IVA Inventiva SA

Table of Contents

​

​

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

​

FORM 20-F

(Mark One)

OR

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022

OR

OR

​

Date of event requiring this shell company report

​

Commission File Number 001-39374

​

Inventiva S.A.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter and translation of Registrant’s name into English)

FRANCE

(Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

50 rue de Dijon

21121 Daix France

(Address of principal executive offices)

Frédéric Cren

Chief Executive Officer

Inventiva S.A.

50 rue de Dijon

21121 Daix France

Tel: +33 3 80 44 75 00

info@inventivapharma.com

(Name, Telephone, Email and/or Facsimile number and Address of Company Contact Person)

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act.

​

*Not for trading, but only in connection with the registration of the American Depositary Shares.

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act. None

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act. None

Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the issuer’s classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report.

Ordinary shares: 42,134,169 shares outstanding as of December 31, 2022

​

Table of Contents

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

If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. ☐ Yes ☒ No

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

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

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

​

​

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

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

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

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

Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial statements included in this filing:

U.S. GAAP ☐

International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board ☒ Other ☐

If “Other” has been checked in response to the previous question, indicate by check mark which financial statement item the registrant has elected to follow. ☐ Item 17 ☐ Item 18

If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). ☐ Yes ☒ No

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

​

​

​

​

2

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION

Unless otherwise indicated, “Inventiva,” “the company,” “our company,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Inventiva S.A.

“INVENTIVA,” “PanNASH,” the Inventiva logo and other trademarks or service marks of Inventiva S.A. appearing in this Annual Report on Form 20-F, or annual report, are the property of Inventiva S.A. Solely for convenience, the trademarks, service marks and trade names referred to in this annual report are listed without the ® and ™ symbols, but such references should not be construed as any indicator that their respective owners will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, their right thereto. All other trademarks, trade names and service marks appearing in this annual report are the property of their respective owners. We do not intend to use or display other companies’ trademarks and trade names to imply any relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, any other companies.

Our audited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards, or IFRS, as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board, or IASB. Our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report are presented in euros and, unless otherwise specified, all monetary amounts are in euros. All references in this annual report to “$,” “US$,” “U.S.$,” “U.S. dollars,” “dollars” and “USD” mean U.S. dollars and all references to “€” and “euros,” mean euros, unless otherwise noted. Throughout this annual report, references to ADSs mean ADSs or ordinary shares represented by such ADSs, as the case may be.

​

​

3

Table of Contents

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 20-F, or annual report, contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, that are based on our management’s beliefs and assumptions and on information currently available to our management. All statements other than present and historical facts and conditions contained in this annual report, including statements regarding our future results of operations and financial positions, business strategy, plans and our objectives for future operations, are forward-looking statements. When used in this annual report, the words “anticipate,” “believe,” “can,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “is designed to,” “may,” “might,” “plan,” “will,” “would,” “potential,” “predict,” “objective,” “should,” or the negative of these and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about:

You should refer to the section of this annual report titled “Item 3.D-Risk Factors” for a discussion of important factors that may cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by our forward-looking statements. As a result of these

4

Table of Contents

factors, we cannot assure you that the forward-looking statements in this annual report will prove to be accurate. Furthermore, if our forward-looking statements prove to be inaccurate, the inaccuracy may be material. In light of the significant uncertainties in these forward-looking statements, you should not regard these statements as a representation or warranty by us or any other person that we will achieve our objectives and plans in any specified time frame or at all. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

You should read this annual report and the documents that we reference in this annual report and have filed as exhibits to this annual report completely and with the understanding that our actual future results may be materially different from what we expect. We qualify all of our forward-looking statements by these cautionary statements.

This annual report contains market data and industry forecasts that were obtained from industry publications. These data involve a number of assumptions and limitations, and you are cautioned not to give undue weight to such estimates. We have not independently verified any third-party information. While we believe the market position, market opportunity and market size information included in this annual report is generally reliable, such information is inherently imprecise.

Summary Risk Factors

5

Table of Contents

​

6

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Our ability to generate revenue from product sales and achieve and maintain profitability depends on our ability, alone or with any future partners, to successfully complete the development of, and obtain the regulatory approvals necessary to commercialize, lanifibranor, odiparcil and any additional product candidates that we may pursue in the future. Currently, lanifibranor is our only product candidate in clinical development. Our prospects, including our ability to finance our operations and generate revenue from product sales, therefore will depend substantially on the development and commercialization of lanifibranor, as other programs in our pre-clinical portfolio are still in earlier stages of development. Since our inception in 2011, the majority of our revenue has been derived from our reliance on research partnerships unrelated to lanifibranor, and we do not anticipate generating revenue from product sales for the next several years, if ever. Our ability to generate revenue from product sales depends heavily on our or any future partners’ success in:

8

Table of Contents

We have incurred significant losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future. We have never generated any revenue from product sales and may never achieve or maintain profitability.

We have incurred significant operating losses since our inception in 2011. We incurred net losses of €54.3 million, €49.6 million and €33.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for the foreseeable future. We have devoted substantially all of our efforts to acquisition and pre-clinical and clinical development of our product candidates, as well as to building our intellectual property portfolio, research programs, management team and infrastructure. It could be several years, if ever, before we or our partners have a commercialized product and our commercialized products, if any, may not be profitable. The net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year. We anticipate that our expenses will increase significantly in connection with our ongoing activities as we:

In order to become and remain profitable, we will need to develop and eventually commercialize, on our own or with partners, one or more product candidates with significant market potential. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including completing clinical trials of our product candidates, developing commercial scale manufacturing processes, obtaining marketing approval, manufacturing, marketing and selling any current and future product candidates for which we may obtain marketing approval, and satisfying any post-marketing requirements. We may never succeed in any or all of these activities and, even if we do, we may never generate revenue from product sales or achieve profitability.

Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with pharmaceutical products and development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses or when, or if, we will be able to achieve profitability. If we are required by the FDA, or other regulatory authorities such as the EMA, to perform studies and trials in addition to those currently expected, or if there are any delays in the development or in the completion of any planned or future pre-clinical studies or clinical trials of our current or future product candidates, our expenses could increase and profitability could be further delayed.

Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to become and remain profitable would decrease the value of our company and could impair our ability to raise capital, maintain our research and development efforts, expand our business or continue our operations. A decline in the value of our company also could cause the price of the ordinary shares and ADSs to decline.

9

Table of Contents

We will require substantial additional funding, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all, and failure to obtain this necessary capital when needed may force us to delay, limit or terminate our product candidate development efforts or other operations. These factors raise substantial doubt regarding our ability to continue as a going concern.

As of December 31, 2022, we had €86.7 million of available cash and cash equivalents, consisting of cash and short-term deposit accounts that are liquid and easily convertible within 3 months without penalty or risk of change in value. We also had €1.0 million of short-term deposits that are considered by the Company as liquid and easily available.

The amount and timing of our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:

As of the date hereof, we estimate, given our current cost structure and our projected expenditure commitments, to be able to finance our activities until the end of the fourth quarter of 2023. This estimate is based on our current business plan and excludes any potential milestones payable to or by us and any additional expenditures related to the potential continued development of the odiparcil program or resulting from the potential in-licensing or acquisition of additional product candidates or technologies, or any associated development we may pursue. We may have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be incorrect and we may end up using our resources sooner than anticipated. Accordingly, our current cash position will not be sufficient to cover operating needs for at least the next 12

10

Table of Contents

months. In order to cover our needs until March 2024, taking into account our current business plan, we estimate needing approximately an additional €20 million. These events and conditions indicate that a material uncertainty exists that may cast significant doubt on our ability to continue as a going concern and, therefore, we may be unable to realize our assets and discharge our liabilities in the normal course of business.

We expect to extend our financing horizon through:

Assuming the condition precedents for the release of the second tranche of the EIB loan are met, we plan to use proceeds from the second tranche for our preclinical and clinical pipeline, including to help fund part of our Phase III clinical trial of lanifibranor in patients with NASH. It cannot be guaranteed that the milestones provided for by us or our partners will be achieved or that the conditions precedent to the receipt of funds under the EIB loan will be met within the time limits provided, if at all.

We intend to seek additional capital to support our operating plan and continue our research and development efforts. Any potential financing could take the form of indebtedness, which would affect our financial structure, or a capital increase, which would result in a dilution of our shareholders, or a strategic transaction. However, we may not be able to secure additional financing on a timely basis, on favorable terms or at all. 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 approved product or be unable to expand our operations or otherwise capitalize on our business opportunities, as desired, which could impair our growth prospects. If we are unable to continue as a going concern, we may have to liquidate our assets and may receive less than the value at which those assets are carried on our financial statements, and it is likely that investors will lose all or a part of their investment. Further, the perception that we may be unable to continue as a going concern may impede our ability to pursue any potential strategic opportunities or operate our business due to concerns regarding our ability to discharge our contractual obligations. Any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and, if approved, commercialize our product candidates. In addition, our ability to raise necessary financing could be impacted by the continuing effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on market conditions in addition to market impacts as a result of geopolitical events, including relating to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

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

We may seek additional funding through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings, partnerships and/or licensing arrangements. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of our shareholders. For example, at the general shareholder meeting of January 25, 2023, our shareholders delegated the authority to our board of directors to increase our share capital by issuance of ordinary shares or securities giving access to our share capital. The incurrence of additional indebtedness and/or the issuance of certain equity securities could result in increased fixed payment obligations and could also result in certain additional restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt and/or issue additional equity, limitations on our ability to acquire or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. For example, on November 28, 2022 we issued 2,266,023 warrants, representing approximately 5.4% of our share capital outstanding as of that date, to the European Investment Bank, or EIB, as a condition to access to the first tranche of €25 million under the finance contract with the EIB, and one of the conditions to potentially accessing the second tranche of €25 million under the finance contract is to issue additional warrants. The number of warrants to be issued to EIB will be determined based on (i) the aggregate amount raised by us through one or more equity offerings, or through upfront or milestone payments, from the date of the finance contract to the time of the disbursement of the relevant tranche, and (ii) the average price per share paid for our shares in its most recent qualifying equity offering. In addition, issuance of additional equity securities, or the possibility of such

11

Table of Contents

issuance, may cause the market price of our ordinary shares or ADSs to decline. In the event that we enter into partnerships and/or licensing arrangements in order to raise capital, we may be required to accept unfavorable terms, including relinquishing or licensing to a third party on unfavorable terms our rights to technologies or product candidates that we otherwise would seek to develop or commercialize ourselves or potentially reserve for future potential arrangements when we might be able to achieve more favorable terms. Additional funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to obtain funding on a timely basis, we may be required to significantly curtail one or more of programs or cease operations altogether.

In addition, we have issued, and may in the future issue additional, equity securities as consideration for business development transactions, which may also dilute our existing shareholders’ or holders of our ADSs ownership interests. In August 2021, we filed a shelf registration statement on Form F-3, or the Shelf Registration Statement, pursuant to which we may offer and sell ordinary shares, ADSs representing ordinary shares and warrants to purchase ordinary shares or ADSs for aggregate gross sale proceeds of up to $300.0 million, of which we may offer and sell up to $100.0 million from time to time pursuant to an “At-The-Market” sales agreement we entered into in August 2021 with Jefferies LLC, as agent, subject to the terms and conditions described in the sales agreement and SEC rules and regulations. We raised $30 million in gross proceeds through that program in September 2021, $1.9 million in October 2021, and €9.4 million in June 2022. If we make further sales under our “At-The-Market” offering program or the Shelf Registration Statement, or otherwise the sales could dilute our shareholders, reduce the price of our ordinary shares or ADSs, or impede our ability to raise future capital.

Furthermore, as part of our policy to incentive our managers, directors and employees and in order to attract and retain qualified personnel, we have issued and granted to our managers, directors and employees equity warrants ("BSAs"), warrants to subscribe for founder's shares ("BSPCEs") and free shares ("AGAs").

As of the date of this disclosure, the exercise of all the dilutive instruments outstanding granted and not yet exercised, representing 3,851,923 underlying shares, would result in a dilution of approximately 9.1% based on a share capital of €421,341.69 as of March 1, 2023.

If we raise additional funds through partnerships, strategic alliances or marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights, future revenue streams, products or product candidates or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. If we choose to pursue a partnership for any of our product candidates, we may be required to relinquish certain valuable rights depending on the terms of such a transaction. If we are unable to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings when needed, we may be required to grant rights to develop and market products or product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves.

Risks Related to Product Development, Regulatory Approval and Commercialization

We are heavily dependent on the success of our product candidate lanifibranor. We cannot give any assurance that any product candidate, or any other compounds in development, will successfully complete clinical trials, receive regulatory approval or be commercialized.

We do not have any drugs that have received regulatory approval and may never be able to develop marketable products. We expect that a substantial portion of our efforts and expenses for the foreseeable future will be devoted to the clinical development of lanifibranor, and as a result, our business currently depends heavily on the successful development, regulatory approval and commercialization of this product candidate. The development of lanifibranor has been and will continue to be a time-consuming and costly process, and may leave us with insufficient resources to advance other programs. In 2020, we decided to focus our clinical efforts on the development of lanifibranor and suspend our clinical efforts relating to odiparcil. In addition, we previously entered into a partnership with AbbVie for the development of cedirogant, which ended in October 2022 when AbbVie decided to stop the development of cedirogant following the analysis of a nonclinical toxicology study.

We cannot be certain that lanifibranor will receive regulatory approval or be successfully commercialized, even if we receive regulatory approval. The research, testing, manufacturing, safety, efficacy, labeling, approval, sale, marketing and distribution of our product candidates are, and will remain, subject to comprehensive regulation by the FDA in the United States, the European Union and EMA in Europe and regulatory authorities in other countries, with regulations differing from country to country. For example, the changes that we announced in January 2023 to our clinical development plan for lanifibranor for the treatment of NASH may not meet our expectations of being beneficial to the overall development program and may not result in an approvable New Drug Application,

12

Table of Contents

whether by accelerated or full approval. While we have reduced the number of biopsies and trial duration of NATIV3, enrollment delays may not have the trial complete earlier than originally planned, particularly relative to other NASH therapies in development that may become commercially available during the conduct of our NATIV3 trial and our planned Phase 3 trial in patients with NASH and compensated cirrhosis. Moreover, any cost efficiencies that we hoped to gain by having confirmation of efficacy in Part 2 of NATIV3 will now be borne by a separate clinical trial in NASH and compensated cirrhosis, such that it may ultimately take longer and cost more to get approved, if at all. In addition, while the protocol amendments, submitted to the FDA in January 2023, are designed to align with the FDA’s public communication suggesting that an alternative approach to seek full approval in patients with NASH could be considered upon submission of positive results of a Phase III trial using a histology surrogate endpoint in patients with NASH and a Phase III clinical outcome trial in patients with NASH and compensated cirrhosis, there can be no assurance that the protocol amendments will result in an approvable New Drug Application. Although the FDA has not objected to the January 2023 protocol amendments, its guidance during a consultation preceding the submission of the protocol amendments was to continue NATiV3 as planned prior to the protocol amendments. In addition, our partner CTTQ may not be successful in developing and seeking regulatory approval for lanifibranor and/or effectively commercializing approved products, if any.

We will not be permitted to market our drug candidates in the United States or Europe until we receive approval of an NDA from the FDA or a marketing authorization application, or MAA, from the European Commission (based on the positive opinion of the EMA), respectively. We have not submitted any marketing applications for any of our product candidates. NDAs and MAAs must include extensive preclinical and clinical data and supporting information to establish the drug candidate’s safety and effectiveness for each desired indication. NDAs and MAAs must also include significant information regarding the chemistry, manufacturing and controls for the drug. Obtaining approval of a NDA or a MAA is a lengthy, expensive and uncertain process, and we may not be successful in obtaining approval. We have received a fast track and breakthrough therapy designation from the FDA for the development of lanifibranor for the treatment of NASH. In September 2021, the FDA decided that this designation also encompasses the treatment of NASG with compensated cirrhosis. While the fast track designation for lanifibranor in NASH permits close and regular contact between us and the FDA, the FDA and the EMA review processes can take more than one year to complete and approval is never guaranteed. If we submit an NDA to the FDA, the FDA must decide whether to accept or reject the submission for filing, before even reviewing the scientific basis. Regulators of other jurisdictions, such as the EMA, have their own procedures for approval of drug candidates. Failure to obtain regulatory approval for lanifibranor or odiparcil in the United States, Europe or other jurisdictions by us or our potential partners will prevent us from commercializing and marketing lanifibranor or odiparcil in such jurisdictions.

Even if we or any of our partners were to successfully obtain approval from the FDA, EMA, NMPA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for our product candidates, any approval might contain significant limitations related to use restrictions for specified age groups, warnings, precautions or contraindications, or may be subject to burdensome post-approval study or risk management requirements. Furthermore, even if we or our current or  future partners obtain regulatory approval for lanifibranor or odiparcil, we will still need to develop a commercial infrastructure, or otherwise develop relationships with partners to commercialize, establish a commercially viable pricing structure and obtain coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors, including and government healthcare programs. If we, or our current or future partners, are unable to successfully commercialize lanifibranor or odiparcil, we may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to continue our business.

13

Table of Contents

We may seek accelerated approval from FDA and conditional authorization from EMA if our Phase III NATiV3 trial of lanifibranor for NASH is successful at the 72-week endpoint, but even if granted, accelerated approval and conditional authorization require completion of the trial to obtain full approval.

If the data from our ongoing NATiV3 Phase III clinical trial of lanifibranor for NASH are positive, we intend to seek approval under the FDA’s accelerated approval pathway and the EMA’s conditional authorization pathway. A product may be eligible for accelerated approval if it treats a serious or life-threatening condition, generally provides a meaningful advantage over available therapies, and demonstrates an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require that a sponsor of a product receiving accelerated approval perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing clinical trials. These confirmatory trials must be completed with due diligence. 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. Even if we do receive accelerated approval or conditional authorization, we may not experience a faster development or regulatory review or approval process, and receiving accelerated approval does not provide assurance of ultimate full FDA or EMA approval.

Due to our limited resources and access to capital, we must and have in the past decided to prioritize development of certain product candidates; these decisions may prove to have been wrong and may adversely affect our revenues.

Because we have limited resources and access to capital to fund our operations, we must decide which product candidates to pursue and the amount of resources to allocate to each. As such, we are currently primarily focused on the development of lanifibranor. Our decisions concerning the allocation of research, partnership, management and financial resources toward particular compounds, product candidates or therapeutic areas may not lead to the development of viable commercial products and may divert resources away from better opportunities. For example, in 2020 we decided to focus our clinical efforts on the development of lanifibranor. As part of this decision, we suspended our clinical efforts relating to odiparcil. In addition, we previously committed resources to pursuing the development of lanifibranor for the treatment of patients with systemic sclerosis, or SSc, through clinical trials. However, following the results of a Phase IIb clinical trial of lanifibranor for the treatment of SSc, we ceased development of lanifibranor in this indication in February 2019. Similarly, our potential decisions to delay, terminate or partner with third parties in respect of certain product development programs, including regarding the suspension of our development of odiparcil, may also prove not to be optimal and could cause us to miss valuable opportunities. In addition, we previously entered into a partnership with AbbVie for the development of cedirogant, which ended in October 2022 when AbbVie decided to stop the development of cedirogant following the analysis of a nonclinical toxicology study. If we make incorrect determinations regarding the market potential of our product candidates or misread trends in the pharmaceutical industry, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

The clinical and commercial success of lanifibranor , as well as our other product candidates, will depend on a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control, and we or our partners may be unable to complete the development or commercialization of our product candidates or our other compounds in development.

The clinical and commercial success of lanifibranor , as well as our other product candidates and compounds in development will depend on a number of factors, including the following:

14

Table of Contents

Many of these factors are beyond our control. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will ever be able to achieve profitability through the sale of, or royalties from, our product candidates. If we or our partners are not successful in obtaining approval for and commercializing our product candidates, or are delayed in completing those efforts, our business and operations would be adversely affected.

The regulatory approval processes of the FDA, the EMA,the NMPA and other comparable regulatory authorities are lengthy, time consuming and inherently unpredictable, and if we are ultimately unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, our business will be substantially harmed.

The time required to obtain approval by the FDA, the EMA, the NMPA and other comparable regulatory authorities is unpredictable but typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. In addition, approval policies, regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. To date, substantially all of our clinical development has been conducted outside the United States.

Although the FDA may accept data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States, acceptance of this data is subject to certain conditions imposed by the FDA. Furthermore, while these clinical trials are subject to applicable local laws, FDA acceptance of the data will be dependent upon its determination that the trials also comply with all applicable U.S. laws and regulations. There can be no assurance that the FDA will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States. If the FDA does not accept the data from any clinical trials that we or our partners conduct outside the United States, it would likely result in the need for additional clinical trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay or permanently halt our ability to develop and market these or other product candidates in the United States. We have not obtained regulatory approval for any product candidate and it is possible that none of our existing product candidates or any product candidates we may seek to develop in the future will ever obtain regulatory approval.

15

Table of Contents

Our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including the following:

This lengthy approval process as well as the unpredictability of future clinical trial results may result in our or our partners’ failure to obtain regulatory approval to market lanifibranor and/or other product candidates, which would harm our business, results of operations and prospects significantly. In addition, even if we were to obtain approval, regulatory authorities may approve any of our product candidates for fewer or more limited indications than we request, may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials, or may approve a product candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of that product candidate. In certain jurisdictions, regulatory authorities may not approve the price we intend to charge for our products. Any of the foregoing scenarios could materially harm the commercial prospects for our product candidates.

We have not previously submitted an NDA, an MAA, or any similar drug approval filing to the FDA, the EMA, the NMPA or any comparable regulatory authority for any product candidate, and we cannot be certain that any of our product candidates will be successful in clinical trials or receive regulatory approval. Further, our product candidates may not receive regulatory approval even if they are successful in clinical trials. Even if we successfully obtain regulatory approvals to market one or more of our product candidates, our revenues will be dependent, to a significant extent, upon the size of the markets in the territories for which we gain regulatory approval and have commercial rights or share in revenues from the exercise of such rights. If the markets for patient subsets that we are targeting are not as significant as we estimate, we may not generate significant revenues from sales of such products, if approved.

Even if we receive regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, we will be subject to ongoing obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense. Additionally, our product candidates, if approved, could be subject to labeling and other restrictions and market withdrawal and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with our products.

Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our product candidates may also be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase IV clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate, and we may be required to include labeling that includes significant use or distribution restrictions or significant safety warnings, including boxed warnings.

16

Table of Contents

If the FDA, the EMA, the NMPA or any other comparable regulatory authority approves any of our product candidates, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for the product will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration requirements and continued compliance with current good manufacturing practices, or cGMPs, and good clinical practices, or GCPs, for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with our third-party manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in, among other things:

Moreover, if any of our product candidates are approved, our product labeling, advertising and promotion will be subject to regulatory requirements and continuing regulatory review. The FDA strictly regulates the promotional claims that may be made about drug products. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses that are not approved by the FDA as reflected in the product’s approved labeling.

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our or our partners’ ability to develop or commercialize lanifibranor or other product candidates, and harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, the policies of the FDA, the EMA, the NMPA and other comparable regulatory authorities may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained, which would adversely affect our business, prospects and ability to achieve or sustain profitability.

Clinical development is a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier studies and trials as well as data from any interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials may not be predictive of future trial results. Clinical failure can occur at any stage of clinical development.

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. Although product candidates may demonstrate promising results in early clinical (human) trials and pre-clinical (animal) studies, they may not prove to be effective in subsequent clinical trials. For example, testing on animals may occur under different conditions than testing in humans and therefore the results of animal studies may not accurately predict human experience. Likewise, early clinical studies may not be predictive of eventual safety or effectiveness results in larger-scale pivotal clinical trials. The results of pre-clinical studies and previous clinical trials as well as data from any interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials of our product candidates, as well as studies and trials of other products with similar mechanisms of action to our product candidates, may not be predictive of the results of ongoing or future clinical trials. There can be significant variability in safety and/or efficacy results between different trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial protocols, differences in composition of the patient populations, adherence to the dosing regimen and other trial protocols and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. For example, certain of the completed clinical trials for lanifibranor were conducted in patients with type 2 diabetes, which is a different indication than we are currently pursuing. The results generated in trials for lanifibranor in this other indication do not ensure that the current or future clinical trials for lanifibranor in NASH will continue to demonstrate similar safety and/or efficacy results.

17

Table of Contents

In addition, we did not control the pre-clinical and clinical development of lanifibranor and odiparcil prior to 2012 and we have relied on Abbott Laboratories, or Abbott, and Abbott’s partners to have conducted such research and development in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, having accurately reported the results of all clinical trials conducted prior to our acquisition of lanifibranor and odiparcil, and having correctly collected and interpreted the data from these studies and trials. To the extent any of these has not occurred, expected development time and costs may be increased which could adversely affect any future revenue from lanifibranor and odiparcil by us or our partners.

Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through pre-clinical studies and earlier clinical trials. In addition to the safety and efficacy traits of any product candidate, clinical trial failures may result from a multitude of factors including flaws in trial design, dose selection, placebo effect and patient enrollment criteria. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials, and it is possible that we will as well. Based upon negative or inconclusive results, we or our partners may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical trials or pre-clinical studies. For example, we previously pursued the development of lanifibranor for the treatment of patients with SSc. However, following the results of our Phase IIb clinical trial of lanifibranor for the treatment of SSc, we ceased development of lanifibranor in this indication in February 2019. In addition, data obtained from trials and studies are susceptible to varying interpretations, and regulators may not interpret our data as favorably as we do, which may delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval.

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

We may experience delays in our ongoing clinical trials and we do not know whether planned clinical trials will begin on time, need to be redesigned, enroll patients on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. We previously experienced such delays with the initiation of our recently completed Phase IIb clinical trial of lanifibranor in patients with NASH and our Phase 1b/II clinical trial of odiparcil in a pediatric population with MPS VI, as well as delays in our plans to report data related to each of these trials. For example, the recruitment and screening of new patients for the Phase II trial of lanifibranor in Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease, or NAFLD, was temporarily suspended due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the trial results are now expected by the middle of the second quarter of 2023, as opposed to the first half of 2022 as initially expected. In 2022, due to the Russian invasion in Ukraine, we determined to put recruitment for our NATiV3 clinical trial of lanifibranor in Ukraine on hold and to remove all of the planned sites in Russia from the trial, which, together with higher than originally projected screen failure rate resulting in slower than anticipated enrollment rate, contributed to a delay in patient enrollment. In addition, clinical trials can be delayed for a variety of reasons, including delays related to:

18

Table of Contents

We could encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the IRBs or ethics committees of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, by the data and safety monitoring board for such trial or by the FDA, the EMA, the NMPA or other comparable regulatory authorities. A suspension or termination may be imposed due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA, the EMA, the NMPA or other comparable regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a drug, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions, manufacturing issues or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. For example, it is possible that safety issues or adverse side effects could be observed in our trials for lanifibranor in NASH, which could result in a delay, suspension or termination of those trials. If we experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates will be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenues from any of these product candidates will be delayed. For example, we decided to focus our clinical efforts on the development of lanifibranor. As part of this decision, we suspended our clinical efforts relating to odiparcil. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly. In addition, many of the factors that cause or lead to a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.

If lanifibranor or any other product candidate is found to be unsafe or lack efficacy, we will not be able to obtain regulatory approval for it and our business would be materially harmed. For example, if the results of our Phase III clinical trial for lanifibranor in NASH do not achieve the primary efficacy endpoints or demonstrates unexpected safety findings, the prospects for approval of lanifibranor, as well as the price of our ordinary shares or ADSs, would be materially and adversely affected.

Moreover, principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as our scientific advisors or consultants from time to time and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA or other regulatory authorities. The FDA or other regulatory authorities may conclude that a financial relationship between us and a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the trial results. The FDA or other regulatory authority may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA or other regulatory authority, as the case may be, and may ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of one or more of our product candidates.

Enrollment and retention of patients in clinical trials is an expensive and time-consuming process and could be made more difficult or rendered impossible by multiple factors outside our control, including difficulties in identifying NASH patients and significant competition for recruiting NASH patients in clinical trials.

Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in our clinical trials is critical to our success. We have in the past and may in the future encounter delays in enrolling, or be unable to enroll, a sufficient number of patients to complete any of our clinical trials, and even once enrolled we may be unable to retain a sufficient number of patients to complete any of our trials. In particular, as a result of the inherent difficulties in diagnosing NASH, the significant competition for recruiting NASH patients in clinical trials, and the higher than originally projected screen failure rate resulting in slower than anticipated enrollment rate, we experienced delays in recruiting patients with NASH for our completed trial of lanifibranor in that indication and in recruiting patients for our NATiV3 clinical trial of lanifibranor. While we amended the protocol for the NATiV3 trial in part to potentially accelerate enrollment, there can be no assurance that the protocol amendments will have the desired effect, and we or our potential future partners may be unable to enroll the patients we need to complete NATiV3 or other potential future clinical trials on a timely basis, or at all. As a result, we may be unable to attain previously announced anticipated timing milestones with respect to clinical or regulatory development of lanifibranor. Enrollment challenges could be exacerbated if the FDA or EMA require us or our partners to conduct pivotal trials of lanifibranor in larger patient populations than we anticipate.

19

Table of Contents

Additionally, patient enrollment and retention in clinical trials depends on many factors, including the size of the patient population, the nature of the trial protocol, our ability to recruit clinical trial investigators with the appropriate competencies and experience, the existing body of safety and efficacy data with respect to the study drug, the number and nature of competing treatments and ongoing clinical trials of competing drugs for the same disease, the proximity of patients to clinical sites and the eligibility criteria for the trials, our ability to obtain and maintain patient consents and the risk that patients enrolled in clinical trials will drop out of the trials before completion. Furthermore, any negative results we may report in clinical trials of our product candidates, or results that we report that are less favorable or perceived to be less favorable than those reported with respect to competitor product candidates, may make it difficult or impossible to recruit and retain patients in other clinical trials of those product candidates. Delays or failures in planned patient enrollment or retention may result in increased costs, program delays or both, which could have a harmful effect on our ability to develop lanifibranor, or could render further development impossible. In addition, we may rely on CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure proper and timely conduct of our future clinical trials and, while we intend to enter into agreements governing their services, we will be limited in our ability to compel their actual performance.

We initiated the NATiV3 trial of lanifibranor in NASH in the second half of 2021 and a combination trial with lanifibranor and empagliflozin in patients with NASH and Type 2 Diabetes (“T2D”) in the second half of 2022. Subject to the implementation and effect of measures currently being reviewed and implemented to accelerate the enrollment rate, the last patient first visit for the ongoing NATiV3 trial is now targeted for the second half of 2023 and the publication of the topline results of the NATiV3 trial for the second half of 2025. As of March 27, 2023, 369 clinical sites are activated. We are continuing to experience delays in the NATiV3 trials, primarily due to a higher than originally projected screen failure rate resulting in slower than anticipated enrollment rate. In addition, we continue to see slower than predicted site activation, screening and enrollment due to negative impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic and we continue to be unable to conduct clinical trial activities at sites located in Ukraine, following our determination in 2022 to put recruitment for our NATiV3 clinical trial in Ukraine on hold and to remove all of the planned sites in Russia from the trial due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Furthermore, we face strong competition for enrollment from competitors who are conducting ongoing clinical trials in NASH, such as Madrigal, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk, and Akero Therapeutics. As of the date of this report, more than 70 Phase I, II and III clinical trials enrolling patients with NASH are listed on the clinicaltrials.gov website. These competitors could obtain marketing authorization in the indications targeted by us, which could have a negative impact on the recruitment and retention of patients randomized to the placebo group. Moreover, certain patients could prefer to undergo treatment that has obtained a marketing authorization rather than participate or continue their participation in an ongoing clinical study with the possibility of being assigned to the placebo-controlled part.

We are developing certain of our product candidates in combination with other therapies, and safety or supply issues with combination use products may delay or prevent development and approval of our therapeutic candidates.

We are developing certain of our product candidates in combination with one or more approved or investigational therapies. Even if any product candidate we or our partners develop were to receive marketing approval or be commercialized for use in combination with other existing therapies, we would continue to be subject to the risks that the FDA, the EMA, the NMPA or similar foreign regulatory authorities could revoke approval of the therapy used in combination with our product or that safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise with any of those existing therapies. If the therapies we use in combination with our product candidates are replaced as the standard of care for the indications we choose for any of our product candidates, the EMA, the FDA, the NMPA or similar foreign regulatory authorities outside may require us to conduct additional clinical trials. The occurrence of any of these risks could result in our own products, if approved, being removed from the market or being less successful commercially.

We or our partners also may evaluate our product candidates in combination with one or more therapies that have not yet been approved for marketing by the FDA, the EMA, the NMPA or similar foreign regulatory authorities. We will not be able to market and sell any product candidate we develop in combination with an unapproved therapy if that unapproved therapy does not ultimately obtain marketing approval. In addition, unapproved therapies face the same risks described with respect to our product candidates currently in development, including the potential for serious adverse effects, delay in their clinical trials and lack of FDA, EMA, or NMPA approval.

If the FDA, the EMA, the NMPA or similar foreign regulatory authorities do not approve these other therapies or revoke their approval of, or if safety, efficacy, manufacturing, or supply issues arise with, the therapies we or our partners choose to evaluate in combination with our product candidates, we may be unable to obtain approval of or market any such product candidate.

20

Table of Contents

We may not be successful in our efforts to discover and develop additional product candidates.

A key element of our strategy is to build a pipeline of product candidates and progress these product candidates through clinical development for the treatment of a variety of diseases. Although our research and development efforts to date have resulted in a pipeline of product candidates directed at various diseases, we may not be able to develop product candidates that are safe and effective. Even if we are successful in continuing to build our pipeline, the potential product candidates that we identify may not be suitable for clinical development, including as a result of being shown to have harmful side effects or other characteristics that indicate that they are unlikely to be products that will receive marketing approval and achieve market acceptance. If we do not continue to successfully develop and begin to commercialize product candidates, we will face difficulty in obtaining product revenues in future periods, which could result in significant harm to our financial position and adversely affect the price of our ordinary shares or ADSs.

We have received Orphan Drug Designation from the FDA and the European Commission and Rare Pediatric Disease Designation from the FDA for odiparcil for the treatment of MPS VI, and we may seek Orphan Drug Designation for our future product candidates, however we may be unable to maintain the benefits associated with Orphan Drug Designation, including the potential for market exclusivity, which could limit the potential profitability of our drug candidates, if approved.

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States and the European Union, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. Under the Orphan Drug Act of 1983, the FDA may designate a drug as an orphan drug if it is a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or if it affects more than 200,000, there is no reasonable expectation that sales of the drug in the United States will be sufficient to offset the costs of developing and making the drug available in the United States. Generally, if a drug with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for an indication for which it receives the designation, then the drug is eligible for a seven-year period of marketing exclusivity in the United States and a ten-year period of marketing exclusivity in the European Union during which the competent authority may not approve another marketing application for the same drug for the same indication, except in limited circumstances, such as if a subsequent application demonstrates that its product is clinically superior. During an orphan drug’s exclusivity period, however, competitors may receive approval for drugs with different active moieties for the same indication as the approved orphan drug, or for drugs with the same active moiety as the approved orphan drug, but for different indications. Orphan drug exclusivity could block the approval of one of our products for seven years if a competitor obtains approval for a drug with the same active moiety intended for the same indication before we do, unless we are able to demonstrate that grounds for withdrawal of the orphan drug exclusivity exist or that our product is clinically superior. Further, if a designated orphan drug receives marketing approval for an indication broader than the rare disease or condition for which it received orphan drug designation, it may not be entitled to exclusivity. A designated orphan drug may not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan drug designation.

We have received orphan drug designation from the FDA and from the EMA for odiparcil for the treatment of MPS VI. We intend to pursue orphan drug designation for other future drug candidates as applicable. Even if we obtain orphan drug designation for a drug candidate, we may not obtain orphan exclusivity, and any such exclusivity, if attained, may not effectively protect the drug from the competition of different drugs for the same condition, which could be approved during the exclusivity period. Additionally, after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA could subsequently approve another application for the same indication if the FDA concludes that the later drug is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. Orphan drug exclusive marketing rights in the United States also may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. The failure to obtain an orphan drug designation for any drug candidates we may develop, the inability to maintain that designation for the duration of the applicable period, or the inability to obtain or maintain orphan drug exclusivity could reduce our ability to make sufficient sales of the applicable drug candidate to balance our expenses incurred to develop it, which would have a negative impact on our operational results and financial condition.

Fast Track and Breakthrough Therapy Designations from the FDA may not actually lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process.

The FDA has granted Fast Track and Breakthrough Therapy Designations to lanifibranor for the treatment of patients with NASH.

21

Table of Contents

If a product is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and the product demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for this condition, the product sponsor may apply for Fast Track Designation. Similarly, breakthrough therapy designation may be requested and granted for products that are intended, alone or in combination with one or more other products, to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product may demonstrate substantial improvement over currently approved therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints. Even though we have received Fast Track and Breakthrough Therapy Designations for lanifibranor for the treatment of NASH we may not experience a faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional FDA procedures and these designations do not change the approval standards of the FDA. The FDA may withdraw such designations if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program.

The EMA, FDA, NMPA and other regulatory agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of drugs for off-label uses. If we or our partners are found to have improperly promoted off-label use, we may become subject to significant liability.

The EMA, the FDA, the NMPA and other regulatory agencies strictly regulate the promotional claims that may be made about prescription drug products, such as our product candidates, if approved. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses that are not approved by the EMA, the FDA, the NMPA or such other regulatory agencies as reflected in the product’s approved labeling. For example, if we receive marketing approval for lanifibranor for NASH, physicians, in their professional medical judgment, may nevertheless prescribe the drug product to their patients in a manner that is inconsistent with the approved label. If we are found to have promoted such off-label use, we may become subject to significant liability under the U.S. federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, and other statutory authorities, such as laws prohibiting false claims for reimbursement. The federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion and has enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion. The FDA has also requested that companies enter into consent decrees or permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed. If we or our partners cannot successfully manage the promotion of our products, if approved, we could become subject to significant liability, which would harm our reputation and negatively impact our financial condition.

Even if any of our product candidates are commercialized, they may not be accepted by physicians, healthcare payors, patients or the medical community in general, and may also become subject to market conditions that could harm our business.

Even if we or our partners obtain regulatory approval for one or more of our product candidates, the product may not gain market acceptance or prevalent usage among physicians, healthcare payors, patients and the medical community, which is critical to commercial success. Our current product candidates both treat diseases which may not frequently be identified by physicians. For example, because various co-morbidities often confound the diagnosis of NASH and NASH diagnosis currently requires liver biopsy, many physicians may not be trained to identify or treat NASH specifically, which could lead to limited prescribing of lanifibranor even if the product candidate obtains regulatory approval and is commercialized. Market acceptance of any product candidate for which we or our partners receive approval depends on a number of factors, including:

22

Table of Contents

If our product candidates are approved but fail to achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, healthcare payors, patients and the medical community, we will not be able to generate significant revenues, and we may not become or remain profitable.

We currently have no marketing and sales organization. To the extent any of our product candidates for which we maintain commercial rights is approved for marketing, if we are unable to establish marketing and sales capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our product candidates, we may not be able to effectively market and sell any product candidates, or generate product revenues.

We currently do not have a marketing or sales organization for the marketing, sales and distribution of pharmaceutical products. In order to independently commercialize any product candidates that receive marketing approval and for which we maintain commercial rights, we would have to build marketing, sales, distribution, managerial and other non-technical capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services, and we may not be successful in doing so. Factors that may inhibit our efforts to commercialize our products on our own include:

In the event of successful development of lanifibranor or any other product candidates in those indications where we can do so in a capital efficient manner, we may elect to build a targeted specialty sales force which will be expensive and time consuming. Any failure or delay in the development of our internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact the commercialization of these products. With respect to our product candidates for larger indications, we may partner with third parties that have direct sales forces and established distribution systems, either to augment our own sales force and distribution systems or in lieu of our own sales force and distribution systems. If we are unable to enter into partnerships with third parties for the commercialization of approved products, if any, on acceptable terms or at all, or if any such partner does not devote sufficient resources to the commercialization of our product or otherwise fails in commercialization efforts, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any of our product candidates that receive regulatory approval. If we are not successful in commercializing our product candidates, either on our own or through partnerships with one or more third parties, our future revenue will be materially and adversely impacted.

23

Table of Contents

Even if we obtain and maintain approval for our current and future product candidates from the FDA, we or our partners may nevertheless be unable to obtain approval for our product candidates outside of the United States, which would limit our market opportunities and could harm our business.

Approval of a product candidate in the United States by the FDA does not ensure approval of such product candidate by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions, and approval by one foreign regulatory authority does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or by the FDA. If approved, sales of lanifibranor and any future product candidate outside of the United States will be subject to foreign regulatory requirements governing clinical trials and marketing approval. Even if the FDA grants marketing approval for a product candidate, comparable regulatory authorities of foreign countries also must approve the manufacturing and marketing of the product candidate in those countries. Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from, and more onerous than, those in the United States, including additional pre-clinical studies or clinical trials. In many countries outside the United States, a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that country. In some cases, the price that we or our partners intend to charge for any product candidates, if approved, is also subject to approval. Obtaining approval for lanifibranor or any future product candidate in the European Union from the European Commission following the opinion of the EMA or in other foreign jurisdictions, if we or our partners choose to submit a marketing authorization application there, would be a lengthy and expensive process. Even if a product candidate is approved, the FDA, the EMA, the NMPA or other foreign regulatory authorities, as the case may be, may limit the indications for which the drug may be marketed, require extensive warnings on the drug labeling or require expensive and time-consuming additional clinical trials or reporting as conditions of approval.

Obtaining foreign regulatory approvals and compliance with foreign regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us or our partners and could delay or prevent the introduction of lanifibranor or any future product candidate in certain countries.

Further, clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries. Also, regulatory approval for lanifibranor or any future product candidate may be withdrawn. If we or our partners fail to comply with the regulatory requirements, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of lanifibranor or any future product candidate will be negatively impacted, and our or our partners’ business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations could be harmed.

Coverage and reimbursement decisions by third-party payors may have an adverse effect on pricing and market acceptance.

There is significant uncertainty related to third-party coverage and reimbursement of newly approved drugs. To the extent that we retain commercial rights following clinical development, we would seek approval to market our product candidates in the United States, the European Union and other selected jurisdictions. Market acceptance and sales of our product candidates, if approved, in both domestic and international markets will depend significantly on the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors for any of our product candidates and may be affected by existing and future healthcare reform measures. Government authorities and other third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which drugs they will cover and establish payment levels. We cannot be certain that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be available for any of our product candidates, if approved. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain price levels and reimbursement rates as high as those granted to other products that may be approved for the treatment of NASH, particularly because these products may have a different therapeutic approach from those developed by us. Also, we cannot be certain that reimbursement policies will not reduce the demand for any of our product candidates, if approved. If reimbursement is not available or is available on a limited basis for any of our product candidates, if approved, we or our partners may not be able to successfully commercialize any such product candidate. Reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including, without limitation, the third-party payor’s determination that use of a product is:

24

Table of Contents

Obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval for a product from a government or other third-party payor is a time consuming and costly process that could require us to provide supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data for the use of our products to the payor. We may not be able to provide data sufficient to gain acceptance with respect to coverage and reimbursement at a satisfactory level. If reimbursement of our future products, if any, is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, such as may result where alternative or generic treatments are available, we may be unable to achieve or sustain profitability.

In the United States, the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, or MMA, changed the way Medicare covers and pays for pharmaceutical products. The legislation established Medicare Part D, which expanded Medicare coverage for outpatient prescription drug purchases by the elderly but provided authority for limiting the number of drugs that will be covered in any therapeutic class. The MMA also introduced a new reimbursement methodology based on average sales prices for physician- administered drugs. Any negotiated prices for any of our product candidates, if approved, covered by a Part D prescription drug plan will likely be lower than the prices we might otherwise obtain outside of the Medicare Part D prescription drug plan.

Moreover, no uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement exists in the United States, and coverage and reimbursement can differ significantly from payor to payor. While Medicare Part D applies only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private third-party payors often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own payment rates, but also have their own methods and approval process apart from Medicare determinations. Any reduction in payment under Medicare Part D may result in a similar reduction in payments from non-governmental payors.

In certain countries, particularly in the European Union, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing approval for a product candidate. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct additional clinical trials that compare the cost-effectiveness of our product candidates to other available therapies. If reimbursement of any of our product candidates, if approved, is unavailable or limited in scope or amount in a particular country, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, we may be unable to achieve or sustain profitability of our products in such country.

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 healthcare 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 or our partners’ ability to commercialize any products for which we obtain marketing approval.

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

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

25

Table of Contents

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or collectively the Affordable Care Act, substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both the government and private insurers, and significantly impacts the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. The Affordable Care Act, among other things: (1) increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and expanded rebate liability from fee-for-service Medicaid utilization to include the utilization of Medicaid managed care organizations as well; (2) established a branded prescription drug fee that pharmaceutical manufacturers of branded prescription drugs must pay to the federal government; (3) expanded the list of covered entities eligible to participate in the 340B drug pricing program by adding new entities to the program; (4) established a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 70% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D; (5) extended manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability to covered drugs dispensed to individuals who are enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations; (6) expanded eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs by, among other things, allowing states to offer Medicaid coverage to additional individuals and by adding new mandatory eligibility categories for individuals with income at or below 133% of the federal poverty level, thereby potentially increasing manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability; (7) created a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for certain drugs and biologics, including our product candidates, that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected; (8) established a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research; (9) established a Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending, potentially including prescription drug spending; and (10) created a licensure framework for follow-on biologic products. There have been judicial, Congressional, and executive branch challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. In addition, there have been a number of health reform measures by the Biden administration that have impacted the Affordable Care Act. For example, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in Affordable Care Act marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the “donut hole” under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and creating a new manufacturer discount program. It is possible that the Affordable Care Act will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how such challenges and the healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the Affordable Care Act and our business. We continue to evaluate the Affordable Care Act and its possible repeal and replacement, as the extent to which any such changes may impact our business or financial condition remains uncertain.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. These changes include aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year pursuant to the Budget Control Act of 2011 and subsequent laws, which began in 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, including the BBA, and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, will remain in effect until 2031 unless additional Congressional action is taken. Under current legislation, the actual reduction in Medicare payments will vary from 1% in 2022 to up to 4% in the final fiscal year of this sequester. Additionally, on March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, beginning January 1, 2024. New laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which may adversely affect customer demand and affordability for our products and, accordingly, the results of our financial operations.

Also, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over the manner in which drug manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. For example, at the federal level, in July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, “Promoting Competition in the American Economy,” with multiple provisions aimed at prescription drugs. In response to Biden’s executive order, on September 9, 2021, HHS released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug pricing reform and sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue as well as potential administrative actions HHS can take to advance these principles. In addition, the IRA, among other things, (1) directs HHS to negotiate the price of certain single-source drugs and biologics covered under Medicare and (2) imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation. These provisions will take effect progressively starting in fiscal year 2023, although they may be subject to legal challenges. It is currently unclear how the IRA will be implemented but is likely to have a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry. Further, the Biden administration released an additional executive order on October 14, 2022, directing HHS to submit a report within 90 days on how the Center for

26

Table of Contents

Medicare and Medicaid Innovation can be further leveraged to test new models for lowering drug costs for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries.

At the 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 certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. For example, since 2016, Vermont requires certain manufacturers identified by the state to justify their price increases.

We expect that these and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and lower reimbursement, and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government-funded programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our drugs, once marketing approval is obtained. We cannot predict what healthcare reform initiatives may be adopted in the future. However, it is possible that there will be further legislation or regulation that could harm the business, financial condition and results of operations.

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

We face significant competition for our drug discovery and development efforts, and if we do not compete effectively, our commercial opportunities will be reduced or eliminated.

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are intensely competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change. Our drug discovery and development efforts may target diseases and conditions that are already subject to existing therapies or that are being developed by our competitors, many of which have substantially greater resources, larger research and development staffs and facilities, more experience in completing pre-clinical testing and clinical trials, and formulation, marketing and manufacturing capabilities than we do. As a result of these resources, our competitors may develop drug products that render our products obsolete or noncompetitive by developing more effective drugs or by developing their products more efficiently. Our ability to develop competitive products would be limited if our competitors succeeded in obtaining regulatory approvals for drug candidates more rapidly than we were able to or in obtaining patent protection or other intellectual property rights that limited our drug development efforts. Any drug products resulting from our research and development efforts, or from our joint efforts with partners or licensees, might not be able to compete successfully with our competitors’ existing and future products, or obtain regulatory approval in the United States, European Union or elsewhere. Further, we may be subject to additional competition from alternative forms of treatment, including generic or over-the-counter drugs.

We face strong competitors who are conducting ongoing clinical trials, such as Madrigal, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk, Akero Therapeutics. As of the date of this report, more than 70 Phase I, II and III clinical trials enrolling patients are listed on the clinicaltrials.gov website. These competitors could obtain marketing authorization in the indications targeted by us, which could have a negative impact on the recruitment and retention of patients randomized to the placebo group. Moreover, certain patients could prefer to undergo treatment that has obtained a marketing authorization rather than participate or continue their participation in an ongoing clinical study with the possibility of being assigned to the placebo-controlled part. Intercept Pharmaceuticals announced its accelerated marketing authorization filing for ocaliva with the FDA for the treatment of NASH in December 2022. The EU marketing authorisation for ocaliva for the treatment of advanced fibrosis was withdrawn in December 2021.

In December 2022, Madrigal Pharmaceuticals announced positive results from their Phase III clinical trial and is expected to submit their Accelerated Marketing Authorization Application to the US FDA in 2023. Novo Nordisk is also conducting a Phase III clinical study for the treatment of NASH with their lead molecule semaglutide, which is already marketed for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and obesity. Akero Therapeutics announced positive results from their Phase IIb clinical study in 2022 and are expected to initiate a Phase III clinical study in 2023 while other companies, including 89Bio, Altimmune, AstraZeneca, Lilly, GNM Bio, NorthSea, Terns, Viking, BMS, BI, Pfizer, Regeneron, Gilead Sciences, have drug candidates for the treatment of NASH that are in less advanced clinical or preclinical development stages.

27

Table of Contents

ERT is the standard of care for the treatment of MPS with current therapies being marketed by BioMarin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Takeda, Sanofi Genzyme, Shire Plc and Ultragenyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Additional ERTs, as well as gene therapy approaches to treating MPS, are in various stages of pre-clinical and clinical development.

Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries could result in even more resources being concentrated among a small number of our competitors. Competition may reduce the number and types of patients available to us to participate in clinical trials, particularly with respect to NASH, because some patients who might have opted to enroll in our trials may instead opt to enroll in a trial being conducted by one of our competitors.

Part of our business strategy involves seeking partnerships from time to time with other organizations or companies, such as our exclusive license and collaboration agreement with CTTQ and potentially a partnership with respect to potential further development of odiparcil. The strong competition between market participants like us who seek such partners could affect our negotiating power and the terms under which we may be able to find a partner if at all. We cannot assure that we will be able to enter into partnerships as and when needed, and if we are unable to enter into development and commercial partnerships and/or sales and marketing arrangements on acceptable terms or timing, or at all, we may be unable to successfully develop and seek regulatory approval for our product candidates and/or effectively market and sell approved products, if any.

Our product candidates may cause undesirable side effects or have other properties that could delay or prevent their regulatory approval, limit the commercial profile of an approved label, or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval, if any.

Results of our trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of certain side effects. In such an event, our or our partners’ trials could be suspended or terminated and the FDA, the EMA, the NMPA or comparable regulatory authorities could order us to cease further development of or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. The drug-related side effects could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

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

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

We may not be able to conduct, or contract others to conduct, animal testing in the future, which could harm our research and development activities.

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

28

Table of Contents

The lack of a reliable non-invasive method for the diagnosis of NASH is likely to present a major challenge to lanifibranor’s market penetration, if ever commercialized.

Liver biopsy is the standard approach for the diagnosis of inflammation and fibrosis associated with NASH. However, the procedure-related morbidity and, in rare cases, mortality, sample errors, costs, patient discomfort and thus lack of patient interest in undergoing the procedure limit its use. As such, only patients with a high risk of NASH, which includes patients with metabolic syndrome and an indication of NAFLD are generally sent for liver biopsy. Because NASH tends to be asymptomatic until the disease progresses, many individuals with NASH remain undiagnosed until the disease has reached its late stages, if at all. The lack of a reliable non-invasive method for the diagnosis of NASH is likely to present a major challenge to lanifibranor’s market penetration, as many practitioners and patients may not be aware that a patient suffers from NASH and requires treatment. As such, use of lanifibranor might not be as wide-spread as our actual target market and this may limit the commercial potential of lanifibranor.

A further challenge to lanifibranor’s market penetration is that currently a liver biopsy is the standard approach for measuring improvement in NASH patients. Because it would be impractical to subject all patients that take lanifibranor, when and if it approved, to regular and repeated liver biopsies, it will be difficult to demonstrate lanifibranor’s effectiveness to practitioners and patients unless and until a reliable non-invasive method for the diagnosis and monitoring of NASH becomes available, as to which there can be no assurance.

While other companies in the industry are currently working on advancing non-invasive diagnostic approaches, none of these has been clinically validated, and the timetable for commercial validation, if at all, is uncertain. Moreover, such diagnostics may also be subject to regulation by FDA or other regulatory authorities as medical devices and may require premarket clearance or approval.

Clinical trials of our product candidates may not uncover all possible adverse effects that patients may experience.

Clinical trials are conducted in representative samples of the potential patient population which may have significant variability. Clinical trials are by design based on a limited number of subjects and of limited duration for exposure to the product used to determine whether, on a potentially statistically significant basis, the planned safety and efficacy of any product candidate can be achieved. As with the results of any statistical sampling, we cannot be sure that all side effects of our product candidates may be uncovered, and it may be the case that only with a significantly larger number of patients exposed to the product candidate for a longer duration, may a more complete safety profile be identified. Further, even larger clinical trials may not identify rare serious adverse effects or the duration of such studies may not be sufficient to identify when those events may occur. There have been other products that have been approved by the regulatory authorities but for which safety concerns have been uncovered following approval. Such safety concerns have led to labelling changes or withdrawal of products from the market, and any of our product candidates may be subject to similar risks.

Although to date we have not seen evidence of significant safety concerns with our product candidates currently in clinical trials, patients treated with our products, if approved, may experience adverse reactions and it is possible that the FDA or other regulatory authorities may ask for additional safety data as a condition of, or in connection with, our efforts to obtain approval of our product candidates. If safety problems occur or are identified after our product candidates reach the market, we may, or regulatory authorities may require us to amend the labeling of our products, recall our products or even withdraw approval for our products.

Our business could be adversely affected by the effects of health epidemics, including the COVID-19 pandemic, in regions where we or third parties on which we rely have significant concentrations of clinical trial sites, manufacturing facilities or other business operations. The COVID-19 pandemic could materially affect our operations, including at our headquarters in France and at our clinical trial sites, as well as the business or operations of our manufacturers, CROs or other third parties with whom we conduct business.

Our business could be adversely affected by health epidemics in regions where we have concentrations of clinical trial sites or other business operations, and could cause significant disruption in the operations of third-party manufacturers, CROs or partners, including our partner CTTQ, which is located in China, upon whom we rely. We have implemented various measures, including work-from-home policies to address and minimize the impact of the various waves of COVID-19 on our employees, partners and customers and to support their health and safety while promoting business continuity. The effects of executive orders and our work-from-home policies may negatively impact productivity, disrupt our business and delay our clinical programs and timelines, the magnitude of which will depend, in part, on the length and severity of the restrictions and other limitations on our ability to conduct our business in the ordinary course.

29

Table of Contents

These and similar, and perhaps more severe, disruptions in our operations could negatively impact our business, operating results and financial condition.

Quarantines, shelter-in-place and similar government orders, or the perception that such orders, shutdowns or other restrictions on the conduct of business operations could occur, related to COVID-19 or other infectious diseases could impact our personnel and the personnel at partners, third-party research and manufacturing facilities in the United States, the European Union, China and other countries. We are working closely with our staff and contractors to manage our supply chain activities and to mitigate potential disruptions in product supply due to the Covid-19 pandemic. However, if the pandemic persists for an extended period of time and begins to impact critical distribution systems, we could experience disruptions in our supply chain and operations. The availability and cost of the products necessary for our activity could also be impacted, in particular for experimental drugs and drugs used as a basis for comparison for clinical trials.

In addition, our clinical trials have been and may continue to be affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, including the surge in COVID-19 cases in China at the end of 2022 and the beginning of 2023. Clinical site activation and patient enrollment have been and may continue to be delayed due to prioritization of hospital resources toward the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to delays in site activation, recruitment and screening of new patients, in addition to higher than anticipated screen failure rates, the results of the Phase II NAFLD trial of lanifibranor are now expected by the middle of the second quarter of 2023, as opposed to the first half of 2022 as initially expected. The COVID-19 pandemic also created a backlog in certain healthcare systems in 2021 and 2022, which made it more difficult for us to contract with potential clinical trial sites for the Phase IIa LEGEND trial of lanifibranor in combination with empagliflozin in patients with NASH and T2D. Some patients may not be able to comply with clinical trial protocols if quarantines impede patient movement or interrupt healthcare services. Similarly, our ability to recruit and retain patients and principal investigators and site staff who, as healthcare providers, may have heightened exposure to COVID-19 and adversely impact our clinical trial operations. Furthermore, changes in local regulations as part of a response to the COVID-19 outbreak may require us to change the ways in which our clinical trials are conducted, which may result in unexpected costs, or discontinue the clinical trials altogether especially in case of delays due to necessary interactions with local regulators, ethics committees and other important agencies and contractors triggered by limitations in employee resources or forced furlough of government employees. In addition, under our license and collaboration agreement with CTTQ, it is anticipated that CTTQ will either join our ongoing NATiV3 Phase III clinical trial of lanifibranor in NASH or undertake an independent study. Due to the surge in COVID-19 cases in China at the end of 2022 and the beginning of 2023, CTTQ may encounter delays in its participation in the NATiV3 Phase III clinical trial or in the initiation of an independent study. For these reasons, the COVID-19 crisis could still have a significant impact on the development of lanifibranor and in particular on the Phase III clinical trial in NASH.

Furthermore, changes in local regulations as part of a response to the COVID-19 pandemic may require us or our partners to change the ways in which its clinical trials are conducted or to change partners, which may result in unexpected costs, or the discontinuation of clinical trials altogether, especially if delays are due to necessary interactions with local regulators, ethics committees and other important agencies and contractors. To date, we have not experienced delays in the timing of our interactions with regulatory authorities. However, we could be affected by such delays, for example, due to the absence of regulatory authority personnel, their inability to conduct the in-person inspections required for regulatory approval or the diversion of efforts and attention of regulatory authorities to COVID-19. Finally, we could face the refusal of the EMA or the FDA to accept data from clinical trials conducted in geographical areas affected by the pandemic.

Although the impact of COVID-19 on our business and operations have been limited so far, the impact from the global pandemic continues to rapidly evolve. Given the general disruption of global health care systems and other risks and uncertainties associated with the pandemic, the extent to which COVID-19 may affect our activity and clinical trials will depend on future developments, which cannot be predicted with certainty, such as the final geographic distribution of the disease, its duration, restrictions on travel, the progress of vaccination and the social distancing measures in the European Union, the United States, China and other countries, business closures or disruptions and the effectiveness of measures taken in these countries. In addition, the extent of the negative impact of this epidemic on the financial markets and on our share price is unknown at this time.

30

Table of Contents

Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties

We may not be successful in establishing development and commercialization partnerships, including with respect to odiparcil, which could adversely affect, and potentially prohibit, our ability to develop our product candidates.

Developing pharmaceutical products, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approval, establishing manufacturing capabilities and marketing approved products are expensive. Accordingly, we have sought and may in the future seek to enter into partnerships with companies that have more resources and experience. For example, in September 2022, we entered into an exclusive license and collaboration agreement with CTTQ to develop and commercialize lanifibranor in Mainland China, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Macau Special Administrative Region and Taiwan. In situations where we enter into a development and commercial partnership arrangement for a product candidate, we may also seek to establish additional partnerships for development and commercialization in territories outside of those addressed by the first partnership arrangement for such product candidate. If we are unable to enter into any additional development and commercial partnerships and/or sales and marketing arrangements on acceptable terms, or at all, we may be unable to successfully develop and seek regulatory approval for our product candidates and/or effectively market and sell approved products, if any.

In 2020, we decided to focus our clinical efforts on the development of lanifibranor and suspend our clinical efforts relating to odiparcil. In the future, we may partner with third-party partners for the development and commercialization of odiparcil or other product candidates. If we are unable to obtain a partner for odiparcil or any of our product candidates, we may be unable to advance the development of odiparcil which could have a negative impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition and growth prospects. Even if we are able to establish such a partnership, there can no assurance that such partnership will be successful. If we partner with a third party for development and commercialization of odiparcil, we can expect to relinquish some or all of the control over the potential success of odiparcil to the third party. We will likely have limited control over the amount and timing of resources that our partners dedicate to the development or commercialization of odiparcil, or any other product candidate. Our ability to generate revenues from these arrangements will depend on our partners’ abilities and efforts to successfully perform the functions assigned to them in these arrangements. Partnerships involving odiparcil, or our other product candidates, could pose numerous risks to us, including the following:

31

Table of Contents

We may not be successful in maintaining development and commercialization partnerships, and any partner may not devote sufficient resources to the development or commercialization of our product candidates or may otherwise fail in development or commercialization efforts, which could adversely affect our ability to develop certain of our product candidates and our financial condition and operating results.

The partnership arrangements that we have established, and any partnership arrangements that we may enter into in the future, may not ultimately be successful, which could have a negative impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition and growth prospects. It is also possible that a partner may not devote sufficient resources to the development or commercialization of our product candidate, decides to no longer consider the development or commercialization of a drug candidate as a priority, or may otherwise fail in development or commercialization efforts, in which event the development and commercialization of such product candidate could be delayed or terminated and our business could be substantially harmed. If we partner with a third party for development and commercialization of a product candidate, we can expect to relinquish some or all of the control of the future success of that product candidates to the third party. For example, we previously entered into a partnership with AbbVie for the development of cedirogant, which ended in October 2022 when AbbVie decided to stop the development of cedirogant following the analysis of a nonclinical toxicology study. In addition, we previously entered into a partnership with Boehringer Ingelheim, or BI, for the development of new treatments for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, which ended in November 2019 following BI’s decision to prioritize other products in its portfolio.

In addition, in September 2022, we entered into an exclusive license and collaboration agreement with CTTQ to develop and commercialize lanifibranor under which we granted CTTQ an exclusive right (i) to develop, import, export, use, manufacture, offer for sale, promote, market, distribute, sell and otherwise commercialize any pharmaceutical product containing lanifibranor and (ii) to develop and manufacture lanifibranor within Mainland China, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Macau Special Administrative Region and Taiwan, in exchange for an upfront payment upon signing of the agreement, certain payments upon the achievement of specified development, regulatory and commercial milestones and specified royalty rights, if approved. CTTQ is expected to either join the ongoing Phase III NATiV3 clinical trial evaluating lanifibranor in NASH or conduct a stand-alone study. If CTTQ runs a successful stand-alone study of lanifibranor, we may have to relinquish all or part of the control over the future development and commercialization of lanifibranor in China to CTTQ.

In addition, the terms of any partnership or other arrangement that we establish may not be favorable to us or may not be perceived as favorable, which may negatively impact the trading price of our ordinary shares or ADSs. In some cases, we may be responsible for continuing development of a product candidate or research program under a partnership and the payment we receive from our partner may be insufficient to cover the cost of this development. Moreover, partnerships and sales and marketing arrangements are complex and time consuming to negotiate, document and implement and they may require substantial resources to maintain.

32

Table of Contents

We are subject to a number of additional risks associated with our dependence on partnerships with third parties, the occurrence of which could cause our partnership arrangements to fail. Conflicts may arise between us and partners, such as conflicts concerning the interpretation of clinical data, the achievement of milestones, the interpretation of financial provisions or the ownership of intellectual property developed during the partnership. If any such conflicts arise, a partner may have significantly greater financial and managerial resources on which to draw and could act in its own self-interest, which may be adverse to our best interests. Any such disagreement between us and a partner could result in one or more of the following, each of which could delay or prevent the development or commercialization of our product candidates, and in turn prevent us from generating sufficient revenues to achieve or maintain profitability:

If our partnerships on research and development candidates do not result in the successful development and commercialization of products or if one of our partners terminates its agreement with us, we may not receive any future research funding or milestone or royalty payments under the partnership. If we do not receive the funding we expect under these agreements, the development of our product candidates could be delayed and we may need additional resources to develop product candidates.

We rely on third parties to conduct our pre-clinical studies and clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates and our business could be substantially harmed.

We have relied upon and plan to continue to rely upon CROs to monitor and manage data for our pre-clinical and clinical programs. We rely on these parties for execution of our pre-clinical studies and clinical trials, and we control only certain aspects of their activities. We and our CROs also rely upon clinical sites and investigators for the performance of our clinical trials in accordance with the applicable protocols and applicable legal, regulatory and scientific standards. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies and trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol and applicable legal and regulatory requirements and scientific standards, and our reliance on CROs as well as clinical sites and investigators does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We, our CROs, as well as the clinical sites and investigators are required to comply with current GCPs, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA, the Competent Authorities of the Member States of the European Economic Area, or EEA, and comparable regulatory authorities for all of our products in clinical development.

Regulatory authorities enforce these GCPs through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, investigators and clinical sites. If we, any of our CROs or any of the clinical sites or investigators fail to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, the EMA, the NMPA or comparable regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with GCP regulations. We also cannot assure you that our CROs, as well as the clinical sites and investigators, will perform our clinical trials in accordance with the applicable protocols as well as applicable legal and regulatory requirements and scientific standards, or report the results obtained in a timely and accurate manner. Furthermore, the operations of our CROs may be constrained or disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to GCPs, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under cGMP regulations. While we have agreements governing activities of our CROs, we have limited influence over the actual performance of our CROs as well as the performance of clinical sites and investigators. In addition, significant portions of the clinical trials for our product candidates are and will continue to be conducted outside of France, which makes it more difficult for us to monitor CROs as well as clinical sites and investigators and perform visits of

33

Table of Contents

our clinical sites, and requires us to rely heavily on CROs to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials in accordance with the applicable protocols and compliance with applicable regulations, including GCPs. Failure to comply with applicable protocols and regulations in the conduct of the clinical trials for our product candidates may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.

Some of our CROs have an ability to terminate their respective agreements with us if it can be reasonably demonstrated that the safety of the subjects participating in our clinical trials warrants such termination, if we make a general assignment for the benefit of our creditors or if we are liquidated.

If any of our relationships with these CROs terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs or to do so on commercially reasonable terms. In addition, our CROs are not our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such CROs, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our pre-clinical and clinical programs. If CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced, or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure (including by clinical sites or investigators) to adhere to our clinical protocols, regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our clinical trials 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 results of operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase substantially and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed significantly.

Switching or adding additional CROs involves additional cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO commences work. As a result, delays may occur, which can materially impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. Though we carefully manage our relationships with our CROs, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and prospects.

We rely completely on third parties to manufacture our pre-clinical and clinical drug supplies and we intend to rely on third parties to produce commercial supplies of any approved product candidate. 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 may have limited capacity.

If, for any reason, we were to experience an unexpected loss of supply of our product candidates or placebo or comparator drug used in certain of our clinical trials, whether as a result of manufacturing, supply or storage issues or otherwise, we could experience delays, disruptions, suspensions or terminations of, or be required to restart or repeat, any pending or ongoing clinical trials. We do not currently have, nor do we plan to acquire, the infrastructure or capability internally to manufacture our pre-clinical and clinical drug supplies and we lack the resources and the capability to manufacture any of our product candidates on a clinical or commercial scale. The facilities used by our contract manufacturers or other third-party manufacturers to manufacture our product candidates are subject to the FDA’s, the EMA’s, the NMPA’s and other comparable regulatory authorities’ pre-approval inspections that will be conducted after we submit our NDA to the FDA or the required approval documents to any other relevant regulatory authority. In addition, such facilities are subject to regulatory inspections and investigations in the ordinary course of business. We do not control the implementation of the manufacturing process of, and are completely dependent on, our contract manufacturers or other third-party manufacturers for compliance with the cGMPs for manufacture of both active drug substances and finished drug products. If our contract manufacturers or other third-party manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to applicable specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA, the EMA, the NMPA or others, or if the operations of such manufacturers are impacted by regulatory investigations, we will not be able to secure and/or maintain regulatory approvals for our products manufactured at these facilities. In addition, we have no control over the ability of our contract manufacturers or other third-party manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the FDA, the EMA, the NMPA or other comparable regulatory authority finds deficiencies at these facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates or if it withdraws any approval because of deficiencies at these facilities in the future, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product candidates, if approved. Further, our agreements with our contract and other third-party manufacturers generally limit these parties’ liability to us and we therefore may not be able to obtain reimbursement for losses or damages that we incur as a result of actions by such parties.

34

Table of Contents

We rely on our manufacturers to purchase from third-party suppliers the materials necessary to produce our product candidates for our clinical trials. There are a limited number of suppliers for raw materials that we use to manufacture our drugs and there may be a need to assess alternate suppliers to prevent a possible disruption of the manufacture of the materials necessary to produce our product candidates for our clinical trials, and if approved, for commercial sale. We do not have any control over the process or timing of the acquisition of these raw materials by our manufacturers. Moreover, we currently do not have any agreements for the commercial production of these raw materials. Although we generally do not begin a clinical trial unless we believe we have access to a sufficient supply of a product candidate to complete the clinical trial, any significant delay in the supply of a product candidate, or the raw material components thereof, for an ongoing clinical trial due to the need to replace a contract manufacturer or other third-party manufacturer could considerably delay completion of our clinical trials, product testing and potential regulatory approval of our product candidates. If our manufacturers or we are unable to purchase these raw materials after regulatory approval has been obtained for our product candidates, the commercial launch of our product candidates would be delayed or there would be a shortage in supply, which would impair our ability to generate revenues from the sale of our product candidates. Additionally, if we receive regulatory approval for our product candidates, we may experience unforeseen difficulties or challenges in the manufacture of our product candidates on a commercial scale compared to the manufacture for clinical purposes.

We expect to continue to depend on contract manufacturers or other third-party manufacturers for the foreseeable future. We currently obtain our supplies of finished drug product through individual purchase orders. We have not entered into long-term agreements with our current contract manufacturers or with any alternate fill/finish suppliers. Although we intend to do so prior to any commercial launch in order to ensure that we maintain adequate supplies of finished drug product, we may be unable to enter into such an agreement or do so on commercially reasonable terms, which could have a material adverse impact upon our business.

We may not realize the benefits expected through the license and collaboration agreement with CTTQ and the license and collaboration agreement could have adverse effects on our business.

In September 2022, we entered into an exclusive license and collaboration agreement with CTTQ, a corporation organized under the laws of China and subsidiary of Sino Biopharm. The purpose of the license and collaboration agreement is to develop and commercialize lanifibranor in Mainland China, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Macau Special Administrative Region and Taiwan. Under the terms of the license and collaboration agreement, CTTQ has the sole right and is solely responsible for all aspects of the commercialization of the licensed products in the territory, subject to regulatory approval. The license and collaboration agreement provides that CTTQ will either join our ongoing NATiV3 Phase III clinical trial of lanifibranor in NASH or undertake an independent study. In connection with the license, CTTQ paid us an upfront payment and is obligated to make additional payments upon the achievement of certain development, regulatory and commercial milestones. In addition, subject to regulatory approval, CTTQ is obligated to pay to us tiered royalties based on incremental annual net sales by CCTQ. There is no assurance that any of the milestones will be achieved or that we will receive any milestone payments

Adverse changes in the economic and political policies relating to China or the surge in COVID-19 cases in China at the end of 2022 and the beginning of 2023 could have a material adverse effect on the expected benefits from this partnership. An escalation of trade tensions between the U.S. and China has resulted in trade restrictions that could harm our ability to participate in Chinese markets and numerous additional such restrictions have been threatened by both the Chinese and U.S. governments. We may find it impossible to comply with these or other conflicting regulations in the U.S., EMEA, France and China, which could make it difficult or impossible to realize the benefits from this partnership. Sustained uncertainty about, or worsening of, current global economic conditions and further escalation of trade tensions between the U.S. and its trading partners, especially China, could result in a global economic slowdown and long-term changes to global trade, including retaliatory trade restrictions that could further restrict our activities in China. Moreover, the surge in COVID-19 cases in China at the end of 2022 and the beginning of 2023 may cause delays in CTTQ’s potential participation in the NATiV3 Phase III clinical trial or in the initiation of a potential independent study.

In addition, the Chinese economic, legal, and political landscape differs from other countries in many respects, including the level of government involvement and regulation, control of foreign exchange and allocation of resources, and uncertainty regarding the enforceability and scope of protection for contractual and intellectual property rights. The Chinese government has exercised and continues to exercise substantial control over the Chinese economy through regulation and state ownership. The laws, regulations and legal requirements in China are also subject to frequent changes and the exact obligations under and enforcement of laws and regulations are often subject to unpublished internal government interpretations and policies which makes it challenging to ascertain compliance with such laws and, at times, enforcement of agreements.

35

Table of Contents

Changes in political conditions in China and changes in the state of geopolitical relations are difficult to predict and could adversely affect the benefits under the license and collaboration agreement.

We are dependent on single-source suppliers for some of the components and materials used in, and the processes required to develop, our development candidates and investigational medicines.

We currently depend on single-source suppliers for some of the components and materials used in lanifibranor. We cannot ensure that these suppliers will remain in business, have sufficient capacity or supply to meet our needs, or that they will not be purchased by one of our competitors or another company that is not interested in continuing to work with us. Our use of single-source suppliers of raw materials, components and finished goods exposes us to several risks, including:

There are, in general, relatively few alternative sources of supply for substitute components. These vendors may be unable or unwilling to meet our future demands for our clinical trials or commercial sale.

Establishing additional or replacement suppliers for these components, materials, and processes could take a substantial amount of time and it may be difficult to establish replacement suppliers who meet regulatory requirements. Any disruption in supply from any single-source supplier could lead to supply delays or interruptions which would damage our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. If we have to switch to a replacement supplier, the manufacture and delivery of our product candidates could be interrupted for an extended period, which could adversely affect our business. Establishing additional or replacement suppliers for any of the components used in our product candidates, if required, may not be accomplished quickly. If we are able to find a replacement supplier, the replacement supplier would need to be qualified and may require additional regulatory authority approval, which could result in further delay.

Any interruption or delay in the supply of components or materials, or our inability to obtain components or materials from alternate sources at acceptable prices in a timely manner, could impair our ability to meet the demand for our investigational medicines.

36

Table of Contents

Manufacturing issues may arise that could increase product and regulatory approval costs or delay commercialization of our products.

As the manufacturing processes are scaled up they may reveal manufacturing challenges or previously unknown impurities that could require resolution in order to proceed with our planned clinical trials and obtain regulatory approval for the commercial marketing of our products. In the future, we may identify manufacturing issues or impurities that could result in delays in the clinical program and regulatory approval for our products, increases in our operating expenses, or failure to obtain or maintain approval for our products. Our reliance on third-party manufacturers entails risks, including the following:

Any of these events could lead to delays in any clinical study we may undertake, failure to obtain regulatory approval or impact our ability to successfully commercialize any product candidates. Some of these events could be the basis for FDA or other regulatory authorities’ action, including injunction, recall, seizure, or total or partial suspension of production.

37

Table of Contents

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If we are unable to obtain and maintain patent protection for our product candidates, or if the patent protection obtained is not sufficiently broad in scope or is non-exclusive, our competitors could develop and commercialize products and technology similar or identical to our product candidates, and our ability to successfully commercialize any product candidates we may develop may be adversely affected.

Our commercial success depends on obtaining and maintaining proprietary rights to our product candidates and other compounds in development for the treatment of NASH, MPS and other diseases, as well as successfully defending these rights against third party challenges. We will only be able to protect our product candidates and our other compounds in development, and their uses from unauthorized use by third parties to the extent that valid and enforceable patents or effectively protected trade secrets, cover them.

Our ability to obtain patent protection for our product candidates and other compounds in development is uncertain due to a number of factors, including:

Even if we have or obtain patents covering our product candidates or compositions, we may still be barred from making, using and selling our product candidates or technologies because of the patent rights of others. Others may have filed, and in the future may file, patent applications covering compositions or products that are similar or identical to ours. If a patent owned by a third party covers one of our product candidates or its use, this could materially affect our ability to develop the product candidate or sell the resulting product if approved. Because patent applications in the United States are not published until 18 months from their priority date, there may be currently pending applications unknown to us that may later result in issued patents that our product candidates or compositions may infringe. Additionally, because the scope of claims in pending patent applications can change, there may be pending applications whose claims do not currently cover any of our product candidates but may be altered such that one or more of our product candidates are covered when the resulting patent issues. These patent applications may have priority over patent applications filed by us.

38

Table of Contents

Moreover, even if we are able to obtain patent protection, such patent protection may be insufficient to achieve our business objectives. For example, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and its scope can be reinterpreted after issuance, which could allow others develop products that are similar to, or better than, ours in a way that is not covered by the claims of our patents. Furthermore, some of our owned and in-licensed patents and patent applications are, and may in the future be, co-owned with third parties. If we are unable to obtain an exclusive license to any such third party co-owners’ interest in such patents or patent applications, such co-owners may be able to license their rights to other third parties, including our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. In addition, we may need the cooperation of any such co-owners of our patents in order to enforce such patents against third parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us. Therefore, even if patent applications we rely on issue as patents, they may not provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent third parties from competing with us, or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage.

Obtaining and maintaining a patent portfolio entails significant expense and resources. Part of the expense includes periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees, various other governmental fees on patents and/or applications due in several stages over the lifetime of patents and/or applications, as well as the cost associated with complying with numerous procedural provisions during the patent application process. We may or may not choose to pursue or maintain protection for particular inventions. In addition, there are situations in which failure to make certain payments or noncompliance with certain requirements in the patent process can result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. If we choose to forgo patent protection or allow a patent application or patent to lapse purposefully or inadvertently, our competitive position could suffer.

Moreover, in future partnerships, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing or prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain the patents, covering technology subject to our partnership or license agreements with third parties. In addition, in future partnerships, our counterparty may have the right to enforce the patent rights subject to the applicable agreement without our involvement or consent or to otherwise control the enforcement of such patent rights. Therefore, these patents and patent applications may not be prosecuted or enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business.

Legal actions to enforce our patent rights can be expensive and may involve the diversion of significant management time. In addition, these legal actions could be unsuccessful and could also result in the invalidation of our patents or a finding that they are unenforceable. We may or may not choose to pursue litigation or other actions against those that have infringed on our patents, or used them without authorization, due to the associated expense and time commitment of monitoring these activities. If we fail to protect or to enforce our intellectual property rights successfully, our competitive position could suffer, which could harm our results of operations.

Pharmaceutical patents and patent applications involve highly complex legal and factual questions, which, if determined adversely to us, could negatively impact our patent position.

The patent positions of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies can be highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions. The interpretation and breadth of claims allowed in some patents covering pharmaceutical compositions may be uncertain and difficult to determine, and are often affected materially by the facts and circumstances that pertain to the patented compositions and the related patent claims. The standards of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, the European Patent Office, and other foreign counterparts are sometimes uncertain and could change in the future.

Consequently, the issuance and scope of patents cannot be predicted with certainty. Patents, if issued, may be challenged, invalidated or circumvented. Certain U.S. patents and patent applications may also be subject to interference proceedings, and U.S. patents may be subject to reexamination proceedings, post-grant review and/or inter partes review and derivation proceedings in the USPTO. European patents and other foreign patents may be subject also to opposition or comparable proceedings in the corresponding foreign patent office, which could result in either loss of the patent or denial of the patent application or loss or reduction in the scope of one or more of the claims of the patent or patent application. In addition, such interference, reexamination, post-grant review, inter partes review and opposition proceedings may be costly. Accordingly, rights under any issued patents may not provide us with sufficient protection against competitive products or processes.

39

Table of Contents

In addition, changes in or different interpretations of patent laws in the United States, Europe, and other jurisdictions may permit others to use our discoveries or to develop and commercialize our technology and products without providing any compensation to us, or may limit the number of patents or claims we can obtain. The laws of some countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as U.S. and European laws and those countries may lack adequate rules and procedures for defending our intellectual property rights. If we fail to obtain and maintain patent protection and trade secret protection of our product candidates, we could lose our competitive advantage and competition we face would increase, reducing any potential revenues and adversely affecting our ability to attain or maintain profitability.

Developments in patent law could have a negative impact on our business.

As is the case with other biopharmaceutical companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biopharmaceutical industry involves both technological and legal complexity and is therefore costly, time consuming and inherently uncertain. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States could increase the uncertainties and costs. Recent patent reform legislation in the United States and other countries, including the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the Leahy-Smith Act), signed into law on September 16, 2011, could increase those uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art and provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents. These include allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that the other statutory requirements are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third party was the first to invent the claimed invention. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

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

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

In addition to patent protection, because we operate in the highly technical field of development of therapies, we rely in part on trade secret protection in order to protect our proprietary technology and processes. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. It is our policy to enter into confidentiality and intellectual property assignment agreements with our employees, consultants, outside scientific partners, sponsored researchers, and other advisors. These agreements generally require that the other party keep confidential and not disclose to third parties any confidential information developed by the party or made known to the party by us during the course of the party’s relationship with us. These agreements also generally provide that inventions conceived by the party in the course of rendering services to us will be our exclusive property. However, these agreements may not be honored and may not effectively assign intellectual property rights to us. Adequate remedies may not exist in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure of our confidential information. The disclosure of our trade secrets would impair our competitive position and may materially harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

40

Table of Contents

In addition to contractual measures, we try to protect the confidential nature of our proprietary information using physical and technological security measures. Such measures may not, for example, in the case of misappropriation of a trade secret by an employee or third party with authorized access, provide adequate protection for our proprietary information. Our security measures may not prevent an employee or consultant from misappropriating our trade secrets and providing them to a competitor, and recourse we take against such misconduct may not provide an adequate remedy to protect our interests fully. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret can be difficult, expensive, and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, courts outside the United States may be less willing to protect trade secrets, with protection varying across Europe and in other countries. Trade secrets may be independently developed by others in a manner that could prevent legal recourse by us. If any of our confidential or proprietary information, such as our trade secrets, were to be disclosed or misappropriated, or if any such information was independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position could be harmed.

We will not seek to protect our intellectual property rights in all jurisdictions throughout the world and we may not be able to adequately enforce our intellectual property rights even in the jurisdictions where we seek protection.

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on our product candidates in all countries and jurisdictions throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries could be less extensive than those in the United States and Europe, assuming that rights are obtained in the United States and Europe. Furthermore, even if patents are granted based on our European patent applications, we may not choose to perfect or maintain our rights in all available European countries. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as laws in the United States and Europe. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions. The statutory deadlines for pursuing patent protection in individual foreign jurisdictions are based on the priority dates of each of our patent applications.

Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we do not pursue and obtain 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 and Europe. 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. Even if we pursue and obtain issued patents in particular jurisdictions, our patent claims or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent third parties from so competing.

The laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States and Europe. Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in certain foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of some countries, particularly developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, especially those relating to pharmaceuticals or biotechnologies. This could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents, if obtained, or the misappropriation of our other intellectual property rights. For example, many foreign countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner must grant licenses to third parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against third parties, including government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, patents may provide limited or no benefit. Patent protection must ultimately be sought on a country-by-country basis, which is an expensive and time-consuming process with uncertain outcomes. Accordingly, we may choose not to seek patent protection in certain countries, and we will not have the benefit of patent protection in such countries.

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, could put 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. In addition, changes in the law and legal decisions by courts in the United States, Europe and other jurisdictions may affect our ability to obtain adequate protection for our technology and the enforcement of intellectual property.

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.

41

Table of Contents

We may be subject to claims by third parties asserting ownership or commercial rights to inventions we develop or obligations to make compensatory payments to employees.

Third parties may in the future make claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our intellectual property. We have written agreements with partners that provide for the ownership of intellectual property arising from our partnerships. These agreements provide that we must negotiate certain commercial rights with partners with respect to joint inventions or inventions made by our partners that arise from the results of the partnership. In some instances, there may not be adequate written provisions to address clearly the resolution of intellectual property rights that may arise from a partnership. If we cannot successfully negotiate sufficient ownership and commercial rights to the inventions that result from our use of a third-party partner’s materials where required, or if disputes otherwise arise with respect to the intellectual property developed with the use of a partner’s samples, we may be limited in our ability to capitalize on the market potential of these inventions. In addition, we may face claims by third parties that our agreements with employees, contractors, or consultants obligating them to assign intellectual property to us are ineffective, or in conflict with prior or competing contractual obligations of assignment, which could result in ownership disputes regarding intellectual property we have developed or will develop and interfere with our ability to capture the commercial value of such inventions. Litigation may be necessary to resolve an ownership dispute, and if we are not successful, we may be precluded from using certain intellectual property, or may lose our exclusive rights in that intellectual property. Either outcome could have an adverse impact on our business.

While it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing or obtaining such an agreement with each party who, in fact, develops intellectual property that we regard as our own. In addition, such agreements may be breached or may not be self-executing, and we may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property. If we fail in prosecuting or defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel.

Third parties may assert that our employees or consultants have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information or misappropriated trade secrets.

We employ individuals who were previously employed at universities, pharmaceutical companies or biopharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees and consultants 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 a 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. 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.

A dispute concerning the infringement or misappropriation of our proprietary rights or the proprietary rights of others could be time consuming and costly, and an unfavorable outcome could harm our business.

Our success will depend in part on our ability to operate without infringing the intellectual property and proprietary rights of third parties. We cannot assure you that our business, products and methods do not or will not infringe the patents or other intellectual property rights of third parties.

42

Table of Contents

There is significant litigation in the pharmaceutical industry regarding patent and other intellectual property rights. While we are not currently subject to any pending intellectual property litigation, and are not aware of any such threatened litigation, we may be exposed to future litigation by third parties based on claims that our product candidates, technologies or activities infringe the intellectual property rights of others. If our development activities are found to infringe any such intellectual property rights, we may have to pay significant damages or seek licenses to such rights. For example, a patentee could prevent us from using the patented drugs or compositions. We may need to resort to litigation to enforce a patent issued to us, to protect our trade secrets, or to determine the scope and validity of third-party proprietary rights. From time to time, we may hire scientific personnel or consultants formerly employed by other companies involved in one or more areas similar to the activities conducted by us. Either we or these individuals may be subject to allegations of trade secret misappropriation or other similar claims as a result of prior affiliations. Even if we are successful in these proceedings, we may incur substantial costs and divert management time and attention in pursuing these proceedings, which could have a material adverse effect on us. If we are unable to avoid infringing the rights of others, we may be required to seek a license, defend an infringement action or challenge the validity of such rights in court, or redesign our products. Patent and other intellectual property litigation is costly and time consuming. We may not have sufficient resources to bring these actions to a successful conclusion. Any adverse ruling or perception of an adverse ruling in defending ourselves against these claims could have a material adverse impact on our cash position and the price of our ordinary shares or ADSs. Any legal action against us or our partners could lead to:

Any of these risks coming to fruition could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Issued patents covering our product candidates could be found to be 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 our product candidate, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our product candidate is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge include alleged failures to meet any of several statutory requirements in most jurisdictions, including lack of novelty, obviousness or non-enablement. In the United States, grounds for unenforceability assertions include allegations that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO, 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 of our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our product candidates or competitive products. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable.

With respect to validity, 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 product candidates. Such a loss of patent protection would have a material adverse impact on our business.

43

Table of Contents

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

Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates such as lanifibranor, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. We expect to seek extensions of patent terms in the United States and, if available, in other countries where we are prosecuting patents. In the United States, the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 permits extension of the term of one U.S. patent that includes at least one claim covering the composition of matter of an FDA-approved drug, an FDA-approved method of treatment using the drug and/or a method of manufacturing the FDA-approved drug. The extended patent term cannot exceed the shorter of five years beyond the non-extended expiration of the patent or 14 years from the date of the FDA approval of the drug. However, the applicable authorities, including the FDA and the USPTO in the United States, and any equivalent regulatory authority in other countries, may not agree with our assessment of whether such extensions are available, and may refuse to grant extensions to our patents, or may grant more limited extensions than we request. Further, we may not elect to extend the most beneficial patent to us or the claims underlying the patent that we choose to extend could be invalidated. If any of the foregoing occurs, our competitors may be able to take advantage of our investment in development and clinical trials by referencing our clinical and pre-clinical data and launch their drug earlier than might otherwise be the case.

Intellectual property rights do not address all potential threats to any competitive advantage we may have.

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

44

Table of Contents

If our trademarks and trade names are not adequately protected, then we may not be able to build name recognition in our markets of interest and our business may be adversely affected.

Our registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names may be challenged, infringed, circumvented or declared generic or determined to be infringing on other marks. We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names, which we need to build name recognition by potential partners or customers in our markets of interest. Over the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected. In addition, some of our trademarks may conflict with trademarks of others. In the event of a conflict, a third party could bring claims against us that could cause us to incur substantial expenses or restrict our ability to use certain marks. Any of the foregoing could have an adverse effect on our business.

Risks Related to Our Organization, Structure and Operation

Our future success depends on our ability to retain the members of our management and to attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel. If we are not successful in attracting and retaining highly qualified personnel, we may not be able to successfully implement our business strategy.

Our industry has experienced a high rate of turnover of management personnel in recent years. Our ability to compete in the highly competitive biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified managerial, scientific and medical personnel. We are highly dependent on our management, scientific and medical personnel, especially our executive officers: Frédéric Cren, our Chief Executive Officer, and Pierre Broqua, our Deputy Chief Executive Officer and Chief Scientific Officer, whose services are critical to the successful implementation of our product candidate acquisition, development and regulatory strategies. We are not aware of any present intention of any of these individuals to leave our company. Although we maintain “key man” insurance with respect to certain of our key employees, this insurance may be insufficient to compensate us for the losses we may incur if we no longer have the services of such key employees. In order to induce valuable employees to continue their employment with us, we have provided founder’s share warrants (bons de souscription de parts de créateur d’entreprise), share warrants (bons de souscription d’actions) and free shares (actions gratuites) that vest over time. The value to employees of such warrants and free shares that vest over time is significantly affected by movements in our share price that are beyond our control, and may at any time be insufficient to counteract more lucrative offers from other companies.

Despite our efforts to retain valuable employees, members of our management, scientific and development teams may terminate their employment with us. The loss of the services of any of the members of management or other key employees and our inability to find suitable replacements could harm our business, financial condition and prospects. Our success also depends on our ability to continue to attract, retain and motivate highly skilled junior, mid-level, and senior managers as well as junior, mid-level, and senior scientific and medical personnel.

We may not be able to attract or retain qualified management and scientific personnel in the future due to the intense competition for a limited number of qualified personnel among biopharmaceutical, biotechnology, pharmaceutical and other businesses. Many of the other pharmaceutical companies that we compete against for qualified personnel have greater financial and other resources, different risk profiles and a longer history in the industry than we do. They also may provide more diverse opportunities and better chances for career advancement. Some of these characteristics may be more appealing to high quality candidates than what we have to offer. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high quality personnel, the rate and success at which we can develop and commercialize product candidates will be limited.

If we fail to manage our growth effectively, our ability to develop and commercialize products could suffer.

We expect that if our drug discovery efforts continue to generate drug candidates, our clinical drug candidates continue to progress in development, and we continue to build our development, medical and commercial organizations, we will require significant additional investment in personnel, management and resources. Our ability to achieve our research, development and commercialization objectives depends on our ability to respond effectively to these demands and expand our internal organization, systems, controls and facilities to accommodate additional anticipated growth. If we are unable to manage our growth effectively, our business could be harmed and our ability to execute our business strategy could suffer.

45

Table of Contents

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

We face an inherent risk of product liability as a result of the clinical testing of our product candidates and will face an even greater risk if we commercialize any products. For example, we may be sued if any product we develop allegedly causes injury or is found to be otherwise unsuitable during product testing, manufacturing, marketing or sale. Any such product liability claims may include allegations of defects in manufacturing, defects in design, a failure to warn of dangers inherent in the product, negligence, strict liability and a breach of warranties. Physicians and patients may not comply with any warnings that identify known potential adverse effects and patients who should not use our products. Claims could also be asserted under state consumer protection acts. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to stop development or, if approved, limit commercialization of our product candidates. Even successful defense would require significant financial and management resources. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

Our inability to obtain and retain sufficient product liability insurance at an acceptable cost to protect against potential product liability claims could prevent or inhibit the development or commercialization of our product candidates. We currently carry clinical trial liability insurance at levels which we believe are appropriate for our clinical trials. Although we maintain such insurance, any claim that may be brought against us could result in a court judgment or settlement in an amount that is not covered, in whole or in part, by our insurance or that is in excess of the limits of our insurance coverage. Our insurance policies also have various exclusions, and we may be subject to a product liability claim for which we have no coverage. We will have to pay any amounts awarded by a court or negotiated in a settlement that exceed our coverage limitations or that are not covered by our insurance, and we may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient capital to pay such amounts.

Risks from the improper conduct of employees, agents, contractors, or partners could adversely affect our reputation and our business, prospects, operating results, and financial condition.

We cannot ensure that our compliance controls, policies, and procedures will in every instance protect us from acts committed by our employees, agents, contractors, or partners that would violate the laws or regulations of the jurisdictions in which we operate, including, without limitation, healthcare, employment, foreign corrupt practices, environmental, competition, and patient privacy and other privacy laws and regulations. Such improper actions could subject us to civil or criminal investigations, and monetary and injunctive penalties, and could adversely impact our ability to conduct business, operating results, and reputation.

46

Table of Contents

In particular, our business activities may be subject to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or FCPA, and similar anti-bribery or anti-corruption laws, regulations or rules of other countries in which we operate, including the U.K. Bribery Act. The FCPA generally prohibits offering, promising, giving, or authorizing others to give anything of value, either directly or indirectly, to a non-U.S. government official in order to influence official action, or otherwise obtain or retain business. The FCPA also requires public companies to make and keep books and records that accurately and fairly reflect the transactions of the corporation and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls. Our business is heavily regulated and therefore involves significant interaction with public officials, including officials of non-U.S. governments. Additionally, in many other countries, the health care providers who prescribe pharmaceuticals are employed by their government, and the purchasers of pharmaceuticals are government entities; therefore, our dealings with these prescribers and purchasers are subject to regulation under the FCPA. Recently the SEC and Department of Justice have increased their FCPA enforcement activities with respect to pharmaceutical companies. There is no certainty that all of our employees, agents, contractors, or partners, or those of our affiliates, will comply with all applicable laws and regulations, particularly given the high level of complexity of these laws. Violations of these laws and regulations could result in significant administrative, civil and criminal fines and sanctions against us, our officers, or our employees, the closing down of our facilities, requirements to obtain export licenses, cessation of business activities in sanctioned countries, exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs including Medicare and Medicaid, implementation of compliance programs, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, and prohibitions on the conduct of our business. Any such violations could include prohibitions on our ability to offer our products in one or more countries and could materially damage our reputation, our brand, our international expansion efforts, our ability to attract and retain employees, and our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition.

We could be subject to liabilities under environmental, health and safety laws or regulations, or fines, penalties or other sanctions, if we fail to comply with such laws or regulations or otherwise incur costs that could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business.

We are subject to numerous French and U.S. federal, state, local and foreign environmental, health and safety laws, regulations, and permitting requirements, including those governing laboratory procedures, decontamination activities and the handling, transportation, use, remediation, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. Our operations involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals, radioactive isotopes and biological materials and 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 or wastes either at our sites or at third party disposal sites. In the event of such contamination or injury, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties. Although we maintain workers’ compensation insurance to cover us for costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of hazardous materials 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, regulations or permitting requirements. These current or future laws, regulations and permitting requirements may impair our research, development or production efforts. Failure to comply with these laws, regulations and permitting requirements also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.

We are subject to stringent and changing obligations related to privacy, data security, and data protection. Our actual or perceived failure to comply with such obligations could lead to regulatory investigations or actions; litigation; fines and penalties; disruptions of our business operations; reputational harm; loss of revenue or profits; loss of customers or sales; and other adverse business consequences.

In the ordinary course of business, we collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share (collectively, processing ) sensitive information, including personal data, proprietary and confidential business data, trade secrets, intellectual property, data we collect about trial participants in connection with clinical trials, and sensitive third-party data. Our data processing activities subject us to numerous data privacy, data security, and data protection obligations, such as various laws, regulations, guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contracts, and other obligations that govern the processing of sensitive information by us and on our behalf.

47

Table of Contents

We and any potential partners or third parties upon whom we may rely may be subject to federal, state, and foreign data protection laws and regulations (i.e., laws and regulations that address privacy, data security and data protection). In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including federal health information privacy laws, state data breach notification laws, state health information privacy laws, and federal and state consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), that govern the processing of personal data could apply to our operations or the operations of our partners. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, or CCPA, imposes obligations on covered businesses. These obligations include, but are not limited to, providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording California residents certain rights related to their personal data. The CCPA allows for statutory fines for noncompliance (up to $7,500 per violation). In addition, the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020, or CPRA, went into effect on January 1, 2023 and expands the CCPA. The CPRA establishes a new California Privacy Protection Agency to implement and enforce the CPRA, which could increase the risk of enforcement. Although the CCPA and the CPRA exempt some data processed in the context of clinical trials as well as protected health information under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, the CCPA and the CPRA may increase compliance costs and potential liability with respect to other personal data we maintain about California residents. Other states have enacted data privacy laws. For example, Virginia passed the Consumer Data Protection Act, which went into effect on January 1, 2023, and Colorado, Connecticut and Utah have also passed laws that come into effect later in 2023.Similar comprehensive privacy laws are being considered in several other states, as well as at the federal and local levels. These developments may further complicate compliance efforts and may increase legal risk and compliance costs for us and the third parties upon whom we rely. A failure to comply with applicable privacy laws may lead to the defense of costly regulatory actions. For example, the CCPA provides for civil penalties ranging from $2,500 - $7,500 per violation (with increased material risk where numerous violations have occurred on a large scale), and a private right of action for certain data breaches which may include an award of statutory damages.

In addition, we may obtain health information from third parties (including research institutions from which we obtain clinical trial data) that are subject to privacy and security requirements under HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, or HITECH. HIPAA imposes specific requirements relating to the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Depending on the facts and circumstances, we could be subject to civil, criminal, and administrative penalties if we violate HIPAA.

Several foreign jurisdictions, including the European Union, or the EU, its Member States, the United Kingdom, Brazil, and Australia, among others, have adopted legislation and regulations that increase or change the requirements governing the collection, use, disclosure and transfer of the personal data of individuals in these jurisdictions. These laws and regulations are complex and change frequently, at times due to changes in political climate, and existing laws and regulations are subject to different and conflicting interpretations, which adds to the complexity of processing personal data from these jurisdictions. These laws have the potential to result in investigations, claims, increased costs of compliance, risks of noncompliance and penalties for noncompliance.

The European Union’s and United Kingdom’s implementation of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, known as the General Data Protection Regulation, or the EU and UK GDPR, as well as EU Member States’ and the United Kingdom’s implementing national legislations, apply to the collection and processing of personal data, including health-related information, by companies located in the European Economic Area, or EEA or the United Kingdom. In certain circumstances, the EU and UK GDPR also apply to companies located outside of the EEA or United Kingdom and processing personal data of individuals located in the EEA or United Kingdom.

These laws impose strict obligations on the ability to process personal data, including health-related information. These include, amongst others, requirements relating to (1) limiting the processing of personal data to only what is necessary for a specified, explicit and legitimate purpose, (2) obtaining a legal basis for the processing of personal data, (3) obtaining, in some situations, the consent of the individuals to whom the personal data relates, (4) the information provided to the individuals about how their personal data is used, (5) ensuring the security and confidentiality of the personal data by implementing and maintaining appropriate technical and organizational safeguards, (6) the obligation to notify, in certain circumstances, regulatory authorities and affected individuals of personal data breaches, (7) extensive internal privacy governance obligations, (8) obligations to honor rights of individuals in relation to their personal data (for example, the right to access, correct and delete their data), and (9) meeting the exceptions under applicable laws to process health-related information.

48

Table of Contents

The EU and UK GDPR impose strict rules on the transfer of personal data outside of the EEA or the United Kingdom respectively, to countries which are deemed to have inadequate levels of data protection safeguards in place, such as the United States. The European Commission released a set of “Standard Contractual Clauses,” or SCCs, that are designed to be a valid mechanism to facilitate personal data transfers out of the EEA to these jurisdictions. Currently, the SCCs are a valid mechanism to transfer personal data outside of the EEA, but this mechanism is subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on this or other mechanisms to lawfully transfer personal data to the United States. Additionally, the SCCs impose additional compliance burdens, such as conducting transfer impact assessments to determine whether additional security measures are necessary to protect the at-issue personal data. In addition, Switzerland similarly restricts personal data transfers outside of those jurisdictions to countries that do not provide an adequate level of personal data protection. If we cannot implement a valid compliance mechanism for cross-border data transfers, we may face increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines, injunctions against processing or transferring personal data from Europe or other foreign jurisdictions, and the interruption or degradation of our operations. The inability to export personal data to the United States could significantly and negatively impact our business operations, including by limiting our ability to collaborate with parties that are subject to such cross-border data transfer or localization laws; or requiring us to increase our personal data processing capabilities and infrastructure in foreign jurisdictions at significant expense. Some European regulators have prevented companies from transferring personal data out of Europe for allegedly violating the GDPR’s cross-border data transfer limitations. On 7 October 222, President Biden signed an Executive Order on “Enhancing Safeguards for United States Signals Intelligence Activities”, which implements into US law the agreement in principle announced in March 2022 on a new EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework. However, if this new transatlantic data transfer framework is not adopted and we are unable to continue to rely on SCCs or alternative mechanisms of data transfers from the EEA to the U.S., this may materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Also, in certain countries, in particular France, the conduct of clinical trials is subject to compliance with specific provisions of the Act No.78-17 of 6 January 1978 on Information Technology, Data Files and Civil Liberties, as amended, and in particular Section 3 of the Chapter III of the Title II relating to the processing of personal data in the health sector. These provisions require, among others, the filing of compliance undertakings with “standard methodologies” adopted by the French Data Protection Authority, or CNIL, or, if not complying, obtaining a specific authorization from the CNIL.

Potential pecuniary fines for noncompliance with the EU and UK GDPR include fines of up to the greater of €20 million/£17.5 million or 4% of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year. In addition to administrative fines, a wide variety of other potential enforcement powers are available to competent supervisory authorities to investigate potential and suspected violations of the EU and UK GDPR, including audit and inspection rights, and powers to impose a temporary or definitive limitation, including a ban on processing of personal data. The EU and UK GDPR also confer a right of action on data subjects to lodge complaints with supervisory authorities and obtain compensation for damages resulting from non-compliance with the EU or UK GDPR. Under the EU GDPR, companies may face private litigation related to processing of personal data brought by classes of data subjects or consumer protection organizations authorized at law to represent their interests. The EU and UK GDPR have increased our responsibility and liability in relation to personal data that we process, and we may be required to put in place additional potential mechanisms to ensure compliance with the EU and UK data protection rules.

Compliance with U.S. and international data protection laws and regulations could require us to take on more onerous obligations in our contracts, restrict our ability to collect, use and disclose data, or in some cases, impact our ability to operate in certain jurisdictions. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations could result in government enforcement actions (which could include civil, criminal and administrative penalties), private litigation, and/or adverse publicity and could negatively affect our operating results and business. Moreover, clinical trial subjects, employees and other individuals about whom we or our potential partners obtain personal data, as well as the providers who share this information with us, may limit our ability to collect, use and disclose the information. We or third parties we work with may also experience a data breach which could subject us to liability under data protection laws. Claims that we have violated individuals’ privacy rights, failed to comply with data protection laws, or breached our contractual obligations, even if we are not found liable, could be expensive and time-consuming to defend and could result in adverse publicity that could harm our business.

49

Table of Contents

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

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

50

Table of Contents

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

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

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

51

Table of Contents

We must maintain effective internal control over financial reporting, and if we are unable to do so, the accuracy and timeliness of our financial reporting may be adversely affected, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, investor confidence and market price.

We must maintain effective internal control over financial reporting in order to accurately and timely report our results of operations and financial condition. In addition, as a U.S. public company, Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, requires, among other things, that we assess the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures annually and the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting at the end of each fiscal year. Beginning with last year’s Annual Report, we were required to perform system and process evaluation and testing of our internal control over financial reporting to allow our management to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. However, while we remain an emerging growth company, we will not be required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. We will incur substantial additional professional fees and internal costs to expand our accounting and finance functions in addition to expending significant management efforts.

The rules governing the standards that must be met for our management to assess our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act are complex and require significant documentation, testing and possible remediation. These stringent standards require that our audit committee be advised and regularly updated on management’s review of internal control over financial reporting. We have designed, our internal control over financial reporting in order to comply with this obligation. This process is time-consuming, costly and complicated. In addition, our independent registered public accounting firm will be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting beginning with our annual report following the date on which we are no longer an “emerging growth company,” which will occur upon the earliest of: (1) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have total annual gross revenue of $1.235 billion or more; (2) December 31, 2025; (3) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in nonconvertible debt during the previous three years; and (4) the date on which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer under the rules of the SEC. Our management may not be able to effectively and timely implement controls and procedures that adequately respond to the increased regulatory compliance and reporting requirements that will be applicable to us as a U.S. public company. If we fail to staff our accounting and finance function adequately or maintain internal control over financial reporting adequate to meet the demands that will be placed upon us as a U.S. public company, including the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, our business and reputation may be harmed and the price of our ordinary shares or ADSs may decline.

Furthermore, investor perceptions of us may be adversely affected, which could cause a decline in the market price of our ordinary shares or ADSs.

If our data or our information technology systems, or those of third parties upon which we rely, are or were compromised, we could experience adverse consequences resulting from such compromise, including but not limited to regulatory investigations or actions; litigation; fines and penalties; disruptions of our business operations; reputational harm; loss of revenue or profits; loss of customers or sales; and other adverse consequences.

In the ordinary course of our business, we collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share (collectively, process) proprietary, confidential, and sensitive data, including personal data (such as health-related data), intellectual property, and trade secrets (collectively, sensitive information). We rely upon third-party service providers and technologies to operate critical business systems to process sensitive information in a variety of contexts, including, without limitation, third-party providers of cloud-based infrastructure, encryption and authentication technology, employee email, and other functions. Our ability to monitor these third parties’ information security practices is limited, and these third parties may not have adequate information security measures in place. We may share or receive sensitive information with or from third parties. We may also publish privacy policies, marketing materials or other statements, such as compliance with certain certifications or self-regulatory principles, regarding data privacy and security. If these policies, materials or statements are found to be deficient, lacking in transparency, deceptive, unfair, or misrepresentative of our practices, we may be subject to investigation, enforcement actions by regulators or other adverse consequences.

52

Table of Contents

Cyberattacks, malicious internet-based activity, and online and offline fraud are prevalent and continue to increase. These threats are becoming increasingly difficult to detect. These threats come from a variety of sources, including traditional computer “hackers,” threat actors, personnel (such as through theft or misuse), sophisticated nation-states, and nation-state-supported actors. We and the third parties upon which we rely may be subject to a variety of evolving threats, including but not limited to social-engineering attacks (including through phishing attacks), malicious code (such as viruses and worms), malware (including as a result of advanced persistent threat intrusions), denial-of-service attacks (such as credential stuffing), personnel misconduct or error, ransomware attacks, supply-chain attacks, software bugs, server malfunctions, software or hardware failures, loss of data or other information technology assets, adware, telecommunications failures, earthquakes, fires, floods, and other similar threats. Ransomware attacks, including by organized criminal threat actors, nation-states, and nation-state-supported actors, are becoming increasingly prevalent and severe and can lead to significant interruptions in our operations, loss of data and income, reputational harm, and diversion of funds. Extortion payments may alleviate the negative impact of a ransomware attack, but we may be unwilling or unable to make such payments due to, for example, applicable laws or regulations prohibiting such payments. Similarly, supply-chain attacks have increased in frequency and severity, and we cannot guarantee that third parties and infrastructure in our supply chain or our third-party partners’ supply chains have not been or will not be compromised or that they do not contain exploitable defects or bugs that could result in a breach of or disruption to our information technology systems or the third-party information technology systems that support us and our services. Some actors now engage and are expected to continue to engage in cyber-attacks, including without limitation nation-state actors for geopolitical reasons and in conjunction with military conflicts and defense activities. During times of war and other major conflicts, we or the third parties upon which we rely may be vulnerable to a heightened risk of these attacks, including retaliatory cyber-attacks, that could materially disrupt our systems and operations, supply chain, and ability to conduct our clinical trials.

The COVID-19 pandemic and our remote workforce pose increased risks to our information technology systems and data, as more of our employees work from home, utilizing network connections outside our premises. Future or past business transactions (such as acquisitions or integrations) could also expose us to additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities, as our systems could be negatively affected by vulnerabilities present in acquired or integrated entities’ systems and technologies.

Any of the previously identified threats (or similar threats) could cause a security incident or other interruption. A security incident or other interruption could result in unauthorized, unlawful, or accidental acquisition, modification, destruction, loss, alteration, encryption, disclosure of, or access to our sensitive information. A security incident or other interruption could disrupt our ability (and that of third parties upon whom we rely) to conduct our clinical trials and operate our business. We may expend significant resources or modify our business activities (including our clinical trial activities) to try to protect against security incidents. Certain data privacy and security obligations may require us to implement and maintain specific security measures, industry-standard or reasonable security measures to protect our information technology systems and sensitive information. While we have implemented security measures designed to protect against cybersecurity incidents, we cannot ensure all the risks will be mitigated by those measures. We have not always been able in the past and may be unable in the future to detect vulnerabilities in our information technology systems (including our products) because such threats and techniques change frequently, are often sophisticated in nature, and may not be detected until after a security incident has occurred. Audit plans are aimed to limit the non-detection of those vulnerabilities. Despite our efforts to identify and remediate vulnerabilities, if any, in our information technology systems (including our products), our efforts may not always be successful. For example, in November 2021, a malicious third party exploited a vulnerability in our email server and gained unauthorized access to our email environment. The forensic investigations have shown that only our email system was affected and the vulnerability has been remediated. While this incident did not expose any personal or proprietary data and, therefore, did not require notification under applicable laws and regulations, we voluntarily notified the Commission nationale de l’informatique et des libertés (CNIL), which could result in litigation and potential liability for us, damage our brand and reputation, or otherwise harm our business. Any claims or investigations may result in our incurring significant external and internal legal and advisory costs, as well as the diversion of management’s attention from the operation of our business.

In addition, with respect to any future incidents, applicable data privacy and security obligations may require us to notify relevant stakeholders of security incidents. Such disclosures are costly, and the disclosures or the failure to comply with such requirements could lead to adverse consequences. If we (or a third party upon whom we rely) experience a security incident or are perceived to have experienced a security incident, we may experience adverse consequences. These consequences may include: government enforcement actions (for example, investigations, fines, penalties, audits, and inspections); additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; restrictions on processing sensitive information (including personal data); litigation (including class claims); indemnification obligations; negative publicity; reputational harm; monetary fund diversions; interruptions in our operations (including availability of data); financial loss; and other similar harms. Further, the loss of product development or clinical trial data could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any security incident

53

Table of Contents

results in a loss of, or damage to, our sensitive information or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of sensitive information, we could incur liability and our development programs and the development of our product candidates could be delayed.

We may also be bound by contractual obligations related to data privacy and security, and our efforts to comply with such obligations may not be successful. For example, certain privacy laws, such as the GDPR and the CCPA, require our customers to impose specific contractual restrictions on their service providers. Our contracts may not contain limitations of liability, and even where they do, there can be no assurance that limitations of liability in our contracts are sufficient to protect us from liabilities, damages, or claims related to our data privacy and security obligations.

We are subject to governmental export and import controls that could limit our ability to operate our business and subject us to liability if we are not in compliance with applicable laws.

We are subject to export control and import laws and regulations and various economic and trade sanctions regulations administered by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Controls. Exports of our product candidates must be made in compliance with these laws and regulations. If we fail to comply with these laws and regulations, we and certain of our employees could be subject to substantial civil or criminal penalties, including the possible loss of export or import privileges; fines, which may be imposed on us and responsible employees or managers; and, in extreme cases, the incarceration of responsible employees or managers.

In addition, changes in our product candidates or changes in applicable export or import laws and regulations may create delays in the introduction or provision of our product candidates in other jurisdictions, prevent others from using our product candidates or, in some cases, prevent the export or import of our product candidates to certain countries, governments or persons altogether. Any limitation on our ability to export or provide our product candidates could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. U.S. or other jurisdictions’ sanctions that may be imposed as a result of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine may impact our ability to continue activities. For example, in 2022, we determined to close trial sites located in Ukraine and Russia due to the Russian invasion in Ukraine for our NATiV3 clinical trial of lanifibranor, which, together with higher than originally projected screen failure rate resulting in slower than anticipated enrollment rate, contributed to a delay in patient enrollment.

Business interruptions could delay us in the process of developing our product candidates.

Loss of our laboratory facilities through fire or other causes could have an adverse effect on our ability to continue to conduct our business. We currently have insurance coverage to compensate us for such business interruptions; however, such coverage may prove insufficient to fully compensate us for the damage to our business resulting from any significant property or casualty loss to our facilities.

We may undertake strategic acquisitions in the future and any difficulties from integrating such acquisitions could adversely affect our share price, operating results and results of operations.

We may acquire companies, businesses and products that complement or augment our existing business. We may not be able to integrate any acquired business successfully or operate any acquired business profitably. Integrating any newly acquired business could be expensive and time-consuming. Integration efforts often take a significant amount of time, place a significant strain on managerial, operational and financial resources, result in loss of key personnel and could prove to be more difficult or expensive than we predict. The diversion of our management’s attention and any delay or difficulties encountered in connection with any future acquisitions we may consummate could result in the disruption of our on-going business or inconsistencies in standards and controls that could negatively affect our ability to maintain third-party relationships. Moreover, we may need to raise additional funds through public or private debt or equity financing, or issue additional shares, to acquire any businesses or products, which may result in dilution for shareholders or the incurrence of indebtedness.

As part of our efforts to acquire companies, business or product candidates or to enter into other significant transactions, we conduct business, legal and financial due diligence with the goal of identifying and evaluating material risks involved in the transaction. Despite our efforts, we ultimately may be unsuccessful in ascertaining or evaluating all such risks and, as a result, might not realize the intended advantages of the transaction. If we fail to realize the expected benefits from acquisitions we may consummate in the future or have consummated in the past, whether as a result of unidentified risks or liabilities, integration difficulties, regulatory setbacks, litigation with current or former employees and other events, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected. If we acquire product candidates, we will also need to make certain assumptions about, among other things, development costs,

54

Table of Contents

the likelihood of receiving regulatory approval and the market for such product candidates. Our assumptions may prove to be incorrect, which could cause us to fail to realize the anticipated benefits of these transactions.

In addition, we will likely experience significant charges to earnings in connection with our efforts, if any, to consummate acquisitions. For transactions that are ultimately not consummated, these charges may include fees and expenses for investment bankers, attorneys, accountants and other advisors in connection with our efforts. Even if our efforts are successful, we may incur, as part of a transaction, substantial charges for closure costs associated with elimination of duplicate operations and facilities and acquired in-process research and development charges. In either case, the incurrence of these charges could adversely affect our results of operations for particular periods.

Our international operations and partnerships subject us to various risks, and our failure to manage these risks could adversely affect our results of operations.

We face significant operational risks as a result of doing business internationally, such as:

At the end of 2021 and into 2022, tensions between the U.S. and Russia escalated when Russia amassed large numbers of military ground forces and support personnel on the Ukraine-Russia border and, in February 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine. In response, NATO has deployed additional military forces to Eastern Europe, including to Lithuania, and the Biden administration announced certain sanctions against Russia. The invasion of Ukraine and the retaliatory measures that have been taken, or could be taken in the future, by the U.S., NATO, and other countries have created global security concerns that could result in a regional conflict and otherwise have a lasting impact on regional and global economies, any or all of which could disrupt our supply chain and adversely affect our ability to conduct ongoing and future clinical trials of our product candidates. including our ongoing Phase III clinical trial for lanifibranor. For example, in 2022, we determined to close trial sites located in Ukraine and Russia for our NATiV3 clinical trial of lanifibranor due to the Russian invasion in Ukraine, which, together with higher than originally projected screen failure rate resulting in slower than anticipated enrollment rate, contributed to a delay in patient enrollment.

55

Table of Contents

If we are unable to use tax loss carryforwards and/or tax credits to reduce future taxable income or benefit from favorable tax legislation, our business, results of operations and financial condition may be adversely affected.

At December 31, 2022, we had cumulative carry forward tax losses of €261.8 million in France. These are available to carry forward and offset against future taxable income for an indefinite period in France. If we are unable to use tax loss carryforwards to reduce future taxable income, our business, results of operations and financial condition may be adversely affected. In France, the use of these carry forward tax losses is capped at €1 million annually, plus 50% of the fraction of profits exceeding this limit. The unutilized balance of these tax losses can be carried forward to subsequent years and set-off under the same conditions without any time limits. However, it is possible that future fiscal changes could limit our ability to utilize the balance of any tax loses, which could adversely affect our results.

As a company active in research and development in France, we have benefited from certain research and development incentives including, for example, the French research tax credit (credit d’impôt recherche), or CIR. These tax credits can be used to offset French corporate income tax due. The excess portion beyond that used to offset corporate income tax due is generally refunded in cash at the end of a three-year fiscal period; however, as long as we are considered a small or medium-sized entity (petite ou moyenne entreprise) in France, the CIR tax credit is refundable in the fiscal year after it is generated, provided that we comply with eligibility requirements. The research and development incentives are calculated based on the amount of eligible research and development expenditures. The French CIR tax credit amounted to €5.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2022. In addition, the French tax authorities have audited in the past, and may again audit in the future, research and development programs in respect of which a tax credit has been claimed in order to assess whether it qualifies for the tax credit regime. The tax authorities may challenge our eligibility for, or our calculation of, certain tax reductions and/or deductions in respect of our research and development activities and expenditures, and should the French tax authorities be successful, we may be liable for additional corporate income tax, and penalties and interest related thereto, which could have a significant impact on our results of operations and future cash flows. For example, in August 2018, we received a collection notice in the amount of €1.9 million, including penalties and late payment interest, related to our CIRs for the 2013, 2014 and 2015 taxable years. On January 7, 2020, we initiated mediation with respect to the CIR reassessment for the 2013, 2014 and 2015 taxable years and received the mediator’s response on January 28, 2021 waiving €0.3 million corresponding to the part of the dispute related to the subcontracting expenses in consideration of the recent changes in the jurisprudence and the last decision of the Council of State in July 2020 on the eligibility of subcontracting expenses in the evaluation of the research tax credit. On January 25, 2021 the Administrative Court of Dijon informed us of the dismissal of the contentious claim regarding the amounts claimed for the fiscal years 2013, 2014 and 2015. Abbott and Inventiva decided not to appeal the decision. On February 10, 2021, we requested the payment from Abbott of €2.0 million corresponding to the maximum amount covered by an indemnity clause in an agreement with Abbott. The entire payment was received during the first quarter of 2021. On February 11, 2021, we received formal notice to pay the amounts due to the French tax authorities under the notice of assessment issued on August 17, 2018 for an amount of €1.9 million. On June 9, 2021, in agreement with the French tax authorities, we paid €1.8 million, including €1.3 million by offsetting VAT credit receivables. As a result, we wired the amount of €0.5 million. On August 9, 2021, following this payment, the tax authorities informed us of the release of part of the bank guarantee provided in 2019 and 2020 for an amount of €1.6 million, corresponding to the portion with regard to payroll taxes. Consequently, Crédit Agricole has accepted the lifting of the pledge over cash for €1.0 million. Furthermore, if the French government decides to eliminate, or reduce the scope or the rate of, the research and development incentive benefit, either of which it could decide to do at any time, our results of operations could be adversely affected.

We may be exposed to significant foreign exchange risk.

We incur portions of our expenses, and may in the future derive revenues, in currencies other than the euro, in particular, the U.S. dollar. As a result, we are exposed to foreign currency exchange risk as our results of operations and cash flows are subject to fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates. We currently do not engage in hedging transactions to protect against uncertainty in future exchange rates between particular foreign currencies and the euro. Therefore, for example, an increase in the value of the euro against the U.S. dollar could be expected to have a negative impact on our revenue and earnings growth as U.S. dollar revenue and earnings, if any, would be translated into euros at a reduced value. We cannot predict the impact of foreign currency fluctuations, and foreign currency fluctuations in the future may adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

56

Table of Contents

The requirements of being a U.S. public company may strain our resources and divert management’s attention.

We are required to comply with various corporate governance and financial reporting requirements under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and the rules and regulations adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Public Corporation Accounting Oversight Board. Further, compliance with various regulatory reporting requires significant commitments of time from our management and our directors, which reduces the time available for the performance of their other responsibilities. Our failure to track and comply with the various rules may materially adversely affect our reputation, ability to obtain the necessary certifications to financial statements, lead to additional regulatory enforcement actions, and could adversely affect the value of our ordinary shares or ADSs.

Risks Related to Ownership of our Ordinary Shares and ADSs

The market price of our equity securities may be volatile, and purchasers of our ordinary shares or ADSs or could incur substantial losses.

The market price for our ordinary shares and ADSs may be volatile. From January 1, 2022 to February 28, 2022, the closing price of our ADSs ranged from a high of $13.66 to a low of $3.66 per ADS. The stock market in general and the market for biopharmaceutical companies in particular have experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. As a result of this volatility, investors may not be able to sell their ordinary shares or ADSs at or above the price originally paid for the security. The market price for our ordinary shares and ADSs may be influenced by many factors, including:

57

Table of Contents

These and other market and industry factors may cause the market price and demand for our ordinary shares or ADSs to fluctuate substantially, regardless of our actual operating performance, which may limit or prevent investors from readily selling their ordinary shares or ADSs and may otherwise negatively affect the liquidity of our capital shares.

If we do not achieve our projected development and commercialization goals in the timeframes we announce and expect, our business will be harmed and the price of our securities could decline as a result.

We sometimes estimate for planning purposes the timing of the accomplishment of various scientific, clinical, regulatory and other product development objectives. These milestones may include our expectations regarding the commencement or completion of scientific studies, clinical trials, the submission of regulatory filings, or commercialization objectives. From time to time, we may publicly announce the expected timing of some of these milestones, such as the completion of an ongoing clinical trial, the receipt of data from a clinical trial, the initiation of other clinical programs, receipt of marketing approval, or a commercial launch of a product. For example, data from our recently completed Phase IIb clinical trial of lanifibranor for the treatment of patients with NASH was delayed due to challenges in patient enrollment.

The achievement of many of these milestones may be outside of our control. All of these milestones are based on a variety of assumptions which may cause the timing of achievement of the milestones to vary considerably from our estimates, including:

If we fail to achieve announced milestones in the timeframes we expect, the commercialization of our product candidates may be delayed, our business and results of operations may be harmed, and the trading price of our ordinary shares and ADSs may decline as a result.

58

Table of Contents

Voting control with respect to our company is concentrated in the hands of Frédéric Cren, our Chief Executive Officer, Pierre Broqua, our Deputy Chief Executive Officer and Chief Scientific Officer, and our significant shareholders and affiliates who will continue to be able to exercise significant influence on us.

In accordance with French law, double voting rights automatically attach to each ordinary share of companies listed on a regulated market (such as the Euronext Paris, where our ordinary shares are listed) that is held of record in the name of the same shareholder for a period of at least two years, except as otherwise set forth in a company’s bylaws. Our bylaws do not exclude such double voting rights. However, under French law, ordinary bearer shares in the form of ADSs are not eligible for double voting rights. To our knowledge, among our shareholders who hold ordinary shares to which are attached double voting rights, Frédéric Cren, our Chief Executive Officer and Pierre Broqua, our Deputy Chief Executive Officer and Chief Scientific Officer hold the most significant portion. Double voting rights attach to the 5,612,224 ordinary shares held by Frédéric Cren, and to the 3,882,500 ordinary shares held by Pierre Broqua, as of December 31, 2022. Given the double voting rights per share attributed to ordinary shares held by Mr. Cren and Dr. Broqua, Mr. Cren and Dr. Broqua together beneficially own approximately 22.5% of our outstanding ordinary shares (including ordinary shares underlying ADSs), but control approximately 34.5% of the voting rights of our outstanding share capital as of December 31, 2022. As a result, Mr. Cren and Dr. Broqua, if they act together, have a significant influence over all matters that require approval by our shareholders, such as the election of directors and approval of significant corporate transactions. Such corporate action might be taken even if other shareholders oppose them. This concentration of ownership might also have the effect of delaying or preventing a change of control of our company that other shareholders may view as beneficial. As members of our board of directors, Mr. Cren and Dr. Broqua have a duty to act without self-interest, on a well-informed basis and to not make any decision against our corporate interest (intérêt social) considering the interests of our shareholders, employees and other stakeholders as a whole. However, as shareholders, Mr. Cren and Dr. Broqua are entitled to vote their shares in their own interests, which may not always be in the interests of our shareholders generally. In addition, Mr. Cren and Dr. Broqua have the ability to control the management and major strategic investments of our company as a result of their positions as our Chief Executive Officer and Deputy Chief Executive Officer and Chief Scientific Officer, respectively.

Further, our executive officers, directors, current 5% or greater shareholders and affiliated entities, including BVF Partners L.P., New Enterprise Associates, Sofinnova Crossover I SLP and entities affiliated with Yiheng Capital Management, L.P. together beneficially own approximately 70.4% of our outstanding ordinary shares (including ordinary shares underlying ADSs) and approximately 73.4% of the voting rights of our outstanding share capital as of December 31, 2022. As a result, these shareholders, if they act together, will have control over all matters that require approval of our shareholders.

This concentrated control limits your ability to influence corporate matters for the foreseeable future and potentially in perpetuity, particularly because purchasers of ADSs or ordinary shares in the open market will be unlikely to meet the requirements to have double voting rights attach to any ordinary shares held by them. This concentrated control could also discourage a potential investor from acquiring our ADSs or ordinary shares and might harm the market price of our ADSs or ordinary shares.

Fluctuations in the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the euro may increase the risk of holding our ordinary shares and ADSs.

Our ordinary shares currently trade on Euronext Paris in euros, while our ADSs trade on Nasdaq in U.S. dollars. Fluctuations in the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the euro may result in temporary differences between the value of our ADSs and the value of our ordinary shares, which may result in heavy trading by investors seeking to exploit such differences.

In addition, as a result of fluctuations in the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the euro, the U.S. dollar equivalent of the proceeds that a holder of our ADSs would receive upon the sale in France of any ordinary shares withdrawn from the depositary and the U.S. dollar equivalent of any cash dividends paid in euros on our ordinary shares represented by our ADSs could also decline.

59

Table of Contents

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or publish inaccurate research or unfavorable research about our business, the price of our ordinary shares and ADSs and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our ordinary shares and ADSs depends in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. If no or few securities or industry analysts cover our company, the trading price for our ordinary shares and ADSs would be negatively impacted. If one or more of the analysts who covers us downgrades our ordinary shares and ADSs or publishes incorrect or unfavorable research about our business, the price of our ordinary shares and ADSs would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases coverage of our company or fails to publish reports on us regularly, or downgrades our ordinary shares and ADSs, demand for our ordinary shares and ADSs could decrease, which could cause the price of our ordinary shares and ADSs or trading volume to decline.

We have no present intention to pay dividends on our ordinary shares in the foreseeable future and, consequently, your only opportunity to achieve a return on your investment during that time is if the price of our ordinary shares or ADSs, as applicable, appreciates.

We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our ordinary shares and we have no present intention to pay dividends in the foreseeable future. Any recommendation by our board of directors to pay dividends will depend on many factors, including our financial condition (including losses carried-forward), results of operations, legal requirements and other factors. Further, under French law, the determination of whether we have been sufficiently profitable to pay dividends is made on the basis of our statutory financial statements prepared and presented in accordance with accounting standards applicable in France. In addition, payment of dividends may subject us to additional taxes under French law. See “Item 10.B-Memorandum and Articles of Association” for further details on the limitations on our ability to declare and pay dividends. Therefore, we may be more restricted in our ability to declare dividends than companies not based in France. If the price of our ordinary shares or ADSs declines before we pay dividends, you will incur a loss on your investment, without the likelihood that this loss will be offset in part or at all by potential future cash dividends.

The rights of shareholders in companies subject to French corporate law differ in material respects from the rights of shareholders of corporations incorporated in the United States.

We are a French public limited company (société anonyme). Our corporate affairs are governed by our bylaws and by the laws governing companies incorporated in France. The rights of shareholders and the responsibilities of members of our board of directors are in many ways different from the rights and obligations of shareholders in companies governed by the laws of U.S. jurisdictions. For example, in the performance of its duties, our board of directors is required by French law to consider the interests of our company, its shareholders, its employees and other stakeholders, rather than solely our shareholders and/or creditors. It is possible that some of these parties will have interests that are different from, or in addition to, your interests as a shareholder or holder of ADSs. Further, in accordance with French law, double voting rights automatically attach to each ordinary share of companies listed on a regulated market (such as the Euronext Paris, where our ordinary shares are listed) that is held of record in the name (action au nominatif) of the same shareholder for a period of at least two years, except as otherwise set forth in a company’s bylaws. Our bylaws currently do not exclude such double voting rights; however, the holders of two-thirds of our outstanding voting rights may vote to amend our bylaws to exclude such double voting rights at any extraordinary general meeting of our shareholders. See the sections of this annual report titled “Item 6. Directors, Senior Management and Employees-Board Practices” and the documents referenced in “Item 10. Additional Information-Memorandum and Articles of Association.”

Our bylaws and French corporate law contain provisions that may delay or discourage a takeover attempt.

Provisions contained in our bylaws and French corporate law could make it more difficult for a third-party to acquire us, even if doing so might be beneficial to our shareholders. In addition, provisions of our bylaws impose various procedural and other requirements, which could make it more difficult for shareholders to effect certain corporate actions. These provisions include the following:

60

Table of Contents

61

Table of Contents

Holders of our ADSs are not treated as shareholders of our company.

Holders of our ADSs are not treated as shareholders of our company, unless they withdraw the ordinary shares underlying our ADSs. The depositary, or its nominee, is the holder of the ordinary shares underlying our ADSs. Holders of ADSs therefore do not have any rights as shareholders of our company, other than the rights that they have pursuant to the deposit agreement.

You may not be able to exercise your right to vote the ordinary shares underlying your ADSs.

Holders of ADSs may exercise voting rights with respect to the ordinary shares represented by the ADSs only in accordance with the provisions of the deposit agreement. The deposit agreement provides that, upon receipt of notice of any meeting of holders of our ordinary shares, the depositary will fix a record date for the determination of ADS holders who shall be entitled to give instructions for the exercise of voting rights. Upon timely receipt of notice from us, if we so request, the depositary shall distribute to the holders as of the record date (1) the notice of the meeting or solicitation of consent or proxy sent by us and (2) a statement as to the manner in which instructions may be given by the holders.

Holders of ADSs may instruct the depositary to vote the ordinary shares underlying their ADSs. Otherwise, ADS holders will not be able to exercise their right to vote, unless they withdraw the ordinary shares underlying the ADSs they hold. However, ADS holders may not know about the meeting far enough in advance to withdraw those ordinary shares. If we ask for instructions from holders of ADSs, the depositary, upon timely notice from us, will notify them of the upcoming vote and arrange to deliver our voting materials to them. We cannot guarantee ADS holders that they will receive the voting materials in time to ensure that they can instruct the depositary to vote their ordinary shares or to withdraw their ordinary shares so that they can vote them themselves. If the depositary does not receive timely voting instructions from a holder of ADSs, it may give a proxy to a person designated by us to vote the ordinary shares underlying such holder’s ADSs. In addition, the depositary and its agents are not responsible for failing to carry out voting instructions or for the manner of carrying out voting instructions. This means that ADS holders may not be able to exercise their right to vote, and there may be nothing they can do if the ordinary shares underlying their ADSs are not voted as they requested. For example, Bank of New York Mellon, the depositary, failed to timely submit the voting instructions of ADS holders for the general meeting of shareholders held on May 19, 2022 to Société Générale Securities Services, the custodian for the depositary in France. Due to this delay, the voting of the ADS holders did not count. This did not impact the adoption or rejection of the resolutions on the agenda of that general meeting.

62

Table of Contents

The right as a holder of ADSs to participate in any future preferential subscription rights or to elect to receive dividends in shares may be limited, which may cause holders of our ADSs to be diluted.

According to French law, if we issue additional securities for cash, current shareholders will have preferential subscription rights for these securities on a pro rata basis unless they waive those rights at an extraordinary meeting of our shareholders (by a two-thirds majority vote) or individually by each shareholder. However, our ADS holders in the United States will not be entitled to exercise or sell such rights unless we register the rights and the securities to which the rights relate under the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act or an exemption from the registration requirements is available. In addition, the deposit agreement provides that the depositary will not make rights available to purchasers of ADSs in the U.S. offering unless the distribution to ADS holders of both the rights and any related securities are either registered under the Securities Act or exempted from registration under the Securities Act. Further, if we offer holders of our ordinary shares the option to receive dividends in either cash or shares, under the deposit agreement the depositary may require satisfactory assurances from us that extending the offer to holders of ADSs does not require registration of any securities under the Securities Act before making the option available to holders of ADSs. We are under no obligation to file a registration statement with respect to any such rights or securities or to endeavor to cause such a registration statement to be declared effective. Moreover, we may not be able to establish an exemption from registration under the Securities Act. Accordingly, ADS holders may be unable to participate in our rights offerings or to elect to receive dividends in shares and may experience dilution in their holdings. In addition, if the depositary is unable to sell rights that are not exercised or not distributed or if the sale is not lawful or reasonably practicable, it will allow the rights to lapse, in which case you will receive no value for these rights.

Holders of ADSs may be subject to limitations on the transfer of their ADSs and the withdrawal of the underlying ordinary shares.

ADSs are transferable on the books of the depositary. However, the depositary may close its books at any time or from time to time when it deems expedient in connection with the performance of its duties. The depositary may refuse to deliver, transfer or register transfers of ADSs generally when our books or the books of the depositary are closed, or at any time if we or the depositary think it is advisable to do so because of any requirement of law, government or governmental body, or under any provision of the deposit agreement, or for any other reason, subject to the right of ADS holders to cancel their ADSs and withdraw the underlying ordinary shares. Temporary delays in the cancellation of your ADSs and withdrawal of the underlying ordinary shares may arise because the depositary has closed its transfer books or we have closed our transfer books, the transfer of ordinary shares is blocked to permit voting at a shareholders’ meeting or we are paying a dividend on our ordinary shares. In addition, ADS holders may not be able to cancel their ADSs and withdraw the underlying ordinary shares when they owe money for fees, taxes and similar charges and when it is necessary to prohibit withdrawals in order to comply with any laws or governmental regulations that apply to ADSs or to the withdrawal of ordinary shares or other deposited securities.

63

Table of Contents

ADS holders may not be entitled to a jury trial with respect to claims arising under the deposit agreement, which could result in less favorable outcomes to the plaintiff(s) in any such action.

The deposit agreement governing our ADSs provides that holders and beneficial owners of ADSs irrevocably waive the right to a trial by jury in any legal proceeding arising out of or relating to the deposit agreement or the ADSs, including in respect of claims under federal securities laws, against us or the depositary to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law. If this jury trial waiver provision is prohibited by applicable law, an action could nevertheless proceed under the terms of the deposit agreement with a jury trial. To our knowledge, the enforceability of a jury trial waiver under the federal securities laws has not been finally adjudicated by a federal court. However, we believe that a jury trial waiver provision is generally enforceable under the laws of the State of New York, which govern the deposit agreement, by a court of the State of New York or a federal court, which have non-exclusive jurisdiction over matters arising under the deposit agreement, applying such law. In determining whether to enforce a jury trial waiver provision, New York courts and federal courts will consider whether the visibility of the jury trial waiver provision within the agreement is sufficiently prominent such that a party has knowingly waived any right to trial by jury. We believe that this is the case with respect to the deposit agreement and the ADSs. In addition, New York courts will not enforce a jury trial waiver provision in order to bar a viable setoff or counterclaim sounding in fraud or one which is based upon a creditor’s negligence in failing to liquidate collateral upon a guarantor’s demand, or in the case of an intentional tort claim (as opposed to a contract dispute), none of which we believe are applicable in the case of the deposit agreement or the ADSs. No condition, stipulation or provision of the deposit agreement or ADSs serves as a waiver by any holder or beneficial owner of ADSs or by us or the depositary of compliance with any provision of the federal securities laws. If you or any other holder or beneficial owner of ADSs brings a claim against us or the depositary in connection with such matters, you or such other holder or beneficial owner may not be entitled to a jury trial with respect to such claims, which may have the effect of limiting and discouraging lawsuits against us and/or the depositary. If a lawsuit is brought against us and/or the depositary under the deposit agreement, it may be heard only by a judge or justice of the applicable trial court, which would be conducted according to different civil procedures and may result in different outcomes than a trial by jury would have had, including results that could be less favorable to the plaintiff(s) in any such action, depending on, among other things, the nature of the claims, the judge or justice hearing such claims, and the venue of the hearing.

We are an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act and will be able to avail ourselves of reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies, which could make our ordinary shares or ADSs less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the U.S. Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the JOBS Act, and we intend to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not “emerging growth companies,” including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and shareholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. In addition, Section 107 of the JOBS Act also provides that an emerging growth company can take advantage of the extended transition period provided in Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act, for complying with new or revised accounting standards. We will not take advantage of the extended transition period provided under Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act for complying with new or revised accounting standards. Since IFRS makes no distinction between public and private companies for purposes of compliance with new or revised accounting standards, the requirements for our compliance as a private company and as a public company are the same. We cannot predict if investors will find our ordinary shares or ADSs less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our ordinary shares or ADSs less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our ordinary shares or ADSs and the price of our ordinary shares or ADSs may be more volatile. We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions until we are no longer an emerging growth company. We will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest of (1) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have total annual gross revenue of $1.235 billion or more; (2) December 31, 2025; (3) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in nonconvertible debt during the previous three years; and (4) the date on which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer under the rules of the SEC.

64

Table of Contents

As a foreign private issuer, we are exempt from a number of rules under the U.S. securities laws and are permitted to file less information with the SEC than a U.S. company. This may limit the information available to holders of ordinary shares or ADSs.

We are a foreign private issuer, as defined in the SEC’s rules and regulations and, consequently, we are not subject to all of the disclosure requirements applicable to public companies organized within the United States. For example, we are exempt from certain rules under the Exchange Act that regulate disclosure obligations and procedural requirements related to the solicitation of proxies, consents or authorizations applicable to a security registered under the Exchange Act, including the U.S. proxy rules under Section 14 of the Exchange Act. In addition, our officers and directors are exempt from the reporting and “short-swing” profit recovery provisions of Section 16 of the Exchange Act and related rules with respect to their purchases and sales of our securities. Moreover, while we currently make annual and semi-annual filings with respect to our listing on Euronext Paris and file financial reports on an annual and semi-annual basis, we are not required to file periodic reports and financial statements with the SEC as frequently or as promptly as U.S. domestic issuers and are not required to file quarterly reports on Form 10-Q or current reports on Form 8-K under the Exchange Act. Accordingly, there is, and will continue to be, less publicly available information concerning our company than there would be if we were not a foreign private issuer.

As a foreign private issuer, we are permitted and we follow certain home country practices in relation to corporate governance matters that differ significantly from Nasdaq’s corporate governance standards. These practices may afford less protection to shareholders than they would enjoy if we complied fully with the corporate governance standards of the Nasdaq Global Market.

As a foreign private issuer listed on the Nasdaq Global Market, we are subject to Nasdaq’s corporate governance standards. However, Nasdaq rules provide that foreign private issuers are permitted to follow home country corporate governance practices in lieu of Nasdaq’s corporate governance standards as long as notification is provided to Nasdaq of the intention to take advantage of such exemptions. We rely on exemptions for foreign private issuers and follow French corporate governance practices in lieu of Nasdaq’s corporate governance standards, to the extent possible. Certain corporate governance practices in France, which is our home country, differ significantly from Nasdaq corporate governance standards.

For example, as a French company, neither the corporate laws of France nor our bylaws require a majority of our directors to be independent and we can include non-independent directors as members of our remuneration committee, and our independent directors are not required to hold regularly scheduled meetings at which only independent directors are present. Nevertheless, the Middlenext Code (middlenext Code de gouvernement d’entreprise) recommends that a majority of the directors be independent (as construed under such code) in a widely-held company like ours. The Middlenext Code only applies on a “comply-or-explain” basis and we may in the future either decide not to apply this recommendation or change the corporate code to which we refer.

We are also exempt from provisions set forth in Nasdaq rules which require an issuer to provide in its bylaws for a generally applicable quorum, and that such quorum may not be less than one-third of the outstanding voting stock. Consistent with French law, our bylaws provide that, at the first meeting convened, a quorum requires the presence of shareholders having at least (1) 20% of the shares entitled to vote in the case of an ordinary shareholders’ general meeting or at an extraordinary shareholders’ general meeting where shareholders are voting on a capital increase by capitalization of reserves, profits or share premium (in case of lack of quorum, no quorum is required at the second meeting convened), or (2) 25% of the shares entitled to vote in the case of any other extraordinary shareholders’ general meeting (in case of lack of quorum, it is decreased to at least 20% of the shares entitled to vote at the second meeting convened).

As a foreign private issuer, we are required to comply with Rule 10A-3 of the Exchange Act, relating to audit committee composition and responsibilities. Under French law, the audit committee may only have an advisory role and appointment of our statutory auditors, in particular, must be decided by the shareholders at our annual meeting.

Therefore, our shareholders may be afforded less protection than they otherwise would have under Nasdaq’s corporate governance standards applicable to U.S. domestic issuers. For an overview of our corporate governance practices, see “Item 6. Directors, Senior Management and Employees-Board Practices.”

65

Table of Contents

We may lose our foreign private issuer status in the future, which could result in significant additional cost and expense.

While we currently qualify as a foreign private issuer, the determination of foreign private issuer status is made annually on the last business day of an issuer’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter and, accordingly, the next determination will be made with respect to us on June 30, 2023. In the future, we would lose our foreign private issuer status if we fail to meet the requirements necessary to maintain our foreign private issuer status as of the relevant determination date. We will remain a foreign private issuer until such time that more than 50% of our outstanding voting securities are held by U.S. residents and any of the following three circumstances applies: (1) the majority of our executive officers or directors are U.S. citizens or residents; (2) more than 50% of our assets are located in the United States; or (3) our business is administered principally in the United States.

The regulatory and compliance costs to us under U.S. securities laws as a U.S. domestic issuer may be significantly more than costs we incur as a foreign private issuer. If we are not a foreign private issuer, we will be required to file periodic reports and registration statements on U.S. domestic issuer forms with the SEC, which are more detailed and extensive in certain respects than the forms available to a foreign private issuer. We would be required under current SEC rules to prepare our financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, rather than IFRS, and modify certain of our policies to comply with corporate governance practices associated with U.S. domestic issuers. Such conversion of our financial statements to U.S. GAAP would involve significant time and cost. In addition, we may lose our ability to rely upon exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements on U.S. stock exchanges that are available to foreign private issuers such as the ones described herein and exemptions from procedural requirements related to the solicitation of proxies.

U.S. investors may have difficulty enforcing civil liabilities against our company and directors and senior management and the experts named.

Certain members of our board of directors and senior management and certain experts are non-residents of the United States, and all or a substantial portion of our assets and the assets of such persons are located outside the United States. As a result, it may not be possible to serve process on such persons or us in the United States or to enforce judgments obtained in U.S. courts against them or us based on civil liability provisions of the securities laws of the United States. Additionally, it may be difficult to assert U.S. securities law claims in actions originally instituted outside of the United States. Foreign courts may refuse to hear a U.S. securities law claim because foreign courts may not be the most appropriate forums in which to bring such a claim. Even if a foreign court agrees to hear a claim, it may determine that the law of the jurisdiction in which the foreign court resides, and not U.S. law, is applicable to the claim. Further, if U.S. law is found to be applicable, the content of applicable U.S. law must be proved as a fact, which can be a time-consuming and costly process, and certain matters of procedure would still be governed by the law of the jurisdiction in which the foreign court resides. In particular, there is some doubt as to whether French courts would recognize and enforce certain civil liabilities under U.S. securities laws in original actions or judgments of U.S. courts based upon these civil liability provisions. In addition, awards of punitive damages in actions brought in the United States or elsewhere may be unenforceable in France. An award for monetary damages under the U.S. securities laws would be considered punitive if it does not seek to compensate the claimant for loss or damage suffered but is intended to punish the defendant. French law provides that a shareholder, or a group of shareholders, may initiate a legal action to seek indemnification from the directors of a corporation in the corporation’s interest if it fails to bring such legal action itself. If so, any damages awarded by the court are paid to the corporation and any legal fees relating to such action may be borne by the relevant shareholder or the group of shareholders.

The enforceability of any judgment in France will depend on the particular facts of the case as well as the laws and treaties in effect at the time. The United States and France do not currently have a treaty providing for recognition and enforcement of judgments (other than arbitration awards) in civil and commercial matters. See “Enforcement of civil liabilities.”

U.S. holders of our ADSs may suffer adverse tax consequences if we are characterized as a passive foreign investment company.

Generally, if, for any taxable year, at least 75% of our gross income is passive income, or at least 50% of the value of our assets is attributable to assets that produce passive income or are held for the production of passive income, we would be characterized as a passive foreign investment company, or PFIC, for U.S. federal income tax purposes. For purposes of these tests, passive income includes dividends, interest, and gains from the sale or exchange of investment property and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties which are received from unrelated parties in connection with the active conduct of a trade or business.

66

Table of Contents

Assets that produce or are held for the production of passive income may include cash, even if held as working capital or raised in a public offering, marketable securities, and other assets that may produce passive income.

Based on our current estimates of the composition of our income and valuation of our assets for the taxable year ending December 31, 2022, we do not believe that we were a PFIC for the year ending December 31, 2022. Our status as a PFIC will depend on the composition of our income and the composition and value of our assets (which, may be determined in large part by reference to the market value of our ADSs, which may be volatile) from time to time. Our status as a PFIC is a fact-intensive determination made on an annual basis and we cannot provide any assurances regarding our PFIC status for the past, current or future taxable years. Our U.S. counsel expresses no opinion regarding our past, current or future PFIC status. If we are characterized as a PFIC, our U.S. holders may suffer adverse tax consequences, including having gains realized on the sale of our ADSs treated as ordinary income, rather than as capital gain and the loss of the preferential rate applicable to dividends received on our ADSs by individuals who are U.S. holders, and having interest charges apply to distributions by us and the proceeds of sales of the ADSs. A U.S. shareholder of a PFIC generally may mitigate these adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences by making a “qualified electing fund,” or QEF, election, or, to a lesser extent, a “mark to market” election. If we determine that we are a PFIC for any taxable year, we will use commercially reasonable efforts to, and currently expect to, provide the necessary information for U.S. holders to make a QEF election. For further discussion of the PFIC rules and the adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences in the event we are classified as a PFIC, see the section of this annual report titled “Item 10. Additional Information-Taxation.”

67

Table of Contents

Lanifibranor for the Treatment of NASH. We are developing our lead product candidate, lanifibranor, for the treatment of patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, or NASH, a progressive, chronic liver disease for which there are currently no approved therapies. NASH is believed to affect 12% of the United States adult population and is a leading cause of cirrhosis, liver transplantation and liver cancer. Compared to the general population, patients with NASH have a ten-fold greater risk of liver-related mortality. NASH is characterized by a metabolic process known as steatosis, or the excessive accumulation of fat in the liver, inflammation and ballooning of liver cells and progressive liver fibrosis that can ultimately lead to cirrhosis. Lanifibranor is an orally-available small molecule in development for the treatment of NASH that acts to induce anti-fibrotic, anti-inflammatory and beneficial vascular and metabolic changes in the body by activating all three peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor, or PPAR, isoforms. PPARs are well-characterized nuclear receptor proteins that regulate gene expression, and their relevance for the fibrotic, inflammatory, vascular and metabolic processes that characterize NASH is well-established. While there are other PPAR agonists that target only one or two PPAR isoforms, lanifibranor is the only pan-PPAR agonist, meaning that it targets the three isoforms, in clinical development. We believe that this pan-PPAR approach provides for a combination of anti-fibrotic, anti-inflammatory and beneficial vascular and metabolic effects that cannot be obtained with single and dual PPAR agonists. Currently, lanifibranor is our only product candidate in clinical development.

In June 2020, we announced positive topline results from our NATIVE Phase IIb clinical trial of lanifibranor in patients with NASH. In this trial, treatment with lanifibranor at a dose of 1,200 mg met the primary endpoint of a reduction in inflammation and ballooning with no worsening of fibrosis after 24 weeks of treatment, while continuing to show the favorable tolerability profile observed in prior clinical trials of lanifibranor. Treatment with lanifibranor at doses of 800 mg and 1,200 mg also met the key secondary endpoints of resolution of NASH with no worsening of fibrosis and, at the 1,200 mg dose, improvement in liver fibrosis without worsening NASH, which are the primary endpoints relevant for seeking accelerated approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, and conditional approval from the European Medical Agency, or EMA, after completion of our Phase III clinical trial, if successful. On October 12, 2020, the FDA granted Breakthrough Therapy designation to lanifibranor for the treatment of NASH based on Phase IIb data, in addition to Fast Track designation which was previously granted to lanifibranor in this indication. In September 2021, the FDA decided that the Fast Track designation previously granted to lanifibranor in NASH also encompasses the treatment of NASH patients with compensated cirrhosis, following a Fast Track designation request filed by Inventiva with the FDA in August 2021. We believe that lanifibranor is the first oral drug candidate to be granted this status for the treatment of NASH since January 2015. The Breakthrough Therapy designation by the FDA is intended to expedite the development and review of drug candidates for serious or life-threatening conditions. To qualify for this designation, drug candidates must show preliminary clinical evidence that they may demonstrate a substantial improvement on at least one clinically significant endpoint over available therapies or over placebo if there are no approved therapies. In October 2021, we announced the publication of NATIVE results in the New England Journal of Medicine. In December 2021, we announced positive results of a clinical QT/QTc study demonstrating lanifibranor had no impact on QT/QTc intervals. This study assessed lanifibranor impact on cardiac repolarization and was conducted in accordance with FDA guidance in a Phase I double-blind clinical trial. The trial enrolled 217 healthy subjects who were randomized into 4 arms: placebo, lanifibranor 1200mg/day, lanifibranor 2400 mg/day and moxifloxacin 400mg/ day (positive control). The primary endpoint was electrocardiogram (ECG) and monitored during the first 24 hours. Results showed that repeated daily administration of lanifibranor dosed at 2-fold higher than anticipated maximal therapeutic dose had no effect on cardiac electrical activity as shown by achieving the pre-specified primary endpoint of demonstrating no prolongation of the QT interval in healthy subjects. Lanifibranor was well tolerated at both dose levels. In 2022, we submitted five scientific abstracts which were accepted for presentation at the annual conference of the American Diabetes Association (ADA), at the International Liver Congress organized by the European Association for the Study of the Liver, and at the Liver Meeting organized by the American Association for the Study of the Liver Diseases. These abstracts provide data and additional analysis about lanifibranor. The first abstract shows that glycemic control correlates with NASH severity measured by liver biopsy. The second abstract focuses on the beneficial effects of lanifibranor on markers of cardiometabolic health in patients with NASH showing that they are independent of weight change. The third abstract focuses on the identification of biomarkers of histological response in patients with non-cirrhotic NASH treated with lanifibranor. The fourth abstract evaluates the beneficial effect of lanifibranor treatment on the FibroScan-aspartate aminotransferase (FastTM) score, what we believe is a promising non-invasive test (NIT) for active NASH with significant fibrosis. Lastly, the fifth abstract evaluates the correlation between the response to lanifibranor therapy and adiponectin levels

In light of the Phase IIb results, we initiated a Phase III clinical trial of lanifibranor in NASH, named NATiV3. However, due to the invasion of Ukraine by Russia in 2022, we determined to put recruitment for our NATiV3 clinical trial of lanifibranor in Ukraine on hold and to remove all of the planned sites in Russia from the trial. In addition, we faced a higher than originally projected screen failure rate resulting in slower than anticipated enrollment rate, which caused a delay in the enrollment of patient in the trial, and we saw slower than predicted site activation, screening and enrollment due to negative impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic.

68

Table of Contents

In January 2023, we announced we had decided to modify the clinical development plan of lanifibranor for the treatment of NASH. The protocol amendments, submitted to the FDA in January 2023, are designed to align with an FDA public communication suggesting that an alternative approach to seek full approval in patients with NASH could be considered upon submission of positive results of a Phase III trial using a histology surrogate endpoint in patients with NASH and a Phase III clinical outcome trial in patients with NASH and compensated cirrhosis. Although the FDA’s guidance during a consultation preceding the January 2023 protocol amendments was to continue NATiV3 as planned, the FDA has not objected to the protocol amendments, which we expect should improve enrollment rates and compress the time to completion of the trial and thus benefit the overall lanifibranor clinical program by:

The NATiV3 clinical trial, including the amended protocol, has been designed as a double-blind, placebo-controlled global pivotal Phase III clinical trial to assess the potential benefit of lanifibranor treatment on liver-related clinical outcomes. Patients will be randomized 1:1:1 to receive lanifibranor (800mg once daily or 1200mg once daily) or placebo. We anticipate submission of a new drug application, or NDA, to the FDA for accelerated approval based on liver histological endpoints of approximately 900 patients treated over a 72-week period for our Phase III trial, if the data is positive. After the pre-specified histological analysis, the trial will remain blinded and all patients randomized in Part 1 of the trial will have access to the active treatment if they decide to continue in a new active 48-week treatment extension study. A placebo-controlled exploratory cohort is also anticipated to be added in parallel to the NATiV3 trial and will include approximately 200 patients with NASH and fibrosis who are not eligible for NATiV3. We anticipate that this exploratory cohort may allow the generation of additional results using non-invasive tests and contribute to the safety database requirement to support the planned submission for potential accelerated approval. Under the new trial design, the originally-planned Part 2 of the NATiV3 trial, a clinical outcome trial that was planned to be conducted in approximately 2,000 patients with F2 and F3 fibrosis for a maximum period of seven years, will be replaced by a placebo-controlled Phase III outcome trial which will be event driven and is expected to last approximately three years depending on patient enrollment. The Phase III outcome trial is expected to randomize approximately 800 patients with NASH and compensated cirrhosis.

If the results of the outcome trial in patients with NASH and compensated cirrhosis confirm sufficient clinical benefit, we anticipate the results will be used in our planned submission of an NDA to the FDA for full approval and the potential expansion of the addressable patient population beyond patients with F2 and F3 fibrosis to include patients with NASH and compensated cirrhosis, a patient population at an increased risk of liver-related morbidity and mortality and for which the anti-fibrotic properties of lanifibranor could potentially prevent worsening of the disease. Subject to the implementation and effect of the protocol amendments and additional measures being reviewed and designed to accelerate the enrollment rate, the last patient first visit for the ongoing NATiV3 trial is now targeted for the second half of 2023 and the publication of the topline results of NATiV3 for the second half of 2025. As of March 27, 2023, 369 clinical sites have been activated. There is no assurance that we will achieve the anticipated benefits of the protocol amendments or additional measures.

In October 2021, we announced the design of LEGEND, a Phase IIa combination trial with lanifibranor and SGLT2 inhibitor empagliflozin, in patients with NASH and Type-2 Diabetes. The primary efficacy endpoint of the trial is a change in Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) at the end of the 24-week treatment compared to baseline. Secondary endpoints include changes in liver enzymes, glycaemic and lipids parameters, inflammatory markers and body fat composition. We expect a total of 63 patients with T2D will be randomized into the trial, in several sites in the United States and Europe. The diagnosis of non-cirrhotic NASH will be based on historic histology evaluation or a combination of non-invasive methods including imaging and serum metabolic diagnostic tests, or probable NASH. On March 8, 2022, we announced that the FDA had completed the tolerability evaluation of the IND application and has concluded that the LEGEND proof-of-concept Phase II clinical trial combining lanifibranor with empagliflozin1, an SGLT2 inhibitor, in patients with type 2 diabetes ("T2D") and non-cirrhotic NASH could continue. On July 7, 2022, we announced the initiation of the LEGEND Phase IIa clinical trial with the screening of the first patient. The publication of top line results is expected for the second half of 2023.

69

Table of Contents

Odiparcil for the Treatment of MPS. Our second clinical-stage asset is odiparcil, which we were previously developing for the treatment of patients with mucopolysaccharidoses, or MPS, a group of rare genetic disorders characterized by an excessive accumulation of large sugar chains, known as glycosaminoglycans, or GAGs, in cells. As announced in 2020, we have decided to focus our clinical efforts on the development of lanifibranor for the treatment of NASH and as part of this decision, we are reviewing available options for potential further development of odiparcil for the treatment of MPS VI and may seek a third-party partner to help pursue the development and commercialization of odiparcil.

For the potential development of odiparcil, we had proposed to the FDA a potential single 52-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, followed by a 52-week safety extension with fifty MPS VI patients aged 5 to 15 receiving placebo or a low or high dose of odiparcil, depending on the patient’s weight, with approval potentially being sought after the initial 52 weeks of treatment if the primary end-point of improvement of a 6-minute walk test were met. In August 2022, we received feedback from the FDA that a single Phase 2/3 clinical trial with odiparcil in children with MPS VI could potentially support a marketing application. While we continue to suspend all MPS-related research and development activities while we evaluate our options, we believe the potential for an efficient development pathway for odiparcil for the treatment of MPS VI exists based on the FDA’s feedback and we continue to review potential options to further development of odiparcil for the treatment of MPS VI, which may include pursuing a partnership.

Odiparcil is an orally-available small molecule designed to modify how GAGs are synthesized. Odiparcil acts to facilitate the production of soluble GAGs that can be excreted in the urine, rather than accumulating in cells. Odiparcil has received orphan drug designation from the FDA and EMA and Rare Pediatric Disease Designation from the FDA for the treatment of MPS VI.

Discovery Engine. We have a scientific team of approximately 90 people with deep biology, medicinal and computational chemistry, pharmacokinetics, pharmacology and clinical development expertise. We also own a library of approximately 240,000 pharmacologically relevant molecules, 60% of which are proprietary, as well as a wholly-owned research and development facility. Using these assets and this expertise, we have built a discovery engine focused on small molecule compounds that target nuclear receptors, transcription factors and epigenetic modulation. We are leveraging this discovery engine to identify and develop compounds addressing a wide range of indications. Our Hippo signaling pathway program aims to disrupt the interaction between yes-associated protein, or YAP, and transcription enhancer associated domain transcription factors, or TEAD, an interaction that plays a key role in oncogenic and fibrotic processes. In xenograft and orthotopic models of malignant pleural mesothelioma, or MPM, we observed that YAP-TEAD inhibition was associated with reduced tumor growth and we are in the process of selecting development candidate for our Hippo program, which we anticipate entering pre-clinical development in 2024.

We are also advancing a pre-clinical program for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, or IPF, and have validated a new target within the transforming growth factor beta, or TGF-β, signaling pathway. We aim to find an agonist of NR4A1 that could modulate the TGF-β1 pathway, which is the main driver of the fibrogenesis. Even though the TGF-β1 pathway appears to be central in the development of fibrosis, prior strategies targeting it directly were unsuccessful and even deleterious. We believe NR4A1 has anti-fibrotic properties coming from its ability to regulate the TGF- β1 signaling. We are evaluating the anti-fibrotic properties of agonist compounds that directly bind to NR4A1 and keep it in an active form to inhibit the TGF-β1 signaling.

70

Table of Contents

Our Pipeline

(1) Licensing agreement giving Chia Tai Tianqing Pharmaceutical Group, Co., LTD. ("CTTQ"), an affiliate of Sino Biopharm, exclusive rights to develop and commercialize in China, Hong-Kong, Macao and Taiwan; (2) We suspended all MPS-related research and development activities in 2020, and continue to evaluate our options for potential further development of odiparcil for the treatment of MPS; (3) Lead generation means identifying molecules in anticipation of selecting candidates.

Our goal is to rapidly deliver multiple, novel and differentiated oral small molecule therapies to patients suffering from NASH, MPS, cancer and other diseases with significant unmet medical need. To work towards achieving our goal, we are pursuing the following strategies:

We have initiated LEGEND, a Phase IIa combination trial with lanifibranor and SGLT2 inhibitor empagliflozin, in patients with NASH and Type-2 Diabetes. The primary efficacy endpoint of the trial is a change in Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) at the end of the 24-week treatment compared to baseline. Secondary endpoints include changes in liver enzymes, glycaemic and lipids parameters, inflammatory markers and body fat composition

We are also supporting a Phase II investigator-initiated clinical trial studying lanifibranor for the treatment of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, or NAFLD, the most common liver disorder in developed countries and a precursor to NASH. If positive, we expect that these data would support our registrational filings for lanifibranor for the treatment of NASH.

Lanifibranor has received fast track designation from the FDA for the treatment of NASH. Based on the broad anti-fibrotic and anti-inflammatory properties, as well as beneficial vascular and metabolic effects, of lanifibranor observed in pre-clinical and clinical development to date, we may also pursue development of lanifibranor for the treatment of NASH patients with stage 4

71

Table of Contents

fibrosis, which is considered cirrhosis of the liver. Given our belief that NASH is underdiagnosed and poorly understood by the medical community, we have founded and sponsored the development of the panNASH Initiative, which is a working group of international independent scientific and medical NASH experts that aims to increase the visibility and contribute to a better understanding of NASH, including improving diagnosis and establishing best practices for the treatment of the disease. As part of the clinical development program of lanifibranor, we entered into an agreement with Sino Biopharm in September 2022 to support the clinical development and potential commercialization of lanifibranor in China.

Competition

The commercialization of new drugs is competitive, and we may face worldwide competition from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies and ultimately generic companies. Our competitors may develop or market therapies that are more effective, safer or less costly than any that we are commercializing, or may obtain regulatory or reimbursement approval for their therapies more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours.

Though there are no currently approved therapies for the treatment of NASH and we believe that lanifibranor is the only pan-PPAR agonist in clinical development for this indication, we cannot assure you that any of our products that we successfully develop will be clinically superior or scientifically preferable to products developed or introduced by our competitors. We face strong competitors who are conducting ongoing clinical trials, such as Madrigal, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk, Akero Therapeutics. As of the date of this report, more than 70 Phase I, II and III clinical trials enrolling patients are listed on the clinicaltrials.gov website. These competitors could obtain marketing authorization in the indications targeted by us, which could have a negative impact on the recruitment and retention of patients randomized to the placebo group. Moreover, certain patients could prefer to undergo treatment that has obtained a marketing authorization rather than participate or continue their participation in an ongoing clinical study with the possibility of being assigned to the placebo-controlled part. Intercept Pharmaceuticals announced its accelerated marketing authorization filing for ocaliva with the FDA for the treatment of NASH in December 2022. The EU marketing authorisation for ocaliva for the treatment of advanced fibrosis was withdrawn in December 2021.

In December 2022, Madrigal Pharmaceuticals announced positive results from their Phase III clinical trial and is expected to submit their Accelerated Marketing Authorization Application to the US FDA in 2023. Novo Nordisk is also conducting a Phase III clinical study for the treatment of NASH with their lead molecule semaglutide, which is already marketed for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and obesity. Akero Therapeutics announced positive results from their Phase IIb clinical study in 2022 and are expected to initiate a Phase III clinical study in 2023 while other companies, including 89Bio, Altimmune, AstraZeneca, Lilly, GNM Bio, NorthSea, Terns,

72

Table of Contents

Viking, BMS, BI, Pfizer, Regeneron, Gilead Sciences, have drug candidates for the treatment of NASH that are in less advanced clinical or preclinical development stages.

ERT is the standard of care for the treatment of MPS with current therapies being marketed by BioMarin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Takeda, Sanofi Genzyme, Shire Plc and Ultragenyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Additional ERTs, as well as gene therapy approaches to treating MPS, are in various stages of pre-clinical and clinical development.

Although we believe our product candidates possess attractive attributes, we cannot ensure that our product candidates will achieve regulatory or market acceptance. If our product candidates fail to gain regulatory approvals and acceptance in their intended markets, we may not generate meaningful revenues or achieve profitability.

Intellectual Property

Our success will significantly depend upon our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other intellectual property and proprietary protection for our drug candidates in the United States and internationally, including composition-of-matter, dosage and formulation patents, as well as patent and other intellectual property and proprietary protection for our novel biological discoveries and other important technology inventions and know-how. In addition to patents, we rely upon unpatented trade secrets, know-how, and continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our competitive position. We protect our proprietary information, in part, using confidentiality agreements with our commercial partners, partners, employees and consultants and invention assignment agreements with our employees. We also have confidentiality agreements or invention assignment agreements with our commercial partners and selected consultants. Despite these measures, any of our intellectual property and proprietary rights could be challenged, invalidated, circumvented, infringed or misappropriated, or such intellectual property and proprietary rights may not be sufficient to permit us to take advantage of current market trends or otherwise to provide competitive advantages. In addition, such confidentiality agreements and invention assignment agreements can be breached and we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach. For more information, please see “Risk factors - Risks Relating to Our Intellectual Property.”

As of December 31, 2022, with respect to lanifibranor, we own five issued U.S. patents and approximately 112 patents and patent applications in other jurisdictions. As of December 31, 2022, with respect to odiparcil, we own two issued U.S. patents, and approximately 84 patent and patent applications in other jurisdictions. We cannot predict whether the patent applications we pursue will issue as patents in any particular jurisdiction or whether the claims of any issued patents will provide any proprietary protection from competitors. The patent portfolios for our lead product candidates as of December 31, 2022 are summarized below.

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 are seeking patent protection for our product candidates, the patent term is 20 years from the earliest date if filing a non-provisional patent application. In the United States, the term of a patent may be lengthened by a patent term adjustment, which provides for term extension in the case of administrative delays at the United States Patent and Trademark Office in granting a patent, or may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over another patent with an earlier expiration date. Furthermore, in the United States, the term of a patent covering an FDA approved drug may be eligible for a patent term extension under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments as compensation for the loss of patent term during the FDA regulatory review process. The period of extension may be up to five years beyond the expiration of the patent but cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval. Only one patent among those eligible for an extension may be extended. In the future, if any of our product candidates receives FDA approval, we expect to apply for a patent term extension, if available, to extend the term of the patent covering such approved product candidate. We also expect to seek patent term extensions in any jurisdictions where they are available, however, there is no guarantee that the applicable authorities, including the FDA, will agree with our assessment of whether such an extension should be granted, and even if granted, the length of such an extension.

Lanifibranor

With respect to lanifibranor patent rights, as of December 31, 2022, we own five U.S. patents, which are due to expire between December 2026 and November 2039 excluding any additional term for patent term extension. Outside the United States, we own approximately 104 patents issued in approximately 55 jurisdictions, including Australia, Canada, China, a number of European countries, Japan, Korea, Israel and Russia; and approximately 8 patent applications pending in approximately six jurisdictions including Brazil, Canada, Egypt, Japan, Philippines and Tunisia. The foregoing patents and patent applications cover lanifibranor and methods of making and using lanifibranor.

73

Table of Contents

On November 28, 2022, we announced that the United States Patent and Trademark Office granted a patent (U.S. Patent No. 11,504,380) that protects the use of lanifibranor for the treatment of cirrhotic patients at risk of progressing from compensated stage to decompensated stage.

Odiparcil

With respect to odiparcil, as of December 31, 2022, we own two issued U.S. patents, which are due to expire in October 2034, excluding any additional term for patent term extension. Outside the United States, we own approximately 83 patents issued in approximately 43 jurisdictions, including a number of European countries; and one patent application pending in Tunisia. The foregoing patents and patent applications cover methods of using odiparcil.

Manufacturing

We rely on contract manufacturing organizations, or CMOs, to produce our drug candidates in accordance with the FDA’s current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, regulations for use in our clinical trials. The manufacture of pharmaceuticals is subject to extensive cGMP regulations, which impose various procedural and documentation requirements and govern all areas of record keeping, production processes and controls, personnel and quality control. Our small molecule drug candidate lanifibranor is manufactured using common chemical engineering and synthetic processes from commercially available raw materials.

To meet our projected needs for clinical supplies to support our activities through regulatory approval and commercial manufacturing, the CMOs with whom we currently work will need to increase the scale of production or we will need to secure alternate suppliers.

If we are unable to obtain sufficient quantities of drug candidates or receive raw materials in a timely manner, we could be required to delay our ongoing clinical trials and seek alternative manufacturers, which would be costly and time-consuming.

Government Regulation and Approval

United States - FDA Process

In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, and other federal and state statutes and regulations, govern, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, storage, recordkeeping, approval, labeling, promotion and marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, sampling, and import and export of drugs. To obtain regulatory approvals in the United States and in foreign countries, and subsequently comply with applicable statutes and regulations, we will need to spend substantial time and financial resources.

Approval Process

The FDA must approve any new drug or a drug with certain changes to a previously approved drug before a manufacturer can market it in the United States. If a company does not comply with applicable United States requirements it may be subject to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions, such as FDA refusal to approve pending applications, warning or untitled letters, clinical holds, drug recalls, drug seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, civil penalties, and criminal prosecution. The steps we must complete before we can market a drug include:

74

Table of Contents

It generally takes companies many years to satisfy the FDA approval requirements, but this varies substantially based upon the type, complexity, and novelty of the drug or disease. Pre-clinical tests include laboratory evaluation of a drug’s chemistry, formulation, and toxicity, as well as animal trials to assess the characteristics and potential safety and efficacy of the drug. The conduct of the pre-clinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements, including GLP. The company submits the results of the pre-clinical testing to the FDA as part of an IND along with other information, including information about the product drug’s chemistry, manufacturing and controls, and a proposed clinical study protocol. Long term pre-clinical tests, such as animal tests of reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity, may continue after submitting the initial IND.

The FDA requires a 30-day waiting period after the submission of each IND before the company can begin clinical testing in humans. The FDA may, within the 30-day time period, raise concerns or questions relating to one or more proposed clinical studies and place the study on a clinical hold. In such a case, the company and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the company begins the clinical study. Accordingly, the submission of an IND may or may not be sufficient for the FDA to permit the sponsor to start a clinical study. The company must also make a separate submission to an existing IND for each successive clinical study conducted during drug development.

Clinical Studies

Clinical studies involve administering the investigational new drug to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of a qualified investigator. The company must conduct clinical studies:

The company must submit each protocol involving testing on United States patients and subsequent protocol amendments to the FDA as part of the IND. The FDA may order the temporary, or permanent, discontinuation of a clinical study at any time, or impose other sanctions, if it believes that the sponsor is not conducting the clinical study in accordance with FDA requirements or presents an unacceptable risk to the clinical study patients. The sponsor must also submit the study protocol and informed consent information for patients in clinical studies to an IRB for approval. An IRB may halt the clinical study, either temporarily or permanently, for failure to comply with the IRB’s requirements, or may impose other conditions.

Companies generally divide the clinical investigation of a drug into three or four phases. While companies usually conduct these phases sequentially, they are sometimes overlapped or combined.

75

Table of Contents

A pivotal study is a clinical study that adequately meets regulatory agency requirements to evaluate a drug’s efficacy and safety to justify the approval of the drug. Generally, pivotal studies are Phase III studies, but the FDA may accept results from Phase II studies if the study design provides a well-controlled and reliable assessment of clinical benefit, particularly in situations in which there is an unmet medical need and the results are sufficiently robust.

The FDA, the IRB, or the clinical study sponsor may suspend or terminate a clinical study at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Additionally, an independent group of qualified experts organized by` the clinical study sponsor, known as a data and safety monitoring board, may oversee some clinical studies. This group provides authorization for whether or not a study may move forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the study.

Submission of an NDA

After we complete the required clinical testing, we can prepare and submit an NDA to the FDA, who must approve the NDA before we can start marketing the drug in the United States. An NDA must include all relevant data available from pertinent pre-clinical and clinical studies, including negative or ambiguous results as well as positive findings, together with detailed information relating to the drug’s chemistry, manufacturing, controls, and proposed labeling, among other things. Data can come from company- sponsored clinical studies on a drug, or from a number of alternative sources, including studies initiated by investigators. To support marketing authorization, the data we submit must be sufficient in quality and quantity to establish the safety and effectiveness of the investigational drug to the FDA’s satisfaction.

The cost of preparing and submitting an NDA is substantial. The submission of most NDAs is additionally subject to a substantial application user fee, and the manufacturer and/or sponsor under an approved NDA are also subject to annual program user fees. The FDA typically increases these fees annually. Orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical study costs, tax advantages, and user-fee waivers.

The FDA has 60 days from its receipt of an NDA to determine whether it will accept the application for filing based on the agency’s threshold determination that the application is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. Once the FDA accepts the filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review. The FDA has agreed to certain performance goals in the review of NDAs. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, the FDA has a goal of responding to standard review NDAs within ten months after the 60-day filing review period, but this timeframe is often extended. The FDA reviews most applications for standard review drugs within twelve months and most applications for priority review drugs within six to eight months. Priority review can be applied to drugs that the FDA determines offer major advances in treatment, or provide a treatment where no adequate therapy exists.

The FDA may also refer applications for novel drugs that present difficult questions of safety or efficacy, to an advisory committee. This is typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts that will review, evaluate, and recommend whether the FDA should approve the application. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it generally follows such recommendations. Before approving an NDA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP, and will inspect the facility or the facilities at which the drug is manufactured. The FDA will not approve the drug unless compliance with cGMP is satisfactory and the NDA contains data that provide evidence that the drug is safe and effective in the indication studied.

76

Table of Contents

The FDA’s Decision on an NDA

After the FDA evaluates the NDA and the manufacturing facilities, it issues either an approval letter or a complete response letter. A complete response letter indicates that the FDA has completed its review of the application, and the agency has determined that it will not approve the application in its present form. A complete response letter generally outlines the deficiencies in the submission and may require substantial additional clinical data and/or other significant, expensive, and time-consuming requirements related to clinical studies, pre-clinical studies and/or manufacturing. The FDA has committed to reviewing resubmissions of the NDA addressing such deficiencies in two or six months, depending on the type of information included. Even if we submit such data the FDA may ultimately decide that the NDA does not satisfy the criteria for approval. Also, the government may establish additional requirements, including those resulting from new legislation, or the FDA’s policies may change, which could delay or prevent regulatory approval of our drugs under development.

An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications. As a condition of NDA approval, the FDA may require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, to help ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh the potential risks. REMS can include medication guides, communication plans for healthcare professionals, special training or certification for prescribing or dispensing, dispensing only under certain circumstances, special monitoring, and the use of patient registries. The requirement for REMS can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the drug. Moreover, the FDA may condition approval on substantial post-approval testing and surveillance to monitor the drug’s safety or efficacy. Once granted, the FDA may withdraw drug approvals if the company fails to comply with regulatory standards or identifies problems following initial marketing.

Changes to some of the conditions established in an approved application, including changes in indications, labeling, or manufacturing processes or facilities, require submission and FDA approval of a new NDA or NDA supplement before we can implement the change. An NDA supplement for a new indication typically requires clinical data similar to that in the original application, and the FDA uses the same procedures and actions in reviewing NDA supplements as it does in reviewing new NDAs. As with new NDAs, the FDA often significantly extends the review process with requests for additional information or clarification.

Post-approval Requirements

The FDA regulates drugs that are manufactured or distributed pursuant to FDA approvals and has specific requirements pertaining to recordkeeping, periodic reporting, drug sampling and distribution, advertising and promotion and reporting of adverse experiences with the drug. After approval, the FDA must provide review and approval for most changes to the approved drug, such as adding new indications or other labeling claims. There also are continuing, annual user fee requirements for any marketed drugs and the establishments who manufacture our drugs, as well as new application fees for supplemental applications with clinical data.

In some cases, the FDA may condition approval of an NDA for a drug on the sponsor’s agreement to conduct additional clinical studies after approval. In other cases, a sponsor may voluntarily conduct additional clinical studies after approval to gain more information about the drug. Such post-approval studies are typically referred to as Phase IV clinical studies.

Drug manufacturers are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and state agencies for compliance with cGMP requirements. There are strict regulations regarding changes to the manufacturing process, and, depending on the significance of the change, it may require prior FDA approval before we can implement it. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose reporting and documentation requirements upon us and any third-party manufacturers that we may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMP and other aspects of regulatory compliance.

The FDA may withdraw approval if a company does not comply with regulatory requirements and maintain standards or if problems occur after the drug reaches the market. If a company or the FDA discovers previously unknown problems with a drug, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, issues with manufacturing processes, or the company’s failure to comply with regulatory requirements, the FDA may revise the approved labeling to add new safety information; impose post-marketing studies or other clinical studies to assess new safety risks; or impose distribution or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences may include:

77

Table of Contents

The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising, and promotion of drugs that are placed on the market. Drugs may be promoted only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses. We could be subject to significant administrative, civil and criminal liability if we violated any of these laws and regulations.

Expedited Development and Review Programs

The FDA has a number of programs intended to expedite the development or review of products that meet certain criteria. For example, new drugs are eligible for Fast Track designation if they are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the disease or 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 fast track product has opportunities for more frequent interactions with the review team during product development, and the FDA may consider for review sections of the NDA on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the NDA, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the NDA and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the NDA.

Any product submitted to the FDA for approval, including a product with a fast track designation, may also be eligible for other types of FDA programs intended to expedite development and review, such as priority review and accelerated approval. A 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 designated for priority review in an effort to facilitate the review. The FDA endeavors to review applications with priority review designations within six months of the filing date as compared to ten months for review of new molecular entity NDAs under its current PDUFA review goals.

In addition, a product may be eligible for accelerated approval. Drug products intended to treat serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions may be eligible for accelerated approval upon a determination that the product has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity, or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require that a sponsor of a drug receiving accelerated approval perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing clinical trials. In addition, the FDA currently requires pre-approval of promotional materials as a condition for accelerated approval, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product.

The Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act established a category of drugs referred to as “breakthrough therapies” that may be eligible to receive breakthrough therapy designation. A sponsor may seek FDA designation of a product candidate as a “breakthrough therapy” if the product is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other products, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. The designation includes all of the fast track program features, as well as more intensive FDA interaction and guidance. The breakthrough therapy designation is a distinct status from both accelerated approval and priority review, which can also be granted to the same drug if relevant criteria are met. If a product is designated as breakthrough therapy, the FDA will work to expedite the development and review of such drug.

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. Even if a product qualifies for one or more of these programs, the

78

Table of Contents

FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened.

Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher Program

FDA awards priority review vouchers to sponsors of designated rare pediatric disease product applications as an incentive to encourage development of new drug and biological products for prevention and treatment of rare pediatric diseases. Specifically, under this program, a sponsor who receives an approval for a drug or biologic for a “rare pediatric disease” may qualify for a voucher that can be redeemed to receive a priority review of a subsequent marketing application for a different product. The sponsor of a rare pediatric disease drug product receiving a priority review voucher may transfer (including by sale) the voucher to another sponsor. The voucher may be further transferred any number of times before the voucher is used, as long as the sponsor making the transfer has not yet submitted the application. The FDA may also revoke any priority review voucher if the rare pediatric disease drug for which the voucher was awarded is not marketed in the United States within one year following the date of approval.

For the purposes of this program, a “rare pediatric disease” is a (a) serious or life-threatening disease in which the serious or life-threatening manifestations primarily affect individuals aged from birth to 18 years, including age groups often called neonates, infants, children, and adolescents; and (b) rare disease or conditions within the meaning of the Orphan Drug Act. A sponsor may choose to request Rare Pediatric Disease Designation, but the designation process is entirely voluntary; requesting designation is not a prerequisite to requesting or receiving a priority review voucher. In addition, sponsors who choose not to submit a Rare Pediatric Disease Designation request may nonetheless receive a priority review voucher if they request such a voucher in their original marketing application and meet all of the eligibility criteria.

Absent any extension, Congress has only authorized the Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher program until September 30, 2024. However, if a drug candidate receives Rare Pediatric Disease Designation before December 18, 2024, it is eligible to receive a voucher if it is approved before September 30, 2026.

Orphan Drug Designation

The FDA may grant orphan drug designation to drugs intended to treat a rare disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or if it affects more than 200,000 individuals in the United States, there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making the drug for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales in the United States.

Orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical study costs, tax advantages, and user-fee waivers. In addition, if a drug receives FDA approval for the indication for which it has orphan drug designation, the drug may be entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means the FDA may not approve any other application to market the same drug for the same indication for a period of seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority over the drug with orphan exclusivity.

Pediatric Information

Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, NDAs or supplements to NDAs must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the drug is safe and effective. The FDA may grant full or partial waivers, or deferrals, for submission of data. Unless otherwise required by regulation, PREA does not apply to any drug for an indication for which the FDA has granted an orphan drug designation.

79

Table of Contents

Healthcare Reform

In the United States and foreign jurisdictions, the legislative landscape continues to evolve. There have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system that could affect our current and future results of operations. In particular, there have been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the federal and state levels that seek to reform the way in which healthcare is funded and reduce healthcare costs. In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2009, or collectively, the Affordable Care Act, was enacted, which includes measures that have significantly changed health care financing by both governmental and private insurers. The Affordable Care Act, among other things: (1) increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and expanded rebate liability from fee-for-service Medicaid utilization to include the utilization of Medicaid managed care organizations as well; (2) established a branded prescription drug fee that pharmaceutical manufacturers of branded prescription drugs must pay to the federal government; (3) expanded the list of covered entities eligible to participate in the 340B drug pricing program by adding new entities to the program; (4) established a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 70% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D; (5) extended manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability to covered drugs dispensed to individuals who are enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations; (6) expanded eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs by, among other things, allowing states to offer Medicaid coverage to additional individuals and by adding new mandatory eligibility categories for individuals with income at or below 133% of the federal poverty level, thereby potentially increasing manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability; (7) created a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for certain drugs and biologics, including our product candidates, that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected; (8) established a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research; (9) established a Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending, potentially including prescription drug spending; and (10) created a licensure framework for follow-on biologic products. There have been judicial, Congressional, and executive branch challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act.

There have been judicial, Congressional and executive branch challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. In addition, there have been a number of health reform measures by the Biden administration that have impacted the Affordable Care Act. For example, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in Affordable Care Act marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the “donut hole” under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and creating a new manufacturer discount program. It is possible that the Affordable Care Act will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how such challenges and the healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the Affordable Care Act.

In addition, other health reform measures have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. For example, as a result of the Budget Control Act of 2011, as amended, providers are subject to Medicare payment reductions of 2% per fiscal year until 2031, unless additional Congressional action is taken. Under current legislation, the actual reduction in Medicare payments will vary from 1% in 2022 to up to 4% in the final fiscal year of this sequester. Further, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 reduced Medicare payments to several providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments from providers from three to five years. Additionally, on March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, beginning January 1, 2024.

80

Table of Contents

Further, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several recent Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, reduce the cost of drugs under Medicare, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. For example, at the federal level, in July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, “Promoting Competition in the American Economy,” with multiple provisions aimed at prescription drugs. In response to Biden’s executive order, on September 9, 2021, HHS released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug pricing reform and sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue as well as potential administrative actions HHS can take to advance these principles. In addition, the IRA, among other things, (1) directs HHS to negotiate the price of certain single-source drugs and biologics covered under Medicare and (2) imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation. These provisions will take effect progressively starting in fiscal year 2023, although they may be subject to legal challenges. Further, the Biden administration released an additional executive order on October 14, 2022, directing HHS to submit a report within 90 days on how the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation can be further leveraged to test new models for lowering drug costs for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries. At the 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 certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. It is also possible that additional governmental action is taken in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

European Union-EMA Process

In the European Union, our product candidates may also be subject to extensive regulatory requirements. As in the United States, medicinal products can only be marketed if a marketing authorization, or MA, from the competent regulatory agencies has been obtained.

Similar to the United States, the various phases of pre-clinical and clinical research in the European Union are subject to significant regulatory controls. Clinical trials of medicinal products in the European Union must be conducted in accordance with European Union and national regulations and the International Conference on Harmonization, or ICH, guidelines on GCP. Although the EU Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC has sought to harmonize the European Union clinical trials regulatory framework, setting out common rules for the control and authorization of clinical trials in the European Union, the EU Member States have transposed and applied the provisions of the Directive differently. This has led to significant variations in the Member State regimes. To improve the current system, Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use, which repealed Directive 2001/20/EC, was adopted on April 16, 2014 and published in the European Official Journal on May 27, 2014. The Regulation aims at harmonizing and streamlining the clinical trials authorization process, simplifying adverse event reporting procedures, improving the supervision of clinical trials, and increasing their transparency. Although the Regulation entered into force on June 16, 2014, it will not be applicable until six months after the full functionality of the IT portal and database envisaged in the Regulation is confirmed (after the publication of the notice referred to in Article 83(2)). This is not expected to occur until 2019. Until then the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC will still apply.

Under the current regime, before a clinical trial can be initiated it must be approved in each of the EU Member States where the trial is to be conducted by two distinct bodies: the National Competent Authority, or NCA, and one or more Ethics Committees, or ECs. Under the current regime all suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions, or SUSARs, to the investigated drug that occur during the clinical trial have to be reported to the NCA and ECs of the Member State where they occurred.

European Union Marketing Authorizations

In the European Economic Area, or EEA, medicinal products can only be commercialized after obtaining a marketing authorization or MA, from the competent regulatory authorities. There are different types of marketing authorizations including:

Centralized Procedure

A centralized MA is issued by the European Commission through the centralized procedure, based on the opinion of the CHMP and is valid in all EU Member States and throughout the entire territory of the EEA.

The centralized procedure is mandatory for certain types of products, such as biotechnology medicinal products, orphan medicinal products, and medicinal products containing a new active substance indicated for the treatment of acquired immune deficiency

81

Table of Contents

syndrome, or AIDS, cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, diabetes, autoimmune and viral diseases. The centralized procedure is optional for products containing a new active substance not yet authorized in the EEA, or for products that constitute a significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovation or which are in the interest of public health in the European Union.

National MAs, which are issued by the competent authorities of the Member States of the EEA and only cover their respective territory, are available for products not falling within the mandatory scope of the centralized procedure.

When a medicinal product does not fall within the mandatory scope of the Centralized Procedure, the applicant may use the decentralized procedure or the mutual recognition procedure in order to obtain a marketing authorization in one or more countries in the European Union. In these cases, the competent authorities of the Member States will issue the MA.

Decentralized Procedure

If the product has not received a national MA in any Member State at the time of application, it can be approved simultaneously in various Member States through the decentralized procedure.

Under the decentralized procedure, an identical dossier is submitted to the competent authorities of each of the Member States in which the MA is sought, one of which is selected by the applicant as the Reference Member State, or RMS. The competent authority of the RMS prepares a draft assessment report, a draft summary of the product characteristics, or SPC, and a draft of the labeling and package leaflet, which are sent to the other Member States (referred to as the Concerned Member States, or CMSs) for their approval. If the CMSs raise no objections, based on a potential serious risk to public health, to the assessment, SPC, labeling, or packaging proposed by the RMS, the product is subsequently granted a national MA in all the Member States (i.e. in the RMS and the CMSs).

Under the above described procedures, before granting the MA, the EMA or the competent authorities of the Member States of the EEA make an assessment of the risk-benefit balance of the product on the basis of scientific criteria concerning its quality, safety and efficacy.

The European Commission may also grant a so-called “conditional marketing authorization” prior to obtaining the comprehensive clinical data required for an application for a full MA. Such conditional marketing authorizations may be granted for product candidates (including medicines designated as orphan medicinal products), if (1) the risk-benefit balance of the product candidate is positive, (2) it is likely that the applicant will be in a position to provide the required comprehensive clinical trial data, (3) the product fulfills an unmet medical need and (4) the benefit to public health of the immediate availability on the market of the medicinal product concerned outweighs the risk inherent in the fact that additional data are still required. A conditional marketing authorization may contain specific obligations to be fulfilled by the MA holder, including obligations with respect to the completion of ongoing or new studies, and with respect to the collection of pharmacovigilance data. Conditional marketing authorizations are valid for one year, and may be renewed annually, if the risk-benefit balance remains positive, and after an assessment of the need for additional or modified conditions and/or specific obligations.

Orphan Drug Designation

In the European Union, Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, as amended, states that a drug will be designated as an orphan drug if its sponsor can establish (Article 3) that it is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition affecting not more than five in ten thousand persons in the European Union when the application is made, or that it is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening, seriously debilitating or serious and chronic condition in the European Union and that without incentives it is unlikely that the marketing of the drug in the European Union would generate sufficient return to justify the necessary investment; and that there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of the condition in question that has been authorized in the European Union or, if such method exists, that the drug will be of significant benefit to those affected by that condition pursuant to Regulation (EC) No. 847/2000 of April 27, 2000 laying down the provisions for implementation of the criteria for designation of a medicinal product as an orphan medicinal product and definitions of the concepts “similar medicinal product” and “clinical superiority.” A sponsor applying for designation of a medicinal product as an orphan medicinal product shall apply for designation at any stage of the development of the medicinal product.

If a centralized procedure MA in respect of an orphan drug is granted pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, regulatory authorities will not, for a period of usually ten years, accept another application for a MA, or grant a MA or accept an application to

82

Table of Contents

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

Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006, all applications for marketing authorization for new medicines must include the results of studies as described in a pediatric investigation plan, or PIP, agreed between regulatory authorities and the applicant, unless the medicine is exempt because of a deferral or waiver (e.g., because the relevant disease or condition occurs only in adults). Before the EMA is able to begin its assessment of a centralized procedure MA application, it will validate that the applicant has complied with the agreed pediatric investigation plan. The applicant and the EMA may, where such a step is adequately justified, agree to modify a pediatric investigation plan to assist validation. Modifications are not always possible; may take longer to agree than the period of validation permits; and may still require the applicant to withdraw its marketing authorization application, or MAA, and to conduct additional non-clinical and clinical studies. Products that are granted a MA on the basis of the pediatric clinical trials conducted in accordance with the PIP are eligible for a six month extension of the protection under a supplementary protection certificate (if any is in effect at the time of approval) or, in the case of orphan medicinal products, a two-year extension of the orphan market exclusivity. This pediatric reward is subject to specific conditions and is not automatically available when data in compliance with the PIP are developed and submitted.

The exclusivity period may increase to 12 years if, among other things, the MAA includes the results of studies from an agreed pediatric investigation plan. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a MA may be granted for the same therapeutic indication to a similar drug if:

Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No. 847/2000 of April 27, 2000 laying down the provisions for implementation of the criteria for designation of a medicinal product as an orphan medicinal product and definitions of the concepts “similar medicinal product” and “clinical superiority,” a sponsor applying for designation of a medicinal product as an orphan medicinal product shall apply for designation at any stage of the development of the medicinal product.

The abovementioned Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000 provides for other incentives regarding orphan medicinal products. It notably provides for a protocol assistance. The sponsor of an orphan medicinal product may indeed, prior to the submission of an application for marketing authorization, request advice from EMA on the conduct of the various tests and trials necessary to demonstrate the quality, safety and efficacy of the medicinal product. Besides, EMA shall draw up a procedure on the development of orphan medicinal products, covering regulatory assistance for the definition of the content of the application for authorization.

Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000 also provides that medicinal products designated as orphan medicinal products under the provisions of this Regulation shall be eligible for incentives made available by the European Union and by the Member States to support research into, and the development and availability of, orphan medicinal products and in particular aid for research for small- and medium-sized undertakings provided for in framework programs for research and technological development.

French Regulatory Framework

In France, Law no. 2011-2012 of December 29, 2011 relating to the reinforcement of the health safety of drug and health product candidates, as amended, completed by Decree no. 2012-745 of May 9, 2012 relating to public declarations of interest and transparency in terms of public health and health safety, set out rules in the French Public Health Code (Code de la santé publique) regarding disclosures on remuneration and advantages awarded to certain health professionals by companies that produce or market health products (Articles L. 1453-1 and D. 1453-1 et seq. of the French Public Health Code). These provisions were recently redefined and expanded by French Decree No. 2016-41 of January 26, 2016. Under this decree, companies that produce or market health products such as drug candidates in France, or that provide services associated with these products, must disclose, any advantages and remuneration effectively awarded to health professionals of over ten euros in value, as well as any agreements entered into with health professionals, along with

83

Table of Contents

detailed information on each agreement (exact purpose, date of signature, duration, direct beneficiary and ultimate beneficiary, and amount under the agreement).

The French Public Health Code also contains “anti-gift” provisions that, in general, prohibit companies that make or market health products from awarding payments or advantages to health professionals, with a limited number of exceptions, and strictly define the conditions under which such payments or advantages may legally be granted. The provisions resulting from French Law no. 2011-2012 were modified by French Ordinance no. 2017-49 of January 19, 2017 which, in particular, made them applicable to a wider range of natural and legal persons, specified the scope of transactions excluded from the ban and transactions authorized under certain conditions, and set out a new process for authorization. The implementing decree is still pending publication.

In France, any advertising or promotion of medication must comply with the authorized summary of the product characteristics; consequently, any promotion on unauthorized allegations is prohibited.

The promotion of drugs subject to medical prescription and aimed at the general public is also prohibited in the EU. Although the overall principles for the advertising and promotion of medication are set by EU directives, each member state is free to set more or less restrictive conditions to implement these principles.

If companies do not comply with applicable requirements, they may be subject to fines, suspensions or withdrawals of their marketing authorizations, recalls or confiscations of their products, operating restrictions and legal proceedings, among others.

Other International Markets-Drug Approval Process

In some international markets (such as China or Japan), although data generated in the United States or European Union trials may be submitted in support of a marketing authorization application, regulators may require additional clinical studies conducted in the host territory, or studying people of the ethnicity of the host territory, prior to the filing or approval of marketing applications within the country.

Pricing and Reimbursement

Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any drugs for which we may obtain regulatory approval. In the United States and markets in other countries, sales of any drugs for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale will depend in part on the availability of coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors. Third-party payors include government authorities, managed care plans, private health insurers and other organizations. The process for determining whether a payor will provide coverage for a drug may be separate from the process for setting the reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the drug. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific drugs on an approved list, or formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved drugs for a particular indication. Moreover, a payor’s decision to provide coverage for a drug does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved.

Additionally, no uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement exists in the United States. Third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates, but also have their own methods and approval process apart from Medicare determinations. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for drugs can differ significantly from payor to payor. 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 drug development.

Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price and examining the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of drugs and services, in addition to their safety and efficacy. To obtain coverage and reimbursement for any drug that might be approved for sale, we may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of our drug. These studies will be in addition to the studies required to obtain regulatory approvals. If third-party payors do not consider a drug to be cost-effective compared to other available therapies, they may not cover the drug after approval as a benefit under their plans or, if they do, the level of payment may not be sufficient to allow a company to sell its drugs at a profit.

The United States government, state legislatures and foreign governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid health care costs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic drugs for branded prescription drugs. By way of example, the Affordable Care Act contains

84

Table of Contents

provisions that may reduce the profitability of drugs, including, for example, increased rebates for drugs sold to Medicaid programs, extension of Medicaid rebates to Medicaid managed care plans, mandatory discounts for certain Medicare Part D beneficiaries and annual fees based on pharmaceutical companies’ share of sales to federal health care programs. Adoption of government controls and measures, and tightening of restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could limit payments for our drugs.

In the European Community, governments influence the price of drugs through their pricing and reimbursement rules and control of national health care systems that fund a large part of the cost of those drugs to consumers. Some jurisdictions operate positive and negative list systems under which drugs may only be marketed once a reimbursement price has been agreed to by the government. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval, some of these countries may require the completion of clinical studies that compare the cost effectiveness of a particular drug candidate to currently available therapies. Other member states allow companies to fix their own prices for medicines, but monitor and control company profits. The downward pressure on health care costs in general, particularly prescription drugs, has become very intense. In addition, in some countries, cross-border imports from low-priced markets exert a commercial pressure on pricing within a country. The marketability of any drugs for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale may suffer if third-party payors fail to provide coverage and adequate reimbursement. In addition, the focus on cost containment measures in the United States and other countries has increased and we expect will continue to increase the pressure on pharmaceutical pricing. Coverage policies and third-party reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if we attain favorable coverage and reimbursement status for one or more drugs for which we receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.

Other Healthcare Laws Impacting Sales, Marketing, and Other Company Activities

Numerous regulatory authorities in addition to the FDA, including, in the United States, the CMS, other divisions of HHS, the United States Department of Justice, and similar foreign, state, and local government authorities, regulate and enforce laws and regulations applicable to sales, promotion and other activities of pharmaceutical manufacturers. These laws and regulations may impact, among other things, our clinical research programs, proposed sales and marketing and education activities, and financial and business relationships with future prescribers of our product candidates, once approved. These laws and regulations include federal, state and foreign anti-kickback, false claims, and data privacy and security laws, which are described below, among other legal requirements that may affect our current and future operations.

The FDA regulates all advertising and promotion activities for drugs under its jurisdiction both prior to and after approval. Only those claims relating to safety and efficacy that the FDA has approved may be used in labeling. Physicians may prescribe legally available drugs for uses that are not described in the drug’s labeling and that differ from those we tested and the FDA approved. Such off-label uses are common across medical specialties, and often reflect a physician’s belief that the off-label use is the best treatment for the patients. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments, but FDA regulations do impose stringent restrictions on manufacturers’ communications regarding off-label uses. Promotion of off-label uses of drugs can also implicate the false claims laws described below.

Anti-kickback laws including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute that applies to items and services reimbursable under governmental healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, make it illegal for a person or entity to, among other things, knowingly and willfully solicit, receive, offer or pay remuneration, directly or indirectly, to induce, or in return for, purchasing, leasing, ordering, or arranging for or recommending the purchase, lease, or order of any good, facility, item, or service reimbursable, in whole or in part, under a federal healthcare program. Due to the breadth of the statutory provisions, limited statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors, and the scarcity of guidance in the form of regulations, agency advisory opinions, sub-regulatory guidance and judicial decisions addressing industry practices, it is possible that our practices might be challenged under anti-kickback or similar laws. Moreover, recent healthcare reform legislation has strengthened these laws. For example, the Affordable Care Act, among other things, amends the intent requirement of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and criminal healthcare fraud statute to clarify that a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of these statutes or specific intent to violate them in order to have committed a crime. In addition, Affordable Care Act clarifies that the government may assert that a claim that includes 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.

False claims laws, including, without limitation, the federal civil False Claims Act, and civil monetary penalties laws, prohibit, among other things, any individual or entity from knowingly and willingly presenting, or causing to be presented for payment, to the federal government (including Medicare and Medicaid) claims for reimbursement for, among other things, drugs or services that are

85

Table of Contents

false or fraudulent, claims for items or services not provided as claimed, or claims for medically unnecessary items or services. Our activities relating to the sales and marketing of our drugs may be subject to scrutiny under these laws.

The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, prohibits, among other things, executing or attempting to execute a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors, knowingly and willfully embezzling or stealing from a healthcare benefit program, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense, and creates federal criminal laws that prohibit knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation, or making or using any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services.

HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, and their implementing regulations, governs the conduct of certain electronic healthcare transactions and imposes requirements with respect to safeguarding the security and privacy of protected health information on health plans, healthcare clearinghouses, and certain healthcare providers, known as covered entities, and individual and entities who provide services involving protected health information to such covered entities, known as business associates, as well as their covered subcontractors.

The federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics, and medical supplies to report annually to CMS information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians, as defined by such law (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners), and teaching hospitals, as well as information regarding ownership and investment interests held by such physicians and their immediate family members.

In addition, we may be subject to state and foreign law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback, self-referral, and false claims laws which may apply to our business practices, including but not limited to, research, distribution, sales and marketing arrangements as well as submitting claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers; state laws that require pharmaceutical manufacturers to comply with the industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the applicable compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government that otherwise restricts payments that may be made to healthcare providers; state laws that require pharmaceutical manufacturers to file reports with states regarding marketing information, such as the tracking and reporting of gifts, compensation and other remuneration and items of value provided to healthcare professionals and entities; state and local laws requiring the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives; and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways, thus complicating compliance efforts.

Violations of these laws may result in significant criminal, civil and administrative sanctions, including fines and civil monetary penalties, imprisonment, the possibility of exclusion from federal healthcare programs (including Medicare and Medicaid), disgorgement, contractual damages, reputational harm and the imposition of corporate integrity agreements or other similar agreements with governmental entities, which may impose, among other things, rigorous operational and monitoring requirements on companies. Similar sanctions and penalties, as well as individual imprisonment, also can be imposed upon executive officers and employees, including criminal sanctions against executive officers under the so-called “responsible corporate officer” doctrine, even in situations where the executive officer did not intend to violate the law and was unaware of any wrongdoing. Given the significant penalties and fines that can be imposed on companies and individuals if convicted, allegations of such violations often result in settlements, which can include significant civil sanctions and additional corporate integrity obligations, even if the company or individual being investigated admits no wrongdoing.

Similar restrictions are imposed on the promotion and marketing of drugs in the European Union and other countries. Even in those countries where we may not be directly responsible for the promotion and marketing of our drugs, if our potential international distribution partners engage in inappropriate activity it can have adverse implications for us.

86

Table of Contents

The following diagram illustrates our corporate structure:

(1)Inventiva Inc. was incorporated in the state of New Jersey on January 5, 2021.

Our corporate headquarters is located in Daix, France, where we occupy approximately 129,000 square feet of space that we own. We believe our existing facilities meet our current needs.

87

Table of Contents

Euronext Paris in February 2017, followed by €32.4 million in net proceeds from a private placement of our ordinary shares in April 2018, €8.6 million in net proceeds from two capital increases for categories of investors in September and October 2019, €14.6 million in net proceeds from a capital increase for categories of investors in February 2020.

In July 2020, we completed our initial public offering on the Nasdaq Global Market of an aggregate of 7,478,261 new ordinary shares in the form of American Depositary Shares, or ADSs, each representing one ordinary share at an offering price of $14.40 per ADS, for an aggregate gross proceeds amount of $107.7 million, equivalent to approximately €94.1 million (based on exchange rate on July 15, 2020, date of receipt of funds), before deduction of underwriting commissions and estimated expenses payable by us. Our net proceeds from this global offering were approximately €87 million. We established an “At-The-Market” program for aggregate gross sales proceeds of up to $100,000,000 in August 2021 and raised $30 million in gross proceeds through that program in September 2021, $1.9 million in October 2021 and €9.4 million in June 2022.

We also received payments under our license and collaboration agreement with CTTQ and under our now-terminated collaboration agreements with AbbVie and Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, or BI, research tax credits, subsidies and bank borrowings.

In May 2022, we entered into a finance contract with the European Investment Bank for up to €50 million (“Finance Contract”). The Finance Contract provides for funding in two equal tranches of €25 million, the disbursement of each tranche being subject to the fulfilment of certain conditions. Borrowings under the Finance Contract shall bear an interest rate equal to 8% per annum for the first tranche and 7% per annum for the second tranche. Each tranche shall be repayable in a single instalment on the maturity date of the relevant tranche, which shall be no later than four years after the disbursement of the first tranche and no later than three years after the disbursement of the second tranche. Following the satisfaction of the conditions attached to the first tranche, €25 million were disbursed on December 8, 2022.

In May 2020, we entered into three credit agreements pursuant to which we received €10.0 million in the form of State Guaranteed Loans (Prêts Garantis par l'Etat, or “PGE”), which were provided by a syndicate of French banks and are guaranteed by the French government in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The loans were initially set to mature in May 2021, but were amended to extend the maturity date for up to an additional four years. The amendments provide for linear repayment extension over four years, beginning in July 2022 for one PGE loan, and in September 2022 for the other two PGE loans, until May 2026.

In June 2022, we entered into three loan agreements with a syndicate of French banks for a total amount of €5.3 million. One loan agreement was part of a state-guaranteed PGE loan facility with Bpifrance and the other two loan agreements were part of a stimulus economic plan (Prêts Participatifs Relance, or “PPR”) granted by Crédit Agricole Champagne-Bourgogne and Société Générale. The 2022 PGE loan granted by Bpifrance is guaranteed up to 90% by the French government and has a maturity aligned with the existing May 2020 PGE, for which the Company has opted for a linear repayment extension until May 2026. The two PPR loans are guaranteed predominantly by the French government and feature an eight-year financing period and a four-year repayment period.

We have incurred significant operating losses since our inception. Our net loss was €33.6 million, €49.6 million and €54.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, 2021 and 2022, respectively. We had cash and cash equivalents of €105.7 million, €86.6 million and €86.7 million as of December 31, 2020, 2021 and 2022, respectively. We expect to incur significant expenses and substantial operating losses over the next several years as we advance clinical development and prepare for potential commercialization of lanifibranor and continue our pre-clinical and research and development efforts of our other product candidates. Our net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year, depending on the timing of our clinical trials, the payment of milestone and other payments, if any, under our collaboration with CTTQ and any potential other partners, and our expenditures on other research and development activities. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially in connection with our ongoing activities, as we:

88

Table of Contents

Impact of COVID-19

The impact of COVID-19 on our financial position and operating results has so far been limited. However, the recruitment and screening of new patients for the Phase II trial of lanifibranor in Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease, or NAFLD, was temporarily suspended due to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021. In addition, while the COVID19 pandemic has eased globally, the strain on health systems continues to affect clinical sites, notably through staffing shortages and higher turnover. The Company saw slower than predicted site activation, screening and enrollment due to negative impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic and the Company continues to be unable to conduct clinical trial activities at sites originally located in Ukraine and Russia. However, the delay in NATiV3 the Company faced in the first half of 2022 was primarily due to a higher than originally projected screen failure rate resulting in slower than anticipated enrollment rate.

At the present date, we are not aware of specific events or circumstances that would require us to update our estimates, assumptions and judgments or to revise the carrying amounts of our assets and liabilities. Such estimates may be adjusted as new events occur and additional information is obtained. The adjustments will be recognized in the consolidated financial statements as soon as we become aware of such new events or additional information. Actual results may differ from the estimates and any differences may have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

Revenue

Our revenue has consisted primarily of up-front and milestone payments, as well as service fees, received in connection with our licensing and collaboration agreement with CTTQ, and our prior collaboration agreements with AbbVie and Boehringer Ingelheim, which were terminated in October 2022 and November 2019, respectively.

In September 2022, we entered into a licensing and collaboration agreement with CTTQ to develop, import, manufacture, commercialize and market lanifibranor, subject to regulatory approval, for the treatment of NASH and potentially other metabolic diseases, in China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan (Greater China). On September 28, 2022, the Company invoiced to CTTQ $12.6 million (the total invoiced corresponds to the initial payment of $12 million, and an additional billing of $0.6 million not included in the contract, following an agreement reached between the parties after the signature of the licensing and collaboration agreement). On November 4, 2022, CTTQ paid us $11.4 million after deducting the withholding taxes of $1.3 million)¹ and is obligated to make (i) additional payments for an aggregate amount of up to $40 million upon the achievement of certain development and regulatory milestones; and (ii) additional payments for an aggregate amount of up to $250 million upon the achievement of certain commercial milestones. In addition, subject to regulatory approval of lanifibranor, we have the right to receive tiered royalties ranging from high single-digit to mid-teen double digits of net sales by CTTQ in Greater China during the first three years of commercialization and from low to mid-teen double digits starting from year four. Depending on multiple factors, including Chinese regulatory authorities’ decisions, CTTQ is expected to either join our ongoing NATiV3 Phase III clinical trial of lanifibranor in NASH or run an independent local phase III clinical trial of lanifibranor. CTTQ will bear all costs associated with the trials conducted in Greater China.

¹ The Company invoiced €12.8 million on September 28, 2022 (corresponds to the initial payment of €12.1 million euros, and an additional invoicing of €0.6 million) and received on November 4, 2022, €11.5 million after deduction of withholding tax for €1.3 million. The exchange rate on the invoice date was 1.009 euros for one dollar.

​

89

Table of Contents

We previously had a strategic collaboration with AbbVie in the area of autoimmune diseases. Our joint efforts led to the discovery of cedirogant, which was being evaluated by AbbVie in a Phase II clinical trial for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis, for which we received a milestone payment of €4.0 million in January 2022 (recognized as revenue over 2021). On October 28, 2022, AbbVie announced that they decided to stop the development of cedirogant and the collaboration agreement was terminated accordingly. Following such termination, we will not receive additional milestone payments under this partnership.

To date, we have not generated any revenue from the sale of products and do not expect to do so for several years, if ever. Our ability to generate product revenue and to become profitable will depend upon our ability to successfully develop and commercialize lanifibranor and our other potential programs. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with product development and regulatory approval, we are unable to predict the amount or timing of product revenue.

Other Income

Our other income consists primarily of research tax credits.

Research tax credits (crédit d'impôt recherche), or CIR, are granted by the French tax authorities to encourage technical and scientific research by French companies. Companies that demonstrate expenses that meet the required criteria, including research expenses located in France or certain other European countries, receive a tax credit that can be used against the payment of the corporate tax due the fiscal year in which the expenses were incurred and during the next three fiscal years. Companies may receive cash reimbursement for any excess portion. We requested the reimbursement of the CIR for 2019 in 2020 (fully paid in June 2020), the reimbursement of the CIR for 2020 in 2021 (fully paid in June 2021), the reimbursement of the CIR for 2021 in 2022 (fully paid in April 2022) and we expect to request the reimbursement of the CIR for 2022 in 2023. Each request for reimbursement was and is expected to be made under the community tax rules for small and medium sized entities and in compliance with the current regulations. CIRs are subject to audit by the French tax authorities.

In 2020, 2021 and 2022, the CIR corresponds to the amount of research tax credit recorded for each period and corrective claim established by the Company following the July 22, 2020 decision of the French administrative supreme court (“Conseil d’Etat”). The research tax credit (both in France and in the US) for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021, and 2020 amounted €5.9 million, €3.8 million and €4.8 million, respectively.

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses consist primarily of costs incurred in connection with the development of our product candidates and pre-clinical programs. We expense research and development costs as incurred. These expenses include:

Following the application of IFRS 16 Leases as of January 1, 2019, only rent that is exempt from IFRS 16 is recognized as expense.

90

Table of Contents

We typically use our employee, consultant and infrastructure resources across our development programs. We track certain outsourced development costs by product candidate, but we do not allocate all personnel costs or other internal costs to specific product candidates.

We expect that our research and development expenses will increase for the foreseeable future as we seek to advance development of lanifibranor and potentially other product candidates. Further, product candidates in later stages of clinical development generally have higher development costs than those in earlier stages of clinical development, primarily due to the increased size and duration of later-stage clinical trials. The successful development of our product candidates is highly uncertain. At this time, we cannot reasonably estimate or know the nature, timing and costs of the efforts that will be necessary to complete the remainder of the development of lanifibranor, and we may never succeed in obtaining regulatory approval for lanifibranor or any product candidates we may decide to develop. We are also unable to predict when, if ever, material net cash inflows may commence from sales of lanifibranor or any product candidates we may develop, due to the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with clinical development, including risks and uncertainties related to:

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses include personnel costs, including salaries, benefits and share-based compensation expense, for personnel other than employees engaged in research and development and marketing and business development activities. General and administrative expenses also include fees for professional services, mainly related to audit and legal services; consulting costs; communications and travel costs; allocated expenses for facility costs, including rent, utilities and maintenance; directors’ attendance fees; and insurance costs.

We anticipate that our general and administrative expenses will increase in the future as we grow our support functions for the expected increase in our research and development activities and the potential commercialization of our product candidates. We also anticipate continuing expenses associated with being a public company in the United States and France, including costs related to audit, legal, regulatory and tax-related services associated with maintaining compliance with U.S. and French exchange listing and SEC and AMF requirements, director and officer insurance premiums, and investor relations costs.

Marketing — Business Development Expenses

Marketing — business development expenses consist primarily of consulting fees and other taxes, and personnel costs, including salaries, benefits and share-based compensation expense, for our business development team. We anticipate that our sales and marketing expenses will increase in the future as we prepare for the potential launch and commercialization of our product candidates, if approved.

91

Table of Contents

Other Operating Income (Expenses)

For the year ended December 31, 2022, our other operating income (expenses) consisted primarily of:

For the year ended December 31, 2021, our other operating income (expenses) consisted primarily of:

For the year ended December 31, 2020, our other operating income (expenses) consisted primarily of:

Payroll tax

In 2019, our payroll taxes for the 2016, 2017 and 2018 taxable years were audited by the French tax authorities and we received a proposed tax adjustment of €1.7 million (including penalties and late payment interest) in December 2019. We challenged the adjustment and, on June 16, 2020, we received a response from the tax authorities resolving the dispute in our favor for fiscal year 2018 and were granted a concession on the related payroll taxes. On October 30, 2020, we received the Notice of Recovery related to the payroll taxes for the taxable year 2016 and 2017 requesting the payment of €1.2 million (including penalties and late payment interest until December 31, 2019). On December 8, 2020, we sent a contentious claim with a request for a suspension of payment. The tax authorities responded favorably to the request, subject to the receipt of a guarantee in the amount of €1.0 million, which we provided in the form of a bank guarantee from Crédit Agricole. For the payroll tax for fiscal years 2016 and 2017, the French tax authorities rejected, by letter dated November 26, 2021, our claim for a total amount of €1.2 million (including penalties and late payment interest).

92

Table of Contents

In January 2021, the administrative court of Dijon rejected our contest claim against the tax authorities for the tax adjustments regarding payroll tax for the fiscal years 2013 to 2015. Consequently, in February 2021, we received formal notice to pay an aggregate amount of €1.9 million , to the tax authorities. In March 2021, Abbott paid us the €2.0 million corresponding to the maximum compensation guaranteed by Abbott and we paid €1.8 million to the tax authorities in June 2021, including €1.3 million by offsetting VAT credit receivables and €0.5 million by bank transfer. Following this payment, Credit Agricole agreed to release the related bank guarantee on short-term deposit for €1.0 million.

On February 15, 2022, we received a global settlement offer from the French tax authorities regarding the tax audit carried out on payroll taxes for 2016 and 2017, and on the CIR for fiscal years 2013 to 2015. We have accepted this proposed settlement. There was no significant impact on the accounts as at December 31, 2022.

CIR

Following the tax audit for fiscal years 2013 to 2015, we received a collection notice on August 17, 2018 for an amount of €1.9 million, including penalties and late payment interest. We initially estimated the maximum risk in connection with the CIR reassessment to be limited to €0.4 million until December 2019. As at December 31, 2020, we had accounted for an additional provision in the amount of €1.1 million to cover the total amount disputed. On November 26, 2021, the tax authorities partially accepted our claim relating to the research tax credit for the years 2013 to 2015 and granted a concession of €0.3 million. Following this letter, the provision recorded for a total amount of €1.5 million in 2020 has been fully reversed and an accrual has been recorded for the same amount as of December 31, 2021.

On February 15, 2022, we received the aforementioned global settlement offer from the French tax authorities regarding the tax audit carried out on payroll taxes for 2016 and 2017 and on the CIR for fiscal years 2013 to 2015. We have accepted this proposed settlement. There was no significant impact on the accounts as at December 31, 2022.

In addition, in 2019, we received a partial reimbursement of the 2017 CIR, in the amount of €3.6 million instead of the €4.5 million initially requested. At December 31, 2020, we estimated the maximum risk with respect the 2017 CIR to be €0.9 million, corresponding to the full amount not yet reimbursed by the tax authorities. On December 6, 2021, we sent a new letter specifying that €0.2 million of the amount not yet reimbursed by the tax authorities corresponded to eligible subcontracting expenses related to the decision of the administrative supreme court (“Conseil d’Etat”) on July 22, 2020 and was compliant with the conditions of the research tax credit. We offered to waive all claims for the remaining 2017 CIR amount of €0.6 million. In January 2022, the tax authorities accepted this request and grant us a concession of €0.2 million. Following this letter, the provision recorded for a total amount of €0.9 million had been fully reversed and the receivable relating to CIR 2017 has been reduced to €0.2 million, corresponding to the rebate granted by tax authorities.

Net Financial Income (Expense)

Net financial income (expense) of 2022 relates primarily to foreign exchange gains and losses, interest and other expense for loans and other financial debts as well as fair value loss on derivatives, offset by income received from cash and cash equivalents and short term investments. Our cash and cash equivalents have been deposited primarily in cash accounts and term deposit accounts with short maturities.

The net financial income (expense) of 2021 and the net financial expense (income) of 2020 related primarily to foreign exchange gains and losses as well as fair value gains and losses on forwards. Our cash and cash equivalents have been deposited primarily in cash accounts and term deposit accounts with short maturities.

Income Tax

Income tax reflects our current income tax, as well as our deferred tax income (expense).

In 2020, 2021 and 2022, we have faced tax losses. As the recoverability of our tax losses is not considered probable in subsequent periods due to the uncertainties inherent in our business, no deferred tax assets were recognized in the consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2020, 2021 and 2022.

93

Table of Contents

In 2022, we faced a tax expense of €34 thousand and a deferred tax income of €54 thousand, both related to the activity of our subsidiary Inventiva Inc. in the United States.

In 2021, we faced a tax expense of €30 thousand related to the activity of our subsidiary Inventiva Inc. in the United States and paid €0.3 million regarding a deficit carry-back.

Comparison of the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2022

Revenue

We generated revenue of €12.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2022, an increase of €8.0 million compared to revenue of €4.2 million generated for the year ended December 31, 2021. The increase was related to the initial payment of $12.0 million² following the license and collaboration agreement we signed with CTTQ on September 22, 2022. In the year ended December 31, 2021, the revenue primarily originated from the milestone payment of €4.0 million following the launch of Phase IIb clinical trials with cedirogant as part of the collaboration agreement with AbbVie, which trial and partnership has since been terminated by AbbVie as described above.

Other Income

We generated other income of €6.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to other income of €4.3 million generated in the year ended December 2021, which represents an increase of 54%. Other income mainly consisted of research tax credit (both in France and in the U.S.) 2021 and 2022 in the amounts of €3.8 million and €5.9 million recorded in 2021 and 2022 respectively.

The increase in our research and development expenses was primarily the result of a €9.4 million increase in research, pre-clinical study and clinical trial expenses, mainly related to lanifibranor Phase III clinical study for NASH and the initiation of Phase II LEGEND, and to a lesser extent, a €1.5 million increase, or 16%, in connection with personnel costs.

^2. The Company invoiced €12.8 million on September 28, 2022 (corresponds to the initial payment of €12.1 million euros, and an additional invoicing of €0.6 million) and received on November 4, 2022, €11.5 million after deduction of withholding tax for €1.3 million. The exchange rate on the invoice date was 1.009 euros for one dollar

​

94

Table of Contents

Research, pre-clinical study and clinical trial expenses are broken down by product candidate for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2022 in the following table:

​

The increase by €9.4 million in research, pre-clinical study and clinical trial expenses is primarily related to lanifibranor, for which the related research, pre-clinical study and clinical trial expenses increased by €9.0 million mainly due to the NATiV3 Phase III clinical study for lanifibranor in NASH.

General and Administrative Expenses

Our general and administrative expenses were €12.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2022, an increase of €1.8 million, or 16% compared to general and administrative expenses of €11.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2021. The increase is mainly due to (i) the additional insurance, legal, audit, communication (investor relations) and consulting fees related to our dual listing status following our initial public offering on the Nasdaq Global Market and (ii) the full year effect of our U.S. affiliate.

Marketing — Business Development Expenses

Our marketing — business development expenses were €2.6 million in the year end December 31, 2022, an increase of €2.2 million, compared to the marketing — business development expenses of €0.4 million in the year ended December 31, 2021.

The increase is primarily due to consulting fees (€0.6 million) and withholding tax (€1.3 million) related to entering into the license and collaboration agreements with CTTQ in September 2022; and, to a lesser extent, to the increase in communication expenses related to the NATiV3 clinical trial.

Other Operating Income (Expenses)

In the year ended December 31, 2022, our net other operating expense was almost nil.

In the year ended December 31, 2021, we had net other operating expense of €0.6 million, primarily related to insurance costs relating to the public offering of securities, for an amount of €0.8 million partially offset by the reassessment of the CIR 2017 receivable for a net amount of €0.2 million and a reversal of depreciation of the tax loss carry back receivable for €0.3 million.

Net Financial Income (Expense)

Our net financial income was €2.8 million for both the year ended December 31, 2022 and the year ended December 31, 2021. The net financial income for both years mainly includes (i) the losses from the change in fair value linked to derivatives (warrants linked to the finance contract with EIB in 2022 and forward currency contracts in 2021) and (ii) the foreign exchange gain generated by cash and cash equivalents denominated in U.S. dollars and the favorable exchange rate of euro against the U.S. dollar over the period. Foreign exchange gains  for the year ended December 31, 2022 also include the €2.4 million related to the unwinding of a short-term deposit that amounted to $31 million and composed of $8 million in the first quarter, in the third quarter for $15 million and $8 million on the fourth quarter.

95

Table of Contents

Comparison of the Years Ended December 31, 2020 and 2021

Revenue

We generated revenue of €4.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2021, an increase of €3.8 million compared to revenue of €0.4 million generated for the year ended December 31, 2020. The increase was primarily related to the milestone payment of €4.0 million following the launch of Phase IIb clinical trials with cedirogant as part of the collaboration agreement with AbbVie, which we received in January 2022 and recognized as revenue over 2021. On October 28, 2022, AbbVie announced that they decided to stop the development of cedirogant and the collaboration agreement was terminated.

Other Income

We generated other income of €4.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2021 compared to other income of €4.9 million generated in the year ended December 31, 2020, which represents a decrease of 12%. Other Income mainly consisted of CIR 2020 and CIR 2021 in the amounts of €4.8 million and €3.8 million recorded in 2020 and 2021, respectively.

The increase in our research and development was primarily the result of a €22.0 million increase in research, pre-clinical study and clinical trial expenses, mainly related to lanifibranor, and to a lesser extent, a €2.1 million increase, or 28%, in connection with personnel costs including shared-based compensation expense.

Research, pre-clinical study and clinical trial expenses are broken down by product candidate for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2021 in the following table:

​

The increase by €22.0 million in research, pre clinical study and clinical trial expenses is primarily related to lanifibranor, for which the related research, pre clinical study and clinical trial expenses increased by €24.2 million mainly due to the launch of the NATiV3study.

96

Table of Contents

This increase is partially offset by the decrease of €2.7 million in research, pre-clinical study and clinical trial expenses related to odiparcil due to our decision in 2020 to focus our clinical efforts on the development of lanifibranor in NASH and to suspend all MPS-related R&D activities. As a consequence, the previously planned Phase I/II SAFE-KIDDS clinical trial evaluating odiparcil in MPS VI children and the Phase IIa extension clinical trial with odiparcil in MPS VI patients who completed the prior iMProveS Phase IIa clinical trial was not initiated in 2021 as initially planned. We continue to review options for the potential further development of odiparcil for the treatment of MPS VI, which could include seeking a third-party partner to potentially pursue the development and commercialization of odiparcil.

General and Administrative Expenses

Our general and administrative expenses were €11.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2021, an increase of €2.7 million, or 31% compared to general and administrative expenses of €8.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2020. The increase is mainly due to additional insurance, legal, audit, communication (investor relations) and consulting fees following our initial public offering on the Nasdaq Global Market and the warrants plan attributed to our managing directors.

Marketing — Business Development Expenses

Our marketing — business development expenses were €0.4 million in the year end December 31, 2021, a decrease of €0.2 million, or 35%, compared to the marketing — business development expenses of €0.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2020. The decrease is primarily due to consulting fees on company strategy in 2020 which amounted to €0.3 million.

Other Operating Income (Expenses)

In the year ended December 31, 2021, we had net other operating expense of €0.6 million primarily related to insurance costs relating to the public offering of securities for an amount of €0.8 million, partially offset by the reassessment of the CIR 2017 receivable for a net amount of €0.2 million and a reversal of depreciation of the tax loss carry back receivable for €0.3 million.

In the year ended December 31, 2020, we had net other operating expenses of €2.2 million primarily related to the transaction costs linked to the initial public offering on the Nasdaq Global Market, which cannot be deducted from the premiums related to share capital for €2.8 million, as well as additional provisions with regard to tax risk on CIR for the years 2013 to 2015 and 2017 for an aggregate amount of €1.8 million and, to a lesser extent, the impairment of the entire tax loss carry-back receivable by €0.3 million following the reception, on December 15, 2020, of a tax reassessment which rejects the entire deficit carry-back which is recognized by since 2017. These expenses were partially offset by the corrective claims for additional reimbursements of CIR with regard to the years from 2017 to 2019 for a total amount of €2.9 million.

Net Financial Income (Expense)

Our net financial income was €2.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2021 compared to a net financial expense of €3.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2020. The change was primarily attributable to foreign exchange gains in 2021 related to bank accounts and short-term deposit accounts denominated in U.S. dollars for a total amount of €5.4 million. These gains were partially offset by financial exchange losses related to the foreign currency short-term deposits and the change in fair value resulting from the settlement of three foreign currency forward sales contracts for €2.5 million in 2021.

For the year ended December 31, 2020, financial income mainly relates to the change in the fair value of foreign currency forwards for €1.8 million and financial expenses mainly relates to the foreign exchange losses related to bank accounts and short-term deposit accounts denominated in U.S. dollars for an amount of €5.9 million.

97

Table of Contents

2019, €14.7 million in net proceeds from a capital increase reserved to categories of investors in February 2020 and raised €87.0 million in net proceeds from the public offering of our ordinary shares on Nasdaq Global Market in July 2020.

In August 2021, we established an ATM program and, through this program, we raised €25.4 million in net proceeds from the sales of ADSs to existing and new specialized institutional investors in September and October 2021. In addition, in June 15, 2022, we raised €8.8 million in net proceeds from the sale of ADSs to existing and new specialized institutional.

In addition, as at December 31, 2022 we received an aggregate of €13.0 million and €3.0 million in upfront and milestone payments under our terminated collaboration agreements with AbbVie and BI, respectively and an upfront payment of €12.1 million ($12.6 million, including $1.3 million of withholding taxes) from CTTQ in December 2022 pursuant to the license and collaboration agreement with CTTQ. We have also received an aggregate of €36.6 million of research tax credit reimbursements, an aggregate of €1.1 million and €0.5 million of non-refundable subsidies from Bpifrance and France’s national research agency, respectively, as well as a financing for a total amount of €15.3 million guaranteed by the French government in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic.

On May 16, 2022, we entered into the Finance Contract with the European Investment Bank for up to €50 million to support our preclinical and clinical pipeline, including to fund a portion of our Phase III clinical trial of lanifibranor in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. The Finance Contract provides for funding in two equal tranches of €25 million. The disbursement of the first tranche was subject to, among other conditions, (i) the issuance of warrants to EIB in accordance with the terms and conditions of the warrants agreement entered into July 1, 2022 (condition met with the issuance of warrants covering 2,266,023 ordinary shares on November 28, 2022), and (ii) the receipt by us of an aggregate amount of at least €18 million, obtained either through the issuance of new shares or through the receipt of upfront or milestone payments from the business development activities (condition met by raising €8.8 million in net proceeds under our At-The-Market financing program in June 2022 and the receipt of $12.6 million pursuant to the license and collaboration agreement with CTTQ on November 4, 2022). There is no assurance that we will be able to satisfy the conditions for the second tranche or that we will be able to draw on the second tranche. Following the satisfaction of these conditions, the first tranche of €25 million was disbursed on December 8, 2022. The disbursement of the second tranche of €25 million is subject to, among other conditions, (i) the issuance of warrants to EIB in accordance with the terms and conditions of the warrants agreements entered into July 1, 2022, (ii) the full drawdown of the first tranche, (iii) the receipt by us from the date of the credit facility of an aggregate amount of at least €70.0 million (inclusive of the €18.0 million that was a condition for the disbursement of the first tranche), paid either in exchange for our shares, or through upfront or milestone payments, (iv) an out-licensing, partnership or royalty transaction with an upfront payment of at least €10.0 million; and (v) operational criteria based on patient enrollment and number of sites activated in the Company’s NATiV3 Phase III clinical trial of lanifibranor in patients with NASH.

As of December 31, 2020, 2021 and 2022, we had cash and cash equivalents of €105.7 million, €86.6 million and €86.7 million, respectively. The following table shows a summary of our cash flows for the periods indicated:

​

Operating Activities

During the year ended December 31, 2020, we used €30.6 million of cash in operating activities. Cash used in operating activities mainly reflected our net loss of €33.6 million and non-cash income of €3.4 million, primarily related to the right to receive our CIR reimbursement of €4.8 million for 2020 and adjustment requests for the right to receive additional reimbursements of CIR for the years 2016 to 2019 following the recent decisions of the Council of State related to the eligibility of subcontracting expenses, in a total amount of €2.8 million. These increases in use are partially offset by €4.2 million of the 2018 CIR and the €4.3 million of the 2019 CIR received in 2020.

During the year ended December 31, 2021, we used €47.6 million of cash in operating activities. Cash used in operating activities mainly reflected our net loss of €49.6 million, due to research and development expenses, which amount to €48.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to €23.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2020.

98

Table of Contents

During the year ended December 31, 2022, we used €44.9 million of cash in operating activities. Cash used in operating activities mainly reflected our net loss, which amounted to €54.3 million (mainly due to research and development expenses amounted to €60.5 million at year ended December 31, 2022, and to the receipt of the initial payment from CTTQ pursuant to the license and collaboration agreement, amounted to €11.5 million net, after €1.3 million of withholding taxes) compensated by an increase of €9.3 million in the working capital.

Investing Activities

During the year ended December 31, 2020, we used €8.6 million of cash in investing activities. Cash used in investing activities reflected mainly the short-term deposit accounts denominated in U.S. dollars of €7.6 million, representing the excess in cash received following the initial public offering in the Nasdaq Global Market that we have invested in accordance with our investment policy.

During the year ended December 31, 2021, we used €1.8 million of cash in investing activities. Cash used in investing activities reflected mainly the increase in short-term deposit accounts denominated in U.S. dollars of €1.3 million.

During the year ended December 31, 2022, investing activities provided €8.9 million of cash. Cash provided by investing activities mainly reflected the decrease in short-term deposit related to the unwinding of a deposit at the end of 2022 amounted to €8.8 million.

Financing Activities

During the year ended December 31, 2020, financing activities provided €111.7 million of cash, primarily consisting of the net proceeds of €87.0 million from the public offering on the Nasdaq Global Market in July 2020, the net proceeds of €14.7 million from a capital increase for categories of investors in February 2020 and the total amount of €10.0 million from three new loans guaranteed by the French government.

During the year ended December 31, 2021, financing activities provided €25.4 million of cash, primarily consisting of the net proceeds of €25.4 million from a capital increase following ATM issuances on September 27, 2021 and on October 1st, 2021.

During the year ended December 31, 2022, financing activities provided €37.3 million consisting of capital increases of €8.8 million (ATM program and subscriptions to warrants), after deduction of transaction costs, of the disbursement of the first tranche of the Finance Contract with EIB of €25 million, the subscription of three guaranteed state loans of €5.3 million in the aggregate, offset by the reimbursements of the loan for €1.0 million and of the lease debt for €0.7 million.

Material cash requirements

The following table discloses aggregate information about material contractual obligations and periods in which payments were due as of December 31, 2022.

​

The commitment amounts in the table above are associated with contracts that are enforceable and legally binding and that specify all significant terms, including interest on long-term debt, fixed or minimum services to be used, fixed, minimum or variable price provisions, and the approximate timing of the actions under the contracts. The table does not include obligations under agreements that we can cancel without a significant penalty. Future events could cause actual payments to differ from these estimates. All amounts (except lease liabilities) in the table above are presented gross and are undiscounted.

99

Table of Contents

Bank borrowings represent a €39,389 million cash requirement as of December 31, 2022 and are related to:

Leases represent a €4.5 million cash requirement as of December 31, 2022 with a repayment horizon up to 2026.

In connection with the lanifibranor studies LEGEND (Phase IIa) and NATiV3 (Phase III NASH), we have entered into agreements with several contract research organizations and contract manufacturing organizations. The total amount to be paid under these agreements amounted globally to €231.6 million as of December 31, 2022, with a repayment horizon up to 2029. These obligations represent off-balance sheet commitments.

Operating Capital Requirements

We expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we continue the research and development of, continue or initiate clinical trials of, and seek marketing approval for, our product candidates. In addition, if we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to program sales, marketing, manufacturing and distribution to the extent that such sales, marketing and distribution are not the responsibility of collaborators. Accordingly, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on attractive terms, we would be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development programs or future commercialization efforts. In May 2020, we entered into three credit agreements pursuant to which we received €10 million in the form of State Guaranteed Loans (PGE), which were provided by a syndicate of French banks and are guaranteed in large part by the French government. These loans were initially set to mature in May 2021, but were amended to extend the maturity date for an additional four years. The amendments provide for reimbursements to be made over four years, beginning in July 2022. In June 2022, we entered into three credit agreements pursuant to which we received an aggregate of €5.3 million in the form of one State Guaranteed Loan (PGE), and two loans from a stimulus economic plan (PPR), each which are guaranteed in large part by the French government. In July 2020, we completed our public offering on the Nasdaq Global Market for a net proceed of €87.0 million. In December 2022, we received the disbursement of the first tranche of the Finance Contract with the EIB, in the amount of €25 million. We believe that our existing cash and cash equivalents in December 31, 2022, should enable us to fund our operations as currently planned until the end of the fourth quarter of 2023. This estimate is based on our current business plan and excludes any potential milestones payable to or by us and any additional expenditures related to the potential continued development of the odiparcil program or resulting from the potential in-licensing or acquisition of additional product candidates or technologies, or any associated development we may pursue. We may have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be incorrect and we may end up using our resources sooner than anticipated. Accordingly, the Company's current cash position is not expected to be sufficient to cover operating needs for at least the next 12 months. These events and conditions indicate that a material uncertainty exists that may cast significant doubt on our ability to continue as a going concern and, therefore, we may be unable to realize our assets and discharge our liabilities in the normal course of business.

We expect to extend our financing horizon through:

100

Table of Contents

Assuming the condition precedents for the release of the second tranche of the EIB loan are met, we plan to use proceeds from the second tranche under the Finance Contract with the EIB for its preclinical and clinical pipeline, including to help fund part of its Phase III clinical trial of lanifibranor in patients with NASH. It cannot be guaranteed that the milestones provided for by us or our partners will be achieved or that the conditions precedent to the receipt of funds under the Finance Contract will be met within the time limits provided, if at all.

We cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain the necessary financing to meet our needs or to obtain funds at acceptable terms and conditions, or at all. 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 approved product or be unable to expand our operations or otherwise capitalize on our business opportunities, as desired, which could impair the growth prospects.

For more information as to the risks associated with our future funding needs, see “Item 3.D—Risk Factors”.

For a discussion of our research and development activities, see “Item 4.B-Business Overview” and “Item 5.A-Operating Results.”

For a discussion of trends, see “Item 4.B-Business Overview,” “Item 5.A-Operating Results” and “Item 5.B-Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

Our consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2021, and 2022 respectively, have been prepared in accordance with IFRS as issued by the IASB.

​

101

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Michael Cooreman has served as our Chief Medical Officer since October 2020. From 2017 to 2020, Dr. Cooreman was Vice President, Science and Medicine, in charge of global research and development in gastroenterology and hepatology at Ferring Pharmaceuticals. From 2015 to 2017, Dr. Cooreman served as Chief Medical Officer at ImmusanT, a biotechnology company located in the United States. He holds a Doctor of Medicine degree from the University of Louvain, Belgium, and a doctor degree from the Heinrich Heine University in Düsseldorf, Germany.

Alice Roudot-Ketelers has served as our Vice President Pharmaceutical & Clinical Development since August 2021. From June 2014 to July 2021, Ms. Roudot-Ketelers served as Vice President Clinical Development at Genfit, a French biopharmaceutical company dedicated metabolic and liver-related diseases, where she was in charge of all drug development programs and oversaw cross-functional teams in Chemistry, Manufacturing and Controls, non-clinical and clinical development up to Phase III trials. She holds a master’s degree in Pharmacy from the University of Lyon, and a Doctor of Pharmacy degree from the University of Lille.

Eric Duranson has served as our General Counsel since July 2021. From February 2020 to June 2021, Mr. Duranson served as the head of the legal team for Western Europe of ResMed, a medical device company. From January 2017 to January 2020 as the head of the for Western Europe legal team for Thermo Fisher Scientific, an analytical laboratory instrument manufacturing company. Prior to that, Mr. Duranson also served as in-house counsel for Sanofi Pasteur from May 2002 to October 2016. He holds a master’s degree in international business law from University Jean Moulin, Lyon III, and a master’s degree in ethics and health law from University Jean Moulin, Lyon III.

Nathalie Harroy has served as our Head of Human Resources since Inventiva’s inception in 2012. Prior to joining Inventiva, from 2010 to 2012 Ms. Harroy worked in human resources at Abbott Labs. Before its acquisition by Abbott Laboratories in 2010, she held various human resource-related roles within Solvay Pharmaceuticals. Ms. Harroy worked in R&D and the Scientific Affairs Division of Fournier Laboratories prior to its acquisition by Solvay Pharmaceuticals. She holds a DESE degree in Human Resources Management from Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers (CNAM), Dijon.

Non-Employee Directors

Chris Buyse has served as a member of our board of directors since February 2017. Chris Buyse is currently the managing partner of Fund+, which is a life sciences investment fund that he co-founded in 2015. Previously, Mr. Buyse was Chief Financial Officer at ThromboGenics NV, a public biotechnology company, from 2006 to 2014. He is currently serving as a director of and EYE-D Pharma SA, and previously served as director of Bone Therapeutics SA from 2008 to 2018 and of Keyware Technologies NV from 2006 to 2019. Mr. Buyse holds a master’s degree in applied economic sciences from the University of Antwerp and a master’s degree in business administration from the Vlerick School of Management in Ghent.

Lucy Lu has served as a member of our board of directors since May 2018. She has been the Chief Executive Officer and a member of the Board of Directors of Avenue Therapeutics, Inc., a public biotechnology company, since its inception in 2015. Previously, she was Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Fortress Biotech, Inc. from 2012 to 2017. Dr. Lu serves as a board member of Veru Inc., a public biopharmaceutical company since 2021. Dr. Lu holds a doctor of medicine degree from the New York University School of Medicine and a master’s degree in business administration from the Leonard N. Stern School of Business at New York University. She also received a bachelor’s degree from the University of Tennessee’s College of Arts and Sciences.

Heinz Maeusli has served as a member of our board of directors since May 2019. Mr. Maeusli also serves on the board of directors of Lantheus since 2020. There he is a member of the audit and nominating & corporate governance committees. He previously served on the board of directors of Progenics Pharmaceuticals from November 2019 to June 2020. There he was the chairman of its audit committee. Prior to joining our board, he served from 2003 to 2018 as the Chief Financial Officer of Advanced Accelerator Applications (also known as AAA) a biopharmaceutical company operating in the field of nuclear medicine. Mr. Maeusli holds master degrees in business from Columbia Business School in New York and from the University of St. Gallen.

Annick Schwebig has served as a member of our board of directors since February 2017. In 2000, she founded Actelion Pharmaceuticals France SAS, a pharmaceuticals company specializing in developing drugs for orphan diseases, and was its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer from 2000 to 2015. Ms. Schwebig has held senior positions in the pharmaceutical industry, including Vice President Medical Affairs France and Vice President Research and Development Europe at Bristol-Myers Squibb, a global biopharmaceutical company, from 1983 to 2000. Ms. Schwebig has been a member of the board of directors of Cellectis SA, a biotechnology company, since 2011. Ms. Schwebig is a graduate of the Paris Faculty of Medicine.

103

Table of Contents

Martine Zimmermann has served as a member of our board of directors since April 2021. Ms. Zimmermann has been the Senior Vice President and Head of Global Regulatory Affairs of Alexion Pharma International since June 2016. Throughout her career, she has acquired extensive expertise as Regulatory Affairs Executive in both small and large pharmaceutical groups, holding senior roles in the United States, Europe and Asia-Pacific. Ms. Zimmermann has worked across all phases of drug development within several therapeutic areas, interacting with relevant regulatory authorities in key markets, including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the European Medicines Agency and the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency. She also serves on the Board of Directors of U.S.-based Caelum Biosciences since 2019. Ms. Zimmerman holds a Doctor of Pharmacy degree from the University of Strasbourg.

The information regarding the diversity of our board of directors as of December 31, 2021 is available in our Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2021.

Family Arrangements and Selection Arrangements

There are no family relationships among any of our executive officers or directors.

Compensation of Directors and Executive Officers

The aggregate compensation paid and benefits in kind granted by us to our current executive officers and directors, including share-based compensation, for the year ended December 31, 2022 was €3.1 million. For the year ended December 31, 2022, the total amount to be set aside or accrued to provide pension, retirement or similar benefits to our directors or our executive officers was €0.4 million.

104

Table of Contents

Non-Employee Director Compensation

The total annual compensation amount is set by the Annual General Meeting. The most recent decision was made on May 28, 2018, setting this amount at €250,000 with effect from 2018. The following table sets forth information regarding the compensation earned by our non-employee directors for service on our board of directors during the year ended December 31, 2022. Mr. Cren, who is our Chief Executive Officer, and Dr. Broqua, who is our Deputy Chief Executive Officer and Chief Scientific Officer, are directors but do not receive any additional compensation for their services as directors.

Following the entry in force of the Sapin 2 Law (French law no. 2016-1691 of December 9, 2016), the payment of the elements of variable compensation and, as appropriate, exceptional compensation attributed for a financial year to the Chairman of the Board, the Chief Executive Officer and the Deputy Chief Executive Officer, is conditional on approval by the next ordinary general meeting of their elements of compensation, paid or attributed during the said financial year (ex post vote). The payments of the above variable compensation are subject to approval by our shareholders at the extraordinary shareholder meeting to be held on May 25, 2023.

Limitations on Liability and Indemnification Matters

Under French law, provisions of bylaws that limit the liability of directors are ineffective. However, French law allows sociétés anonymes to contract for and maintain liability insurance against civil liabilities incurred by any of their directors and officers involved in a third-party action, provided that they acted in good faith and within their capacities as directors or officers of the company. Criminal liability cannot be indemnified under French law, whether directly by the company or through liability insurance. We have liability

105

Table of Contents

insurance for our directors and officers, including insurance against liability under the Securities Act. We also may enter into agreements with our directors and executive officers to provide contractual indemnification. With certain exceptions and subject to limitations on indemnification under French law, these agreements will provide for indemnification for damages and expenses including, among other things, attorneys’ fees, judgments and settlement amounts incurred by any of these individuals in any action or proceeding arising out of his or her actions in that capacity. Certain of our non-employee directors may also, through their relationships with their employers or partnerships, be insured against certain liabilities in their capacity as members of our board of directors. These arrangements may discourage shareholders from bringing a lawsuit against our directors and executive officers for breach of their duty. These provisions also may have the effect of reducing the likelihood of derivative litigation against directors and executive officers, even though such an action, if successful, might otherwise benefit us and our shareholders. Furthermore, a shareholder’s investment may be adversely affected to the extent we pay any costs of settlement and damage awards against directors and officers pursuant to any insurance arrangements.

Equity Incentives

We believe our ability to grant equity incentives is a valuable and necessary compensation tool that allows us to attract and retain the best available personnel for positions of substantial responsibility, provides additional incentives to employees and promotes the success of our business. Due to French corporate law and tax considerations, we have historically granted or may grant in the future several different equity incentive instruments to our directors, executive officers, employees and other service providers, including:

Our board of directors’ authority to grant these equity incentive instruments and the aggregate amount authorized to be granted under these instruments must be approved by a two-thirds majority of the votes held by our shareholders present, represented or voting by authorized means, at the relevant extraordinary shareholders’ meeting. Once approved by our shareholders, our board of directors can grant founder’s share warrants (bons de souscription de parts de créateur d’entreprise) and share warrants (bons de souscription d’actions) for up to 18 months, and free shares (actions gratuites) and stock options (options de souscription et/ou d’achats d’actions) for up to 38 months from the date of the applicable shareholders’ approval. The authority of our board of directors to grant equity incentives may be extended or increased only by extraordinary shareholders’ meetings. As a result, we typically request that our shareholders authorize new pools of equity incentive instruments at every annual shareholders’ meeting.

We had eleven share-based compensation plans in force in 2022 for our executive officers, non-employee directors, employees and service providers, the BSPCE 2013-1 and BSPCE 2021 Plans, AGA 2021-1, AGA 2021 bis and AGA 2022 Plans, and the BSA 2017, BSA 2018, BSA 2019, BSA 2019 bis, BSA 2019 ter, and BSA 2021 Plan. In general, founder’s share warrants (bons de souscription de parts de créateur d’entreprise) and share warrants (bons de souscription d’actions) no longer continue to vest following termination of the employment, office or service of the holder and all vested shares must be exercised within post-termination exercise periods set forth in the grant documents. In the event of certain changes in our share capital structure, such as a consolidation or share split or dividend, French law and applicable grant documentation provides for appropriate adjustments of the numbers of shares issuable and/or the exercise price of the outstanding warrants.

Founder’s Share Warrants (bons de souscription de parts de créateur d’entreprise)

Founder’s share warrants (bons de souscription de parts de créateur d’entreprise) have traditionally been granted to certain of our employees who were French tax residents because the warrants carry favorable tax and social security treatment for French tax residents. Similar to options, founder’s share warrants (bons de souscription de parts de créateur d’entreprise) entitle a holder to exercise the warrant for the underlying vested shares at an exercise price per share determined by our board of directors and at least equal to the fair

106

Table of Contents

market value of an ordinary share on the date of grant. However, unlike options, the exercise price per share is fixed as of the date of implementation of the plans pursuant to which the warrants may be granted, rather than as of the date of grant of the individual warrants.

Our shareholders, or pursuant to delegations granted by our shareholders, our board of directors, determines the recipients of the warrants, the dates of grant, the number and exercise price of the founder’s share warrants (bons de souscription de parts de créateur d’entreprise) to be granted, the number of shares issuable upon exercise and certain other terms and conditions of the founder’s share warrants (bons de souscription de parts de créateur d’entreprise), including the period of their exercisability and their vesting schedule.

We have two founder’s share warrants plans in force (bons de souscription de parts de créateur d’entreprise):

107

Table of Contents

BSPCE 2021 (2021) Plan

On April 16, 2021, the Board of Directors approved the allocation of 600,000 founder share warrants (BSPCE 2021) to Mr. Frédéric Cren and Mr. Pierre Broqua as corporate officers of the Company;