BCAX Corporate Presentation

Page 1

Fighting cancer with precision and power. Corporate Presentation | August 2025

Page 2

Forward-Looking Statements 2 This presentation contains forward-looking statements that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. All statements other than historical factual information are forward-looking statements, including without limitation statements regarding our product development activities for ficerafusp alfa and ongoing clinical trials; the ability of clinical trials to demonstrate safety and efficacy of ficerafusp alfa; the beneficial characteristics, and the potential safety, efficacy and therapeutic effects of ficerafusp alfa; our ability to develop and advance our potential future product candidates and programs; our ability to pursue and execute our strategy for our indications, business, programs and technology; our ability to leverage existing programs and to progress additional programs, the timing of investigational new drug application submissions, our and our collaborators’ ability to protect our intellectual property for our products; our ability to enter into future license agreements and collaborations; regulatory developments; and our ability to attract and retains key scientific and management personnel. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements because they contain words such as “may,” “might,” “will,” “would,” “shall,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “could,” “intends,” “target,” “projects,” “contemplates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “looks,” “seeks,” “predicts,” “potential,” “ongoing,” or “continue” or the negative of these words or other similar terms or expressions that concern our expectations, strategy, plans or intentions, although not all forward-looking statements are accompanied by such words. Forward-looking statements are based on assumptions and assessments made by our management in light of their experience and perceptions of historical trends, current conditions, expected future developments and other factors they believe to be appropriate, and speak only as of the date of this presentation. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance or other events to be materially different from any future results, performance or other events expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Given these uncertainties, you should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Our actual future results, performance or other events may be materially different from what we expect. Except as required by law, we assume no obligation to update these forward-looking statements, or to update the reasons actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements, even if new information becomes available in the future. Factors that could cause actual results to differ from those predicted in our forward-looking statements include, among others, risks and uncertainties related to product development, including delays or challenges that may arise in the development and regulatory approval of our current and future product candidates or programs; uncertainties as to the availability and timing of results and data from preclinical and clinical studies; the timing of and our ability to submit and obtain regulatory clearance for investigational new drug applications, initiate additional clinical trials, and submit new drug applications or biologics license applications; our ability to initiate and complete our current and expected clinical trials; our ability to establish and maintain collaborations, strategic relationships and supply arrangements, or that we will not realize the intended benefits from such relationships or arrangements; whether our cash resources will be sufficient to fund our foreseeable and unforeseeable operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements; our ability to raise additional funding on favorable terms, or at all; the rate and degree of market acceptance and clinical utility of our product candidates; the ability and willingness of our third-party collaborators to continue research and, development and manufacturing activities relating to our product candidates; the accuracy of our data analyses or estimates for the potential and market for our products; our ability, and the ability of our collaborators, to protect our intellectual property and to conduct activities for the development and commercialization of our candidates in view of third party intellectual property positions; our financial performance; our ability to retain and recruit key personnel, as well as the potential contribution of our employees and board to our growth and success as a Company; developments and projections relating to our competitors or our industry; changes in general economic conditions and global instability, in particular economic conditions in the markets on which we or our suppliers operate; changes in laws and regulations; and those risks and uncertainties identified in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), including under the heading “Risk Factors” in our most-recently filed Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, and such other risks and uncertainties that may be described in subsequent filings we may make with the SEC. You should not rely upon forward-looking statements as predictions of future events or performance, or as a representation or warranty (express or implied) by us or any other person that we will achieve our objectives and plans in any specified time frame, on such specified terms, or at all. Although our management believes that the expectations reflected in our statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee that the future results, performance or events and circumstances described in the forward-looking statements will be achieved or occur. New risks and uncertainties may emerge from time to time, and it is not possible to predict all risks and uncertainties. Except as required by applicable law, we do not plan to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements contained herein. Market data and industry information used throughout this presentation are based on management’s knowledge of the industry and the good faith estimates of management. We also relied, to the extent available, upon management’s review of independent industry surveys and publications and other publicly available information prepared by a number of third-party sources. All of the market data and industry information used in this presentation involves a number of assumptions and limitations, and you are cautioned not to give undue weight to such estimates. Although we believe that these sources are reliable as of their respective dates, we cannot guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this information, and we have not independently verified this information. Projections, assumptions and estimates of our future performance and the future performance of the industry in which we operate are necessarily subject to a high degree of uncertainty and risk due to a variety of factors. These and other factors could cause results to differ materially from those expressed in our estimates and beliefs and in the estimates prepared by independent parties. This presentation discusses potential future product candidates that are investigational only and have not yet been approved for marketing by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. No representation is made as to the safety or effectiveness of these potential future product candidates for the use for which such potential future product candidates are being studied.

Page 3

3 Bicara Therapeutics Investment Highlights Advancing ficerafusp alfa (FICERA) – a bifunctional EGFR-directed antibody x TGF-β ligand trap 1 5 4 3 2 FICERA designed to enable tumor penetration by breaking barriers in the tumor microenvironment to drive deep and durable responses FICERA + pembro offers a potential new 1L therapy for HPV-negative R/M HNSCC; FORTIFI-HN01 Ph. 2/3 trial ongoing and enrolling Significant market opportunity with ~23,000 cases of R/M HNSCC annually in the U.S. and a significant unmet need for better treatment options (13% 5yr survival) Expansion into other squamous cell carcinomas and solid tumors, with encouraging clinical activity observed in Ph. 1b expansion cohorts to date Seasoned management team with a strong track record of execution; robust financial position with ~$437M in cash and equivalents 1 1. Cash and cash equivalents as of 6/30/25. R/M HNSCC = recurrent / metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

Page 4

Bicara Therapeutics is led by a seasoned and driven management team 4 Claire Mazumdar, Ph.D., MBA Chief Executive Officer Ivan Hyep, MBA Chief Financial Officer Ryan Cohlhepp, Pharm.D. President & Chief Operating Officer David Raben, M.D. Chief Medical Officer Jeltje Schulten, M.D., MBA SVP, Clin. & Med. Affairs Sathish Hasige, Ph.D. SVP, Technical Ops & Supply Chain Lara Meisner, J.D. Chief Legal Officer Rachel Salazar, D.H.Sc. SVP, R&D Strategy & Operations All trademarks are the property of their respective owners. Jean-Paul Rodrique SVP, Quality Pauline Dufresne Chief People Officer

Page 5

5 Maximizing the value of FICERA across HNSCC & other solid tumors Indication Phase 1/1b Phase 2/3 Status Pivotal Ph. 2/3: FORTIFI-HN01 – 750/1500mg QW (+ pembro) Ph. 1b Expansion Cohort – 1500mg QW (+ pembro) Ph. 1b Expansion Cohort – 750mg QW (+ pembro) Ph. 1b Expansion Cohort – 2000mg Q2W (+ pembro) HPV-Positive Smokers Ph. 1b Expansion Cohort (+ pembro) 1L R/M Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma Neoadjuvant / Locally Advanced HNSCC (combo with RT and/or anti-PD-1) Ph. 1b Expansion: 3L+ Colorectal Cancer (RAS / BRAF wild type) Ph. 1b Expansion: 2L+ Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma (monotherapy) Earlier-Line Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma Other EGFR+ Solid Tumors Trial ongoing Data presented at ASCO 2025 Data expected in Q4 2025 or Q1 2026 Data expected in Q1 2026 Expect to initiate trial in 2025 Expect to initiate trial in 2025 Data presented at AACR 2025 Trial ongoing HPV- neg HPV- pos HNSCC = head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, QW = once weekly, CPS = combined positive score, RT = radiation therapy. Ph. 1b Expansion Cohort – CPS=0 (+ pembro) Data expected in 2026

Page 6

FICERA was designed to tackle a major challenge in solid tumor cancers: tumor penetration 6 Inadequate tumor penetration has challenged the treatment of many solid tumor cancers including R/M HNSCC FICERA was specifically designed to enable tumor penetration by breaking barriers in the tumor microenvironment FICERA’s tumor penetration drives deep and durable responses 1 2 3

Page 7

7 FICERA was designed to enable tumor penetration by breaking barriers in the tumor microenvironment (TME) MOA MOA = mechanism of action; TME = tumor microenvironment; PR = partial response Remodeling the TME in an HPV-neg patient in our Ph.1/1b study with a -84% PR Baseline Tumor cells Immune cells FICERA + Pembro (3wks) Immune cells Tumor cells Immune Cells (CD45) Tumor Cells (PanCK) Fibroblasts (FAP)

Page 8

8 FICERA – a bifunctional EGFR-directed antibody x TGF-β ligand trap designed to drive tumor penetration MOA Action 1 Targeting EGFR 1. Direct anti-tumor effect • Inhibits EGFR signaling, killing cells • Maintains ADCC functionality 2. Drives tumor targeting • Localizes TGF-β inhibition to the TME Action 2 Trapping TGF-β 1. Enables tumor penetration • Breaks the barriers in the TME by reducing fibrosis and T-cell exclusion / suppression 2. Prevents resistance • Prevents known EGFR resistance mechanism (via EMT) Improve tolerability Improve anti-tumor activity Increase depth and duration of response EGFR = epidermal growth factor receptor; TGF = transforming growth factor; ADCC = antibody dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity, TME = tumor microenvironment, EMT = epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Designed to: Goal:

Page 9

Reducing EMT Resistance Increasing Immune Activation / Penetration 9 FICERA tumor penetration via reduced EMT in HPV-Neg HNSCCMOA 1. Paired biopsy spatial transcriptomics analysis conducted from n=8 paired biopsy samples amongst HPV-neg HNSCC patients in the Ph.1/1b study. Source: O'Connell, Brenda C., et al. Cancer Research 85.8_Supplement_1 (2025): 3284-3284. EMT = epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Inhibiting EGFR & TGF-β 1 3 2 HPV-Neg Paired Biopsies1 Illustrate FICERA MOA Reduced EMT Increased Immune Activation EGFR Inhibition Paired Biopsy Spatial Transcriptomics (FICERA + pembro) HALLMARK PATHWAY Gene Set (n) NES p.adj EPITHELIAL_MESENCHYMAL_TRANSITI 189 -3.43 8.96E-34 HYPOXIA 177 -3.00 7.71E-20 APICAL_JUNCTION 169 -2.66 9.23E-13 TNFA_SIGNALING_VIA_NFKB 189 -2.58 9.23E-13 GLYCOLYSIS 175 -2.50 2.07E-11 G2M_CHECKPOINT 185 -2.29 7.17E-09 CHOLESTEROL_HOMEOSTASIS 67 -2.25 1.27E-05 ESTROGEN_RESPONSE_LATE 170 -2.23 1.24E-07 P53_PATHWAY 186 -2.16 5.54E-08 MYOGENESIS 148 -2.16 1.24E-06 COAGULATION 102 -2.13 1.71E-05 MTORC1_SIGNALING 183 -2.06 1.62E-06 ANGIOGENESIS 33 -2.06 1.45E-03 TGF_BETA_SIGNALING 52 -2.04 3.66E-04 HALLMARK PATHWAY Gene Set (n) NES p.adj INTERFERON_ALPHA_RESPONSE 90 2.42 3.07E-11 INTERFERON_GAMMA_RESPONSE 181 2.28 4.22E-12 ALLOGRAFT_REJECTION 170 2.00 2.26E-07 Down-Regulated in Tumor Up-Regulated in Tumor TGF-β Inhibition TGF-β Inhibition CD8+ T-Cells * *

Page 10

EGFR Overexpression Role of TGF-β 10 FICERA dose expansion strategy driven by strong biologic rationale for the dual inhibition of both EGFR and TGF-β 2L+ CSCC n = 12 + 25* 3L+ CRC (RAS / BRAF wild type) FICERA monotherapy R/M 1L HNSCC n = 13+ 26* 2L+ SCAC 3L+ CRC (RAS / BRAF wild type) FICERA + PEMBRO Dose Expansion *Simon 2-stage design FICERA – 1500mg QW FICERA – 1500mg QW Dose Expansion Based on preliminary efficacy and safety & tolerability data, 1500mg QW FICERA was chosen as recommended dose to take into dose expansion cohorts MTD was not reached MTD = Maximum Tolerated Dose Enrollment complete

Page 11

11 Sources: Cancer.net, Cleveland Clinic (2022); SEER 2012-2018 data; Cerner (2022); Bedi et al. Mol Cancer Ther. 2012; Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2020, KeyNote-048 ph.3 trial; ASCO (2022); DRG HNSCC (2019) HNSCC is a common cancer with significant unmet need for improved treatment options that extend survival Overview of head & neck cancers • Head and neck cancer accounts for ~4% of all cancers in the U.S. • Squamous cell carcinomas represent ~90% of H&N • Oropharyngeal lesions are typically tested for HPV  HPV-positive caused by HPV infection  HPV-negative typically caused by smoking and chewing tobacco represents 80% of HNSCC in the R/M setting and carries a worse prognosis vs. HPV-positive • Treatment decisions are guided by CPS or PD-L1 expression and options are limited to cetuximab, anti-PD1, chemotherapy Market Opportunity ~67,000 cases of HNSCC each year in the U.S. 10% ~30% ~23,000 cases of R/M HNSCC each year in the U.S. ~12 months 13% metastatic at diagnosis metastases eventually median survival 5-year survival

Page 12

HPV-negative disease demonstrates distinct biological and mutational features correlated with a poor prognosis • HPV-negative disease is etiologically distinct from HPV-positive disease and associated with:  Increased EGFR expression compared to HPV- positive HNSCC patients  Elevated levels of TGF-β1 in serum  High rate of therapeutic resistance (including to anti-PD-1 checkpoint inhibitors)  High tumor burden and symptomatic disease 12 HPV-negative R/M HNSCC: a challenging tumor type associated with overexpression of EGFR and TGF-β Overexpression of EGFR and TGF-β in HNSCC Log2(EGFR_FKPM+1) Market Opportunity Source: Bedi, Atul, et al. Molecular cancer therapeutics (2012).

Page 13

13 Symptoms Testing and Staging MDT & Treatment Patient presents to primary care/ENT with symptoms: Pain, swallowing difficulty, mucosal bleeding, asthenia, weight loss 1 2 3 Diagnosis of cancer Work-up may include: Laryngoscopy, biopsy, imaging (CT scan, MRI) HPV/p16 testing in Oropharynx Multi-disciplinary (med-onc, rad- onc, surgeon) decision: Locally Advanced HNSCC: Curative-intent surgery and/or chemo-radiation M1 disease: palliative treatment & Molecular testing: PD-L1 CPS 4 Relapse 1L R/M HNSCC CPS = 0 CPS≥1 Platinum-based + cetuximab Study Platinum + 5FU + Pembro2 Study Pembrolizumab mono 50% Relapse within 2 years after treatment for LA HNSCC1 1. HNSCC population who relapse <6 months after CRT receive nivolumab as 1L treatment 2. Choice of pembro + chemo (platinum + 5FU) is at the physician’s discretion and is typically more common in the CPS<20 group and/or rapidly progressing disease. LA HNSCC Metastatic at diagnosis Initial focus The patient journey in HNSCC Market Opportunity LA = Locally advanced

Page 14

14 Source: Head and Neck Cancer Alliance. HNSCC patients suffer significant symptomology and represent a major unmet need Market Opportunity Chemo-RT = chemoradiotherapy Acute side effects • Painful sores in the mouth or throat (oral mucositis) and dermatitis • Difficulty swallowing (dysphagia) from surgery or chemo-RT • Feeding tube may be required for nutritional support during Chemo-RT for many patients • Dry mouth (xerostomia) • Speech/voice difficulties and managing the stoma after laryngectomy Chronic side effects • Trismus – difficulty opening the jaw / nerve damage to jaw • Osteoradionecrosis – breakdown of the mandible • Radiation based fibrosis causing tissue damage • Neuropathies from surgery/chemotherapy and radiation • Lymphedema (tissue swelling) • Nutritional deficits Patients experience acute and chronic toxicities after surgery and/or chemo-radiation

Page 15

15 FICERA + pembro R/M HNSCC expansion cohort based on mechanistic synergies with anti-PD-1 and IST precedent Two ISTs exploring anti-PD-1 + cetuximab help inform FICERA registration path 1L HNSCC 1. Data shown only for patients with CPS ≥ 1 treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy. All trademarks are the property of their respective owners. Study KEYNOTE-0481 Sacco, et al 2021 Chung, et al 2022 Published Drug(s) Pembro Cetux + pembro Cetux + nivo Phase Phase 3 Phase 2 Phase 1/2 Size N=257 N=33 N=43 Design Randomized, open-label, three-arm study Open-label, single- arm Open-label, single- arm Efficacy Metrics ORR 19% 48% 37% CRR 5% 3% 2% mPFS 3.2 months 6.5 months 6.2 months mOS 12.3 months 18.4 months 20.2 months Action 2 Trapping TGF-β 1. Enables tumor penetration • Breaks the barriers in the TME by reducing fibrosis and T-cell exclusion / suppression 2. Prevents resistance • Prevents known EGFR resistance mechanism (via EMT)

Page 16

Page 17

17 Patient Demographics and Baseline Characteristics Ph. 1b Overview Characteristic Safety Set (N=30) Age Median (range) 63 (31-84) Sex – n (%) Male/Female 19/11 (63% vs. 37%) HNSCC Primary site of disease – n (%) Oropharynx (HPV-neg) 8 (27%) Oral Cavity 14 (47%) Hypopharynx 4 (13%) Larynx 4 (13%) CPS – n (%) 1-19 15 (50%) ≥20 15 (50%) Locoregional vs. distant metastatic disease – n (%) LR only 9 (30%) LR + DM 14 (47%) DM only 7 (23%) Sum (mm) of Target Lesion Diameters – n (%) > 50 14 (47%) > 70 8 (27%) ECOG Performance Status – n (%) 0 vs.1 11 vs. 19 (37% vs. 63%) FICERA 1500mg IV D1, D8, D15 + Pembrolizumab 200mg IV D1, every 21 days Population • 1L R/M HNSCC, HPV-negative • Oral cavity, oropharynx, larynx & hypopharynx • CPS≥1 Data snapshot: March 20, 2025. LR = locoregional; DM = distant metastases; CPS = combined positive score; ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; IV = intravenous.

Page 18

18 FICERA has been generally well-tolerated with no treatment-related deaths Ph. 1b 1L HNSCC Most common (>20%) adverse events related to FICERA – summary by preferred term and maximum grade: FICERA + pembro in 1L R/M HNSCC safety profile: • EGFR-related AEs:  76% had dermatitis acneiform, majority (27/32; 84%) are grade 1-2 in severity • Hypothesized TGF-β-related AEs:  Nearly all AEs were transient Grade 1-2 local mucosal bleeds or epistaxis • No treatment related deaths were reported *One grade 4 event of ‘pericarditis’ which does not appear in this table because not >20% Data snapshot: March 20, 2025. QW = every week. All 1L R/M HNSCC subjects received 1500mg QW and Pembrolizumab (n=42) Preferred term All Grades Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Any Related AE 40 (95%) 17 (40%) 1 ( 2%)* 0 (0%) Dermatitis acneiform 32 (76%) 5 (12%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) Fatigue 18 (43%) 1 (2%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) Pruritus 18 (43%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) Hypophosphataemia 16 (38%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) Anaemia 15 (36%) 6 (14%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) Hypomagnesaemia 15 (36%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) Dry skin 13 (31%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) Stomatitis 10 (24%) 1 (2%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Page 19

19 Response Rates ORR = objective response rate; cORR = confirmed objective response rate; BOR = best overall response; CR = complete response; PR = partial response; SD = stable disease; LR = locoregional; DM = distant metastatic; SLD = sum of target lesion diameters (mm) 1. Three unconfirmed responses with BOR of PR with tumor shrinkage of -30%, -44%, -60%. HPV-negative efficacy-evaluable population (n=28). Data snapshot: March 20, 2025. Investigator-assessed best overall response per RECIST 1.1. 320 60 40 20 0 −20 −40 −60 −80 −100 Best change from baseline, % * CPS 1-19 CR * CRCRCRCR * CRPR * PRPR * PR * PRPR * PR * PR PR PRPR SDPR SD SD * SD * PD * * SD * SD * PDPD PD Deep PR / CR With ≥ 80% Shrinkage PR With < 80% Shrinkage SD PD • Confirmed ORR: 54% (15/28)  ORR (confirmed or unconfirmed1): 64% (18/28)  Disease Control Rate: 89% (25/28) • Deep Responses: 80% (12/15) of responders achieved ≥ 80% tumor shrinkage  CR rate: 21% (6/28) • Rapid Responses  Median time to response: 1.4 months ORR % (N) cORR % (N) CPS CPS 1-19 54% (7/13) 54% (7/13) CPS ≥ 20 73% (11/15) 53% (8/15) Tumor Burden (SLD) ≤ 50mm 60% (9/15) 53% (8/15) > 50mm 69% (9/13) 54% (7/13) > 70mm 71% (5/7) 43% (3/7) Activity Across Patient Subgroups FICERA drives deep responses (≥ 80% shrinkage) in HPV-neg patients ORR with FICERA + Pembrolizumab in HPV-neg, CPS≥1 1L R/M HNSCC (Ph. 1b)

Page 20

20 mPFS mPFS = median progression-free survival. HPV-negative efficacy-evaluable population (n=28). Data snapshot: March 20, 2025. Investigator-assessed best overall response per RECIST 1.1. 1. Based on historical data. No head-to-head studies have been conducted. 28 18 12 9 8 2 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 Months PFS, % 100 0 20 40 60 80 Censored Median PFS: 9.9 months At risk n=28 Median PFS 9.9 months 6-Month PFS Rate 64% 12-Month PFS Rate 48% ~10-month PFS with FICERA + pembrolizumab PFS with FICERA + Pembrolizumab in HPV-neg, CPS≥1 1L R/M HNSCC (Ph. 1b) Historical data for pembrolizumab in HPV-all population (KEYNOTE-048): mPFS1: 3.2 mo (HPV-pos & HPV-neg)

Page 21

21 Durability DOR = duration of response. DOR in patients with confirmed response (n=15). *Based on current information as of April 2025, post data snapshot. At data snapshot (March 20, 2025) final mDoR had not been reached. 15 15 10 9 8 4 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 Months Ongoing response, % Censored At risk 7 0 0 20 40 100 80 60 Median DOR: 21.7 months FICERA’s tumor penetration and resistance prevention drives durable responses Duration of Response With FICERA + Pembrolizumab in HPV-neg, CPS≥1, 1L R/M HNSCC (Ph. 1b) n=15 Final Median DOR 21.7 months* CPS 1-19: 17.2 months* CPS ≥ 20: 20.9 months* DOR Rate: ≥6 Months ≥12 Months ≥18 Months 79% 65% 57%

Page 22

22 Overall Survival OS = overall survival. HPV-negative efficacy-evaluable population (n=28). Data snapshot: March 20, 2025. In the safety population (n=30), median OS was 20.6 months and the 2-year rate OS was 43%. 1. Subsequent follow-up after data snapshot in patients with ~22-23 months of follow-up confirmed that these patients remained alive at 24 months. 2. Vasiliadou, Ifigenia, et al. International Journal of Cancer 155.5 (2024): 883-893. 3. Black, Christopher M., et al. Frontiers in Oncology 13 (2023): 1160144. At risk 28 26 19 17 16 7 2 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 Months OS, % 0 20 40 60 80 100 Censored Median OS: 21.3 months Prolonged Overall Survival in difficult to treat HPV-Neg patient population OS with FICERA + Pembrolizumab in HPV-neg, CPS≥1 1L R/M HNSCC (Ph. 1b) 1L HPV-negative R/M HNSCC Median OS2,3 = ~9 months 24-Month OS Rate2,3 = ~20-25% Overall survival outcomes to pembro in CPS≥1 n=28 Median OS 21.3 months CPS 1-19: 22.0 months CPS ≥ 20: 20.6 months 2-year OS Rate 46%* Median Follow-up 25.2 months

Page 23

23 Ph. 1b Summary Data snapshot: March 20, 2025. Median DOR and 2-year OS rate based on current information as of April 2025, post data snapshot. At data snapshot (March 20, 2025) final mDoR not reached and 2-year OS rate of 46%. Summary and Key Takeaways FICERA + Pembrolizumab in HPV-neg, CPS≥1 1L R/M HNSCC (Ph. 1b) FICERA + pembrolizumab is a promising 1L regimen in HPV-neg R/M HNSCC that has shown deep and durable responses • Manageable safety profile • High ORR: 54% ORR (n=15/28) • Deep responses: 80% of responders achieved a deep response (≥80% tumor shrinkage) • Median PFS of 9.9 months • Durable responses: median DOR of 21.7 months with DOR rates of 79% at 6 months, 65% at 12 months, and 57% at 18 months • Prolonged overall survival: median OS of 21.3 months, with 2-year OS rate of 46%

Page 24

24 Duration of Response FICERA’s tumor penetration designed to drive durability Historical Duration of Response (DOR) Amongst Select R/M HNSCC Treatments Based on historical published data. No head-to-head studies have been conducted and cross -trial comparisons may not be reliable due to differences in molecule composition, trial design, and patient population and characteristics. Sources: KN-048: Burtness, Barbara, et al. The Lancet 394.10212 (2019): LEAP -010: Licitra et al. MHNCS 2024, 18(5) Abs 1; Sacco, et al. The Lancet Oncology 22.6 (2021): 883-892. Median Duration of Response (DOR) in R/M HNSCC 2 6 10 14 18 22 4 8 12 16 20 240 Pembro Mono (KN-048) Pembro + chemo (KN-048) 6.7 months Cetux + chemo (KN-048) 4.3 months Non-Tumor Penetrant (Chemo / EGFR) Responses: High ORR but less durable Tumor Penetrant (PD-1 / FICERA) Responses: Durable HPV-All HPV-Neg Median DOR (Months) Addition of chemo to pembro drastically shortens mDOR Lenvatinib + pembro (LEAP-010) 10.1 months Pembro + cetux (IST Sacco et. al.) 13.1 months FICERA + Pembro (HPV-Neg) 21.7 months in HPV-neg only 23.4 months

Page 25

25 FICERA Durability FICERA’s tumor penetration drives responses with depth and durability Higher Response Rates With Durable Responses – A Void Amongst R/M HNSCC Treatment Options 2 6 10 14 18 22 4 8 12 16 20 240 Unmet need for treatments with improved ORR and durability Median DOR (Months) ORR (%) 10% 70% 50% 40% 30% 20% 60% Unmet Need Based on published historical data. No head-to-head studies have been conducted and cross-trial comparisons may not be reliable due to differences in molecule composition, trial design, and patient population and characteristics. Sources: KN-048: Burtness, Barbara, et al. The Lancet 394.10212 (2019). Lower ORR / Lower DOR Lower ORR / Higher DOR Higher ORR / Lower DOR Higher ORR / Higher DOR Pembro Pembro + chemo Cetux + chemo

Page 26

26 FICERA Durability FICERA’s tumor penetration drives responses with depth and durability Higher Response Rates With Durable Responses – Potentially Filling A Void Amongst R/M HNSCC Treatment Options 2 6 10 14 18 22 4 8 12 16 20 240 Unmet need for treatments with improved ORR and durability Median DOR (Months) ORR (%) 10% 70% 50% 40% 30% 20% 60% Lower ORR / Lower DOR Lower ORR / Higher DOR Higher ORR / Lower DOR Higher ORR / Higher DOR Pembro FICERA Pembro + chemo Cetux + chemo ORR and mDOR amongst HPV-neg confirmed responders (n=15/28). March 20, 2025 data snapshot. Median DOR based on current information as of April 2025, post data snapshot. Based on published historical data. No head-to-head studies have been conducted and cross-trial comparisons may not be reliable due to differences in molecule composition, trial design, and patient population and characteristics. Sources: KN-048: Burtness, Barbara, et al. The Lancet 394.10212 (2019).

Page 27

27 Depth Of Response FICERA designed to drive deep responses TGF-β inhibition breaks barriers in the immune- excluded TME to enable tumor penetration by immune cells and drive complete tumor responses FICERA (EGFR x TGF-β) % Of Responders Achieving Deep (≥80%) Response 80% 0% Median Depth of Response 40% 60% 20% 80% 100% FICERA (EGFR x TGF-β) 100% FICERA drives deep responses in HPV-Neg R/M HNSCC Depth of response analysis: FICERA + Pembrolizumab (Ph. 1b) Depth of response amongst HPV-neg confirmed responders (n=15/28). March 20, 2025 data snapshot. 10% 30% 50% 70% 90% 0% 40% 60% 20% 80% 100% 10% 30% 50% 70% 90%

Page 28

28 Depth  Durability Evaluating whether deep responses (≥80% shrinkage) impact outcomes Duration of Response Progression Free Survival Overall Survival Observing deep responders (≥80% shrinkage) trend to benefits of more durable responses, longer PFS, and prolonged OS Impact of depth of response to durability and outcomes Analysis of FICERA + Pembrolizumab in HPV-neg, CPS≥1 1L R/M HNSCC (Ph. 1b) Analysis conducted amongst HPV-neg patients (n=30). March 20, 2025 data snapshot. No tumor shrinkage Tumor shrinkage ≥80% Tumor shrinkage <80%

Page 29

Page 30

30 FORTIFI-HN01 Phase 2/3 trial design allows for efficient path-to-market R/M HNSCC 1L Setting CPS ≥ 1 excl. HPV-positive OPSCC R FICERA 1500mg QW + Pembro 200mg Q3W FICERA 750mg QW + Pembro 200mg Q3W Pembro 200mg Q3W FICERA optimal dose + Pembro 200mg Q3W Dose Selection Endpoint: ORR (primary) Endpoint: OS (primary) Interim Analysis Potential Accelerated Approval Potential Full Approval FORTIFI- HN01 Design Interim Analysis 1 (Dose Optimization) Interim Analysis 2 (ORR) Primary Analysis (OS) Total Sample Size n ~ 60 n ~ 415 n ~ 650 Anticipated data availability are based on current expectations and may be subject to delay. QW = weekly; Q3W = every 3 weeks; ORR = objective response rate; OS = overall survival

Page 31

Switch from 1:1:1 to 2:1 randomization 31 Seamless design in FORTIFI-HN01 expedites timelines to potential approval 1. Dose selection will be made after the first ~10-20 patients in each dose arm have at least 12-weeks of follow up. At the time of dose selection, it is estimated that ~60-100 patients in each dose arm will have been enrolled in the non-optimal dose arm and will not contribute to the efficacy analyses of the Ph. 3 trial. Non-Optimal FICERA Dose Optimal FICERA Dose Ph. 2/3 FORTIFI-HN01 is designed such that patients enrolled in dose selection at the optimal dose will contribute to the final efficacy analyses, while those at the non-optimal dose will not FORTIFI- HN01 Pembro control Approximate # of Patients Enrolled In Each Arm ~LPI for Dose Selection Dose Selection Decision Made Non-Optimal Dose arm dropped. Patients enrolled in this arm do not contribute to primary efficacy analysis of Ph. 3 (ORR/OS) 20 40 60 100 150 ~20010 20 40 6010 ~LPI for ORR Analysis ~LPI for OS Analysis 20 40 60 90 115 ~14010 ~360 ~220 Enrolling & contribute to final ORR / OS Enrolling & contribute to final ORR / OS Enrolling but do NOT contribute to final ORR / OS Enrollment not stopped; Time for follow-up and regulatory interaction LPI = last patient in.

Page 32

32 Proposed Optimal Biological Dose (OBD) data package will include data from both Ph. 1/1b and Ph. 2/3 studies 1. In Ph. 1/1b dose expansion, of the n=42 patients across HPV-negative and HPV-positive, the n=30 HPV-negative patients will inform dose selection. 2. Dose selection will be made after the first ~10-20 patients in each dose arm have at least 12 weeks of follow up. At the time of dose selection, it is estimated that ~60-80 patients in each dose arm will have been enrolled, and thus those patients in the non-optimal dose arm will not contribute to the efficacy analyses of the trial. Anticipated data availability are based on current expectations and may be subject to delay. N = ~60-80 enrolled2 N = 10-20 with 12 weeks FU Ph. 1/1b Dose Expansion & New Dose Expansion Cohort N = 301 >2 years follow up Ph. 2/3 FORTIFI-HN01 1500mg QW (n=39) 750mg QW (n~30) 750mg QW 1500mg QW N ~ 30 >1 year follow up N = 10-20 with 12 weeks FU FICERA dose selection: ~ 40-50 patients informing selection across both dose options ~ 30 patients at each dose with > 1 year of follow up to capture durability Data package will include updated popPK, exposure- response analysis, safety, efficacy, and durability Extended safety & durability Randomized safety & efficacy N = ~60-80 enrolled2 Based on FDA feedback, team will request a Type D meeting to seek agreement on the dose to carry forward Ongoing Dose Selection OBD = optimal biological dose. FU = follow up. PopPK = population pharmacokinetics.

Page 33

33 FORTIFI- HN01 Deliberate focus on HPV-Neg R/M HNSCC Following the science and data in R/M HNSCC Treating HPV-Pos & HPV-Neg as two different diseases Understanding which patient populations benefit from FICERA Precisely tailoring our approach to HPV-Neg “HPV-pos and HPV-neg HNSCC are two different diseases and should be viewed independently in clinical trials. Not only does disease biology differ, but also response to therapy and prognosis” - HNSCC KOL Excluding HPV-Pos OPSCC1 in FORTIFI-HN0164% 24% 15% 12% 57% 41% 27% 0% 0% 0% 33% 18% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Ficera + Pembro (Ph. 1b) Cetuximab (INTERLINK) Cetuximab (MEHGAN) Duligotuzumab (MEHGAN) Cetux + Pembro (Sacco et. al.) Cetux + Nivo (Chung et. al.) ORR HPV-Neg HPV-Pos EGFR (+/- PD-1): ORR By HPV-Type Plus PD-1 Interaction with regulators to align on incorporating nucleic- acid based HPV-test Developing HPV companion diagnostic with a CDx partner 1. OPSCC = oropharyngeal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (~30% of HNSCC) represents the 1 subtype of HNSCC that requires H PV testing. CDx = companion diagnostic. Based on published historical data. No head-to-head studies have been conducted and cross -trial comparisons may not be reliable due to differences in molecule composition, trial design, and patient population and characteristics. Sources: Primary market research (n=130) January 2025. INTERLINK: Fayette, J., et al. Annals of Oncology 34 (2023); MEHGAN: Fayette, Jérôme, et al. Frontiers in oncology 6 (2016); Sacco, et al. The Lancet Oncology 22.6 (2021): 883- 892; Chung, Christine H., et al. Clinical Cancer Research 28.11 (2022): 2329- 2338. Immune inflamed Immune excluded HPV-positive (viral mediated) HPV-negative (tobacco / alcohol mediated) EGFR PTEN IL6 TP53 TGFβ VEGF FGFR3 HPV E7 E2F1 P16+ HPV E6

Page 34

34 Development of HPV companion diagnostic in place Ph. 2/3 FORTIFI-HN01 excludes patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal SCC; companion diagnostic being developed alongside FICERA with a CDx partner FORTIFI- HN01 Regulatory • Interaction with FDA CDRH to align on incorporation of nucleic acid- based test (PCR test) for patient selection in FORTIFI-HN01 Patient Selection Commercial Impacts • Only 1 subtype of HNSCC requires testing: oropharyngeal (~30% of HNSCC) • OPSCC patients likely already have HPV-status known from prior p16+ IHC • Medical community moving towards more sensitive diagnostic CDx = companion diagnostic; CDRH = Center for Devices and Radiological Health; PCR = polymerase chain reaction; IHC = immunohistochemistry.

Page 35

Expansion Opportunities 35

Page 36

36 Relapse 1L R/M HNSCC CPS = 0 CPS≥1 Platinum-based + cetuximab Study Platinum + 5FU + Pembro2 Study Pembrolizumab mono 50% Relapse within 2 years after treatment for LA HNSCC1 LA HNSCC Metastatic at diagnosis expansion opportunity Advancing to earlier stages of HNSCC represents a significant opportunity for FICERA LA HNSCC Opportunity >60K cases / year in U.S. Recurrent / Metastatic HNSCC

Page 37

37 Most HNSCC patients are diagnosed with locally advanced (LA) HNSCC Strong rationale to explore FICERA in LA-HNSCC Stage2,3 Standard-of-care treatment2,3 10% Metastatic 30% Early stage 60% Locally advanced 30% Early stage (Stage 0–II) 60% Locally advanced (Stage III–IVB) Radiotherapy or surgery Surgery ± CRT or CRT, or cetuximab + RT or RT pembro ± CT or cetuximab + CT or CT alone or BSC 10% Metastatic (Stage IVC) Treatment goals for patients with LA HNSCC, treated with curative intent, include:2,3,8-11  Cure  Long term survival  Locoregional control (LRC)  Organ preservation  Quality of life 1. Corvò R. Radiother Oncol. 2007 Oct;85(1):156-70; 2. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Head and Neck Cancers V3.2021; 3. Machiels JP, et al. Ann Oncol 2020;31:1462–1475; 4. Bray FF, Pisani P, Parkin DM. GLOBOCAN 2002: Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide. IARC Cancer Base No. 5. version 2.0. Lyon: IARC Press; 2004. http://www -dep.iarc.fr; 5. Seiwert et al. Nat ure Clinical Practice Oncology, March 2007; Vol 4 No. 3 (The chemoradiation paradigm in head and neck cancer); 6. Bernier J, et al. N Engl J Med 2004;350:1945–1952; 7. Cooper JS, et al. N Engl J Med 2004;350:1937– 1944; 8. Lo Nigro C, et al. Cancer Manag Res 2017;9:363–371; 9. Ang KK. Oncologist 2008;13:899–910; 10. Haigentz M Jr, et al. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2010;11:1305–1316; 11. Haddad RI, et al. Ann Oncol 2018;29:1130–1140; 12. Centurione, L., et al. (2016). Frontiers in Oncology, 6, 175 HNSCC disease stage at diagnosis1 FICERA has strong biologic rationale to deliver on treatment goals of LA HNSCC 1) Targeting TGF-β in LA setting: radiation therapy associated with increases in TGF-β12; target immunosuppression and immune-exclusion early and reduce scarring / fibrosis in normal tissue for organ preservation and improved quality of life 2) Cetuximab precedent in combination with RT for unresectable, cisplatin-ineligible patients; improve long-term survival and LRC LA HNSCC Opportunity

Page 38

38 FICERA in 2L+ cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) demonstrates encouraging single-agent activity and durability in PD-1-refractory patientsCSCC Data as of March 20th, 2025; see AACR 2025 poster presentation for additional details. cSCC: cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma; CBR: clinical benefit rate; ORR: objective response rate; PD: progressive disease; PR: partial response; SD: stable disease • 2L+ CSCC Overview  Ph. 1b expansion (n=23)  Ficera monotherapy 1500mg QW • Population:  Metastatic/locally advanced CSCC, post anti-PD1  Most of the efficacy-evaluable population (16/23 [70%]) had progressive disease as best response to prior anti–PD-1 therapy • Preliminary efficacy:  ORR = 30% (7/23)  CBR (CR, PR, and SD lasting for ≥5 weeks) = 83% (19/23)  mPFS = 7.0 months For patients whose disease progresses on anti-PD1 therapy or is refractory to anti-PD-1 therapy, there is no approved second-line therapy

Page 39

39 FICERA + pembro shows activity in 2L+ squamous cancer of the anal canal (SCAC) SCAC ASCO-GI Highlights: • Denotes patient with lymph-node only disease. 1. Based on historical data. No head-to-head studies have been conducted. SCAC = squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal; DCR = disease control rate; TRAE = treatment-related adverse events; c = confirmed; CR = complete response, PR = partial response; SD = stable disease, PD = progressive disease. 2L+ SCAC (n=28): • Locally advanced / unresectable or metastatic SCAC  1-2 prior lines of chemotherapy  Checkpoint inhibitor naïve Efficacy: • 25% ORR (7/28), including 6 PRs and 1 CR  Excludes one additional PR pending confirmation  DCR = 64% (18/28) • 12-month PFS rate = 40.7% (n=27 evaluable)  mPFS of 2.9 months Safety: • Tolerable safety profile with most common TRAEs of any grade:  Acneiform dermatitis (57%, 16/28), epistaxis (50%, 14/28), and pruritus (46%,13/28) Historical1 pembro monotherapy (KEYNOTE-158) showed: ORR = 11%, DCR = 26%, 12-month PFS = 15%

Page 40

40 Expansion to 3L+ MSS RASwt metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)CRC Unresectable mCRC • 2-3 previous lines • Anti-EGFR is not the last line of treatment • Received prior biologics i.e. anti-VEGF • Confirmed RAS/BRAF wt and MSS • ECOG 0-1 Randomized 1:1 FICERA FICERA + pembro N = ~20 in Stage 1 N = ~20 in Stage 1 • EGFR an established target in mCRC • Ability to target TGF-β driven resistance to EGFR targeted therapies • Initial late-line development strategy supported by clinical evidence1 of activity of EGFR-rechallenge in wtRAS CRC population • Rationale to combine TGF-β inhibition with immunotherapy to address overlapping but non-redundant tumor survival mechanisms Expansion to mCRC Initial Ph. 1/2 Proof of Concept Study Primary goals: evaluate safety, tolerability, and initial efficacy (ORR/DCR). Potential to expand cohorts to n~50 in each arm in Stage 2. 1. Sartore-Bianchi, Andrea, et al. Nature Medicine 28.8 (2022): Bev: bevacizumab (Avastin); mCRC: metastatic colorectal cancer; MSS: microsatellite stable; ORR: objective response rate; Q2W: dosed every 2 weeks

Page 41

Tumor Penetration: A Needed Advance in Treating Solid Tumors 41 Chemo Antibody Therapies Checkpoint Inhibitors Tumor Penetrating Therapies Not Adequately Tumor Penetrating Surface-acting Challenged in fibrotic and immuno-suppressed / immune-excluded tumors • Break down TME barriers • Reverse immune-exclusion and immune-suppression • Change biology of the disease • Drive deep and durable responses • Enable long-term survival benefit Short-acting Select diseases challenged by inadequate tumor penetration: HPV-Neg HNSCC, CRC, CSCC, SCAC, PACA, GBM, Gastric, Lung, Breast, MIBC Next Needed Advance

Page 42

42 Bicara Therapeutics Investment Highlights Advancing ficerafusp alfa (FICERA) – a bifunctional EGFR-directed antibody x TGF-β ligand trap 1 5 4 3 2 FICERA designed to enable tumor penetration by breaking barriers in the tumor microenvironment to drive deep and durable responses FICERA + pembro offers a potential new 1L therapy for HPV-negative R/M HNSCC; FORTIFI-HN01 Ph. 2/3 trial ongoing and enrolling Significant market opportunity with ~23,000 cases of R/M HNSCC annually in the U.S. and a significant unmet need for better treatment options (13% 5yr survival) Expansion into other squamous cell carcinomas and solid tumors, with encouraging clinical activity observed in Ph. 1b expansion cohorts to date Seasoned management team with a strong track record of execution; robust financial position with ~$437M in cash and equivalents 1 1. Cash and cash equivalents as of 6/30/25.

Slides