10-K

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 USC. 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 whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☒

The aggregate market value of the voting common shares held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $345.2 million, computed by reference to the closing sale price of the Class A common stock as reported by The Nasdaq Capital Market on June 30, 2022, the last trading day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter. The Company has no non-voting common shares.

The number of shares of the registrant’s Class A common stock outstanding as of February 15, 2023 was 131,176,200.

Certain information required to be provided in Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K will be provided by a Definitive Proxy Statement for our 2023 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Proxy Statement”) to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or before May 1, 2023.

This Annual Report on Form 10-K, including the sections entitled “Business,” “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” contains forward-looking statements. These statements may relate to, but are not limited to, expectations of our future results of operations, business strategies and operations, financing plans, potential growth opportunities, potential market opportunities and the effects of competition, as well as assumptions relating to the foregoing. Forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties, some of which cannot be predicted or quantified. These risks and other factors include, but are not limited to, those listed under “Risk Factors.” In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “expect,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “intend,” “potential,” “might,” “would,” “continue” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. These statements are only predictions. Actual events or results may differ materially.

As used herein, except as otherwise indicated by context, references to “we,” “us,” “our,” “the Company,” “Organogenesis” and “ORGO” will refer to Organogenesis Holdings Inc. and its subsidiaries.

All trademarks, trade names, product names, graphics and logos of Organogenesis contained herein are trademarks or registered trademarks of Organogenesis Holdings Inc. or its subsidiaries, as applicable, in the United States and/or other countries. All other party trademarks, trade names, product names, graphics and logos contained herein are the property of their respective owners. The use or display of other parties’ trademarks, trade names, product names, graphics or logos is not intended to imply, and should not be construed to imply, a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of Organogenesis by such other party.

Solely for convenience, the trademarks, service marks and trade names referred to in this annual report are listed without the ®, (sm) and (TM) symbols, but we will assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, our rights or the rights of the applicable licensors to these trademarks, service marks and trade names.

Organogenesis is a leading regenerative medicine company focused on the development, manufacture and commercialization of solutions for the Advanced Wound Care and Surgical & Sports Medicine markets. Our products have been shown through clinical and scientific studies to support and in some cases accelerate tissue healing and improve patient outcomes. We are advancing the standard of care in each phase of the healing process through multiple breakthroughs in tissue engineering and cell therapy. Our solutions address large and growing markets driven by aging demographics and increases in comorbidities such as diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular and peripheral vascular disease and smoking. We offer our differentiated products and in-house customer support to a wide range of health care customers including hospitals, wound care centers, government facilities, ambulatory service centers (“ASCs”) and physician offices. Our mission is to provide integrated healing solutions that substantially improve medical outcomes and the lives of patients while lowering the overall cost of care.

We offer a comprehensive portfolio of products in the markets we serve that address patient needs across the continuum of care. We have and intend to continue to generate data from clinical trials, real-world outcomes and health economics research that validate the clinical efficacy and value proposition offered by our products. Several of our existing and pipeline products in our portfolio have Premarket Application (“PMA”) approval, or 510(k) clearance from the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”). Given the extensive time and cost required to conduct clinical trials and receive FDA approvals, we believe that our data and regulatory approvals provide us a strong competitive advantage. Our product development expertise and multiple technology platforms provide a robust product pipeline, which we believe will drive future growth.

In the Advanced Wound Care market, we focus on the development and commercialization of advanced wound care products for the treatment of chronic and acute wounds in various treatment settings. We have a comprehensive portfolio of regenerative medicine products, capable of supporting patients from early in the wound healing process through wound closure regardless of wound type. Our advanced wound care products include Apligraf for the treatment of venous leg ulcers (“VLUs”) and diabetic foot ulcers (“DFUs”); Dermagraft for the treatment of DFUs (manufacturing currently suspended pending transition to a new manufacturing facility or engagement of a third-party manufacturer); PuraPly AM as an antimicrobial barrier for a broad variety of wound types; and the Affinity, Novachor, and NuShield wound coverings to address a variety of wound sizes and types. We have a highly trained and specialized direct wound care sales force paired with comprehensive customer support services.

In the Surgical & Sports Medicine market, we are leveraging our broad regenerative medicine capabilities to address chronic and acute surgical wounds and tendon and ligament injuries. Our Sports Medicine products include NuShield for surgical applications in targeted soft tissue repairs; and Affinity, Novachor, PuraPly MZ, and PuraPly AM for management of open wounds in the surgical setting. We currently sell these products through independent agencies and our direct sales force.

As of December 31, 2022, we had approximately 1,030 full-time employees worldwide. For the year ended December 31, 2022, we generated revenue of $450.9 million and we incurred operating expenses of $323.6 million.

We believe we have several unique strengths that have been instrumental to our success and position us well for future growth:

•

Leader in Regenerative Medicine Technology with Strong Brand Recognition. Given our extensive history in regenerative medicine, we have strong brand recognition and market-leading positions across our portfolio, which includes flagship products Apligraf, Dermagraft, and PuraPly AM, as well as our placental-based (amnion & chorion tissue) products NuShield, Affinity, and Novachor. Organogenesis is well recognized as an innovator that has advanced the science of regenerative medicine, as well as the methodology to manufacture living technology at a large commercial scale and ship it worldwide. We first entered the market in 1998 with Apligraf, which is still considered one of the major breakthroughs of the Company in the regenerative medicine market, and a leader in the skin substitute category. In addition, our product Dermagraft received FDA approval in 2001 and is a well-known brand in the global regenerative medicine market.

•

Well-Positioned in Large, Attractive and Growing Global Markets—Advanced Wound Care and Surgical & Sports Medicine. We believe both markets will continue to see accelerated growth given favorable global demographics that include an aging population and a greater incidence of comorbidities such as diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular and peripheral vascular disease and smoking. We believe there is growing adoption of regenerative medicine products by the physician community due to their clinical superiority and cost effectiveness for all major stakeholders compared to traditional products.

•

Comprehensive Suite of Products to Address the Clinical and Economic Needs of Wound Care Patients and Providers. Our comprehensive portfolio of wound care products allows physicians to personalize solutions to meet the needs of individual wound care patients. We engage with the physician at the earliest incidence of the patient’s healing process with our PuraPly AM product, which has antimicrobial properties that are beneficial for most types of wounds. If the underlying healing issues persist, we offer an array of bioactive products and placental-based (amnion & chorion tissue) wound coverings customizable for various sizes and types of wounds. Our experienced wound care sales force is highly trained to assist clinicians in effectively deploying the full complement of our wound care products.

•

Large and Growing Body of Clinical Data and FDA Approved Products. We have a deep body of scientific, clinical and real-world outcomes data, including over 200 publications that review the technical and clinical attributes of our products. Several of our existing and pipeline products in our product portfolio have FDA regulatory approval, including PMA approval or 510(k) clearance. Given the extensive time and cost required to conduct clinical trials and receive FDA approval, we believe our data and regulatory approvals provide us with a strong competitive advantage.

•

Robust and Extensive Relationships Across the Continuum of Care. We have established robust and extensive customer relationships across the entire continuum of care and sites of care including hospitals, wound care centers, government facilities, ASCs, and physician offices to sell our broad portfolio of products. We serve more than 4,000 health care facilities, hospital systems, integrated delivery network (“IDNs”) and Group Purchasing Organizations (“GPOs”). In addition, we have developed important relationships with various physician specialties (Plastics, General, Vascular, Orthopedic, Podiatry, Dermatology), nurses, and other key decision-makers as well as third-party payers. Given these relationships across the continuum of care, we believe we are well positioned to increase our penetration in the Advanced Wound Care market and leverage those relationships in the Surgical & Sports Medicine market.

•

Differentiated In-house Customer Support Capabilities Including Third-Party Reimbursement Support. We strengthen our customer relationships with extensive in-house customer support capabilities. Through our dedicated team of experienced professionals, our “Circle of Care” program provides in-house third-party reimbursement, and medical and technical support.

•

Established and Scalable Regulatory, Manufacturing and Commercial Infrastructure. We have developed significant in-house expertise on the regulatory approval process that is based on our successful management of multiple products through various FDA approval pathways including PMA approval, Biologics License Application (“BLA”) approval and Premarket Notification 510(k) clearance. We have also developed rigorous and proven FDA-compliant manufacturing, distribution, and logistics capabilities. We pair our operational capabilities with a strong commercial team of sales and marketing professionals. Our established regulatory, operational and commercial infrastructure provides a firm foundation for growth as we continue to scale our business.

•

Extensive Executive Management Experience in Regenerative Medicine. Our executive management team has extensive experience in the regenerative medicine industry, boasting over 80 years of collective experience in the space. This experience allows us to operate from a deep understanding of the underlying trends in regenerative medicine and the intertwined scientific, clinical, regulatory, commercial and manufacturing issues that drive success in the industry.

We believe the following strategies will play a critical role in our future growth:

•

Drive Penetration in the Fast-Growing Advanced Wound Care Market. We intend to leverage our comprehensive product portfolio and relationships with key constituents to deepen our presence in the Advanced Wound Care market. We believe the breadth and flexibility of the portfolio we now offer allow us to address a wide variety of wound types (chronic & acute), sizes, and reimbursement levels, offering significant new opportunities for growth. Furthermore, we believe our expanded product portfolio is enhancing the ability of our sales representatives to reach and penetrate customer accounts, contributing to strong growth over time. Additionally, we believe there is significant room for expansion of the Advanced Wound Care market as a whole and our wound biologics product category in particular as more physicians and payers are educated about the benefits of regenerative medicine technologies versus traditional therapies. We continue to invest to support physician and payer education as well as preclinical and clinical trials, real-world evidence, and other research to confirm the benefits of our products. We will continue to seek expanded payer coverage for all of our products, particularly PuraPly AM, Novachor, NuShield and Affinity, for which we do not yet have the broad commercial payer coverage enjoyed by Apligraf and Dermagraft.

•

Continued Expansion into Surgical & Sports Medicine Market. We entered the Surgical & Sports Medicine market with the acquisition of NuTech Medical and its established and leading presence in placental-based products in 2017. We plan to continue to accelerate penetration into this market with our placental-based and collagen biomaterial products by leveraging our established commercial and operational infrastructure including our direct sales force and independent sales

agencies. We also plan to continue to take advantage of significant opportunities to cross-sell within our established customer bases in both the Advanced Wound Care and Surgical & Sports Medicine markets. We believe that the Surgical & Sports Medicine market presents a strong near-term opportunity with respect to our current product portfolio as well as a significant long-term opportunity with respect to chronic inflammatory and degenerative conditions. Given our experience in the Advanced Wound Care market and regenerative medicine in general, we believe we are well positioned to capture this opportunity.

•

Launch Robust Pipeline of Products and Drive Innovation with a Proven Research and Development Platform. We have a robust pipeline of products in both the Advanced Wound Care and Surgical & Sports Medicine markets that we expect to launch in the next few years. We expect these products will deepen our portfolios and allow us to address additional clinical applications. In addition, we anticipate our ongoing efforts to complete clinical studies and publish research regarding our products will further enhance physician and payer receptiveness to our products over time. Our proven research and development capabilities and established technology platforms also support a robust and adaptable product pipeline for future applications.

•

Continue to Maximize Our Sales Force and Increase Sales Productivity and Geographic Reach. We plan to continue to expand the reach and penetration of our products by optimizing our sales organization to serve the Advanced Wound Care and Surgical & Sports Medicine markets. This effort should allow us to achieve more focused and effective sales coverage for specific market categories, broaden our geographic footprint, and leverage our expanding relationships with large hospital systems and GPOs. We also plan to increase our focus on sales outside of the United States, including the European Union and the Middle East. Currently, substantially all of our sales are in the United States.

•

Supplement Organic Growth Through Selective Acquisitions. We have demonstrated our ability to successfully identify and integrate assets that complement our strategy through the acquisitions of Dermagraft and TransCyte from Shire and our placental-based products from NuTech Medical. We continue to evaluate tuck-in acquisitions which complement our existing portfolios in both the Advanced Wound Care and Surgical & Sports Medicine markets and will leverage our established commercial and manufacturing infrastructure.

We focus our efforts on medical conditions that involve difficult-to-heal wounds and musculoskeletal injuries. Healing difficulties may arise from a variety of causes and in various types of tissue and anatomic areas. Impaired healing is commonly associated with an inability to move beyond the inflammatory stages of healing, resulting in a chronic wound or injury, an ongoing inflammatory cycle, and an inability to achieve normal tissue healing. Biofilm and other infectious conditions also play a key role in disrupting wound healing processes. Regenerative medicine is a collection of technologies aimed at generating tissue as close as possible to native or natural tissue, to replace damaged tissue, and to fill or replace defects. Demand for these technologies is increasing as physician understanding of the underlying wound healing processes grows and as demographic and population health trends result in the increased prevalence of systemic comorbidities that contribute to healing problems throughout the body.

Our products use regenerative medicine technologies to provide solutions in the Advanced Wound Care (Chronic Wound) and Surgical (Acute Wound) & Sports Medicine markets. Based on industry reports and management estimates, we believe that our addressable Advanced Wound Care and Surgical & Sports Medicine markets totaled approximately $24 billion in 2021, which included an estimated $10 billion addressable market for Advanced Wound Care and an estimated $14 billion for Surgical & Sports Medicine. Within the Advanced Wound Care market in 2021, 49% of treatments used advanced wound dressings, 18% used biologics, 21% used external wound healing devices, and 13% consisted of more traditional wound care dressings. The skin substitute market, within biologics, is expected to grow from $1.1 billion in 2021 to $2 billion in 2026. Within the Surgical & Sports Medicine market, the surgical/acute wound sub-market accounts for $9.1 billion, the chronic inflammatory and degenerative condition sub-market accounts for approximately $3.8 billion, and the tendon and ligament injuries sub-market accounts for approximately $1.0 billion in 2015.

Wounds represent a large and growing burden on the public health as well as a significant cost to the health care system. Wounds are divided into two primary types, chronic and acute. It is estimated that approximately 80 million patients suffer from chronic and acute wounds globally each year, excluding surgical incisions. Chronic wounds account for most of the expenses due to their complexity and length of treatment.

Chronic wounds are wounds that have not appropriately closed after four weeks of treatment with traditional treatment such as dressings. Chronic wounds include:

While the underlying etiology of these chronic wounds is different, at a cellular level many of the problems that result in failed healing are the same. These include uncontrolled inflammatory processes, shortages of cell types, and growth factors secreted by cells that are critical to healing, and that result in disrupted cell signaling pathways.

Our customers in outpatient wound care facilities are faced with a wide variety of types of wounds with different anatomical locations and underlying causes. Based on a retrospective cohort study of data from wound care centers from June 2008 and June 2012, the distribution of wound types in hospital outpatient wound care centers is detailed below:

* Based on a September 2013 JAMA Dermatology published retrospective cohort study.

Due to the breadth of our wound care portfolio, our products are able to address both chronic and acute wounds across all of these wound types.

The wound care market includes traditional dressings such as bandages, gauzes, and ointments and advanced wound care products such as mechanical devices, advanced dressings, and biologics. These advanced wound care products target chronic and acute wounds not adequately addressed by traditional therapies. Our products are primarily classified as skin substitutes, which fall within the biologics category of the Advanced Wound Care market.

According to Grand View Research, the Global Advanced Wound Care market was estimated to be approximately $10 billion in 2021 and is expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate, or CAGR, of 4% through 2028. This market consists of several product categories including advanced wound dressings, external wound healing devices such as negative pressure wound therapy, or NPWT, biologics such as skin substitute and growth factors and other traditional wound dressings. The approximate breakdown for these product categories in 2021 is set forth below.

Wound biologics represents one of the smallest segments of the Advanced Wound Care market but is the fastest growing and has seen the highest level of innovation. According to BCC Research, the worldwide wound biologics market, which includes skin substitutes and growth factors, was estimated to be approximately $1.7 billion in 2021, of which skin substitute products are estimated to represent approximately 62%. Skin substitutes, bioengineered or biologic grafts that cover skin defects and support healing, are one of the fastest-growing categories of the Advanced Wound Care market. The skin substitute market, within biologics, is expected to grow from $1.1 billion in 2021 to $2 billion in 2026. Going forward, the skin substitute market is projected to continue to grow as patients with hard-to-heal wounds transition from other therapies to skin substitute treatment.

We expect this market to continue to grow at a rapid rate as physicians are educated about the use of these products and understand the benefits as compared to other currently marketed products, payers incentivize doctors to use more cost-effective treatments, patients demand more effective treatment solutions and advanced wound care becomes more common outside of the United States. We also believe that adoption of these products will increase as clinical evidence supporting the benefits of skin substitutes over traditional therapies continues to grow. Skin substitutes have demonstrated improved chronic and acute wound healing rates at a lower overall cost than the current standard of care. In a matched cohort study we commissioned, Medicare treatment costs for DFUs treated with Apligraf were $5,253 (p=0.49) lower per patient than the standard of care and for DFUs treated with Dermagraft, these costs were $6,991 (p=0.84) lower per patient than the standard of care. See Rice et al. “Economic outcomes among Medicare patients receiving bioengineered cellular technologies for treatment of diabetic foot ulcers.” J Med Econ. 2015;18(8):586-95.

Our products compete with other skin substitutes as well as other advanced wound care products such as NPWT and growth factors. Due to its market position as a skin substitute with antimicrobial properties appropriate for the treatment of wounds with biofilm or otherwise at high risk of infection, our PuraPly AM product also competes with antimicrobial dressings. Antimicrobial wound products have historically represented a more than $1 billion annual market. We are a market leader in the antimicrobial skin substitute market and have supported the expansion of that market with our comprehensive marketing and educational campaigns.

Finally, the skin substitute market remains substantially underpenetrated. According to BioMed GPS, over 7.9 million wounds globally, 3.7 million in the United States, require medical care and are classified as difficult-to-heal wounds where traditional therapies are unlikely to succeed. Market growth will be propelled by the aging population and rise of diabetes, obesity, and cardiovascular disease — all associated with poor vascularity increasing the susceptibility of chronic, hard-to-heal wounds. Despite the vast need and proven benefits of advanced wound care products in general including skin substitutes, market penetration remains low in relation to the size of the total addressable market. Our internal estimates indicate that if the potentially addressable market were completely penetrated today, annual skin substitute revenue in the United States alone could exceed $9 billion.

We believe that we are well positioned in the skin substitute market as adoption continues to increase. According to BioMed GPS, we are a leading skin substitute company in the United States, and we have an experienced and established sales force with deep relationships with clinicians, wound care centers, and hospitals. We also have a diverse array of products to address the different varieties of wounds throughout the wound healing process.

An estimated 313 million surgical procedures are performed worldwide annually. An analysis of Medicare beneficiaries reveals that surgical wound care is associated with the highest wound care expenses, followed by DFUs. Trauma wounds, including burns, are included in the surgical/acute wound area. It is estimated that traumatic injury is responsible for more than 5 million deaths worldwide per year. Sports Medicine has displayed considerable growth as compared to other healthcare fields as a result of the rise in incidence of sports-associated injuries along with increase in awareness among people regarding physical fitness. We estimate the immediate addressable Surgical & Sports Medicine market for our products to be approximately $14 billion with a CAGR of approximately 6% through 2028.

A surgical and/or acute wound is an injury that causes a rapid break in the skin and sometimes the underlying tissue. Acute wounds can be traumatic wounds, such as abrasions, lacerations, penetrating injuries and burns, or surgical wounds (grafts, dehiscences, necrotizing soft tissue infections) from surgical incisions. In contrast to chronic wounds, which would normally heal but stall due to biologic factors, acute wounds can be so severe that they overwhelm the body’s normal healing capacity. Biofilm and other infectious conditions, particularly in acute wounds with a high risk of infection such as open fractures, may also pose challenges to the healing of acute wounds. According to BCC Research, in the United States alone more than 150,000 deaths stem from traumatic injuries and there are more than 3 million nonfatal injuries per year. An estimated 180,000 deaths every year are caused by burns, and nonfatal burn injuries are a leading cause of morbidity. According to the American Burn Association, approximately 450,000 Americans sustain serious burn injuries every year, and more than 40,000 require hospitalization and advanced medical care.

Tendon and ligament injuries are common orthopedic conditions in an active and aging population. There are approximately 250,000 rotator cuff repairs performed in the United States annually. Additionally, in 2015, there were approximately 40,000 outpatient Achilles tendon repairs in the United States. Re-rupture and reoperation continue to be a significant source of concern with non-operative management, occurring in 4.8% of Achilles tendon repair cases and as many as 25% or more rotator cuff repair cases. Comorbidities such as diabetes and obesity, as well as age, are correlated with a higher risk of failed healing and re-rupture. Regenerative tissue scaffolds may be used to support the healing of tendons, ligaments, and other soft tissues. According to Technavio, the annual regenerative tissue scaffold market is estimated to exceed $1 billion.

While our current portfolio of products has applicability across a wide variety of clinical specialties and wound types in the advanced wound care and surgical wound care market, our goal is to re-enter the regenerative orthobiologics market in the future (if BLA approval for ReNu is obtained). Orthobiologics are biologic substances that are used to address injuries of the musculoskeletal system. Orthobiologic products are used to treat people with long-term disabling musculoskeletal disorders and injuries. The majority of musculoskeletal injuries occur due to recreational and sports activities. The patient demographics include both younger populations and those involved in professional sports, as well as the elderly population, usually requiring treatment for degenerative disorders and chronic diseases. The market has seen an increase in surgical volumes in part due to a higher incidence of comorbidities and chronic inflammatory and degenerative conditions, such as osteoarthritis (“OA”) and tendonitis. The growing and aging population affected with OA that is still looking to remain active will continue to seek non-surgical or minimally invasive alternatives. The prevalence of knee OA has been increasing over the past several decades in the U.S., mirroring the aging population and the growing obesity epidemic.

Chronic inflammatory and degenerative orthopedic conditions are increasingly prevalent, driven in part by an aging demographic and higher levels of comorbidities such as diabetes and obesity. OA is the most common chronic condition of the joints, affecting approximately 27 million individuals in the United States. OA can affect multiple joints in the body, with arthritis of the knee being the most commonly treated. One in two adults will develop symptoms of knee OA during their lives. Other chronic inflammatory conditions such as Achilles and rotator cuff tendinosis and plantar fasciitis are also increasingly common. Similar to many of the other conditions that we seek to address, chronic inflammatory and degenerative orthopedic conditions are often correlated with smoking, obesity, and diabetes, among other factors. Collectively, these and other related conditions were treated with an estimated 9 million injections in 2016, including steroids and hyaluronic acid, or HA. According to Grand View Research, the global chronic inflammatory and degenerative orthopedic market (Viscosupplementation Market) exceeded $3.8 billion in 2020.

We believe our multiple regenerative technology platforms will allow us to build a broad portfolio covering the full range of needs in the Surgical & Sports Medicine market. In the short term, our focus will be on providing clinicians with wound covering and solutions to support soft tissue healing solutions with our placental-based technologies for open acute wounds and tendon and ligament surgical repair procedures. In the long-term, we plan to deepen our focus and provide solutions for chronic inflammatory and degenerative conditions, and in particular, OA as illustrated by our current Phase III Clinical Trial for ReNu. We intend to address patient needs with our portfolio in the inpatient hospital, ASC, and clinic settings. We estimate the immediate addressable Surgical & Sports Medicine market for our products to be approximately $14 billion respectively with a CAGR of approximately 6% through 2028.

For surgical/acute wounds, as skin substitutes continue to gain market adoption based on their demonstrated efficacy in improving healing rates with lower overall costs for these comprised healing situations, we believe we are well positioned with our comprehensive portfolio of technologies. Our placental-based technologies (Affinity, Novachor, NuShield) and skin substitute with antimicrobial properties (PuraPly AM) are highly differentiated both in composition along with their level of clinical utility. These product attributes coupled with our current market-leading position and high level of organizational competency give us the confidence that we have the ability to capture a high percent share of this growing market.

In tendon and ligament repair, conventional surgical approaches rely on mechanical fixation to temporarily approximate damaged tissues, assuming that the natural healing process will then result in a permanent repair. Patients with impaired healing may be unable to generate the necessary tissue structures, resulting in unacceptable failure rates over time. As additional clinical evidence and technology adoption is gained with our placental-based technologies, we believe we are well positioned with our current offering (NuShield as a surgical barrier) and our native collagen surgical matrix (PuraForce for soft tissue reinforcement).

OA and other degenerative conditions, as well as soft tissue injuries such as tendinosis and fasciitis, are currently treated by injection with steroids or HA. However, steroids offer pain relief for only a limited period and have been shown to further degrade

some types of tissues over time, worsening the underlying condition. The evidence of HA’s efficacy has been questioned, and it is clear that a significant percentage of patients do not respond to HA treatment. Patients who fail these less invasive therapies have limited options and may require surgical intervention, including total joint replacement.

Orthobiologics have been shown to be an effective alternative to traditional treatments. Due to their anti-inflammatory and pro-healing effects, they go beyond mechanical intervention to support the healing process in the damaged tissue and often result in faster healing times and shorter hospital stays. The orthobiologics market includes bone morphogenetic protein, viscosupplementation with HA, synthetic bone graft substitutes, and stem cell therapy, in addition to DBM and allograft. Our current product pipeline includes Sports Medicine solutions based on placental-based technologies (ReNu). There is a rapidly growing body of clinical and scientific evidence indicating the potential of these products, particularly orthobiologics, in surgical applications, resulting in increased adoption of these products.

In the Advanced Wound Care (Chronic Wound) market, we focus on the development and commercialization of a broad portfolio of cellular and acellular wound care offerings that treat patients from the earliest indication of impaired healing to wound closure. Our suite of products helps treat a wide range of chronic wounds such as VLUs, DFUs, and pressure ulcers.

The breadth and depth of our portfolio allow physicians to tailor solutions to meet the needs of individual wound care patients. Wounds of all types normally progress through predictable phases of healing, starting with inflammation, progressing to cell proliferation, and finally remodeling to form normal skin. Wounds may stall during this process, typically in the inflammatory phase, for a variety of reasons. These reasons include biofilm or infection, uncontrolled inflammatory processes, shortages of cell types and growth factors secreted by cells that are critical to healing and disrupted cell signaling pathways.

It is increasingly recognized that addressing biofilm is an important step in healing any wound. Biofilm is generated by densely packed microbial communities that are attached to the wound surface and enclosed in a matrix of self-produced extracellular polymeric substance, or EPS. Biofilm is present in at least 78% of chronic wounds and can inhibit the healing of all wound types. We engage with the physician at the earliest indication of impaired healing with our PuraPly AM product, which helps control biofilm as an antimicrobial barrier via the broad-spectrum antimicrobial PHMB. If reduction of biofilm and control of the excessive inflammatory response is sufficient to result in healing, as is many times the case, PuraPly AM may be the only product required to achieve wound closure. If underlying healing issues persist, we offer an array of bioactive products and placental-based wound coverings tailored for a wide variety of wound sizes and types.

Our advanced wound care products are used in wound clinics that are located in an outpatient hospital setting as well as in physician offices and ASCs. The table below summarizes our comprehensive advanced wound care product suite:

Affinity & Novachor are fresh, amnion & chorion allograft wound coverings for application in the care of chronic and acute wounds. We believe both products are one of only a few placental tissue products containing viable amniotic cells, and are unique in that they undergo our proprietary AlloFresh process that hypothermically stores the products in their fresh state, never dried or frozen, which retains their native benefits and structure. Regulated as human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue-based product, or HCT/P, under Section 361 of the PHSA, these products are referred to as Section 361 HCT/Ps, or simply 361 HCT/Ps. Affinity was launched in 2014 by NuTech Medical and acquired by us in 2017. Novachor was launched in December 2021.

Apligraf is a bioengineered bi-layered skin substitute that is the only product that has, to date, received PMA approval for the treatment of both VLUs and DFUs. Launched in 1998, Apligraf drives faster healing and more complete wound closure through its tissue-engineered structure, which includes an outer layer of protective skin cells (human epidermal keratinocytes), and an inner layer of cells (human dermal fibroblasts) contained within a collagen matrix. Apligraf is the leading skin substitute product for the treatment of VLUs, and its effectiveness has been established based on an extensive clinical history with over one million units shipped. We believe Apligraf is also the first and only wound-healing therapy to demonstrate in a randomized controlled trial, or RCT, a significant change in patients’ VLU wound tissue, showing a shift from a non-healing gene profile to a healing profile. Apligraf plays an active role in healing by providing the wound with living human skin cells, growth factors and other proteins produced by the cells, and a collagen matrix.

Dermagraft is a dermal substitute grown from human dermal fibroblasts and has received PMA approval for the treatment of DFUs. Launched in 2001 by Smith & Nephew and acquired by us in 2014, this product helps to restore the compromised wound bed to facilitate healing. The living cells in Dermagraft produce many of the same proteins and growth factors that support the healing response in healthy skin. In addition to an FDA-monitored RCT demonstrating its superiority to conventional therapy in the healing of

DFUs, studies based on real-world electronic health records and Medicare data have demonstrated its superior clinical efficacy and value as compared to competitive wound care products and conventional therapy. Dermagraft can be applied weekly (up to eight times) over a twelve-week period and does not need to be removed from the wound during this period because it contains a temporary mesh fabric that is dissolvable and becomes part of the body’s own healing processes. Manufacturing of Dermagraft was suspended in the fourth quarter of 2021 and sales of Dermagraft were suspended in the second quarter of 2022 as part of our plan to transition our Dermagraft manufacturing to a new manufacturing facility or engage a third-party manufacturer, which we expect will result in substantial long-term cost savings. In the period when Dermagraft is not available, we expect that customers will be willing to substitute Apligraf for Dermagraft and that the suspension of Dermagraft sales will not have a material impact on our net revenue.

NuShield is a dehydrated placental tissue wound covering and surgical barrier that is topically or surgically applied to the target tissue to support native healing. Regulated as a 361 HCT/P, NuShield is processed using our proprietary LayerLoc process, which preserves the native structure of the amnion and chorion membranes, including the intermediate or spongy layer, and their native structural and regulatory proteins. NuShield is available in multiple sizes, can be used as a wound covering to help support native healing of chronic and acute wounds of many sizes, and can be stored at room temperature with a five-year shelf life. NuShield was launched in 2010 by NuTech Medical and acquired by us in 2017.

PuraPly Antimicrobial, or PuraPly AM, was developed to address the challenges posed by bioburden and excessive inflammation in the wound. Functioning as an antimicrobial barrier skin substitute, PuraPly AM is a purified native porcine type I collagen matrix embedded with polyhexamethylene biguanide, or PHMB, a localized broad-spectrum antimicrobial. PuraPly AM was launched in 2016 and has received 510(k) clearance for the management of multiple wound types, including partial and full-thickness wounds, pressure ulcers, venous ulcers, diabetic ulcers, chronic vascular ulcers, tunneled/undermined wounds, surgical wounds, trauma wounds, draining wounds, and first- and second-degree burns. The combination of PHMB with a native collagen matrix helps manage bioburden while supporting healing across a wide variety of wound types, regardless of severity or duration. Line extensions include PuraPly XT, which contains additional layers of collagen matrix and a higher level of PHMB. Extra-fenestrated (EF) versions of the products allow for added conformability and fluid drainage. We also developed and received 510(k) clearance for PuraPly without PHMB, which we refer to as “PuraPly,” including PuraPly MZ, for those patients who do not require an antimicrobial agent.

In the Surgical & Sports Medicine market, we focus on the development and commercialization of products that support the healing of surgical/acute wounds, and musculoskeletal injuries including tendon repair and chronic degenerative conditions such as

OA. Our products in this market are used predominantly in the inpatient and outpatient hospital and ASC settings. The table below summarizes the principal products in our Surgical & Sports Medicine product suite:

We market our NuShield product for surgical and orthopedic applications. NuShield may be used as a surgical barrier or as an on-lay or wrap barrier to support soft tissue repairs. When used as a barrier membrane, the native biological characteristics of this placental tissue may help support the healing of soft tissue defects, particularly in difficult-to-heal locations or challenging patient populations. We market our Affinity and Novachor products as wound coverings for acute surgical wounds and our PuraPly AM product as an antimicrobial barrier for the management of open wounds in the surgical setting. PuraForce is a bioengineered porcine collagen surgical matrix for use in soft tissue reinforcement applications. PuraPly MZ is a micronized particulate version of PuraPly that allows application in powder or gel form for the management of open wounds in the surgical setting.

Our bone allograft products, which are derived from donated human cadaveric bone, include FiberOS and OCMP. Each of these products is used as a bone void filler, primarily in orthopedic and neurosurgical applications requiring bony fusion, such as spinal fusions and foot and ankle fusions. FiberOS is a blend of demineralized cortical fibers, mineralized cortical powder, and demineralized cortical powder and OCMP is a freeze-dried allograft cancellous (spongy or mesh-like) and demineralized cortical mixture.

We have a robust pipeline of products under development for both the Advanced Wound Care and Surgical & Sports Medicine markets. We believe our pipeline efforts will deepen our comprehensive portfolio of offerings as well as allow us to address additional clinical applications. The following table summarizes our pipeline products and potential timeline for their commercial launch:

The PuraPly portfolio is comprised of a purified native collagen matrix. PuraPly AM is an antimicrobial barrier leveraging the purified native collagen matrix with broad-spectrum PHMB antimicrobial agent. The design objective of line extensions in development is to leverage our knowledge and expertise to develop products to specifically meet the needs of additional sites of care.

We have placental products under development. The design objective is to develop a larger graft with a long shelf life stored at room temperature to meet the needs of the surgical wound market.

Our R&D team continues to research and develop additional product concepts from our placental technology platform, as well as to collaborate with our Business Development team to assess additional product in-licensing or acquisition opportunities.

We have two development projects underway to develop additional sizes of Apligraf and Dermagraft. The objective is to develop at least one additional smaller size of each product to optimize clinical utilization for smaller wounds such as DFUs. These types of changes to living cell-based products require significant development and validation work, and will require FDA PMA Supplement approval for the changes. Therefore, we expect the duration of the development projects to be several years before commercial products will be available. Manufacturing of Dermagraft line extensions is dependent on the completion of manufacturing and supply capabilities for the product.

FortiShield is a biosynthetic wound matrix made from a semi-permeable silicone membrane bonded to a kitted nylon fabric and coated with collagen, to provide a flexible dressing that is designed to adhere to the application site, provide a barrier to the external environment, and allow for excess exudate drainage. FortiShield is intended for use as a temporary wound covering, and to provide a moist wound healing environment on cleanly debrided wounds after hemostasis has been established. The primary indication for the product is as a transitional wound matrix for second degree burns. There are additional chronic and acute wound applications. A 510(k) application has been filed, and FDA has requested additional testing which is under review by the agency. If the product receives 510(k) clearance, we plan to commercially launch it for acute and chronic wound applications. This is also dependent on the completion of manufacturing and supply capabilities for the product.

TransCyte is a bioengineered tissue scaffold that promotes burn healing, and has received PMA approval for the treatment of deep second- and third-degree burns. We acquired the product from Shire, and it was previously marketed by Smith & Nephew. TransCyte complements our portfolio to address all severities of burn wounds. TransCyte is a flexible, durable product that provides bioactive dermal components, an outer protective barrier, increased re-epithelialization and pain relief for patients suffering from burns. We believe TransCyte will address a sizable market opportunity with limited competition, with only two other PMA approved products that would be directly competitive to TransCyte currently on the market, and only one competitor product containing a biosynthetic barrier to protect wounds. We conducted a clinical experience program with burn surgeons in 2022 with a limited supply of product manufactured at the closed La Jolla facility. Full launch is dependent on the completion of manufacturing capabilities.

ReNu is a cryopreserved suspension derived from human amniotic tissue and cells derived from amniotic fluid, formulated for office use. It has been used to support healing of soft tissues, particularly in degenerative conditions such as OA and joint and tendon injuries such as tendinosis and fasciitis. The initial target indication for ReNu is for the management of symptoms associated with knee OA. A clinical study of ReNu for knee OA has been published, which we believe may indicate signs of its safety and suggest potential efficacy for a period of more than a year. On May 31, 2021, we suspended commercial distribution of ReNu in connection with the end of the FDA’s enforcement grace period for certain products that previously were marketed as 361 HCT/Ps. We are continuing to conduct clinical studies of ReNu to support BLA approval for the management of symptoms associated with knee OA, and are in the planning stages to conduct clinical studies of ReNu to support the management of symptoms associated with Hip OA. We believe ReNu may have potential as a treatment for additional OA and tissue regeneration applications, which would need to be clinically evaluated further before any such approved uses. ReNu was launched in 2015 by NuTech Medical and acquired by us in 2017.

We believe gathering robust and comprehensive clinical and real-world outcomes data is an essential component of developing a competitive product portfolio and driving further penetration in the markets where we compete. We have three ongoing prospective trials and six comparative effectiveness studies. We continue to invest in generating clinical data for our Advanced Wound Care and Surgical & Sports Medicine products, and believe such data enhance sales efforts with physicians and reimbursement dynamics with payers over time. The tables below summarize the status of our recent clinical studies for our Advanced Wound Care and Surgical & Sports Medicine products. As used herein, p value is a measure of statistical significance. The lower the p value, the more likely it is that the results of a clinical trial or study are statistically significant rather than an experimental anomaly. Generally, to be considered statistically significant, such results must have a p value <0.05.

In a published prospective, multicenter, cohort study of 307 patients on the use of PuraPly AM in cutaneous wounds including acute and chronic wounds, 52, 62, and 73% of all wounds achieved closure at week 20, 26, and 32 respectively, with a median time to wound closure of 17 weeks. The wounds studied included 67 (22%) venous leg ulcers, 62 (20%) diabetic foot ulcers, 45 (15%) pressure ulcers, 54 (18%) post-surgical wounds, and 79 (26%) other wounds. For all 307 wounds, the incidence of achieving greater than a 60% reduction in baseline area and depth was 81 and 71% respectively. In addition, the incidence of wounds demonstrating greater than a 75% reduction in baseline volume was 85%.

Two subgroup analyses from the PuraPly AM multicenter, cohort study of 307 patients were published. In the venous leg ulcer (n=67) cohort, wound closure frequencies were 33%, 42%, 45%, 53%, and 73% at weeks 8, 12, 16, 24, and 32, respectively. The median time to closure was 22 weeks. Incidences of achieving a greater than 60% reduction in baseline area and depth were 78% and 70%, respectively, with 87% showing a reduction of greater than 75% in volume.

In the pressure injury (n=45) cohort, wound closure frequencies were 5%, 39%, 49%, and 62% at weeks 4, 16, 24, and 32 weeks, respectively. The median time to wound closure for all wounds was 32 weeks. Incidences of achieving a greater than 60% reduction in baseline area and depth were 78% and 64%, respectively, with approximately 82% of wounds showing a reduction in volume greater than 75%.

In a published randomized controlled clinical trial of Affinity for use in diabetic foot ulcers comparing the use of Affinity and the standard of care (n=38) to the use of the standard of care alone (n=38), 60% of wounds in the Affinity and standard of care group achieved wound closure at 12 weeks compared to 38% of wounds in the standard of care group (p=0.04) and 63% of wounds in the Affinity and standard of care group achieved wound closure at 16 weeks compared to 38% of wounds in the standard of care group (p=0.04). In addition: 82% of wounds in the Affinity and standard of care group achieved a greater than 60% reduction in wound area as compared to 58% of wounds in the standard of care group (p=0.02); 65% of wounds in the Affinity and standard of care group achieved a greater than 60% reduction in wound depth as compared to 39% in the standard of care group (p=0.04); and 81% of wounds in the Affinity and standard of care group achieved a greater than 75% reduction in wound volume as compared to 58% in the standard of care group.

In a published clinical study of clinical experience using NuShield for the management of 50 wounds (VLUs (n=14), DFUs (n=24) and other wounds (n=12)), 45 (90%) of the wounds had wound closure percentages between 60% to 100%. The median time to complete wound closure (or healing) for all wounds was 102 days (14.6 weeks), and the percent healing rate of all wounds healed at 16 and 24 weeks was 56% and 73%, respectively. For DFUs treated with NuShield, the median time to healing was 120 days (17.1 weeks) and the percent healing rates at 16 and 24 weeks were 43% and 59%, respectively. For VLUs treated with NuShield, the median time to healing was 90 days (12.9 weeks), with percent healing rates of 56% and 85% at 16 and 24 weeks, respectively. For all other wounds treated with NuShield (including pressure ulcers, nonhealing surgical, ischemic, mixed etiology, and nonhealing amputation), the median time to healing was 48 days (6.9 weeks), with percent healing rates of 57% and 100% at 16 and 24 weeks, respectively.

In a 200-patient randomized controlled multicenter single-blind study comparing the treatment of knee OA symptoms with ReNu (n=68), a commercially available hyaluronic acid, or HA (n=64), and saline (n=68), patients treated with ReNu reported a clinically meaningful and statistically significant reduction in Visual Analogue Scale (“VAS”) pain and higher OMERACT-OARSI responder rate at 12 months follow-up compared to patients treated with HA or saline. Pain was also evaluated using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (“KOOS”) Pain score, and ReNu resulted in a statistically greater improvement in pain compared to HA at both 3 and 6 months.

A 474-patient Phase 3 prospective, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study is underway to evaluate the efficacy of ReNu (Amniotic Suspension Allograft, “ASA”) for the treatment of symptomatic knee OA (NCT04636229). Patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a single intra-articular (IA) injection of 2 mL of ASA (plus 2 mL of normal saline) or 4 mL of normal saline. The primary efficacy endpoint has been defined as the difference in change from baseline in WOMAC Pain scale at 6 months between ASA- and placebo-treated patients. The design and statistical methodology of the current Phase III multi-center trial were informed and optimized based on the results of the 200 patient study. In March 2023, we reported the positive outcome of a pre-specified interim analysis of the data from 50% of the 474 required patients in our Phase 3 clinical trial for management of symptoms associated with knee OA that focused on the 6-month primary endpoint for sample size re-estimation. Based on the interim analysis, the independent data monitoring committee (“DMC”) recommended that the trial proceed without modification and continue without change to sample size. The DMC also found the safety data to be consistent with the known safety profile for ReNu.

In a published study of the safety and efficacy of TransCyte for the treatment of partial thickness burns, the mean timing to achieve greater than 90% wound epithelialization was 11 days for patients treated with TransCyte as compared to 18 days for patients treated with silver sulfadiazine cream (p=0.002).

We also have accumulated a significant body of clinical evidence demonstrating the efficacy of our FDA-approved products, Apligraf and Dermagraft. We continue to invest in generating similar data for other Advanced Wound Care and Surgical & Sports Medicine products, and believe such data enhance sales efforts with physicians and reimbursement dynamics with payers over time. Our product Apligraf is the only product that has obtained FDA approval for the treatment of both VLUs and DFUs. Our product Dermagraft has also received FDA approval for DFUs. Below is a summary of the primary data supporting each product, and a description of the clinical studies that are currently in progress. As used herein, p value is a measure of statistical significance. The lower the p value, the more likely it is that the results of a clinical trial or study are statistically significant rather than an experimental anomaly. Generally, to be considered statistically significant, such results must have a p value <0.05.

Two pivotal studies were initially conducted with Apligraf demonstrating the safety and efficacy of the product in the treatment of full- and partial-thickness VLUs and DLUs. As a result, Apligraf obtained FDA approval for these indications. We have conducted a number of additional studies that provide further clinical evidence of the safety and efficacy of the product, including recent comparative effectiveness, cost effectiveness, and mechanism of action studies.

For the DFU indication, a multi-center prospective RCT of Apligraf for the treatment of DFUs versus standard of care was conducted. Two hundred eight patients with Type 1 and 2 diabetes were enrolled, who had a plantar DFU of full- or partial-thickness. Patients with a chronic wound that exhibited less than 30% healing prior to treatment were eligible for the clinical trial. All patients’ ulcers were off-loaded using either crutches or a wheelchair for the first six weeks, followed by customized pressure-relieving footwear for at least four weeks post closure. Mean ulcer size was 2.97 cm2 and 2.83 cm2 in the Apligraf and the control group, respectively. The mean duration of the ulcer was 12 months in the Apligraf group and 11 months in the control group.

Apligraf was significantly more effective than conventional therapy for the incidence of complete wound closure over time. By 12 weeks of treatment, 56% (63 of 112 patients) of DFUs treated with Apligraf plus conventional therapy (debridement, saline dressings, total off-loading) were 100% closed, compared to 38% (36 of 96 subjects) of ulcers treated with conventional therapy alone (p=.0042). The median time to 100% wound closure was 65 days for DFUs treated with Apligraf plus conventional therapy versus 90 days for ulcers treated with conventional therapy alone (p=.0026).

Recurrence is an important measure of healing durability, and in the study, 96% of ulcers treated with Apligraf remained closed at six months versus 87% in the control group. An important outcome of the study was an observed reduction in the incidence of reported adverse events of osteomyelitis and amputations/resections. Patients receiving Apligraf had a statistically significant (p<.05) lower incidence of osteomyelitis at the study ulcer site (2.7% vs. 10.4%) compared to patients treated with conventional therapy at six months. Apligraf-treated patients required significantly fewer amputations or resections of the study limb (6.3% vs. 15.6%) (p <.05) compared to patients treated with conventional therapy at six months. The primary results of the study are presented in the figures below.

For the VLU pivotal trial, the efficacy of Apligraf was evaluated in a prospective, parallel-group, randomized, controlled, multi-center study involving 240 patients with VLUs. Subjects receiving Apligraf in combination with compression therapy were compared with an active treatment concurrent control of zinc paste gauze and compression therapy. Apligraf plus compression therapy was more effective in achieving complete wound closure by week 24 (57% vs 40%, p=.022). In patients with long-standing VLUs with greater than one year’s duration (n=120), Apligraf plus compression therapy was more than twice as effective in achieving complete wound closure by week 24 (47% vs 19%, p=.002). The primary results of the study are presented in the figures below.

We conducted four comparative effectiveness studies with Apligraf utilizing our proprietary access to data collected in Net Health’s Wound Expert® Electronic Medical Record, or EMR, database. Net Health’s wound care software is utilized by more than 1,000 wound care centers across the United States. In collaboration with statistical experts and leading clinicians, we analyzed outcomes of treatment with Apligraf versus other skin substitutes including EpiFix (owned by MiMedx), Theraskin (owned by Bioventus, Inc.), Oasis (owned by Smith & Nephew), and Primatrix (Owned by Integra). All four studies showed that Apligraf improved overall healing rates as well as time to healing. For example, patients treated with Apligraf showed a 53% relative improvement in healing over patients treated with EpiFix at 24 weeks. All four studies have been published in peer-reviewed journals.

The Analysis Group, a private economics consulting firm, conducted a study to evaluate the economic outcomes of Medicare patients receiving Apligraf and Dermagraft, assessing the real-world medical services utilization and associated costs compared to patients receiving conventional care. Data for 502 matched Apligraf and conventional care patient pairs and 222 matched Dermagraft and conventional care patient pairs were analyzed. Increased costs associated with outpatient service utilization relative to matched conventional care patients were offset by lower amputation rates, fewer days hospitalized and fewer emergency department visits among Apligraf and Dermagraft patients. Consequently, Apligraf and Dermagraft patients with DFUs had per-patient average healthcare costs during the 18-month follow-up period that were lower than their respective matched conventional care counterparts (Apligraf was $5,253 (p=0.49), lower per patient, while Dermagraft was $6,991 (p=0.84) lower). These findings suggest that use of Apligraf and Dermagraft for treatment of DFU may lower overall medical costs through reduced utilization of costly healthcare services.

To elucidate the mechanisms through which Apligraf promotes healing of chronic VLUs, the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine Department of Dermatology & Cutaneous Surgery conducted an RCT in which 24 patients with non-healing VLUs were treated with either standard of care (compression therapy) or Apligraf together with standard of care. Tissue biopsies were collected

from the VLU edge before and one week after treatment, and the samples underwent a comprehensive analysis of gene expression and protein analyses. The analyses conducted suggest that Apligraf induced a shift from a non-healing to a healing tissue response, involving modulation of inflammatory and growth factor signaling, keratinocyte activation, and attenuation of signaling involved in the chronic ulcer impaired state. In these ways, Apligraf application orchestrated a shift from the chronic non-healing ulcer microenvironment to a distinctive healing milieu resembling that of an acute, healing wound.

Dermagraft was approved as a Class III medical device for the treatment of DFUs based on the results of a large pivotal clinical trial. Three hundred fourteen patients were enrolled in a prospective RCT to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Dermagraft in conjunction with conventional therapy compared to a control arm of conventional therapy alone. Conventional therapy involved the sharp debridement and cleaning of the ulcer, application of a wet-to-dry gauze, and the use of therapeutic, pressure-reducing footwear. Patients were eligible to be screened for the trial if they had a plantar DFU on the heel or forefoot that was greater than 1cm2 and less than 20cm2. At the screening visit, the patients began receiving conventional therapy. If the DFU had not decreased in size by more than 50% during the next two weeks and the patient met all other inclusion and exclusion criteria, the patient was randomized into one of two treatment groups: Dermagraft plus conventional therapy or conventional therapy alone. Patients in the Dermagraft group received a weekly application of Dermagraft and conventional therapy for up to eight weeks. The primary endpoint for the trial was superiority in complete DFU closure by 12 weeks.

In the pivotal clinical trial, the weekly application of Dermagraft and conventional therapy for up to eight weeks increased the proportion of DFUs that achieved 100% closure at 12 weeks by 64%, when compared to the use of conventional therapy alone. Patients treated in the Dermagraft group were 1.7 times more likely to achieve 100% closure than patients receiving conventional therapy alone. These results demonstrated statistically significant improvements. The incidence of adverse events among the Dermagraft and control groups was generally consistent across both groups, with the most common adverse events being infection at the DFU site, infection not at the DFU site, accidental injury and skin dysfunction/blister. However, the percentage of patients who developed an infection at the DFU site was significantly lower in the Dermagraft treatment group as compared with the control group, 10.4% versus 17.9%, respectively. No adverse laboratory findings were associated with the use of Dermagraft and no adverse device effects were reported in the trial. In addition, no immunological responses or rejections from patients that received Dermagraft were reported in this trial or in patients treated to date. The primary healing data for the trial is presented in the figure below.

In a post-hoc analysis, it was determined that in patients treated with Dermagraft, there was a significant reduction in incidence of amputations or bone resections, as compared to the control group (12.6% versus 5.5%, respectively, p=0.031). No adverse laboratory findings were associated with the use of Dermagraft and no adverse device effects were reported in the trial. In addition, no

immunological responses or rejections from patients that received Dermagraft were reported in this trial or in patients treated to date. The amputation or bone resection data is presented in the figure below.

We have conducted three comparative effectiveness studies with Dermagraft, which utilizes our proprietary access to data collected in the EMR database. In collaboration with statistical experts and leading clinicians, we analyzed outcomes of treatment with Dermagraft versus other skin substitutes including EpiFix (owned by MiMedx), Primatrix (owned by Integra), and Grafix (owned by Smith & Nephew). All three studies showed that Dermagraft improved overall healing rates as well as time to healing. In one study, patients treated with Dermagraft showed a 52% relative improvement in healing over EpiFix by week 24.

The economic study of Dermagraft in a Medicare population conducted by the Analysis Group is described under the heading “—Our Products— Previously Published Clinical Studies for FDA-Approved Products—Apligraf—Comparative Effectiveness and Economic Studies” above.

Our proven research and development capabilities and established technology platforms support a robust and adaptable product pipeline for future applications. The platform technologies in which we have deep experience include:

•

Collagen Biomaterial Technology Platform: Our porcine collagen biomaterial technology platform incorporates proprietary tissue cleaning processes and allows us to bioengineer products for specific applications by controlling thickness, strength, and remodeling rates. We currently hold 510(k) clearances for a number of products in this platform with indications ranging from tendon reinforcement to plastic surgery and general surgery applications.

•

Placental-Based Products: Our placental-based products are based on significant expertise in the processing of placental tissues and fluids to yield products with desirable characteristics. We have expertise using the full array of available tissue types and multiple processing methodologies, including our proprietary AlloFresh and LayerLoc processing methods. Our proprietary AlloFresh process hypothermically stores our Affinity product in its fresh state, never dried or frozen, which retains its native benefits and structure. Our proprietary LayerLoc process preserves the native structure of the amnion and chorion membranes, optimized to provide excellent strength, flexibility, and handling.

We have dedicated substantial resources to establish a multi-faceted sales capability in the United States. Our current Advanced Wound Care portfolio is sold throughout the United States via an experienced direct sales force, which focuses its efforts on wound care in various sites of care. We use a mix of direct sales representatives and independent agencies to service the Surgical & Sports Medicine market. As of December 31, 2022, we had approximately 360 direct sales representatives and approximately 150 independent agencies who have substantial medical device sales experience in our target end markets. These sales representatives are supported by teams of professionals focused on sales management, sales operations and effectiveness, ongoing training, analytics, and marketing.

We have historically focused our market development and commercial activities in the United States, but we have obtained marketing registrations, developed commercial and distribution capabilities, and are currently selling products in several countries outside of the United States. Our Apligraf product is currently distributed by our direct sales force in Switzerland, and through independent sales agents in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Our NuShield product is also distributed by our direct sales force in Switzerland, and through independent sales agents in Kuwait. We have obtained marketing registration for our Dermagraft product in Mexico, but we are not currently distributing it. Additionally, we are evaluating the regulatory pathways and market potential for our products in other major markets, including the European Union. Sales generated by our direct sales forces in the United States have represented, and we anticipate will continue to represent, a majority of our revenues.

We offer our customers in-house customer support services, including services provided by our experienced reimbursement support team, our medical and technical support team, and our field-based medical science liaison team. We believe that we have a competitive advantage by providing these essential support services in-house in that we are able to align the support services closely with our sales efforts as appropriate and improve the customer’s overall experience.

Our research and development team has extensive experience in developing regenerative medicine products, and works to design products that are intended to improve patient outcomes, simplify techniques, shorten procedures, reduce hospitalization and rehabilitation times, and, as a result, reduce costs. We conduct research and development activities at our laboratory facilities in Canton, MA, Birmingham, AL, and San Diego, CA. We have recruited and retained staff with significant experience and skills, gained through both industry experience and training at leading colleges and universities with regenerative medicine graduate programs. In addition to our internal staff, our external network of development labs, testing labs, and expert clinicians aid us in our research and development process. We continue to build our clinical operations capabilities to effectively run multiple concurrent multicenter clinical trials, including trials intended for FDA regulatory submissions (e.g. BLA). We have significant regulatory affairs capabilities to prepare and manage our regulatory submissions for product approvals.

The majority of our product portfolio, including Apligraf, our PuraPly product family, our collagen biomaterial technology platform product family, and all of our placental-based products, was developed by our research and development team at our three facilities. We have proven competencies to bring products to market via a broad range of regulatory classifications, as evidenced by FDA approval or clearance of our products via PMA approval of a Class III medical device; BLA approval of a biologics product; and 510(k) clearance of a Class II medical device, in addition to our 361 HCT/P allograft products and several products for which we have obtained international registrations.

We manufacture internally our primary non-placental-based products and use third-party manufacturers for our placental-based products. We have significant expansion capabilities in our in-house manufacturing facilities and we believe that our contract manufacturers are well positioned to support future expansion.

We have robust internal compliance processes to maintain the high quality and reliability of our products. We use annual internal audits, combined with external audits by regulatory agencies to monitor our quality control practices. We are registered with the FDA as a medical device manufacturing establishment and a HCT/P registered establishment. We are also accredited by the

American Association of Tissue Banks (“AATB”) and licensed with several states per their tissue banks regulations. All of our contract manufacturers are registered with the FDA as HCT/P establishments and are AATB accredited.

We utilize third-party raw material suppliers to support our internal manufacturing processes. We select all of our suppliers through a rigorous process to ensure high quality and reliability with the capacity to support our expanding production levels. Only raw material from approved suppliers is used in the manufacture of our products. To confirm quality and identify any risks, our approved suppliers are audited at pre-determined intervals. Historically, we have not experienced any significant difficulty locating and obtaining the suppliers or materials necessary to fulfill our production requirements. In the first quarter of 2019, however, we suspended production of our product Affinity due to production issues at one of our suppliers. As this was our sole supplier of Affinity, it resulted in a disruption of our production capabilities. We identified an alternate supplier and were able to resume commercial-scale production in the second quarter of 2020. Subsequently, we have added a second source to provide additional capacity and redundancy in supply.

The manufacture of our products is dependent on the availability of sufficient quantities of source tissue, which is the primary component of our products. Source tissue includes donated human tissue, porcine tissue, and bovine tissue. We acquire donated human tissue directly through institutional review board-approved protocols at multiple hospitals, as well as through tissue procurement firms engaged by us or by our contract manufacturers. We have two qualified porcine tissue suppliers, and currently one source of bovine tissue. Our processing of these tissues is, and our supplier sources are required to be, compliant with applicable FDA current Good Tissue Practice, or cGTP, regulations, AATB standards, and U.S. Department of Agriculture, or USDA, requirements.

Our customers primarily consist of hospitals, wound care centers, government facilities, ASCs, and physician offices, all of which rely on coverage and reimbursement for our products by Medicare, Medicaid, and other third-party payers. Governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, typically have published and defined coverage criteria and published reimbursement rates for medical products, services, and procedures that are established by law or regulation. Non-government payers have their own coverage criteria and often negotiate payment rates for medical products, services, and procedures. Many also require prior authorization as a prerequisite to coverage. In addition, in the United States, an increasing percentage of insured individuals are receiving their medical care through managed care programs, which monitor utilization and also may require prior authorization for the products and services that a member receives. Coverage and reimbursement from government and commercial payers are not assured and are subject to change.

Medicare, the federally funded program that provides healthcare coverage for senior citizens and people with disabilities, is the largest third-party payer in the United States. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) administers the Medicare program and uses Medicare Administrative Contractors (“MACs”) to process claims, develop coverage policies and make payments within designated geographic jurisdictions. CMS does not have a national coverage determination related to skin substitutes. Coverage for our products falls under the jurisdiction of the Part A/B MACs. Medicare coverage for our products is determined by each MAC for its specific jurisdiction. Currently, all the MACs, even those without published local coverage determinations (“LCDs”), cover our products in the outpatient hospital, physician office, and ASC settings.

Private payers often, but not always, follow the lead of Medicare or other governmental payers in making coverage and reimbursement determinations. Therefore, achieving favorable Medicare coverage and reimbursement can sometimes be a significant factor in obtaining favorable coverage and reimbursement for products by private payers. While most private payers currently cover Apligraf and Dermagraft, and some cover Affinity, most of those payers do not cover many of our other products, such as PuraPly, PuraPly AM, and NuShield.

Currently, Medicare makes a separate payment for our products when used in the physician office at a payment rate based on average sales price (“ASP”) methodology, including ASP plus 6% for some products. In the outpatient hospital and ASC settings, Medicare payment for all our products is bundled into the payment for the application procedure.

All Medicare payment amounts, including separate payment for our products, are affected by sequestration. In 2020, legislation was enacted that temporarily discontinued the sequestration rate of 2% of the government portion, which was imposed under the Budget Control Act of 2011 (“BCA”); under 2% sequestration, the final payment rate for products paid based on ASP is ASP+4.3%. The sequestration began again on April 1, 2022 at a rate of 1%. Starting on July 1, 2022, the sequestration rate returned to 2%. Sequestration may also be ordered under the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (“Statutory PAYGO”), which requires deficit neutrality in most laws passed by Congress. The $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 was expected to trigger Statutory PAYGO at the end of the 2021 Congressional session, but Congress has delayed a Statutory PAYGO sequestration order until after 2024.

The proposed update to the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (“MPFS”) for calendar year 2023 included a proposal to stop making separate payments for all skin substitutes, including all of our products, in 2024 or 2025. Instead of making separate payment for skin substitutes, Medicare would bundle the payment for skin substitutes into the payment made for the application procedure. As part of this proposal, Medicare would consider all skin substitutes to be supplies instead of biologicals and would require manufacturers of skin substitutes, including us, to apply for new HCPCS codes that would be effective starting in 2024. In the 2023 MPFS final rule, published on November 1, 2022, CMS did not finalize this bundling proposal and will consider more public input in the future; however, they may propose the same policy again or make other proposals in the future that could affect our business and our revenue.

All skin substitute products administered in the hospital outpatient department and ASC settings are bundled. No skin substitute products currently have pass-through status. Pursuant to the Appropriations Act, PuraPly AM and PuraPly had pass-through status from October 1, 2018 through September 30, 2020, at which time the pass-through status expired. As of October 1, 2020, payment for PuraPly and PuraPly AM is bundled into the payment rate for the application procedure.

All of our Advanced Wound Care products are classified as “skin substitutes” for Medicare reimbursement purposes. In 2014, CMS instituted “bundled” payments in the hospital outpatient and ASC setting for skin substitutes using a two-tier payment system. The Medicare payment system bundles payment for our products (and all skin substitutes) into the payment for the application of the skin substitute, resulting in a single payment to the provider that includes both the application of the product and the product itself. There is one bundled payment amount for procedures that involve high-cost products, i.e., products whose cost exceeds a threshold amount, and another bundled payment amount for procedures that involve low-cost products that do not meet the threshold. The bundled payment rate is updated annually and is also geographically adjusted. Currently, all of our wound care products are assigned to the high-cost bundle; it is not possible to predict, however, whether those products will continue to be assigned to the high-cost bundle or the rates that will be paid for each bundle. Further, under the bundling policy, there is an inherent incentive to use the cheapest products available, even if those products are less effective.

The bundled payment rates are also geographically adjusted. This geographic adjustment may result in significant payment variations among regions; sixty percent of the hospital payment rate and fifty percent of the ASC payment is adjusted to take into account the region’s wage-index, which can vary widely from one region to another. The wage-index adjustment can increase or decrease the unadjusted payment amount and may result in reimbursement being insufficient to account for the cost of skin substitute products and sizes in one geographic area that are fully reimbursed in other geographic areas.

Medicare has signaled that it may revise its two-tiered bundled payment policy for skin substitutes. Medicare solicited comments in the calendar year 2019 proposed rule related to proposed updates and policy changes under the Medicare Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS) and ASC Payment System. Medicare specifically solicited comments on whether it should eliminate the two-tiered bundle policy and establish a single bundle for all products. However, CMS has not implemented any changes to its two-tiered payment structure for skin substitutes in response to those comments. In the calendar year 2023 proposed rule, CMS did not solicit comments on changes to its two-tiered payment structure. However, if CMS finalizes any revisions to its two-tiered payment policy, those changes could result in decreased reimbursement for our products which could decrease utilization and reduce our revenues. Moreover, any new policy could result in a financial incentive for hospitals and ASCs to use our competitor’s products, thereby reducing our market share and revenue.

In the physician office setting, payment for skin substitutes is not bundled into the payment for the administration of the product. Skin substitutes are paid separately from the application procedure and the Medicare payment rate for all biological skin substitutes (including ours) is calculated based on the ASP methodology on a per square centimeter basis with the total payment for the product being the per square centimeter ASP-based payment rate multiplied by the total number of centimeters. In the physician office setting the Medicare payment rates for all biological skin substitutes (including ours) are updated quarterly based on the ASP methodology and are not geographically adjusted. All Medicare payment amounts, including separate payment for our products, are affected by sequestration. Under the BCA, sequestration reduces by two percent the federal portion of the Medicare payment amount; the

beneficiary coinsurance amount of 20 percent is unaffected by sequestration. Congress had suspended sequestration during the COVID-19 public health emergency until April 1, 2022, at which time the reduction was one percent. Starting on July 1, 2022, the sequestration rate returned to two percent.

The ASP-based payment methodology applies only to physician offices. However, in the future, it is possible, through legislation or regulation, that Medicare will institute bundled payment for skin substitutes in the physician office setting. In fact, the proposed updates to the MPFS for calendar year 2023 included a proposal to stop making separate payment for all skin substitutes, including all of our products, in 2024 or 2025. Instead of making separate payment for skin substitutes, Medicare would bundle the payment for skin substitutes into the payment made for the application procedure. In the 2023 MPFS final rule, published on November 1, 2022, CMS did not finalize this bundling proposal and will consider more public input in the future; however, they may propose the same policy again or make other proposals in the future that could affect our business and our revenue.

Before calendar year 2022, Medicare did not require us to report ASP for some of our products because they are regulated by the FDA as medical devices; we voluntarily reported ASP data for most products. However, starting on April 30, 2022, we were required to report ASP for all our products because of a provision enacted in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2020, signed into law on December 27, 2020. CMS does not necessarily include all products that report ASP data in the quarterly ASP file. The local Part A/B MACs establish local payment for drugs and biologics whose ASP does not appear in the quarterly ASP file. MACs have the discretion to pay for such products based on invoices submitted by providers, Wholesale Acquisition Cost (“WAC”) + 3%, or they may contact CMS to determine if there are unpublished ASP data.

Section 90004 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, enacted in November 2021, requires manufacturers to pay a refund to the federal government if more than a certain applicable percentage of their single-use product is not administered to a patient and is discarded (“wasted”) by providers. Because there is a lack of consistency and uniformity in wound sizes, it is likely that some skin substitute product is discarded with every treatment. Providers are only required to report discarded product when the product is paid separately (not part of a bundled payment rate.) The rebate obligation took effect on January 1, 2023, and CMS proposed a methodology to implement the rebate in the MPFS rulemaking. The applicable percentage is required to be at least 10 percent of total allowed charges for the drug in a given calendar quarter. CMS has the authority to increase the applicable percentage that applies to refunds for discarded product if there are “unique circumstances”. We submitted comments on the proposal noting the unique circumstances related to skin substitutes and asking CMS to apply a higher percentage. In the 2023 MPFS final rule, published on November 1, 2022, CMS did not apply a higher applicable percentage to any products other than the hydrogel example they used in the proposed rule and stated that they plan to collect additional information about products that may have unique circumstances such that an increased applicable percentage (higher than 10 percent) would apply. CMS estimated the wastage percentage for three of our products - Apligraf, Dermagraft, and PuraPly - based on 2020 data. We do not know if the refund amounts calculated in 2023 will be similar to these estimates but if they are, we may owe rebates, which could be material, on these products and possibly other products. The total amount of any discarded product rebate liability is not known at this time.

In the calendar year 2022 Final Rule for the MPFS, CMS established ten healthcare common procedure coding system (HCPCS), codes that describe synthetic skin substitutes, and more of these codes for synthetic skin substitutes have been established since. CMS has directed MACs to make separate payments for these codes when they are reported with the CPT codes for the application of skin substitutes. Because manufacturers of these products are not required to establish a WAC, or submit an ASP (because they are not treated as drugs or biologics by Medicare), it is likely the Part A/B MACs will pay for these products based on invoices. We do not know what effect this will have on our business or revenue.

Commercial insurers contract with participating providers such as hospitals, wound care centers, government facilities, ASCs, and physician offices to establish agreed-upon payment rates for items and services, including skin substitutes. Usually, these rates are in the form of a fee-schedule but sometimes there is a bundled payment rate. In many cases, the fee schedules are based on Medicare payment rates, which are bundled in hospitals and ASCs, but not in physician offices. These rates may vary by insurer, by provider and by region.

Medicaid coverage and payment rates and policies as to the types of providers (e.g., podiatrists) who are allowed to apply our products are determined by each state’s Medicaid program. Some states may bundle Medicaid payment for skin substitutes into the payment for the application procedure, like Medicare, while other states may pay separately. State Medicaid programs may reach different conclusions regarding the medical necessity of products used in treating Medicaid patients.

Currently, three MACs (Novitas, FCSO, and CGS) are in the process of issuing LCDs for skin substitutes for the treatment of DFUs and VSUs. Each of the proposed LCDs has the PuraPly products listed as non-covered. We have commented on the proposed policies and are working to reverse this in the final LCDs, but if the noncoverage of the PuraPly products stands in the final LCDs, then this noncoverage could adversely impact utilization of the PuraPly products and our revenue. In addition, these proposed policies would (1) limit the number of skin substitutes that can be applied to a wound, (2) prohibit switching skin substitutes during a course of

treatment, and (3) would require us to get certification from the FDA that our amniotic products are solely regulated under Section 361 of the Public Health Services Act. These LCDs have only been released in draft form and we do not know if or when they might be finalized or what policies will be included in any final LCD. If any of these proposals are finalized, our business and revenue could be adversely affected.

Surgical & Sports Medicine products administered on an inpatient basis in a hospital are reimbursed by Medicare as part of a bundled payment based on the Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Group (“MS-DRG”), to which a patient is assigned upon discharge from the hospital. MS-DRG assignment is determined according to the patient’s primary diagnosis, but can also be affected by other secondary diagnoses and the provision of certain surgical procedures. Certain MS-DRGs account for complications and comorbidities, which may increase the reimbursement amount.

The MS-DRG payment rate is a consolidated prospective payment for all services provided by the hospital during the patient’s hospitalization, based on the average cost of care calculated from Medicare claims data. With extremely few exceptions, the MS-DRG payment is inclusive of all services, products, and resources. Products administered during surgical procedures are not typically coded or paid separately when provided to a hospital inpatient. MS-DRG payments are case rates and hospitals profit when their costs for a particular patient are below the case rate and they are at risk of a loss if their costs are above the case rate.

Some private payers use the MS-DRG based system to reimburse facilities for inpatient services.

We operate in highly competitive markets that are subject to rapid technological change. Success in these markets depends primarily on product efficacy, ease of product use, product price, availability of coverage and adequate third-party reimbursement, customer support services for technical, clinical, and reimbursement support, and customer preference for, and loyalty to, the products.

We believe that the demonstrated clinical efficacy of our products, the breadth of our product portfolio, our in-house customer support services, our customer relationships and reputation offer us advantages over our competitors. In addition, we believe we are one of the few regenerative medicine companies offering PMA approved and 510(k) cleared products in addition to our 361 HCT/Ps.

Our products compete primarily with skin substitute products, placental-based technology products, orthobiologics products, other advanced wound care and traditional wound care products, among others. Our competitors include Amniox Medical, Inc., Arthrex, Inc., Bioventus Inc., Convatec Group Plc., Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation, MiMedx Group, Inc., Smith & Nephew plc and 3M, Incorporated.

We also compete in the marketplace to recruit and retain qualified scientific, management and sales personnel, as well as to acquire technologies and technology licenses complementary to our products or advantageous to our business.

We are aware of several companies that compete, or are developing technologies, in our current and future product areas. As a result, we expect competition to remain intense. Our ability to compete successfully will depend on our ability to develop proprietary products that reach the market in a timely manner, receive adequate coverage and reimbursement, are cost effective, and are safe and effective.

Our success depends in part on our ability to protect our proprietary technology and intellectual property and operate without infringing the patents and other proprietary rights of third parties. We rely on a combination of trademark, trade secret, patents, copyright, and other intellectual property rights and measures to protect the intellectual property rights that we consider important to our business. We also rely on know-how and continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our competitive position. Other than a license from Novartis Pharma AG for trademark and domain name rights to Apligraf and an exclusive license from RESORBA Medical GmbH, or Resorba, to a U.S. patent for a collagen-based wound dressing containing PHMB, we do not have any additional material licenses to any technology or intellectual property rights. Under the terms of the exclusive license from Resorba, we were obligated to make minimum royalty payments of $1.0 million in each of 2018 and 2019, and were subject to a $2.5 million minimum royalty payment in 2017, as part of an ongoing low single-digit royalty payment on net sales of PuraPly AM; the term of the license shall continue for the life of the patent, which expires in October 2026. We may also terminate the license upon written notice to Resorba in the event that (i) the patent is invalidated or (ii) we stop all activities that would require a license to the patent, and either party may terminate the license in the event of a material breach by the other party, subject to notice and an ability to cure. In addition,

we were obligated to make upfront and maintenance payments totaling $0.6 million at specified periods prior to April 1, 2019, including a payment of $0.2 million that was made on July 1, 2018. The license is assignable but not sub-licensable.

As of December 31, 2022, we owned 36 issued patents globally, of which 15 were U.S. patents. As of December 31, 2022, we owned 13 pending patent applications, of which 9 were patent applications pending in the United States. Subject to payment of required maintenance fees, annuities, and other charges, many of our issued patents are currently expected to expire between 2027 and 2042. The expiration of these patents is not expected to have a material impact on our business. In addition, many of our products, including our Apligraf, Dermagraft, and NuShield products, are not covered by our issued patents or pending patent applications. Our issued patents are drawn to the following main areas: methods of making and using cultured tissue constructs, methods for preparing multi-layer stacks of living tissue, methods for treating recessed oral gingiva using cultured tissue constructs, methods of making and using osteogenic implants comprising a placental membrane sheet, wound treatment methods using amniotic stem cell solutions and placental membrane sheets, methods of generating cartilage in a skeletal joint using placental membrane preparations, hepatocyte growth factor- and hyaluronic acid-containing compositions and methods of using such compositions, methods making placental membrane preparations comprising hyaluronic acid, methods of harvesting or proliferating human prenatal stem cells, hypothermic morselized placental membrane storage methods, uses of human amniotic fluid for treating chronic wounds and joint diseases, and adjustable debridement curette apparatuses. Our pending patent applications encompass additional areas, including wound treating methods using morselized amnion tissue and amniotic-derived cells, methods of assessing native stem cell populations using cultured isolated stem cells and reference cell sources, visco-supplement compositions and musculoskeletal inflammatory treatment methods using same, wound care treatment and methods of making and using such treatment, model systems and methods to characterize anti-inflammatory activity, and porcine collagen compositions and methods of using such compositions. Our pending patent applications may not result in issued patents and we can give no assurance that any patents that have been issued or might be issued in the future will protect our current or future products or provide us with any competitive advantage. See the section titled “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property” for additional information.

Additionally, we own or have rights to trademarks or trade names that are used in our business and in conjunction with the sale of our products, including 10 U.S. trademark registrations and 11 foreign trademark registrations, as of December 31, 2022.

We also seek to protect our proprietary rights through a variety of methods, including confidentiality agreements and proprietary information agreements with suppliers, employees, consultants, and others who may have access to our proprietary information.

We market medical products in the United States that have either been approved or cleared by the FDA prior to marketing, or do not require FDA premarket review. Our marketed products that have received marketing authorization from the FDA have done so under one of the following agency pathways: 510(k) clearance for a Class II medical device or approval of a PMA for a Class III medical device. These medical products are regulated by the FDA under the PHSA or the FDCA along with the FDA’s implementing regulations. These federal statutes and regulations govern, among other things, the following activities that we perform or are performed on our behalf and will continue to perform or have performed on our behalf: the production, research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, packaging, labeling, storage, approval, advertising, and promotion, distribution of our products into interstate commerce, record keeping, service and surveillance, complaint handling, repair or recall of products, adverse event reporting and other field safety corrective actions.

Unless an exemption applies or the product is a Class I device, each medical device that we market must first receive either 510(k) clearance or PMA approval from the FDA. In addition, certain modifications made to marketed devices also may require 510(k) clearance or approval of a PMA supplement. We maintain necessary clearances and approvals for products derived from porcine, bovine, and human tissues that are regulated by the FDA. PuraPly, PuraPly AM, PuraPly XT, PuraPly MZ, and PuraForce are medical devices that have been cleared for marketing under a number of 510(k)s for uses such as wound dressing, intraoral barrier, and surgical mesh. We also maintain medical device approvals for the Apligraf (P950032) and Dermagraft (P000036) devices, both approved by the FDA as chronic wound treatments.

With respect to the manufacture of medical devices and biologics, the FDA regulates and inspects equipment, facilities, laboratories, and processes used in the manufacturing and testing of products prior to providing approval to market products. After receiving approval from the FDA, additional regulatory review or inspection may be required if we make a material change in manufacturing equipment, location or process. Our manufacturing processes must comply with the FDA’s Quality System Regulation, or QSR, for our medical device products. The QSR requires that each device manufacturer establish and implement a quality system under which the manufacturer monitors the manufacturing process and maintains records that show compliance with FDA regulations and the manufacturer’s written specifications and procedures relating to the devices. Among other things, these regulations require that manufacturers establish performance requirements before production and follow requirements applicable to design controls, testing, record keeping, documentation, manufacturing standards, labeling, complaint handling, and management review.

Manufacturers of biologics must comply with applicable cGMP regulations, including quality control and quality assurance and maintenance of records and documentation. Manufacturers and others involved in the manufacture and distribution of such products also must register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies. Both domestic and foreign manufacturing establishments must register and provide additional information to the FDA upon their initial participation in the manufacturing process. Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional preclinical studies and must also develop additional information about the physical characteristics of the biologic product candidate, as well as finalize a process for manufacturing the product candidate in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. To help reduce the risk of the introduction of adventitious agents or of causing other adverse events with the use of biologic products, the PHSA emphasizes the importance of manufacturing control for products whose attributes cannot be precisely defined. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other requirements, the sponsor must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality, potency, and purity of the final biologic product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the biologic product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

The FDA conducts periodic visits, both announced and unannounced, to re-inspect our equipment, facilities, laboratories, and processes to confirm regulatory compliance. These inspections may include the manufacturing facilities of subcontractors. Following an inspection, the FDA may issue a report, known as a 483, listing instances where the manufacturer has failed to comply with applicable regulations and/or procedures or, if observed violations are severe and urgent, a warning letter. If the manufacturer does not adequately respond to a 483 or warning letter, the FDA may take enforcement action against the manufacturer or impose other sanctions or consequences, which may include:

In addition, we must comply with medical device reporting regulations and corrections and removal reporting regulations. Medical device reporting regulations require that manufacturers report to the FDA if their devices may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or malfunctioned in a way that would likely cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if it were to recur. Corrections and removal reporting regulations require that manufacturers report to the FDA field corrections and product recalls or removals if undertaken to reduce a risk to health posed by the device or to remedy a violation of the FDCA that may present a risk to health. The FDA may also order a mandatory recall if there is a reasonable probability that the device would cause serious adverse health consequences or death.

Certain human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue-based products, or HCT/Ps, are regulated under Section 361 of the PHSA and are referred to as “Section 361 HCT/Ps” or simply “361 HCT/Ps,” while other HCT/Ps are subject to the FDA’s regulatory requirements for medical devices and/or biologics. A product that is regulated as a 361 HCT/P may be commercially distributed without prior FDA clearance or approval. Pursuant to 21 CFR 1271.10, in order to be regulated as a 361 HCT/P, and hence exempt from premarket review, an HCT/P must be minimally manipulated, intended for homologous use, and manufactured without being combined with another article (except for water, crystalloids, or sterilizing, preserving, or storage agents). The HCT/P must also either

have no systemic effect and not be dependent upon the metabolic activity of living cells for its primary function or, if it has a systemic effect, be intended for autologous use, for allogeneic use in a first-degree or second-degree blood relative or for reproductive use. We believe that Affinity and NuShield generally fulfill the relevant criteria under 21 CFR 1271.10. In light of the 361 HCT/P Guidance, our labeling and marketing claims for Affinity and NuShield clarify that they are intended for use as wound coverings, and thus qualify as Section 361 HCT/Ps. However, the FDA could disagree with our conclusion and require premarket approval or clearance for Affinity, NuShield, or any placental-based sheet product we presently have or may have in the future market, which would disrupt the marketing of these products, potentially expose us to regulatory sanctions, and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Section 361 HCT/Ps are subject to specific FDA regulations that include cGTPs, donor eligibility determination requirements, adverse event reporting, and advertising and labeling requirements. cGTP regulations govern the methods used in, and the facilities and controls used for, the manufacture of HCT/Ps, including but not limited to all steps in recovery, donor screening, donor testing, processing, storage, labeling, packaging, and distribution.

Before testing any biologic product candidate in humans, the product candidate must undergo preclinical testing. Preclinical tests, also referred to as nonclinical studies, include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, potency, toxicity, and formulation, as well as in vivo studies to assess the potential safety and activity of the product candidate and to establish a rationale for therapeutic use. The conduct of the preclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements including GLPs. Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually must complete some long-term preclinical testing, such as animal tests of reproductive adverse events and carcinogenicity, and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the drug and finalize a process for manufacturing the drug in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the drug candidate and, among other things, the manufacturer must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality, and purity of the final drug product.

The clinical trial sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical studies, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature, and a proposed clinical protocol, to the FDA as part of the Investigational New Drug Application (“IND”). The FDA may impose clinical holds on a biologic product candidate at any time before or during clinical trials due to safety concerns or non-compliance. If the FDA imposes a clinical hold, clinical trials may not recommence without FDA authorization and then only under terms authorized by the FDA. Accordingly, we cannot be sure that submission of an IND will result in the FDA allowing clinical trials to commence, or that, once begun, issues will not arise that suspend or terminate such trials.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the biologic product candidate to volunteers or patients under the supervision of qualified investigators who generally are physicians not employed by, or under, the control of the trial sponsor. Clinical trials are conducted under written study protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the clinical trial, dosing procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria and the parameters to be used to monitor subject safety, including stopping rules that assure a clinical trial will be stopped if certain adverse events should occur. Each protocol and certain amendments to the protocol must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Submission of an IND may or may not result in the FDA allowing clinical trials to commence. Clinical trials must be conducted and monitored in accordance with the FDA’s regulations comprising the GCP requirements, including the requirement that all research subjects provide informed consent. Further, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an Institutional Review Board (“IRB”) at or servicing each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted. An IRB is charged with protecting the welfare and rights of trial participants and considers items such as whether the risks to individuals participating in the clinical trials are minimized and are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits. The IRB also approves the form and content of the informed consent that must be signed by each clinical trial subject, or their legal representative, reviews and approves the trial protocol, and must monitor the clinical trial until completed.

Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap, be combined, or be bifurcated into two parts:

•

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

•

Phase 3. Clinical trials are undertaken to further evaluate dosage, clinical efficacy, potency and safety in an expanded patient population at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites. These clinical trials are intended to establish the overall risk/benefit ratio of the product candidate and provide an adequate basis for product approval and labeling. In January 2021, we announced that the first patient was enrolled in the pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of ReNu for the management of symptoms associated with knee OA.

Post-approval clinical trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials, may be conducted after initial approval. These clinical trials are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication, particularly for long-term safety follow-up. Sometimes approval for a product is conditional upon the completion of post-marketing clinical studies.

During all phases of clinical development, regulatory agencies require extensive monitoring and auditing of all clinical activities, clinical data and clinical trial investigators. Annual progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted to the FDA. Written IND safety reports must be promptly submitted to the FDA, the IRB, and the investigators for: serious and unexpected suspected adverse reactions; any findings from other trials; findings from animal or in vivo laboratory tests or in vitro testing that suggest a significant risk for human subjects; or any clinically important increase in the rate of a serious suspected adverse reaction over that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure. The sponsor must submit an IND safety report as soon as possible, but in no case later than 15 calendar days after the sponsor determines that the information qualifies for reporting. The sponsor also must notify the FDA of any unexpected fatal or life-threatening suspected adverse reaction as soon as possible but no later than seven calendar days after the sponsor’s initial receipt of the information.

The FDA or the sponsor or its data safety monitoring board may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the biologic product candidate has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients.

The FDA is authorized to expedite the review of BLAs in several ways. Under the Fast Track program, the sponsor of a biologic product candidate may request the FDA to designate the product for a specific indication as a Fast Track product concurrent with or after the filing of the IND. Biologic products are eligible for Fast Track designation if they are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the condition. Fast Track designation applies to the combination of the product candidate and the specific indication for which it is being studied. In addition to other benefits, such as the ability to have greater interactions with the FDA, the FDA may initiate review of sections of a Fast Track BLA before the application is complete, a process known as rolling review.

Any product submitted to the FDA for marketing, including under a Fast Track program, may be eligible for other types of FDA programs intended to expedite development and review, such as breakthrough therapy designation, regenerative medicine advance therapy designation, priority review and accelerated approval.

•

Breakthrough therapy designation. To qualify for the breakthrough therapy program, product candidates must be intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence must indicate that such product candidates may demonstrate substantial improvement on one or more clinically significant endpoints over existing therapies. The FDA will seek to ensure the sponsor of a breakthrough therapy product candidate receives intensive guidance on an efficient drug development program; intensive involvement of senior managers and experienced staff on a proactive, collaborative and cross-disciplinary review; and a rolling review.

•

Regenerative Medicine Advance Therapy (RMAT) designation. RMAT was introduced as a new designation under the 21st Century Cures Act for the development and review of certain regenerative medicine therapies. As set forth in section 506(g)(8) of the FDCA, the term “regenerative medicine therapy” is defined to include cell therapy, therapeutic tissue engineering products, human cell and tissue products, and combination products using any such therapies or products, except for those regulated solely under section 361 of the PHSA. To receive RMAT designation, a regenerative medicine product candidate must be intended to treat, modify, reverse, or cure a serious or life-threatening disease or condition with preliminary clinical evidence indicating that the drug has the potential to address unmet medical needs. RMAT designation does not require evidence to indicate that the drug may offer a substantial improvement over available therapies, as breakthrough designation requires. Similar to breakthrough designation, an RMAT product candidate receives intensive guidance on an efficient drug development program; involvement of senior managers and experienced staff on a proactive, collaborative and cross-disciplinary review; and a rolling review. Regenerative medicine therapies that qualify for RMAT designation may also qualify for other FDA expedited programs, including Fast Track designation, breakthrough therapy designation, accelerated approval, and priority review designation, if they meet the criteria for such programs. In January 2021, we announced ReNu received the RMAT designation from the FDA for the management of symptoms associated with knee OA.

•

Accelerated approval. Drugs or biologic products studied for their safety and effectiveness in treating serious or life-threatening illnesses and that provide meaningful therapeutic benefit over existing treatments may receive accelerated approval. Accelerated approval means that a product candidate may be approved on the basis of adequate and well-controlled clinical trials establishing that the product candidate has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict a clinical benefit, or on the basis of an effect on a clinical endpoint other than survival or irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefits, taking into account the severity, rarity and prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. As a condition of approval, FDA may require that a sponsor of a drug or biologic product candidate receiving accelerated approval perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing clinical trials to verify the predicted clinical benefit. In addition, for accelerated approval products FDA typically requires pre-dissemination submission of promotional materials to FDA for the agency’s consideration. A drug approved under the accelerated approval pathway may have its approval revoked on several grounds including if a required post-approval trial fails to verify clinical benefit or does not demonstrate sufficient clinical benefit to justify the risks associated with the drug.

Fast Track designation, breakthrough therapy designation, RMAT designation and accelerated approval do not change the standards for approval but may expedite the development or approval process.

FDA regulation of biologic products continues after approval, particularly with respect to cGMP requirements, including quality control and quality assurance and maintenance of records and documentation. Other post-approval requirements applicable to biologic products include reporting of cGMP deviations that may affect the identity, potency, purity and overall safety of a distributed product, record-keeping requirements, reporting of adverse effects, reporting updated safety and efficacy information and complying with electronic record and signature requirements. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or after approval, may subject an applicant or manufacturer to administrative or judicial civil or criminal actions and adverse publicity. These actions could include refusal to approve pending applications or supplemental applications, withdrawal of an approval, clinical hold, suspension or termination of a clinical trial by an IRB, warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines or other monetary penalties, refusals of government contracts, mandated corrective advertising or communications with healthcare providers, debarment, restitution, disgorgement of profits or other civil or criminal penalties.

Advertising, marketing and promotional activities for devices and biologics are also subject to FDA oversight and must comply with the statutory standards of the FDCA, and the FDA’s implementing regulations. The FDA’s oversight authority review of marketing and promotional activities encompasses, but is not limited to, direct-to-consumer advertising, healthcare provider-directed advertising and promotion, sales representative communications to healthcare professionals, promotional programming and promotional activities involving electronic media. The FDA also regulates industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities that make representations regarding product safety or efficacy in a promotional context. A sponsor also must comply with the FDA’s advertising and promotion requirements, such as the prohibition on promoting products for uses or in patient populations that are not described in the product’s approved labeling (known as “off-label use”). The FDA may take enforcement action against a company for promoting unapproved uses of a product or for other violations of its advertising and labeling laws and regulations. Enforcement actions may include product seizures, injunctions, civil or criminal penalties or regulatory letters, which may require corrective advertising or other corrective communications to healthcare professionals.

We engage in public policy advocacy with policymakers and continue to work to demonstrate that our therapeutic products provide value to patients and to those who pay for health care. We advocate with government policymakers to encourage a long-term approach to sustainable health care financing that ensures access to innovative medicines and does not disproportionately target FDA-regulated medical devices and biologics as a source of budget savings. In markets with historically low rates of health care spending, we encourage those governments to increase their investments and adopt market reforms in order to improve their citizens’ access to appropriate health care.

Within the United States, our products and our customers are subject to extensive regulation by a wide range of federal and state agencies. These agencies regulate the coverage and reimbursement of our products, and prohibit activities that might result in health care fraud and abuse against patients and insurance programs. Internationally, other governments also impose regulations in connection with their health care reimbursement programs and the delivery of health care items and services.

U.S. federal health care fraud and abuse laws generally apply to our activities because our products are covered under federal healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. The principal U.S. federal health care fraud and abuse laws applicable to us and our activities include: (1) the Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits the knowing and willful offer, solicitation, payment or receipt of anything of value in order to generate business reimbursable by a federal health care program; (2) the False Claims Act, which prohibits the submission of false or otherwise improper claims for payment to a federally funded health care program, including claims resulting from a violation of the Anti-Kickback Statute; and (3) health care fraud statutes that prohibit false statements and fraudulent and abusive claims made to any third-party payer.

The Anti-Kickback Statute is particularly relevant because of its broad applicability. Specifically, the Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving, or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, in exchange for, or to induce, either the referral of an individual, or the furnishing, arranging for or recommending a good or service for which payment may be made in whole or part under federal health care programs, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Depending on the circumstances, almost any financial interaction with a healthcare provider, patient or customer could implicate the Anti-Kickback Statute. Statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protect certain interactions from prosecution if all specified requirements are met. However, most safe harbors or exceptions require, among other things, fair market value exchanges. The government can exercise enforcement discretion in taking action against unprotected activities. Many types of interactions in which we commonly engage, such as customer support services, could implicate the Anti-Kickback Statute, are not protected by a safe harbor or exception and have been the subject of government scrutiny and enforcement action when not structured appropriately. If the government determines that these activities are abusive, we could be subject to enforcement action. Other companies that manufacture wound care products have been subject to government scrutiny and enforcement action. For example, in early 2017, Shire Pharmaceuticals LLC and other subsidiaries of Shire plc agreed to pay $350 million to settle federal and state False Claims Act allegations that Shire and the company that Shire acquired in 2011, Advanced BioHealing, employed kickbacks and other unlawful methods to induce clinics and physicians to use or overuse its product Dermagraft (a product we subsequently acquired). Penalties for Anti-Kickback Statute violations may include both criminal penalties such as imprisonment and civil sanctions such as fines and possible exclusion from Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal health care programs. Exclusion would mean that our products would no longer be eligible for reimbursement under federal healthcare programs.

There are similar state false claims, anti-kickback, and insurance laws that apply to state-funded Medicaid and other health care programs as well as to commercial third-party payers. Insurance companies may also bring a private cause of action for treble damages against a manufacturer for a pattern of causing false claims to be filed under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO. In addition, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or FCPA, may be used to prosecute companies in the United States for arrangements with physicians, or other parties outside the United States if the physician or party is a government official of another country and the arrangement violates the laws of that country.

In addition to receiving scrutiny and providing potential grounds for action under the Anti-Kickback Statute, pricing, sales and marketing practices of medical device and pharmaceutical manufacturers are also subject to tightly focused regulation at the federal and state levels. Federal law and regulation, for example, establish pricing methodologies for government health insurance programs and require regular reporting of sales information to CMS in support of manufacturer price calculations. In recent years, the federal government and a growing number of states have introduced new drug price transparency requirements that can require extensive information disclosures to agencies or potential purchasers relating to drug price increases. Health care laws and regulations generally limit financial interactions between manufacturers and health care providers; require pharmaceutical and medical device companies to comply with voluntary compliance standards issued by industry associations and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the U.S. federal government; and/or require disclosure to the government and/or public of financial interactions (so-called “sunshine laws”). Many of these laws and regulations contain ambiguous requirements or require administrative guidance for implementation. Manufacturers must adopt reasonable interpretations of requirements if there is ambiguity and those interpretations could be

challenged. Given the lack of clarity in laws and their implementation, our activities could be subject to the penalty provisions of the pertinent federal and state laws and regulations.

The healthcare laws and regulations applicable to us, including those described above, are subject to evolving interpretations and enforcement discretion. If a governmental authority were to conclude that we are not in compliance with applicable laws and regulations, we and our officers and employees could be subject to severe criminal and civil financial penalties, including, for example, exclusion from participation as a supplier of product to beneficiaries covered by Medicare or Medicaid. Any failure to comply with laws and regulations relating to reimbursement and health care goods and services could adversely affect our reputation, business, financial condition and cash flows. To help ensure compliance with the laws and regulations governing the provision of health care goods and services, we have implemented a comprehensive compliance program based on the HHS Office of Inspector General’s Seven Elements of an Effective Compliance Program. Despite our compliance program, we cannot be certain that we have always operated in full compliance with all applicable healthcare laws.

Our profitability and operations are subject to risks relating to changes in legislative, regulatory, and reimbursement policies and decisions as well as changes to private payer reimbursement coverage and payment decisions and policies. Implementation of further legislative or administrative reforms to reimbursement systems, or adverse decisions relating to our products by administrators of these systems in coverage or reimbursement, could significantly reduce reimbursement or result in the denial of coverage, which could have an impact on the acceptance of and demand for our products and the prices that our customers are willing to pay for them.

Revenues during our fourth quarter tend to be stronger than other quarters because many hospitals increase their purchases of our products during the fourth quarter to coincide with the end of their budget cycles in the United States. Satisfaction of patient deductibles through the course of the year also results in increased revenues later in the year. In general, our first quarter usually has lower revenues than the preceding fourth quarter, the second and third quarters have higher revenues than the first quarter, and the fourth quarter revenues are the highest in the year.

As of December 31, 2022, we had approximately 1,030 employees worldwide. None of our employees are represented by a collective bargaining agreement. We have never experienced a work stoppage. We believe our employee relations are good.

In managing our business, we focus on a number of measures and objectives with respect to the attraction, development, and retention of our employees that we believe are important to our business, including diversity, communication, compensation, tenure, professional development, and health, well-being and safety:

•

We are proud to be an equal opportunity employer. We seek to attract a diverse slate of candidates, including from historically underrepresented groups. We believe that diversity and inclusion in the workplace enhance employee engagement and stimulate innovation, and that people in diverse groups work better, share information more broadly and consider a wider range of views. We pride ourselves on our diverse workforce, which we believe has been and will continue to be a major contributor to our growth and innovation, and intend to continue to make diversity and inclusion a focus of our efforts regarding our workforce.

•

We aim to maintain an “open door” culture, and encourage employees to voice their concerns, questions, suggestions and comments. We strive to foster an atmosphere where employees openly share ideas and where people are treated with dignity and respect. Our goal is to provide a productive working environment based on mutual respect and the highest level of ethical and lawful conduct. We have also established a hotline for employees to report suspected violations of law and concerns related to accounting, auditing, compliance and ethical violations.

•

We provide our employees a competitive wage and evaluate our compensation programs to ensure that our employees are paid fairly for the valuable work they are doing. We are also committed to achieving internal pay equity and rewarding outstanding performance. We offer our employees competitive benefits and are proud that we have not raised employee contributions to our healthcare benefits for 7 years running.

•

We aim to foster a culture where learning is continuous, and we strive to promote from within. We believe in our people and their ability to accept new responsibilities and challenges and to grow with us to contribute to our success. Growth is fostered through professional development and learning programs as well as practical experience. Employees receive regular performance reviews to support their progress and development.

•

We prioritize the health and safety of our employees. Guided by an Environmental Health & Safety (“EHS”) manual that is regularly reviewed, we have a dedicated EHS team, who seek to prevent and reduce workplace risks and injuries through various programs, training, projects, services, and assistance, such as ergonomic evaluation, hazard reporting, risk assessment, and first aid training. We require all work-related injuries or illnesses to be reported. This information is reviewed bi-monthly by our EHS Team and Safety Committee for analysis and trending.

Our Internet website address is http://www.organogenesis.com. Through our website, we make available, free of charge, our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to those reports, as well as proxy statements, and, from time to time, other documents as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. These SEC reports can be accessed through the “Investors” section of our website. The information found on our website is not part of this or any other report we file with or furnish to the SEC.

Below is a summary of the principal factors that make an investment in our Class A common stock speculative or risky. This summary does not address all of the risks that we face. Additional discussion of the risks summarized in this risk factor summary, and other risks that we face, can be found below under the heading “Risk Factors” and should be carefully considered, together with other information in this Form 10-K and our other filings with the SEC before making an investment decision regarding our Class A common stock.

•

Our success will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement for the costs of our products and related services will be available from government payers, private health insurers, and other third-party payers and we do not know whether such reimbursement will be available or, if such reimbursement is available, the rate at which it will be available. The rate of reimbursement and coverage for the use of our products has been and may continue to be unstable, unpredictable and subject to changes in government and private payer policies that could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Currently, not all of our products are covered by all payers.

•

Many existing and potential customers for our products are members of GPOs and/or IDNs, including accountable care organizations or public-based purchasing organizations, and our business is partly dependent on major contracts with these organizations. Cost-containment efforts of our customers, GPOs, IDNs, third-party payers, and governmental organizations could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

•

Medicare, which is the major source of revenue for most of our customers, reimburses the same amounts for most of our products and the products of our competitors targeting the same indications in the hospital outpatient setting. Because in some sites of care the reimbursement amount is not based on the cost we charge our customers for our products or the cost our competitors charge for products targeting the same indication, our customers may elect to use products cheaper than ours in order to increase their margins, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

•

As of January 1, 2022, we began reporting ASP for all our skin substitute products that are paid separately as biologics. The first such ASP report was made on April 30, 2022 for Q1 2022. If we do not report ASP or if we incorrectly report ASP, we may have to restate ASP for prior quarters or may face penalties, including statutory and regulatory sanctions.

•

Section 90004 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, enacted in November 2021, requires manufacturers to pay a refund to the federal government if more than a certain applicable percentage of their single-use product is not administered to a patient and is discarded (“wasted”) by providers. Because there is a lack of consistency and uniformity in wound sizes, it is likely that some skin substitute product is discarded with every treatment. The rebate obligation took effect January 1, 2023 and CMS proposed a methodology to implement the rebate in the MPFS rulemaking. The applicable percentage is required to be at least 10 percent of total allowed charges for the drug in a given calendar quarter. CMS has the authority to increase the applicable percentage that applies to refunds for discarded product if there are “unique circumstances.” We submitted comments on the proposal noting the unique circumstances related to skin substitutes and asking CMS to apply a higher percentage. In the 2023 MPFS final rule, published on November 1, 2022, CMS did not apply a higher applicable percentage to any products other than the hydrogel example they used in the proposed rule and stated that they plan to collect additional information about products that may have unique circumstances such that an increased applicable percentage (higher than 10 percent) would apply. CMS estimated the wastage percentage for three of our products - Apligraf, Dermagraft, and PuraPly - based on 2020 data. We do not know if the refund amounts calculated in 2023 will be similar to these estimates but if they are then we may owe rebates, which could be material, on these products and possibly other products. The total amount of any discarded product rebate liability is not known at this time.

•

We have identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, and our management has concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are not effective. While we have successfully addressed certain of the internal control deficiencies that were included in the aggregation of the previously reported material weakness, we are continuing to work on remediating the remaining internal control deficiencies, as well as other internal control deficiencies identified during the current period, that collectively are aggregating to form the material weaknesses in our internal controls over financial reporting that exists as of December 31, 2022. However, we cannot assure you that additional material weaknesses or significant deficiencies will not occur in the future. If our internal control over financial reporting or our disclosure controls and procedures are not effective, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud, which may cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information and may lead to a decline in our stock price.

•

The FDA may determine that certain of our products that are, or are derived from, human cells or tissues, such as Affinity, Novachor, and NuShield, do not qualify for regulation solely under Section 361 of the Public Health Services Act, or PHSA. To the extent that any of these products are deemed not to be HCT/Ps or Section 361 HCT/Ps, the FDA may require that we revise our labeling and marketing claims for these products or that we suspend sales of such products until FDA approval is obtained, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

•

The FDA may determine that our suspension of NuCel and ReNu commercialization on May 31, 2021 was not conducted in a timely or otherwise proper manner. To the extent that our suspension of any of these products is determined not to comply with the 361 HCT/P Guidance, we may be subject to regulatory sanctions, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

•

Because we depend upon a limited group of suppliers and manufacturers for our products, including Apligraf, Affinity, Novachor, NuShield and PuraPly Antimicrobial products, we may incur significant product development costs or experience material delivery delays if there is an interruption in supply from any one of these suppliers or manufacturers, which could materially impact sales of our products.

•

We are dependent on the proper functioning of our and third-party manufacturing facilities, our supply chain and our sales force, all of which could be negatively impacted by public health emergencies, including the global COVID-19 pandemic, or other factors, in a manner that could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

•

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, signed into law on August 16, 2022, includes several provisions to lower prescription costs for people with Medicare and reduce health care spending by the federal government. Among these is a requirement for manufacturers to pay a rebate to the federal government if prices for single-source biologicals covered under Medicare Part B, such as our products, increase faster than the rate of inflation.

You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below, together with the information included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and other documents we file with the SEC. The risks and uncertainties described below are those that we have identified as material, but are not the only risks and uncertainties facing us. Our business is also subject to general risks and uncertainties that affect many other companies, such as overall U.S. and non-U.S. economic and industry conditions including a global economic slowdown, geopolitical events, changes in laws or accounting rules, fluctuations in interest and exchange rates, terrorism, international conflicts, major health concerns, natural disasters or other disruptions of expected economic and business conditions. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or that we currently believe are immaterial also may impair our business operations and liquidity.

Our operating results may fluctuate significantly as a result of a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control.

We are subject to the following factors, among others, that may negatively affect our operating results:

We have based our current and future expense levels largely on our investment plans and estimates of future events, although certain of our expense levels are, to a large extent, fixed. We may be unable to adjust spending in a timely manner to compensate for any unexpected revenue shortfall. Accordingly, any significant shortfall in revenue relative to our planned expenditures would have an immediate adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Further, as a strategic response to changes in the competitive environment or to changes in laws and regulations, we may from time to time make certain pricing, service, or marketing decisions (e.g., reduce prices) that could have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Due to the foregoing factors, our revenue and operating results are and will remain difficult to forecast.

We have incurred significant losses in past years and, notwithstanding our reported net income for the 2020, 2021, and 2022 fiscal years, we may incur losses in the future.

To date, we have financed our operations primarily through debt and equity financings, and, with the exception of the fiscal years ended December 31, 2022, 2021, and 2020, in which we reported net income of $15.5 million, $94.2 million and $17.2 million, respectively, we have incurred losses from operations in many years since our inception. As of December 31, 2022, we had an accumulated deficit of $45.3 million. We expect to incur significant sales and marketing costs to support the sale of our products. Our prior losses, combined with any potential future losses, may have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

We have identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, and our management has concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are not effective.

A “material weakness” is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. We did not design and maintain effective controls (i) to properly identify and assess significant non-routine transactions and (ii) over information technology general controls and proper segregation of duties to support the proper initiation and recording of transactions and the resulting impact on business process controls and applications that rely on such data.

While we have successfully addressed certain of the internal control deficiencies that were included in the aggregation of the previously reported material weakness, we are continuing to work on remediating the remaining internal control deficiencies, as well as other internal control deficiencies identified during the current period, that collectively are aggregating to form the material weaknesses in our internal controls over financial reporting that exists as of December 31, 2022. However, we cannot assure you that additional material weaknesses or significant deficiencies will not occur in the future. If our internal control over financial reporting or our disclosure controls and procedures are not effective, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud, which may cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information and may lead to a decline in our stock price.

Although we have made certain progress in remediating these material weaknesses, we concluded that the material weaknesses described above continued to exist as of December 31, 2022. We have taken actions to remediate the deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting and implemented additional processes and controls designed to address the underlying causes of the above-mentioned material weaknesses. If we do not successfully remediate the material weaknesses described above, or if other material weaknesses or other deficiencies arise in the future, we may be unable to accurately report our financial results, which could cause our financial results to be materially misstated and require restatement.

Rapid technological change could cause our products to become obsolete, and if we do not enhance our product offerings through our research and development efforts, we may be unable to effectively compete.

The technologies underlying our products are subject to rapid and profound technological change. Competition intensifies as technical advances in each field are made and become more widely known. We can give no assurance that others will not develop services, products, or processes with significant advantages over the products, services, and processes that we offer or are seeking to develop. Any such occurrence could have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

We plan to enhance and broaden our product offerings in response to changing customer demands and competitive pressure and technologies, but we may not be successful. The success of any new product offering or enhancement to an existing product will depend on numerous factors, including our ability to:

If we do not develop and, when necessary, obtain regulatory clearance or approval for new products or product enhancements in time to meet market demand, or if there is insufficient demand for these products or enhancements, our results of operations will suffer. Our research and development efforts may require a substantial investment of time and resources before we are adequately able to determine the commercial viability of a new product, technology, material or other innovation. In addition, even if we are able to successfully develop enhancements or new generations of our products, these enhancements or new generations of products may not be covered or reimbursed by government healthcare programs such as Medicare or private health plans, may not produce sales in excess of the costs of development and/or may be quickly rendered obsolete by changing customer preferences or the introduction by our competitors of products embodying new technologies or features.

To be commercially successful, we must convince physicians that our products are safe and effective alternatives to existing treatments and that our products should be used in their procedures.

We believe physicians will only adopt our products if they determine, based on experience, clinical data and published peer-reviewed journal articles, that the use of our products in a particular procedure is a favorable alternative to conventional methods. Physicians also are more interested in using cost-effective products and may practice in settings like Accountable Care Organizations, or ACOs, or Medical Homes, where they face considerable cost-containment pressure. In general, physicians may be slow to change their medical treatment practices and use of our products for the following reasons, among others:

The degree of market acceptance of our products will continue to depend on a number of factors, including:

In addition, we are currently conducting clinical studies for some of our products that were brought to market as 361 HCT/Ps to generate efficacy data in various clinical applications. Unfavorable results from these 361 HCT/P clinical trials such as lack of clinical efficacy or serious treatment-related side effects could negatively affect the use and adoption of our products by physicians and hospitals, thereby compromising our market acceptance.

We believe recommendations for, and support of our products by, influential physicians are essential for market acceptance and adoption. If we do not receive this support (e.g., because we are unable to demonstrate favorable long-term clinical data), physicians and hospitals may not use our products, which would significantly reduce our ability to achieve expected revenue and would prevent us from sustaining profitability.

In the course of conducting our business, we must comply with regulatory quality requirements, and adequately address quality issues that may arise with our products, as well as defects in third-party components included in our products. Although we have established internal procedures to minimize risks that may arise from quality issues, we may not be able to eliminate or mitigate these risks and quality issues may arise in which case we would be subject to liability. If the quality of our products does not meet the expectations of regulators, physicians, or patients, then we could be subject to regulatory sanctions and our brand and reputation could suffer and our business, results of operations, and financial condition could be adversely impacted.

We face the risk of product liability claims and may not be able to obtain or maintain adequate product liability insurance.

Our business exposes us to the risk of product liability claims that are inherent in the manufacturing, processing, investigating, and marketing of medical devices and human tissue products. We are, and may in the future be, subject to product liability claims and lawsuits, including potential class actions or mass tort claims, alleging that our products have resulted or could result in an unsafe condition or injury. Product liability claims may be made by patients and their families, healthcare providers, or others selling our products. Defending a lawsuit, regardless of merit, could be costly, divert management attention, and result in adverse publicity, which could result in the withdrawal of, or reduced acceptance of, our products in the market. If we cannot successfully defend against product liability claims, we could incur substantial liability and costs. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

Although we have product liability insurance that we believe is adequate, this insurance is subject to deductibles and coverage limitations and we may not be able to maintain this insurance. Also, it is possible that claims could exceed the limits of our coverage or be excluded from coverage under our policy. If we are unable to maintain product liability insurance at an acceptable cost or on acceptable terms with adequate coverage or otherwise protect ourselves against potential product liability claims or we underestimate the amount of insurance we need, we could be exposed to significant liabilities, which may harm our business. One or more product liability claims could cause our stock price to decline and, if our liability exceeds our insurance coverage, could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Interruptions in the supply of our products or inventory loss may adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Our products are manufactured using technically complex processes requiring specialized facilities, highly specific raw materials, and other production constraints. The complexity of these processes, as well as strict company and government standards

for the manufacture and storage of our products, subjects us to production risks. In addition to ongoing production risks, process deviations or unanticipated effects of approved process changes may result in non-compliance with regulatory requirements including stability requirements or specifications. Most of our products must be stored and transported within a specified temperature range. For example, if environmental conditions deviate from that range, our products’ remaining shelf-lives could be impaired or their safety and efficacy could be adversely affected, making them unsuitable for use. These deviations may go undetected. The occurrence of actual or suspected production and distribution problems can lead to lost inventories, and in some cases recalls, with consequential reputational damage and the risk of product liability. The investigation and remediation of any identified problems can cause production delays and result in substantial additional expenses. Production of our Affinity product, for example, was suspended in the first quarter of 2019 due to production issues at one of our suppliers. As a result, we identified an alternate supplier, and were only able to resume commercial-scale production in the second quarter of 2020. Subsequently, we have added a second source to provide additional capacity and redundancy in supply. This disruption in supply resulted in reduced Affinity revenue. Although we were able to partially offset the lost Affinity revenue by increasing production of our other products, there can be no assurance that we will be able to do so in the event of any future suspensions or failures in the storage or manufacturing of Affinity, Dermagraft or our other products. Any future failure in the storage or manufacture of our products or loss in supply could result in a loss of our market share and negatively affect our revenues and operations.

As noted above, manufacturing of Dermagraft was suspended in the fourth quarter of 2021, and sales of Dermagraft were suspended in the second quarter of 2022. We plan to transition our Dermagraft manufacturing to a new manufacturing facility or engage a third-party manufacturer, which we expect will result in substantial long-term cost savings. In the period when Dermagraft is not available, we expect that customers will be willing to substitute Apligraf for Dermagraft and that the suspension of Dermagraft sales will not have a material impact on our net revenue. However, if we do not realize the expected substantial long-term cost savings or if customers are unwilling to substitute Apligraf for Dermagraft during the period in which Dermagraft is unavailable, it could have an adverse effect on our net revenue and results of operations.

Because we depend upon a limited group of suppliers and manufacturers for our products, including our NuShield, Affinity, Apligraf and PuraPly Antimicrobial products, we may incur significant product development costs and experience material delivery delays if we lose any significant supplier, which could materially impact sales of our products.

We obtain some of the components for our products from a limited group of suppliers. For us to be successful, our suppliers must be able to provide us with these components in substantial quantities, in compliance with regulatory requirements, in accordance with agreed-upon specifications, at acceptable costs, and on a timely basis. Our efforts to maintain a continuity of supply and high quality and reliability may not be successful. Manufacturing disruptions experienced by our suppliers may jeopardize our supply of these components. Due to the stringent regulations and requirements of the FDA regarding the manufacture of our products, we may not be able to quickly establish additional or replacement sources for certain components or materials. A change in suppliers could require significant effort or investment in circumstances where the items supplied are integral to product performance or incorporate unique technology. A reduction or interruption in manufacturing (including the current suspension of Dermagraft manufacturing pending its transition to a new manufacturing facility or engagement of a third-party manufacturer), or an inability to secure alternative sources of raw materials or components, could have a material effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. In addition, one or more of our suppliers may refuse to extend us credit with respect to our purchasing or leasing equipment, supplies, products, or components, or may only agree to extend us credit on significantly less favorable terms or subject to more onerous conditions. This could significantly disrupt our ability to purchase or lease required equipment, supplies, products and components in a cost-effective and timely manner and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Any casualty, natural disaster, other disruption of any of our sole-source suppliers’ operations, or any unexpected loss of any existing exclusive supply contract, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Our products are dependent on the availability of tissue from human donors, and any disruption in supply could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Many of the products that we manufacture require that we obtain human tissue. The success of our business depends upon, among other factors, the availability of tissue from human donors. Any failure to obtain tissue from our sources will interfere with our ability to effectively meet the demand for our products incorporating human tissue. The processing of human tissue for our products is very labor-intensive and it is therefore difficult to maintain a steady supply stream. The availability of donated tissue could also be adversely impacted by regulatory changes, public opinion of the donor process as well as our own reputation in the industry. The challenges we may face in obtaining adequate supplies of human tissue involve several risks, including limited control over the availability, quality, and delivery schedules. In addition, any interruption in the supply of any human tissue component could materially harm our ability to manufacture our products until a new source of supply, if any, could be found. We may be unable to find a sufficient alternative supply channel in a reasonable time period or on commercially reasonable terms, if at all, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Increased prices for, or unavailability of, raw materials used in our products could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Our profitability is affected by the prices of the raw materials used in the manufacture of our products. These prices may fluctuate based on a number of factors beyond our control, including changes in supply and demand, general economic conditions, labor costs, fuel-related delivery costs, competition, import duties, excises and other indirect taxes, currency exchange rates, and government regulation. Due to the highly competitive nature of the healthcare industry and the cost containment efforts of our customers and third-party payers, we may be unable to pass along cost increases for key components or raw materials through higher prices to our customers. If the cost of key components or raw materials increases, and we are unable fully to recover these increased costs through price increases or offset these increases through other cost reductions, we could experience lower margins and profitability. Significant increases in the prices of raw materials, due to inflation or otherwise, that cannot be recovered through productivity gains, price increases or other methods could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

We continue to invest significant capital to maximize our sales and marketing infrastructure, and there can be no assurance that these efforts will result in significant increases in sales.

We are committed to maximizing our internal sales and marketing capabilities, including by optimizing our sales force to further support the marketing and sales of the products acquired in connection with our 2017 acquisition of NuTech Medical and our 2020 acquisition of CPN Biosciences. As a result, we continue to invest in sales and marketing resources for our products to allow us to reach new customers and potentially increase sales. These expenses impact our operating results, and there can be no assurance that we will continue to be successful in significantly increasing the sales of our products.

The impairment or termination of our relationships with independent sales agencies, whom we do not control, could materially and adversely affect our ability to generate revenues and profits. We intend to develop additional relationships with independent sales agencies in order to increase revenue from certain of our products; our inability to do so may prevent us from increasing sales.

We derive a portion of our revenues through our relationships with independent sales agencies. The impairment or termination of these relationships for any reason could materially and adversely affect our ability to generate revenues and profits. Because the independent sales agency often controls the customer relationships within its territory, there is a risk that if our relationship with the independent sales agency ends, our relationship with the customer will be lost. Also, because we do not control an independent sales agency’s field sales agents, there is a risk we will be unable to ensure that our sales processes, regulatory compliance, and other priorities will be consistently communicated and executed by the distributor. If we fail to maintain relationships with our key independent sales agencies, or fail to ensure that our independent sales agencies adhere to our sales processes, regulatory compliance, and other priorities, this could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. We may have liability for the actions of independent sales agencies in marketing our products and our lack of control over their activities impedes our ability to prevent, detect or address such non-compliance.

We intend to develop relationships and arrangements with additional independent sales agencies in order to increase our sales with respect to certain of our products. However, we may fail to develop such relationships, in which case we may not be able to increase our sales. Our success is partially dependent upon our ability to retain and motivate our independent sales agencies and their representatives to sell our products in certain territories. They may not be successful in implementing our marketing plans. Some of our independent sales agencies may not sell our products exclusively and may offer similar products from other companies. Our independent sales agencies may terminate their contracts with us, may devote insufficient sales efforts to our products, or may focus their sales efforts on other products that produce greater commissions for them, which could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. We also may not be able to find additional independent sales agencies who will agree to market and/or distribute those products on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. If we are unable to establish new independent sales agency relationships or renew current sales agency agreements on commercially acceptable terms, our business, results of operations, and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected. In addition, because we do not control these independent sales agencies as closely as our employees, while we may take steps to mitigate the risks associated with noncompliance by independent sales agencies, there remains a risk they do not comply with regulatory requirements or our requirements or our policies which could also adversely affect our business.

We will need to continue to expand our organization, and managing growth may be more difficult than expected.

Managing our growth may be more difficult than we expect. We anticipate that a period of significant expansion will be required to penetrate and service the markets for our existing and anticipated future products and to continue to develop new products. This expansion will place a significant strain on management, operational and financial resources. To manage the expected growth of our operations, we must both modify our existing operational and financial systems, procedures and controls and implement new systems, procedures and controls. We must also expand our finance, administrative, and operations staff. Management may be unable

to hire, train, retain, motivate, and manage necessary personnel or to identify, manage, and exploit existing and potential strategic relationships and market opportunities.

In addition to expanding our organization, we are expanding our manufacturing capabilities, which requires significant capital expenditures. If these capital expenditures are higher than expected, it may adversely affect our financial condition and capital resources. In addition, if the expansion of our manufacturing facilities is delayed, for regulatory or other reasons, it may limit our ability to expand the size of our organization and to meet our corporate goals. Even if we are able to expand our manufacturing facilities as we plan, we may not realize the full expected benefit of our investment.

We may expand our business through acquisitions, similar to our acquisitions of NuTech Medical and CPN Biosciences, licenses, investments, and other commercial arrangements in other companies or technologies. Such acquisitions or commercial arrangements may entail significant risks.

We periodically evaluate strategic opportunities to acquire companies, divisions, technologies, products, and rights through licenses, distribution agreements, investments, and outright acquisitions to grow our business, such as our acquisitions of NuTech Medical and CPN Biosciences. In connection with one or more of those transactions, we may:

Any of these items could materially and adversely affect our revenues, financial condition, and profitability. Business acquisitions also involve the risk of unknown liabilities associated with the acquired business, which could be material. Our acquisition of NuTech Medical and CPN Biosciences expanded our wound care portfolio and our acquisition of NuTech Medical broadened our addressable market to include the Surgical & Sports Medicine market. We may not realize the increased revenues, cost savings, and synergies that we anticipate from this acquisition in the near term or at all due to many factors, including delays in the integration process, an inability to successfully penetrate the amniotic category of the wound care market or an inability to obtain necessary regulatory approvals. Additional liabilities related to acquisitions could include a lack of compliance with government regulations that could subject us to investigation and civil and criminal sanctions. For example, we may acquire a company that was not compliant with FDA quality requirements or was making payments or other forms of remuneration to physicians to induce them to use their products. Incurring unknown liabilities or the failure to realize the anticipated benefits of an acquisition could materially and adversely affect our business and we may lose our entire investment or be unable to recover our initial investment, which could include the cost of acquiring licenses or distribution rights, acquiring products, purchasing initial inventory, or investments in early-stage companies. Inability to recover our investment, or any write off of such investment, associated goodwill, or assets, could have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

New lines of business or new products and services may subject us to additional risks.

From time to time, we may implement or may acquire new lines of business, such as our Surgical & Sports Medicine products that were acquired in connection with our acquisition of NuTech Medical, or we may offer new products and services within existing lines of business. There are risks and uncertainties associated with these efforts, particularly in instances where the markets are not fully developed or are evolving. In developing and marketing new lines of business and new products and services, we may invest significant time and resources. External factors, such as regulatory compliance obligations, competitive alternatives, lack of market acceptance, and shifting market preferences, may also affect the successful implementation of a new line of business or a new product

or service. Failure to successfully manage these risks in the development and implementation of new lines of business or new products or services could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Significant disruptions of information technology systems or breaches of information security could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

We rely to a large extent upon sophisticated information technology systems to operate our business. In the ordinary course of business, we collect, store, and transmit large amounts of confidential information (including, but not limited to, personal information and intellectual property). We also have outsourced significant elements of our operations to third parties, including significant elements of our information technology infrastructure and, as a result, we are managing many independent vendor relationships with third parties who may or could have access to our confidential information. The size and complexity of our information technology and information security systems, and those of our third-party vendors with whom we contract (and the large amounts of confidential information that is present on them), make such systems potentially vulnerable to service interruptions or to security breaches from inadvertent or intentional actions by our employees or vendors, or from malicious attacks by third parties. Such attacks are of ever-increasing levels of sophistication and are made by groups and individuals with a wide range of motives (including, but not limited to, industrial espionage and market manipulation) and expertise. While we have invested significantly in the protection of data and information technology, there can be no assurance that our efforts will prevent service interruptions or security breaches. For example, in August 2020, our information technology (“IT”) systems were exposed to a ransomware attack, which partially impaired certain IT systems for a short period of time. We finished investigating the incident, together with legal counsel and other incident response professionals. We did not experience any material losses related to the ransomware attack and were able to recover all data quickly, with only a minimal and temporary interruption to our business. While we have implemented measures to protect our data security and information technology systems, such measures may not prevent these events. Although we have cyber-insurance coverage that may cover certain events described above, this insurance is subject to deductibles and coverage limitations and we may not be able to maintain this insurance. Also, it is possible that claims could exceed the limits of our coverage. Any interruption or breach in our systems could adversely affect our business operations and/or result in the loss of critical or sensitive confidential information or intellectual property, and could result in financial, legal, business, and reputational harm to us or allow third parties to gain material, inside information that they use to trade in our securities.

If a breach of our measures protecting personal data covered by HIPAA, the HITECH Act, or the CCPA occurs, we may incur significant liabilities.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, as amended by the HITECH Act, and the regulations that have been issued under it, impose certain obligations, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of protected health information. The requirements and restrictions apply to “covered entities” (which include health care providers and insurers) as well as to their business associates that receive protected health information from them in order to provide services to or perform certain activities on their behalf. The statute and regulations also impose notification obligations on covered entities and their business associates in the event of a breach of the privacy or security of protected health information. We occasionally receive protected health information from our customers in the course of our business. As such, we believe that we are business associates and therefore subject to HIPAA’s requirements and restrictions with respect to handling such protected health information, and have executed business associate agreements with certain customers.

In addition, California has enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”), which came into effect on January 1, 2020. Pursuant to the CCPA, certain businesses are required, among other things, to make certain enhanced disclosures related to California residents regarding the use or disclosure of their personal information, allow California residents to opt-out of certain uses and disclosures of their personal information without penalty, provide Californians with other choices related to personal data in our possession, and obtain opt-in consent before engaging in certain uses of personal information relating to Californians under the age of 16. The California Attorney General may seek substantial monetary penalties and injunctive relief in the event of our non-compliance with the CCPA. The CCPA also allows for private lawsuits from Californians in the event of certain data breaches. Aspects of the CCPA remain uncertain, and we may be required to make modifications to our policies or practices in order to comply. Aside from California, Texas and several other major states impose rigorous local medical privacy requirements.

It is possible the data protection laws may be interpreted and applied in a manner that is inconsistent with our practices. If so, this could result in government-imposed fines or orders requiring that we change our practices, which could adversely affect our business. In addition, these privacy regulations may differ from country to country and state to state, and may vary based on whether testing is performed in the United States or in the local country. Complying with these various laws and regulations could cause us to incur substantial costs or require us to change our business practices and compliance procedures in a manner adverse to our business. Further, compliance with 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. We can provide no assurance that we are or will remain in compliance with diverse privacy and security requirements in all of the jurisdictions

in which we do business. If we fail to comply or are deemed to have failed to comply with applicable privacy protection laws and regulations such failure could result in government enforcement actions and create liability for us, which could include substantial civil and/or criminal penalties, as well as private litigation and/or adverse publicity that could negatively affect our operating results and business.

We engage in transactions with related parties and such transactions present possible conflicts of interest that could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

We have entered into a significant number of transactions with related parties. Related party transactions create the possibility of conflicts of interest with regard to our management, including that:

Such conflicts could cause an executive officer or a director to seek to advance his or her economic interests or the economic interests of certain related parties above ours. Conversely, we may not be able to enter into transactions with third parties on terms as favorable as the terms of existing transactions with related parties. Further, the appearance of conflicts of interest created by related party transactions could impair the confidence of our investors. It is possible that a conflict of interest could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Our financial performance may be adversely affected by medical device tax provisions in healthcare reform laws.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the “PPACA”) imposed, among other things, an excise tax of 2.3% on any entity that manufactures or imports medical devices offered for sale in the United States. Under these provisions, the Congressional Research Service predicted that the total cost to the medical device industry may be up to $20 billion over a decade. The Internal Revenue Service issued final regulations implementing the tax in December 2012, which required, among other things, bi-monthly payments and quarterly reporting. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (Pub. L. 114-113), signed into law in December 2015, included a two-year moratorium on the medical device excise tax. A second two-year moratorium on the medical device excise tax was signed into law in January 2018 as part of the Extension of Continuing Appropriations Act, 2018 (Pub. L. 115-120), extending the moratorium through December 31, 2019. On December 20, 2019, President Trump signed into law a permanent repeal of the medical device tax under the PPACA, but there is no guarantee that Congress will not reverse course in the future. If such an excise tax on sales of our products in the United States is enacted, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

We could incur asset impairment charges related to certain leasehold improvements, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Our long-term assets include property, plant and equipment of $102.5 million and $79.2 million as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. We review our long-lived assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. If an asset is determined to be impaired, the asset is written down to fair value, which is determined based on appraised value. Any such impairment could result in a non-cash charge equal to the full value of these improvements. During the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021, and 2020, we did not recognize an impairment charge with respect to our long-lived assets. Changes in our assumptions with respect to our expected use of these assets may result in an impairment charge in the future, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

We may be required to record a significant charge to earnings if our goodwill and other amortizable intangible assets, or other investments become impaired.

We are required under generally accepted accounting principles to test goodwill for impairment at least annually and to review our goodwill, amortizable intangible assets, and other assets acquired through merger and acquisition activity, for impairment when events or changes in circumstance indicate the carrying value may not be recoverable. Factors that could lead to impairment of goodwill, amortizable intangible assets, and other assets acquired via acquisitions include significant adverse changes in the business climate and actual or projected operating results (affecting our company as a whole or affecting any particular segment) and declines

in the financial condition of our business. We may be required in the future to record additional charges to earnings if our goodwill, amortizable intangible assets, or other investments become impaired. Any such charge would adversely impact our financial results.

Our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards may be subject to certain limitations.

As of December 31, 2022, we had approximately $44.4 million of federal net operating loss carry-forwards available for the reduction of future years’ federal taxable income, all of which can be carried forward indefinitely. Under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, the deductibility of the net operating loss-carry-forward as of December 31, 2022 and all future net operating loss-carry-forwards is limited to 80% of taxable income, limiting or delaying in part the use of net operating loss-carry-forwards. As of December 31, 2022, we also had state net operating loss carry-forwards of approximately $14.3 million expiring from the year ended December 31, 2031 through 2038. It is uncertain whether and to what extent applicable state tax laws will conform to the federal rule, though we are already subject to limitations in net operating loss utilization in certain states.

In addition, our ability to utilize our federal net operating loss carryforwards may be limited under Section 382 of the Code. In the event of an “ownership change”, Section 382 imposes an annual limitation on the amount of post-ownership change taxable income that may be offset with pre-ownership change net operating losses of the loss corporation experiencing the ownership change. An “ownership change” is defined by Section 382 as a cumulative change in ownership of our company of more than 50% within a three-year period. As of December 31, 2021, we performed a study and determined that there is no limitation on our federal net operating losses. Current or future changes in our stock ownership may trigger an “ownership change,” some of which may be outside our control. Accordingly, our ability to utilize our net operating loss carryforwards to offset federal taxable income, if any, could be limited by Section 382, which could potentially result in increased future tax liability to us.

We are dependent on the proper functioning of our and third-party manufacturing facilities, our supply chain, and our sales force, all of which could be negatively impacted by public health emergencies, including the COVID-19 pandemic, or other factors, in a manner that could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

We manufacture our non-placental-based products and use third-party manufacturers for our placental-based products and we use third-party raw material suppliers to support our internal manufacturing processes. If our manufacturing capabilities or the manufacturing capabilities of our suppliers are impacted as a result of a public health emergency, including a resurgence of the COVID-19 pandemic, it may not be possible for us to timely manufacture relevant products at the required levels or at all. While the COVID-19 pandemic has not had a material adverse effect on our business to date, a reduction or interruption in any of our manufacturing processes as a result of a public health emergency in the future (including a resurgence of the COVID-19 pandemic) could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

We also may be unable to obtain the raw materials necessary to support our internal manufacturing processes due to the additional constraints on suppliers. The manufacture of our products is dependent on the availability of sufficient quantities of source tissue, which is the primary component of our products. Source tissue includes donated human tissue, porcine tissue, and bovine tissue. We acquire donated human tissue directly through institutional review board-approved protocols at multiple hospitals, as well as through tissue procurement firms engaged by us or by our contract manufacturers. Any failure to obtain tissue from our sources, including any failures related to public health emergencies, like the COVID-19 pandemic, will interfere with our ability to effectively meet the demand for our products. Any interruption in the supply of source tissue could materially harm our ability to manufacture our products until a new source of supply, if any, could be found. We may be unable to find a sufficient alternative supply channel in a reasonable time period or on commercially reasonable terms, if at all, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Our current Advanced Wound Care portfolio is sold throughout the United States via an experienced direct sales force, which focuses its efforts on wound care in various sites of care. We use a mix of direct sales representatives and independent agencies to service the Surgical & Sports Medicine market. These sales representatives are supported by teams of professionals focused on sales management, sales operations and effectiveness, ongoing training, analytics and marketing. Our direct sales force functions by meeting in person with physicians and health care providers to discuss our products. Public health emergencies, like COVID-19, may negatively affect demand for our products by limiting the ability of our sales personnel to maintain their customary contacts with physicians and health care providers. In such case, we cannot assure you that our direct sales representatives or independent agencies will increase or maintain our current sales levels, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. We may also experience significant and unpredictable reductions in demand for certain of our

products if patients are unable to access certain advanced therapies due to stay-at-home orders or other governmental actions taken to address a public health emergency.

Our ability to comply with financial covenants under our credit agreement and raise capital may be materially adversely impacted by COVID-19 or other factors.

We have funded our operations and capital spending, in part, through third-party debt and proceeds from the sale of our Class A common stock. Our 2021 Credit Agreement requires that we comply with certain financial covenants that include Consolidated Fixed Charge Coverage Ratio and Consolidated Total Net Leverage Ratio, tested quarterly. If we are unable to meet these financial covenants due to the economic impact of COVID-19 or otherwise, the borrowings under the 2021 Credit Agreement may become due and payable immediately unless we obtain an amendment from our lenders and we would be prohibited from making any borrowings under the Revolving Facility. There can be no assurance that our lenders would agree to any such amendment on acceptable terms, or at all. In addition, any sustained disruption in the capital markets from the COVID-19 pandemic could negatively impact our ability to raise capital from the offering of equity or debt securities.

Our products are subject to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and rebate obligations that took effect on January 1, 2023, and we may owe rebates, which could be material, on our Apligraf, Dermagraft, and PuraPly products and possibly other products.

Section 90004 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, enacted in November 2021, requires manufacturers to pay a refund to the federal government if more than a certain applicable percentage of their single-use product is not administered to a patient and is discarded (“wasted”) by providers. Because there is a lack of consistency and uniformity in wound sizes, it is likely that some skin substitute product is discarded with every treatment. The rebate obligation took effect January 1, 2023, and CMS proposed a methodology to implement the rebate in the MPFS rulemaking. The applicable percentage is required to be at least 10 percent of total allowed charges for the drug in a given calendar quarter. CMS has the authority to increase the applicable percentage that applies to refunds for discarded product if there are “unique circumstances.” We submitted comments on the proposal noting the unique circumstances related to skin substitutes and asking CMS to apply a higher percentage. In the 2023 MPFS final rule, published on November 1, 2022, CMS did not apply a higher applicable percentage to any products other than the hydrogel example they used in the proposed rule and stated that they plan to collect additional information about products that may have unique circumstances such that an increased applicable percentage (higher than 10 percent) would apply. CMS estimated the wastage percentage for three of our products - Apligraf, Dermagraft, and PuraPly - based on 2020 data. We do not know if the refund amounts calculated in 2023 will be similar to these estimates but if they are then we may owe rebates, which could be material, on these products and possibly other products. The total amount of any discarded product rebate liability is not known at this time.

Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of our product candidates, we must conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product candidates. Clinical testing is expensive, time-consuming and uncertain as to the outcome. We have limited experience with clinical trials. We cannot guarantee that any clinical trials will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing. Events that may prevent successful or timely completion of clinical development include:

ReNu is in Phase 3 clinical development for the management of symptoms associated with knee OA. Our anticipated timeline for these and other trials and studies on our clinical trial candidates may be subject to delays due to factors such as those discussed above.

Any inability to successfully complete preclinical and clinical development could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to generate revenues from product sales, regulatory, development and commercialization milestones and royalties. In addition, if we make manufacturing or formulation changes to our product candidates, we may need to conduct additional studies to bridge our modified product candidates to earlier versions. Clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, which could impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Success in research and preclinical studies or early clinical trial results may not be indicative of results obtained in later trials. Likewise, preliminary, initial or interim data from clinical trials should be considered carefully and with caution since the final data may be materially different from the preliminary, initial or interim data, particularly as more patient data become available.

Results from preclinical studies or early clinical trials, including feasibility studies, or earlier conducted clinical trials are not necessarily predictive of future clinical trial results, and interim results of a clinical trial are not necessarily indicative of final results. Our clinical trial candidates, including ReNu, may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy in clinical development despite demonstrating positive results in preclinical studies or having successfully advanced through initial or earlier clinical trials or preliminary stages of clinical trials. From time to time, we have and may in the future publish or report preliminary, initial or interim data. Preliminary, initial or interim data from our clinical trials and those of our partners may not be indicative of the final results of the trial and are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and/or more patient data become available. In this regard, such data may show initial evidence of clinical benefit, but as patients continue to be followed and more patient data becomes available, there is a risk that any therapeutic effects will not be durable in patients and/or will decrease over time, or cease entirely. Preliminary, initial or interim data also remain subject to audit and

verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from such preliminary, initial or interim data. As a result, preliminary, initial or interim data should be considered carefully and with caution until the final data are available.

There is no guarantee that any of our clinical trials will be successful. In addition, there is a high failure rate for drugs, biologic products and cell therapies proceeding through clinical trials. Many companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials even after achieving promising results in preclinical testing and earlier-stage clinical trials. Data obtained from preclinical and clinical activities are subject to varying interpretations, which may delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. Any such setbacks could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Obtaining the necessary regulatory approvals or clearances for certain of our products will be expensive and time-consuming and may impede our ability to fully exploit our technologies or otherwise limit our ability to meet other business objectives.

As biological products and medical devices, many of the products that we market require regulatory approvals or clearances from the FDA, or from similar regulatory authorities outside of the United States, before they may legally be distributed in commerce. In particular, such products may require FDA approval of Biologics License Applications, or BLAs, under Section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (the “PHSA”), Premarket Approval, or PMA, submissions under Section 515 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, or may require clearance under Section 510(k) of the FDCA. Although we believe that we have all necessary regulatory approvals or clearances legally required for the products that we currently market, the introduction of new or modified products may require us to secure new approvals or clearances. Additionally, the FDA may take the position that some of the products that we currently market without premarket approval or clearance in fact require such approval or clearance. The process of obtaining an approved BLA or PMA requires the expenditure of substantial time, effort and financial resources and may take years to complete. Although obtaining clearance under section 510(k) is somewhat less burdensome, it is also associated with significant costs and resource commitments. The fee for filing a BLA, PMA or 510(k) notification, and the annual user fees for any establishment that manufactures biologics or medical devices, as well as product fees applicable to each approved product are substantial.

In January 2021, we announced that the first patient was enrolled in the pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of ReNu for the management of symptoms associated with knee OA. There are significant costs associated with conducting clinical trials to support approvals that cannot necessarily be estimated with any accuracy until investigational plans have been developed. Moreover, data obtained from clinical activities may show a lack of safety or efficacy or may be inconclusive or susceptible to varying interpretations, any of which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. Failure or delay can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. Success in preclinical testing and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful. Even product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the required safety profile or meet the efficacy endpoints despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. We cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. Even with positive clinical trial results, there may be other barriers to approval or clearance, and the FDA may not grant approval or clearance on a timely basis, or at all. Even if the FDA clears or approves our products, the clinical data submitted to the FDA may not be sufficient for payers to cover and/or adequately reimburse our customers for use of our products. Additionally, the FDA may limit the indications for use in an approval or clearance, or place other conditions on an approval, that could restrict the commercial application of the products.

Regenerative medicine advanced therapy, or RMAT, designation for our product candidates may not lead to faster development or regulatory processes nor does it increase the likelihood that such product candidates will receive marketing approval.

RMAT was introduced as a new designation under the 21st Century Cures Act for the development and review of certain regenerative medicine therapies. To receive RMAT designation, a regenerative medicine product candidate must be intended to treat, modify, reverse, or cure a serious or life-threatening disease or condition with preliminary clinical evidence indicating that the drug has the potential to address the unmet medical needs. RMAT designation does not require evidence to indicate that the drug may offer a substantial improvement over available therapies, as breakthrough designation requires.

An RMAT product candidate receives intensive guidance on an efficient product development program; involvement of senior managers and experienced staff on a proactive, collaborative and cross-disciplinary review; and a rolling review. Regenerative medicine therapies that qualify for RMAT designation may also qualify for other FDA expedited programs, including fast track designation, breakthrough therapy designation, accelerated approval and priority review designation, if they meet the criteria for such programs. However, RMAT designation does not assure that marketing approval will be granted and, if granted, that the approval process would be any faster than it would have otherwise been.

In January 2021, we announced RMAT designation for ReNu for the management of symptoms associated with knee OA. However, there is no guarantee that the receipt of RMAT designation will result in a faster development process, review or approval for ReNu for the management of symptoms associated with knee OA or increase the likelihood that ReNu will be granted marketing approval for the management of symptoms associated with knee OA. Likewise, any future RMAT designation or other expedited review status such as breakthrough therapy designation for any of our other product candidates neither guarantees a faster development process, review or approval nor improves the likelihood of the grant of marketing approval by FDA for any such product candidate compared to drugs considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures. In addition, the FDA may withdraw any RMAT or other expedited review status at any time. We may seek RMAT or breakthrough therapy designation for our other product candidates, but the FDA may not grant this status to any such product candidates.

We may seek fast track designation by the FDA for one or more of our product candidates, but we might not receive such designation, and even if we do, such designation may not actually lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process.

If a product is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and the product demonstrates the potential to address unmet needs for this condition, the treatment sponsor may apply for FDA fast track designation. Even if we receive fast track designation, fast track designation does not ensure that we will receive marketing approval or that approval will be granted within any particular time frame. We may not experience a faster development, regulatory review or approval process with fast track designation compared to conventional FDA procedures. Additionally, the FDA may withdraw fast track designation if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program. Fast track designation alone does not guarantee qualification for the FDA’s priority review procedures.

A breakthrough therapy designation by the FDA for a product candidate may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process, and it would not increase the likelihood that the product candidate will receive marketing approval.

We may seek a breakthrough therapy designation for one or more product candidates. A breakthrough therapy is defined as a product candidate that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product candidate may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For product candidates that have been designated as breakthrough therapies, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens. Product candidates designated as breakthrough therapies by the FDA are also eligible for priority review if supported by clinical data at the time of the submission of the new drug application.

Designation as a breakthrough therapy is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe that one of our product candidates meets the criteria for designation as a breakthrough therapy, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. In any event, the receipt of a breakthrough therapy designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to product candidates considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and it would not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one or more of our product candidates qualify as breakthrough therapies, the FDA may later decide that the product candidate no longer meets the conditions for qualification or it may decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened.

We must comply with applicable post-marketing regulatory obligations, which could include obtaining new regulatory approvals or clearances.

Following approval or clearance, some types of changes to the approved or cleared product, such as adding new indications or additional labeling claims or introducing manufacturing changes, are subject to FDA review and approval, which may require further nonclinical or clinical testing. The costs and other resource burdens associated with obtaining new regulatory approvals or clearances for existing or future products may limit the resources available to us to fully exploit our technologies or may otherwise limit our ability to carry out other business activities. Depending on the nature of the change, we may determine that the change may be carried out without obtaining premarket approval or clearance. The FDA or another regulatory body could disagree with our conclusion and require such premarket approval or clearance, which would disrupt the marketing of these products, potentially expose us to regulatory sanctions, and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The FDA may determine that certain of our products that are, or are derived from, human cells or tissues, such as Affinity, Novachor, and NuShield, do not qualify for regulation solely under Section 361 of the Public Health Services Act, or PHSA, and may require that we revise our labeling and marketing claims for these products or that we suspend sales of such products until FDA approval is obtained, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Certain of the products that we manufacture, process and distribute are, or are derived from, human cells or tissues, including amniotic tissue. The FDA has specific regulations governing human cells, tissues and cellular and tissue-based products, or HCT/Ps. In particular, HCT/Ps that meet certain criteria set forth in the FDA’s regulations at 21 C.F.R. § 1271.10 are regulated solely under Section 361 of the PHSA, so-called “Section 361 HCT/Ps”, and are not subject to any premarket clearance or approval requirements. They are also subject to less stringent post-market regulatory requirements than products regulated under Section 351 of the PHSA and/or under Sections 505, 510 or 515 of the FDCA. The Company has believed that certain of our HCT/Ps, including our products derived from amniotic membrane, qualify for regulation as Section 361 HCT/Ps. However, the regulatory classification of an HCT/P as a Section 361 HCT/P depends in part on the purposes for which the product is intended and in part on the processing to which an HCT/P is subject. On November 16, 2017, the FDA issued a final guidance document entitled, “Regulatory Considerations for Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products: Minimal Manipulation and Homologous Use”, or 361 HCT/P Guidance, which provides FDA’s current thinking on how to apply the existing regulatory criteria for regulation as a Section 361 HCT/P. These include, in addition to other requirements, requirements that an HCT/P be both minimally manipulated and intended for homologous use. In general, “minimal manipulation” is a standard referring to the degree to which the original characteristics of an HCT/P have been altered by processing and “homologous use” refers to the requirement that an HCT/P perform the same basic function in the donor as in the recipient. Any action by the FDA to apply the principles set forth in the 361 HCT/P Guidance to the HCT/Ps that we distribute could have adverse consequences for us and make it more difficult or expensive for us to conduct our business.

In light of the 361 HCT/P Guidance, our labeling and marketing claims for our placental-based membrane products, including our Affinity, NuShield, and Novachor products, clarify that they are intended as wound coverings, and thus meet the homologous use requirement to qualify as Section 361 HCT/Ps. However, the FDA could disagree with our conclusion and require premarket approval or clearance for Affinity, NuShield, or any placental-based sheet product we market, which would disrupt the marketing of these products, potentially expose us to regulatory sanctions, and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Further, we believe it is necessary to obtain FDA approval of a BLA for NuCel and ReNu because those products may be deemed to be more than minimally manipulated, not for homologous use, or otherwise not regulated as Section 361 HCT/Ps. We continue to conduct clinical studies of ReNu to support FDA approval of a BLA for the management of symptoms associated with knee OA and, based on favorable feasibility studies that are subject to further evaluation, we believe ReNu has potential as a treatment for additional OA and tissue regeneration applications. We have discontinued clinical development of NuCel. If we obtain BLA approval for ReNu or NuCel, compliance with applicable post-market regulatory requirements will involve significant time and substantial costs. Even for those products that remain regulated as Section 361 HCT/Ps, increasing regulatory scrutiny within the industry in which we operate could lead to heightened requirements, compliance with which could be costly. The costs and other resource burdens associated with any of these regulatory outcomes may limit the resources available to us to fully exploit our technologies or may otherwise limit our ability to carry out other business activities.

The 361 HCT/P Guidance originally indicated that the FDA was providing a 36-month enforcement grace period to allow time for distributors of HCT/Ps to make any regulatory submissions and obtain any premarket approvals necessary to comply with the guidance. In July 2020, the FDA announced that the enforcement grace period would be extended until May 31, 2021 as a result of the challenges presented by the COVID-19 public health emergency. On April 21, 2021, the FDA reaffirmed that the enforcement grace period would end on May 31, 2021, at which time we ceased commercial distribution of ReNu and NuCel. Although we believe our suspension of ReNu and NuCel commercialization was timely and proper, the FDA and other regulators may disagree with how or when such commercialization practices were conducted, which could expose us to regulatory sanctions, and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

To the extent that the FDA may determine that certain of our products that are, or are derived from, human cells or tissues do not qualify for regulation solely under Section 361 of the PHSA, the introduction of new tissue products would become more expensive, expansion of our tissue product offerings could be significantly delayed, and we could be subject to additional post-market regulatory requirements or suspension of product sales until FDA approval is obtained.

As stated above, in light of the 361 HCT/P Guidance, the FDA may determine that the types of cell- and tissue-based products that we distribute—and in particular, products derived from allografts consisting of human skin or amniotic tissue—are subject to premarket clearance or approval requirements. Should the FDA make such a determination, products of this type, including future products that we seek to introduce, will be much more costly to commercialize, as we will likely have to carry out preclinical work in animals and/or clinical trials in humans to support approval. Such preclinical work and clinical trials are expensive and time-consuming with no guarantee of success. In addition, these products will be subject to more stringent post-market regulatory requirements than those that currently apply, including but not limited to more stringent restrictions on advertising and promotion of these products, as well as more extensive adverse event reporting. In the future, we may also wish to market our existing HCT/P

products for new intended uses that may render them ineligible for regulation as Section 361 HCT/Ps and cause them to require premarket clearance or approval and comply with post-market regulations under the medical device or biological product provisions of the FDCA and/or PHSA instead. Compliance with these requirements will involve significant time and substantial costs and could limit the resources available to us to fully exploit our technologies, including limiting our ability to introduce new allograft-derived products.

We conduct a range of nonclinical, as well as clinical trials, comparative effectiveness, economic and other studies of our products. Unfavorable results from these trials or studies or from similar trials or studies conducted by others may negatively affect the use or adoption of our products by physicians, hospitals, and payers, which could have a negative impact on the market acceptance of these products and their profitability.

We conduct a variety of nonclinical and clinical trials, comparative effectiveness studies and economic and other studies of our products, including our ongoing clinical trial for ReNu, in an effort to generate comprehensive clinical and real-world outcomes data and cost-effectiveness data in order to obtain product approval and drive further penetration in the markets we serve. In the event that these trials and studies, or similar trials and studies conducted by others, yield unfavorable results, those results could negatively affect the use or adoption of our products by physicians, hospitals, and payers, thereby compromising market acceptance and profitability.

Our business is subject to continuing significant regulatory obligations by the FDA and other authorities, compliance with which is expensive and time-consuming and may impede our ability to fully exploit our technologies or otherwise limit our ability to meet other business objectives.

Aside from the obligation to obtain regulatory approvals or clearances, companies such as ours have ongoing regulatory obligations that are expensive and time-consuming to meet. In particular, the production and marketing of our products are subject to extensive regulation and review by the FDA and numerous other governmental authorities both in the United States and abroad. As noted above, some of the products that we distribute are considered Section 361 HCT/Ps. The FDA’s regulation of HCT/Ps includes requirements for registration and listing of products; donor screening and testing; processing and distribution, known as “Current Good Tissue Practices,” or cGTP; labeling; record keeping and adverse-reaction reporting; and inspection and enforcement. Moreover, it is likely that the FDA’s regulation of HCT/Ps will continue to evolve in the future. Complying with any such new regulatory requirements may entail significant time delays and expense, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Our other products are regulated as biologics and medical devices, which are subject to even more stringent regulation by the FDA. As noted above, these products are subject to rigorous premarket review processes, and an approval or clearance may place substantial restrictions on the indications for which the product may be marketed or the population for whom it may be marketed, may require warnings to accompany the product or may impose other restrictions on the sale and/or use of the product. In addition, approved and cleared products are subject to continuing obligations to comply with other substantial regulatory requirements, including the FDA’s cGTP regulations, the FDA’s QSR and/or the FDA’s Current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP regulations, adverse event reporting, and FDA inspections. The costs and other resource burdens associated with maintaining regulatory approvals or clearances for our products and otherwise meeting our regulatory obligations may limit the resources available to us to fully exploit our technologies or may otherwise limit our ability to carry out other business activities.

In some states, the manufacture, storage, or distribution of HCT/Ps requires a license or permit to operate as a tissue bank or tissue distributor. We believe that we have all required state licenses or permits applicable to the distribution of HCT/Ps, but there is a risk that there may be state or local license or permit requirements of which we are unaware or with which we have not complied. In the event that such noncompliance exists in a given jurisdiction, we could be precluded from distributing HCT/Ps in that jurisdiction and also could be subject to fines or other penalties. If any such actions were to be instituted against us, it could adversely affect our business and/or financial condition.

The American Association of Tissue Banks, or AATB, has issued operating standards for tissue banking. Compliance with these standards is a requirement in order to become an accredited tissue bank. In addition, some states have their own tissue banking regulations. In addition, procurement of certain human organs and tissue for transplantation is subject to the restrictions of the National Organ Transplant Act, or NOTA, which prohibits the transfer of certain human organs, including skin and related tissue for valuable consideration, but permits the reasonable payment associated with the removal, transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control and storage of human tissue and skin. We reimburse tissue banks, hospitals, and physicians for their services associated with the recovery, storage, and transportation of donated human tissue. Although we have independent third-party appraisals that confirm the reasonableness of the service fees we pay, if we were to be found to have violated NOTA’s prohibition on the sale or transfer of human tissue for valuable consideration, we, our officers, or employees, would potentially be subject to criminal enforcement sanctions, which could materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Many of the products we manufacture and process are derived from human tissue and therefore have the potential for disease transmission.

The utilization of human tissue creates the potential for transmission of communicable diseases, including, but not limited to, human immunodeficiency virus, or HIV, viral hepatitis, syphilis and other viral, fungal or bacterial pathogens. We are required to comply with federal and state regulations intended to prevent communicable disease transmission.

Although we maintain strict quality controls over the procurement and processing of our tissue, there is no assurance that these quality controls will be adequate. In addition, negative publicity concerning disease transmission from other companies’ improperly processed donated tissue could have a negative impact on the demand for our products. If any of our products are implicated in the transmission of any communicable disease, our officers, employees and we could be subject to government sanctions including but not limited to recalls, and civil and criminal liability, with sanctions that include exclusion from doing business with the federal government. We could also be exposed to product liability claims from those who used or received our products as well as loss of our reputation.

Defects, failures, or quality issues associated with our products could lead to product recalls or safety alerts, adverse regulatory actions, litigation, including product liability claims, and negative publicity that could erode our competitive advantage and market share and materially adversely affect our reputation, business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Quality is extremely important to us and our customers due to the serious and costly consequences of product failure. Quality and safety issues may occur with respect to any of our products, and our future operating results will depend on our ability to maintain an effective quality control system and effectively train and manage our workforce with respect to our quality system. The development, manufacture, and control of our products are subject to extensive and rigorous regulation by numerous government agencies, including the FDA and similar foreign agencies. Compliance with these regulatory requirements, including but not limited to the FDA’s QSR, GMPs, and adverse events/recall reporting requirements in the United States and other applicable regulations worldwide, is subject to continual review and is monitored rigorously through periodic inspections by the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA and foreign regulatory authorities may also require post-market testing and surveillance to monitor the performance of approved products. Our manufacturing facilities and those of our suppliers and independent sales agencies are also subject to periodic regulatory inspections. If the FDA or a foreign authority were to conclude that we have failed to comply with any of these requirements, it could institute a wide variety of enforcement actions, ranging from a public warning letter to more severe sanctions, such as product recalls or seizures, withdrawals, monetary penalties, consent decrees, injunctive actions to halt the manufacture or distribution of products, import detentions of products made outside the United States, export restrictions, restrictions on operations or other civil or criminal sanctions. Civil or criminal sanctions could be assessed against our officers, employees, or us. Any adverse regulatory action, depending on its magnitude, may restrict us from effectively manufacturing, marketing, and selling our products.

In addition, we cannot predict the results of future legislative activity or future court decisions, any of which could increase regulatory requirements, subject us to government investigations or expose us to unexpected litigation. Any regulatory action or litigation, regardless of the merits, may result in substantial costs, divert management’s attention from other business concerns, and place additional restrictions on our sales or the use of our products. In addition, negative publicity, including regarding a quality or safety issue, could damage our reputation, reduce market acceptance of our products, cause us to lose customers, and decrease demand for our products. Any actual or perceived quality issues may also result in issuances of physician’s advisories against our products or cause us to conduct voluntary recalls. Any product defects or problems, regulatory action, litigation, negative publicity or recalls could disrupt our business and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

We may implement a product recall or voluntary market withdrawal, which could significantly increase our costs, damage our reputation and disrupt our business.

The manufacturing, marketing, and processing of our products involve an inherent risk that our products or processes may not meet manufacturing specifications, applicable regulatory requirements or quality standards. In that event, we may voluntarily implement a recall or market withdrawal or may be required to do so by a regulatory authority. A recall or market withdrawal of one of our products would be costly and would divert management resources. A recall or withdrawal of one of our products, or a similar product processed by another entity, also could impair sales of our products as a result of confusion concerning the scope of the recall or withdrawal, or as a result of the damage to our reputation for quality and safety.

We are subject to various governmental regulations relating to the labeling, marketing, and sale of our products.

Both before and after a product is commercially released, we have ongoing responsibilities under regulations promulgated by the FDA, the Federal Trade Commission, and similar U.S. and foreign regulations governing product labeling and advertising, distribution, sale, and marketing of our products.

Manufacturers of medical devices and biological products are permitted to promote products solely for the uses and indications set forth in the approved or cleared product labeling. A number of enforcement actions have been taken against manufacturers that promote products for “off-label” uses (i.e., uses that are not described in the approved or cleared labeling), including actions alleging that claims submitted to government healthcare programs for reimbursement of products that were promoted for “off-label” uses are fraudulent in violation of the Federal False Claims Act or other federal and state statutes and that the submission of those claims was caused by off-label promotion. The failure to comply with prohibitions on “off-label” promotion can result in significant monetary penalties, revocation or suspension of a company’s business license, suspension of sales of certain products, product recalls, civil or criminal sanctions, exclusion from participating in federal healthcare programs, or other enforcement actions. In the United States, allegations of such wrongful conduct could also result in a corporate integrity agreement with the U.S. government that imposes significant administrative obligations and costs.

We and our employees and contractors are subject, directly or indirectly, to federal, state and foreign healthcare fraud and abuse laws, including false claims laws. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face substantial penalties.

Our operations are subject to various federal, state, and foreign fraud and abuse laws. These laws may constrain our operations, including the financial arrangements and relationships through which we market, sell, and distribute our products.

U.S. federal and state laws that affect our ability to operate include, but are not limited to:

•

the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons or entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering, or paying any remuneration (including any kickback, bribe, or rebate), directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind in return for, the purchase, recommendation, leasing or furnishing of an item or service reimbursable under a federal healthcare program, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs;

•

federal transparency laws, including the Physician Payments Sunshine Act which requires the tracking and disclosure to the federal government by pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers of payments and other transfers of value to physicians and teaching hospitals as well as ownership and investment interests that are held by physicians and their immediate family members; and

•

state law equivalents of each of these federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws that may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payer, including commercial insurers; state laws that require pharmaceutical and medical device companies to comply with their industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the applicable compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government or otherwise restrict certain payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; state laws that require drug and medical device manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures; state laws that prohibit giving gifts to licensed healthcare professionals; and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts in certain circumstances, such as specific disease states.

Activities and arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, waste, and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of activities or other arrangements related to the development, marketing, or promotion of products, including pricing and discounting of products, provision of customer incentives, provision of reimbursement support, other customer support services, provision of sales commissions or other incentives to employees and independent contractors and other interactions with healthcare practitioners, other healthcare providers and patients.

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrow scope of the statutory or regulatory exceptions and safe harbors available, our business activities could be challenged under one or more of these laws. Relationships between medical product manufacturers and health care providers are an area of heightened scrutiny by the government. We engage in various types of activities, including the conduct of speaker programs to educate physicians, the provision of reimbursement advice and support to customers, and the

provision of customer and patient support services, that have been the subject of government scrutiny and enforcement action within the medical device industry.

Government expectations and industry best practices for compliance continue to evolve and our past activities may not always be consistent with current industry best practices. Further, there is a lack of government guidance as to whether many varied industry practices comply with these laws, and government interpretations of these laws continue to evolve, all of which create compliance uncertainties. Any non-compliance could result in regulatory sanctions, criminal or civil liability, and serious harm to our reputation. Although we have a comprehensive compliance program designed to ensure that our employees’ and commercial partners’ activities and interactions with healthcare professionals and patients are appropriate, ethical, and consistent with all applicable laws, regulations, guidelines, policies, and standards, it is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in preventing such conduct, mitigating risks, or reducing the chance of governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with these laws or regulations.

If a government entity opens an investigation into possible violations of any of these laws (which may include the issuance of subpoenas or civil investigative demands), we would have to expend significant resources to defend ourselves against the allegations. Allegations that we, our officers, or our employees violated any one of these laws can be made by individuals called “whistleblowers” who may be our employees, customers, competitors, or other parties. Government policy is to encourage individuals to become whistleblowers and file a complaint in federal court alleging wrongful conduct. The government is required to investigate all of these complaints and decide whether to intervene. If the government intervenes and we are required to pay money back to the government, the whistleblower, as a reward, is awarded a percentage of the collection. If the government declines to intervene, the whistleblower may proceed on their own and, if they are successful, they will receive a percentage of any judgment or settlement amount the company is required to pay. The government may also initiate an investigation on its own. Such actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant fines, and other sanctions that may materially impair our ability to run a profitable business. In particular, if our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or if we agree to settle with the government without admitting to any wrongful conduct or if we are found to be in violation of any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we, our officers and employees may be subject to sanctions, including civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from participation in government health care programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, imprisonment, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations and the imposition of a corporate integrity agreement, any of which could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

We could be subject to legal exposure if we do not report the average sales prices, or ASP, to government agencies or if our reporting is not accurate and complete.

Our products are reimbursed by Medicare in physician office settings at a rate of ASP plus 6%. All Medicare payments, including payments based on the ASP methodology, are subject to sequestration. Congress previously suspended sequestration imposed under the BCA, and there was no sequestration through March 31, 2022. On April 1, 2022, there was a 1% sequestration and beginning on July 1, 2022, the sequestration returned to 2%. Sequestration applies to the government’s payment portion, which is 80% of the total payment amount. Additionally, in future years, it is possible that an up-to 4% Medicare sequestration could be ordered under Statutory PAYGO, which requires deficit neutrality in most laws passed by Congress. Until January 2022, we were not required to report ASP for all our skin substitute products that are paid separately as biologics because they are regulated as medical devices by the FDA, although we chose to report ASP for some of our products. Starting with the reporting deadline for the first quarter of 2022, we were required to report ASP for all our skin substitute products that are paid separately as biologics as a result of provisions included in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2020. As of January 1, 2022, we began reporting ASP for all our skin substitute products that are paid separately as biologics. The first such ASP report was made on April 30, 2022 for Q1 2022. Government price reporting requirements are complex. If we do not report ASP correctly, we may have to restate ASP for prior quarters and we could be subject to civil monetary penalties and/or, if the violation is knowing or reckless, be subject to False Claims Act liability. In the case of very serious or repeated violations, we could be excluded from doing business with the Medicare program and other federal healthcare programs.

We face significant uncertainty in the industry due to government healthcare reform and other legislative action.

There have been and continue to be laws enacted by the federal government, state governments, regulators, and third-party payers to control healthcare costs, and generally, to reform the healthcare system in the United States. For example, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (“PPACA”) and the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 substantially changed the way healthcare is delivered and financed by both governmental and private insurers. These changes included the creation of demonstration programs and other value-based purchasing initiatives that provide financial incentives for physicians and hospitals to reduce costs, including incentives for furnishing low-cost therapies for chronic wounds even if those therapies are less effective than our products. There were extensive efforts recently to modify or repeal all or part of PPACA. Tax reform legislation was passed that includes provisions that impact healthcare insurance coverage and payment such as the elimination of the tax penalty for individuals who do not maintain health insurance coverage (the so-called “individual mandate”). Such actions or similar actions

could have a negative effect on the utilization of our products. We expect such efforts to continue and that there may be additional reform proposals at federal and state levels. On December 18, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld a lower court’s determination in California v. Texas (orig. Texas v. Azar, 4:18-cv-00167), that the individual mandate was unconstitutional and remanded the case to the lower court for further analysis as to whether PPACA as a whole is unconstitutional because the individual mandate is not severable from other provisions of the law. The United States Supreme Court agreed to review the case and on June 17, 2021, ordered that the Fifth Circuit’s decision be reversed and that the case be dismissed.

Additionally, on August 16, 2022, Congress passed legislation to limit the price of drugs and biological under the Medicare program. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) establishes a Drug Price Negotiation Program that requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate the price of certain high expenditure Medicare drugs that do not have generic or biosimilar competition. The law also establishes Medicare Part B inflationary rebates, effective Q1 2023. Generally, manufacturers of Part B drugs with an ASP+6% that exceeds the inflation-adjusted payment amount from Q3 2021 will be required to pay a rebate to the Medicare program. These and similar drug pricing reforms could increase pricing pressure on our products.

General legislative action may also affect our business. For example, the Budget Control Act of 2011 included provisions to reduce the federal deficit. The Budget Control Act, as amended, resulted in the imposition of reductions of up to 2% in Medicare payments to providers which began in April 2013 and are scheduled to remain in effect through the first six months of 2032. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act and subsequent legislation suspended the payment adjustment from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022. There was 1% Medicare sequestration from April 1 to June 30, 2022, and the 2% Medicare sequester was reinstated on July 1, 2022. Additionally, under Statutory PAYGO, a 4% Medicare sequester could be ordered at the end of the 2024 Congressional session. These or other similar reductions in government healthcare spending could result in reduced demand for our products or additional pricing pressure.

Bills currently before the United States Congress may also affect our business, if enacted. For example, during the 117th Congressional session, the Cures 2.0 Act, H.R. 6000, 117th Cong. (2021) was introduced into the United States House of Representatives. If reintroduced in a similar form, it may contain provisions that could result in legal and regulatory changes that affect our business. These changes may include a new payment pathway for breakthrough medical devices that are FDA approved or cleared on or after a certain date. The enactment of Cures 2.0 (or similar legislation) may also accelerate FDA timelines for designation of breakthrough and RMAT therapies and also result in new requirements for the use of patient experience data and real-world evidence in regulating certain FDA products. If enacted, these changes could make it easier for our competitors to bring comparable or more advanced products to market quickly, resulting in reduced demand for our products.

Our sales into foreign markets expose us to risks associated with international sales and operations.

We are currently selling into foreign markets and plan to expand such sales. Managing a global organization is difficult, time-consuming, and expensive. Conducting international operations subjects us to risks that could be different from those faced by us in the United States. The sale and shipment of our products across international borders, as well as the purchase of components and products from international sources, subject us to extensive U.S. and foreign governmental trade, import and export and customs regulations and laws, including but not limited to, the Export Administration Regulations and trade sanctions against embargoed countries, which are administered by the Office of Foreign Assets Control within the Department of the Treasury, as well as the laws and regulations administered by the Department of Commerce. These regulations limit our ability to market, sell, distribute, or otherwise transfer our products or technology to prohibited countries or persons.

Compliance with these regulations and laws is costly, and failure to comply with applicable legal and regulatory obligations could adversely affect us in a variety of ways that include, but are not limited to, significant criminal, civil, and administrative penalties, including imprisonment of individuals, fines and penalties, denial of export privileges, seizure of shipments and restrictions on certain business activities. Also, the failure to comply with applicable legal and regulatory obligations could result in the disruption of our distribution and sales activities.

These risks may limit or disrupt our expansion, restrict the movement of funds, or result in the deprivation of contractual rights or the taking of property by nationalization or expropriation without fair compensation. Operating in international markets also requires significant management attention and financial resources.

We could be adversely affected by violations of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and similar worldwide anti-bribery laws.

The U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or FCPA, the U.K. Bribery Act of 2010, and similar anti-bribery laws in other jurisdictions generally prohibit companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. Our policies mandate compliance with these anti-bribery laws, including the requirements to maintain accurate information and internal controls. We operate in many parts of the world that have experienced governmental corruption to some degree and in certain circumstances, strict compliance with anti-bribery laws may conflict with local customs and practices. There is no assurance that our internal control policies and procedures will protect us from acts committed by our employees or agents. If we

are found to be liable for FCPA or other violations (either due to our own acts or our inadvertence, or due to the acts or inadvertence of others), we could suffer from civil and criminal penalties or other sanctions, including contract cancellations or debarment, and loss of reputation, any of which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

The rate of reimbursement and coverage for the purchase of our products by government and private insurance is subject to change.

Sales of almost all of our products depend partly on the ability of our customers to obtain reimbursement for the cost of our products under government healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid and from other global government authorities. Government healthcare programs and private health plans continuously seek to reduce healthcare costs. For example, in 2014, Medicare established a policy to stop making separate payment for our products in certain clinical settings. This policy required us to reduce prices for our products which caused significant reduction in our revenue.

Our success will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement for the costs of such products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers, and other third-party payers and we do not know whether such reimbursement will be available. For example, currently most private payers provide limited coverage for our PuraPly AM, PuraPly, Novachor, and NuShield products and as a result, there is limited use of these products for patients covered by private payers.

The continuing efforts of government agencies, private health plans, and other payers of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of healthcare may adversely affect:

The proposed updates to the MPFS for calendar year 2023 included a proposal to stop making separate payments for all skin substitutes, including all of our products, in 2024 or 2025. Instead of making separate payment for skin substitutes, Medicare would bundle the payment for skin substitutes into the payment made for the application procedure. As part of this proposal, Medicare would consider all skin substitutes to be supplies instead of biologicals and would require manufacturers of skin substitutes, including us, to apply for new HCPCS codes that would be effective starting in 2024. In the 2023 MPFS final rule, published on November 1, 2022, CMS did not finalize this bundling proposal and will consider more public input in the future; however, they may propose the same policy again or make other proposals in the future that could affect our business and our revenue. If Medicare reproposes and finalizes a policy to stop making separate payment for skin substitutes in calendar year 2024 or calendar year 2025, reimbursement for our products may not be adequate and our business, results of operations, and financial condition may be negatively affected.

Payers are increasingly attempting to contain healthcare costs by limiting both the breadth of coverage and the level of reimbursement, particularly for new therapeutic products generally or specifically for new therapeutic products that target an indication that is perceived to be well served by existing treatments. Specifically, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or PPACA, enacted in 2010, contains provisions for Medicare demonstration programs that create financial incentives to treat patients with chronic wounds conservatively and not use our products. Furthermore, all our products are not paid separately in the outpatient hospital setting which is our largest customer base. This payment policy has created incentives to use our competitors’ products. Accordingly, even if coverage and reimbursement are provided, market acceptance of our products has been and will be adversely affected if access to coverage is administratively burdensome to obtain and/or use of our products is administratively burdensome or unprofitable for healthcare providers or less profitable than alternative treatments. In addition, Medicare, which is the major source of revenue for most of our customers, reimburses the same amounts for most of our products and the products of our competitors targeting the same indications in the hospital outpatient setting. Because in some sites of care, the reimbursement amount is not based on the cost we charge our customers for our products or the cost our competitors charge for products targeting the same indication, our customers may elect to use products cheaper than ours in order to increase their margins, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Reimbursement from Medicare, Medicaid, and other third-party payers is usually adjusted yearly as a result of legislative, regulatory, and policy changes as well as budgetary pressures. In fact, Medicare has signaled that it may discontinue its two-tier bundling policy when it solicited comments on alternatives in its calendar year 2019 rulemaking. Changes in the policy could occur as early as calendar year 2023 and could include the establishment of a single bundle for all products which could place our products at a

significant competitive disadvantage. Possible reductions in, or eliminations of, coverage or reimbursement by third-party payers, or the denial of, or provision of uneconomical reimbursement for new products, as a result of these changes may affect our customers’ revenue and ability to purchase our products. Any changes in the healthcare regulatory, payment, or enforcement landscape relative to our customers’ healthcare services also have the potential to significantly affect our operations and revenue. In addition, Medicare uses regional contractors called Medicare Administrative Contractors, or MACs, to process claims, develop coverage policies and make payments within designated geographic jurisdictions. While our products are currently covered by most MACs, we cannot be certain they will be in the future.

Wound care supplies, such as our product line acquired from CPN Biosciences, are subject to coding verification from CMS’s Pricing, Data Analysis and Coding contractor (the “PDAC”). The PDAC is responsible for verifying the HCPCS Level II DMEPOS Codes for all wound care supplies. Our current wound care supplies sold through CPN have received coding verification from the PDAC and all products have HCPCS Level II codes. Additional wound care supplies that we develop or acquire will also be subject to the PDAC coding verification process. We cannot guarantee the outcome of the PDAC coding verification process. If we are unsuccessful in receiving verification of the applicable HCPCS codes for our products, our wound care supplies could be ineligible for reimbursement or reimbursed at a lower rate than appropriate for our supplies.

While we cannot predict the outcome of current or future legislation, we anticipate, particularly given the recent focus on healthcare reform legislation, that governmental authorities will continue to introduce initiatives directed at lowering the total cost of healthcare and restricting coverage and reimbursement for our products. If we are not successful in obtaining adequate reimbursement for our products from third-party payers, the market’s acceptance of our products could be adversely affected. Inadequate reimbursement levels also likely would create downward price pressure on our products. Even if we do succeed in obtaining widespread reimbursement for our products, future changes in reimbursement policies could have a negative impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The rate of reimbursement and coverage for the purchase of our products by government and private insurance (including by Medicare Administrative Contractors) is subject to uncertainty.

Our products are subject to varying forms of governmental and private payor reimbursement, and fluctuations in these forms of payment may adversely affect our business. For example, in sites of service where payment for skin substitutes is based on the ASP methodology, Medicare pays for skin substitutes separately from the application procedure. In this case, the Medicare payment rate for all skin substitutes (including ours) is calculated on a per square centimeter basis. These rates are adjusted quarterly based on manufacturer ASP reporting, and the payment amount is ASP plus 6%, WAC plus 3%, or invoice pricing. All Medicare payment amounts, including separate payments under the ASP methodology, are subject to sequestration. The Medicare sequestration of 2%, under the BCA, was temporarily suspended and that suspension continued through March 31, 2022. On April 1, 2022, the sequestration became 1% and it returned to 2% as of July 1, 2022. Additionally, under Statutory PAYGO, a 4% Medicare sequester could be ordered at the end of the 2024 Congressional session. Before January 2022, the Medicare statute did not require us to report ASP for our products because they are regulated by the FDA as medical devices. However, starting with the reporting deadline for the first quarter of 2022, we were required to report ASP for our products based on a provision within the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2020, signed into law on December 27, 2020.

When ASP data are not available in the quarterly ASP file published by CMS (for instance our Affinity product in the fourth quarter of 2021), the Part A/B MACs establish payment for drugs and biologics in their jurisdiction(s). In these situations, MACs can update their reimbursement methodology as frequently as quarterly, without notice. MACs also have the discretion to establish coverage policies for all skin substitute products (including ours). Accordingly, even if coverage and reimbursement are provided, market acceptance of our products has been and will be adversely affected if access to coverage is administratively burdensome to obtain, use of our products is administratively burdensome, or is unprofitable for healthcare providers or less profitable than alternative treatments.

Furthermore, Medicare has signaled that it may revise its two-tiered bundled payment policy for skin substitutes. Medicare solicited comments in rulemaking for calendar year 2019 related to proposed updates and policy changes under the Medicare Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS) and Ambulatory Surgical Center (ASC) Payment System. Medicare specifically solicited comments on whether it should eliminate the two-tiered bundle policy and establish a single bundle for all products. However, Medicare did not make any changes to its two-tiered payment policy in response to those comments. If CMS proposes and finalizes any revisions to its two-tiered payment policy, those changes could result in decreased reimbursement for our products which could decrease utilization and reduce our revenues. Moreover, any new policy could result in a financial incentive for hospitals and ASCs to use our competitor’s products, thereby reducing our market share and revenue.

Cost-containment efforts of our customers, purchasing groups, third-party payers, and governmental organizations could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Many existing and potential customers for our products within the United States are members of GPOs and/or IDNs, including accountable care organizations or public-based purchasing organizations, and our business is partly dependent on major contracts with these organizations. Our products can be contracted under national tenders or with larger hospital GPOs. GPOs and IDNs negotiate pricing arrangements with healthcare product manufacturers and distributors and offer the negotiated prices to affiliated hospitals and other members. GPOs and IDNs typically award contracts on a category-by-category basis through a competitive bidding process. At any given time, we are typically at various stages of responding to bids and negotiating and renewing GPO and IDN agreements, including agreements that would otherwise expire. Bids are generally solicited from multiple manufacturers or service providers with the intention of obtaining lower pricing. Due to the highly competitive nature of the bidding process and the GPO and IDN contracting processes in the United States, we may not be able to obtain or maintain contract positions with major GPOs and IDNs across our product portfolio. Failure to be included in certain of these agreements could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, while having a contract with a major purchaser, such as a GPO or IDN, for a given product category can facilitate sales, sales volumes of those products may not be maintained. For example, GPOs and IDNs are increasingly awarding contracts to multiple suppliers for the same product category. Even when we are the sole contracted supplier of a GPO or IDN for a certain product category, members of the GPO or IDN generally are free to purchase from other suppliers. Furthermore, GPO and IDN contracts typically are terminable without cause upon 60 to 90 days’ notice. The healthcare industry has been consolidating, and the consolidation among third-party payers into larger purchasing groups will increase their negotiating and purchasing power. Such consolidation may result in greater pricing pressure on us due to pricing concessions and may further exacerbate the risks described above.

Our patents and other intellectual property rights may not adequately protect our products.

Our ability to compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to maintain the proprietary nature of our technology and manufacturing processes. We rely on manufacturing and other know-how, patents, trade secrets, trademarks, license agreements, and contractual provisions to establish our intellectual property rights and protect our products. These legal means, however, afford only limited protection and may not adequately protect our rights. The failure to obtain, maintain, enforce, or defend such intellectual property rights, for any reason, could allow third parties to make competing products or impact our ability to develop, manufacture and market our own products on a commercially viable basis, or at all, which could have a material adverse effect on our revenues, financial condition or results of operations.

In particular, we rely primarily on trade secrets, know-how, and other unpatented technology, which are difficult to protect. Although we seek such protection in part by entering into confidentiality agreements with our vendors, employees, consultants, and others who may have access to proprietary information, we cannot be certain that these agreements will not be breached, adequate remedies for any breach would be available or our trade secrets, know-how, and other unpatented proprietary technology will not otherwise become known to or be independently developed by our competitors. If we are unsuccessful in protecting our intellectual property rights, sales of our products may suffer and our ability to generate revenue could be severely impacted.

We have filed applications to register various trademarks for use in connection with our products in various countries and also, with respect to certain products, rely on the trademarks of third parties. These trademarks may not afford adequate protection. We or these third parties also may not have the financial resources to enforce the rights under these trademarks which may enable others to use the trademarks and dilute their value. Additionally, our marks may be found to conflict with the trademarks of third parties. In such a case, we may not be able to derive any value from such trademarks or, even, may be required to cease using the conflicting mark. The value of our trademarks may also be diminished by our own actions, such as failing to impose appropriate quality control when licensing our trademarks. Any of the foregoing could impair the value of, or ability to use, our trademarks and have an adverse effect on our business.

Most of the key patents related to our marketed products are expired. We have no patent protection covering, for example, our Apligraf, Dermagraft, or NuShield products. However, in addition to trade secrets, trademarks, know-how, and other unpatented technology, we have pursued and plan to continue to pursue patent protection where we believe that doing so offers potential commercial benefits. However, we may be incorrect in our assessments of whether or when to pursue patent protection. Moreover, patents may not issue from any of our pending patent applications. Even if we obtain or in-license issued patents, such patent rights may not provide valid patent protection sufficiently broad to prevent any third party from developing, using, or commercializing products that are similar or functionally equivalent to our products or technologies, or otherwise provide any competitive advantage. In addition, these patent rights may be challenged, revoked, invalidated, infringed, or circumvented by third parties. Laws relating to such rights may in the future be changed or withdrawn in a manner adverse to us.

Additionally, our products or the technologies or processes used to formulate or manufacture our products may now, or in the future, infringe the patent rights of third parties. It is also possible that third parties will obtain patent or other proprietary rights that might be necessary or useful for the development, manufacture, or sale of our products. In such cases, we may need or choose to obtain licenses for intellectual property rights from others and it is possible that we may not be able to obtain these licenses on commercially reasonable terms, if at all.

Pending and future intellectual property litigation could be costly and disruptive and may have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

We operate in an industry characterized by extensive intellectual property litigation. Defending intellectual property litigation is expensive and complex, takes significant time and diverts management’s attention from other business concerns, and the outcomes are difficult to predict. We have in the past been subject to claims that our products or technology violate a third party’s intellectual property rights, and we may be subject to such assertions in the future. Any pending or future intellectual property litigation may result in significant damage awards, including treble damages under certain circumstances, and injunctions that could prevent the manufacture and sale of affected products or could force us to seek a license and/or make significant royalty or other payments in order to continue selling the affected products. Such licenses may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. We have in the past and may in the future choose to settle disputes involving third-party intellectual property by taking a license. Such licenses or other settlements may involve, for example, upfront payments, yearly maintenance fees and royalties. At any given time, we may be involved as either a plaintiff or a defendant in a number of intellectual property actions, the outcomes of which may not be known for prolonged periods of time. A successful claim of patent or other intellectual property infringement or misappropriation against us could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

We may be subject to damages resulting from claims that we, our employees, or our independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets, proprietary or confidential information of our competitors or are in breach of non-competition or non-solicitation agreements with our competitors.

Some of our employees were previously employed at other medical device, pharmaceutical, or biotechnology companies. We may also hire additional employees who are currently employed at other medical device, pharmaceutical, or biotechnology companies, including our competitors. Additionally, consultants or other independent agents with whom we may contract may be or have been in a contractual arrangement with one or more of our competitors. Although no claims are currently pending, we may be subject to claims that we, our employees, or our independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed trade secrets or other proprietary information of these former employers or competitors. In addition, we have been and may in the future be subject to claims that we caused an employee to breach the terms of his or her non-competition or non-solicitation agreement. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management. If we fail to defend such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. There can be no assurance that this type of litigation will not occur, and any future litigation or the threat thereof may adversely affect our ability to hire additional direct sales representatives, or other personnel. A loss of key personnel or their work product could hamper or prevent our ability to market existing or new products, which could severely harm our business.

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

Competitors may infringe or misappropriate the patents or other intellectual property that we own or license. In response, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us, such as alleging that we infringe their patents. In addition, in a patent infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent that we own or license is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, construe the patent’s claims narrowly or conclude that there is no infringement. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceeding could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing.

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

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

We seek to protect our proprietary technology and processes, in part, by entering into confidentiality and assignment of inventions agreements with our employees, consultants, scientific advisors, and contractors. We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data and trade secrets by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. Despite our efforts, agreements may be breached and security measures may fail, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach or failure. In addition, our trade secrets and know-how may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive, and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. Moreover, if any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to prevent them, or those to whom they communicate it, from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position would be harmed.

We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of the patents and other intellectual property that we own or license.

We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators, or other third parties have an ownership interest in the patents and intellectual property that we own or license. While it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the development of intellectual property to execute agreements obligating them to assign such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who in fact develops intellectual property that we regard as our own; our licensors may face similar obstacles. We could be subject to ownership disputes arising, for example, from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates. Litigation may be necessary to defend against any claims challenging inventorship or ownership. If we fail in defending any such claims, we may have to pay monetary damages and may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, intellectual property, which could adversely impact our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

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

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees, and other fees on patents and patent applications will be due to be paid to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and similar foreign agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patents and patent applications. We rely on our outside counsel to pay these fees due to foreign patent agencies. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and various foreign patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment, and other provisions during the patent application process. We employ law firms and other professionals to help us comply, and in many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. However, there are situations in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, potential competitors might be able to enter the market, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Changes in U.S. patent law could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products.

Success in the biopharmaceutical industry is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the pharmaceutical industry involve both technological and legal complexity, and therefore obtaining and enforcing pharmaceutical patents is costly, time-consuming, and inherently uncertain.

Recent patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs of prosecuting patent applications and enforcing and defending patents. Enacted in 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, made significant changes to U.S. patent law, including provisions that affect the prosecution of patent applications and also affect patent litigation. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office developed new regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, including the first to file provisions, only became effective in March 2013. The full impact of the Leahy-Smith Act on our business is not yet clear, but it could result in increased costs and more limited patent protection, either of which could adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Moreover, recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty regarding our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty regarding the value of any patents we do obtain. Depending on decisions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce any current or future patents that we may own or license.

Our indebtedness could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

As of December 31, 2022, we had approximately $71.3 million of aggregate principal amount of indebtedness outstanding under our 2021 Credit Agreement. Our indebtedness increases the risk that we may be unable to generate cash sufficient to pay amounts due in respect of our indebtedness and could have other important consequences to our debt holders and significant effects on our business. For example, it could:

In addition, the credit agreements governing our senior secured credit facilities collateralize substantially all of our personal property and assets, including our intellectual property, and contain restrictive covenants that limit our ability to engage in activities that may be in our long-term best interests. Our failure to comply with those covenants could result in an event of default that, if not cured or waived, could result in the acceleration of all of our indebtedness.

Despite our current level of indebtedness, we may incur substantially more debt. This could further exacerbate the risks associated with our substantial leverage.

We may incur significant additional indebtedness in the future. Although the credit agreements governing our senior secured and subordinated credit facilities limit our ability and the ability of our present and future subsidiaries to incur additional indebtedness, the terms of the senior secured and subordinated credit facilities permit us to incur significant additional indebtedness under certain circumstances. In addition, the credit agreements governing our senior secured and subordinated credit facilities do not prohibit us from incurring obligations that do not constitute indebtedness as defined therein. To the extent that we incur additional indebtedness or such other obligations, the risk associated with our substantial indebtedness described above, including our potential inability to service our debt, will increase.

We will require a significant amount of cash to service our debt, and our ability to generate cash depends on many factors beyond our control, and any failure to meet our debt service obligations could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Our ability to make payments on and to refinance our indebtedness and to fund working capital needs and planned capital expenditures will depend on our ability to generate cash in the future. This, to a certain extent, is subject to general economic, financial, competitive, business, legislative, regulatory, and other factors that are beyond our control.

If our business does not generate sufficient cash flow from operations or if future borrowings are not available to us in an amount sufficient to enable us to pay our indebtedness or to fund our other liquidity needs, we may need to refinance all or a portion of our indebtedness on or before the maturity thereof, sell assets, reduce or delay capital investments or seek to raise additional capital, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. In addition, we may

not be able to effect any of these actions, if necessary, on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Our ability to restructure or refinance our indebtedness will depend on the condition of the capital markets and our financial condition at such time. Any refinancing of our debt could be at higher interest rates and may require us to comply with more onerous covenants, which could further restrict our business operations. The terms of existing or future debt instruments, including the credit agreements governing our senior and subordinated secured credit facilities, may limit or prevent us from taking any of these actions. In addition, any failure to make scheduled payments of interest and principal on our outstanding indebtedness would likely result in a reduction of our credit rating, which could harm our ability to incur additional indebtedness on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Our inability to generate sufficient cash flow to satisfy our debt service obligations, or to refinance or restructure our obligations on commercially reasonable terms or at all, would have an adverse effect, which could be material, on our business, results of operations, and financial condition, as well as on our ability to satisfy our obligations in respect of the senior and subordinated secured credit facilities and our other indebtedness.

Our failure to comply with the agreements relating to our outstanding indebtedness, including as a result of events beyond our control, could result in an event of default that could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

If there were an event of default under any of the agreements relating to our outstanding indebtedness, the holders of the defaulted debt could cause all amounts outstanding with respect to that debt to be due and payable immediately. We cannot guarantee that our assets or cash flow would be sufficient to fully repay borrowings under our outstanding debt instruments if accelerated upon an event of default. Further, if we are unable to repay, refinance or restructure our indebtedness under our secured debt, the holders of such debt could proceed against the collateral securing that indebtedness. In addition, any event of default or declaration of acceleration under one debt instrument could also result in an event of default under one or more of our other debt instruments. As a result, any default by us on our indebtedness could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

The credit agreements governing our senior secured credit facility and our subordinated credit facility restrict our current and future operations, particularly our ability to respond to changes or to take certain actions.

The credit agreements governing our senior secured credit facility and our subordinated credit facility are collateralized by substantially all of our assets, including our intellectual property, and impose significant operating and financial restrictions and limit our ability and our other restricted subsidiaries’ ability to, among other things:

As a result of these covenants and restrictions, we are and will be limited in how we conduct our business, and we may be unable to raise additional debt or equity financing to compete effectively or to take advantage of new business opportunities. In addition, our senior secured credit facility requires us to comply with a minimum consolidated revenue covenant (measured on a trailing twelve-month basis) and a minimum monthly liquidity ratio (measured as of the last day of each month). The operating and financial restrictions and covenants in the senior secured credit facility, as well as any future financing agreements that we may enter into, may restrict our ability to finance our operations, engage in business activities or expand or fully pursue our business strategies. Our ability to comply with these covenants may be affected by events beyond our control, and we may not be able to meet those covenants. For example, in the past, we have not been in compliance with certain financial covenants in our debt agreements, which may occur again in the future. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to maintain compliance with these covenants in the future and, if we fail to do so, that we will be able to obtain waivers from the lenders and/or amend the covenants.

Our failure to comply with the restrictive covenants described above as well as others contained in our future debt instruments from time to time could result in an event of default, which, if not cured or waived, could result in our being required to repay these borrowings before their due date. If we are forced to refinance these borrowings on less favorable terms, our business, results of operations, and financial condition could be adversely affected.

The Significant Stockholder Group exercises significant control over us, and their interests may conflict with yours in the future.

Alan A. Ades, Albert Erani, Glenn H. Nussdorf, Dennis Erani, Starr Wisdom, and certain of their respective affiliates, including Organo PFG LLC, Organo Investors LLC, Dennis Erani 2012 Issue Trust, Alan Ades as Trustee of the Alan Ades 2014 GRAT, Albert Erani Family Trust dated 12/29/2012, GN 2016 Family Trust u/a/d August 12, 2016, GN 2016 Organo 10-Year GRAT u/a/d September 30, 2016 and RED Holdings, LLC, who we refer to collectively as the Significant Stockholder Group, control a significant amount of the voting power of the outstanding Class A common stock. As of February 15, 2023, the Significant Stockholder Group collectively beneficially owns approximately 45% of the Company’s Class A common stock. As a result of this voting control, the Significant Stockholder Group collectively can effectively determine the outcome of all matters requiring stockholder approval, including, but not limited to, the election and removal of the Company’s directors (including the right to designate four of our directors pursuant to the terms of an agreement between the Company and the Significant Stockholder Group), as well as other matters of corporate or management policy (such as potential mergers or acquisitions, payment of dividends, asset sales, and amendments to the Company’s certificate of incorporation and bylaws). This concentration of ownership may delay or deter possible changes in control and limit the liquidity of the trading market for the Company’s Class A common stock, which may reduce the value of an investment in its Class A common stock. This voting control could also deprive stockholders of an opportunity to receive a premium for their shares of Class A common stock as part of a potential sale of the Company. So long as the Significant Stockholder Group and their affiliates continue to own a significant amount of the Company’s combined voting power, they may continue to be able to strongly influence or effectively control its decisions. The interests of the Significant Stockholder Group and their affiliates may not coincide with the interests of other holders of the Company Class A common stock.

In the ordinary course of their business activities, the Significant Stockholder Group and their affiliates may engage in activities where their interests conflict with our interests or those of our other stockholders. In addition, the Significant Stockholder Group may have an interest in pursuing acquisitions, divestitures, and other transactions that, in their judgment, could enhance their investment, even though such transactions might involve risks to you.

Our stock price has been, and is likely to continue to be, volatile. Fluctuations in revenue or results of operations could cause additional volatility in our stock price and thus our stockholders could incur substantial losses.

Our stock price has been volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, many of which are beyond our control. The stock market in general and the market for biotechnology companies in particular have experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies, which in some cases has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Any unanticipated shortfall in our revenue in any fiscal quarter could have an adverse effect on our results of operations in that quarter. The effect on our net income of such a shortfall could be exacerbated by the relatively fixed nature of most of our costs, which primarily include personnel costs as well as facilities costs. These fluctuations could cause the trading price of our stock to be negatively affected. Our quarterly operating results have varied substantially in the past and may vary substantially in the future.

Some companies that have experienced volatility in the trading price of their shares have been the subject of securities class action litigation, as we are and as disclosed in Item 3, “Legal Proceedings”. Any lawsuit to which we are a party, with or without merit, may result in an unfavorable judgment. We also may decide to settle lawsuits on unfavorable terms.

Any such negative outcome could result in payments of substantial damages or fines, damage to our reputation or adverse changes to our business practices. Defending against litigation is costly and time-consuming, and could divert our management’s attention and our resources. Furthermore, during the course of litigation, there could be negative public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments, which could have a negative effect on the market price of our Class A common stock.

The Company bylaws designate the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, to the fullest extent permitted by law, as the sole and exclusive forum for certain types of actions and proceedings that may be initiated by the Company stockholders, which could limit the ability of the Company stockholders to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with the Company or with directors, officers or employees of the Company and may discourage stockholders from bringing such claims.

Under the Company bylaws, unless the Company consents in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the sole and exclusive forum will be the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware for:


Delaware	98-1329150
(State or Other Jurisdiction of	(I.R.S. Employer
Incorporation or Organization)	Identification No.)


Title of each class	Trading Symbol(s)	Name of each exchange on which registered
Class A Common Stock, $0.0001 par value	ORGO	Nasdaq Capital Market


Auditor Firm Id:	49	Auditor Name:	RSM US LLP	Auditor Location:	Boston, Massachusetts


		Page
PART I

Item 1.	Business	2
Item 1A.	Risk Factors	34
Item 1B.	Unresolved Staff Comments	70
Item 2.	Properties	70
Item 3.	Legal Proceedings	70
Item 4.	Mine Safety Disclosures	70

PART II

Item 5.	Market For Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities	71
Item 6.	Reserved	72
Item 7.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	73
Item 7A.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	86
Item 8.	Financial Statements and Supplementary Data	87
Item 9.	Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure	87
Item 9A.	Controls and Procedures	87
Item 9B.	Other Information	88
Item 9C.	Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspections	88

PART III

Item 10.	Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance	89
Item 11.	Executive Compensation	89
Item 12.	Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters	89
Item 13.	Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence	89
Item 14.	Principal Accounting Fees and Services	89

PART IV

Item 15.	Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules	90
Item 16.	Form 10-K Summary	92

SIGNATURES		93


Product (Launch Year)	Description	Regulatory Pathway	Clinical Application
Affinity (2014)†	Fresh amniotic membrane wound covering in which viable cells, growth factors/cytokines, and ECM proteins in the native tissue are preserved.	361 HCT/P	Chronic and acute wounds

Novachor (2021)	Fresh chorion membrane wound covering in which viable cells, growth factors/cytokines, and ECM proteins in the native tissue are preserved.	361 HCT/P	Chronic and acute wounds

Apligraf (1998)	Bioengineered living cell therapy that contains two living cell types, keratinocytes, and fibroblasts, that produce a broad spectrum of cytokines and growth factors	PMA	VLUs; DFUs


Large accelerated filer	☐	Accelerated filer	☒
Non-accelerated filer	☐	Smaller reporting company	☐
		Emerging growth company	☐