INCYTE CORP

Previous wording

Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical products and services, and payors and employers are adopting benefit plan changes that shift a greater portion of prescription drug costs to patients. Third party pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs, other similar organizationsand payors can limit coverage to specific products on an approved list, or formulary, which might not include all of the approved products for a particular indication, and to exclude drugs from their formularies in favor of competitor drugs or alternative treatments, or place drugs on formulary tiers with higher patient co-pay obligations, and/or to mandate stricter utilization criteria. Formulary exclusion effectively encourages patients and providers to seek alternative treatments, make a complex and time-intensive request for medical exemptions, or pay 100% of the cost of a drug. In addition, in many instances, certain PBMs, other similar organizations and third party payors may exert negotiating leverage by requiring incremental rebates, discounts or other concessions from manufacturers in order to maintain formulary positions, which could continue to result in higher gross to net deductions for affected products. There has been significant consolidation in the health insurance industry, resulting in large insurers and PBMs exerting greater pressure and leverage in pricing and usage negotiations with drug manufacturers. In this regard, while we have entered into agreements with a number of PBMs, we are in the process of negotiating agreements with additional PBMs and payor accounts to provide rebates to those entities related to formulary coverage for OPZELURA, and we cannot guarantee that we will be able to agree to or maintain acceptable coverage terms with these PBMs and other third party payors. Payors could decide to exclude OPZELURA from formulary coverage lists, impose step edits that require patients to try alternative, including generic, treatments before authorizing payment for OPZELURA, limit the types of diagnoses for which coverage will be provided or impose a moratorium on coverage for products while the payor makes a coverage decision. An inability to maintain adequate formulary positions could increase patient cost-sharing for OPZELURA and cause some patients to determine not to use OPZELURA. Any delays or unforeseen difficulties in reimbursement approvals could limit patient access, depress therapy adherence rates, and adversely impact our ability to successfully commercialize OPZELURA. If we are unsuccessful in obtaining and maintaining broad coverage and reimbursement for OPZELURA, our anticipated revenue from and growth prospects for OPZELURA could be negatively affected.

Current wording

Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical products and services, and payors and employers are adopting benefit plan changes that shift a greater portion of prescription drug costs to patients. Third party pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs, other similar organizationsand payors can limit coverage to specific products on an approved list, or formulary, which might not include all of the approved products for a particular indication, and to exclude drugs from their formularies in favor of competitor drugs or alternative treatments, or place drugs on formulary tiers with higher patient co-pay obligations, and/or to mandate stricter utilization criteria. Formulary exclusion effectively encourages patients and providers to seek alternative treatments, make a complex and time-intensive request for medical exemptions, or pay 100% of the cost of a drug. In addition, in many instances, certain PBMs, other similar organizations and third party payors may exert negotiating leverage by requiring incremental rebates, discounts or other concessions from manufacturers in order to maintain formulary positions, which could continue to result in higher gross to net deductions for affected products. There has been significant consolidation in the health insurance industry, resulting in large insurers and PBMs exerting greater pressure and leverage in pricing and usage negotiations with drug manufacturers. In this regard, while we have entered into agreements with a number of PBMs, we are in the process of negotiating agreements with additional PBMs and payor accounts to provide rebates to those entities related to formulary coverage for OPZELURA, and we cannot guarantee that we will be able to agree to or maintain acceptable coverage terms with these PBMs and other third party payors for OPZELURA or additional products in the future. Payors could decide to exclude our products from formulary coverage lists, impose step edits that require patients to try alternative, including generic, treatments before authorizing payment for our products, limit the types of diagnoses for which coverage will be provided or impose a moratorium on coverage for products while the payor makes a coverage decision. An inability to maintain adequate formulary positions could increase patient cost-sharing for our products and cause some patients to determine not to use our products. Any delays or unforeseen difficulties in reimbursement approvals could limit patient access, depress therapy adherence rates, and adversely impact our ability to successfully commercialize our products. If we are unsuccessful in obtaining and maintaining broad coverage and reimbursement for our products, our anticipated revenue from and growth prospects for our products could be negatively affected.

Previous wording

Furthermore, disruptions at the FDA and other regulatory agencies could prevent those agencies from performing normal business functions on which the operation of our business relies, which could negatively impact our business. For example, a recent decision from the U.S. Supreme Court in July 2024 which overturned the precedent to defer to a regulatory agency’s reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous statute that the regulatory agency administers may lead to an increase in litigation against regulatory agencies that could create uncertainty and thus negatively impact our business.

Current wording

Furthermore, disruptions at the FDA and other regulatory agencies could prevent those agencies from performing normal business functions on which the operation of our business relies, which could negatively impact our business.

Previous wording

Present and potential competitors for JAKAFI include major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, as well as specialty pharmaceutical firms. In addition, JAKAFI could face competition from generic products. As a result of the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, commonly known as the Hatch-Waxman Act, in the United States, generic manufacturers may seek approval of a generic version of an innovative pharmaceutical by filing with the FDA an Abbreviated New Drug Application, or ANDA. The Hatch-Waxman Act provides significant incentives to generic manufacturers to challenge U.S. patents on successful innovative pharmaceutical products. In February 2016, we received a notice letter regarding an ANDA that requested approval to market a generic version of JAKAFI and purported to challenge patents covering ruxolitinib phosphate and its use that expire in 2028. The notice letter does not challenge the ruxolitinib composition of matter patent, which expires in June 2028. To date, to our knowledge, the FDA has taken no action with respect to this ANDA. Subsequently, we received a notice letter in February 2024 challenging the patent covering ruxolitinib composition of matter and its use, which expires in June 2028. There can be no assurance that our patents will be upheld or that any litigation in which we might engage with any such generic manufacturer would be successful in protecting JAKAFI’s exclusivity. The entry of a competitive drug product from another company or a generic version of JAKAFI could result in a decrease in JAKAFI sales and materially harm our business, operating results, and financial condition.

Current wording

Present and potential competitors for JAKAFI include major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, as well as specialty pharmaceutical firms. In addition, JAKAFI could face competition from generic products. As a result of the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, commonly known as the Hatch-Waxman Act, in the United States, generic manufacturers may seek approval of a generic version of an innovative pharmaceutical by filing with the FDA an Abbreviated New Drug Application, or ANDA. The Hatch-Waxman Act provides significant incentives to generic manufacturers to challenge U.S. patents on successful innovative pharmaceutical products. In February 2016, we received a notice letter from Apotex, Inc. regarding its filing of an ANDA that requested approval to market a generic version of JAKAFI and purported to challenge patents covering ruxolitinib phosphate and its use that expire (with pediatric extension) in December 2028. The notice letter does not challenge the ruxolitinib composition of matter patent, which expires (with pediatric extension) in June 2028. Subsequently, we received a notice letter in February 2024 from Apotex challenging the patent covering ruxolitinib composition of matter and its use, which expires (with pediatric extension) in June 2028. In response, in March 2024, we initiated a patent infringement action against Apotex in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey asserting certain FDA Orange Book listed patents. That action remains pending. In January 2025, we received a notice letter from Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. regarding its filing of an ANDA that requested approval to market a generic version of JAKAFI and purported to challenge patents covering ruxolitinib phosphate and its use that expire (with pediatric extension) in December 2028 and patents covering ruxolitinib composition of matter and its use that expire (with pediatric extension) in June 2028. In response, in March 2025, we initiated a patent infringement action against Hikma in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey asserting certain FDA Orange Book listed patents. That action remains pending.

Previous wording

With respect to deuterated ruxolitinib, in January 2018 the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of United States Patent and Trademark Office denied a petition challenging our patent covering deuterated ruxolitinib analogs. The PTAB subsequently denied the petitioner’s request for rehearing in May 2018, a decision that was upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Nevertheless, the petitioner still has the right separately to challenge the validity of our patent in federal court.

Current wording

With respect to deuterated ruxolitinib, in January 2018 the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, or PTAB, of United States Patent and Trademark Office denied institution of a petition challenging our patent covering deuterated ruxolitinib analogs. The PTAB subsequently denied the petitioner’s request for rehearing in May 2018. Although the PTAB's decision is now final, the petitioner still has the right separately to challenge the validity of our patent in federal court.

Previous wording

Competitors for OPZELURA include existing over-the-counter topical treatments and prescription topical treatments, as well as oral and injectable therapies, from major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, and companies that produce generic version of prescription treatments. In September 2023, we received a notice letter regarding an ANDA that requested approval to market a generic version of OPZELURA and purported to challenge patents covering ruxolitinib phosphate cream and its uses that expire in 2031 and 2040. The notice letter does not challenge ruxolitinib nor the ruxolitinib phosphate composition of matter patents, providing patent coverage (with pediatric extension) until December 2028. To date, to our knowledge, the FDA has taken no action with respect to this ANDA.

Current wording

Competitors for OPZELURA include existing over-the-counter topical treatments and prescription topical treatments, as well as oral and injectable therapies, from major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, and companies that produce generic version of prescription treatments. In September 2023, we received a notice letter from Padagis Israel Pharmaceuticals Ltd. regarding its filing of an ANDA that requested approval to market a generic version of OPZELURA and purported to challenge patents covering ruxolitinib phosphate cream and its uses that expire in 2031 and 2040. The notice letter does not challenge the ruxolitinib or ruxolitinib phosphate composition of matter patents, providing patent coverage (with pediatric extension) until December 2028. In November 2023, we initiated a patent infringement action against Padagis in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey asserting certain FDA Orange Book listed patents. That action remains pending. In January 2025, we received a notice letter from Taro Pharmaceuticals Inc. regarding its filing of an ANDA that requested approval to market a generic version of OPZELURA and purported to challenge patents covering ruxolitinib phosphate cream and its uses that expire in 2031 and 2040. The notice letter does not challenge ruxolitinib or ruxolitinib phosphate composition of matter patents, providing patent coverage (with pediatric extension) until December 2028. In March 2025, we initiated a patent infringement action against Taro in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey asserting certain FDA Orange Book listed patents. That action remains pending. In January 2025, we received a notice letter from Zydus Lifesciences Limited regarding its filing of an ANDA that requested approval to market a generic version of OPZELURA and purported to challenge patents covering ruxolitinib phosphate cream and its uses that expire in 2040. The notice letter does not challenge the ruxolitinib or ruxolitinib phosphate composition of matter patents or certain patents covering ruxolitinib phosphate cream and its uses, providing patent coverage (with pediatric extension) until November 2031. In March 2025, we initiated a patent infringement action against Zydus in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey asserting certain FDA Orange Book listed patents. That action remains pending.

Previous wording

Data obtained from clinical trials are susceptible to varying interpretation, which may delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. Many companies in the pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical industry, including our company, have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials, even after achieving promising results in earlier clinical trials. In addition, regulatory authorities may refuse or delay approval as a result of other factors, such as changes in regulatory policy during the period of product development and regulatory agency review. For example, the FDA has in the past required, and could in the future require, that we or our collaborators conduct additional trials of any of our drug candidates, which would result in delays and could result in our termination of a drug development program. From time to time we and our collaborators have experienced events that have resulted in delays, setbacks and terminations of drug development programs. In April 2017, we and our collaborator Lilly announced that the FDA had issued a complete response letter for the New Drug Application, or NDA, of OLUMIANT as a once-daily oral medication for the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis. The letter indicated that additional clinical data were needed to determine the most appropriate doses and to further characterize safety concerns across treatment arms. In June 2018, after a resubmission of the NDA, the FDA approved the 2mg dose of OLUMIANT for the treatment of adults with moderately-to-severely active rheumatoid arthritis who have had an inadequate response to one or more tumor necrosis factor inhibitor therapies. The FDA did not at that time approve any higher dose of OLUMIANT and required a warning label in connection with its approval. In addition, in January 2022, we announced that we withdrew the NDA seeking approval of parsaclisib for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma, marginal zone lymphoma and mantle cell lymphoma. The decision to withdraw the NDA followed discussions with FDA regarding confirmatory clinical trials that we determined cannot be completed within the time period to support the investment. Also, in March 2023, we received a complete response letter for ruxolitinib extended-release (XR) tablets, which identified additional requirements for approval.

Current wording

Data obtained from clinical trials are susceptible to varying interpretation, which may delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. Many companies in the pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical industry, including our company, have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials, even after achieving promising results in earlier clinical trials. In addition, regulatory authorities may refuse or delay approval as a result of other factors, such as changes in regulatory policy during the period of product development and regulatory agency review. Delays in FDA approval of drug candidates may also result from other factors such as funding limitations, staffing reductions or other resource restrictions, any of which could have an adverse effect on the regulatory approval process. Further, the FDA has in the past required, and could in the future require, that we or our collaborators conduct additional trials of any of our drug candidates, which would result in delays and could result in our termination of a drug development program. From time to time we and our collaborators have experienced events that have resulted in delays, setbacks and terminations of drug development programs. In April 2017, we and our collaborator Lilly announced that the FDA had issued a complete response letter for the New Drug Application, or NDA, of OLUMIANT as a once-daily oral medication for the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis. The letter indicated that additional clinical data were needed to determine the most appropriate doses and to further characterize safety concerns across treatment arms. In June 2018, after a resubmission of the NDA, the FDA approved the 2mg dose of OLUMIANT for the treatment of adults with moderately-to-severely active rheumatoid arthritis who have had an inadequate response to one or more tumor necrosis factor inhibitor therapies. The FDA did not at that time approve any higher dose of OLUMIANT and required a warning label in connection with its approval. In addition, in January 2022, we announced that we withdrew the NDA seeking approval of parsaclisib for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma, marginal zone lymphoma and mantle cell lymphoma. The decision to withdraw the NDA followed discussions with FDA regarding confirmatory clinical trials that we determined cannot be completed within the time period to support the investment. Also, in March 2023, we received a complete response letter for ruxolitinib extended-release (XR) tablets, which identified additional requirements for approval.

Previous wording

Our acquisition of ARIAD’s European operations significantly expanded our operations in Europe, and we plan to continue to expand our operations and conduct certain development activities outside of the United States. For example, as part of our plans to expand our activities outside of the United States, we now conduct some of our operations in Canada, commercial and clinical development activities in Japan, have opened an office in China and are working with partners in additional markets. International operations and business expansion plans are subject to numerous additional risks, including:

Current wording

We have European operations and plan to continue to expand our operations and conduct certain development activities outside of the United States. For example, as part of our plans to expand our activities outside of the United States, we now conduct some of our operations in Canada, commercial and clinical development activities in Japan, have opened an office in China and are working with partners in additional markets. International operations and business expansion plans are subject to numerous additional risks, including:

Previous wording

•multiple, conflicting and changing laws and regulations such as tax laws, privacy regulations, tariffs, export and import restrictions, employment, immigration and labor laws, regulatory requirements, and other governmental approvals, permits and licenses, compliance with which can increase in complexity as we enter into additional jurisdictions;

Current wording

•multiple, conflicting and changing laws and regulations such as tax laws, privacy regulations, tariffs, export and import restrictions, employment, immigration and labor laws, regulatory requirements, and other governmental approvals, permits and licenses, compliance with which can increase in complexity and cost as we enter into additional jurisdictions;

Previous wording

•financial risks, such as longer payment cycles, difficulty obtaining financing in foreign markets, difficulty enforcing contracts and intellectual property rights, difficulty collecting accounts receivable and exposure to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations;

Current wording

•financial risks, such as longer payment cycles, difficulty obtaining financing in foreign markets, difficulty enforcing contracts and intellectual property rights, difficulty collecting accounts receivable, exposure to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations and increased costs due to tariffs;

Previous wording

Business disruptions could seriously harm our operations, future revenues and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses.

Current wording

Business disruptions and uncertainties could seriously harm our operations, future revenues and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses.

Previous wording

Our operations, and those of our CROs, suppliers, and other contractors and consultants, could be subject to geopolitical events, natural disasters, power and other infrastructure failures or shortages, public health pandemics or epidemics, and other natural or man-made disasters or business interruptions. In addition, geopolitical and other events, such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine or the conflicts in the Middle East, could lead to sanctions, embargoes, supply shortages, regional instability, geopolitical shifts, cyberattacks, other retaliatory actions, and adverse effects on macroeconomic conditions, currency exchange rates, and financial markets, which could adversely impact our operations and financial results, as well as those of third parties with whom we conduct business. The occurrence of any of these business disruptions could seriously harm our operations, future revenues and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses.

Current wording

Our operations, and those of our CROs, suppliers, and other contractors and consultants, could be subject to business disruptions as a result of natural disasters, power and other infrastructure failures or shortages, public health pandemics or epidemics, and other natural or man-made disasters, as well as other business uncertainties as a result of international trade policies, including tariff and trade disputes, trade sanctions and import and export licensing requirements. In addition, geopolitical and other events, such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine or the conflicts in the Middle East, could lead to sanctions, embargoes, supply shortages, regional instability, geopolitical shifts, cyberattacks, other retaliatory actions, and adverse effects on macroeconomic conditions, currency exchange rates, and financial markets, which could adversely impact our operations and financial results, as well as those of third parties with whom we conduct business. The occurrence of any of these business disruptions or other uncertainties could seriously harm our operations, future revenues and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses.

Previous wording

Our marketable securities, short term equity investments and long term equity investments are subject to risks that could adversely affect our overall financial position.

Current wording

Our marketable securities and equity investments are subject to risks that could adversely affect our overall financial position.

Previous wording

We invest our cash in accordance with an established internal policy and customarily in short-term instruments, money market funds, U.S. government backed-funds and Treasury securities, which are investment grade and historically have been highly liquid and carried relatively low risk.

Current wording

We invest our cash in accordance with an established internal policy and customarily in money market funds, U.S. government backed-funds and Treasury securities, which are investment grade and historically have been highly liquid and carried relatively low risk.

Previous wording

Any loss in value of our short and long term equity investments could adversely affect our financial position on the consolidated balance sheets and consolidated statements of operations.

Current wording

Any loss in value of our equity investments could adversely affect our financial position on the condensed consolidated balance sheets and condensed consolidated statements of operations.

Previous wording

New tax laws or regulations could be enacted at any time, and existing tax laws or regulations could be interpreted, modified or applied in a manner that is adverse to us or our customers, which could adversely affect our results of operations, business and financial condition. For example, beginning in 2022, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 eliminated the option to deduct research and development expenditures for tax purposes in the year incurred and instead requires taxpayers to capitalize and subsequently amortize such expenditures over five years for research activities conducted in the United States and over 15 years for research activities conducted outside the United States. If the requirement to amortize research and development expenditures is not repealed or otherwise modified, it will continue to have an adverse effect on our tax liability, and the amount of that effect could be material. As another example, in August 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 was enacted, which, among other things, includes a new 15% alternative minimum tax on the adjusted financial statement income of certain large corporations for tax years beginning after December 31, 2022. Furthermore, the enactment of some or all of the recommendations set forth or that may be forthcoming in the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) project on “Base Erosion and Profit Shifting” (commonly known as BEPS 2.0) by tax authorities and economic blocs in the countries in which we operate, could unfavorably impact our effective tax rate. Broadly speaking, BEPS 2.0 would make fundamental changes to the international tax system, including with respect to the entitlement to tax global corporate profits and minimum global tax rates. For example, in December 2022, the European Union member states agreed to implement in their domestic tax laws a 15% global minimum tax on the profits of large multinational enterprises with a target effective date for fiscal years beginning on or after December 31, 2023. Althoughwe continue to evaluate and assess the potential impact of the recent U.S. legislation and BEPS 2.0 on us, the minimum tax rules could result in tax increases in both the United States and many foreign jurisdictions where we operate or have a presence. Any new tax legislation or initiatives could not only significantly increase our tax provision, cash tax liabilities, and effective tax rate, but could also significantly increase tax uncertainty due to differing interpretations and increased audit scrutiny.

Current wording

New tax laws or regulations could be enacted at any time, and existing tax laws or regulations could be interpreted, modified or applied in a manner that is adverse to us or our customers, which could adversely affect our results of operations, business and financial condition. For example, beginning in 2022, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 eliminated the option to deduct research and development expenditures for tax purposes in the year incurred and instead requires taxpayers to capitalize and subsequently amortize such expenditures over five years for research activities conducted in the United States and over 15 years for research activities conducted outside the United States. If the requirement to amortize research and development expenditures is not repealed or otherwise modified, it will continue to have an adverse effect on our tax liability, and the amount of that effect could be material. As another example, in August 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 was enacted, which, among other things, includes a new 15% alternative minimum tax on the adjusted financial statement income of certain large corporations for tax years beginning after December 31, 2022. Furthermore, the enactment of some or all of the recommendations set forth or that may be forthcoming in the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, or OECD, project on “Base Erosion and Profit Shifting,” commonly known as BEPS 2.0, by tax authorities and economic blocs in the countries in which we operate, could unfavorably impact our effective tax rate. Broadly speaking, BEPS 2.0 would make fundamental changes to the international tax system, including with respect to the entitlement to tax global corporate profits and minimum global tax rates. For example, in December 2022, the European Union member states agreed to implement in their domestic tax laws a 15% global minimum tax on the profits of large multinational enterprises with a target effective date for fiscal years beginning on or after December 31, 2023. Although we continue to evaluate and monitor the potential impact of BEPS 2.0 on us, and the OECD minimum tax rules do not currently have a material impact on us, these minimum tax rules could in the future result in tax increases in both the United States and many foreign jurisdictions where we operate or have a presence. On January 15, 2025, the OECD released new guidance addressing implementation of the Pillar Two global minimum tax rules, which were effective for us in tax year 2024. As part of the guidance, the OECD placed limitations on transactions that produce deferred tax assets entered into during the transition period that runs from November 2021 through an entity’s adoption of Pillar Two. On January 20, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order effectively cancelling the United States’ commitments to the global minimum tax rules, stating that those commitments cannot have any effect in the United States without an act of approval of th…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

We derived a substantial portion of our revenues for the year ended December 31, 2023 and the nine months ended September 30, 2024 from JAKAVI and OLUMIANT product royalties and, in prior periods, we derived a substantial portion of our revenues from milestone payments under our collaboration agreements. Future revenues from research and development collaborations depend upon continuation of the collaborations, the achievement of milestones and royalties we earn from any future products developed from our research. If we are unable to successfully achieve milestones or our collaborators fail to develop successful products, we will not earn the future revenues contemplated under our collaborative agreements. For example, delays in or other limitations with respect to the approval of baricitinib in the United States for the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis, or the failure to obtain such approval as a first line therapy, as discussed under “—We depend on our collaborators and licensees for the future development and commercialization of some of our drug candidates. Conflicts may arise between our collaborators and licensees and us, or our collaborators and licensees may choose to terminate their agreements with us, which may adversely affect our business.” could affect potential future royalty and milestone and contract revenue.

Current wording

We derive a substantial portion of our total revenues from product royalties and milestone payments under our collaboration agreements, with royalties on JAKAVI and OLUMIANT representing most of our product royalty, milestone and contract revenues for each of the three years ended December 31, 2024 and the three months ended March 31, 2025. Future revenues from research and development collaborations depend upon continuation of the collaborations, the achievement of milestones and royalties we earn from any future products developed from our research. If we are unable to successfully achieve milestones or our collaborators fail to develop successful products, we will not earn the future revenues contemplated under our collaborative agreements. For example, delays in or other limitations with respect to the approval of baricitinib in the United States for the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis, or the failure to obtain such approval as a first line therapy, as discussed under “—We depend on our collaborators and licensees for the future development and commercialization of some of our drug candidates. Conflicts may arise between our collaborators and licensees and us, or our collaborators and licensees may choose to terminate their agreements with us, which may adversely affect our business.” could affect potential future royalty and milestone and contract revenue.

Previous wording

Our business and competitive position depends in significant part upon our ability to protect our proprietary technology, including any drug products that we create. Despite our efforts to protect this information, unauthorized parties may attempt to obtain and use information that we regard as proprietary. For example, one of our collaborators may disclose proprietary information pertaining to our drug discovery efforts. In addition, while we have filed numerous patent applications with respect to ruxolitinib and our drug candidates in the United States and in foreign countries, our patent applications may fail to result in issued patents. In addition, because patent applications can take several years to issue as patents, there may be pending patent applications of others that may later issue as patents that cover some aspect of ruxolitinib and our drug candidates. Our existing patents and any future patents we may obtain may not be broad enough to protect our products or all of the potential uses of our products, or otherwise prevent others from developing competing products or technologies. In addition, our patents may be challenged and invalidated or may fail to provide us with any competitive advantages if, for example, others were first to invent or first to file a patent application for the technologies and products covered by our patents. As noted above under “—Risks Relating to Commercialization of Our Products—Competition for our products could potentially harm our business and result in a decrease in our revenue,” a potential generic drug company competitor has challenged certain patents relating to JAKAFI.

Current wording

Our business and competitive position depends in significant part upon our ability to protect our proprietary technology, including any drug products that we create. Despite our efforts to protect this information, unauthorized parties may attempt to obtain and use information that we regard as proprietary. For example, one of our collaborators may disclose proprietary information pertaining to our drug discovery efforts. In addition, while we have filed numerous patent applications with respect to ruxolitinib and our drug candidates in the United States and in foreign countries, our patent applications may fail to result in issued patents. In addition, because patent applications can take several years to issue as patents, there may be pending patent applications of others that may later issue as patents that cover some aspect of ruxolitinib and our drug candidates. Our existing patents and any future patents we may obtain may not be broad enough to protect our products or all of the potential uses of our products, or otherwise prevent others from developing competing products or technologies. In addition, our patents may be challenged and invalidated or may fail to provide us with any competitive advantages if, for example, others were first to invent or first to file a patent application for the technologies and products covered by our patents. As noted above under “—Risks Relating to Commercialization of Our Products—Competition for our products could potentially harm our business and result in a decrease in our revenue,” potential generic drug company competitors have challenged certain patents relating to JAKAFI and OPZELURA.