Commitment and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2026
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies The Company is subject to various claims and legal actions that arise in the ordinary course of business. Management, after consultation with legal counsel, believes that the resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. As of December 31, 2025, the Company has evaluated all known contingencies and commitments, and, in the opinion of management, no accrual for loss contingencies is required in the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements under ASC 450. On March 3, 2026, the Company received a Three Day Notice to Pay Rent or Quit from Dren Bio demanding payment of unpaid rent payments of approximately $0.7 million in connection with the sublease of its facilities situated in Redwood City or in the alternative quit and deliver up possession of the premises. Following receipt of such notice, the Company did not remit a payment and on March 9, 2026, Dren Bio filed a Complaint for Unlawful Detainer against GPCR USA in the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo, seeking restitution of possession of the premises and forfeiture of the sublease and the unpaid rent payments of approximately $0.7 million, damages and attorney’s fees. The Company vacated the facility in Redwood City as of April 15, 2026. The Company is continuing to review the complaint and evaluate its next steps. The Company and certain of its current and former officers and directors were defendants in Colwell v. Exicure, Inc. et al., a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Case No. 1:21-cv-06637) (the “Securities Class Action”). On May 26, 2023, plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint generally alleging that the defendants made false statements about the results of experiments concerning the drug XCUR-FXN and asserting claims for violations of federal securities laws under Section 10(b) and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. On October 8, 2024, the court granted preliminary approval of the settlement in the Securities Class Action and set a schedule for final approval proceedings, including a final approval hearing on January 13, 2025. On January 13, 2025, the court entered final judgment approving a settlement of this litigation, which settlement included a $5.625 million payment. The settlement described above will be fully covered by insurance. However, the settlement includes a reservation of rights by the insurers against the Company for the unsatisfied portion of its self-insured retainer. As a result, the Company recorded an accrual as of September 30, 2024 for the amount of the unsatisfied retainer of approximately $1.1 million needed to bridge the $2.5 million retainer that the Company is liable for under its self- insured retention. On July 29, 2025, the Company entered into an agreement with the insurer to remit $1 million in order to satisfy the remaining balance of its self-insured retention obligation and paid this on August 13, 2025. Three related stockholder derivative lawsuits were filed against certain of the Company’s current and former officers and directors and against the Company as a nominal defendant between March and April 2022 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Puri v. Giljohann, et al. (Case No. 1:22-cv-01083); Sim v. Giljohann, et al. (Case No. 1:22-cv-01217)), and the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (Stourbridge Investments LLC v. Exicure, Inc. et al. (Case No. 1:22-cv-00526)) (collectively, the “Derivative Complaints”). On March 18, 2022, James McNabb, through counsel, sent a written demand to the Company (the “Demand Letter”) demanding that the Board investigate certain allegations and commence proceedings on the Company’s behalf against certain of the Company’s officers and directors for alleged breaches of fiduciary duties and corporate waste. The Derivative Complaints and the Demand Letter are currently stayed. On or around July 22, 2025, the parties informed the courts in which the Derivative Complaints are pending that they have reached an agreement in principle for global resolutions of the Derivative Complaints and Demand Letter. The agreement in principle remains subject to being memorialized in a formal agreement and subject to court approval. On March 18, 2026, the parties executed a formal settlement agreement. Also on March 18, 2026, the plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. On March 19, 2026, that court granted preliminary approval of the settlement. The court also set a hearing on final approval of the settlement for June 2, 2026. On October 3, 2023, a former employee filed a complaint against the Company and various of its former executives in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The complaint is primarily a breach of contract claim relating to the former employee’s separation from the Company, as well as a claim for unpaid wages under the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act (“IWPCA”). The matter remains pending and settlement efforts have proven unsuccessful. The parties completed discovery depositions in December 2025. Based on information discovered in the plaintiff’s deposition, the Company’s legal counsel believes that the Company will not be successful in its breach of contract defense and that it will likely settle for no less than $250,000 to $300,000. As a result, the Company accrued $250,000 for this legal settlement as of December 31, 2025. The court scheduled a settlement conference on February 5, 2026, where the parties could not agree on a settlement amount because plaintiff is now taking the position that the settlement should reflect, not just payment for the breach of contract claim, but also damages under the IWPCA, which includes 5% in monthly interest that continues to accrue without limitation. Factoring in the IWPCA claims, plaintiff contends the damages are significantly higher. The court then scheduled an ex parte conference for February 24, 2026, prior to which the parties were directed to conduct research regarding the applicability of the IWPCA. Since the parties once again could not agree on a settlement amount, the court scheduled the parties for an in-person Final Pretrial Conference on June 3, 2026. Once the Pretrial Order is finalized, the Company intends to move for partial summary judgment on the IWPCA claims. If that motion is successful, the liability will likely remain in the amount referenced above. If that motion is not successful, the liability under the IWPCA could be significantly higher.

On March 3, 2026, the Company received a Three Day Notice to Pay Rent or Quit from Dren Bio demanding payment of unpaid rent payments of approximately $0.7 million in connection with the sublease of its facilities situated in Redwood City or in the alternative quit and deliver up possession of the premises. Following receipt of such notice, the Company did not remit a payment and on March 9, 2026, Dren Bio filed a Complaint for Unlawful Detainer against GPCR USA in the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo, seeking restitution of possession of the premises and forfeiture of the sublease and the unpaid rent payments of approximately $0.7 million, damages and attorney’s fees. The Company vacated the facility in Redwood City as of April 15, 2026. The Company is continuing to review the complaint and evaluate its next steps.

The Company and certain of its current and former officers and directors were defendants in Colwell v. Exicure, Inc. et al., a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Case No. 1:21-cv-06637) (the “Securities Class Action”). On May 26, 2023, plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint generally alleging that the defendants made false statements about the results of experiments concerning the drug XCUR-FXN and asserting claims for violations of federal securities laws under Section 10(b) and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. On October 8, 2024, the court granted preliminary approval of the settlement in the Securities Class Action and set a schedule for final approval proceedings, including a final approval hearing on January 13, 2025. On January 13, 2025, the court entered final judgment approving a settlement of this litigation, which settlement included a $5.625 million payment.

The settlement described above will be fully covered by insurance. However, the settlement includes a reservation of rights by the insurers against the Company for the unsatisfied portion of its self-insured retainer. As a result, the Company recorded an accrual as of September 30, 2024 for the amount of the unsatisfied retainer of approximately $1.1 million needed to bridge the $2.5 million retainer that the Company is liable for under its self- insured retention. On July 29, 2025, the Company entered into an agreement with the insurer to remit $1 million in order to satisfy the remaining balance of its self-insured retention obligation and paid this on August 13, 2025.

Three related stockholder derivative lawsuits were filed against certain of the Company’s current and former officers and directors and against the Company as a nominal defendant between March and April 2022 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Puri v. Giljohann, et al. (Case No. 1:22-cv-01083); Sim v. Giljohann, et al. (Case No. 1:22-cv-01217)), and the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (Stourbridge Investments LLC v. Exicure, Inc. et al. (Case No. 1:22-cv-00526)) (collectively, the “Derivative Complaints”).

On March 18, 2022, James McNabb, through counsel, sent a written demand to the Company (the “Demand Letter”) demanding that the Board investigate certain allegations and commence proceedings on the Company’s behalf against certain of the Company’s officers and directors for alleged breaches of fiduciary duties and corporate waste. The Derivative Complaints and the Demand Letter are currently stayed. On or around July 22, 2025,

the parties informed the courts in which the Derivative Complaints are pending that they have reached an agreement in principle for global resolutions of the Derivative Complaints and Demand Letter. The agreement in principle remains subject to being memorialized in a formal agreement and subject to court approval. On March 18, 2026, the parties executed a formal settlement agreement. Also on March 18, 2026, the plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. On March 19, 2026, that court granted preliminary approval of the settlement. The court also set a hearing on final approval of the settlement for June 2, 2026.

On October 3, 2023, a former employee filed a complaint against the Company and various of its former executives in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The complaint is primarily a breach of contract claim relating to the former employee’s separation from the Company, as well as a claim for unpaid wages under the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act (“IWPCA”). The matter remains pending and settlement efforts have proven unsuccessful. The parties completed discovery depositions in December 2025. Based on information discovered in the plaintiff’s deposition, the Company’s legal counsel believes that the Company will not be successful in its breach of contract defense and that it will likely settle for no less than $250,000 to $300,000. As a result, the Company accrued $250,000 for this legal settlement as of December 31, 2025. The court scheduled a settlement conference on February 5, 2026, where the parties could not agree on a settlement amount because plaintiff is now taking the position that the settlement should reflect, not just payment for the breach of contract claim, but also damages under the IWPCA, which includes 5% in monthly interest that continues to accrue without limitation. Factoring in the IWPCA claims, plaintiff contends the damages are significantly higher. The court then scheduled an ex parte conference for February 24, 2026, prior to which the parties were directed to conduct research regarding the applicability of the IWPCA. Since the parties once again could not agree on a settlement amount, the court scheduled the parties for an in-person Final Pretrial Conference on June 3, 2026. Once the Pretrial Order is finalized, the Company intends to move for partial summary judgment on the IWPCA claims. If that motion is successful, the liability will likely remain in the amount referenced above. If that motion is not successful, the liability under the IWPCA could be significantly higher.