Likewise, in the U.S., several states, including Colorado and California, passed laws that will take effect in 2026, to regulate various uses of AI, including to make consequential decisions. In addition, various federal regulators have issued guidance and focused enforcement efforts on the use of AI in regulated sectors. The FDA, for example, issued guidance on the use of AI in medical devices, requiring detailed risk management and review processes to obtain approvals. If we use AI systems governed by these laws or regulations, we will need to meet higher standards of data quality, transparency, monitoring and human oversight, and we would need to adhere to specific and potentially burdensome and costly ethical, accountability, and administrative requirements, with the potential for significant enforcement or litigation in the event of any perceived non-compliance.
The rapid evolution of AI will require the application of significant resources to design, develop, test and maintain such systems to help ensure that AI is implemented in accordance with applicable law and regulation and in a socially responsible manner and to minimize any real or perceived unintended harmful impacts. The use of certain AI technologies can also give rise to IP risks, including by disclosing or otherwise compromising our confidential or proprietary IP, or by undermining our ability to assert or defend ownership rights in IP created with the assistance of AI tools.
Our vendors may in turn incorporate AI tools into their offerings, and the providers of these AI tools may not meet existing or rapidly evolving regulatory or industry standards, including with respect to privacy and data security. Further, bad actors around the world use increasingly sophisticated methods, including the use of AI, to engage in illegal activities involving the theft and misuse of personal information, confidential information and IP. Any of these effects could damage our reputation, result in the loss of valuable property and information, cause us to breach applicable laws and regulations, and adversely impact our business.
Risks Related to Competition
We face significant competition in an environment of rapid technological change. The possibility that our competitors may achieve regulatory approval before we do or develop therapies that are more advanced or effective than ours may harm our business and financial condition or our ability to successfully market or commercialize our product candidates.
The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are extremely competitive in the race to develop new products. While we believe we have significant competitive advantages with our industry-leading expertise in genome editing, clinical development expertise and dominant IP position, we currently face and will continue to face competition for our development programs from companies that use genome editing or gene therapy development platforms and from companies focused on more traditional therapeutic modalities such as small molecules and antibodies. The competition is likely to come from multiple sources, including large and specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic research institutions, government agencies and public and private research institutions. Many of these competitors may have access to greater capital and resources than us. For any products that we may ultimately commercialize, not only will we compete with any existing therapies and those therapies currently in development, but we will also have to compete with new therapies that may become available in the future.
Specific to our nex-z program, we are aware of other companies that are currently commercializing or developing products and therapies used to treat ATTR amyloidosis, including Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc., AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, BridgeBio Pharma Inc., Bayer AG, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Metagenomi Technologies, LLC, Novo Nordisk A/S, Pfizer, Inc. and YolTech Therapeutics.
Specific to our NTLA-2002 program, we are aware of other companies that are currently commercializing or developing products used to treat HAE, including ADARx Therapeutics, Inc., Astria Therapeutics Inc., BioCryst Pharmaceuticals Inc., CSL Limited, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., KalVista Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Pharming Group N.V., Pharvaris N.V. and Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.
Our platform and product foci are on the development of therapies using CRISPR-based technologies. Genome editing companies focused on CRISPR-based technologies include: Arbor Biotechnologies, Inc., Beam Therapeutics Inc., Caribou Biosciences, Inc., CRISPR Therapeutics AG, EdiGene, Inc., Editas Medicine, Inc., Emendo Biotherapeutics, Inc., Ensoma, Inc., Excision Biotherapeutics, Inc., Integra Therapeutics, S.L., Mammoth Biosciences, Inc., Metagenomi Technologies, LLC, Modalis Therapeutics Inc., nChroma Bio (formerly Chroma Medicine, Inc.), Prime Medicine, Inc., Scribe Therapeutics, Inc., Tessera Therapeutics, Inc., ToolGen, Inc., Tune Therapeutics, Inc., Verve Therapeutics, Inc. and YolTech Therapeutics.
There are also companies developing therapies using additional genome editing technologies, which include Allogene Therapeutics, Inc., bluebird bio, Inc., Cellectis S.A., Editas Medicine, Inc., Life Edit Therapeutics (an ElevateBio Company), Myeloid Therapeutics, Inc., Poseida Therapeutics, Inc. (acquired by Roche Holdings, Inc.), Precision Biosciences, Inc., Prime Medicine, Inc., Sangamo Therapeutics, Inc., Seamless Therapeutics, Inc., Stylus Medicine, Inc. and Tessera Therapeutics, Inc.