25 • clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages and side effects of the product candidate being studied in relation to other available therapies and product candidates; • our ability to obtain and maintain patient consents; and • the risk that patients enrolled in clinical trials will not complete such trials, for any reason. Our inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our clinical trials could result in significant delays or may require us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether. Enrollment delays in our clinical trials may result in increased development costs for our product candidates, delay or halt the development of and approval processes for our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to commence sales of and generate revenues from our product candidates, which may harm our business and results of operation. Our clinical trials may fail to demonstrate substantial evidence of the durability, efficacy and safety of our product candidates, which would prevent, delay or limit the scope of regulatory approval and commercialization. Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of any of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that our product candidates are both safe and effective for use in each target indication. For those product candidates that are subject to regulation as biological drug products, we will need to demonstrate that they are safe, pure, and potent for use in their target indications. Each product candidate must demonstrate an adequate risk versus benefit profile in its intended patient population and for its intended use, which is especially true for anti-VEGF biologic agents, where available marketed therapies are well-established products with accepted safety profiles. Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. Most product candidates that begin clinical trials are never approved by regulatory authorities for commercialization. The results of preclinical studies of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of early-stage or later-stage clinical trials, and results of early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. The results of clinical trials in one set of patients or disease indications may not be predictive of those obtained in another. In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety, efficacy or durability results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial procedures set forth in protocols, differences in the size and type of the patient populations, changes in and adherence to the dosing regimen and other clinical trial protocols and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety, efficacy and durability profile despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or unacceptable safety issues, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. For example, in our Phase 2b/3 DAZZLE clinical trial evaluating the efficacy, durability and safety of tarcocimab in treatment-naïve subjects with neovascular wet AMD and in our Phase 3 GLEAM and GLIMMER studies, tarcocimab did not meet the primary efficacy endpoint of showing non-inferior visual acuity gains. We may be unable to design and execute clinical trials that support marketing approval. We cannot be certain that our planned clinical trials or any other future clinical trials will be successful. Additionally, any safety concerns observed in any one of our clinical trials in our targeted indications could limit the prospects for regulatory approval of our product candidates in those and other indications, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, even if such clinical trials are successfully completed, we cannot guarantee that the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities will interpret the results as we do, and more trials or trials of a different design could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval. To the extent that the results of trials are not satisfactory to the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities for support of a marketing application, we may be required to expend significant resources, which may not be available to us, to conduct additional trials in support of potential approval of our product candidates. Even if regulatory approval is secured for any of our product candidates, the terms of such approval may limit the scope and use of our product candidate, which may also limit its commercial potential. Even if trial results are successful at the primary endpoint, clinical trial results may be different or worse in the extended treatment periods following the primary endpoint, and such data may negatively impact perceptions by regulatory authorities, the clinical community or commercial payors of the benefits of our product candidates.