item 8 above.

(a)(2) Financial Statement Schedules.

All schedules have been omitted because they are not required or because the required information is given in the Consolidated Financial Statements or Notes thereto set forth under Item 8 above.

(a)(3) Exhibits.

See the Exhibit Index immediately before the signature page of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The exhibits listed in the Exhibit Index are filed or incorporated by reference as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Item 16. Form 10-K Summary

Not applicable.


100


Table of Contents
bluebird bio, Inc.

Index to Consolidated Financial Statements

Pages

Pages

F-2

F-3

F-4

F-5

F-6

F-7



F-1

Table of Contents
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Stockholders and the Board of Directors of bluebird bio, Inc.

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of bluebird bio, Inc. (the Company) as of December 31, 20172020 and 2016,2019, the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2017,2020, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “consolidated financial statements”). In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company at December 31, 20172020 and 2016,2019, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2017,2020, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the Company's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017,2020, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 framework) and our report dated February 21, 201823, 2021 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

Adoption of ASU No. 2016-02
As discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company changed its method of accounting for leases in 2019 due to the adoption of Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842), and the related amendments.
Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Critical Audit Matters
The critical audit matters communicated below are matters arising from the current period audit of the financial statements that were communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that: (1) relate to accounts or disclosures that are material to the financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the consolidated financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matters below, providing separate opinions on the critical audit matters or on the accounts or disclosures to which they relate.







F-2

Table of Contents
Amendment to the Bristol-Myers Squibb Collaboration Agreement
Description of the Matter
As discussed in Note 11 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company and Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) entered into the First Amendment to the Amended and Restated Co-Development, Co-Promote and Profit Share Agreement for Idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) and the Second Amended and Restated License Agreement for bb21217 (collectively with the First Amendment to the Amended and Restated Co-Development, Co-Promote and Profit Share Agreement for Idecabtagene vicleucel, the “Amendments”). The Amendments reduced the scope of the Company's ongoing performance obligations for vector manufacturing services through development for both ide-cel and bb21217 and resolved the uncertainty associated with certain previously constrained variable consideration included in the prior agreements. The Company allocated the $200.0 million up-front payment received in connection with the Amendments to the remaining performance obligations pursuant to the variable consideration allocation exception.

Auditing management’s application of the contract modification guidance under ASC 606, Revenue from contracts with customers to the Amendments was especially challenging due to the complicated contractual terms of the prior agreements and the Amendments and the information necessary to determine the nature and extent of changes to previously identified performance obligations was obtained from multiple sources. In addition, auditing management’s evaluation that the up-front payment received in connection with the Amendments (i) related specifically to the Company's satisfaction of each of its remaining performance obligations and (ii) was representative of the amount of consideration the Company expected to be entitled to in exchange for satisfying the respective performance obligations, and thus was subject to the variable consideration allocation exception, required significant judgment.
How We Addressed the Matter in Our Audit
We obtained an understanding, evaluated the design and tested the operating effectiveness of internal controls that addressed the information used in and the identified risks related to the Company’s process for accounting for amendments to its collaboration agreements.

To test the Company’s application of the contract modification guidance under ASC 606 to the Amendments and assess the application of the variable consideration allocation exception, our procedures included, among others, inspecting the Amendments, obtaining information from the Company’s personnel that oversee the collaboration activities and participated in the negotiations of the Amendments, understanding the nature of and basis for determining the up-front consideration received in connection with the Amendments and inspecting the associated model used to determine the amount of consideration to be received, and evaluating the application of the variable consideration allocation exception based on the nature of the previously constrained variable consideration and the performance obligations remaining to be satisfied.
F-3

Table of Contents
Bristol-Myers Squibb Ide-cel Co-Development, Co-Promote and Profit Share Agreement
Description of the Matter
As discussed in Notes 2 and 11 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company recognizes amounts received pursuant to collaboration arrangements in which both parties are active participants in the activities and exposed to significant risks and rewards dependent on the commercial success of those activities as collaborative arrangement revenue, with an offset for amounts owed to the collaboration partner. Where amounts owed to a collaboration partner exceed the Company’s collaborative arrangement revenue from the collaboration partner in a quarterly period, such amounts are classified as research and development expense. The process of recognizing collaborative arrangement revenue (expense) for the BMS Ide-cel Co-Development, Co-Promote and Profit Share Agreement includes the identification of costs incurred by the Company that relate to the collaboration arrangement, evaluating the nature of such costs, and applying the terms of the collaborative arrangement to determine the portion of such costs that are the responsibility of BMS. The process also includes an assessment of the costs incurred and reported by BMS, as well as the determination of the appropriate financial statement presentation in each quarterly reporting period. The Company recorded collaborative arrangement revenue for the BMS Ide-cel Co-Development, Co-Promote and Profit Share Agreement of $108.2 million, net of collaborative partner amounts, and collaborative arrangement expense (included as a component of research and development expense) of $41.6 million, net of collaborative arrangement revenue, for the year ended December 31, 2020.

Auditing collaborative arrangement revenue (expense) for the BMS Ide-cel Co-Development, Co-Promote and Profit Share Agreement is especially complex due to the fact that the contractual terms of the arrangement are complicated, the information necessary to determine collaborative arrangement revenue (expense) is accumulated from multiple sources and, in certain circumstances, the determination of (i) whether amounts incurred are eligible to be included in the determination of collaborative arrangement revenue (expense) or (ii) the portion of costs incurred that are the responsibility of BMS requires judgment.
How We Addressed the Matter in Our Audit
We obtained an understanding, evaluated the design and tested the operating effectiveness of internal controls that addressed the information used in and the identified risks related to the Company’s process for recording collaborative arrangement revenue (expense) for the BMS Ide-cel Co-Development, Co-Promote and Profit Share Agreement.

To test the Company’s collaborative arrangement revenue (expense) for the BMS Ide-cel Co-Development, Co-Promote and Profit Share Agreement, our procedures included, among others, inspecting the Company’s collaboration agreement, comparing the Company’s computations of collaborative arrangement revenue (expense) to the contractual terms of its collaboration arrangement, testing the accuracy and completeness of the underlying data used in the computation of collaborative arrangement revenue (expense), and evaluating the costs included in the computation of collaborative arrangement revenue (expense) based on the nature of the costs and the relevant contractual terms. We also obtained information directly from the Company’s collaboration partner regarding the costs incurred by the collaboration partner during the period and agreed those amounts to the Company’s computation of collaborative arrangement revenue (expense) for the BMS Ide-cel Co-Development, Co-Promote and Profit Share Agreement.
Accrued Clinical and Contract Research Organization Costs and Manufacturing Costs
Description of the Matter
As discussed in Notes 2 and 7 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company records costs for clinical trial activities and manufacturing activities based upon estimates of costs incurred through the balance sheet date that have yet to be invoiced by the contract research organizations, clinical study sites, laboratories, consultants, contract manufacturing organizations or other vendors. The Company's accruals for clinical and contract research organization costs and manufacturing costs totaled $46.3 million at December 31, 2020.

Auditing the Company’s accruals for clinical and contract research organization costs and manufacturing costs is especially complex due to the fact that information necessary to estimate the accruals is accumulated from multiple sources. In addition, in certain circumstances, the determination of the nature and level of services that have been received during the reporting period requires judgment because the timing and pattern of vendor invoicing does not correspond to the level of services provided and there may be delays in invoicing from clinical study sites and other vendors.
F-4

Table of Contents
How We Addressed the Matter in Our Audit
We obtained an understanding, evaluated the design and tested the operating effectiveness of internal controls that addressed the information used in and the identified risks related to the Company’s process for recording accrued clinical and contract research organization costs and manufacturing costs.

To test the completeness and valuation of the accruals for clinical and contract research organization costs and manufacturing costs, we performed audit procedures that included, among others, reading certain contracts with contract research organizations, contract manufacturing organizations, and clinical study sites to evaluate financial and certain other contractual terms, and testing the accuracy and completeness of the underlying data used in the accrual computations. We also compared the progress of clinical trials and the progress of manufacturing completed through the balance sheet date with information provided by the Company’s operations personnel that oversee the clinical trials and manufacturing activities. Additionally, we obtained information directly from certain clinical study sites and contract manufacturing organizations which indicated the progress of clinical trials and the progress of manufacturing completed through the balance sheet date and compared that to the Company’s accrual computations.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2012.

Boston, Massachusetts

February 21, 2018

23, 2021

F-5


Table of Contents
bluebird bio, Inc.

Consolidated Balance Sheets

(in thousands, except per share amounts)

As of December 31,

 

As of December 31,

2017

 

 

2016

 

20202019

Assets

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assets

Current Assets:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current assets:Current assets:

Cash and cash equivalents

$

758,505

 

 

$

278,887

 

Cash and cash equivalents$317,705 $327,214 

Marketable securities

 

531,604

 

 

 

425,491

 

Marketable securities833,546 779,246 

Tenant improvement receivable

 

3,112

 

 

 

8,542

 

Prepaid expenses

 

21,171

 

 

 

8,209

 

Prepaid expenses37,472 32,888 

Other current assets and receivables

 

8,377

 

 

 

3,085

 

Receivables and other current assetsReceivables and other current assets26,814 12,826 

Total current assets

 

1,322,769

 

 

 

724,214

 

Total current assets1,215,537 1,152,174 

Marketable securities

 

324,193

 

 

 

180,452

 

Marketable securities122,891 131,506 

Property, plant and equipment, net

 

199,606

 

 

 

156,955

 

Property, plant and equipment, net162,831 151,176 

Intangible assets, net

 

16,931

 

 

 

20,694

 

Intangible assets, net10,041 14,326 

Goodwill

 

13,128

 

 

 

13,128

 

Goodwill13,128 13,128 
Operating lease right-of-use assetsOperating lease right-of-use assets184,019 185,885 

Restricted cash and other non-current assets

 

23,940

 

 

 

22,679

 

Restricted cash and other non-current assets72,805 79,229 

Total assets

$

1,900,567

 

 

$

1,118,122

 

Total assets$1,781,252 $1,727,424 

Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity

Current Liabilities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current liabilities:Current liabilities:

Accounts payable

$

12,873

 

 

$

13,664

 

Accounts payable$21,602 $42,995 

Accrued expenses and other current liabilities

 

57,065

 

 

 

54,660

 

Accrued expenses and other current liabilities145,406 141,556 
Operating lease liability, current portionOperating lease liability, current portion25,024 20,175 

Deferred revenue, current portion

 

25,674

 

 

 

6,209

 

Deferred revenue, current portion2,320 8,474 
Collaboration research advancement, current portionCollaboration research advancement, current portion9,236 10,380 

Total current liabilities

 

95,612

 

 

 

74,533

 

Total current liabilities203,588 223,580 

Deferred rent, net of current portion

 

2,720

 

 

 

10,408

 

Deferred revenue, net of current portion

 

21,763

 

 

 

40,204

 

Deferred revenue, net of current portion25,762 9,791 

Contingent consideration, net of current portion

 

2,231

 

 

 

3,277

 

Financing lease obligation, net of current portion

 

154,749

 

 

 

120,140

 

Collaboration research advancement, net of current portionCollaboration research advancement, net of current portion21,581 27,834 
Operating lease liability, net of current portionOperating lease liability, net of current portion167,997 170,812 

Other non-current liabilities

 

60

 

 

 

120

 

Other non-current liabilities7,268 10,414 

Total liabilities

 

277,135

 

 

 

248,682

 

Total liabilities$426,196 $442,431 

Commitments and contingencies (Note 8)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stockholders' Equity:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Preferred stock, $0.01 par value, 5,000 shares authorized; 0 shares issued and

outstanding at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Common stock, $0.01 par value, 125,000 shares authorized; 49,406 and 40,691 shares

issued and outstanding at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively

 

494

 

 

 

407

 

Commitments and contingencies Note 9
Commitments and contingencies Note 9
00
Stockholders' equity:Stockholders' equity:
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value, 5,000 shares authorized; 0 shares issued and
outstanding at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value, 5,000 shares authorized; 0 shares issued and
outstanding at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019
$$
Common stock, $0.01 par value, 125,000 shares authorized; 66,432 and 55,368 shares
issued and outstanding at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively
Common stock, $0.01 par value, 125,000 shares authorized; 66,432 and 55,368 shares
issued and outstanding at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively
665 554 

Additional paid-in capital

 

2,540,951

 

 

 

1,447,856

 

Additional paid-in capital4,260,443 3,568,184 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

 

(4,205

)

 

 

(1,149

)

Accumulated other comprehensive loss(5,505)(1,893)

Accumulated deficit

 

(913,808

)

 

 

(577,674

)

Accumulated deficit(2,900,547)(2,281,852)

Total stockholders' equity

 

1,623,432

 

 

 

869,440

 

Total stockholders' equity1,355,056 1,284,993 

Total liabilities and stockholders' equity

$

1,900,567

 

 

$

1,118,122

 

Total liabilities and stockholders' equity$1,781,252 $1,727,424 

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.


F-6


Table of Contents
bluebird bio, Inc.

Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss

(in thousands, except per share amounts)

Year Ended December 31,

 

Year ended December 31,

 

2017

 

 

 

2016

 

 

 

2015

 

202020192018

Revenue:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Revenue:

Collaboration revenue

$

22,207

 

 

$

6,155

 

 

$

14,079

 

License and royalty revenue

 

13,220

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Service revenueService revenue$114,064 $30,729 $44,533 
Collaborative arrangement revenueCollaborative arrangement revenue115,594 5,740 7,820 
Royalty and other revenueRoyalty and other revenue21,076 8,205 2,226 

Total revenues

 

35,427

 

 

 

6,155

 

 

 

14,079

 

Total revenues250,734 44,674 54,579 

Operating expenses:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Operating expenses:

Research and development

 

273,040

 

 

 

204,775

 

 

 

134,038

 

Research and development587,956 582,413 448,589 

General and administrative

 

93,550

 

 

 

65,119

 

 

 

46,209

 

Cost of license and royalty revenue

 

1,527

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Selling, general and administrativeSelling, general and administrative286,896 271,362 174,129 
Cost of royalty and other revenueCost of royalty and other revenue5,396 2,978 885 

Change in fair value of contingent consideration

 

(525

)

 

 

4,091

 

 

 

2,869

 

Change in fair value of contingent consideration(6,468)2,747 2,999 

Total operating expenses

 

367,592

 

 

 

273,985

 

 

 

183,116

 

Total operating expenses873,780 859,500 626,602 

Loss from operations

 

(332,165

)

 

 

(267,830

)

 

 

(169,037

)

Loss from operations(623,046)(814,826)(572,023)

Interest (expense) income, net

 

(2,001

)

 

 

3,782

 

 

 

1,591

 

Interest income, netInterest income, net11,539 34,761 14,624 

Other (expense) income, net

 

(1,267

)

 

 

(71

)

 

 

723

 

Other (expense) income, net(6,502)(10,088)1,961 

Loss before income taxes

 

(335,433

)

 

 

(264,119

)

 

 

(166,723

)

Loss before income taxes(618,009)(790,153)(555,438)

Income tax (expense) benefit

 

(210

)

 

 

612

 

 

 

(60

)

Income tax (expense) benefit(686)545 (187)

Net loss

$

(335,643

)

 

$

(263,507

)

 

$

(166,783

)

Net loss$(618,695)$(789,608)$(555,625)

Net loss per share - basic and diluted

$

(7.71

)

 

$

(7.07

)

 

$

(4.81

)

Net loss per share - basic and diluted$(9.95)$(14.31)$(10.68)

Weighted-average number of common shares used in computing net loss per

share - basic and diluted

 

43,535

 

 

 

37,284

 

 

 

34,669

 

Weighted-average number of common shares used in computing net loss per
share - basic and diluted
62,178 55,191 52,032 

Other comprehensive income (loss):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax expense of $0.0,

$0.6 and $0.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2017,

2016 and 2015, respectively

 

(3,056

)

 

 

1,142

 

 

 

(2,220

)

Total other comprehensive income (loss)

 

(3,056

)

 

 

1,142

 

 

 

(2,220

)

Other comprehensive (loss) income:Other comprehensive (loss) income:
Other comprehensive (loss) income, net of tax benefit (expense) of
$0.0 million, $(1.2) million and $(0.4) million for the years ended
December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively
Other comprehensive (loss) income, net of tax benefit (expense) of
$0.0 million, $(1.2) million and $(0.4) million for the years ended
December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively
(3,612)1,734 578 
Total other comprehensive (loss) incomeTotal other comprehensive (loss) income(3,612)1,734 578 

Comprehensive loss

$

(338,699

)

 

$

(262,365

)

 

$

(169,003

)

Comprehensive loss$(622,307)$(787,874)$(555,047)

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.


F-7


Table of Contentsbluebird
bluebird bio, Inc.

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity

(in thousands)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accumulated

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Additional

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 

Common stockAdditional
paid-in
capital
Accumulated
other
comprehensive
loss
Accumulated
deficit
Total
stockholders'
equity

 

Common Stock

 

 

Paid-In

 

 

Comprehensive

 

 

Accumulated

 

 

Stockholders'

 

SharesAmount

 

Shares

 

 

Amount

 

 

Capital

 

 

Loss

 

 

Deficit

 

 

Equity

 

Balances at December 31, 2014

 

 

32,340

 

 

$

323

 

 

$

638,389

 

 

$

(71

)

 

$

(147,384

)

 

$

491,257

 

Balances at December 31, 2017Balances at December 31, 201749,406 $494 $2,540,951 $(4,205)$(913,808)$1,623,432 
Adjustment to beginning
accumulated deficit from adoption
of ASU 2014-09
Adjustment to beginning
accumulated deficit from adoption
of ASU 2014-09
— — — — (29,375)(29,375)

Vesting of restricted stock units

 

 

62

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

(1

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Vesting of restricted stock units152 (2)— — 

Issuance of common stock upon public offering, net

of issuance costs of $22,753

 

 

2,941

 

 

 

29

 

 

 

477,218

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

477,247

 

Issuance of common stock to Pregenen

equityholders

 

 

94

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

(1

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exercise of common stock warrants

 

 

164

 

 

 

2

 

 

 

(2

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Issuance of common stock upon
public offering, net of issuance
costs of $34,588
Issuance of common stock upon
public offering, net of issuance
costs of $34,588
4,169 42 649,326 — — 649,368 
Issuance of common stock to
Regeneron
Issuance of common stock to
Regeneron
420 54,480 — — 54,484 

Exercise of stock options

 

 

1,282

 

 

 

13

 

 

 

9,370

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9,383

 

Exercise of stock options575 29,763 — — 29,768 

Purchase of common stock under ESPP

 

 

11

 

 

 

 

 

 

492

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

492

 

Purchase of common stock under
ESPP
16 — 1,604 — — 1,604 

Stock-based compensation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

41,120

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

41,120

 

Stock-based compensation— — 110,836 — — 110,836 

Unrealized loss on available-for-sale securities, net

of tax

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(2,220

)

 

 

 

 

 

(2,220

)

Other comprehensive incomeOther comprehensive income— — — 578 — 578 

Net loss

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(166,783

)

 

 

(166,783

)

Net loss— — — — (555,625)(555,625)

Balances at December 31, 2015

 

 

36,894

 

 

$

369

 

 

$

1,166,585

 

 

$

(2,291

)

 

$

(314,167

)

 

$

850,496

 

Balances at December 31, 2018Balances at December 31, 201854,738 $547 $3,386,958 $(3,627)$(1,498,808)$1,885,070 
Adjustment to beginning
accumulated deficit from adoption
of ASU 2016-02
Adjustment to beginning
accumulated deficit from adoption
of ASU 2016-02
— — — — 6,564 6,564 

Vesting of restricted stock units

 

 

113

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

(1

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Vesting of restricted stock units251 (3)— — 

Issuance of common stock upon public offering, net

of issuance costs of $15,269

 

 

3,289

 

 

 

33

 

 

 

234,698

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

234,731

 

Exercise of stock options

 

 

377

 

 

 

4

 

 

 

6,141

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6,145

 

Exercise of stock options354 17,834 — — 17,838 

Purchase of common stock under ESPP

 

 

18

 

 

 

 

 

 

677

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

677

 

Purchase of common stock under
ESPP
25 — 2,766 — — 2,766 

Stock-based compensation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

39,756

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

39,756

 

Stock-based compensation— — 160,629 — — 160,629 

Unrealized gain on available-for-sale securities, net

of tax

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1,142

 

 

 

 

 

 

1,142

 

Other comprehensive incomeOther comprehensive income— — — 1,734 — 1,734 

Net loss

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(263,507

)

 

 

(263,507

)

Net loss— — — — (789,608)(789,608)

Balances at December 31, 2016

 

 

40,691

 

 

$

407

 

 

$

1,447,856

 

 

$

(1,149

)

 

$

(577,674

)

 

$

869,440

 

Retroactive adjustment to beginning accumulated

deficit and additional paid-in capital resulting

from adoption of ASU 2016-09

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

491

 

 

 

 

 

 

(491

)

 

 

 

Balances at December 31, 2019Balances at December 31, 201955,368 $554 $3,568,184 $(1,893)$(2,281,852)$1,284,993 
Issuance of common stock upon
public offering, net of issuance
costs of $33,645
Issuance of common stock upon
public offering, net of issuance
costs of $33,645
10,455 105 541,431 — — 541,536 

Vesting of restricted stock units

 

 

88

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

(1

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Vesting of restricted stock units434 (4)— — 

Issuance of common stock upon public offering, net

of issuance costs of $53,487

 

 

7,625

 

 

 

76

 

 

 

1,006,494

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1,006,570

 

Exercise of stock options

 

 

981

 

 

 

10

 

 

 

31,676

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

31,686

 

Exercise of stock options95 1,846 — — 1,847 

Purchase of common stock under ESPP

 

 

21

 

 

 

 

 

 

1,153

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1,153

 

Purchase of common stock under
ESPP
80 3,774 — — 3,775 

Stock-based compensation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

53,282

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

53,282

 

Stock-based compensation— — 145,212 — — 145,212 

Other comprehensive loss

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(3,056

)

 

 

 

 

 

(3,056

)

Other comprehensive loss— — — (3,612)— (3,612)

Net loss

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(335,643

)

 

 

(335,643

)

Net loss— — — — (618,695)(618,695)

Balances at December 31, 2017

 

 

49,406

 

 

$

494

 

 

$

2,540,951

 

 

$

(4,205

)

 

$

(913,808

)

 

$

1,623,432

 

Balances at December 31, 2020Balances at December 31, 202066,432 $665 $4,260,443 $(5,505)$(2,900,547)$1,355,056 

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.


F-8


Table of Contents
bluebird bio, Inc.

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

(in thousands)

Year Ended December 31,

Year ended December 31,

2017

 

2016

 

2015

202020192018

Cash flows from operating activities:

 

 

 

 

 

Cash flows from operating activities:

Net loss

$(335,643)

 

$(263,507)

 

$(166,783)

Net loss$(618,695)$(789,608)$(555,625)

Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating

activities:

 

 

 

 

 

Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating
activities:

Change in fair value of contingent consideration

(2,189)

 

2,675

 

2,344

Change in fair value of contingent consideration(6,468)2,747 2,999 

Depreciation and amortization

13,538

 

9,648

 

7,419

Depreciation and amortization19,356 17,434 17,158 

Stock-based compensation expense

53,282

 

39,756

 

41,120

Stock-based compensation expense156,631 160,629 110,836 
Unrealized loss (gain) on equity securitiesUnrealized loss (gain) on equity securities7,217 9,297 (2,154)

Other non-cash items

3,153

 

2,825

 

1,513

Other non-cash items458 (11,000)(5,880)

Changes in operating assets and liabilities:

 

 

 

 

 

Changes in operating assets and liabilities:

Prepaid expenses and other assets

(20,092)

 

(14,318)

 

(6,847)

Prepaid expenses and other assets(10,089)(13,913)(24,288)
Operating lease right-of-use assetsOperating lease right-of-use assets21,281 22,496 

Accounts payable

526

 

6,658

 

2,541

Accounts payable(20,100)23,600 3,614 

Accrued expenses and other liabilities

5,406

 

20,889

 

9,423

Accrued expenses and other liabilities(4,982)46,291 37,832 
Operating lease liabilitiesOperating lease liabilities(17,380)(9,944)

Deferred revenue

1,024

 

4,565

 

11,171

Deferred revenue9,817 (16,674)(41,872)

Deferred rent

442

 

1,162

 

(330)

Collaboration research advancementCollaboration research advancement(7,397)(5,739)43,954 

Net cash used in operating activities

(280,553)

 

(189,647)

 

(98,429)

Net cash used in operating activities(470,351)(564,384)(413,426)

Cash flows from investing activities:

 

 

 

 

 

Cash flows from investing activities:

Restricted cash

627

 

(4,379)

 

(8,816)

Purchase of property, plant and equipment, including assets under

financing lease obligation

(62,242)

 

(28,029)

 

(7,055)

Purchase of property, plant and equipmentPurchase of property, plant and equipment(28,986)(71,028)(55,737)

Purchases of marketable securities

(686,204)

 

(348,225)

 

(755,175)

Purchases of marketable securities(1,003,525)(756,570)(1,517,982)
Sales of marketable securitiesSales of marketable securities29,878 0 0 

Proceeds from maturities of marketable securities

431,816

 

443,364

 

199,179

Proceeds from maturities of marketable securities918,288 1,340,629 894,284 

Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities

(316,003)

 

62,731

 

(571,867)

Purchase of intangible assetsPurchase of intangible assets(5,224)
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activitiesNet cash provided by (used in) investing activities(84,345)507,807 (679,435)

Cash flows from financing activities:

 

 

 

 

 

Cash flows from financing activities:

Cash paid for contingent purchase price consideration

(1,074)

 

(2,025)

 

(453)

Reimbursement of assets under financing lease obligation

38,021

 

1,663

 

Reimbursement of assets under financing lease obligation3,098 

Payments on financing lease obligation

(574)

 

 

Payments on financing lease obligation(1,017)

Proceeds from public offering of common stock, net of issuance costs

1,006,570

 

234,962

 

477,064

Proceeds from public offering of common stock, net of issuance costs541,536 649,368 

Proceeds from issuance of common stock

33,231

 

6,934

 

10,109

Proceeds from exercise of stock options and ESPP contributionsProceeds from exercise of stock options and ESPP contributions5,179 21,187 31,759 
Proceeds from issuance of common stock to RegeneronProceeds from issuance of common stock to Regeneron54,484 

Net cash provided by financing activities

1,076,174

 

241,534

 

486,720

Net cash provided by financing activities546,715 21,187 737,692 

Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

479,618

 

114,618

 

(183,576)

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year

278,887

 

164,269

 

347,845

Cash and cash equivalents at end of year

$758,505

 

$278,887

 

$164,269

Decrease in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cashDecrease in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash(7,981)(35,390)(355,169)
Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash at beginning of yearCash, cash equivalents and restricted cash at beginning of year381,709 417,099 772,268 
Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash at end of yearCash, cash equivalents and restricted cash at end of year$373,728 $381,709 $417,099 
Reconciliation of cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash:Reconciliation of cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash:
Cash and cash equivalentsCash and cash equivalents$317,705 $327,214 $402,579 
Restricted cash included in receivables and other current assetsRestricted cash included in receivables and other current assets$1,500 $$364 
Restricted cash included in restricted cash and other non-current assetsRestricted cash included in restricted cash and other non-current assets$54,523 $54,495 $14,156 
Total cash, cash equivalents and restricted cashTotal cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash$373,728 $381,709 $417,099 

Supplemental cash flow disclosures:

 

 

 

 

 

Supplemental cash flow disclosures:

Cash paid for interest in connection with financing lease obligation

$11,411

 

$                       —

 

$                       —

Supplemental cash flow disclosures from investing and financing

activities:

 

 

 

 

 

Assets acquired under financing lease obligation

$3,271

 

$48,034

 

$61,901

Purchases of property, plant and equipment included in accounts

payable and accrued expenses

$2,566

 

$6,363

 

$2,089

Purchases of property, plant and equipment included in accounts
payable and accrued expenses
$2,854 $5,286 $7,449 

Tenant improvements under financing lease included in tenant

improvements receivable

$3,112

 

$8,542

 

$                       —

Right-of-use assets obtained in exchange for operating lease liabilitiesRight-of-use assets obtained in exchange for operating lease liabilities$19,414 $23,939 $
Cash paid during the period for interestCash paid during the period for interest$$$15,494 
Cash paid during the period for income taxesCash paid during the period for income taxes$361 $637 $358 

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.


F-9


Table of Contents
bluebird bio, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

For the Years Ended December 31, 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 2015

2018

1. Description of the business

bluebird bio, Inc. (the “Company” or “bluebird”) was incorporated in Delaware on April 16, 1992, and is headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The Company researches, develops, manufacturesis a biotechnology company committed to researching, developing and plans to commercializecommercializing potentially transformative gene therapies for severe genetic diseases and cancer. Since its inception, the Company has devoted substantially all of its resources to its research and development efforts relating to its product candidates, including activities to manufacture product candidates, conduct clinical studies of its product candidates, perform preclinical research to identify new product candidates and provide selling, general and administrative support for these operations.

Onoperations, including commercial-readiness activities.

The Company’s programs in severe genetic diseases include betibeglogene autotemcel (beti-cel; formerly LentiGlobin for β-thalassemia gene therapy) as a treatment for transfusion-dependent β-thalassemia, or TDT; its LentiGlobin® product candidate as a treatment for sickle cell disease, or SCD; and elivaldogene autotemcel (eli-cel; formerly Lenti-D gene therapy) as a treatment for cerebral adrenoleukodystrophy, or CALD. The Company’s programs in oncology are focused on developing novel T cell-based immunotherapies, including chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) and T cell receptor (TCR) T cell therapies. Idecabtagene vicleucel, or ide-cel, and bb21217 are product candidates in oncology under the Company’s collaboration arrangement with Bristol-Myers Squibb ("BMS"). ide-cel and bb21217 are CAR T cell product candidates for the treatment of multiple myeloma. Please refer to Note 11, Collaborative arrangements, for further discussion of the Company’s collaboration with BMS.
In June 30, 2014,2019, the Company acquired allreceived conditional marketing authorization from the European Commission for beti-cel as a treatment of patients 12 years and older with TDT who do not have a β00 genotype, for whom hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplantation is appropriate but a human leukocyte-matched related HSC donor is not available. beti-cel is being marketed as ZYNTEGLO™ in the outstanding capital stockEuropean Union. Since receiving conditional marketing authorization for ZYNTEGLO, the Company has continued to advance its commercial readiness activities. Through December 31, 2020, the Company had not generated any revenue from product sales. In February 2021 the Company temporarily suspended marketing of Precision Genome Engineering,ZYNTEGLO in light of safety events in the HGB-206 study of LentiGlobin gene therapy for SCD which is manufactured using the same vector as ZYNTEGLO. Additionally, the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, has paused the renewal procedure for ZYNTEGLO's conditional marketing authorization while the EMA's pharmacovigilance risk assessment committee reviews the risk-benefit assessment for ZYNTEGLO and determines whether any additional pharmacovigilance measures are necessary.
In January 2021, the Company announced its intent to separate its severe genetic disease and oncology programs into two separate, independent publicly traded companies, bluebird bio, Inc. and a new company, referred to as Oncology NewCo in these consolidated financial statements. bluebird bio, Inc. intends to retain focus on its severe genetic disease programs and Oncology NewCo is expected to focus on the Company's oncology programs. The transaction is expected to be completed in late 2021 and is anticipated to be tax-free, subject to receipt of a favorable Internal Revenue Service (“Pregenen”IRS”) ruling.
In accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 205-40, Going Concern, the Company evaluated whether there are conditions and events, considered in connection therewith, obtained the rightsaggregate, that raise substantial doubt about its ability to Pregenen’s gene editingcontinue as a going concern within one year after the date that the consolidated financial statements are issued. The Company has incurred losses since inception and cell signaling technology.

to date has financed its operations primarily through the sale of equity securities and, to a lesser extent, through collaboration agreements and grants from governmental agencies and charitable foundations. As of December 31, 2017,2020, the Company had an accumulated deficit of $2.90 billion. During the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company incurred a loss of $618.7 million and used $470.4 million of cash in operations. The Company expects to continue to generate operating losses and negative operating cash flows for the next few years and will need additional funding to support its planned operating activities through profitability. The transition to profitability is dependent upon the successful development, approval, and commercialization of the Company’s products and product candidates and the achievement of a level of revenues adequate to support its cost structure.

As of December 31, 2020, the Company had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of $1.6$1.27 billion. Although the Company has incurred recurring losses and expects to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, theThe Company expects its cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will be sufficient to fund current planned operations for at least the next twelve months.

months from the date of issuance of these financial statements, though it may pursue additional cash resources through public or private equity or debt financings or by establishing additional collaborations with other companies. Management's expectations with respect to its ability to fund current planned operations is based on estimates that are subject to

F-10

Table of Contents
risks and uncertainties. If actual results are different from management's estimates, the Company may need to seek additional strategic or financing opportunities sooner than would otherwise be expected. However, there is no guarantee that any of these strategic or financing opportunities will be executed or executed on favorable terms, and some could be dilutive to existing stockholders. If the Company is unable to obtain additional funding on a timely basis, it may be forced to significantly curtail, delay, or discontinue one or more of its planned research or development programs or be unable to expand its operations or otherwise capitalize on its commercialization of its product and product candidates.
2. Summary of significant accounting policies and basis of presentation

Basis of presentation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared by the Company in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”) as found in the ASC and principlesAccounting Standards Updates (“ASUs”) of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”).  Any reference in these notes to applicable guidance is meant to refer to the authoritative United States GAAP as found in the ASC and ASUs of the FASB.
Certain items in the prior year’s consolidated financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current presentation.  No subtotals in the prior year consolidated financial statements were impacted by these reclassifications.
Amounts reported are computed based on thousands, except percentages, per share amounts or as otherwise noted. As a result, certain totals may not sum due to rounding.
Principles of consolidation

The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. All intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. These consolidated financial statements have been prepared
The Company continually assesses whether it is the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity as changes to existing relationships or future transactions may result in conformity with accounting principles generally acceptedconsolidation or deconsolidation of one or more collaborators or partners. In determining whether it is the primary beneficiary of an entity in the United States of America (“GAAP”). Any reference in these notes to applicable guidance is meant to refer to the authoritative United States generally accepted accounting principles as found in the Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) and Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”).

Certain aggregations of prior year amounts have been made to conform to current year presentation.  In the prior year balance sheet, tenant improvements receivable, prepaid expenses and restricted cash and other current assets are included within prepaid expenses and other current assets. In the prior year statements of operations and comprehensive loss, interest (expense) income, net and other (expense) income, net are aggregated.  Additionally,which the Company has combined ina variable interest, management applies a qualitative approach that determines whether the statementsCompany has both (1) the power to direct the economically significant activities of cash flows the purchaseentity and (2) the obligation to absorb losses of, property and equipment and tenant improvements.

or the right to receive benefits from, the entity that could potentially be significant to that entity.

Use of estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could materially differ from those estimates. Management considers many factors in selecting appropriate financial accounting policies and controls, and in developing the estimates and assumptions that are used in the preparation of these financial statements. Management must apply significant judgment in this process. In addition, other factors may affect estimates, including: expected business and operational changes, sensitivity and volatility associated with the assumptions used in developing estimates, and whether historical trends are expected to be representative of future trends. The estimation process often may yield a range of potentially reasonable estimates of the ultimate future outcomes and management must select an amount that falls within that range of reasonable estimates. This process may result in actual results differing materially from those estimated amounts used in the preparation of the financial statements.
Estimates and judgments are used in the following areas, among others: future undiscounted cash flows and subsequent fair value estimates used to assess potential and measure any impairment of long-lived assets, including goodwill and intangible assets, financingand the measurement of right-of-use assets and lease obligations,liabilities, contingent consideration, stock-based compensation expense, accrued expenses, income taxes, and the assessment of the Company's ability to fund its operations for at least the next twelve months from the date of issuance of these financial statements.  In addition, estimates and judgments are used in the Company’s accounting for its revenue-generating arrangements, in particular as it relates to determining the standalone selling price of performance obligations, evaluating whether an option to acquire additional goods and services represents a material right, estimating the total transaction price, including estimating variable consideration and the probability of achieving future potential development and regulatory milestones, assessing the period of performance over which revenue may be recognized, and income taxes.

accounting for modifications to revenue-generating arrangements.

F-11

Table of Contents
Foreign currency translation

The financial statements of the Company’s subsidiaries with functional currencies other than the U.S. dollar are translated into U.S. dollars using period-end exchange rates for assets and liabilities, historical exchange rates for stockholders’ equity and weighted average exchange rates for operating results. Translation gains and losses are included in accumulated other comprehensive income


(loss) in stockholders’ equity. Foreign currency transaction gains and losses are included in other income (expense) income,, net in the results of operations.

Segment information

The Company operates in a single segment, focusing on the development ofresearching, developing and commercializing potentially transformative gene therapies for severe genetic diseases and cancer.  Consistent with its operational structure, its chief operating decision maker manages and allocates resources at a global, consolidated level. Therefore, results of ourthe Company's operations are reported on a consolidated basis for purposes of segment reporting, consistent with our management reporting.  All material long-lived assets of the Company reside in the United States.

Cash and cash equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid investments purchased with original final maturities of 90 days or less from the date of purchase to be cash equivalents. Cash and cash equivalents comprise funds in cash, money market accounts, and federally insured deposits.marketable securities with maturities of less than 90 days when purchased. Cash equivalents are reported at fair value.

Marketable securities

The Company classifies marketable securities with a remaining maturity when purchased of greater than three months as available-for-sale. Marketable securities with a remaining maturity date greater than one year are classified as non-current. Available-for-salenon-current assets. The Company’s marketable securities are maintained by investment managers and consist of U.S. Treasury securities, U.S. government agency securities and certificates of deposit. Available-for-saletreasuries, equity securities, corporate bonds, and commercial paper. Debt securities are carried at fair value with the unrealized gains and losses included in other comprehensive income (loss) as a component of stockholders’ equity until realized. Any premium orarising at purchase is amortized to the earliest call date and any discount arising at purchase is amortized and/or accreted to maturity. Amortization and accretion of premiums and discounts are recorded in interest income, and/or expense over the life of the instrument.net. Equity securities with readily determinable fair values are also carried at fair value with unrealized gains and losses included in other (expense) income, net. Realized gains and losses on both debt and equity securities are determined using the specific identification method and are included in other (expense) income, net.

If

The Company classifies equity securities with readily determinable fair values, which would be available for use in its current operations, as current assets even though the Company may not dispose of such marketable securities within the next 12 months. Equity securities are included in the balance of marketable securities on the Company's consolidated balance sheet.
Effective January 1, 2020, the Company adopted ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Statements (“ASU 2016-13” or “ASC 326”), using the effective date method. As the Company had never recorded any adjustmentother-than-temporary-impairment adjustments to its available-for-sale debt securities prior to the effective date, no transition provisions are applicable to the Company.
The Company assesses its available-for-sale debt securities under the available-for-sale debt security impairment model in ASC 326 as of each reporting date in order to determine if a portion of any decline in fair value reflectsbelow carrying value recognized on its available-for-sale debt securities is the result of a declinecredit loss. The Company records credit losses in value of the investment, the Company considers all available evidence to evaluate the extent to which the decline is “other-than-temporary” and, if so, marks the investment to market through a charge to the Company’s statementconsolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss.

loss as credit loss expense within other (expense) income, net, which is limited to the difference between the fair value and the amortized cost of the security. To date, the Company has not recorded any credit losses on its available-for-sale debt securities.

Accrued interest receivable related to the Company's available-for-sale debt securities is presented within receivables and other current assets on the Company's consolidated balance sheets. The Company has elected the practical expedient available to exclude accrued interest receivable from both the fair value and the amortized cost basis of available-for-sale debt securities for the purposes of identifying and measuring any impairment. The Company writes off accrued interest receivable once it has determined that the asset is not realizable. Any write offs of accrued interest receivable are recorded by reversing interest income, recognizing credit loss expense, or a combination of both. To date, the Company has not written off any accrued interest receivables associated with its marketable securities.
F-12

Table of Contents
Concentrations of credit risk and off-balance sheet risk

Financial instruments that subject the Company to credit risk primarily consist of cash and cash equivalents and available-for-sale securities. The Company maintains its cash and cash equivalent balances with high-quality financial institutions and, consequently, the Company believes that such funds are subject to minimal credit risk. The Company’s available-for-sale investmentsmarketable securities primarily consist of U.S. Treasury securities, U.S. government agency securities, and certificates of deposit, corporate bonds, and commercial paper, and potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk. The Company has adopted an investment policy that limits the amounts the Company may invest in any one type of investment and requires all investments held by the Company to be at least AA+/Aa1 rated, thereby reducing credit risk exposure.

Fair value of financial instruments

The Company has certain financial assets and liabilities recorded at fair value which have been classified as Level 1, 2 or 3 within the fair value hierarchy as described in the accounting standards for fair value measurements

measurements:

Level 1—Fair values are determined utilizing quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access at the measurement date.

Level 2—Fair values are determined utilizing quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in active markets or other market observable inputs such as interest rates, yield curves and foreign currency spot rates.

Level 3—Prices or valuations that require inputs that are both significant to the fair value measurement and unobservable.

To the extent that valuation is based on models or inputs that are less observable or unobservable in the market, the determination of fair value requires more judgment. Accordingly, the degree of judgment exercised by the Company in determining fair value is greatest for instruments categorized in Level 3. A financial instrument’s level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement.


Items measured at fair value on a recurring basis include marketable securities (Note(see Note 3,Marketable securities, and Note 4)4, Fair value measurements) and contingent consideration (Note 4)(see Note 4, Fair value measurements). The carrying amounts of accounts payable and accrued expenses approximate their fair values due to their short-term nature.

Business combinations

Business combinations are accounted for using the acquisition method of accounting. Using this method, the tangible and intangible assets acquired and the liabilities assumed are recorded as of the acquisition date at their respective fair values. The Company evaluates a business as an integrated set of activities and assets that is capable of being managed for the purpose of providing a return in the form of dividends, lower costs or other economic benefits and consists of inputs and processes that provide or have the ability to provide outputs. In an acquisition of a business, the excess of the fair value of the consideration transferred over the fair value of the net assets acquired is recorded as goodwill. In an acquisition of net assets that does not constitute a business, no goodwill is recognized.

The consolidated financial statements include the results of operations of an acquired business after the completion of the acquisition. See Note 4, “FairFair value measurements, for additional information.

Goodwill

Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the net assets acquired when accounted for using the acquisition method of accounting for business combinations. Goodwill is not amortized but is evaluated for impairment within the Company’s single reporting unit on an annual basis, during the fourth quarter, or more frequently if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more-likely-than-not reduce the fair value of the Company’s reporting unit below its carrying amount. During the fourth quarter of 2019, the Company early adopted ASC 2017-04, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment ("ASU 2017-04"), which removes the second step of the goodwill impairment test. Under this ASU, the Company performs a one-step quantitative test and records the amount of goodwill impairment, if any, as the excess of a reporting unit's carrying amount over its fair value, not to exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to the reporting unit. The Company has not0t recognized any impairment charges related to goodwill to date.

F-13

Table of Contents
Intangible assets,

net

Intangible assets, net consist of acquired core technology and in-licensed rights with finite lives.lives, net of accumulated amortization. The Company amortizes its intangible assets using the straight-line method over their estimated economic lives and periodically reviews for impairment.

The Company has not recognized any impairment charges related to intangible assets to date.

Contingent consideration

Each reporting period, the Company revalues the contingent consideration obligations associated with business combinations to their fair value and records within operating expenses increases in their fair value as contingent consideration expense and decreases in the fair value as contingent consideration income. Changes in contingent consideration result from changes in the assumptions regarding probabilities of successful achievement of related milestones, the estimated timing in which the milestones aremay be achieved, and the discount rate used to estimate the fair value of the liability. Contingent consideration may change significantly as development of the Company’s programs in certain indications progress and additional data are obtained, impacting the Company’s assumptions. The assumptions used in estimating fair value require significant judgment. The use of different assumptions and judgments could result in a materially different estimate of fair value. See Note 4, “FairFair value measurements, for additional information.

Property, plant and equipment

Property, plant and equipment is stated at cost. Maintenance and repairs that do not improve or extend the lives of the respective assets are expensed to operations as incurred. Depreciation and amortization is calculated using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets, which are as follows:


Asset

Estimated useful life

Building

40 years

Computer equipment and software

3 years

Furniture and fixtures

2-5 years

Laboratory equipment

2-5 years

Leasehold improvements

Shorter of the useful life or remaining lease term

The

Prior to the adoption of ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) (“ASU 2016-02” or “ASC 842”), on January 1, 2019 (discussed further below), the Company recordsrecorded certain estimated costs incurred and reported by a landlord as ana building asset and corresponding financing lease obligation on the consolidated balance sheets. See Note 8, “Commitments and contingencies,”Leases, for additional information.


Impairment of long-lived assets

The Company reviews long-lived assets when events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying value of the assets may not be recoverable. Recoverability is measured by comparison of the book values of the assets to future net undiscounted cash flows that the assets are expected to generate. If such assets are considered to be impaired, the impairment to be recognized is measured by the amount by which the book value of the assets exceed their fair value, which is measured based on the projected discounted future net cash flows arising from the assets.

Financing lease obligation

Beginning in 2015 and through construction completion in 2017,

Leases
Effective January 1, 2019, the Company adopted ASC 842 using the required modified retrospective approach and utilizing the effective date as its date of initial application. As a result, amounts for the year ended December 31, 2018 are presented in accordance with the previous guidance in ASC 840, Leases (“ASC 840”).
At the inception of an arrangement, the Company determines whether the arrangement is or contains a lease based on the unique facts and circumstances present in the arrangement. Leases with a term greater than one year are recognized on the balance sheet as right-of-use assets and current and non-current lease liabilities, as applicable. The Company does not have material financing leases.
Operating lease liabilities and their corresponding right-of-use assets are initially recorded certain estimated construction costs incurred and reportedbased on the present value of lease payments over the expected remaining lease term. Certain adjustments to the right-of-use asset may be required for items
F-14

Table of Contents
such as incentives received. The interest rate implicit in lease contracts is typically not readily determinable. As a result, the Company utilizes its incremental borrowing rate to discount lease payments, which reflects the fixed rate at which the Company could borrow on a collateralized basis the amount of the lease payments in the same currency, for a similar term, in a similar economic environment. To estimate its incremental borrowing rate, a credit rating applicable to the Company is estimated using a synthetic credit rating analysis since the Company does not currently have a rating agency-based credit rating. Prospectively, the Company will adjust the right-of-use assets for straight-line rent expense or any incentives received and remeasure the lease liability at the net present value using the same incremental borrowing rate that was in effect as of the lease commencement or transition date.
The Company has elected not to recognize leases with an original term of one year or less on the balance sheet. The Company typically only includes an initial lease term in its assessment of a lease arrangement. Options to renew a lease are not included in the Company’s assessment unless there is reasonable certainty that the Company will renew.
Assumptions made by the landlordCompany at the commencement date are re-evaluated upon occurrence of certain events, including a lease modification. A lease modification results in a separate contract when the modification grants the lessee an additional right of use not included in the original lease and when lease payments increase commensurate with the standalone price for the additional right of use. When a lease modification results in a separate contract, it is accounted for in the same manner as a new lease.
ASC 842 transition practical expedients and application of transition provisions to leases at the transition date
The Company elected the following practical expedients, which must be elected as a package and applied consistently to all of its 60 Binney Street locationleases at the transition date (including those for which the entity is a lessee or a lessor): (i) the Company did not reassess whether any expired or existing contracts are or contain leases; (ii) the Company did not reassess the lease classification for any expired or existing leases (that is, all existing leases that were classified as anoperating leases in accordance with ASC 840 are classified as operating leases, and all existing leases that were classified as capital leases in accordance with ASC 840 are classified as finance leases); and (iii) the Company did not reassess initial direct costs for any existing leases.
For leases that existed prior to the date of initial application of ASC 842 (which were previously classified as operating leases), a lessee may elect to use either the total lease term measured at lease inception under ASC 840 or the remaining lease term as of the date of initial application of ASC 842 in determining the period for which to measure its incremental borrowing rate. In transition to ASC 842, the Company utilized the remaining lease term of its leases in determining the appropriate incremental borrowing rates.
Application of ASC 842 policy elections to leases post adoption
The Company has made certain policy elections to apply to its leases executed post adoption, or subsequent to January 1, 2019, as further described below.
In accordance with ASC 842, components of a lease should be split into three categories: lease components, non-lease components, and non-components. The fixed and in-substance fixed contract consideration (including any consideration related to non-components) must be allocated based on the respective relative fair values to the lease components and non-lease components.
Entities may elect not to separate lease and non-lease components. Rather, entities would account for each lease component and related non-lease component together as a single lease component. The Company has elected to account for lease and non-lease components together as a single lease component for all underlying assets and allocate all of the contract consideration to the lease component only.
ASC 842 allows for the use of judgment in determining whether the assumed lease term is for a major part of the remaining economic life of the underlying asset and corresponding financingwhether the present value of lease payments represents substantially all of the fair value of the underlying asset. The Company applies the bright line thresholds referenced in ASC 842-10-55-2 to assist in evaluating leases for appropriate classification. The aforementioned bright lines are applied consistently to the Company’s entire portfolio of leases.
F-15

Table of Contents
Revenue recognition
Under ASC Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (“Topic 606”), an entity recognizes revenue when its customer obtains control of promised goods or services, in an amount that reflects the consideration that the entity expects to receive in exchange for those goods or services. To determine revenue recognition for arrangements that an entity determines are within the scope of Topic 606, the entity 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, including variable consideration, if any; (iv) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract; and (v) recognize revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation. The Company only applies the five-step model to contracts when it is probable that the entity will collect the consideration to which it is entitled in exchange for the goods or services it transfers to the customer.
Once a contract is determined to be within the scope of Topic 606, the Company assesses the goods or services promised within each contract and determines those that are performance obligations.  Arrangements that include rights to additional goods or services that are exercisable at a customer’s discretion are generally considered options.  The Company assesses if these options provide a material right to the customer and if so, they are considered performance obligations. The identification of material rights requires judgments related to the determination of the value of the underlying good or service relative to the option exercise price. The exercise of a material right is accounted for as a contract modification for accounting purposes.
The Company assesses whether each promised good or service is distinct for the purpose of identifying the performance obligations in the contract. This assessment involves subjective determinations and requires management to make judgments about the individual promised goods or services and whether such are separable from the other aspects of the contractual relationship. Promised goods and services are considered distinct provided that: (i) the customer can benefit from the good or service either on its own or together with other resources that are readily available to the customer (that is, the good or service is capable of being distinct) and (ii) the entity’s promise to transfer the good or service to the customer is separately identifiable from other promises in the contract (that is, the promise to transfer the good or service is distinct within the context of the contract).  In assessing whether a promised good or service is distinct, the Company considers factors such as the research, manufacturing and commercialization capabilities of the collaboration partner and the availability of the associated expertise in the general marketplace. The Company also considers the intended benefit of the contract in assessing whether a promised good or service is separately identifiable from other promises in the contract. If a promised good or service is not distinct, an entity is required to combine that good or service with other promised goods or services until it identifies a bundle of goods or services that is distinct.
The transaction price is then determined and allocated to the identified performance obligations in proportion to their standalone selling prices (“SSP”) on a relative SSP basis. SSP is determined at contract inception and is not updated to reflect changes between contract inception and when the performance obligations are satisfied. Determining the SSP for performance obligations requires significant judgment. In developing the SSP for a performance obligation, the Company considers applicable market conditions and relevant entity-specific factors, including factors that were contemplated in negotiating the agreement with the customer and estimated costs. The Company validates the SSP for performance obligations by evaluating whether changes in the key assumptions used to determine the SSP will have a significant effect on the consolidated balance sheets becauseallocation of arrangement consideration between multiple performance obligations.
If the consideration promised in a contract includes a variable amount, the Company estimates the amount of consideration to which it waswill be entitled in exchange for transferring the promised goods or services to a customer. The Company determines the amount of variable consideration by using the expected value method or the most likely amount method. The Company includes the unconstrained amount of estimated variable consideration in the transaction price. The amount included in the transaction price is constrained to the amount for which it is probable that a significant reversal of cumulative revenue recognized will not occur. At the end of each subsequent reporting period, the Company re-evaluates the estimated variable consideration included in the transaction price and any related constraint, and if necessary, adjusts its estimate of the overall transaction price. Any such adjustments are recorded on a cumulative catch-up basis in the period of adjustment.
If an arrangement includes development and regulatory milestone payments, the Company 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 control or the licensee’s control, such as regulatory approvals, are generally not considered probable of being achieved until those approvals are received.
For arrangements with licenses of intellectual property that include sales-based royalties, including milestone payments based on the level of sales, and the license is deemed to be the ownerpredominant item to which the royalties relate, the Company
F-16

Table of Contents
recognizes royalty revenue and sales-based milestones at the later of (i) when the related sales occur, or (ii) when the performance obligation to which the royalty has been allocated has been satisfied.
In determining the transaction price, the Company adjusts consideration for the effects of the building duringtime value of money if the constructiontiming of payments provides the Company with a significant benefit of financing.  The Company does not assess whether a contract has a significant financing component if the expectation at contract inception is such that the period for accounting purposes. Any costs incurredbetween payment by the licensees and the transfer of the promised goods or services to the licensees will be one year or less.  The Company assessed each of its revenue generating arrangements in order to determine whether a significant financing component exists and concluded that havea significant financing component does not exist in any of its arrangements.
The Company then recognizes as revenue the amount of the transaction price that is allocated to the respective performance obligation when (or as) each performance obligation is satisfied, either at a point in time or over time, and if over time recognition is based on the use of an output or input method.
The Company recognizes revenue within the following financial statement captions:
Service revenue
To date, the Company’s service revenue has primarily been reimbursed bygenerated from the landlord orelements of its collaboration arrangement with BMS that qualifyare accounted for reimbursement bypursuant to Topic 606, using the landlord are recorded as an asset and financing lease obligation. Any incremental costs incurred directly byfive-step model described above. As discussed further below, the Company that do not qualify for reimbursement byanalyzes its collaboration arrangements to assess whether they are within the landlordscope of ASC 808, Collaborative Arrangements (“ASC 808”) or Topic 606. For the elements of a collaboration arrangement which are also capitalized. In each reporting period,more reflective of a vendor-customer relationship and therefore within the landlord estimates and reports toscope of Topic 606, the Company any costs incurred to daterecords the related to its portion ofrevenue as service revenue on the building using allocation estimates. During construction, the Company periodically met with the landlord and its construction manager to review these estimates and observe construction progress before recording such amounts.  Upon completion of the construction of the building in the first quarter of 2017, the Company evaluated the lease and determined that it did not meet the criteria for “sale-leaseback” treatment. Accordingly, the Company is depreciating the building over 40 years and incurring interest expense in its consolidated statement of operations and comprehensive loss related to the financing lease obligation recorded on its consolidated balance sheet. The Company bifurcates its lease payments pursuant to the lease into (i) a portion that is allocated to the financing obligation related to the building and (ii) a portion that is allocated to the land on which the building was constructed. The portion of the lease obligation allocated to the land is treated for accounting purposes as an operating lease that commenced in September 2015 and is recorded on a straight-line basis over the initial lease term. See Note 8, “Commitments and contingencies,”loss. Refer below for additional information.

Revenue recognition

The Company has primarily generated revenue through collaboration arrangements and out-licensing arrangements including royalties on net sales of products to licensees or sublicensees.

Collaboration revenue

As of December 31, 2017,discussion around the Company’s policy for recognizing collaborative arrangement revenue and the determination of whether elements of a collaboration arrangement are within the scope of ASC 808 or Topic 606.

Collaborative arrangement revenue
To date, the Company’s collaborative arrangement revenue ishas been generated exclusively from its collaboration arrangementarrangements with Celgene CorporationBMS and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Celgene”), which was originally entered into in March 2013 and was subsequently amended in June 2015 (the “Amended Collaboration Agreement”Regeneron”), as further described in Note 10.

11, Collaborative arrangements.

The Company analyzes its collaboration arrangements to assess whether they are within the scope of ASC 808, Collaborative Arrangements (“ASC 808”) to determinewhich includes determining whether such arrangements involve joint operating activities performed by parties that are both active participants in the activities and exposed to significant risks and rewards dependent on the commercial success of such activities.  This assessment is performed throughout the life of the arrangement based on changes in the responsibilities of all parties in the arrangement.  For collaboration arrangements that are deemed to be within the scope of ASC 808 that contain multiple elements, the Company first determines which elements of the collaboration are deemed to be within the scope of ASC 808 and those that are more reflective of a vendor-customer relationship and therefore within the scope of ASC 605, Revenue Recognition (“ASC 605”).  

For those elementsTopic 606 (refer above for further discussion of the arrangement that are accountedCompany's policy for pursuant to ASC 605, revenue is recognized for each unit of accounting when all of the following criteria are met:

Persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists

Delivery has occurred or services have been rendered

The seller’s price to the buyer is fixed or determinable

Collectability is reasonably assured

When a collaboration arrangement has multiple-elements accounted for under ASC 605, the Company determines whether the individual deliverables represent separate units of accounting or whether they must be accounted for as a combined unit of accounting. This evaluation involves subjective determinations and requires management to make judgments about the individual deliverables and whether such deliverables are separable from the other aspects of the contractual relationship. Deliverables are considered separate


units of accounting provided that: (i) the delivered item(s) has value to the customer on a standalone basis and (ii) if the arrangement includes a general right of return relative to the delivered item(s), delivery or performance of the undelivered item(s) is considered probable and substantially in the control of the Company. In assessing whether an item has standalone value, the Company considers factors such as the research, manufacturing and commercialization capabilities of the collaboration partner and the availability of the associated expertise in the general marketplace. In addition, the Company considers whether the collaboration partner can use the other deliverable(s) for their intended purpose without the receipt of the remaining element(s), whether the value of the deliverable is dependent on the undelivered item(s) and whether there are other vendors that can provide the undelivered element(s).

Arrangement consideration that is fixed or determinable is allocated among the separate units of accounting using the relative selling price method and the applicable revenue recognition criteria are applied to determine the appropriate period and pattern of recognition. The Company determines the selling price of a unit of accounting following the hierarchy of evidence prescribed by ASC 605-25. Accordingly, the Company determines the estimated selling price for units of accounting within each arrangement using vendor-specific objective evidence (“VSOE”) of selling price, if available, third-party evidence (“TPE”) of selling price if VSOE is not available, or best estimate of selling price (“BESP”) if neither VSOE nor TPE is available. The Company typically uses BESP to estimate the selling price, since it generally does not have VSOE or TPE of selling price for its units of accounting. Determining the BESP for a unit of accounting requires significant judgment. In developing the BESP for a unit of accounting, the Company considers applicable market conditions and relevant entity-specific factors, including factors that were contemplated in negotiating the agreement with the customer and estimated costs. The Company validates the BESP for units of accounting by evaluating whether changes in the key assumptions used to determine the BESP will have a significant effect on the allocation of arrangement consideration between multiple units of accounting.

Options are considered substantive if, at the inception of the arrangement, the Company is at risk as to whether the collaboration partner will choose to exercise the option. Factors that the Company considers in evaluating whether an option is substantive include the overall objective of the arrangement, the benefit the collaborator might obtain from the arrangement without exercising the option, the cost to exercise the option and the likelihood that the option will be exercised. For arrangements under which an option is considered substantive, the Company does not consider the item underlying the option to be a deliverable at the inception of the arrangement and the associated option fees are not included in allocable arrangement consideration, assuming the option is not priced at a significant and incremental discount. Conversely, for arrangements under which an option is not considered substantive or if an option is priced at a significant and incremental discount, the Company would consider the item underlying the option to be a deliverable at the inception of the arrangement and a corresponding amount would be included in allocable arrangement consideration.

The Company recognizes arrangement consideration allocated to each unit of accounting when all of the revenue recognition criteria are satisfied. The Company will recognize arrangement consideration attributed to licenses that have standalone value as revenue upon delivery. When arrangement consideration attributed to licenses do not have standalone value, the Company will recognize revenue over the Company’s estimated performance period of the combined deliverable.  For elements of the arrangement that are recognized over time, and there is no discernible pattern of performance and/or objectively measurable performance measures do not exist, the Company recognizes revenue on a straight-line basis over the period the Company is expected to complete its performance obligations. Conversely, if the pattern of performance in which therecognizing service is provided to the customer can be determined and objectively measurable performance measures exist, then the Company recognizes revenue under the arrangement using the proportional performance method.

revenue). For elements of collaboration arrangements that are accounted for pursuant to ASC 808, an appropriate recognition method is determined and applied consistently, generally by analogy to ASC 605.Topic 606.  Amounts that are owed to collaboration partners are recognized as an offset to collaborationcollaborative arrangement revenues as such amounts are incurred by the collaboration partner.  Where amounts owed to a collaboration partner exceed the Company’s collaborationcollaborative arrangement revenues in each quarterly period, such amounts are classified as research and development expense.

At

Prior to the inceptionadoption of an arrangement that includes milestone payments,ASU No. 2018-18, Collaborative Arrangements (Topic 808): Clarifying the Interaction between Topic 808 and Topic 606 (“ASU 2018-18”) on January 1, 2020, the Company evaluates whether each milestone is substantivepresented all revenue recognized under its collaborative arrangements as collaboration revenue on its consolidated statements of operations and at risk to both parties on the basis of the contingent nature of the milestone. This evaluation includes an assessment of whether: (i) the consideration is commensurate with either the Company’s performance to achieve the milestone or the enhancement of the value of the delivered item(s) as a result of a specific outcome resulting from the Company’s performance to achieve the milestone, (ii) the consideration relates solely to past performance and (iii) the consideration is reasonable relative to all of the deliverables and payment terms within the arrangement. The Company evaluates factors suchcomprehensive loss. However, as the scientific, clinical, regulatory, commercial and other risks that must be overcome to achieve the respective milestone and the level of effort and investment required to achieve the respective milestone in making this assessment. There is considerable judgment involved in determining whether a milestone satisfies all of the criteria required to conclude that a milestone is substantive. The Company has concluded that all of the clinical and regulatory milestones pursuant to its collaboration arrangement are substantive. Accordingly, in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 605-28, Revenue Recognition-Milestone Method, revenue from clinical and regulatory milestone payments will be recognized in its entirety upon successful accomplishment of the milestone, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria are met. Milestones that are


not considered substantive would be recognized as revenue over the remaining period of performance, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria are met. All commercial milestones will be accounted for in the same manner as royalties and recorded as revenue upon achievement of the milestone, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria are met.

The Company recognizes royalty revenue generated under collaborationits collaborative arrangements inboth within and outside the periodscope of sale of the related product(s), based on the underlying contract terms, provided that the reported sales are reliably measurable andTopic 606, the Company has no remaining performance obligations.

Licenserevised its presentation of revenue on its consolidated statements of operations and royaltycomprehensive loss as follows: service revenue

includes revenue from collaborative partners recognized within the scope of Topic 606 and collaborative arrangement revenue includes revenue from collaborative partners recognized outside the scope of Topic 606. The termsdisaggregation of revenue recognized under Topic 606 and outside of Topic 606 had previously otherwise been disclosed in the Company’s licensenotes to consolidated financial statements.

F-17

Table of Contents
Royalty and other revenue
The Company enters into out-licensing agreements include deliverythat are within the scope of an intellectual property license or the performance of research and development activities.Topic 606. The Company does not have any material license arrangements that contain multiple deliverables.more than one performance obligation. The Companyterms of such out-license agreements include the license of functional intellectual property, given the functionality of the intellectual property is compensated undernot expected to change substantially as a result of the licensor’s ongoing activities, and typically include payment of one or more of the following: non-refundable up-front license arrangements through nonrefundable up-frontfees; development and regulatory milestone payments milestones, and futuremilestone payments based on the level of sales; and royalties on net product sales.sales of licensed products. Nonrefundable up-front license fees are recognized as revenue upon delivery provided there are no undelivered elementsat a point in time when the arrangement.

The Company will recognize royalty revenue inlicensed intellectual property is made available for the period of salecustomer’s use and benefit, which is generally at the inception of the related product(s), based on the underlying contract terms, provided that the reported salesarrangement.  Development and regulatory milestone fees, which are reliably measurable and the Company has no remaining performance obligations, assuming all other revenue recognition criteriaa type of variable consideration, are met.

Amounts received prior to satisfying the revenue recognition criteria are recorded as deferred revenue in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. Amounts expected to be recognized as revenue withinto the extent that it is probable that a significant reversal will not occur. The Company recognizes royalty revenue and sales-based milestones at the later of (i) when the related sales occur, or (ii) when the performance obligation to which the royalty has been allocated has been satisfied.

For a complete discussion of accounting for collaboration and other revenue-generating arrangements, see Note 11, Collaborative arrangements, and Note 12, months following the balance sheet date are classified as deferredRoyalty and other revenue current portion. Amounts not expected to be recognized as revenue within the 12 months following the balance sheet date are classified as deferred revenue, net of current portion.

.

Research and development expenses

Research and development costs are charged to expense as costs are incurred in performing research and development activities, including salaries and benefits, facilities costs, overhead costs, clinical study and related clinical manufacturing costs, license and milestone fees, contract services, manufacturing costs for pre-launch inventory that did not qualify for capitalization, and other related costs. Research and development costs, including up-frontUp-front fees and milestones paid to collaborators,third parties in connection with technologies which have not reached technological feasibility and do not have an alternative future use are also expensed as research and development expense as incurred. In circumstances where amounts have been paid in excess of costs incurred, the Company records a prepaid expense. The Company accrues costs for clinical trial activities based upon estimates of the services received and related expenses incurred that have yet to be invoiced by the contract research organizations, clinical study sites, laboratories, consultants, or other clinical trial vendors that perform the activities. The Company recognizesWhere amounts owed to a collaboration partner exceed the reimbursement associated withCompany’s collaborative activities to its collaborative partnersarrangement revenues in each quarterly period, such amounts are classified as research and development expense in the period the services are provided.

expense.

Cost of licenseroyalty and royaltyother revenue

Cost of licenseroyalty and royaltyother revenue represents expense associated with amounts owed to third parties as a result of revenue recognized under the Company’s out-license arrangements.

Stock-based compensation

The Company’s share-based compensation programs grant awards that have included stock options, restricted stock units, restricted stock awards, and shares issued under its employee stock purchase plan.  Grants are awarded to employees and non-employees, including directors, and non-employees.  

the Company's board of directors.  

The Company accounts for its stock-based compensation awards in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718, Compensation—Stock Compensation (“ASC 718”). ASC 718 requires all stock-based payments, to employees, including grants of employee stock options and restricted stock units and modifications to existing stock options, to be recognized in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss based on their fair values. The Company uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the fair value of options granted.

The Company’s stock-based awards are subject to either service or performance-based vesting conditions. Compensation expense related to awards to employees and directors with service-based vesting conditions is recognized on a straight-line basis based on the grant date fair value over the associated service period of the award, which is generally the vesting term. Compensation expense related to awards to non-employees with service-based vesting conditions is recognized based on the then-current fair value at each financial reporting date prior to the measurement date over the associated service period of the award, which is generally the vesting term, using the accelerated attribution method. Compensation expense related to awards to employees with performance-based vesting


conditions is recognized based on the grant date fair value over the requisite service period using the accelerated attribution method to the extent achievement of the performance condition is probable. Compensation expense related to awards to non-employees with performance-based vesting conditions is recognized based on the then-current fair value at each financial reporting date prior to the measurement date over the requisite service period using the accelerated attribution method to the extent achievement of the performance condition is probable.

The Company expenses restricted stock unit awards to employees based on the fair value of the award on a straight-line basis over the associated service period of the award. Awards of restricted stock units to non-employees are adjusted through stock-based compensation expense at each reporting period end to reflect the current fair value of such awards and expensed using an accelerated attribution model.

The Company estimates the fair value of its option awards to employees and directors using the Black-Scholes option pricing model, which requires the input of subjective assumptions, including (i) the expected stock price volatility, (ii) the calculation of expected term of the award, (iii) the risk-free interest rate, and (iv) expected dividends. Due toEffective January 1, 2020, the lackCompany eliminated the use of complete company-specifica representative peer group and uses only its own historical and implied volatility data for the full expected term of the stock-based awards, the Company basesin its estimate of expected volatility on a representative group of publicly traded companies in addition to its own volatility data. For these analyses, the Company selected companies with comparable characteristics to its own, including enterprise value, risk profiles, position within the industry, and with historical share price information sufficient to meet the expected life of the stock-based awards. The Company computes historical volatility data using the daily closing prices for the selected companies’ shares during the equivalent period of the calculated expected term of the stock-based awards. The Company will continue to apply this process untilgiven that there is now a sufficient amount of historical information regarding the volatility of its own stock price becomes available.price. The Company has estimated the expected term of its employee stock options using the “simplified” method, whereby, the expected term equals the
F-18

Table of Contents
arithmetic average of the vesting term and the original contractual term of the option due to its lack of sufficient historical data. The risk-free interest rates for periods within the expected term of the option are based on the U.S. Treasury securities with a maturity date commensurate with the expected term of the associated award. The Company has never paid, and does not expect to pay, dividends in the foreseeable future.

As a result of the adoption of ASU 2016-09, Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting, effective January 1, 2017, the

The Company accounts for forfeitures as they occur instead of estimating forfeitures at the time of grant and revising those estimates in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from its estimates.occur. Stock-based compensation expense recognized in the financial statements is based on awards for which performance or service conditions are expected to be satisfied.

Consistent with

Prior to the guidanceadoption of ASU No. 2018-07 on July 1, 2018, Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting (“ASU 2018-07”),  the measurement date for non-employee awards was generally the date the services are completed, resulting in FASB ASC Topic 505-50, Equity-Based Paymentsfinancial reporting period adjustments to Non-Employees,stock-based compensation during the vesting terms for changes in the fair value of eachthe awards.  After adoption of ASU 2018-07 on July 1, 2018, the measurement date for non-employee stock option and warrant awardawards is estimated at the date of grant usingwithout changes in the Black-Scholes option pricing model with assumptions generally consistent with those used for employee stock options, withfair value of the exception of expected term, which is over the contractual life.

award.

Interest (expense) income, net

Interest (expense) income, net consists primarily of interest expense on the Company’s 60 Binney Street financing lease obligation and interest income earned on investments, net of amortization of premium and accretion of discount. Interest income was approximately $9.5$11.5 million, $3.8$34.8 million, and $1.6$30.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016,2020, 2019, and 2015,2018, respectively.  Interest expense was $11.4$0.0 million, $0.0 million, and $15.5 million for the yearyears ended December 31, 2017.2020, 2019, and 2018, respectively. Please refer to Note 8, “Commitments and contingencies,”Leases, for further discussion of interest expense incurred on the 60 Binney Street lease.

Other (expense) income, net

Other (expense) income, net consists primarily of gains and losses on equity securities held by the disposal of fixed assets, realizedCompany, gains and losses on investments,disposal of assets, and gains and losses on foreign currency transactions and remeasurement.

currency.

Net loss per share

Basic net loss per share is calculated by dividing net loss attributable to common stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net income per share is calculated by dividing the net income attributable to common stockholders by the weighted-average number of common equivalent shares outstanding for the period, including any dilutive effect from outstanding stock options, unvested restricted stock, restricted stock units, and employee stock purchase plan stock using the treasury stock method. Given that the Company recorded a net loss for each of the periods presented, there is no difference between basic and diluted net loss per share since the effect of common stock equivalents would be anti-dilutive and are, therefore, excluded from the diluted net loss per share calculation.


The Company follows the two-class method when computing net loss per share in periods when issued shares that meet the definition of participating securities are outstanding. The two-class method determines net loss per share for each class of common and participating securities according to dividends declared or accumulated and participation rights in undistributed earnings. The two-class method requires income available to common stockholders for the period to be allocated between common and participating securities based upon their respective rights to received dividends as if all income for the period had been distributed. Accordingly, in periods in which the Company reports a net loss attributable to common stockholders when participating securities are outstanding, losses are not allocated to the participating securities.

Income taxes

Income taxes are recorded in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 740, Income Taxes (“ASC 740”), which provides for deferred taxes using an asset and liability approach. The Company recognizes deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in the financial statements or tax returns. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the difference between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse. Valuation allowances are provided, if based upon the weight of available evidence, it is more likely than not that some or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized.

The Company accounts for uncertain tax positions in accordance with the provisions of ASC 740. When uncertain tax positions exist, the Company recognizes the tax benefit of tax positions to the extent that the benefit will more likely than not be realized. The determination as to whether the tax benefit will more likely than not be realized is based upon the technical merits
F-19

Table of Contents
of the tax position as well as consideration of the available facts and circumstances. As of December 31, 2017The Company accrues for potential interest and 2016, the Company does not have any significant uncertainpenalties related to unrecognized tax positions.

benefits in income tax expense.

Comprehensive loss

Comprehensive loss is composed of net loss and other comprehensive income (loss). Other comprehensive income (loss) consists of unrealized gains and losses on marketabledebt securities, and foreign currency translation adjustments.

adjustments and other items.

Recent accounting pronouncements

Recently adopted

ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Statements, ASU No. 2019-5 Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326): Targeted Transition Relief, ASU No. 2019-11, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses
In MarchJune 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, Improvements2016-13, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Statements.  The new standard, as amended, requires that expected credit losses relating to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting,financial assets measured on an amortized cost basis and available-for-sale debt securities be recorded through an allowance for credit losses. It also limits the amount of credit losses to be recognized for available-for-sale debt securities to the amount by which simplifies share-based payment accounting through a varietycarrying value exceeds fair value and also requires the reversal of amendments. Upon adoption, all excess tax benefits and tax deficiencies (including tax benefitspreviously recognized credit losses if fair value increases. The targeted transition relief standard allows filers an option to irrevocably elect the fair value option of dividendsASC 825-10, Financial Instruments-Overall, applied on share-based payment awards) are recognized as income tax expense or benefit in the statement of operations and comprehensive loss. The tax effects of exercised or vested awards are treated as discrete items in the reporting period in which they occur. an instrument-by-instrument basis for eligible instruments. The Company adopted this standard effectiveon January 1, 20172020 on a prospective basis and applied the modified retrospective adoption approach beginning in 2017, and therefore prior periods have not been adjusted. The adoption impacted the income tax footnote disclosure and did not have a material impact on its financial position and results of operations.
ASU No. 2018-13, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework – Changes to the Company’s consolidated financial statements. The Company recognizes excess tax benefits regardless of whether or not the benefit reduces taxes payable in the current period. As a result, the Company established a net operating loss deferred tax asset of $76.7 million to accountDisclosure Requirements for prior period excess tax benefits through retained earnings, however an offsetting valuation allowance of $76.7 million was also established through retained earnings because it is not more likely than not that the deferred tax asset will be realized due to historical and expected future losses, and as a result there was no impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. The Company also elected to account for forfeitures as they occur, and recorded a cumulative catch up of $0.5 million within additional paid-in capital and retained earnings upon adoption in the first quarter of 2017.

Not yet adopted

Fair Value Measurement

In May 2014,August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (“ASC 606”), which supersedes all existing revenue recognition requirements, including most industry-specific guidance.2018-13, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework – Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement. The new standard requires a companyremoves certain disclosures, modifies certain disclosures, and adds additional disclosures related to recognize revenue when it transfers goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration that the company expects to receive for those goods or services.fair value measurement. The newCompany adopted this standard will be effective on January 1, 20182020, and earlier application is permitted only for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period. ASC 606 allows for eitherit did not have a full retrospective adoption, in which the standard is applied to all of the periods presented, or a modified retrospective approach, in which the standard is applied to the most current period presented in the financial statements. The Company expects to adopt this standard using the modified retrospective approach.  The revenue generated in the year ended December 31, 2017 relates to the Company’s collaboration arrangement with Celgene and the Company’s out-licensing arrangements. The Company is continuing to assess the potentialmaterial impact that ASC 606 may have on its financial position and results of operations as it relates toupon adoption.
ASU No. 2018-15, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other - Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Customer’s Accounting for Implementation Costs Incurred in a Cloud Computing Arrangement That Is a Service Contract
In August 2018, the Celgene arrangementFASB issued ASU 2018-15, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other-Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Customer’s Accounting for Implementation Costs Incurred in a Cloud Computing Arrangement That Is a Service Contract. The Company expectsamendments in this update align the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred in a hosting arrangement that certainis a service contract with the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred to develop or obtain internal-use software (and hosting arrangements that include an internal-use software license). The accounting for the service element of its accounting conclusions will require


further judgment, including, buta hosting arrangement that is a service contract is not limited to, (1)affected by the evaluation of variable consideration, andamendments in particular, milestone payments due from Celgene as the inclusion of milestone payments in the transaction price could accelerate revenue recognized under ASC 606 compared to ASC 605, (2) allocation of variable consideration to one or more performance obligations, (3) evaluation of whether a significant financing component is present, and (4) determination of the revenue recognition method for services performed under the arrangement.  As the Company is still in the process of completing its assessment of the Celgene arrangement, an estimate of the potential impact has not yet been made.this update. The Company will complete its assessment in the first quarteradopted this standard on a prospective basis as of 2018.  The Company has substantially completed its assessment of the ASC 606 impact on its two out-licensing arrangementsJanuary 1, 2020, and doesit did not expect the adoption of ASC 606 to have a material impact on its financial position and results of operations when applied to its out-licensing arrangements.

upon adoption.

ASU No. 2018-18, Collaborative Arrangements (Topic 808): Clarifying the Interaction between Topic 808 and Topic 606
In February 2016,November 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, Leases2018-18, Collaborative Arrangements (Topic 808): Clarifying the Interaction between Topic 808 and Topic 606, (“(“ASU 2016-02”2018-18”). The amendments in this update clarify that certain transactions between collaborative arrangement participants should be accounted for as revenue under ASC 606, which requires Revenue from Contracts with Customers (“Topic 606” or “ASC 606”) when the counter party is a lessee to recognize assets and liabilities oncustomer in the balance sheet for operating leases and changes many key definitions, including the definitioncontext of a lease.unit of account. ASU 2018-18 also precludes companies from presenting transactions with collaborative partners that are outside the scope of Topic 606together with revenue within the scope of Topic 606. The Company adopted this standard on a retrospective basis on January 1, 2020. As a result, revenue for prior periods are presented in accordance with the new standardstandard.
Prior to the adoption of ASU 2018-18, the Company presented all revenue recognized under its collaborative arrangements as collaboration revenue on its consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss. However, as the Company recognizes revenue under its collaborative arrangements both within and outside the scope of Topic 606, the Company has revised its presentation of revenue on its consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss as follows: service revenue includes a short-term lease exceptionrevenue from collaborative partners recognized within the scope of Topic 606 and collaborative arrangement revenue includes revenue from collaborative partners recognized outside the scope of Topic 606. The disaggregation of revenue
F-20

Table of Contents
recognized under Topic 606 and outside of Topic 606 had previously otherwise been disclosed in the notes to consolidated financial statements.
ASU No. 2019-4, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses, Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging, and Topic 825, Financial Instruments
In April 2019, the FASB issued ASU 2019-4, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses, Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging, and Topic 825, Financial Instruments. This update provides clarifications for leases with a term of 12 months or less, as partthree topics related to financial instruments accounting, some of which a lessee can make an accounting policy election not to recognize lease assets and lease liabilities. Lessees will continue to differentiate between finance leases (previously referred to as capital leases) and operating leases using classification criteria that are substantially similarapply to the previous guidance.Company. The Company adopted this standard on January 1, 2020 on a prospective basis, and it did not have a material impact on its financial position and results of operations upon adoption.
Not yet adopted
ASU No. 2019-12, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Simplifying the Accounting for Income Taxes
In December 2019, the FASB issued ASU 2019-12, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Simplifying the Accounting for Income Taxes (“ASU 2019-12”), which is intended to simplify the accounting for income taxes. ASU 2019-12 removes certain exceptions to the general principles in Topic 740 and also clarifies and amends existing guidance to improve consistent application. The new standard will be effective beginning January 1, 2019, and early adoption is permitted for public entities. The Company is currently evaluating the potential impact ASU 2016-02 may have on its financial position and results of operations.

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows: Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments. The new standard clarifies certain aspects of the statement of cash flows, including the classification of contingent consideration payments made after a business combination, the clarification of restricted cash, and several clarifications not currently applicable to the Company. The new standard also clarifies that an entity should determine each separately identifiable source or use within the cash receipts and cash payments on the basis of the nature of the underlying cash flows. In situations in which cash receipts and payments have aspects of more than one class of cash flows and cannot be separated by source or use, the appropriate classification should depend on the activity that is likely to be the predominant source or use of cash flows for the item. The new standard will be effective for the Company on January 1, 2018. The Company is continuing to assess the impact that adoption of this standard is expected to have on the Company’s consolidated statements of cash flows upon adoption.

In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-18, Statement of Cash Flows: Restricted Cash (“ASU 2016-18”). The amendments in this update require that amounts generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents be included within cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts shown on the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-18 will be effective January 1, 2018 and early adoption is permitted. As of December 31, 2017, the Company has not elected to early adopt this guidance, but expects the adoption to have an impact on its consolidated statement of cash flows as, upon adoption, it will include the Company’s restricted cash balance in the cash and cash equivalents reconciliation of operating, investing and financing activities.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-04, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment.  To address concerns over the cost and complexity of the two-step goodwill impairment test, the amendments in this ASU remove the second step of the test. An entity will apply a one-step quantitative test and record the amount of goodwill impairment as the excess of a reporting unit's carrying amount over its fair value, not to exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to the reporting unit. The new guidance does not amend the optional qualitative assessment of goodwill impairment. The new standard will be effective beginning January 1, 2020 and early adoption is permitted with measurement dates on or after January 1, 2017.2021. The adoption of this standardASU 2019-12 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’sCompany's financial position or results of operations upon adoption.

ASU No. 2020-06, Debt—Debt with Conversion and Other Options (Subtopic 470-20) and Derivatives and Hedging—Contracts in Entity’s Own Equity (Subtopic 815-40): Accounting for Convertible Instruments and Contracts in an Entity’s Own Equity
In April 2017,August 2020, the FASB issued ASU 2017-08,2020-06, Debt—Debt with Conversion and Other Options (Subtopic 470-20) and Derivatives and Hedging—Contracts in Entity’s Own Equity (Subtopic 815-40): Accounting for Convertible Instruments and Contracts in an Entity’s Own Equity (“ASU 2020-06”). ASU 2020-06 simplifies the complexity associated with applying U.S. GAAP for certain financial instruments with characteristics of liabilities and equity. More specifically, the amendments focus on the guidance for convertible instruments and derivative scope exception for contracts in an entity's own equity. The Company will early adopt the new standard, effective January 1, 2021. The adoption of ASU 2020-06 is not expected to have an impact on the Company's financial position or results of operations upon adoption.
ASU No. 2020-08, Codification Improvements to Subtopic 310-20, Receivables - Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs
In October 2020, the FASB issued ASU 2020-08, Codification Improvements to Subtopic 310-20, Receivables - Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs (“Subtopic 310-20”(“ASU 2020-08”) to provide further clarification and update the previously issued guidance in ASU 2017-08, Receivables - Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs (Subtopic 310-20: Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities) (“ASU 2017-08”). The new standard amendsASU 2017-08 shortened the amortization period for certain purchased callable debt securities heldpurchased at a premium by shorteningrequiring that the amortization period for the premium be amortized to the earliest call date. Subtopic 310-20 calls for a modified retrospective application under which a cumulative-effect adjustment will be made to retained earnings as of the beginning of the firstASU 2020-08 requires that at each reporting period, in whichto the guidance is adopted. extent that the amortized cost of an individual callable debt security exceeds the amount repayable by the issuer at the next call date, the excess premium shall be amortized to the next call date. The new standard will be effective beginning January 1, 2019 and early adoption is permitted for public entities. 2021. The adoption of this standardASU 2020-08 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Company's financial position or results of operations upon adoption.

ASU No. 2020-10, Codification Improvements
In May 2017,October 2020, the FASB issued ASU 2017-09, Compensation – Stock Compensation (“Topic 718”2020-10, Codification Improvements ("ASU 2020-10"): Scope Modification Accounting.. The new standard is intendedamendments in this ASU represent changes to reduceclarify the diversity in practice and cost and complexity when applyingASC, correct unintended application of the guidance, in Topic 718 to a changeor make minor improvements to the termsASC that are not expected to have a significant effect on current accounting practice or conditions ofcreate a share-based payment award.  Thesignificant administrative cost to most entities. This new standard will be effective beginning January 1, 2019. 2021. The adoption of this standardASU 2020-10 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s Company's financial position or results of operations upon adoption.


3. Marketable securities

The following table summarizes the available-for-salemarketable securities held at December 31, 20172020 and 20162019 (in thousands):

Description

 

Amortized Cost

 

 

Unrealized Gains

 

 

Unrealized Losses

 

 

Fair Value

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. government agency securities and treasuries

 

$

841,895

 

 

$

 

 

$

(3,579

)

 

$

838,316

 

Certificates of deposit

 

 

17,480

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

17,481

 

Total

 

$

859,375

 

 

$

1

 

 

$

(3,579

)

 

$

855,797

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. government agency securities and treasuries

 

$

600,001

 

 

$

34

 

 

$

(575

)

 

$

599,460

 

Certificates of deposit

 

 

6,480

 

 

 

6

 

 

 

(3

)

 

 

6,483

 

Total

 

$

606,481

 

 

$

40

 

 

$

(578

)

 

$

605,943

 

F-21

No


Table of Contents
Amortized cost / costUnrealized gainsUnrealized lossesFair value
December 31, 2020
U.S. government agency securities and treasuries$675,043 $302 $(74)$675,271 
Corporate bonds197,171 432 (40)197,563 
Commercial paper77,949 77,950 
Equity securities20,017 (14,364)5,653 
Total$970,180 $735 $(14,478)$956,437 
December 31, 2019
U.S. government agency securities and treasuries$633,970 $2,014 $(48)$635,936 
Certificates of deposit960 960 
Corporate bonds185,827 824 (43)186,608 
Commercial paper74,378 74,378 
Equity securities20,017 (7,147)12,870 
Total$915,152 $2,838 $(7,238)$910,752 
NaN available-for-sale debt securities held as of December 31, 20172020 or 20162019 had remaining maturities greater than threefive years.

F-22

Table of Contents
4. Fair value measurements

The following table sets forth the Company’s assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 20172020 and 20162019 (in thousands):

Description

 

Total

 

 

Quoted

prices in

active

markets

(Level 1)

 

 

Significant

other

observable

inputs

(Level 2)

 

 

Significant

unobservable

inputs

(Level 3)

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TotalQuoted
prices in
active
markets
(Level 1)
Significant
other
observable
inputs
(Level 2)
Significant
unobservable
inputs
(Level 3)
December 31, 2020December 31, 2020
Assets:Assets:
Cash and cash equivalentsCash and cash equivalents$317,705 $317,705 $$
Marketable securities:Marketable securities:
U.S. government agency securities and treasuriesU.S. government agency securities and treasuries675,271 675,271 
Corporate bondsCorporate bonds197,563 197,563 
Commercial paperCommercial paper77,950 77,950 
Equity securitiesEquity securities5,653 5,653 
Total assetsTotal assets$1,274,142 $323,358 $950,784 $
Liabilities:Liabilities:
Contingent considerationContingent consideration$1,509 $$$1,509 
Total liabilitiesTotal liabilities$1,509 $$$1,509 
December 31, 2019December 31, 2019

Assets:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assets:

Cash and cash equivalents

 

$

758,505

 

 

$

758,505

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

Cash and cash equivalents$327,214 $311,245 $15,969 $

Marketable securities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Marketable securities:

U.S. government agency securities and

treasuries

 

 

838,316

 

 

 

 

 

 

838,316

 

 

 

 

U.S. government agency securities and treasuries635,936 635,936 

Certificates of deposit

 

 

17,481

 

 

 

 

 

 

17,481

 

 

 

 

Certificates of deposit960 960 
Corporate bondsCorporate bonds186,608 186,608 
Commercial paperCommercial paper74,378 74,378 0
Equity securitiesEquity securities12,870 12,870 0

Total assets

 

$

1,614,302

 

 

$

758,505

 

 

$

855,797

 

 

$

 

Total assets$1,237,966 $324,115 $913,851 $

Liabilities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Liabilities:

Contingent consideration

 

$

2,231

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

2,231

 

Contingent consideration$7,977 $$$7,977 

Total liabilities

 

$

2,231

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

2,231

 

Total liabilities$7,977 $$$7,977 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assets:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

 

$

278,887

 

 

$

278,887

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

Marketable securities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. government agency securities

 

 

599,460

 

 

 

 

 

 

599,460

 

 

 

 

Certificates of deposit

 

 

6,483

 

 

 

 

 

 

6,483

 

 

 

 

Total assets

 

$

884,830

 

 

$

278,887

 

 

$

605,943

 

 

$

 

Liabilities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contingent consideration

 

$

7,756

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

7,756

 

Total liabilities

 

$

7,756

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

7,756

 

Cash and cash equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid securities with original final maturities of 90 days or less from the date of purchase to be cash equivalents. As of December 31, 2017,2020, cash and cash equivalents comprise funds in cash and money market accounts. As of December 31, 2016,2019, cash and cash equivalents comprise funds in cash, money market accounts, and federally insured deposits.

commercial paper.

Marketable securities

Marketable securities classified as Level 2 within the valuation hierarchy generally consist of certificates of deposit, U.S. government agency securities and treasuries, corporate bonds, and commercial paper. The Company estimates the fair values of these marketable securities by taking into consideration valuations obtained from third-party pricing sources. These pricing sources utilize industry standard valuation models, including both income and market-based approaches, for which all significant inputs are observable, either directly or indirectly, to estimate fair value. These inputs include market pricing based on real-time trade data for the same or similar securities, issuer credit spreads, benchmark yields, and other observable inputs. The Company validates the prices provided by its third-party pricing sources by understanding the models used, obtaining market values from other pricing sources and analyzing pricing data in certain instances.
F-23

Table of Contents
The amortized cost of available-for-sale debt securities is adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts to maturity.the earliest call date for premiums or to maturity for discounts. At December 31, 20172020 and 2016,2019, the balance in the Company’s accumulated other comprehensive loss was composed primarily of activity related to the Company’s available-for-sale marketabledebt securities. There were no0 material realized gains or losses recognized on the sale or maturity of available-for-sale securities during the yearsyear ended December 31, 20172020 or 2016,2019.
Accrued interest receivable on the Company's available-for-sale debt securities totaled $3.1 million and $3.6 million as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively. NaN accrued interest receivable was written off during the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 or 2019.
The following table summarizes available-for-sale debt securities in a result, the Company did not reclassify any amount out of accumulated other comprehensive loss for the same periods.

The aggregate fair value of securities held by the Company in ancontinuous unrealized loss position for less than twelve months as of December 31, 2017 and 2016 was $704.1 million and $376.1 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2017 and 2016, there were $134.4 million and $95.5 million in securities held by the Company in an unrealized loss position for moregreater than twelve months, respectively.  The Companyand for which an allowance for credit losses has the intentnot been recorded at December 31, 2020 and ability to hold such securities until recovery. 2019 (in thousands):

Less than 12 months12 months or greaterTotal
DescriptionFair valueUnrealized lossesFair valueUnrealized lossesFair valueUnrealized losses
December 31, 2020
U.S. government agency securities
and treasuries
$211,384 $(74)$$$211,384 $(74)
Corporate bonds76,598 (40)1,205 77,803 (40)
Total$287,982 $(114)$1,205 $$289,187 $(114)
December 31, 2019
U.S. government agency securities
and treasuries
$13,234 $(3)$79,618 $(45)$92,852 $(48)
Corporate bonds53,983 (43)53,983 (43)
Total$67,217 $(46)$79,618 $(45)$146,835 $(91)
The Company determined that there was no material change in the credit risk of the above investments.investments during the twelve months ended December 31, 2020. As a result, the Company determined it didsuch, an allowance for credit losses was not hold any investments with an other-than-temporary impairment asrecognized. As of December 31, 2017 and 2016.

Contingent consideration

On June 30, 2014,2020, the Company acquired Pregenen.  does not intend to sell such securities and it is not more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell the securities before recovery of their amortized cost bases.

The Company holds equity securities with an aggregate fair value of $5.7 million and $12.9 million at December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively within current marketable securities on its consolidated balance sheet. The Company recorded unrealized losses of $7.2 million and $9.3 million and an unrealized gain of $2.2 million during the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018 respectively, related to its equity securities, which are included in other (expense) income, net on the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss. In January 2021, the Company sold a portion of its equity securities for proceeds of $31.3 million. The fair value of the remaining equity securities held as of the trade date is $7.3 million.
Contingent consideration
In connection with theits prior acquisition of Pregenen,Precision Genome Engineering, Inc. (“Pregenen”), the Company recordedmay be required to pay future consideration that is contingent consideration pertaining toupon the amounts potentially payable to Pregenen’s former equityholders pursuant to the Stock Purchase Agreement by and among the Company, Pregenen and Pregenen’s former equityholders.achievement of specified development, regulatory approvals or sales-based milestone events. Contingent consideration is measured at fair value and is based on significant inputs not observable in the market, which represents a Level 3 measurement within the fair value hierarchy. The valuation of contingent consideration uses assumptions the Company believes would be made by a market participant. The Company assesses these estimates on an on-going basis as additional data impacting the assumptions is obtained. Future changes in the fair value of contingent consideration related to updated assumptions and estimates are recognized within the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss.

In the absence of new information related to the probability of milestone achievement, changes in fair value will reflect changing discount rates and the passage of time. Contingent consideration may change significantly as development progresses and additional data are obtained, impacting the Company’s assumptions regarding probabilities of successful achievement of related milestones used to estimate the fair value of the liability and the timingis included in which they are expected to be achieved. In evaluating the fair value information, considerable judgment is required to interpret the market data used to develop the estimates. The estimates of fair value may not be indicative of the amounts that could be realized in a current market exchange. Accordingly, the use of different market assumptions and/or different valuation techniques could result in materially different fair value estimates.

The significant unobservable inputs used in the measurement of fair value of the Company’s contingent consideration are probabilities of successful achievement of clinical and commercial milestones, the period in which these milestones are expected to be achieved ranging from 2021 to 2028 and discount rates ranging from 19.0% to 20.0%. Significant increases or decreases in any of the probabilities of success would result in a significantly higher or lower fair value measurement, respectively. Significant increases or decreases in these other inputs would result in a significantly lower or higher fair value measurement, respectively.

The table below provides a roll-forward of fair value of the Company’s contingent consideration obligations which include Level 3 inputs (in thousands):

 

Year ended December 31,

 

 

2017

 

 

2016

 

Beginning balance

$

7,756

 

 

$

8,665

 

Additions

 

 

 

 

 

Changes in fair value

 

(525

)

 

 

4,091

 

Payments

 

(5,000

)

 

 

(5,000

)

Ending balance

$

2,231

 

 

$

7,756

 

A $5.0 million preclinical milestone was achieved and paid to the former equityholders of Pregenen in each of the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016.  As of December 31, 2017, the remaining $2.2 million contingent consideration obligation is reflected as a non-current liability in the consolidated balance sheet.  As of December 31, 2016, $4.5 million and $3.3 million of the fair value of the Company’s total contingent consideration obligation was reflected as components of accrued expenses and other current liabilities and as aother non-current liability, respectively, withinliabilities on the consolidated balance sheet. sheets.

Please refer to Note 8, “Commitments9, Commitments and contingencies, for further information.


F-24


Table of Contents
5. Property, plant and equipment, net

Property, plant and equipment, net, consists of the following (in thousands):

As of December 31,

 

As of December 31,

2017

 

 

2016

 

20202019

Land

$

1,210

 

 

$

 

Land$1,210 $1,210 

Building

 

164,414

 

 

 

 

Building15,745 15,664 

Computer equipment and software

 

5,134

 

 

 

1,655

 

Computer equipment and software6,950 6,947 

Office equipment

 

4,478

 

 

 

1,427

 

Office equipment7,665 7,599 

Laboratory equipment

 

24,914

 

 

 

16,305

 

Laboratory equipment55,521 44,560 

Leasehold improvements

 

116

 

 

 

13,697

 

Leasehold improvements34,286 33,788 

Construction-in-progress

 

15,189

 

 

 

136,315

 

Construction-in-progress92,514 77,981 

Total property, plant and equipment

 

215,455

 

 

 

169,399

 

Total property, plant and equipment213,891 187,749 

Less accumulated depreciation and amortization

 

(15,849

)

 

 

(12,444

)

Less accumulated depreciation and amortization(51,060)(36,573)

Property, plant and equipment, net

$

199,606

 

 

$

156,955

 

Property, plant and equipment, net$162,831 $151,176 

Depreciation and amortization expense related to property, plant and equipment was $15.1 million, $13.4 million, and $13.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018, respectively.
North Carolina manufacturing facility
In November 2017, the Company acquired a manufacturing facility which is in the process of construction, in Durham, North Carolina for the future manufacture of lentiviral vector for the Company’s gene therapies. As of December 31, 2020, a portion of the facility has been placed into service and cell therapies.the remainder of the facility is still in process of construction and qualification, which is required for the facility to be ready for its intended use.  Construction-in-progress as of December 31, 20172020, and 2019, includes $12.9$91.1 million and $74.2 million, respectively, related to the North Carolina manufacturing facility.

As of December 31, 2017, total property, plant and equipment includes $164.4 million related to the Company’s headquarters at 60 Binney Street in Cambridge, Massachusetts, of which $156.0 was incurred by the landlord.  Construction-in-progress as of December 31, 2016 includes $126.9 million related to the construction of the Company’s headquarters at 60 Binney Street in Cambridge, Massachusetts.  

Depreciation and amortization expense related to property, plant and equipment was $9.8 million, $5.9 million, and $3.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016, and 2015, respectively. Please refer to Note 8, “Commitments and contingencies,” for further information.

6. Restricted cash

As of both December 31, 2017,2020 and 2019, the Company maintained letters of credit of $13.8 $54.5 million, which are required to be collateralized with a bank accountaccounts at a financial institutioninstitutions in accordance with the Company’s 60 Binney Street Lease agreement. Asagreements. Total restricted cash as of December 31, 2016,2020 and 2019 consisted of the Company maintainedfollowing (in thousands):
As of December 31,
20202019
60 Binney Street lease$13,763 $13,763 
50 Binney Street sublease40,072 40,072 
Other2,188 660 
Total restricted cash$56,023 $54,495 
Refer to Note 8, Leases, for further information on the Company's letters of credit of $14.4 million which were required to be collateralized with a bank account at a financial institution in accordance with the Company’s current and prior headquarters’ lease agreements. Subject to the terms of the 60 Binney Street Lease agreement and certain reduction requirements specified therein, including market capitalization requirements, this amount may decrease by $1.5 million on the fourth, fifth and sixth anniversaries of the date the Company occupies the building.

credit.

7. Accrued expenses and other current liabilities

Accrued expenses and other current liabilities consist of the following (in thousands):

 

 

As of December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

 

2016

 

Employee compensation

 

$

19,657

 

 

$

11,296

 

Accrued goods and services

 

 

29,533

 

 

 

34,275

 

Accrued license and milestone fees

 

 

4,584

 

 

 

2,464

 

Accrued professional fees

 

 

1,402

 

 

 

1,492

 

Financing lease obligation, current portion

 

 

1,051

 

 

 

 

Contingent consideration, current portion

 

 

 

 

 

4,479

 

Other

 

 

838

 

 

 

654

 

Total accrued expenses and other current

   liabilities

 

$

57,065

 

 

$

54,660

 

F-25



Table of Contents

As of December 31,
20202019
Employee compensation$55,802 $44,679 
Manufacturing costs22,571 23,126 
Clinical and contract research organization costs23,766 16,799 
Collaboration research costs20,004 27,142 
Property, plant, and equipment789 2,354 
License and milestone fees278 300 
Professional fees1,541 1,827 
Other20,655 25,329 
Total accrued expenses and other current liabilities$145,406 $141,556 

8. CommitmentsLeases
The Company leases certain office and contingencies

Operating lease commitments

On June 3, 2013,laboratory space. Additionally, the Company entered into a nine-year building lease for approximately 43,600 square feet of space locatedhas embedded leases at 150 Second Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts, which commenced in December 2013. This lease was amended in June 2014 to add approximately 9,900 additional square feet. The lease originally had monthly lease payments of $0.2 million for the first 12 months, which increased to $0.3 million per month beginning in December 2014 due to the lease amendment, with annual rent escalations thereafter. Rent expense was recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease through April 2017. The lease provided a contribution from the landlord towards the initial build-out of the space of up to $7.8 million. The Company capitalized the leasehold improvements as property, plant and equipment and recorded the landlord incentive payments received as deferred rent and amortized these amounts as reductions to rent expense over the lease term. In addition, in accordance with the lease, the Company entered into a cash-collateralized irrevocable standby letter of credit in the amount of $1.3 million, naming the landlord as beneficiary, which had a balance of $0.6 million as of December 31, 2016. On September 30, 2016, the Company entered into an Assignment and Assumption of Lease (“Assignment”) relating to this lease. Under the Assignment, the Company assigned all of its rights, interests, obligations and responsibilities under the lease, effective May 1, 2017.  Accordingly, $8.3 million of tenant improvement assets were disposed and $8.0 million of non-current deferred rent was removed from the consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2017, with the resulting loss of $0.3 million recorded within the consolidated statement of operations and comprehensive loss during the year ended December 31, 2017. The $0.6 million letter of credit was also released during the year ended December 31, 2017.

On June 29, 2015, the Company entered into a lease agreement for additional office space located at 215 First Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts.  Under the terms of the lease, the Company leased approximately 15,120 square feet starting on July 13, 2015 for $0.5 million per year in base rent, which was subject to a 3% annual rent increase plus certain operating expenses and taxes. The lease term was until August 31, 2020, and included early termination provisions that could allow the Company to terminate the lease without penalty at the end of the 20th full calendar month following the delivery of the premises if the Company met certain conditions specified within the lease.  Under the terms of the lease, the Company also leased an additional 8,075 square feet of office space in the same premises starting on January 1, 2016 for an additional $0.3 million per year in base rent, which was subject to a 3% annual rent increase plus certain operating expenses and taxes. The Company terminated this lease effective April 12, 2017.

On June 3, 2016, the Company entered into a strategic manufacturing agreement for the future commercial production of the Company’s Lenti-D and LentiGlobin product candidates with a contract manufacturing organization. Under this 12 year agreement, the contract manufacturing organization will complete the design, construction, validation and process validation of the leased suites prior to anticipated commercial launch of the product candidates. During construction, the Company is required to pay $12.5 million upon the achievement of certain contractual milestones, and may pay up to $8.0 million in additional contractual milestones if the Company elects its option to lease additional suites. The Company paid $5.0 million for the achievement of the first and second contractual milestones during 2016 and paid the third milestone of $3.0 million during the first quarter of 2017.  Additionally, the fourth milestone of $2.5 million was achieved in the fourth quarter of 2017 and is reflected as a component of accrued expenses and other current liabilities within the consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2017. Following construction completion, the Company will pay $5.1 million per year in fixed suite fees as well as certain fixed labor, raw materials, testing and shipping costs for manufacturing services, and may pay additional suite fees if it elects its option to reserve or lease additional suites. The Company estimates completion will occur in 2018. The Company may terminate this agreement any time after upon payment of a one-time termination fee and up to 24 months of fixed suite and labor fees. The Company concluded that this agreement contains an embedded lease as the suites are designated for the Company’s exclusive use during the term of the agreement. The Company concluded that it is not the deemed owner during construction nor is it a capital lease under ASC 840-10, Leases – Overall. As a result, the Company accounts for the agreement as an operating lease and expenses the rental payments on a straight-line basis over the term of the embedded lease.

On November 18, 2016, the Company entered into an agreement for future clinical and commercial production of the Company’s LentiGlobin gene therapy drug products with a contract manufacturing organization at an existing facility. The term of the agreement is five years with a three year renewal at the mutual option of each party. Under the agreement, the Company is required to pay an up-front fee of €3.0 million, €2.0 million of which was paid in the fourth quarter of 2016 and €1.0 million of which is expected to be paid in mid-2018, and annual maintenance and production fees of up to €9.8 million, depending on its production needs. The Company may terminate this agreement with six months’ notice and a one-time termination fee prior to July 1, 2018, or twelve months’ notice and a one-time termination fee thereafter. The Company concluded that this agreement contains an embedded lease as the clean rooms are designated for the Company’s exclusive use during the term of the agreement, and determined that it is not a capital lease under ASC 840-10, Leases – Overall. As a result, the Company will account for the agreement as an operating lease and expense the rental payments on a straight-line basis over the term of the embedded lease.

organizations.

60 Binney Street Lease commitments

Onlease

In September, 21, 2015, the Company entered into a lease agreement for office and laboratory space located in a building (the “Building”) at 60 Binney Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts (the “60 Binney Street Lease”) to become its new, which is now the Company’s corporate headquarters. Under the terms of the 60 Binney Street Lease, starting on October 1, 2016, the Company leases approximately 253,108 square feet of office and laboratory space at $72.50 per square foot per year, or $18.4 million per year in base rent, which is subject to scheduled annual rent increases of 1.75% plus certain operating expenses and taxes. The Company also executedcurrently maintains a $9.2$13.8 million collateralized letter of credit upon signing the 60 Binney Street Lease, which was required to be collateralized with a bank account at a financial institution in accordance with the 60 Binney Street Lease agreement. This letter of credit was increased to $13.8 million during the third quarter of 2016 as required under the terms of the lease. Subjectand, subject to the terms of the lease and certain reduction requirements specified therein, including market capitalization requirements, this amount may decrease back to $9.2 million over time. The 60 Binney Street Lease will continue until March 31, 2027.$13.8 million of cash collateralizing the letter of credit is classified as restricted cash and other non-current assets on the Company's consolidated balance sheets. Pursuant to a work letter entered into in connection with the 60 Binney Street Lease, the landlord will contributecontributed an aggregate of $42.4 million toward the cost of construction and tenant improvements for the Building.
The purpose ofCompany occupied the Building beginning on March 27, 2017 and the 60 Binney Street Lease was to replace the Company’s previously leased premises at 150 Second Street and 215 First Street in Cambridge, Massachusetts, both of which were fully exited in the first half of 2017.will continue until March 31, 2027. The Company has the option to extend the 60 Binney Street Lease for two2 successive five-year terms. In applying the ASC 842 transition guidance, the Company classified this lease as an operating lease and recorded a right-of-use asset and lease liability on the effective date. The Company occupiedis recognizing rent expense on a straight-line basis throughout the Building beginning on March 27, 2017.

Becauseremaining term of the lease.

50 Binney Street sublease
In April 2019, the Company entered into a sublease agreement for office space located at 50 Binney Street in Cambridge, Massachusetts (the “50 Binney Street Sublease”) to supplement the Company’s corporate headquarters located at 60 Binney Street in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Under the terms of the 50 Binney Street Sublease, the Company will lease 267,278 square feet of office space for $99.95 per square foot, or $26.7 million per year in base rent subject to certain operating expenses, taxes and annual rent increases of approximately 3%. The lease will commence when the space is involvedavailable for use by the Company, which is anticipated to be in the construction project, including having responsibilityfirst half of 2022, which reflects the sublessor's exercise of its option to pay for a portionpostpone the commencement date of the costssublease, and end on December 31, 2030, unless other conditions specified in the 50 Binney Street Sublease occur. Upon signing the 50 Binney Street Sublease, the Company executed a $40.1 million cash-collateralized letter of finish work and mechanical, electrical, and plumbing elementscredit, which may be reduced in the future subject to the terms of the Building, among other items,50 Binney Street Sublease and certain reduction requirements specified therein. The $40.1 million of cash collateralizing the Companyletter of credit is deemed for accounting purposes to be the owner of the Building during the construction period. Accordingly, construction costs that have been incurred by the landlord directly or indirectly through reimbursement to the Companyclassified as part of its tenant improvement allowance have been recorded as an asset in “Property, plant and equipment, net” with a related financing obligation in “Accrued expensesrestricted cash and other current liabilities” and “Financing lease obligation, net of current portion”non-current assets on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. Tenant improvement costs that are reimbursable byPayments will commence at the landlordearlier of (i) the date which is 90 days following the commencement date and have not yet been paid to(ii) the date the Company aretakes occupancy of all or any portion of the premises. In connection with the execution of the 50 Binney Street Sublease, the Company also entered into a Purchase Agreement for furniture and equipment (the “Furniture Purchase Agreement”) located on the premises upon lease commencement. Upon execution of the Furniture Purchase Agreement, the Company made an upfront payment of $7.5 million, all of which was recorded in “Tenant improvements receivable”within restricted cash and other non-current assets on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. Tenant improvement costs that are not reimbursable by the landlord are recorded in “Property, plant and equipment, net” on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets.

sheets as

F-26

Table of Contents
of December 31, 2020. The Company evaluatedwill assess the 60lease classification of the 50 Binney Street LeaseSublease and commence recognition of the associated rent expense upon occupancylease commencement.
Seattle, Washington leases
In July 2018, the Company entered into a lease agreement for office and laboratory space located in a portion of a building in Seattle, Washington. The lease was amended in October 2018 to increase the total rentable space to approximately 36,126 square feet at $54.00 per square foot in base rent per year, which is subject to scheduled annual rent increases of 2.5% plus certain operating expenses and taxes. The lease commenced on March 27, 2017January 1, 2019 and the lease term will continue through January 31, 2027 ("the Initial Term"). The Company moved into the facility in June 2019. The Company determined that the 60 Binney Street Lease did not meetclassification of this lease to be an operating lease and recorded a right-of-use asset and lease liability at lease commencement.
In September 2019, the criteria for “sale-leaseback” treatment. This determination was based on, among other things, the Company's continuing involvement with the property in the form of non-recourse financingCompany entered into a second amendment to the lessor. Accordingly, upon occupancy,lease (the “Second Amendment”). The Second Amendment added approximately 22,188 square feet to the existing space and extended the lease term of the entire premises by 16 months, or until April 2028. Fixed monthly rent for the expanded space will be incurred at a rate of $62.80 per square foot per year beginning in January 2021, subject to annual increases of 2.5%. The Second Amendment includes a five-year option to extend the term.
Upon the execution of the Second Amendment, which was deemed to be a lease modification, the Company commenced depreciatingre-evaluated the portionassumptions made at the original lease commencement date. The Company determined the Second Amendment consists of 2 separate contracts under ASC 842. One contract is related to a new right-of-use for the building in service overexpanded 22,188 square feet of space, which is to be accounted for as a useful life of 40 yearsnew lease, and incurred interest expensethe other is related to the financing obligationmodification of $11.4 millionterm for the year ended December 31, 2017.original 36,126 square feet of space. The Company made $0.6 million in principal payments, which are included in operating expense,recorded an additional right-of-use asset and lease liability upon lease commencement of the expanded space. In September 2020, the Company entered into a sublease agreement for the 22,188 square feet added under the Second Amendment at a fixed monthly rent of $62.80 per square foot per year ended December 31, 2017.

beginning in January 2021, subject to annual increases of 2.5%. The sublease term will continue through April 2028. The Company bifurcatesis recognizing rent expense on a straight-line basis through the remaining extended term of the respective leases. The head lease and the sublease will be accounted for as two separate contracts with the income from the sublease presented separately from the lease expense on the head lease.

Embedded leases
In June 2016, the Company entered into a manufacturing agreement for the future commercial production of the Company’s beti-cel and eli-cel drug products with a contract manufacturing organization. Under this 12-year agreement, the contract manufacturing organization will complete the design, construction, validation and process validation of the leased suites prior to anticipated commercial launch of the product candidates. During construction, the Company paid $12.0 million upon the achievement of certain contractual milestones. Construction was completed in March 2018 and beginning in April 2018, the Company pays $5.1 million per year, subject to annual inflationary adjustments, in fixed suite fees, as well as certain fixed labor, raw materials, testing and shipping costs for manufacturing services. The Company may terminate this agreement at any time upon payment of a one-time termination fee and up to 24 months of fixed suite and labor fees. The Company concluded in prior periods that this agreement contained an embedded lease as the suites are designated for the Company’s exclusive use during the term of the agreement. The Company recorded a right-of-use asset and lease liability for this operating lease on the effective date of ASC 842 and is recognizing rent expense on a straight-line basis throughout the remaining term of the embedded lease.
In November 2016, the Company entered into an agreement for clinical and commercial production of the Company’s ZYNTEGLO, LentiGlobin for SCD, and eli-cel drug products with a contract manufacturing organization at an existing facility. The Company concluded that this agreement contains an embedded operating lease as the clean rooms are designated for the Company’s exclusive use during the term of the agreement. The term of the agreement is five years with subsequent three-year renewals at the mutual option of each party. As a result, the Company recorded a right-of-use asset and lease liability for this operating lease on the effective date of ASC 842, and is recognizing rent expense on a straight-line basis throughout the estimated remaining term of the embedded lease. In March 2020, the Company amended its agreement with the contract manufacturing organization, resulting in a lease payments pursuantmodification. Under the terms of the amended arrangement, the Company may be required to pay annual maintenance and production fees of up to €16.5 million, depending on its production needs, and may terminate this agreement with twelve months’ notice and a one-time termination fee. The amendment also provides for an option to reserve an additional clean room for a one-time option fee plus annual maintenance fees. As a result, the Company increased the right-of-use asset and lease liability related to this embedded operating lease during the first quarter of 2020.
In July 2020, the Company entered into an agreement reserving manufacturing capacity with a contract manufacturing organization. The Company concluded that this agreement contains an embedded lease as a controlled environment room at the
F-27

Table of Contents
facility is designated for the Company's exclusive use during the term of the agreement, with the option to sublease the space if the Company provides notice that it will not utilize it for a specified duration of time. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company will be required to pay up to $5.4 million per year in maintenance fees in addition to the 60 Binney Street Lease into (i) a portion thatcost of any services provided and may terminate this agreement with eighteen months' notice. The term of the agreement is allocatedfive years, with the option to extend, and is expected to commence in the Building and (ii) a portion that is allocated to the land on which the Building is located, which is recorded as rental expense.first half of 2021. The Company began makingintends to assess the lease payments pursuant toclassification of the 60 Binney Street Lease in March 2017.  embedded lease and commence recognition of the associated rent expense upon lease commencement.
Summary of all lease costs recognized under ASC 842
The portionfollowing table contains a summary of the lease obligation allocatedcosts recognized under ASC 842 and other information pertaining to the land is treatedCompany’s operating leases for accounting purposes as an operating lease that commenced upon execution of the 60 Binney Street Lease in September 2015. During the years ended December 31, 2017, 20162020 and 2015,2019 (in thousands):

For the year ended December 31,
20202019
Lease cost (1)
Operating lease cost$35,049 $35,346 
Total lease cost$35,049 $35,346 
Other information
Operating cash flows used for operating leases$32,097 $31,026 
Weighted average remaining lease term6.4 years7.4 years
Weighted average discount rate6.35 %6.70 %

(1) Short-term lease costs and variable lease costs incurred by the Company recognized $1.9 million, $1.9 million, and $0.5 million of rental expense attributable tofor the land, respectively.


As oftwelve months ended December 31, 2017, future minimum commitments under the 60 Binney Street Lease2020 and facility operating leases 2019were as follows (in thousands):

immaterial.

Years Ended December 31,

 

60 Binney

Street Lease

 

Other Operating

Leases (1)

 

Total Lease

Commitments

2018

 

$18,647

 

$13,941

 

$32,588

2019

 

18,974

 

11,491

 

30,465

2020

 

19,306

 

11,521

 

30,827

2021

 

19,642

 

11,551

 

31,193

2022

 

19,987

 

5,365

 

25,352

2023 and thereafter

 

88,888

 

27,625

 

116,513

Total minimum lease payments

 

$185,444

 

$81,494

 

$266,938

(1)

Includes the lease of the Company’s lab and office space in Seattle, Washington and two embedded operating leases at contract manufacturing organizations.

For the 60 Binney Street Lease, the table above sets forth the future minimum rental payments that the Company is obligated to pay, including amounts reflected on the consolidated balance sheet as part of the balance under the caption “Accrued expenses and other current liabilities” and “Financing lease obligation, net of current portion.” The Company commenced rental payments in April 2017.

Rent expense is calculated on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. Rent expense recognized under all leases, including additional rent charges for utilities, parking, maintenance, and real estate taxes, and including rental expense attributable to the 60 Binney Street Lease land was $9.0$47.7 million, $8.3$45.3 million, and $5.7$9.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 2015,2018, respectively.

Note that the Company adopted ASC 842 effective January 1, 2019 using the required modified retrospective approach and utilizing the effective date as its date of initial application.  Therefore, amounts disclosed pertaining to the year ended December 31, 2018 are presented under previous accounting guidance and are therefore not comparable to the amounts recorded during the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 under ASC 842.

As of December 31, 2020, future minimum commitments under ASC 842 under the Company’s operating leases were as follows (in thousands):

As of
Maturity of lease liabilitiesDecember 31, 2020
2021$36,430 
202236,899 
202337,387 
202437,398 
202532,082 
2026 and thereafter56,095 
Total lease payments236,291 
Less: imputed interest(43,270)
Total operating lease liabilities$193,021 

The above table excludes legally binding minimum lease payments for leases executed but not yet commenced as of December 31, 2020.
F-28

Table of Contents
9. Commitments and contingencies
Lease commitments
The Company leases certain office and laboratory space and has embedded leases at contract manufacturing organizations. Refer to Note 8, Leases, for further information on the terms of these lease agreements.
Contingent consideration related to business combinations

On June 30, 2014, the Company acquired Pregenen. During 2017, one milestone under the Stock Purchase Agreement was achieved, which resulted in a $5.0 million payment to the former equityholders of Pregenen during 2017. During 2016, two milestones were achieved, which resulted in a $5.0 million payment to the former equityholders of Pregenen. The Company may be required to make up to an additional $120.0 million in remaining future contingent cash payments to the former equityholders of Pregenen upon the achievement of certain clinical and commercial milestones related to the Pregenen technology, of which $20.1 million relates to clinical milestones and $99.9 million relates to commercial milestones. In accordance with accounting guidance for business combinations, contingent consideration liabilities are required to be recognized on the consolidated balance sheets at fair value. Estimating the fair value of contingent consideration requires the use of significant assumptions primarily relating to probabilities of successful achievement of certain clinical and commercial milestones, the expected timing in which these milestones will be achieved and discount rates. The use of different assumptions could result in materially different estimates of fair value. See Note 4, “Fair value measurements” for additional information.

Other funding commitments

The Company is party to various agreements, principally relating to licensed technology, that require future payments relating to milestones notthat may be met at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016in subsequent periods or royalties on future sales of specified products.  products, which includes the collaboration agreement entered into with Regeneron in August 2018. Please refer to Note 11, Collaborative arrangements, for further information on the collaboration agreement with Regeneron.
Additionally, the Company is party to various contracts with contract research organizations and contract manufacturers that generally provide for termination on notice, with the exact amounts in the event of termination to be based on the timing of the termination and the terms of the agreement.  In each
Based on our development plans as of 2018 and 2019,December 31, 2020, the Company expectsmay be obligated to make future development, regulatory and commercial milestone payments and royalty payments on future sales of approximately $12.0 millionspecified products associated with the Company's collaboration and license agreements. Payments under an agreement withthese agreements generally become due and payable upon achievement of such milestones or sales. When the achievement of these milestones or sales have not occurred, such contingencies are not recorded in the Company’s financial statements. As further discussed in Note 11, Collaborative arrangements, BMS assumed responsibility for amounts due to licensors as a contract manufacturer.

result of any future ex-U.S. sales of ide-cel and bb21217.

The Company has various manufacturing development and license agreements to support clinical and commercial product needs. The following table presents non-cancelable contractual obligations arising from these arrangements:
Years ended December 31,Purchase
commitment
2021$83,885 
202212,611 
2023
2024
2025
2026 and thereafter
Total purchase commitments$96,496 
Litigation
From time to time, the Company is party to various claims and complaints arising in the ordinary course of business, including securities class action litigation. The Company enters into standard indemnification agreements in the ordinary course of business. Pursuant to the agreements, the Company indemnifies, holds harmless, and agrees to reimburse the indemnified party for losses suffered or incurred by the indemnified party, generally the Company’s business partners. The term of these indemnification agreements is generally perpetual any time after execution of the agreement. The maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is unlimited. Management
F-29

Table of Contents
does not believe that any ultimate liability resulting from any of these claims will have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial position, or liquidity. However, management cannot give any assurance regarding the ultimate outcome of any claims, and their resolution could be material to operating results for any particular period.
The Company also indemnifies each of its directors and officers for certain events or occurrences, subject to certain limits, while the officer or director is or was serving at the Company's request in such capacity, as permitted under Delaware law and in accordance with its certificate of incorporation and by-laws. The term of the indemnification period lasts as long as a director may be subject to any proceeding arising out of acts or omissions of such director or officer in such capacity. The maximum amount of potential future indemnification is unlimited; however, the Company currently holds director and officer liability insurance. This insurance allows the transfer of risk associated with the Company's exposure and may enable it to recover a portion of any future amounts paid. The Company believes that the fair value of these indemnification obligations is minimal. Accordingly, it has never incurred costs to defend lawsuits or settle claims relatednot recognized any liabilities relating to these indemnification agreements.

obligations.

9.

10. Common stock and preferred stock

The Company is authorized to issue 125,000,000125.0 million shares of common stock. Holders of common stock are entitled to one1 vote per share. Holders of common stock are entitled to receive dividends, if and when declared by the Company’s Boardboard of Directors,directors, and to share ratably in the Company’s assets legally available for distribution to the Company’s shareholders in the event of liquidation. Holders of common stock have no preemptive, subscription, redemption or conversion rights. As of December 31, 20172020, and 2016,2019, the Company had 49,406,01166.4 million and 40,691,90455.4 million shares of common stock issued and outstanding, respectively.

In June 2015, the Company sold 2,941,176, shares of common stock through an underwritten public offering at a price of $170.00 per share for aggregate net proceeds of $477.2 million.  In December 2016, the Company sold 3,289,473 shares of common stock through an underwritten public offering at a price of $76.00 per share for aggregate net proceeds of $234.7 million.  On June 27, 2017, the Company sold 4,381,500 shares of common stock (inclusive of 571,500 shares of common stock sold by the Company pursuant to the full exercise of an overallotment option granted to the underwriters in connection with the offering) through an underwritten public offering at a price of $105.00 per share for aggregate net proceeds of $436.8 million. On December 15, 2017, the Company sold 3,243,244 shares of common stock (excluding any shares sold pursuant to an overallotment option granted to the underwriters in connection with the offering) through an underwritten public offering at a price of $185.00 per share for aggregate net proceeds of $569.8 million.  

In January 2018, the Company sold 277,1090.3 million shares of common stock pursuant to the partial exercise of an overallotment option granted to the underwriters in connection with the December 2017 underwritten public offering at a price of $185.00 per share for aggregate net proceeds of $48.6$48.7 million.

In July 2018, the Company sold 3.9 million shares of common stock (excluding any shares sold pursuant to an overallotment option granted to the underwriters in connection with the offering) through an underwritten public offering at a price of $162.50 per share for aggregate net proceeds of $600.6 million. In August 2018, the Company sold 0.4 million shares of common stock to Regeneron in connection with a collaboration arrangement at a price of $238.10 per share for aggregate net proceeds of $100.0 million, of which $45.5 million was attributed to a prepayment of joint research activities.

In May 2020, the Company sold 10.5 million shares of common stock (inclusive of shares sold pursuant to an option granted to the underwriters in connection with the offering) through an underwritten public offering at a price of $55.00 per share for aggregate net proceeds of $541.5 million.
The Company is authorized to issue 5,000,0005.0 million shares of preferred stock in one or more series and to fix the powers, designations, preferences and relative participating option or other rights thereof, including dividend rights, conversion rights, voting rights, redemption terms, liquidation preferences and the number of shares constituting any series, without any further vote or action by the Company’s shareholders. As of December 31, 20172020 and 2016,2019, the Company had no0 shares of preferred stock issued or outstanding.

Reserved for future issuance

The Company has reserved for future issuance the following number of shares of common stock (in thousands):

 

As of December 31,

 

As of December 31,

 

2017

 

 

2016

 

20202019

Options to purchase common stock

 

 

3,755

 

 

 

3,735

 

Options to purchase common stock6,262 5,483 

Restricted stock units

 

 

477

 

 

 

263

 

Restricted stock units1,495 1,127 

2013 Stock Option and Incentive Plan

 

 

1,550

 

 

 

1,226

 

2013 Stock Option and Incentive Plan2,545 2,007 

2013 Employee Stock Purchase Plan

 

 

188

 

 

 

209

 

2013 Employee Stock Purchase Plan67 147 

 

 

5,970

 

 

 

5,433

 

10,369 8,764 

10. Significant agreements


F-30

Table of Contents
11. Collaborative arrangements
To date, the Company’s service and collaborative arrangement revenue has been primarily generated from its collaboration arrangements with BMS, formerly Celgene Corporation

("Celgene") prior to its acquisition by BMS in November 2019, and Regeneron, each as further described below.

Bristol-Myers Squibb
BMS Original Collaboration Agreement

On

In March 19, 2013, the Company entered into a Master Collaboration Agreement (the “Collaboration“BMS Collaboration Agreement”) with Celgene (now BMS following its acquisition of Celgene in November 2019) to discover, develop and commercialize potentially disease-altering gene therapies in oncology. The collaboration is focused on applying gene therapy technology to genetically modify a patient’s own T cells, known as chimeric antigen receptor, or CAR T cells, to target and destroy cancer cells. Additionally, onin March 19, 2013, the Company entered into a Platform Technology Sublicense Agreement (the “Sublicense Agreement”) with CelgeneBMS pursuant to which the Company obtained a sublicense to certain intellectual property from Celgene,BMS, originating under Celgene’sBMS’s license from Baylor College of Medicine, for use in the collaboration.

Under the terms of the BMS Collaboration Agreement, the Company received a $75.0 millionan up-front, non-refundable, cash payment.non-creditable payment of $75.0 million. The Company was responsible for conducting discovery, research and development activities through completion of Phase Iphase 1 clinical studies, if any, during the initial term of the BMS Collaboration Agreement, or three years. The collaboration is governed by a joint steering committee (“JSC”) formed by an equal number of representatives from the Company and Celgene. The JSC, among other activities, reviews the collaboration program, reviews and evaluates product candidates and approves regulatory plans. In addition to the JSC, the Collaboration Agreement provides that the Company and Celgene each appoint representatives to a patent committee, which is responsible for managing the intellectual property developed and used during the collaboration.


BMS Amended Collaboration Agreement

On

In June 3, 2015, the Company and CelgeneBMS amended and restated the BMS Collaboration Agreement (the “Amended BMS Collaboration Agreement”).  Under the Amended BMS Collaboration Agreement, the parties will nownarrowed the focus of the collaboration to exclusively work on anti- B-cellanti-B-cell maturation antigen (“BCMA”) product candidates for a new three-year term. In connection with the Amended BMS Collaboration Agreement, the Company received an upfront,up-front, one-time, non-refundable, non-creditable payment of $25.0 million to fund research and development under the collaboration. The collaboration will continue to be governed by the JSC. 

Under the terms of the Amended BMS Collaboration Agreement, for up to two2 product candidates selected for development under the collaboration, the Company iswas responsible for conducting and funding all research and development activities performed up through completion of the initial Phase Iphase 1 clinical study if any, of such product candidate.

candidates.

On a product candidate-by-product candidate basis, up through a specified period following enrollment of the first patient in an initial Phase Iphase 1 clinical study for such product candidate, (the “Option Period”), the Company hashad granted CelgeneBMS an option to obtain an exclusive worldwide license to develop and commercialize such product. In the event that Celgene exercises its option with respect to anyFollowing BMS’s license of each product candidate, the Company mayis entitled to elect to co-develop and co-promote theeach product candidate in the United States, provided that, if the Company does not exercise its option to co-develop and co-promote the first product candidate in-licensed by Celgene under the Amended Collaboration Agreement, then the Company will not be permitted to exercise its option to co-develop and co-promote any future product candidates under the Amended Collaboration Agreement. If Celgene elects to exercise its option to exclusively in-license a product candidate, it must pay the Company an option fee in the amount of $10.0 million for the first product candidate and $15.0 million for any additional product candidates.

bb2121U.S.

BMS Ide-cel License Agreement

On

In February 10, 2016, CelgeneBMS exercised its option to obtain an exclusive worldwide license to develop and commercialize bb2121,ide-cel, the first product candidate under the Amended BMS Collaboration Agreement, pursuant to an executed license agreement (“bb2121Ide-cel License Agreement”) entered into by the parties onin February 16, 2016 and paid to the Company the associated $10.0 million option fee. Pursuant to the bb2121Ide-cel License Agreement, Celgene isBMS was responsible for development and related funding of bb2121ide-cel after the substantial completion of the on-going Phase Iphase 1 clinical trial.  The Company iswas responsible for the manufacture of vector and associated payload throughout development and upon BMS’s request, throughout commercialization, the costs of which is fully reimbursedwere reimbursable by Celgene,BMS in accordance with the terms of the Amended and Celgene isRestated Co-Development, Co-Promote and Profit Share Agreement, as further described below. BMS was responsible for the manufacture of drug product throughout development and commercialization.

The Under the Ide-cel License Agreement, the Company may electwas eligible to receive U.S. milestones of up to $85.0 million for the first indication to be addressed by ide-cel and royalties for U.S. sales of ide-cel. Additionally, the Company was eligible to receive ex-U.S. milestones of up to $55.0 million and royalties for ex-U.S. sales of ide-cel.

BMS Ide-cel Co-Development, Co-Promote and Profit Share Agreement
In March 2018, the Company elected to co-develop and co-promote bb2121ide-cel within the United States, which it currently expectsU.S. pursuant to elect.  The Company’s election to co-develop and co-promote bb2121 must be made by the substantial completionexecution of the ongoing Phase I trialAmended and Restated Co-Development, Co-Promote and Profit Share Agreement (“Ide-cel CCPS”), which replaced the Ide-cel License Agreement.  As a result of bb2121.  If elected,executing the Ide-cel CCPS, the responsibilities of the parties remain largely unchanged from
F-31

Table of Contents
those under the Ide-cel License Agreement, however, the Company will share equally in all costsprofits and losses relating to developing, commercializing and manufacturing bb2121ide-cel within the United StatesU.S. and has the right to participate in the development and promotion of bb2121ide-cel in the United States. Under this scenario,U.S. BMS is responsible for the Company may receive, per product, upcosts incurred to $10.0 million in clinical milestone paymentsmanufacture vector and associated payload for use outside of the United States, up to $54.0 million in regulatory milestone payments, and up to $36.0 million in commercial milestone payments. In addition, to the extent bb2121 is commercialized, the Company would be entitled to receive tiered royalty payments ranging from the mid-single digits to low-teens based onU.S., plus a percentagemarkup. As a result of net sales generated outside of the United States, subject to certain reductions.

In the event the Company does not exercise its optionelecting to co-develop and co-promote bb2121,ide-cel within the U.S., the milestones and royalties payable under the Ide-cel License Agreement were adjusted. Under the Ide-cel CCPS, the Company will receive an additional fee in the amount of $10.0 million. Under this scenario, the Company may bewas eligible to receive a $10.0 million milestone related to the development of ide-cel in the U.S. and, for the first indication to be addressed by ide-cel, ex-U.S. regulatory and commercial milestones of up to $60.0 million. Under the Ide-cel CCPS, the $10.0 million development milestone was achieved in clinical milestone payments, up to $117.0 million in regulatory milestone payments,the second quarter of 2019 and up to $78.0 million in commercial milestone payments. subsequently paid by BMS.

In addition,May 2020, the First Amendment to the extent bb2121 is commercialized,Amended and Restated Co-Development, Co-Promote and Profit Share Agreement (as amended, the Company would be entitled"Amended Ide-cel CCPS") was executed, which amended the Ide-cel CCPS. Under the Amended Ide-cel CCPS, the parties will continue to receive tiered royalty payments ranging fromshare equally in all profits and losses related to developing, commercializing and manufacturing ide-cel within the mid-single digits to low-teens based on a percentage of net sales, subject to certain reductions.

U.S. Under the Amended Ide-cel CCPS and the Amended bb21217 License Agreement,

On described further below, BMS was relieved of its obligations to pay the Company for future ex-U.S. milestones and royalties on ex-U.S. sales for each of ide-cel and bb21217 in exchange for an up-front, non-refundable, non-creditable payment of $200.0 million, which represents the aggregate of the probability-weighted, net present value of the future ex-U.S. milestones and royalties on ex-U.S. sales for each of ide-cel and bb21217. In connection with these amendments, BMS assumed the contract manufacturing agreements related to ide-cel adherent lentiviral vector. Over time, BMS is assuming responsibility for manufacturing ide-cel suspension lentivrial vector outside of the U.S., with bluebird responsible for manufacturing ide-cel suspension lentiviral vector in the U.S. In addition, under the Amended Ide-cel CCPS and the Amended bb21217 License Agreement, described further below, the parties are released from future exclusivity related to BCMA-directed T cell therapies. There are no remaining milestones or royalties under the Amended Ide-cel CCPS.

BMS bb21217 License Agreement
In September 22, 2017, CelgeneBMS exercised its option to obtain an exclusive worldwide license to develop and commercialize bb21217, the second product candidate under the Amended BMS Collaboration Agreement, pursuant to an executed license agreement (“bb21217 License Agreement”) entered into by the parties onin September 28, 2017 and paid the associatedCompany an option fee of $15.0 million option fee.  million.  Pursuant to the license agreement, Celgenebb21217 License Agreement, BMS is responsible for development and related funding of bb21217 after the substantial completion of the on-going Phase Iongoing phase 1 clinical trial. TheIn 2019, the parties amended the protocol for the ongoing phase 1 clinical trial to enroll additional patients for which the Company will be reimbursed based upon an agreed-upon amount per patient. Under the bb21217 License Agreement, the Company is eligible to receive U.S. milestones of up to $85.0 million for the first indication to be addressed by bb21217 and royalties for U.S. sales of bb21217. Additionally, the Company was eligible to receive ex-U.S. milestones of up to $55.0 million and royalties for ex-U.S. sales of bb21217.
In May 2020, the Second Amended and Restated License Agreement ("Amended bb21217 License Agreement") was executed, which replaced the bb21217 License Agreement. Under the Amended bb21217 License Agreement, over time, BMS is assuming responsibility for manufacturing suspension lentiviral vector outside of the U.S., with bluebird responsible for manufacturing suspension lentiviral vector in the manufacture of vector andU.S. Under the Amended bb21217 License Agreement, expenses incurred by the Company associated payload throughoutwith these activities are fully reimbursable by BMS at cost plus a mark-up. Throughout both development and commercialization, which is fully reimbursed by Celgene, and CelgeneBMS is responsible for the manufacture of drug product throughoutproduct. There are no remaining milestones and royalties related to the ex-U.S. development and commercialization.

or commercialization of bb21217 following execution of the Amended bb21217 License Agreement.

The Company may elect tocurrently expects it will exercise its option to co-develop and co-promote bb21217 within the United States.U.S.  The Company’s election to co-develop and co-promote bb21217 must be made by the substantial completion of the ongoing Phase Ion-going phase 1 clinical trial of bb21217.  If elected, the Company expects the responsibilities of the parties to remain largely unchanged, however, the Company expects it will share equally in all costsprofits and losses relating to developing, commercializing and manufacturing bb21217 within the United StatesU.S. and hasto have the right to participate in the development and promotion of bb21217 in the United States.  U.S.  Under this scenario, the Company may receive, per product, up to $10.0 million in clinical milestone paymentsU.S. milestones and outside ofroyalties payable under the United States, up to $54.0 million in regulatory milestone payments,Amended bb21217 License Agreement would be adjusted and up to $36.0 million in commercial milestone payments. In addition, to the extent bb21217 is commercialized, the Company would be entitledeligible to receive tiered royalty payments ranging froma $10.0 million development milestone payment related to the mid-single digits to low-teens baseddevelopment of bb21217 within the U.S. The Company would not be eligible for royalties on a percentageU.S. sales of net sales generated outside of the United States, subject to certain reductions.

bb21217 under this scenario.

In the event the Company does not exercise its option to co-develop and co-promote bb21217, the Company will receive an additional fee in the amount of $10.0 million. Under this scenario, the Company maythere would be eligible to receive up to $10.0 million in clinical milestone payments, up to $117.0 million in regulatory milestone payments, and up to $78.0 million in commercial milestone payments. In addition,no change to the extentU.S. milestones and royalties for U.S. sales of bb21217, is commercialized,as previously described above, for which the Company would be entitledeligible to receive tiered royalty payments ranging from the mid-single digits to low-teens based on a percentagereceive.
F-32

Table of net sales, subject to certain reductions.

Contents

Accounting Analysis – bb2121

Upon executionAmended Ide-cel CCPS and Amended bb21217 License Agreement

In accordance with the Company’s accounting policies related to variable consideration, as further described in Note 2, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies and Basis of Presentation, if an arrangement includes variable consideration, including milestone payments, the Company evaluates whether the milestones are considered probable of being achieved and estimates the amount to be included in the transaction price of an arrangement. 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 control, such as regulatory approvals, are generally not considered probable of being achieved until those approvals are received. The Company recognizes royalty revenue and sales-based milestones at the later of (i) when the related sales occur, or (ii) when the performance obligation to which the royalty has been allocated has been satisfied.
Prior to the May 2020 amendments, the Company had constrained all variable consideration related to the remaining ex-U.S. milestones and royalties for ex-U.S. sales under the Ide-cel CCPS and bb21217 License Agreement. As a result of the May 2020 amendments, the uncertainty associated with the previously constrained variable consideration for future ex-U.S. milestones and royalties on ex-U.S. sales for each of ide-cel and bb21217 was resolved in exchange for an up-front, non-refundable, non-creditable payment of $200.0 million.
While the Ide-cel CCPS and bb21217 License Agreement were historically accounted for as separate contracts, the May 2020 amendments to each agreement were negotiated as a package with a single commercial objective and, as such, the Amended CollaborationIde-cel CCPS and Amended bb21217 License Agreement were combined for accounting purposes and treated as a single arrangement.
At the time of the May 2020 amendments, there was one remaining performance obligation under each of the Ide-cel CCPS and bb21217 License Agreement, neither of which were fully satisfied: a combined performance obligation of the ide-cel license and ide-cel vector manufacturing through development; and a combined performance obligation of the bb21217 license and bb21217 vector manufacturing through development. Subsequent to the May 2020 amendments, the Company concluded the two performance obligations are distinct from each other as BMS can benefit from each license and associated manufacturing services separately and the respective licenses and manufacturing services do not modify one another and are not interdependent. Accordingly, the Company will continue to account for each performance obligation separately.
The Company allocated the $200.0 million up-front payment received in connection with the May 2020 amendments to the remaining performance obligations described above based on the general allocation principles of Topic 606. In applying these principles, the Company considered the $200.0 million up-front payment is representative of previously constrained variable consideration that has been changed and the related uncertainties resolved by the May 2020 amendments. Moreover, the Company considered that a portion of the $200.0 million was specifically attributable to each remaining performance obligation as the amount represents the aggregate of the probability-weighted, net present value of the future ex-U.S. milestones and royalties on ex-U.S. sales for each of ide-cel and bb21217 and that each respective portion therefore (i) relates specifically to the Company's satisfaction of each of its remaining performance obligations and (ii) is representative of the amount of consideration the Company expects to be entitled to in exchange for satisfying the respective performance obligations. As such, the Company concluded that the portion of the $200.0 million up-front payment specifically attributable to each of ide-cel and bb21217 should be allocated to each respective performance obligation pursuant to the variable consideration allocation exception.
The Amended Ide-cel CCPS and Amended bb21217 License Agreement represent a contract modification to an existing contract under Topic 606 given the May 2020 amendments resulted in a reduction in scope of the Company's responsibilities under each performance obligation described above. Specifically, the May 2020 amendments reduced the scope of the Company's obligation to provide ex-U.S. vector manufacturing services through development for both ide-cel and bb21217 as those activities will transition to BMS over time. In addition, the May 2020 amendments resulted in a change in the overall transaction price under the arrangement. The May 2020 amendments did not include any additional promised goods and services.
The remaining goods and services to be provided in order to fully satisfy each performance obligation described above are not distinct from those previously provided with respect to each performance obligation. Therefore, for each performance obligation, the remaining goods and services are part of a single performance obligation that is partially satisfied at the date of the contract modification. Accordingly, the effect that the contract modification had on the transaction price and the measure of progress toward complete satisfaction of each respective performance obligation has been recognized on a cumulative catch-up basis. The accounting for any previously satisfied performance obligations as of the contract modification date are not affected by the modification.
F-33

Table of Contents
Ide-cel transaction price
The following tables summarize the total transaction price, the allocation of the total transaction price to the identified performance obligations under the arrangement contained(including those performance obligations that were completed as of the following deliverables: (i)May 2020 contract modification date), and the amount of the transaction price unsatisfied as of December 31, 2020 (in thousands):
Ide-cel transaction price as of December 31, 2020
Upfront non-refundable payments received prior to May 2020 contract modification (1)$120,000 
Allocated portion of the upfront non-refundable payment received in connection with the Amended Ide-cel CCPS and bb21217 License Agreement (2)184,029 
Estimated variable consideration (3)83,900 
$387,929 
(1) Composed of all up-front payments and option fee and milestone payments received under the BMS Collaboration Agreement, Amended BMS Collaboration Agreement, Ide-cel License Agreement, and Ide-cel CCPS. This consideration was allocated to the performance obligations under the Ide-cel CCPS based on a relative standalone selling price (“SSP”) basis.  The Company estimated the SSP of the ide-cel license after considering potential future cash flows under the license. The Company then discounted these probability-weighted cash flows to their present value. The Company estimated the SSP of each of the ide-cel research and development services (ii) participationand ide-cel manufacturing services to be provided based on the JSC, (iii) participation onCompany’s estimated cost of providing the patent committee, (iv) a licenseservices plus an applicable profit margin commensurate with observable market data for similar services.
(2) This represents the portion of the $200.0 million up-front payment received under the Amended Ide-cel CCPS and Amended bb21217 License Agreement which was allocated to ide-cel.
(3) Estimated variable consideration represents the estimated reimbursement from BMS for the manufacture of vectors and associated payload through development.

Allocation of
transaction
price to
performance
obligations
Transaction price unsatisfied as of December 31, 2020
Ide-cel research and development services$40,912 $
Ide-cel license and manufacturing services347,017 1,082 
$387,929 $1,082 
Ide-cel research and development services
The Company allocated $40.9 million of the transaction price to the first product candidate, bb2121, (v)research and development services.  The Company satisfied this performance obligation as the research and development services were performed.  The Company determined that the period of performance of the research and development services was through projected initial phase 1 clinical study substantial completion, or through May 2018.  The research and development performance obligation was satisfied prior to the May 2020 amendments and, as a result, the accounting for this previously satisfied performance obligation was not affected by the modification. The Company recognized 0 revenue related to ide-cel research and development services for the year ended December 31, 2020. The Company recognized $2.3 million and $5.8 million related to ide-cel research and development services for the year ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively.
Ide-cel license and manufacturing services
The Company allocated $347.0 million of the transaction price to the combined unit of accounting which consists of the license and manufacture of vectors and associated payload for incorporation into bb2121, under the license, and (vi) participation on the JGC under the co-development and co-promotion agreement for bb2121.

The license to the first product candidate, bb2121, was considered a deliverable at the inception of the arrangement and therefore the associated option fee was included in allocable arrangement consideration as the Company believed there was minimal risk with regard to whether Celgene will exercise the option based on the successful completion of preclinical activities and proximity of enrollment of the first patient in an initial Phase I clinical study for this product candidate. ide-cel.

The Company also determined that the obligation to manufacture, or have manufactured, supplies of vector and associated payload (hereafter referred to as vector manufacturing services) was a deliverable.

However, the Company determined that the options to license any additional product candidates were substantive options and therefore were not considered deliverables at execution of the Amended Collaboration Agreement. Celgene was not contractually obligated to exercise the options. Additionally, as a result of the uncertain outcome of the discovery, research and development activities, the Company was at risk with regard to whether Celgene would exercise the options to license additional product candidates. Moreover, the Company determined that the options were not priced at a significant and incremental discount. Accordingly, the options to other product candidates were not considered deliverables and the associated option fees were not included in allocable arrangement consideration.

Upon execution of the Amended Collaboration Agreement in June 2015, the Company concluded that each of the three delivered elements at the inception of the agreement (research and development services, participation on the JSC and participation on the patent committee) had standalone value from the undelivered elements. Additionally, the Amended Collaboration Agreement does not include return rights related to the collaboration term. Accordingly, each deliverable qualified as a separate unit of accounting.

The Company determined that each of the delivered elements had the same period of performance (the three-year term through projected initial Phase I clinical study substantial completion) and the same pattern of revenue recognition, ratably over the period of performance as there was no other discernible pattern of recognition. The Company identified the allocable arrangement consideration as the $25.0 million up-front research and development funding payment, $10.0 million option feeaccounts for the first product candidate, bb2121, $20.0 million related to remaining deferred revenue from the original Collaboration Agreement, and $54.1 million related to the estimated amounts that will be received from Celgene for manufacturing services. The $109.0 million total allocable arrangement consideration was allocated based on the relative estimated selling price of the separate units of accounting at the inception of the amended agreement, resulting in $17.3 million allocated to the three delivered elements at the inception of the agreement, which will be recognized over a three year term.

The Company determined that each of the identified deliverables that qualify as a separate unit of accounting continue to have the same period of performance (the three year term through projected initial Phase I clinical study substantial completion) and the same pattern of revenue recognition, ratably over the period of performance as there is no other discernible pattern of recognition, and therefore there is no change in the recognition of $17.3 million allocated to these three elements.  These services continue to be recognized over a three-year term that began in June 2015.


However, the Company concluded that the license to bb2121 did not have standalone value from the vector manufacturing services, because the manufacturing is essential to the use of the license. Accordingly, these two deliverables qualify as a single combined unit of accounting. The Company is required to reassess its conclusions on standalone value of deliverables each period end.  As of December 31, 2017, the Company determined that there were no changes to its initial standalone value conclusion and that the bb2121 license agreement continues to not have standalone value from the manufacturing services. Accordingly, these two deliverables continue to qualify as a single combined unit of accounting.

Based on the likelihood and the Company’s intent to execute the co-development and co-promotion agreement for bb2121, the Company determined that the operating activities involved in the co-development and co-promotion of bb2121 in the U.S., which include the Company’s vector manufacturing services for development in the U.S. development, participation on the JGC, and Celgene’sBMS’s U.S. development efforts are deemed to be within the scope of ASC 808 given that both parties are active participants in the activities and both parties are exposed to significant risks and rewards dependent on the commercial success of the activities.  The Company recognizes collaboration revenue for its U.S. manufacturing services by application of ASC 605 as it has deemed its vector manufacturing servicesanalogy to be essential to Celgene’s use of the license to bb2121 and therefore is a combined unit of accounting.Topic 606.  The portion of Celgene’sBMS’s U.S. development costs that bluebirdthe Company is responsible for are recognized as a reduction to its collaboration revenues, or, if in excess of such revenues in a given quarter, the excess is recorded as research and development expense.  

bb2121 research and development services

The Company recognized revenue related to bb2121 research and development services for Celgene

F-34

Table of $6.2 million for each of the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016.  

bb2121 license and manufacturing services

Revenue recognition for the combined unit of accounting commenced during the first quarter of 2017 after the Company reached agreement with Celgene regarding the budget and timing for vector manufacturing services.  Contents

The Company recognizes revenue associated with the combined unit of accountingperformance obligation using the proportional performance method.method, as the Company will satisfy this performance obligation as the manufacturing services are performed through development. In using this method, the Company estimated through discussions with Celgene regarding theirits development plan for bb2121,ide-cel, including expected demand from BMS, and the costs associated with the manufacture of vectors and associated payload for incorporation into ide-cel. On a quarterly basis, the Company determines the proportion of effort it incurred as a percentage of total effort it expects to incur andexpend. This ratio is applied this ratio to the total estimated budget for bb2121 vector manufacturing services. In developing the total estimated budget, management assumed that the Company will exercise its option to co-develop and co-promote bb2121 and therefore is currently recognizing revenue related to 67.5% of worldwide development costs incurred,transaction price, which represents the percentage the Company is contractually entitled to bill Celgene under the cost share provisions of the co-development and co-promotion agreement, upon its execution. The period of performance and recognition pattern will be revisited as the development plan changes or if other events impacting the deliverables occur.

The Company recognized $10.4 million of revenue relatedincludes variable consideration, allocated to the combined unitperformance obligation consisting of accounting for its rest of worldthe ide-cel license and vector manufacturing services for the year ended December 31, 2017 in accordance with ASC 605. With respect to the combined unit of accounting for its U.S. license and vector manufacturing services accounted for in accordance with ASC 808, $4.9 million was recognized as revenue (representative of gross revenue of $10.5 million offset by approximately $5.6 million of cost reimbursement to Celgene) and $3.0 million was recognized as research and development expense for the year ended December 31, 2017. As noted above, revenue recognition for the combined unit of accounting commenced during the first quarter of 2017 and as such there was no revenue recognized related to the combined unit of accounting in 2016.  In the event the Company does not exercise its option to co-develop and co-promote bb2121, the Company expects to recognize the remaining 32.5% of worldwide development costs, as Celgene would be responsible for 100% of costs incurred, plus a markup. Actual costs could materially differ from these estimates, and managementservices. Management has applied significant judgment in the process of developing its budget estimates. Anyestimates and any changes to these estimates will be recognized in the period in which they change as a cumulative catch up.

catch-up.

The following table summarizes the net collaboration revenue recognized or expense incurred for the joint ide-cel development efforts in the U.S. under ASC 808, including revenue or expense related to the combined performance obligation for the license and vector manufacturing of ide-cel in the U.S. for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018 (in thousands):
For the years ended December 31,
202020192018
ASC 808 ide-cel license and manufacturing revenue - U.S. (1)
$108,196 $$6,255 
ASC 808 ide-cel research and development expense - U.S. (1)
$41,599 $32,415 $8,689 
(1)As noted above, the calculation of collaboration revenue or research and development expense to be recognized for joint ide-cel development efforts in the U.S. is performed on a quarterly basis. The calculation is independent of previous activity, which may result in fluctuations between revenue and expense recognition period over period, depending on the varying extent of effort performed by each party during the period.
Revenue related to the combined unit of accounting for the non-US license and vector manufacturing services is accounted for in accordance with Topic 606. The following table summarizes the revenue recognized related to the combined unit of accounting for the ide-cel ex-U.S. license and vector manufacturing services for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018 (in thousands):
For the years ended December 31
202020192018
ASC 606 ide-cel license and manufacturing revenue - ex-U.S.$99,053 $25,522 $35,900 

As of December 31, 2020, the aggregate amount of the transaction price allocated to the combined performance obligation, which consists of the ide-cel license and manufacturing services, that is unsatisfied, or partially unsatisfied, is $1.1 million, which the Company evaluated all milestonesexpects to recognize as revenue as manufacturing services are provided through the remaining development period. As of December 31, 2020 and 2019, the Company had $0.8 million and $8.5 million, respectively, of deferred revenue associated with the combined performance obligation consisting of the ide-cel license and manufacturing services.
bb21217 transaction price
The following tables summarize the total transaction price, the allocation of the total transaction price to the identified performance obligations under the arrangement (including those performance obligations that may be received in connection with Celgene’s bb2121 license to determine if they were substantive in nature. All clinicalcompleted as of the May 2020 contract modification date), and regulatory milestones that may bethe amount of the transaction price unsatisfied as of December 31, 2020 (in thousands):
(in thousands)bb21217 transaction price as of December 31, 2020
Upfront non-refundable payments received prior to May 2020 contract modification (1)$15,000 
Allocated portion of the up-front non-refundable payment received in connection with the Amended Ide-cel CCPS and bb21217 License Agreement (2)15,971 
Estimated variable consideration (3)1,803 
$32,774 

(1) Composed of the up-front non-refundable payment received under the bb2121 license agreement are considered substantive onbb21217 License Agreement. This consideration was allocated to the basis of the contingent nature of the milestone, specifically reviewing factors such as the scientific, clinical, regulatory, commercial and other risks that must be overcome to achieve the milestone as well as the level of effort and investment required. Accordingly, such amounts will be recognized as revenue in full in the period in which the associated milestone is achieved, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria are met. All commercial milestones will be accounted for in the same manner as royalties and recorded as revenue upon achievement of the milestone, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria are met.


Accounting Analysis – bb21217

On September 22, 2017, Celgene exercised its option to obtain an exclusive worldwide license to develop and commercialize bb21217, the second optioned product candidate, pursuant toperformance obligations under the bb21217 License Agreement entered into bybased on a relative SSP basis.  The Company estimated the parties on September 28, 2017, and paidSSP of the associated $15.0 million option fee.

bb21217 license after considering potential future cash flows under the license. The

F-35

Table of Contents
Company then discounted these probability-weighted cash flows to their present value. The Company’sCompany estimated the SSP of each of the bb21217 License Agreement with Celgene contains the following deliverables: (i) research and development services (ii) a licenseand bb21217 manufacturing services to be provided based on the second product candidate,Company’s estimated cost of providing the services plus an applicable profit margin commensurate with observable market data for similar services.
(2) This represents the portion of the $200.0 million up-front payment received under the Amended Ide-cel CCPS and Amended bb21217 (iii)License Agreement which was allocated to bb21217.
(3) Estimated variable consideration represents the estimated reimbursement from BMS for the manufacture of vectors and associated payload for incorporation into bb21217,through development.
Allocation of transaction
price to performance
obligations
Transaction price unsatisfied as of December 31, 2020
bb21217 research and development services$5,444 $
bb21217 license and manufacturing services27,330 27,330 
$32,774 $27,330 
All of the remaining development, regulatory, and commercial milestones under the license, and (iv) participation on the JGC under the co-development and co-promotion agreement for bb21217.

Upon execution of theAmended bb21217 License Agreement in September 2017,are related to U.S. development, regulatory and commercialization activities and are fully constrained and are therefore excluded from the transaction price. As part of its evaluation of the constraint, the Company concludedconsidered numerous factors, including the fact that achievement of the milestones is outside the control of the Company and contingent upon the future success of its clinical trials, the licensee’s efforts, or the receipt of regulatory approval. Any consideration related to U.S. sales-based milestones (including royalties) will be recognized when the related sales occur as these amounts have been determined to relate predominantly to the license granted to BMS and therefore are recognized at the later of when the performance obligation is satisfied, or the related sales occur.

The Company re-evaluates the transaction price, including its estimated variable consideration included in the transaction price and all constrained amounts, each reporting period and as uncertain events are resolved or other changes in circumstances occur.
bb21217 research and development services
The Company satisfied this performance obligation as the research and development services which commenced at the inception of the arrangement, have standalone value from the license to bb21217 and manufacture of vectors and associated payload under the license (hereafter referred to as bb21217 vector manufacturing services).  

However, the Company concluded that the license to bb21217 does not have standalone value from one of the undelivered elements, the bb21217 manufacturing services under the license, because the manufacturing is essential to the use of the license.  Accordingly, these two deliverables qualify as a single combined unit of accounting.

were performed.  The Company determined that the period of performance of the research and development services was two years through projected substantial completion of the initial Phase Iphase 1 clinical study, substantial completion, and revenue will be recognized ratably over the period of performance as there was no other discernible pattern of recognition.

or through September 2019.  The Company identified the allocable arrangement consideration as the $15.0 million option fee for the second product candidate and $26.7 million related to the estimated amounts that will be received from Celgene for bb21217 vector manufacturing services. The $41.7 million total allocable arrangement consideration was allocated based on the relative estimated selling price of the separate units of accounting at the inception of the bb21217 License Agreement, resulting in $5.4 million allocated to the research and development services atperformance obligation was satisfied prior to the inceptionMay 2020 amendments, and as a result, the accounting for this previously satisfied performance obligation was not affected by the modification. As part of the agreement, which will be recognized over anperforming its initial two-year term.  As of December 31, 2017, this will continueobligation to be recognized overcomplete a two-year term that began in September 2017.

bb21217 research and development services

Thephase 1 trial as originally contemplated, the Company recognized 0 revenue related to research and development services of $0.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2017.  As noted above,2020 and revenue recognitionof $2.2 million and $2.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively.

The agreement to expand the bb21217 researchphase 1 trial that occurred in 2019 was previously treated as a separate contract for accounting purposes, because the trial expansion was for the addition of a promised good or service that is distinct and development servicesthe associated consideration reflected the standalone selling price of the additional promised good or service. This contract was not affected by the May 2020 amendments and, accordingly, the accounting for Celgene commencedthis agreement was not impacted by the May 2020 amendments. The transaction price associated with these additional patients consists of variable consideration and is based upon an agreed-upon amount per patient which will be recognized as revenue as the patients are treated. The Company began fulfilling the performance obligation in September 2017the fourth quarter of 2019 and as such thereit was nosatisfied in the fourth quarter of 2020. In connection with treating additional patients in the phase 1 trial, the Company recognized revenue recognized in 2016.

of $12.4 million, $0.4 million, and $0.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018, respectively.

bb21217 license and manufacturing services

As of December 31, 2017,

The Company will satisfy its performance obligation related to the manufacture of vectors and associated payload for incorporation into bb21217 through development as the bb21217 manufacturing services are performed. As of December 31, 2020, the manufacturing services for bb21217 had not yet commenced.  Therefore, no revenue has0 amounts have been recognized for the combined unitperformance obligation in the consolidated statements of accountingoperations and comprehensive loss for the yearyears ended December 31, 2017. 2020, 2019, and 2018.
F-36

Table of Contents
The aggregate amount of the transaction price allocated to the combined performance obligation, which consists of the bb21217 license and manufacturing services, is $27.3 million.  The Company currently expectsdoes not expect that recognition may commencewill begin in 2018 butthe next twelve months and has therefore classified deferred revenue associated with the combined unit of accountingperformance obligation as deferred revenue, net of current portion on its consolidated balance sheet given exact timingsheet. The Company had $25.8 million and $9.8 million of remaining deferred revenue as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively, associated with the combined performance obligation consisting of the bb21217 license and manufacturing services.
Contract assets and liabilities – ide-cel and bb21217
The Company receives payments from its collaborative partners based on billing schedules established in each contract. Up-front payments and fees are recorded as deferred revenue upon receipt or when due until such time as the Company satisfies its performance obligations under these arrangements. A contract asset is currently unknowna conditional right to consideration in exchange for goods or services that the Company has transferred to a customer.  Amounts are recorded as accounts receivable when the Company’s right to consideration is unconditional.
The following table presents changes in the balances of the Company’s BMS receivables and contract liabilities during the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 (in thousands):
Balance at
December 31, 2019
AdditionsDeductions
Balance at
December 31, 2020
Receivables$400 $12,400 $(12,400)$400 
Contract liabilities:
Deferred revenue$18,265 $200,000 $(191,683)$26,582 
The change in the receivables balance for the year ended December 31, 2020 is primarily driven by amounts owed to the Company for bb21217 research and development services provided during the period (expanded phase 1 clinical trial), offset by amounts collected from BMS in the period.
The increase in deferred revenue during the year ended December 31, 2020 is primarily driven by the $200.0 million consideration received in connection with the May 2020 amendments, offset by revenue recognized in the year-to-date period related to the combined unit of accounting for ide-cel license and vector manufacturing services. A total of $191.7 million was released from deferred revenue during the year-to-date period, of which $169.2 million is related to a cumulative catch-up adjustment to revenue recorded in connection with the May 2020 contract modification described further above. As of December 31, 2019, the Company had $8.5 million of deferred revenue associated with the combined performance obligation consisting of the ide-cel license and manufacturing services, of which $8.2 million was released during the year ended December 31, 2020.
Regeneron
Regeneron Collaboration Agreement
In August 2018, the Company entered into a Collaboration Agreement (the “Regeneron Collaboration Agreement”) with Regeneron pursuant to which the parties will apply their respective technology platforms to the discovery, development, and commercialization of novel immune cell therapies for cancer. In August 2018, following the completion of required regulatory reviews, the Regeneron Collaboration Agreement became effective.  Under the terms of the agreement, the parties will leverage Regeneron’s proprietary platform technologies for the discovery and characterization of fully human antibodies, as well as T cell receptors directed against tumor-specific proteins and peptides and the budgetCompany will contribute its field-leading expertise in gene therapy.
In accordance with the Regeneron Collaboration Agreement, the parties jointly selected 6 initial targets and intend to equally share the costs of research up to the point of submitting an IND application for such services has not yet beena potential gene therapy product directed to a particular target. Additional targets may be selected to add to or replace any of the initial targets during the five-year research collaboration term as agreed to by the parties.

Regeneron will accrue a certain number of option rights exercisable against targets as the parties reach certain milestones under the terms of the agreement.  Upon the acceptance of an IND for the first product candidate directed to a target, Regeneron will have the right to exercise an option for co-development/co-commercialization of product candidates directed to such target
F-37

Table of Contents
on a worldwide or applicable opt-in territory basis, with certain exceptions. Where Regeneron chooses to opt-in, the parties will share equally in the costs of development and commercialization, and will share equally in any profits or losses therefrom in applicable opt-in territories.  Outside of the applicable opt-in territories, the target becomes a licensed target and Regeneron would be eligible to receive, with respect to any resulting product, milestone payments of up to $130.0 million per product and royalties on net sales outside of the applicable opt-in territories at a rate ranging from the mid-single digits to low-double digits.  A target would also become a licensed target in the event Regeneron does not have an option to such target, or Regeneron does not exercise its option with respect to such target.
Either party may terminate a given research program directed to a particular target for convenience, and the other party may elect to continue such research program at its expense, receiving applicable cross-licenses. The terminating party will receive licensed product royalties and milestone payments on the potential applicable gene therapy products. Where the Company terminates a given research program for convenience, and Regeneron elects to continue such research program, the parties will enter into a transitional services agreement. Under certain conditions, following its opt-in, Regeneron may terminate a given collaboration program and the Company may elect to continue the development and commercialization of the applicable potential gene therapy products as licensed products.
Regeneron Share Purchase Agreement
A Share Purchase Agreement (“SPA”) was entered into by the parties in August 2018.  In August 2018, on the closing date of the transaction, the Company issued Regeneron 0.4 million shares of the Company’s common stock, subject to certain restrictions, for $238.10 per share, or $100.0 million in the aggregate.  The purchase price represents $63.0 million worth of common stock plus a $37.0 million premium, which represents a collaboration research advancement, or credit to be applied to Regeneron’s initial 50 percent funding obligation for collaboration research, after which the collaborators will continue to fund ongoing research equally. The collaboration research advancement only applies to pre-IND research activities and is not refundable or creditable against post-IND research activities for any programs where Regeneron exercises their opt-in rights.
Accounting analysis – Regeneron
At the commencement of the arrangement, two units of accounting were identified, which are the issuance of 0.4 million shares of the Company’s common stock and joint research activities during the five year research collaboration term. The Company evaluated all milestonesdetermined the total transaction price to be $100.0 million, which comprises $54.5 million attributed to the equity sold to Regeneron and $45.5 million attributed to the joint research activities. In determining the fair value of the common stock at closing, the Company considered the closing price of the common stock on the closing date of the transaction and included a lack of marketability discount because Regeneron received shares subject to certain restrictions.
The Company analyzed the joint research activities to assess whether they fall within the scope of ASC 808, and will reassess this throughout the life of the arrangement based on changes in the roles and responsibilities of the parties. Based on the terms of the arrangement as outlined above, for the collaboration research performed prior to submission of an IND application for a potential gene therapy product, both parties are deemed to be active participants in the collaboration. Both parties are performing research and development activities and will share equally in these costs through IND. Additionally, Regeneron and the Company are exposed to significant risks and rewards dependent on the commercial success of any product candidates that may result from the collaboration.  As such, the collaboration arrangement is deemed to be received in connection with Celgene’s bb21217 licensewithin the scope of ASC 808.
The $45.5 million attributed to determine if they were substantive in nature. All clinical and regulatory milestones that maythe joint research activities includes the $37.0 million creditable against amounts owed to the Company by Regeneron. The collaboration research advancement will be received underreduced over time for amounts due to the bb21217 license agreement are considered substantive on the basisCompany by Regeneron as a result of the contingent natureparties agreeing to share in the costs of collaboration research equally. The remainder of the milestone, specifically reviewing factors such asamount attributed to the scientific, clinical, regulatory, commercial and other risks that must be overcome to achieve the milestone as well as the level of effort and investment required. Accordingly, such amountsjoint research activities will be recognized asover the five-year research collaboration term.
Consistent with its collaboration accounting policy, the Company will recognize collaboration revenue or research and development expense related to the joint research activities in fullfuture periods depending on the amounts incurred by each party in a given reporting period.  That is, if the periodCompany’s research costs incurred exceed those research costs incurred by Regeneron in a given quarter, the Company will record collaboration revenue and reduce the original $37.0 million advance by the amount due from Regeneron until such advancement is fully utilized, after which the associated milestone is achieved, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria are met. All commercial milestonesCompany would record an amount due from Regeneron.  If Regeneron’s research costs incurred exceed those research costs incurred by the Company in a given quarter, the Company will be accountedrecord research and development expense and record a liability for in the same manner as royalties and recorded as revenue upon achievement of the milestone, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria are met.

Balance sheet impact

amount due to Regeneron. As of December 31, 20172020 and December 31, 2016, there was $47.42019, the Company has $30.8 million and $46.4$38.2 million, respectively, of total deferred revenue relatedthe amount attributed to the Company’s collaboration with Celgene,joint research activities remaining to be recognized which is classified as collaboration research advancement, current or non-current inportion and collaboration research advancement, net of current portion on the consolidated balance sheets.  Assheet.

F-38

Table of Contents
The Company recognized $7.4 million and $5.7 million of collaboration revenue from the Regeneron Collaboration Agreement during the years ended December 31, 2017, total deferred2020 and 2019, respectively. 
12. Royalty and other revenue related to bb2121 is $32.6 million, of which $9.8 million is classified as non-


current.  As of December 31, 2017, total deferred revenue related to bb21217 is $14.8 million, of which $12.0 million is classified as non-current.  

As of December 31, 2017, other current assets and receivables includes a $4.6 million receivable related to cost reimbursement from Celgene for bb2121 development costs incurred to date, net of costs incurred and billable by Celgene to the Company. There was no receivable from Celgene as of December 31, 2016.  

Novartis Pharma AG

On

In April 26, 2017, the Company entered into a worldwide license agreement with Novartis. Under the terms of the agreement, Novartis non-exclusively licensed certain patent rights related to lentiviral vector technology to develop and commercialize CAR T cell therapies for oncology, including Kymriah (formerly known as CTL019)CTL19), Novartis’s anti-CD19 CAR T therapy. At contract inception, financial terms of the agreement included a $7.5 million payment upon execution, $7.5 million of potential future milestone payments associated with regulatory approvals, and $1.1 million of payments for each subsequently licensed product, as well as low single digit royalty payments on net sales of covered products. AtIn August 2017, Novartis received FDA approval for Kymriah and paid the dateCompany $2.5 million as a result of the achievement of a related milestone.
Under Topic 606, the Company identified only 1 performance obligation, consisting of the license, which was satisfied at contract inception, only one deliverable was identified and accordinglyinception. Accordingly, the entire nonrefundable license fee of $7.5 million was recognized as revenue upon contract execution in the second quarter of 2017 and a $2.5 million regulatory milestone was recognized as revenue upon milestone achievement, also in the second quarter of 2017, given there were no other undelivered elementsunsatisfied performance obligations in the arrangement.

Given that there were no further deliverables identified inRegulatory approvals are not within the contract,Company’s control or the licensee’s control and are generally not considered probable of being achieved until those approvals are received. As such, these milestones are constrained until such time as regulatory approvals are received. Because the single performance obligation was previously satisfied, all regulatory milestones will be recognized as revenue in full in the period in which the associated milestone is achieved, assuming all otherachieved.

The Company began recognizing royalty revenue recognition criteria are met.

In August 2017, Novartis received FDA approval forfrom sales of Kymriah and as a resultin the fourth quarter of 2017. As the license was deemed to be the predominant item to which the royalties relate, the Company recognized revenuerecognizes royalties from the sales of $2.5 million as a result ofKymriah when the achievement of a related milestone.  Duringsales occur. For the yearyears ended December 31, 2017, the Company recognized license revenue of $10.0 million in connection with this arrangement, as there were no other undelivered elements in the arrangement.  During the year ended December 31, 2017,2020, 2019, and 2018, the Company recognized royalty and other revenue of $0.1$21.1 million, in connection with this arrangement. The cost of license revenue related to this agreement was $1.4$8.2 million, forand $2.2 million, respectively. For the yearyears ended December 31, 2017.

2020, 2019, and 2018, the Company recognized cost of royalty and other revenue of $5.4 million, $3.0 million, and $0.9 million, respectively.

In December 2020, the Company received notice of termination from Novartis for the license agreement described above. This termination will be effective in March 2021, at which point in time Novartis will no longer be required to pay the Company royalty or other payments on net sales of Kymriah or any future products.
Orchard Therapeutics Limited (assigned by GlaxoSmithKline Intellectual Property Development Limited

OnLimited)

In April 28, 2017, the Company entered into a worldwide license agreement with GSK.GlaxoSmithKline Intellectual Property Development Limited (“GSK”). Under the terms of the agreement, GSK non-exclusively licensed certain patent rights related to lentiviral vector technology to develop and commercialize gene therapies for Wiscott-Aldrich syndrome and metachromatic leukodystrophy, two rare genetic diseases. Financial terms of the agreement include a nonrefundable upfront payment of $3.0 million as well as $1.3 million of potential milestone payments forrelated to each marketing authorization for each indication in any country as well as low single digit royalties on net sales of covered products. AtThis license agreement was assigned by GSK to Orchard Therapeutics Limited, effective in April 2018. 
Under Topic 606, the dateCompany identified only 1 performance obligation, consisting of the license, which was satisfied at contract inception, only one deliverable was identified and accordinglyinception. Accordingly, the entire nonrefundable license fee of $3.0 million was recognized as revenue upon contract execution in the second quarter of 2017 given there were no0 other undelivered elementsunsatisfied performance obligations in the arrangement. 

Given that there were no further deliverables identifiedRegulatory approvals are not within the Company’s control or the licensee’s control and are generally not considered probable of being achieved until those approvals are received. As such, these milestones are constrained until such time as after regulatory approvals are received. There was 0 revenue recognized under this arrangement in the contract,years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, or 2018. Because the single performance obligation was previously satisfied, all regulatory milestones will be recognized as revenue in full in the period in which the associated milestone is achieved, assuming all otherachieved.

Given there was 0 revenue recognition criteria are met.

Duringrecognized under this arrangement in the yearyears ended December 31, 2017, the Company recognized revenue2020, 2019, or 2018, there was 0 associated cost of $3.0royalty and other revenue.

13. Intangible assets
Intangible assets, net of accumulated amortization, are summarized as follows (in thousands):
F-39

Table of Contents
As of December 31,As of December 31,
20202019
CostAccumulated amortizationNetCostAccumulated amortizationNet
Developed technology$30,100 $(24,456)$5,644 $30,100 $(20,694)$9,406 
In-licensed rights5,224 (827)4,397 5,224 (304)4,920 
Total$35,324 $(25,283)$10,041 $35,324 $(20,998)$14,326 
Amortization expense for intangible assets was $4.3 million, associated with the delivery$4.1 million, and $3.8 million for each of the license, as there were no other undelivered elements in the arrangement.  The cost of license revenue related to this agreement was $0.1 million for the yearyears ended December 31, 2017.

11. Intangible assets

On June 30, 2014, the Company completed2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively.

Developed technology
The Company's developed technology was obtained through its acquisition of Pregenen, a privately-held biotechnology company upon which Pregenen became a wholly-owned subsidiary. As a result, thein 2014. The Company obtained gene editing and cell signaling technology with a broad range of potential therapeutic applications. The Company considered the intangible asset acquired to be developed technology, as at the date of the acquisition it could be used the way it was intended to be used in certain ongoing research and development activities. The gene editing platform intangible asset is being amortized to research and development expenseon a straight-line basis over its expected useful life of approximately eight years from the date of the acquisition.

Amortization expense Please refer to Note 4, Fair value measurements, and Note 9, Commitments and contingencies, for further information.

In-licensed rights
In-licensed rights consist of capitalized milestone payments made to third parties upon receiving regulatory approval of ZYNTEGLO in the gene editing platform intangible asset was $3.8 million for each of the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively, and accumulated amortization as of December 31, 2017 and 2016 was $13.2 million and $9.4 million, respectively. EU. The intangible asset will continue to bein-licensed rights are being amortized on a straightlinestraight-line basis over itsthe remaining useful life of 4.5 years.

the related patents of approximately ten years, as the life of the related patents reflects the expected time period that the Company will benefit from the in-licensed rights.

The following table summarizes the estimated future amortization for intangible assets for the next five years and thereafter (in thousands):

12.

As of December 31, 2020
2021$4,285 
20222,404 
2023522 
2024522 
2025522 
2026 and thereafter1,786 
Total$10,041 

14. Stock-based compensation

On

In June 3, 2013, the Company’s board of directors adopted its 2013 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (“2013 Plan”), which was subsequently approved by its stockholders and became effective upon the closing of the Company’s IPO on June 24, 2013.IPO. The 2013 Plan replaces the 2010 Stock Option and Grant Plan (“2010 Plan”).

The 2013 Plan allows for the granting of incentive stock options, non-qualified stock options, restricted stock units and restricted stock awards to the Company’s employees, members of the board of directors, and consultants of the Company. The Company initially reserved 955,0001.0 million shares of its common stock for the issuance of awards under the 2013 Plan. The 2013 Plan provides that the number of shares reserved and available for issuance under the 2013 Plan will automatically increase each January 1, beginning on January 1, 2014, by four4 percent of the outstanding number of shares of common stock on the immediately preceding December 31 or such lesser number of shares as determined by the Company’s compensation committee. In January 20172020 and January 2018,2021, the number of common stock available for issuance under the 2013 Plan was increased by approximately 1.62.2 million and 2.02.7 million shares, respectively, as a result of this automatic increase provision.

F-40

Table of Contents
Any options or awards outstanding under the Company’s previous stock option plans, including both the 2010 Plan and the Second Amended and Restated 2002 Employee, Director and Consultant Stock Plan (“2002 Plan”), at the time of adoption of the 2013 Plan remain outstanding and effective. The shares of common stock underlying any awards that are forfeited, canceled, repurchased, expireexpired or are otherwise terminated (other than by exercise) under the 2002 Plan and 2010 Plan are added to the shares of common stock available for issuance under the 2013 Plan. As of December 31, 2017,2020, the total number of common stock that may be issued under all plans is 1.62.6 million.

The Company does not currently hold any treasury shares. Upon stock option exercise, the Company issues new shares and delivers them to the participant.

Stock-based compensation expense

The Company recognized stock-based compensation expense totaling $53.3$156.6 million, $39.8$160.6 million, and $41.1$110.8 million during the years ended December 31, 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 2015,2018, respectively. Stock-based compensation expense recognized by award type is as follows (in thousands):

Year Ended December 31,

 

Year Ended December 31,

2017

 

 

2016

 

 

2015

 

202020192018

Stock options

$

42,262

 

 

$

33,966

 

 

$

37,536

 

Stock options$93,977 $95,668 $83,449 

Restricted stock units

 

10,495

 

 

 

5,374

 

 

 

3,325

 

Restricted stock units49,326 63,580 26,628 

Employee stock purchase plan

 

525

 

 

 

416

 

 

 

259

 

Employee stock purchase plan and otherEmployee stock purchase plan and other13,328 1,381 759 

$

53,282

 

 

$

39,756

 

 

$

41,120

 

$156,631 $160,629 $110,836 

Stock-based compensation expense by classification included within the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss was as follows (in thousands):

Year Ended December 31,

 

Year Ended December 31,

2017

 

 

2016

 

 

2015

 

202020192018

Research and development

$

26,633

 

 

$

19,690

 

 

$

24,854

 

Research and development$72,239 $80,139 $54,422 

General and administrative

 

26,649

 

 

 

20,066

 

 

 

16,266

 

Selling, general and administrativeSelling, general and administrative84,392 80,490 56,414 

$

53,282

 

 

$

39,756

 

 

$

41,120

 

$156,631 $160,629 $110,836 

In February 2018, the Company issued restricted stock units with service and performance conditions to employees, less than 0.1 million of which are outstanding as of December 31, 2020. Vesting of these awards is contingent on the occurrence of a certain regulatory milestone event which was achieved in June 2019 and fulfillment of any remaining service condition.  The Company began recognizing expense for these awards in the second quarter of 2019 when achievement of the regulatory milestone was deemed probable. The Company recognized $20.1 million of expense related to these awards in the second quarter of 2019 and will continue to recognize stock-based compensation expense related to these awards through June 2021 when the final tranche of the awards vest.
As of December 31, 2017, there was $94.52020, the Company had $146.0 million, $31.1$89.3 million and $0.1$0.4 million of unrecognized compensation expense related to unvested stock options, restricted stock units (exclusive of those with service and performance conditions that have not yet been achieved) and the employee stock purchase plan, respectively, that is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 2.6, 2.9,2.1 years, 2.4 years, and 0.1 years.

In 2015, the Company modified outstanding options held by its former Chief Scientific Officer as part of his separation agreement, modified the vesting conditions of a stock option award held by a non-employee founder, and modified the vesting conditions of stock option awards held by two employees immediately following their separation from the Company. As a result of these modifications, the Company recognized $10.3 million of incremental stock-based compensation expense during 2015.

0.3 years, respectively.

Stock options

The fair value of each option issued to employees was estimated at the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following weighted-average assumptions:

 

Year Ended December 31,

 

Year Ended December 31,

 

2017

 

 

2016

 

 

2015

 

202020192018

Expected volatility

 

 

78.1

%

 

 

74.3

%

 

 

72.6

%

Expected volatility69.5 %70.7 %75.5 %

Expected term (in years)

 

 

6.0

 

 

 

6.0

 

 

 

5.9

 

Expected term (in years)6.06.06.0

Risk-free interest rate

 

 

2.1

%

 

 

1.5

%

 

 

1.7

%

Risk-free interest rate1.4 %2.3 %2.7 %

Expected dividend yield

 

0.0

%

 

0.0

%

 

0.0%

 

Expected dividend yield0.0 %0.0 %0.0 %

The following table summarizes the stock option activity under the Company’s equity awards plans:

 

Shares

(in thousands)

 

 

Weighted-average

exercise price

per share

 

 

Weighted-average

contractual

life

(in years)

 

 

Aggregate

intrinsic

value (a)

(in thousands)

 

Outstanding at December 31, 2016

 

3,735

 

 

$

52.17

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Granted

 

1,206

 

 

$

90.95

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exercised

 

(982

)

 

$

32.39

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Canceled or forfeited

 

(204

)

 

$

86.84

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Outstanding at December 31, 2017

 

3,755

 

 

$

67.91

 

 

 

7.5

 

 

$

414,169

 

Exercisable at December 31, 2017

 

1,834

 

 

$

50.60

 

 

 

6.4

 

 

$

234,190

 

Vested and expected to vest at December 31, 2017

 

3,755

 

 

$

67.91

 

 

 

7.5

 

 

$

414,169

 

F-41


(a)

The aggregate intrinsic value is calculated as the difference between the exercise price of the underlying options and the fair value of the common stock for the options that were in the money at December 31, 2017.

Table of Contents

Shares
(in thousands)
Weighted-
average
exercise price
per share
Weighted-
average
contractual
life
(in years)
Aggregate
intrinsic
value (a)
(in thousands)
Outstanding at December 31, 20195,483 $116.30 
Granted1,585 $69.40 
Exercised(95)$19.43 
Canceled or forfeited(711)$124.00 
Outstanding at December 31, 20206,262 $105.02 7.0$15,716 
Exercisable at December 31, 20203,669 $107.11 5.8$15,659 
Vested and expected to vest at December 31, 20206,262 $105.02 7.0$15,716 
(a)The aggregate intrinsic value is calculated as the difference between the exercise price of the underlying options and the fair value of the common stock for the options that were in the money at December 31, 2020.
The weighted-average fair values of options granted during 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 20152018 was $62.03, $34.22,$43.24, $83.44, and $74.65,$125.12, respectively.  The intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016,2020, 2019, and 2015,2018, was $91.0$4.0 million, $15.3$29.0 million and $147.9$73.1 million, respectively.

Restricted stock units

The following table summarizes the restricted stock unit activity under the Company’s equity award plans (shares in thousands):

plans:

Shares

 

 

Weighted-average

grant date

fair value

 

Unvested balance at December 31, 2016

 

263

 

 

$

63.07

 

Shares
(in thousands)
Weighted-average
grant date
fair value
Unvested balance at December 31, 2019Unvested balance at December 31, 20191,127 $146.10 

Granted

 

332

 

 

 

91.15

 

Granted1,018 70.18 

Vested

 

(87

)

 

 

72.91

 

Vested(433)130.10 

Forfeited

 

(31

)

 

 

64.52

 

Forfeited(217)123.32 

Unvested balance at December 31, 2017

 

477

 

 

$

80.72

 

Unvested balance at December 31, 2020Unvested balance at December 31, 20201,495 $102.34 

The intrinsic value of restricted stock units vested during the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016,2020, 2019, and 20152018 was $8.1$30.9 million, $5.3$28.4 million and $10.4$25.5 million, respectively.

Employee Stock Purchase Plan

On

In June 3, 2013, the Company’s board of directors adopted its 2013 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (“2013 ESPP”), which was subsequently approved by its stockholders and became effective upon the closing of the Company’s IPO on June 24, 2013.IPO. The 2013 ESPP authorizes the initial issuance of up to a total of 238,0000.2 million shares of the Company’s common stock to participating employees. During each of the years ended December 31, 20172020 and 2016, 20,773 and 18,3382019, less than 0.1 million shares of common stock were issued under the 2013 ESPP, respectively.


13.

15. 401(k) Savings plan

In 1997, the Company established a defined-contribution savings plan under Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code (“the 401(k) Plan”). The 401(k) Plan covers all employees who meet defined minimum age and service requirements, and allows participants to defer a portion of their annual compensation on a pretax basis. In February 2018 and 2017,March 2021, the Company madeexpects to make matching contributions of approximately $1.5$5.2 million and $1.0 million, respectively, related to employee contributions made during 2017 and 2016, which2020. In March 2020, the Company made $4.6 million of matching contributions related to employee contributions made during 2019. The match contribution is included in accrued expenses and other current liabilities as of December 31, 20172020 and 2016.2019.  Expense related to the 401(k) Plan totaled $1.5$5.2 million, $1.0$4.6 million, $0.6$2.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016,2020, 2019, and 2015,2018, respectively.

14.

16. Income taxes

The components of loss before income taxes were as follows (in thousands):

 

Year Ended December 31,

 

 

2017

 

 

2016

 

 

2015

 

U.S.

$

(266,236

)

 

$

(210,188

)

 

$

(162,287

)

Foreign

 

(69,197

)

 

 

(53,931

)

 

 

(4,436

)

Total

$

(335,433

)

 

$

(264,119

)

 

$

(166,723

)

F-42


Table of Contents
Year ended December 31,
202020192018
U.S.$(489,091)$(649,172)$(440,473)
Foreign(128,918)(140,981)(114,965)
Total$(618,009)$(790,153)$(555,438)
The provision for (benefit from) income taxes were as follows (in thousands):

Year Ended December 31,

 

Year ended December 31,

2017

 

 

2016

 

 

2015

 

202020192018

Current:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current:

Federal

$

 

 

$

 

 

$

 

Federal$$$

State

 

115

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

State324 

Foreign

 

95

 

 

 

 

 

 

60

 

Foreign684 612 222 

Deferred:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deferred:

Federal

 

 

 

 

(588

)

 

 

 

Federal(966)(307)

State

 

 

 

 

(24

)

 

 

 

State(198)(52)

Foreign

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Foreign

Total income tax expense (benefit)

$

210

 

 

$

(612

)

 

$

60

 

Total income tax expense (benefit)$686 $(545)$187 

A reconciliation of income tax provisionexpense (benefit) computed at the statutory federal income tax rate to the Company’s effective income tax rate (benefit) provision as reflected in the financial statements is as follows:

 

Year Ended December 31,

 

Year ended December 31,

 

2017

 

 

2016

 

 

2015

 

202020192018

Federal income tax expense at statutory rate

 

 

34.0

%

 

 

34.0

%

 

 

34.0

%

Federal income tax expense at statutory rate21.0 %21.0 %21.0 %

State income tax, net of federal benefit

 

 

4.3

%

 

 

3.3

%

 

 

4.2

%

State income tax, net of federal benefit3.1 %3.7 %5.1 %

Permanent differences

 

 

2.7

%

 

 

(5.3

%)

 

 

(6.4

%)

Permanent differences(0.6)%(0.8)%(0.7)%
Stock-based compensationStock-based compensation(2.4)%(0.7)%1.6 %

Research and development credit

 

 

12.8

%

 

 

15.0

%

 

 

14.6

%

Research and development credit6.0 %5.4 %6.5 %

Foreign differential

 

 

(6.9

%)

 

 

(7.0

%)

 

 

(1.0

%)

Foreign differential(4.6)%(3.7)%(4.4)%

Federal tax rate change

 

 

(31.6

%)

 

 

0.0

%

 

 

0.0

%

Federal tax rate change%%0.1 %

Other

 

 

(0.8

%)

 

 

0.0

%

 

 

(0.5

%)

Other(0.3)%0.8 %(0.1)%

Change in valuation allowance

 

 

(14.6

%)

 

 

(39.9

%)

 

 

(44.9

%)

Change in valuation allowance(22.3)%(25.6)%(29.1)%

Effective income tax rate (benefit)

 

 

(0.1

%)

 

 

0.1

%

 

 

0.0

%

Effective income tax rate (expense) benefitEffective income tax rate (expense) benefit(0.1)%0.1 %%

For the years ended December 31, 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 2015,2018, the Company recognized an income tax (expense) benefitexpense (benefit) of $(0.2)$0.7 million or (0.1%)(0.1)%, $0.6$(0.5) million or 0.1%, and $(0.1)$0.2 million or 0.0%, respectively.  The Company did not recognize any significant tax benefitexpense for the years ended December 31, 2017, December 31, 2016, and December 31, 20152020, 2019, or 2018 as the Company was subject to a full valuation allowance.


Deferred taxes are recognized for temporary differences between the basis of assets and liabilities for financial statement and income tax purposes. The significant components of the Company’s deferred tax assets and liabilities are composed of the following (in thousands):

 

Year Ended December 31,

 

 

2017

 

 

2016

 

Deferred tax assets:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. net operating loss carryforwards (federal and state)

$

194,160

 

 

$

106,064

 

Tax credit carryforwards (federal and state)

 

131,289

 

 

 

87,117

 

Capitalized research and development expenses

 

241

 

 

 

631

 

60 Binney Street lease

 

42,025

 

 

 

47,191

 

Deferred revenue

 

12,795

 

 

 

18,231

 

Capitalized license fees

 

13,388

 

 

 

11,752

 

Accruals and other

 

25,781

 

 

 

32,172

 

Total deferred tax assets

 

419,679

 

 

 

303,158

 

Intangible assets

 

(4,567

)

 

 

(8,129

)

Fixed assets

 

(42,062

)

 

 

(48,902

)

Less valuation allowance

 

(373,050

)

 

 

(246,127

)

Net deferred taxes

$

 

 

$

 

F-43


Table of Contents
Year ended December 31,
20202019
Deferred tax assets:
U.S. net operating loss carryforwards (federal and state)$546,098 $439,839 
Tax credit carryforwards (federal and state)246,742 213,810 
Capitalized license fees and research and development expenses14,402 16,295 
Deferred revenue15,644 15,119 
Stock-based compensation51,828 46,111 
Lease liabilities48,680 52,631 
Accruals and other14,536 15,432 
Total deferred tax assets937,930 799,237 
Intangible assets(1,499)(2,518)
Right-of-use assets(45,976)(49,480)
Fixed assets(7,576)(2,670)
Less valuation allowance(882,879)(744,569)
Net deferred taxes$$
A valuation allowance is recorded against deferred tax assets if it is more likely than not that some or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. Due to the uncertainty surrounding the realization of the favorable tax attributes in future tax returns, the Company has recorded a full valuation allowance against the Company’s otherwise recognizable net deferred tax assets. The valuation allowance increased on a net basis by approximately $126.9$138.3 million during the year ended December 31, 20172020 due primarily to net operating losses, and tax credit carryforwards, and stock-based compensation. Effective January 1, 2019, the Company adopted ASU 2016-02, which are partially offset byresulted in the decrease in federal statutory rate due tode-recognition of the 60 Binney Street lease and related fixed assets and the recognition of lease liabilities and right-of-use assets. The Company adjusted its deferred tax reform.

balances as a result of the adoption.

As of December 31, 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 2015,2018, the Company had U.S. federal net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $716.1$2.03 billion, $1.62 billion, and $1.10 billion, respectively, which may be available to offset future income tax liabilities. Of the amount as of December 31, 2020, $1.32 billion will carryforward indefinitely while $711.0 million $466.8 million,will expire at various dates through 2037. As of December 31, 2020, 2019 and $347.5 million,2018, the Company also had U.S. state net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $1.89 billion, $1.56 billion, and $1.08 billion, respectively, which may be available to offset future income tax liabilities and expire at various dates through 2037. 2039.
As of December 31, 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 2015, the Company also had U.S. state net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $692.9 million, $456.8 million, and $335.0 million, respectively, which may be available to offset future income tax liabilities and expire at various dates through 2037. At December 31, 2016, $195.4 million and $195.4 million of federal and state net operating losses, respectively, related to excess equity based compensation tax deductions, the benefits for which will be recorded to additional paid-in capital when recognized through a reduction of cash taxes paid. As a result of adopting FASB ASU 2016-09 in the first quarter of 2017, the Company recorded a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings of $76.7 million to record a net deferred tax asset relative to these tax attribute carryforwards.  The deferred tax asset was offset by a corresponding adjustment to the valuation allowance.  At December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, the Company also had approximately $0.0 million, $0.0 million, and $0.6 million, respectively, of foreign net operating loss carryforwards that may be available to offset future income tax liabilities; these carryforwards do not expire.

As of December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015,2018, the Company had federal research and development and orphan drug tax credit carryforwards of approximately $124.1$235.3 million, $83.2$203.1 million, and $44.9$156.2 million, respectively, available to reduce future tax liabilities which expire at various dates through 2037.2039. As of December 31, 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 2015,2018, the Company had state credit carryforwards of approximately $9.1$14.5 million, $6.0$13.6 million, and $3.8$14.3 million, respectively, available to reduce future tax liabilities which expire at various dates through 2032.

2034. During the fourth quarter of 2018, the Company completed an analysis of prior year estimates of U.S. research and development and orphan drug tax credits for the years 2013 through 2017. The analysis resulted in an immaterial adjustment to the Company's income tax benefit, which was offset by an adjustment to the valuation allowance. An analysis of the U.S. research and development and orphan drug credits has not yet been completed for 2018, 2019, or 2020.

In March 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”) was enacted. This law temporarily suspends and adjusts certain law changes enacted in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in 2017. In December 2020, the Consolidated Appropriations Act was enacted. This law modified the employee retention credit under the CARES Act and created credit extenders for certain credits. The Company has concluded that the provisions in the CARES Act and Consolidated Appropriations Act have an immaterial impact on the Company’s income tax expense due to its cumulative losses and full valuation allowance position.
Under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, the net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards are subject to review and possible adjustment by the Internal Revenue Service and state tax authorities. Net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards may become subject to an annual limitation in the event of certain cumulative changes in the ownership interest of significant shareholders over a three-year period in excess of 50 percent, as defined under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code, respectively, as well as similar state provisions. This could limit the amount of tax attributes that can be
F-44

Table of Contents
utilized annually to offset future taxable income or tax liabilities. The amount of the annual limitation is determined based on the value of the Company immediately prior to the ownership change. Subsequent ownership changes may further affect the limitation in future years. The Company has completed several financings since its inception and prior to its initial public offering in 2013, which it believes has resulted in a change in control as defined by Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code.

The Company will recognize interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions in income tax expense. As of December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, the Company had no significant accrued interest or penalties related to uncertain tax positions and no significant amounts have been recognized in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss.


For all years through December 31, 2017, the Company generated research credits but has not conductedcompleted a study to documentthrough September 2019 confirming no ownership changes have occurred since the qualified activities. This study mayCompany's initial public offering in 2013; any ownership shifts occurring after September 2019 could result in an adjustment to the Company’s research and development credit carryforwards; however, until a study is completed and any adjustment is known, no amounts are being presented as an uncertain tax position. A full valuation allowance has been provided against the Company’s research and development credits and, if an adjustment is required, this adjustment would be offset by an adjustment to the deferred tax asset established for the research and development credit carryforwards and the valuation allowance.

ownership change under Section 382.

The Company or one of its subsidiaries files Federal income tax returns in the United States, and various state and foreign jurisdictions. The federal, state and foreign income tax returns are generally subject to tax examinations for the tax years ended December 31, 20142017 through December 31, 2016.2019. To the extent the Company has tax attribute carryforwards, the tax years in which the attribute was generated may still be adjusted upon examination by the Internal Revenue Service, or state or foreign tax authorities to the extent utilized in a future period.

On December 22, 2017, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“TCJA”) was enacted. This law substantially amended the Internal Revenue Code and among other things, permanently reduced the U.S. corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%. On December 22, 2017, the SEC staff issued Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 118, Income Tax Accounting Implications

A reconciliation of the Tax Cutsbeginning and Jobs Act (“SAB 118”), which allows the recordingending amount of provisional amounts during a measurement period not to extend beyond one year of the enactment date.   In accordance with SAB 118, the Company has determined that its deferredunrecognized tax asset value and associated valuation allowance reduction of $106.0 millionbenefits is a provisional amount and a reasonable estimateas follows (in thousands):
Unrecognized tax benefits
Balance as of December 31, 2018$12,095 
Increases (decreases) for tax positions related to current period3,554 
Increases (decreases) for tax positions related to prior periods296 
Balance as of December 31, 201915,945 
Increases (decreases) for tax positions related to current period3,149 
Increases (decreases) for tax positions related to prior periods(100)
Balance as of December 31, 202018,994 
The unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2017.  The final impact may differ from this provisional amount2020, if recognized, would not affect the Company’s effective tax rate due to among other things, changes in interpretations and assumptionsits full valuation allowance position. The Company does not anticipate that the amount of existing unrecognized tax benefits will significantly increase or decrease within the next 12 months. The Company has made thus farelected to include interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions as a component of its provision for income taxes. For the issuance of additional regulatory or other guidance.  The Company expectsyears ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, the Company’s accrued interest and penalties related to complete the final impact within the measurement period.

15.uncertain tax positions were 0t material.

17. Net loss per share

The following common stock equivalents were excluded from the calculation of diluted net loss per share for the periods indicated because including them would have had an anti-dilutive effect (in thousands):

Year Ended December 31,

 

Year ended December 31, 2020,

 

2017

 

 

 

2016

 

 

 

2015

 

202020192018

Outstanding stock options

 

3,755

 

 

 

3,735

 

 

 

3,532

 

Outstanding stock options6,262 5,483 4,643 

Restricted stock units

 

477

 

 

 

263

 

 

 

148

 

Restricted stock units1,495 1,127 931 

ESPP shares

 

9

 

 

 

11

 

 

 

3

 

ESPP shares and otherESPP shares and other326 19 10 

 

4,241

 

 

 

4,009

 

 

 

3,683

 

8,083 6,629 5,584 

16.


F-45

Table of Contents
18. Selected quarterly financial data (unaudited)

The following table contains quarterly financial information for 20172020 and 2016.2019. The Company believes that the following information reflects all normal recurring adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of the information for the periods presented. The operating results for any quarter are not necessarily indicative of results for any future period.

 

2017

 

 

First

Quarter

 

 

Second

Quarter

 

 

Third

Quarter

 

 

Fourth

Quarter

 

 

Total

 

2020

 

(in thousands, except per share data)

 

First
quarter
Second
quarter
Third
quarter
Fourth
quarter
Total

Total revenue

 

$

6,832

 

 

$

16,716

 

 

$

7,711

 

 

$

4,168

 

 

$

35,427

 

(in thousands, except per share data)
Total revenuesTotal revenues$21,863 $198,890 $19,273 $10,708 $250,734 

Total operating expenses

 

 

76,745

 

 

 

84,538

 

 

 

85,369

 

 

 

120,940

 

 

 

367,592

 

Total operating expenses225,288 224,835 208,967 214,690 873,780 

Loss from operations

 

 

(69,913

)

 

 

(67,822

)

 

 

(77,658

)

 

 

(116,772

)

 

 

(332,165

)

Loss from operations(203,425)(25,945)(189,694)(203,982)(623,046)

Net loss

 

 

(68,712

)

 

 

(70,898

)

 

 

(78,805

)

 

 

(117,228

)

 

 

(335,643

)

Net loss(202,611)(21,465)(194,745)(199,874)(618,695)

Net loss per share applicable to common stockholders - basic and

diluted

 

$

(1.68

)

 

$

(1.73

)

 

$

(1.73

)

 

$

(2.52

)

 

$

(7.71

)

Net loss per share applicable to common
stockholders - basic and diluted
$(3.64)$(0.36)$(2.94)$(3.01)$(9.95)

 

 

2016

 

 

 

First

Quarter

 

 

Second

Quarter

 

 

Third

Quarter

 

 

Fourth

Quarter

 

 

Total

 

 

 

(in thousands, except per share data)

 

Total revenue

 

$

1,499

 

 

$

1,552

 

 

$

1,552

 

 

$

1,552

 

 

$

6,155

 

Total operating expenses

 

 

58,879

 

 

 

61,527

 

 

 

79,692

 

 

 

73,887

 

 

 

273,985

 

Loss from operations

 

 

(57,380

)

 

 

(59,975

)

 

 

(78,140

)

 

 

(72,335

)

 

 

(267,830

)

Net loss

 

 

(56,274

)

 

 

(58,844

)

 

 

(77,025

)

 

 

(71,364

)

 

 

(263,507

)

Net loss per share applicable to common stockholders - basic and

   diluted

 

$

(1.52

)

 

$

(1.59

)

 

$

(2.07

)

 

$

(1.88

)

 

$

(7.07

)


17.

2019
First
quarter
Second
quarter
Third
quarter
Fourth
quarter
Total
(in thousands, except per share data)
Total revenues$12,471 $13,296 $8,910 $9,997 $44,674 
Total operating expenses183,645 215,998 219,326 240,531 859,500 
Loss from operations(171,174)(202,702)(210,416)(230,534)(814,826)
Net loss(164,446)(195,782)(206,033)(223,347)(789,608)
Net loss per share applicable to common
stockholders - basic and diluted
$(2.99)$(3.55)$(3.73)$(4.04)$(14.31)

19. Subsequent events

As discussed in Note 9, “Common stock and preferred stock,” in

In January 2018,2021, the Company sold 277,109 sharesannounced its intent to separate its severe genetic disease and oncology programs into 2 separate, independent publicly traded companies, bluebird bio, Inc. and a new company, referred to as Oncology NewCo in these consolidated financial statements. bluebird bio, Inc. intends to retain focus on its severe genetic disease programs and Oncology NewCo is expected to focus on the Company's oncology programs. The transaction is expected to be completed in late 2021 and is anticipated to be tax-free, subject to receipt of common stocka favorable IRS ruling.
F-46

Exhibit Index
Incorporated by Reference
Exhibit
Number
Exhibit TitleFormFile no.ExhibitFiling Date
2.18-K001-359662.1June 30, 2014
3.18-K001-359663.1June 24, 2013
3.2Filed herewith
4.1S-1/A333-1886054.1June 4, 2013
4.2Filed herewith
10.1#S-1333-18860510.1May 14, 2013
10.2#S-1333-18860510.2May 14, 2013
10.3#S-1/A333-18860510.3June 4, 2013
10.4S-1333-18860510.4May 14, 2013
10.5†S-1333-18860510.6May 14, 2013
10.6†10-K001-3596610.7February 22, 2017
10.7†S-1333-18860510.7May 14, 2013
10.8†S-1333-18860510.8May 14, 2013
10.9†10-Q001-3596610.2November 14, 2013
10.10†10-Q001-3596610.1May 6, 2015
10.11†S-1333-18860510.9May 14, 2013
10.12†S-1333-18860510.1May 14, 2013
10.13†S-1333-18860510.11May 14, 2013
10.14†10-Q001-3596610.14August 7, 2015
10.1510-Q001-3596610.15May 4, 2016
10.1610-Q001-3596610.17November 1, 2017
10.17†10-Q/A001-3596610.16November 2, 2016


Incorporated by Reference
Exhibit
Number
Exhibit TitleFormFile no.ExhibitFiling Date
10.1810-Q001-3596610.18August 5, 2020
10.19†10-Q001-3596610.20May 2, 2018
10.20††10-Q001-3596610.20August 5, 2020
10.21†10-Q/A001-3596610.17November 2, 2016
10.22†10-Q001-3596610.21November 1, 2017
10.23†10-Q/A001-3596610.18November 2, 2016
10.24†10-K001-3596610.23February 21, 2019
10.25††10-Q001-3596610.24August 1, 2019
10.26††10-Q001-3596610.25August 1, 2019
10.27††8-K001-3596610.1January 21, 2020
10.28Filed herewith
10.29#S-1/A333-18860510.12June 4, 2013
10.30#S-1/A333-18860510.13June 4, 2013
10.31#S-1/A333-18860510.15June 4, 2013
10.32#10-Q001-3596610.18May 13, 2014
10.33#10-Q001-3596610.25May 4, 2016
10.34#10-K001-3596610.27February 22, 2017
10.35#10-Q001-3596610.21August 7, 2015
10.36#10-K001-3596610.31February 22, 2017
10.37#S-1/A333-18860510.17June 4, 2013
10.38#10-K001-3596610.38February 21, 2018
10.39#10-K001-3596610.39February 21, 2018


Incorporated by Reference
Exhibit
Number
Exhibit TitleFormFile no.ExhibitFiling Date
10.40#S-1333-18860510.18May 14, 2013
10.41#8-K001-3596610.1February 11, 2019
10.42†10-Q001-3596610.3November 5, 2015
10.4310-Q001-3596610.37August 3, 2016
10.4410-K001-3596610.44February 22, 2017
10.45††10-Q001-3596610.42August 1, 2019
10.4610-Q001-3596610.43August 1, 2019
21.1Filed herewith
23.1Filed herewith
31.1Filed herewith
31.2Filed herewith
32.1Furnished herewith
101.INSInline XBRL Instance Document (the instance document does not appear in the Interactive Data File because its XBRL tags are embedded within the Inline XBRL document) 
101.SCHInline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document.Filed herewith
101.CALInline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document.Filed herewith
101.DEFInline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document.Filed herewith
101.LABInline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document.Filed herewith
101.PREInline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document.Filed herewith
104Cover Page Interactive Data File (formatted as Inline XBRL with applicable taxonomy extension information contained in Exhibits 101)Filed herewith
______________
†    Portions of this exhibit (indicated by asterisks) have been omitted pursuant to the partial exercise of an overallotment option granteda request for confidential treatment and this exhibit has been submitted separately to the underwritersSEC.
††    Portions of this exhibit (indicated by asterisks) have been omitted in connectionaccordance with the December 2017 underwritten public offering atrules of the SEC.
#    Indicates a pricemanagement contract or any compensatory plan, contract or arrangement.



Table of $185.00 per share for aggregate net proceeds of $48.6 million.


Contents

Exhibit Index

  

  

 

  

Incorporated by Reference

Exhibit

Number

  

Exhibit Title

  

Form

  

File no.

 

  

Exhibit

 

  

Filing Date

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.1

  

Stock Purchase Agreement by and between the Registrant and Precision Genome Engineering, Inc.

  

8-K

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

2.1

  

  

June 30, 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.1

  

Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Registrant

  

8-K

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

3.1

  

  

June 24, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.2

  

Amended and Restated By-laws of the Registrant

  

8-K

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

3.2

  

  

June 24, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.3

 

Amendment No. 1 to Amended and Restated By-laws of the Registrant

 

8-K

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

3.1

 

 

February 11, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.1

  

Specimen Common Stock Certificate

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

4.1

  

  

June 4, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.2

  

Amended and Restated Investors’ Rights Agreement, dated as of July 23, 2012, by and among the Registrant and the Investors listed therein.

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

4.5

  

  

May 14, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.3

  

Amendment to Amended and Restated Investors’ Rights Agreement, dated as of July 8, 2014, by and among the Registrant and the Investors listed therein.

  

10-Q

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

4.6

  

  

August 12, 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.1#

  

Second Amended and Restated 2002 Employee, Director and Consultant Plan, as amended, and forms of award agreement thereunder

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.1

  

  

May 14, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.2#

  

2010 Stock Option and Grant Plan, as amended, and forms of award agreement thereunder

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.2

  

  

May 14, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.3#

  

2013 Stock Option and Incentive Plan and forms of award agreement thereunder

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.3

  

  

June 4, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.4

  

Form of Indemnification Agreement between the Registrant and each of its Executive Officers and Directors

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.4

  

  

May 14, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.5

  

Amended and Restated Lease Agreement, dated May 18, 2007, by and between the Registrant and Rivertech Associates II, LLC, as amended

  

10-Q

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

10.1

  

  

November 14, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.6†

  

Patent License Agreement, dated December 11, 1996, by and between the Registrant (formerly known as Genetix Pharmaceuticals Inc., successor-in-interest to Innogene Pharmaceuticals Inc.) and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as amended

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.6

  

  

May 14, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.7†

 

Fourth Amendment to Patent License Agreement, dated October 28, 2016, by and between the Registrant and Massachusetts Institute of Technology

 

10-K

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

10.7

  

  

February 22, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.8†

  

Patent and Know-How License Agreement No. 07554F30, dated May 14, 2009, by and between the Registrant (formerly known as Genetix Pharmaceuticals Inc.) and INSERM-TRANSFERT, as amended

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.7

  

  

May 14, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.9†

  

License Agreement, dated September 13, 2011, by and between the Registrant and Institut Pasteur, as amended

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.8

  

  

May 14, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.10†

  

Amendment No. 3 to License Agreement, dated September 10, 2013, by and between the Registrant and Institut Pasteur

  

10-Q

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

10.2

  

  

November 14, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.11†

 

Amendment No. 4 to License Agreement, dated April 1, 2015, by and between the Registrant and Institut Pasteur

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.10

 

 

May 6, 2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.12†

  

License Agreement, dated December 7, 2011, by and between the Registrant and Research Development Foundation

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.9

  

  

May 14, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.13†

  

Novation Agreement, dated April 2, 2012, by and between the Registrant and The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.10

  

  

May 14, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


  

  

 

  

Incorporated by Reference

Exhibit

Number

  

Exhibit Title

  

Form

  

File no.

 

  

Exhibit

 

  

Filing Date

10.14†

  

Master Collaboration Agreement by and between the Registrant and Celgene Corporation, dated March 19, 2013

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.11

  

  

May 14, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.15†

 

Amended and Restated Master Collaboration Agreement by and between the Registrant and Celgene Corporation, dated June 3, 2015

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.14

 

 

August 7, 2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.16

 

Amendment No. 1 to Amended and Restated Master Collaboration Agreement by and between the Registrant and Celgene Corporation, dated February 17, 2016

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.15

 

 

May 4, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.17

 

Amendment No. 2 to Amended and Restated Master Collaboration Agreement by and between the Registrant and Celgene Corporation, dated September 28, 2017

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.17

 

 

November 1, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.18†

 

Amended and Restated License Agreement by and between the Registrant and Celgene Corporation, dated February 16, 2016

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.16

 

 

November 2, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.19†

 

Amended and Restated License Agreement by and between the Registrant and Celgene Corporation, dated September 28, 2017

 

10-Q

-

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.19

 

 

November 1, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.20†

 

License Agreement by and between the Registrant and Biogen Idec MA Inc., dated August 13, 2014

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.17

 

 

November 2, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.21†

 

Letter Agreement by and between the Registrant and Biogen MA Inc., dated September 29, 2017

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.21

 

 

November 1, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.22†

 

Exclusive Patent License Agreement by and between the Registrant and the National Institutes of Health, dated August 31, 2015

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.18

 

 

November 2, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.23#

  

Amended and Restated Employment Agreement by and between the Registrant and Nick Leschly

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.12

  

  

June 4, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.24#

  

Amended and Restated Employment Agreement by and between the Registrant and Jeffrey T. Walsh

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.13

  

  

June 4, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.25#

  

Amended and Restated Employment Agreement by and between the Registrant and Mitch Finer

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.14

  

  

June 4, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.26#

 

Transitional Services and Separation Agreement by and between the Registrant and Mitch Finer

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.17

 

 

May 6, 2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.27#

  

Amended and Restated Employment Agreement by and between the Registrant and David M. Davidson, M.D.

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.15

  

  

June 4, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.28#

  

Employment Agreement, dated February 3, 2014, by and between the Registrant and Jason F. Cole

  

10-Q

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

10.18

  

  

May 13, 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.29#

 

Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated March 7, 2016, by and between the Registrant and Jason F. Cole

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.25

 

 

May 4, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.30#

 

Amendment No. 2 to Employment Agreement, dated November 3, 2016, by and between the Registrant and Jason F. Cole

 

10-K

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

10.27

  

  

February 22, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.31#

  

Employment Agreement, dated October 20, 2014, by and between the Registrant and James DeTore

  

8-K

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

10.1

  

  

November 10, 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.32#

 

Separation Agreement, dated February 24, 2016, by and between the Registrant and James DeTore

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.27

 

 

May 4, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.33#

 

Employment Agreement, dated May 30, 2015, by and between the Registrant and Philip D. Gregory

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.21

 

 

August 7, 2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.34#

 

Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated November 3, 2016, by and between the Registrant and Philip D. Gregory

 

10-K

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

10.31

  

  

February 22, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.35#

 

Employment Agreement, dated November 23, 2016, by and between the Registrant and Susanna High

 

10-K

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

10.32

  

  

February 22, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.36#

  

Offer Letter, dated October 14, 2013, by and between the Registrant and Eric Sullivan

  

10-Q

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

10.19

  

  

May 13, 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


  

  

 

  

Incorporated by Reference

Exhibit

Number

  

Exhibit Title

  

Form

  

File no.

 

  

Exhibit

 

  

Filing Date

10.37#

  

2013 Employee Stock Purchase Plan

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.17

  

  

June 4, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.38#

 

First Amendment of the Bluebird Bio, Inc. 2013 Employee Stock Purchase Plan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed herewith

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.39#

 

Offer Letter, dated November 16, 2017, by and between the Registrant and Kory Wentworth

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed herewith

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.40#

  

Executive Cash Incentive Bonus Plan

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.18

  

  

May 14, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.41

  

Lease, dated June 3, 2013, by and between the Registrant and 150 Second Street, LLC, as amended

  

S-1/A

  

 

333-188605

  

  

 

10.19

  

  

June 4, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.42

  

Lease Amendment, dated November 15, 2013, by and between the Registrant and 150 Second Street, LLC, as amended

  

10-K

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

10.19

  

  

March 5, 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.43

  

Lease Amendment, dated June 9, 2014, by and between the Registrant and 150 Second Street, LLC, as amended

  

10-Q

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

10.24

  

  

August 12, 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.44

 

Consent to Assignment, dated September 30, 2016, by and among the Registrant, ARE-MA Region No. 50, LLC, and Foundation Medicine, Inc.

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.35

 

 

November 2, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.45

 

Assignment and Assumption of Lease, dated September 30, 2016, by and between the Registrant and Foundation Medicine, Inc.

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.36

 

 

November 2, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.46

 

Lease, dated June 29, 2015, by and between the Registrant and ARE-MA Region No. 38, LLC

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.29

 

 

August 7, 2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.47†

 

Lease, dated September 21, 2015, by and between the Registrant and ARE-MA Region No. 40 LLC

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.30

 

 

November 5, 2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.48

 

First Amendment to Lease, dated June 21, 2016, by and between the Registrant and ARE-MA Region No. 40 LLC

 

10-Q

 

 

001-35966

 

 

 

10.37

 

 

August 3, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.49

 

Second Amendment to Lease, dated November 14, 2016, by and between the Registrant and ARE-MA Region No. 40 LLC

 

10-K

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

10.44

  

  

February 22, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.50

 

Termination of Lease, dated February 10, 2017, by and between the Registrant and ARE-MA Region No. 38, LLC

 

10-K

  

 

001-35966

  

  

 

10.45

  

  

February 22, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

21.1

 

Subsidiaries of the Registrant

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed herewith

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

23.1

 

Consent of Ernst & Young LLP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed herewith

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

31.1

 

Certification of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed herewith

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

31.2

 

Certification of Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed herewith

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

32.1

 

Certification of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Furnished herewith

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

101

 

The following materials from the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, formatted in XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language): (i) Consolidated Balance Sheets, (ii) Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss, (iii) Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows and (iv) Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed herewith

Portions of this exhibit (indicated by asterisks) have been omitted pursuant to a request for confidential treatment and this exhibit has been submitted separately to the SEC.

SIGNATURES

#

Indicates a management contract or any compensatory plan, contract or arrangement.



SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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.

bluebird bio, Inc.

By:

/s/ Nick Leschly

Nick Leschly

President, Chief Executive Officer and Director

SIGNATURES AND POWER OF ATTORNEY

We, the undersigned directors and officers of bluebird bio, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby severally constitute and appoint Nick Leschly and Jeffrey Walsh,Chip Baird, and each of them singly, our true and lawful attorneys, with full power to them, and to each of them singly, to sign for us and in our names in the capacities indicated below, any and all amendments to this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and to file or cause to be filed the same, with all exhibits thereto and other documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys, and each of them, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in connection therewith, as fully to all intents and purposes as each of us might or could do in person, and hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys, and each of them, or their substitute or substitutes, shall do or cause to be done by virtue of this Power of Attorney.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

Name

Title

Date

Name

Title
Date

/s/ Nick Leschly

President, Chief Executive Officer and Director

February 21, 2018

23, 2021

Nick Leschly

(Principal Executive Officer and Duly Authorized Officer)

/s/ Jeffrey Walsh

Chip Baird

Chief Financial and Strategy Officer and Treasurer

February 21, 2018

23, 2021

Jeffrey Walsh

Chip Baird

(Principal Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer, and Duly Authorized Officer)

/s/ Kory Wentworth

Vice President, Finance

February 21, 2018

Kory Wentworth

(Principal Accounting Officer)

/s/ Daniel S. Lynch

Director

February 21, 2018

23, 2021

Daniel S. Lynch

/s/ John O. Agwunobi, M.D.

Director

February 21, 2018

23, 2021

John O. Agwunobi, M.D.

/s/ Wendy L. Dixon, Ph.D.

Director

February 21, 2018

23, 2021

Wendy L. Dixon, Ph.D.

/s/ Mary Lynne Hedley, Ph.D.

Ramy Ibrahim, M.D.

Director

February 21, 2018

23, 2021

Mary Lynne Hedley, Ph.D.

Ramy Ibrahim, M.D.

/s/ James Mandell, M.D..

William R. Sellers, M.D.

Director

February 21, 2018

23, 2021

James Mandell,William R. Sellers, M.D.

/s/ Douglas A. Melton, Ph.D.

Denice Torres

Director

February 21, 2018

23, 2021

Douglas A. Melton, Ph.D.

Denice Torres

/s/ David P. Schenkein, M.D.

Director

February 21, 2018

David P. Schenkein, M.D.

/s/ Mark Vachon

Director

February 21, 2018

23, 2021

Mark Vachon