DBV TECHNOLOGIES

Corporate Presentation I January 2023

Euronext Paris: DBV I Nasdaq: DBVT

Safe Harbor Statement
This presentation contains forward looking statements including, but not limited to, statements concerning the outcome or success of DBV’s clinical trials; its ability to successfully gain
regulatory approvals and commercialize products; its ability to successfully advance its pipeline of product candidates; the rate and degree of market acceptance of its products; and
its ability to develop sales and marketing capabilities. Forward looking statements are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Moreover, DBV operates in a very
competitive and rapidly changing environment. New risks emerge from time to time. It is not possible for DBV’s management to predict all risks, nor can DBV assess the impact of all
factors on its business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward looking statements
it may make. In light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, the forward looking events and circumstances discussed in this presentation may not occur and actual results could
differ materially and adversely from those anticipated or implied in the forward looking statements. You should not rely upon forward looking statements as predictions of future
events. Although DBV believes that the expectations reflected in the forward looking statements are reasonable, it cannot guarantee that the future results, levels of activity,
performance or events and circumstances reflected in the forward looking statements will be achieved or occur. Moreover, except as required by law, neither DBV nor any other person
assumes responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the forward looking statements. Forward looking statements in this presentation represent DBV’s views only as of the date
of this presentation. DBV undertakes no obligation to update or review any forward looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise,
except as required by law.

As of the date of this presentation, EPIT™ and DBV’s Viaskin™ technology platform are investigational and have not yet been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
(FDA), European Medicines Agency (EMA), or any other regulatory agencies. Some of the information contained herein regarding EPIT or Viaskin is or may be under review by FDA,
EMA and other regulatory agencies as part of a biologics license application (or equivalent) and is subject to change based on such review.

DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 2

 Investment Highlights
Late-stage Clinical Programs

Comprehensive late-stage clinical programs in food allergy

indications

Novel Viaskin™ Technology

Novel Viaskin™ technology based on Epicutaneous Immunotherapy

(EPIT™)

Science-Driven Leadership Team

Science-driven leadership team with deep regulatory and commercial

experience

Well Financed
We are dedicated to improving the lives of
Well financed with $212.7 million of cash and equivalents as of September
patients with food allergies and other
30, 2022
immunological diseases
DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 3
Committed to Generating Long-term Viaskin™ Data to Inform Real-Life Use
Completed and Currently Ongoing Clinical Trials*

Program and Indication Trial Phase 2 Phase 3

PEPITES: Ages 4-11 years

PEOPLE: Ages 4-11 years

REALISE: Ages 4-11 years

Viaskin Peanut (DBV712) - Peanut Allergy VITESSE: Ages 4-7 years

Safety study: Ages 4-7 years

EPITOPE: Ages 1-3 years

EPOPEX: Ages 1-3 years

Viaskin Milk (DBV135) – Cow’s Milk Allergy MILES: Ages 2-17 years

Viaskin Milk (DBV135) – Eosinophilic Esophagitis SMILEE: Ages 4-17 years

Non-IgE Mediated Cow’s Milk Allergy Diagnostic

APTITUDE: Ages 6 months to 5 years
Tool (DBV1605) with Nestle Health Science

* Phase I and Phase IIb trials of Viaskin Peanut are not included here. Complete Ongoing Planned
EPIT=epicutaneous immunotherapy; PEPITES=Peanut EPIT Efficacy and Safety Study; PEOPLE=PEPITES Open Label Extension Study; REALISE=Real Life Use and
Safety of EPIT; VITESSE=Viaskin Peanut Immunotherapy Trial to Evaluate Safety, Simplicity and Efficacy; EPITOPE=EPIT in Toddlers with Peanut Allergy;
EPOPEX=EPITOPE Open Label Extension Study DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 4
In the US, More Children Are Living With Peanut Allergy Than Ever Before
Approximately ~75% will not outgrow their allergy1

1-3 years old 4-7 years old

280,000 Toddlers2,3 390,000 Children2,3

1. Savage J, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2016;4:196-203. 2. Gupta RS, et al. Pediatrics. 2018;142:e20181235. 3. DBV Data on File. DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 5
 For Many Families, Avoidance Is Not Enough
• Accidental exposures still happen despite families’ best efforts1

• In a follow-up, prospective study, approximately 41% of peanut-allergic children

reported an accidental exposure within 3 years of diagnosis2

Reactions Are Unpredictable

• Reactions to peanut are more likely to be severe than in other food allergies3

• Many factors — such as exercise, infection, asthma, hormones and stress —

contribute to reaction severity, making it unpredictable4

Peanut Allergy Directly Impacts Quality of Life

• Patients and their families have reported experiencing increased anxiety and
healthcare costs, and decreased quality of life due to fear of life-threatening
reactions 5,6

• Approximately 35% of caregivers and 42% of children report that their peanut
allergy interferes with their daily life7
There Are Multiple Unmet Needs • Nearly 80% of peanut-allergic children report that fear of accidental exposure
Concerning The Management Of impacts their emotional well-being7
1. Capucilli P, et al. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2020;124:459-465. 2. Kansen HM, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2020;145:705-707.e7. 3. Gupta RS, et

Peanut Allergy al. Pediatrics. 2018;142:e20181235 4. Turner PJ, et al. Allergy. 2016;71:1241-1255. 5. Shaker MS, et al. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2017;29:497-502. 6. Blaiss
MS, et al. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2021;27:516-527.
7. Nowak-Wegrzyn A, et al. World Allergy Organ J. 2021 Feb 15;14(2):100512
DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 6
Caregivers and physicians are seeking a treatment that1,2:
• Reduces the likelihood of an allergic reaction in case of accidental
exposure

• Has a low risk of a serious reaction caused by the treatment and low
risk of side effects

• Is accepted by the caregiver and child

The goals of peanut allergy treatment aim to maximize

effectiveness by balancing efficacy, safety, and practicality1,3

Multiple treatment options are desired so families and

allergists can together choose the best approach considering3:
• Patient preference

• Family lifestyle Allergists, Families and Children Want

• Medical evidence Additional Protection from Allergic
Reactions Due to Accidental Peanut
1. Greenhawt M, et al. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2018;120:620-625. doi:10.1016/[Link].2018.03.001. 2. Based on primary
market research conducted on behalf of DBV among 100 allergists in the United States. Survey question: If a new peanut allergy
desensitization treatment for children 4 to 11 years of age became FDA approved and available for use, what would be the
Exposure
importance of each of the following attributes to you? Please use a 0- to 7-point scale where 0 means “not at all important to me” DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 7
and 7 means “very important to me.” 3. Anagnostou A, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2020;8:46-51.
Families and Allergists Want Additional Therapy Options for Peanut Allergy1,2
Oral immunotherapy is often not an ideal option for many patients and their families1

Complex dose escalation schedule, requiring multiple visits to an

allergist’s office that can each last more than 1 hour

Avoidance of certain activities (sports, other strenuous physical

activities and hot showers/baths) within 3 hours of dose
90%
N=100

Increased risk of an allergic reaction to OIT dose if patient is

having an illness such as a viral infection, very tired or missing
sleep, stressed, having a menstrual period, or exercising
90% of allergists see the need for
Requirement to eat peanut every day at the same time additional options in the treatment of
regardless of potential fear of ingesting peanut or aversion to pediatric peanut allergy2
taste

1. Chu DK et al. Oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy (PACE): a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety. Lancet. 2019 Jun 1;393(10187):2222-2232. 2. . Based on primary market
research conducted on behalf of DBV among 100 allergists in the United States conducted in May 2022. Survey question: Do you see the need for additional options in the treatment of pediatric peanut allergy?
DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 8
Target Product Profile: A Treatment That Can Be Incorporated into the Busy Lives
of Families
Viaskin Peanut:

No treatment escalation requiring frequent doctor's

appointments

No increased risk of side effects due to illness, missed sleep,

stress or menstrual cycles

No restriction on activities such as sports, exercise or hot

bath/shower

No oral peanut ingestion required

Applied at home, once a day

EPIT™ and DBV’s Viaskin™ technology platform are investigational and have not yet been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), European Medicines Agency (EMA), or any other
regulatory agencies DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 9
The Viaskin™ Patch: Our Innovative Approach to Epicutaneous Immunotherapy
A Novel Drug-Device Combination For Delivering Allergen Immunotherapy

Adhesive Overlay

PET Titanium Backing

Condensation
Chamber Allergen
Adhesive Crown

Condensation Chamber Allergen Solubilization

formed by adhesive crown, allergen and titanium backing, Occurs within condensation chamber when natural epidermal
secured by adhesive overlay water loss solubilizes dry antigen on titanium backing

1. Dioszeghy V, et al. J Immunol. 2011;186:5629-5637. 2. Mondoulet L, et al. Immunotherapy. 2015;7:1293-1305. 3. Fleischer DM, et al. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2020; 41(5):326-335. DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 10
Epicutaneous Immunotherapy (EPIT™) Aims To Re-educate the Immune System by
Inducing Specific Regulatory T Cells1-6

EPIT delivers allergen to Antigen Presenting Cells capture allergen and Regulatory T Cells act on the immune system to suppress the
intact skin induce unique Regulatory T Cells allergic response

B cell
Decrease in allergen-specific IgE
Induction of IgG4
Allergen
Regulatory
Epidermis
T Cells Suppression of inflammatory DCs
DC
Induction of tolerogenic DCs
Dermis
Antigen
Presenting Cell Suppression of Th2 and other allergen-specific
Th2
effector T cells

Basophils

Mast Downregulation of pro-inflammatory cells

cell

Eosinophils

DC=dendritic cell; IgE=immunoglobulin E; IgG4=immunoglobulin G4; Th2=T-helper 2 cell.1. Mondoulet L, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2015;135:1546-57. 2. Mondoulet L, et al. Allergy. 2019;74:152-
164. 3. Moingeon P, Mascarell L. Sem Immunol. 2017;30:52-60. 4. Feuille E, Nowak-Wegrzyn A. Allergy Asthma Immunol Res. 2018;10:189-206. 5. Tordesillas L, et al. Immunity. 2017;47(1):32-50. 6.
Dioszeghy V, et al. Cell Mol Immunol. 2017;14:770-782. DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 11
Viaskin™ Uses Minimal Amounts of Allergen to Induce an Immune Response1-3

Solubilized allergen is captured by skin dendritic cells

(eg, Langerhans cells) in the epidermis

Langerhans cells process the allergen, migrate to the

lymph nodes and present its epitopes to the lymphocytes,
leading to a specific immune response

Allergen delivered via Viaskin is not detected in the

bloodstream in animal models

1. Dioszeghy V, et al. J Immunol. 2011;186:5629-5637. 2. Mondoulet L, et al. Immunotherapy. 2015;7:1293-1305. 3. Mondoulet L, et al. Clin Transl Allergy. 2012;2:22. DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 12
13
Occurrence of Reactions is Determined by the Relationship Between Eliciting Dose
and Exposure Dose
Eliciting Dose Exposure Dose Reaction Prediction

The amount of allergen that induces The amount of allergen accidentally ingested, An allergic reaction is predicted to occur when
unmistakable allergic symptoms1: determined by two factors2: a patient’s eliciting dose is less than an
exposure dose3
How much food was consumed?
Reaction Predicted No Reaction Predicted

500 mg 500 mg

Eliciting Dose 300 mg

How much allergen was

present in the food? Exposure Dose 150 mg Exposure Dose 150 mg

Eliciting Dose 30 mg
0 mg 0 mg

Allergen (mg) Allergen (mg)

1. Sampson HA, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2012;130:1260-1274. 2. Blom WM, et al. Food Chem Toxicol. 2019;125:413-421. 3. Baumert JL, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2018;6:457-465.e4.
DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 14
 Decrease in Reaction Risk
Following Allergen Immunotherapy
Modeling* data suggest increasing
a patient’s eliciting dose decreases ED after allergen
the risk of an allergic reaction1 immunotherapy 1,000 mg

ED after allergen
300 mg 300 mg
immunotherapy
ED before allergen
immunotherapy
100 mg

30 mg
ED before allergen
10 mg
immunotherapy
1 mg

Increasing a patient’s eliciting dose from

1, 10, or 30 mg to 300 mg or 100 or 300 mg to 1,000 mg
via allergen immunotherapy is predicted to reduce their risk of an
allergic reaction by ≥99%
*The Quantitative Risk Analysis model inputs variables including the clinical threshold for peanut-allergic individuals and the
exposure dose of peanut residue to predict the allergenic risk associated with the exposure to residual peanut protein.
ED=eliciting dose.

1. Baumert JL, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2018;6:457-465. DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 15
Phase 3 PEPITES/PEOPLE: Viaskin Peanut 250 µg in Children 4–11 Years Of Age
Full results published in peer-reviewed publications JAMA (PEPITES)1, Journal of Allergy & Clinical Immunology (PEOPLE)2

Viaskin Peanut Viaskin Peanut

Global Phase 3 Trial
250 µg 250 µg
Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled
M36
356 patients* aged 4-11 years; Randomized 2:1 DBPCFC

298 rolled over into PEOPLE Viaskin Peanut

Placebo 250 µg
~31 sites in US, Canada, UK, Europe, Australia

M36
M0 M12 DBPCFC
DBPCFC DBPCFC

PEPITES Primary efficacy endpoint: difference between the percentage of PEOPLE Primary outcome measures: % of subjects originating from the active
treatment responders in the active vs. placebo group after 12 months arm of PEPITES reaching an Eliciting Dose (ED) ≥ 1,000 mg after 24 months of
additional treatment in PEOPLE
Treatment responder (assessed by DBPCFC) defined as:
• If ED ≤ 10 mg at baseline, responder if ED ≥ 300 mg at M12
• If ED > 10 mg at baseline, responder if ED ≥ 1,000 mg at M12

DBPCFC=double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge; CRD=cumulative reactive dose; ED=eliciting dose; PEOPLE=PEPITES Open-Label Extension Study; PEPITES=Peanut EPIT Efficacy and Safety Study;
* Confirmed peanut allergy by SPT ≥6 mm for 4- to 5-year-olds or ≥8 mm for 6- to-11-year-olds and slgE levels (>0.7 kUA/L)
DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 16
1. Fleischer DM, et al. JAMA. 2019;321:946-955. 2. Fleischer DM, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2020;146:863-874.
Viaskin™ Peanut Treatment Achieved Clinically Meaningful Changes In
Eliciting Dose (ED) After 1 Year
Primary efficacy outcome showed statistically significant treatment benefit

Response Rate after 12 Months Change in Eliciting Dose after 12 Months†

50% 100%

28.0%
Percent of Responders (%)

P<0.001
40% 80%

Percent of Subjects (%)

62.6%
35.3% ED Increase
30% 60%
Δ= 21.7% 38.1% ED Stable

20% (95% CI: 12.4, 29.8) 40% ED Decrease

10% 13.6% 20% 30.7%

33.9%

6.7%
0% 0%
Placebo VP250 Placebo VP250
(N=118) (N=238) (N=118) (N=238)

The prespecified 15% lower bound of the 95% CI of the difference between An increase in ED was >4 times more likely to occur in the Viaskin Peanut group
treatment groups was not met. The clinical relevance of this is not known. compared with placebo

†Based on ITT population; missing data calculated using mBOCF. DBPCFC=double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge; ED=eliciting dose.
Source: Fleischer DM, et al. JAMA. 2019;321:946-955 DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 17
Changes in ED Maintained or Improved Over 3 Years in the Majority of
Subjects in the Open-Label Extension Study1

% of Patients 51.8% of subjects reached an ED of ≥1,000 mg at Month 36,

c
(N=141) compared to 40.4% at Month 12

M0 M12 M36
75.9% of subjects demonstrated an increase in ED from baseline
c
>2000* 4 18 to Month 36

2000 14 6
13.5% of subjects were able to tolerate the full DBPCFC of 5,444
1000 22 27 c
mg (~18 peanuts) at Month 36
300 35 32 25

100 40 23 16
77.8% (14/18) of subjects who completed the oral food challenge
c
30 12 5 4 at Month 38 maintained desensitization with an ED ≥ 1,000 mg*.

10 10 2
Food Allergy Quality of Life (QoL) Assessment in PEPITES, PEOPLE3
3 3 1 Based on validated food allergy QoL questionnaires, children experienced
1 statistically significant QoL improvements after 2 years of Viaskin Peanut
treatment
ED=eliciting dose DBPCFC=double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge.
* All participants who reached an ED ≥ 1,000 mg at Month 36 were eligible to continue the study for two additional months without treatment while maintaining a peanut-free diet. A further double-blind
placebo-controlled food challenge to determine ED was administered at the end of this period (Month 38). Similar sustained unresponsiveness results reported Phase IIb program.4 DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 18
1. Fleischer DM, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2020;146:863-874. 3. DunnGalvin A et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2021;9:216-224.e1. 4. . Sampson HA, et al. JAMA. 2017;318:1798-1809.
Post-Hoc Analysis of PEPITES Data Supports Concept That Greater Gains in
Desensitization May be Achieved in Younger vs Older Children1
Treatment Responders
Children Ages 4-7 Years By post hoc analysis, a larger treatment effect in subjects aged 4–7 years who
50% P<0.001
received Viaskin Peanut 250 μg versus placebo was demonstrated
40%
40.0%
30%
• 40.0% of subjects in the Viaskin Peanut 250 μg arm were responders compared
Δ= 30.8%
(95% CI: 18.3, 40.8)
with 9.2% in the placebo arm, with a risk difference of 30.8% (95% CI: 18.3–
20%
40.8; P<0.001)
10%
9.2%
0% • In comparison, the difference in the proportion of treatment responders between
Placebo VP250
(N=118) (N=238) Viaskin Peanut and placebo subjects aged 8–11 years was 11.2% (95% CI: -3.4–
23.4)
ED ≥1,000 mg at Month 12
Children Ages 4-7 Years
• Furthermore, among subjects aged 4–7 years, 35.2% in the Viaskin Peanut 250 μg
50%
arm versus 7.7% in the placebo arm reached an ED of ≥1000 mg at Month 12
40%

30% 35.2% The safety profile in the subgroup of children aged 4–7 years was consistent
20% with that observed in the overall 4 to 11-year-old PEPITES population
10%
7.7%
0%
Placebo VP250
(N=118) (N=238)
1. Efficacy of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy with ViaskinTM Peanut for 4-7 Year-Old Peanut-Allergic Children in a Phase 3 Clinical Trial (PEPITES). David Fleischer, MD Presented at Canadian Society for
Allergy and Clinical Immunology Annual Meeting, September 2022. DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 19
 Pooled Safety Data from Phase III Studies of Viaskin™ Peanut1
749 subjects included in the overall pooled safety analyses, including 630 subjects treated with Viaskin Peanut 250 μg
for up to 36 months

749 Subjects from Months 0–6 (Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Treatment Period)
• Serious Treatment-Emergent AEs (TEAEs) were experienced by 1.1% of Viaskin Peanut 250 µg subjects and 1.8% of placebo subjects
• TEAEs leading to permanent discontinuation occurred in 1.1% of patients treated for 6 months with Viaskin™ Peanut vs 0% with placebo

630 Subjects Treated with Viaskin Peanut for Up to 36 Months

• Treatment with Viaskin Peanut 250 μg for up to 36 months in peanut-allergic children was generally safe and well tolerated
• Most adverse events (AEs) were mild to moderate in both the Viaskin Peanut and placebo groups
• The most common treatment-related AEs were local application site reactions
• Low occurrence of systemic allergic* AEs (5.3 events per 100 subject years [SY]) and anaphylactic reactions (3.7/100 SY)

“A well-tolerated treatment approach with a favorable benefit: risk profile could afford those with peanut allergy a
Conclusion valuable therapeutic option for managing this serious condition”1

*Identified through the algorithm of the Anaphylactic Reaction SMQ (Standardized MedDRA [Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities] Queries)
RDBPC = Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled 1. Pooled Safety Data from Phase 3 Studies of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy for Peanut Allergy in Children Aged 4-11 Years – Rachel Robison, MD.
Presented at presented at AAAAI Annual Meeting, February 2022 DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 20
Viaskin™ Peanut Regulatory Background

 FDA issued a Complete Response Letter (CRL) in August 2020 regarding the
Biologics License Application for Viaskin Peanut in children ages 4 to 11 years1

 FDA identified four concerns in the CRL, including1

– Impact of patch-site adhesion on efficacy
– Need for patch modifications and supplementary clinical data to support a modified
patch
– Need for Human Factors study with modified patch
– Additional Chemistry, Manufacturing and Controls (CMC) data requested

 DBV selected the modified Viaskin Peanut patch based on adhesion data from
a Phase I trial of five modified patches in healthy adult volunteers2

 DBV determined the most efficient approach to demonstrate effectiveness,

safety, and improved adhesion of the modified Viaskin Peanut patch is a new,
Phase 3 placebo-controlled efficacy trial3

1. DBV Technologies Press Release August 4, 2020; 2. DBV Technologies Press Release August 2, 2021; 3. DBV Technologies Press Release December 20, 2021 DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 21
22
VITESSE Partial Clinical Hold Lifted on December 23

On September 7
Importantly, DBV had not screened or
DBV initiated its Phase 3 clinical trial, VITESSE, evaluating VIASKIN PEANUT in children
recruited any patients into the trial at
ages 4-7 years old.
the time of the partial clinical hold.

On September 21 DBV continued internal preparations

The company announced that the FDA had placed a partial clinical hold on the trial, and start-up activities for VITESSE
specifying changes to elements of the VITESSE protocol with the intent for the trial to such as conducting certain site
support a future Biologics License Application (BLA) submission. assessments to support prompt study
launch once the partial clinical hold
lifted.
On December 23
DBV announced that the FDA lifted the partial clinical hold on VITESSE and confirmed DBV
satisfactorily addressed all clinical hold issues

VITESSE=Viaskin Peanut Immunotherapy Trial to Evaluate Safety, Simplicity and Efficacy’ FDA=United States Food and Drug Administration; DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 23
FDA Stated VITESSE May Proceed with Protocol Revisions That Addressed
Agency’s Requested Modifications

FDA Modification DBV Response

Redefinition of Minimum Daily The updated VITESSE IFU now outlines that Viaskin Peanut 250 µg is to be worn for as close to a full day as possible (i.e., 24
Wear Time hours) with a minimum daily wear time of 20 hours each day.

Statistical Test for Patch DBV and the FDA agreed a statistical test of adhesion will be included in the VITESSE statistical analysis plan and further
Adhesion Assessment considered patch adhesion data collection and interpretation in the context of the novel nature of the Viaskin patch platform.

Reclassification of Adverse Four adverse events will be classified as adverse events of special interest. These AEs were collected and assessed in all
Events of Special Interest previous Viaskin Peanut trials and included in the previous VITESSE protocol. Only the classification of these AEs has changed.

Increase in Number of Trial DBV plans to initiate a separate safety study in approximately 275 additional subjects, randomized 3:1 active versus placebo.
Participants on Active The additional safety data generated by this six-month study will supplement the safety data generated by the VITESSE trial,
Treatment resulting in a safety database comprised of approximately 600 children ages 4 – 7 years treated with Viaskin Peanut.

Source: DBV Technologies Press Release December 23, 2022 DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 24
VITESSE is Designed for Younger, More Allergen-Sensitive Patients
Inclusion criteria, primary efficacy endpoint, responder criteria, efficacy assessment methodology and safety endpoints were not
impacted by the Partial Clinical Hold letter and remain unchanged from initial VITESSE protocol

Viaskin Peanut
Global Phase 3 Trial
250 µg
Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled

~600 patients aged 4-7 years

Randomized 2:1 Placebo

M0 M12
~80 sites in US, Canada, Europe, Australia DBPCFC DBPCFC

Primary endpoint:
difference between the percentage of treatment responders in the active vs. placebo group after 12 months

Treatment responder (assessed by DBPCFC) defined as:

• If ED ≤ 30 mg at baseline, responder if ED ≥ 300 mg at M12
• If ED = 100 mg at baseline, responder if ED ≥ 600 mg at M12

1 mg 3 mg 10 mg 30 mg 100 mg 300 mg 600 mg 1000 mg

M = Month, DBPCFC = Double Blind Placebo Controlled Food Challenge DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 25
Summary

Patch overlay* Modified (circular, larger) Square

Age 4-7 years 4-11 years
Inclusion Criterion Baseline ED < 100 mg < 300 mg
Baseline ED Month 12 ED Baseline ED Month 12 ED

Responder Definition < 30 mg  ≥300 mg < 10 mg  ≥300 mg

100 mg  ≥600 mg >10 mg  ≥ 1,000 mg

Viaskin Peanut 250 µg is to be worn for as close to a full

Viaskin Peanut 250 µg is to be worn 24 +/- 4 hours each
Instructions for Use (IFU) day as possible (i.e., 24 hours) with a minimum daily wear
day
time of 20 hours each day

Statistical test of adhesion will be included in the statistical

Adhesion Referenced in August 2020 CRL
analysis plan; NOT an approval criterion

Efficacy endpoint success criterion Lower bound of 95% confidence interval ≥ 15% Lower bound of 95% confidence interval ≥ 15%
Size 600 subjects, randomized 2:1 356 subjects, randomized 2:1
Supplementary Safety Study 275 additional subjects, randomized 3:1 REALISE (393 patients)

*The
DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 26
size of the condensation chamber is identical in both patches, as is the composition of the overlay
27
Phase 3 EPITOPE: Viaskin Peanut 250 µg in Toddlers 1-3 Years Of Age
Results Presented at American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology in November 20221

Viaskin Peanut
Pivotal Global Phase 3 Trial
250 µg
Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled
362 patients

Randomized 2:1
Placebo
51 sites in US, Canada, Europe, Australia
M0 M12
DBPCFC DBPCFC

Primary endpoint:
difference between the percentage of treatment responders in the active
compared to the placebo group after 12 months
Baseline 1 mg 3 mg 10 mg 30 mg 100 mg 300 mg
Treatment responder (assessed by DBPCFC) defined as:
If ED ≤10 mg at baseline, responder if ED ≥300 mg at M12 Month 12 1 mg 3 mg 10 mg 30 mg 100 mg 300 mg 1,000 mg 2,000 mg

If ED >10 mg at baseline, responder if ED ≥1,000 mg at M12

M = Month, DBPCFC = Double Blind Placebo Controlled Food Challenge

1. EPITOPE Study Results: Phase 3, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy in Peanut-allergic Toddlers – Matthew Greenhawt, MD. Oral Presentation at ACAAI DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 28
Annual Meeting November 2022
Viaskin Peanut Demonstrated a Statistically Significant Treatment Effect1

80%
80%
P<0.001 70% P<0.001
70%

Percent of Participants with ED

67.0% 60% 64.2%
60%

≥1,000 mg at M12 (%)

Percent of Responders (%)

Δ= 33.4% 50% Δ= 34.7%

50% (95% CI: 22.4, 44.5) (95% CI: 23.6, 45.7)
40%
40%
30%
30% 33.5% 29.6%
20%
20%
10%
10%
0%
0% VP250 Placebo
VP250 Placebo (N=244) (N=118)
(N=244) (N=118)

95% CI lower bound of 22.4% ≥ 15% → Regardless of baseline ED, a statistically significantly larger percentage
Primary endpoint is met of participants on VP250 achieved an ED ≥ 1,000 mg

CI=confidence interval; ED=eliciting dose; ITT=intent to treat population; M=month; VP250=Viaskin Peanut 250 µg.
1. EPITOPE Study Results: Phase 3, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy in Peanut-allergic Toddlers – Matthew Greenhawt, MD. Oral Presentation at ACAAI
Annual Meeting November 2022 DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 29
Shift Toward Reduction in Reaction Severity Following 12 Months of
Viaskin Peanut Treatment1

Maximum Symptom Severity at Month 12 DBPCFC

At baseline Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Food 100%
Challenge (DBPCFC), the proportions of maximum reaction 23.0%
12.5%
25.5% 28.6%
severity were balanced between groups. 80%

60% 51.0%
At Month 12, the distribution of maximum symptom severity
was significantly shifted toward less severe symptoms in the 51.0%
40% 68.4% 71.0%
Viaskin Peanut 250 µg (VP250) group relative to placebo
(P<0.001). 20.5%
20%
14.3%
16.0%
This shift toward a reduction in reaction severity coincided 0% 6.1% 6.0% 6.1%

with an increase in eliciting dose (ED) and a greater Placebo VP250 Placebo VP250
proportion of responders in the Viaskin Peanut 250 µg Baseline Month 12
group versus the placebo group.
Absent Mild Moderate Severe

CI=confidence interval; ED=eliciting dose; ITT=intent to treat population; M=month; VP250=Viaskin Peanut 250 µg.
1. Reduction in Reaction Severity Following 12 Months of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy with Peanut Patch in Toddlers – Terri Brown-Whitehorn, MD. Poster Presentation at ACAAI Annual Meeting November 2022
DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 30
EPITOPE Safety Summary1
Safety Profile Consistent with Prior Viaskin Peanut Studies

Local Application Site Reactions (VP250 vs placebo): primarily mild to moderate that decreased in frequency with time 99.6% vs 94.1%

Serious Adverse Events (VP250 vs placebo) 8.6% vs 2.5%

Serious Adverse Events related to IMP (VP250 vs placebo): 1 case of mild periorbital edema 0.4% vs 0%

Adverse Events leading to study discontinuation (VP250 vs placebo) 3.3% vs 0%

Anaphylactic reaction related to IMP (VP250 vs placebo): No severe events (3 moderate and 1 mild) 1.6% vs 0%

Any Adverse Event leading to epinephrine intake considered related to IMP (VP250 vs placebo) 1.2% vs 0%

IMP=investigational medicinal product; TEAE=treatment-emergent adverse event; VP250=Viaskin Peanut 250 µg.
1. EPITOPE Study Results: Phase 3, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study of Epicutaneous Immunotherapy in Peanut-allergic Toddlers – Matthew Greenhawt, MD. Oral Presentation at ACAAI Annual
Meeting November 2022 DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 31
Two Potential Regulatory Pathways for Viaskin™ Peanut
Flexibility of Viaskin manufacturing process supports potential for two in-market patches

Target Age Patch* Phase III Efficacy Data Next Steps

• FDA guidance on
potential regulatory
pathway
1-3 years old

• VITESSE enrollment

• Safety study protocol

design submission
4-7 years old

*Patch images are for illustrative purposes only. Final patch design may be subject to modification. DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 32
We Aim to Unlock the Powerful Immune
Properties of the Skin with our
Viaskin™ Platform

Proprietary electrospray technology

deposits a precise antigen dose without any
adjuvant on a PET titanium backing film

DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 33

Our Long-Term Vision is to Realize the Full Potential of the Viaskin™ Platform

Program Discovery Pre-clinical Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

Viaskin Milk (DBV135) – Milk Allergy

Viaskin Milk (DBV135) – Eosinophilic Esophagitis

Viaskin – Autoimmune and Inflammatory Disorders

Viaskin – Vaccines

DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 34

September 30, 2022 YTD Financial Results

$212.7M in cash and cash equivalents as of September 30, 2022

$14.1M1 raised through ATM in May

$181.2M1 raised in PIPE in June

$27.1M reimbursement of the French Research Tax Credit2

Cash used in operations

Decreased by ~65%3 for nine months ended September 30, 2002, versus comparable period in 2021

Cash runway

Expected to support operations through VITESSE topline data4

Notes: 1. Net of transaction costs; 2. French Crédit Impôt Recherche, or CIR; 3. Based on United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles; 4. Based on current assumptions
ATM= At-the-Market; PIPE= private investment in public equity DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 35
Near-Term Milestones

Initiation of FDA interaction about FY2022 Financial Publication of

VITESSE EPITOPE data Results EPITOPE results
enrollment

DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 36

 Investment Highlights
Late-stage Clinical Programs

Comprehensive late-stage clinical programs in food allergy

indications

Novel Viaskin™ Technology

Novel Viaskin™ technology based on Epicutaneous Immunotherapy

(EPIT™)

Science-Driven Leadership Team

Science-driven leadership team with deep regulatory and commercial

experience

Well Financed
We are dedicated to improving the lives of
Well financed with $212.7 million of cash and equivalents as of September
patients with food allergies and other
30, 2022
immunological diseases
DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 37
Investor Relations
Anne Pollak
+1 857-529-2363
[Link]@[Link]

Public Relations and Media

Angela Marcucci
+1 646-842-2393
[Link]@[Link]

Partnering and Licensing

generalinquiries@[Link]

Clinical Trial Participation

clinicaltrials@[Link]

Medical Information
medicalinformation@[Link]

EPIT and Viaskin are trademarks of DBV Technologies.

Patented Patch Manufacturing Capabilities
Integrated end-to-end patch manufacturing in place

Source Material Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) Final Product Process

Proprietary electrospray technology

deposits a precise antigen dose without any
adjuvant on a PET titanium backing film

DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 39

Robust Intellectual Property Portfolio
IP Covers:
Core patch technology Condensation chamber
Epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) activates the immune system by allowing the antigen to
Mechanism of action
penetrate the upper layer of the epidermis (intact skin)
Manufacturing Electrospray patch manufacturing allows for precise antigen deposits without adjuvants
Specific indications EPIT peanut, EoE, vaccines, etc.
Regulatory exclusivity Up to 12 years of biologic exclusivity, if approved

Broad Geographic Coverage Including US, Europe, Australia and Canada

Key patent expiries Through 2035
Patent Innovation-driven patent lifecycle management

DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 40

REALISE: study Design and Preliminary Results of the 6-Month Blinded Portion1
Children 4–11 years

REALISE Phase 3
Randomized, double-blind, placebo- Placebo
controlled
250 µg
393 patients aged 4–11 years with history of
Safety checkpoint Safety checkpoint Safety checkpoint
IgE-mediated reactions to peanut, including 250 µg
those with severe anaphylaxis
M0 M6 M12 M24 M36
32 centers in the US and Canada
Open-Label Extension
Confirmed peanut allergy by SPT (≥8 mm), Safety endpoint
and slgE levels (≥14 kU/L)

• REALISE met its primary endpoint in the 6-month blinded portion of the study, demonstrating that Viaskin Peanut was tolerated with
no new or unexpected AEs
• Preliminary results indicated that all study participants had a similar safety profile

AE=adverse event; IgE=immunoglobulin; sIgE=specific immunoglobulin E; SPT=skin prick test.

1. Pongracic JA, et al. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2022 Jul;10(7):1864-1873.e10 DBV Technologies | Corporate Overview 41