1. 1 One Year Follow-Up Results from AUGMENT-HF: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial of the Efficacy of Left Ventricular Augmentation with Algisyl-LVR in the Treatment of Heart Failure* Douglas L. Mann, Randall J. Lee, Andrew J.S. Coats, Gheorghe Neagoe, Dinu Dragomir, Enrico Pusineri, Massimo Piredda, Luca Bettari, Bridget-Anne Kirwan, Robert Dowling, Maurizio Volterrani, Scott D. Solomon, Hani N. Sabbah, Andy Hinson, Stefan D. Anker on behalf of the AUGMENT-HF Investigators Disclosures: Scientific Advisory Board - Lone Star Heart, miRagen therapeutics, Lilly Corporation Consultant – Bio Control Medical, Cardioxyl, Medtronic Grant Support – NIH * These data will be published online in European Journal of Heart Failure following this presentation

2. 2 Therapeutic options are limited for patients with advanced heart failure who become refractory to conventional pharmacological therapies The injection of biomaterials into diseased myocardium has been shown to reduce myofiber stress, LV wall stress, restore LV geometry and improve LV function 1,2 Algisyl ® is a medical device that consists of an alginate hydrogel that is injected into the midwall of the LV, where it remains as a permanent implant that is intended to reduce LV wall stress and prevent or reverse the progression of HF Results of the AUGMENT-HF 6-month primary endpoint analysis were presented at this meeting in 2014 and published earlier this summer 3 Background 1 Sabbah HN, et. al., JACC Heart Fail. 2013;1(3):252-8. 2 Lee RJ, et. al, Int J Cardiol. 2015 Jul 2;199:18-24. 3 Anker, SD, et. al. Eur Heart J. 2015 Sep 7;36(34):2297-309

3. 3 Modified (LVR)Dilated   P x R = 2h  P x R = 2h R  R h Mechanism of Action of Algisyl h LV Restoration & Laplace’s Law

4. 4 Placement of Alginate Hydrogel via a Limited Thoracotomy LV Restoration with Algisyl Mean procedure duration 80.5 (±24.9) minutes Mean number of implants 15.5 (±2.0) Mean total volume of Alginate-hydrogel 4.6 (±0.6) mL

5. 5 AUGMENT-HF Study Design & Objectives Multicenter prospective randomized clinical trial 78 Patients with moderate to severe HF that had been treated with optimal medical and/or device therapy, randomized 1:1 − 40 patients randomized to Algisyl implant procedure + optimal standard medical therapy (SMT) − 38 patients randomized to optimal standard medical therapy alone 15 centers in Australia, Italy, Romania, Netherlands & Germany Primary Efficacy Endpoint: peak VO 2 assessed by a blinded core lab at 6 months Secondary Endpoints: peak VO 2, 6MWT, Symptoms, QOL and measures of LV remodeling (echo) at 12, 18 and 24 months Safety: clinical outcomes (MACE) adjudicated by blinded CEC

6. 6 Inclusion criteria − Written informed consent − ischemic or non-ischemic HF patients who are symptomatic despite optimal evidence-based therapies for HF − LVEF ≤ 35% − Peak VO 2 of 9.0 - 14.5 mL/min/kg − LVEDDi 30 to 40mm/m 2 (LVEDD/BSA) − Stable, evidence-based therapy for heart failure  Previously reported high compliance: diuretics (99%) Beta Blockers (95%), ARBs/ACE-enzyme inhibitors (89%) and MRAs (69% ) Exclusion criteria − renal, hepatic, stroke and MI status − LV wall thickness < 8 mm required for implant AUGMENT-HF Key Inclusion & Exclusion Criteria

7. 7 AUGMENT-HF Baseline Demographics Patients Completing 1-year follow-up All Patients (n=73)* All (n=59)** Control (n=33) Algisyl (n=26) Age (years)62.6 ± 9.663.2 ± 9.1 63.0  9.363.5  9.0 Ischemic HF42 (58%)35 (59%)20 (61%)15 (58%) Non-ischemic HF31 (42%)24 (41%)13 (39%)11 (42%) NYHA Class III/IV81%79%76%81% LVEF (%) 25.5  5.126.0  5.025.9  5.126.1  5.0 Peak VO 2 (mL/min/kg) 12.2  1.812.4  1.7 12.3  1.8 6MWT distance (m) 293  84292  88306  81275  95 Mitral regurgitation  3+ 37 (51%)27 (46%)18 (55%)9 (35%) Hypertension43 (59%)37 (63%)20 (61%)17 (65%) Diabetes29 (40%)25 (42%)15 (46%)10 (39%) Previous PCI or CABG20 (27%)17 (29%)9 (27%)8 (31%) * Modified Intention-to-Treat (mITT) population; ** 1 patient assessed by telephone only

8. 8 Peak VO 2 - Mean Change from Baseline Algisyl was superior to SMT at 12 months with a mean treatment effect of 2.10 mL/kg/min (CI 0.96–3.24). Algisyl patients completed the 1 year follow-up with a mean peak VO2 of 14.0 (±3.1) mL/min/kg

9. 9 Anaerobic Threshold – Mean Change from Baseline AT is independent of patient motivation or effort. Algisyl was superior to SMT with a mean treatment effect of 2.34 mL/kg/min (CI 1.35–3.32) at 12 months (p<0.001).

10. 10 Post-hoc Analysis – Impact of Missing Peak VO 2 Data This is an advanced HF patient population with a high 1 year mortality, hence loss of patient data over this period is a concern. Shown here is a post-hoc analysis of the repeated measures model for Peak VO 2 including only paired data; those 58 patients with both a baseline and a 12 months assessment.

11. 11 Six Minute Walk Test - Change from Baseline Treatment effect (vs. SMT) of 101 meters for median 6MWT distance

12. 12 NYHA Functional Class at 12 months At 12 months, 85% of patients in the Algisyl group were NYHA functional class I or II compared to 25% of patients on SMT. Only 4 patients in the Algisyl group remained in NYHA class III at 12 months. These differences were highly statistically significant. The odds ratio favoring improvement by one class for Algisyl was 31.90 (CI 7.6–133.4); P < 0.001 Odds Ratio: 31.90 (CI 7.6–133.4); P < 0.001

13. 13 Outcomes Mean Difference Algisyl vs. Standard Medical Therapy P Value Algisyl vs. Standard Medical Therapy Peak VO 2 (mL/kg/min)2.10< 0.001 Anaerobic Threshold (mL/kg/min)2.34< 0.001 Peak Watts11.90.003 Total Exercise Time (min)1.520.002 6-min walk test distance (m) a 101 a < 0.001 NYHA class- 1.0< 0.001 KCCQ Overall Summary score13.40.016 KCCQ quality of life score12.50.04 a non-parametric test AUGMENT-HF – Summary of 12 Month Outcomes

14. 14 Safety population SMT (N=38) Algisyl-LVR (N=40) Total # of events # of patients with events (%) Total # of events # of patients with events (%) P All adverse events9825 (66)14434 (85)<0.001 # Serious adverse events 4418 (47)5021 (53)0.186 # # p-value calculated by the log-rank test of the hazard ratio (hazard rate per 100 patient years at risk) All Adverse Events at 12 months

15. 15 Safety population SMT (N=38) Algisyl-LVR (N=40) Event Total # of events # of patients (%) Total # of events # of patients (%) Death 44 (10.5%)99 (22.5%) Cardiovascular death 44 (10.5%)88 (20.0%) Non-cardiovascular death 00 (0.0%)11 (2.5%) MACE events (excludes index procedure) 3815 (39.5%)1910 (25.0%) Cardiovascular death 44 (10.5%)66 (15.0%) Cardiac arrest 33 (7.9%)22 (5.0%) Worsening heart failure 2313 (34.2%)116 (15.0%) Sustained ventricular arrhythmias 85 (13.2%)11 (2.5%) MACE and Mortality – Blinded CEC Adjudication The study was not powered to detect differences in event rates and there were no statistically significant differences between groups for any of these event categories

16. 16 AUGMENT-HF II – Large US PMA Study (recent FDA cleared IDE) Sample size of 240 patients, randomized 1:1 versus usual care Endpoints essentially identical to the prior AUGMENT-HF study Peak VO2 and Combined HF hospitalization and mortality The Future of Algisyl Algisyl as a Percutaneous Intervention

17. 17 We previously reported that Algisyl injections can be administered safely in patients with advanced HF, with an acceptable 30 day post-operative morbidity & mortality. These one-year follow-up results from AUGMENT-HF demonstrate continued long term benefits of the Algisyl implant procedure in patients with advanced HF. Algisyl combined with SMT provided substantial improvements in functional capacity & HF symptoms compared to patients on SMT alone at 1 year post treatment. The 1 year MACE suggest a potential favorable reduction in HF hospitalization in patients treated with Algisyl. However there was a trend towards higher CV mortality and overall mortality at 1 year for patients receiving Algisyl. Longer term observations for this patient cohort and larger studies will provide insights into important clinical outcomes such as HF hospitalizations and CV mortality Conclusions