Taysha Gene Therapies Inc
For the period ended Dec 31, 2024. Filed Feb 26, 2025.
View on SEC.govAbout this filing
A company's yearly report to the SEC, with audited financial statements. It is the fullest account a company gives of its business, its finances and the risks it sees.
FY2024 · Filed Feb 26, 2025
What changed in Risk Factors?
Read the current filingPrevious report: 10-K
Period ended 2023-12-31; filed 2024-03-19.
0000950170-24-033484
Item 1A. Risk FactorsCurrent report: 10-K
Period ended 2024-12-31; filed 2025-02-26.
0000950170-25-027348
Item 1A. Risk FactorsThe baseline is this issuer’s latest earlier reporting period of the same form that was filed before the current report. A previous 10-Q is a different quarter, not a year-over-year comparison. Amendments are excluded.
Compared 484 previous paragraphs and 488 current paragraphs.
400 unchanged; 71 reworded; 8 added; 12 removed; 1 previous and 9 current paragraphs rearranged.
Tables are not compared: 0 previous and 0 current tables excluded. Dates, whitespace, punctuation and numbering changes are ignored; changes to financial figures remain significant.
A changed paragraph is not evidence that risk increased or decreased. An unchanged paragraph does not establish that risk stayed the same.
Added paragraphs (8)
Current report
All existing EU marketing authorizations for centrally authorized products were automatically converted or grandfathered into UK marketing authorizations, effective in the United Kingdom only, free of charge on January 1, 2021, unless the marketing authorization holder opted-out of this possibility. Northern Ireland remained within the scope of EU authorizations in relation to centrally authorized medicinal products until January 1, 2025. However, on January 1, 2025, a new arrangement as part of the so-called “Windsor Framework” came into effect and reintegrated Northern Ireland under the regulatory authority of the MHRA with respect to medicinal products. The Windsor Framework removes EU licensing processes and EU labelling and serialization requirements in relation to Northern Ireland and introduces a UK-wide licensing process for medicines.
Current report
In addition, on April 26, 2023, the European Commission adopted a proposal for a new Directive and Regulation to revise the existing pharmaceutical legislation. The proposed revisions remain to be agreed and adopted by the European Council. Moreover, on December 1, 2024, a new European Commission took office. The proposal could, therefore, still be subject to revisions. If adopted in the form proposed, the recent European Commission proposals to revise the existing EU laws governing authorization of medicinal products may result in a decrease in data and market exclusivity opportunities for our product candidates in the European Union and make them open to generic or biosimilar competition earlier than is currently the case with a related reduction in reimbursement status.
Current report
We have a limited number of unreserved, authorized shares.
Current report
If we seek equity financing we may need to use a significant percentage of our unreserved authorized shares of common stock in such an offering, and would therefore need stockholder approval to implement an increase in our authorized shares of common stock or a reverse stock split in order to issue additional shares of common stock in the future. Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and the Delaware General Corporation Law currently require the approval of not less than a majority of votes cast by the stockholders entitled to vote on the matter in order to approve an increase in our authorized shares of common stock or a reverse stock split. There are no assurances that stockholder approval will be obtained, in which event we will be unable to raise additional capital through the issuance of shares of common stock to fund our future operations.
Current report
Applicable data privacy and security laws and Data Protection Obligations may require us, or we may voluntarily choose, to notify relevant stakeholders of security breaches, including affected individuals, regulators and investors, of security incidents, or to take other actions, such as providing credit monitoring and identity theft protection services. Such disclosures and related actions can be costly, and the disclosures or the failure to comply with such applicable requirements, could lead to adverse consequences.
Current report
We are obligated to maintain proper and effective internal controls over financial reporting, and any failure to maintain the adequacy of these internal controls may adversely affect investor confidence in our company and, as a result, the value of our common stock.
Current report
We are required, pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or Section 404, to furnish a report by management on, among other things, the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting on an annual basis. This assessment includes disclosure of any material weaknesses identified by our management in our internal control over financial reporting. We are also required to disclose significant changes made in our internal control procedures on a quarterly basis. In addition, our independent registered public accounting firm will be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting in our first annual report required to be filed with the SEC following the date we are no longer an emerging growth company.
Current report
During the evaluation and testing process of our internal controls, if we identify one or more material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, we will be unable to assert that our internal control over financial reporting is effective. We cannot assure you that there will not be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting in the future. Any failure to maintain internal control over financial reporting could severely inhibit our ability to accurately report our financial condition or results of operations. If we are unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, or if our independent registered public accounting firm determines we have a material weakness or significant deficiency in our internal control over financial reporting, we could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, the market price of our common stock could decline, and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the Nasdaq, the SEC or other regulatory authorities. Failure to remedy any material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, or to maintain other effective control systems required of public companies, could also restrict our future access to the capital markets.
Removed paragraphs (12)
Previous report
Actual events involving limited liquidity, defaults, non-performance or other adverse developments that affect financial institutions or other companies in the financial services industry or the financial services industry generally, or concerns or rumors about any events of these kinds, have in the past and may in the future lead to market-wide liquidity problems. For example, on March 10, 2023, Silicon Valley Bank, or SVB, was closed by the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, which appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or the FDIC, as receiver.
Previous report
Although a statement by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, the Federal Reserve and the FDIC stated that all depositors of SVB would have access to all of their money after only one business day following the date of closure, uncertainty and liquidity concerns in the broader financial services industry remain. Inflation and rapid increases in interest rates have led to a decline in the trading value of previously issued government securities with interest rates below current market interest rates. The U.S. Department of Treasury, FDIC and Federal Reserve Board have announced a program to provide up to $25 billion of loans to financial institutions secured by such government securities held by financial institutions to mitigate the risk of potential losses on the sale of such instruments. However, widespread demands for customer withdrawals or other needs of financial institutions for immediate liquidity may exceed the capacity of such program. There is no guarantee that the U.S. Department of Treasury, FDIC and Federal Reserve Board will provide access to uninsured funds in the future in the event of the closure of other banks or financial institutions in a timely fashion or at all.
Previous report
Our access to our cash and cash equivalents in amounts adequate to finance our operations could be significantly impaired by the financial institutions with which we have arrangements directly facing liquidity constraints or failures. In addition, investor concerns regarding the U.S. or international financial systems could result in less favorable commercial financing terms, including higher interest rates or costs and tighter financial and operating covenants, or systemic limitations on access to credit and liquidity sources, thereby making it more difficult for us to acquire financing on acceptable terms or at all. Any material decline in available funding or our ability to access our cash and cash equivalents could adversely impact our ability to meet our operating expenses, result in breaches of our contractual obligations or result in violations of federal or state wage and hour laws, any of which could have material adverse impacts on our operations and liquidity.
Previous report
Marketing authorizations in the United Kingdom are governed by the Human Medicines Regulations (SI 2012/1916), as amended. Since January 1, 2021, an applicant for the EU centralized procedure marketing authorization can no longer be established in the United Kingdom. As a result, since this date, companies established in the United Kingdom cannot use the EU centralized procedure and instead must follow one of the United Kingdom national authorization procedures or one of the remaining post-Brexit international cooperation procedures to obtain a marketing authorization to market products in the United Kingdom. All existing EU marketing authorizations for centrally authorized products were automatically converted or grandfathered into United Kingdom marketing authorization, effective in Great Britain only, free of charge on January 1, 2021, unless the marketing authorization holder opted-out of this possibility. Northern Ireland currently remains within the scope of EU authorizations in relation to centrally authorized medicinal products. Accordingly, until the Windsor Framework is implemented in Northern Ireland on January 1, 2025, products falling within the scope of the EU centralized procedure can only be authorized through United Kingdom national authorization procedures in Great Britain.
Previous report
In light of the entry into application of the CTR on January 31, 2022, we may be required to transition clinical trials for which we have obtained regulatory approvals in accordance with the CTD to the regulatory framework of the CTR. Transition of clinical trials governed by the CTD to the CTR will be required for clinical trials which will have at least one site active in the E.U. on January 30, 2025. A transitioning application would need to be submitted to the competent authorities of E.U. Member States through the Clinical Trials Information Systems and related regulatory approval obtained to continue the clinical trial past January 30, 2025. This would require financial, technical and human resources. If we are unable to transition our clinical trials in time, the conduct of those clinical trials may be negatively impacted.
Previous report
It is currently unclear to what extent the UK will seek to align its regulations with the EU in the future. The UK regulatory framework in relation to clinical trials is derived from existing EU legislation (as implemented into UK law, through secondary legislation). On January 17, 2022, the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, or MHRA, launched an eight-week consultation on reframing the UK legislation for clinical trials. The UK Government published its response to the consultation on March 21, 2023 confirming that it would bring forward changes to the legislation. These resulting legislative amendments will determine how closely the UK regulations will align with the CTR. Failure of the UK to closely align its regulations with the EU may have an effect on the cost of conducting clinical trials in the UK as opposed to other countries and/or make it harder to seek a marketing authorization for our product candidates on the basis of clinical trials conducted in the United Kingdom.
Previous report
These exclusive forum provisions may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or other employees, which may discourage lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and other employees. If a court were to find either exclusive-forum provision in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur further significant additional costs associated with resolving the dispute in other jurisdictions, all of which could seriously harm our business.
Previous report
Our employees and personnel use generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies to perform their work, and the disclosure and use of personal data in generative AI technologies is subject to various privacy laws and other privacy obligations. Governments have passed and are likely to pass additional laws regulating generative AI. Our use of this technology could result in additional compliance costs, regulatory investigations and actions, and lawsuits. If we are unable to use generative AI, it could make our business less efficient and result in competitive disadvantages.
Previous report
Applicable data privacy and security laws and Data Protection Obligations may require us to notify relevant stakeholders of Security Breaches, including affected individuals, regulators and credit reporting agencies. Such disclosures are costly, and the disclosures or the failure to comply with such requirements, could lead to material adverse impacts, including without limitation, negative publicity, a loss of confidence in our security measures or breach of contract claims. There can be no assurance that our contracts contain a limitation of liability or that the limitations of liability in our contracts would be enforceable or adequate or would otherwise protect us from liabilities or damages if we fail to comply with applicable data privacy and security laws or Data Protection Obligations related to information security or Security Breaches.
Previous report
We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and the rules and regulations of The Nasdaq Stock Market. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting.
Previous report
We must perform system and process evaluation and testing of our internal control over financial reporting to allow management to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting in this report and future annual reports on Form 10-K, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. This requires that we incur substantial additional professional fees and internal costs to expand our accounting and finance functions and that we expend significant management efforts. Prior to the year ended December 31, 2021, we have never been required to test our internal controls within a specified period, and, as a result, we may experience difficulty in meeting these reporting requirements in a timely manner.
Previous report
If we are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, or if we are unable to maintain proper and effective internal controls, we may not be able to produce timely and accurate financial statements. If that were to happen, the market price of our stock could decline and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by The Nasdaq Stock Market, the SEC or other regulatory authorities.
Reworded paragraphs (71)
Previous wording
We are very early in our development efforts and all of our product candidates are in preclinical or clinical development. If we are unable to successfully develop, receive regulatory approval for and commercialize our product candidates for these or any other indications, or successfully develop any other product candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be harmed.
Current wording
All of our product candidates are in preclinical or clinical development. If we are unable to successfully develop, receive regulatory approval for and commercialize our product candidates for these or any other indications, or successfully develop any other product candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be harmed.
Previous wording
Since our inception, we have incurred significant net losses, and we expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating losses for the foreseeable future. Our net losses were $111.6 million and $166.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. As of December 31, 2023, we had an accumulated deficit of $513.0 million. We have financed our operations with $589.0 million in gross proceeds from equity financings, including from pre-IPO private placements of convertible preferred stock, our initial public offering, or the IPO, and subsequent sales of common stock in public and private securities offerings, from our previous loan agreement with Silicon Valley Bank and our current loan agreement with Trinity Capital and from the option agreement dated October 21, 2022, or the Option Agreement, with Audentes Therapeutics, Inc. (d/b/a Astellas Gene Therapy), or Astellas, and the securities purchase agreement dated October 21, 2022, or the Securities Purchase Agreement (and together with the Option Agreement, the Astellas Transactions), with Astellas. We have no products approved for commercialization and have never generated any revenue from product sales.
Current wording
Since our inception, we have incurred significant net losses, and we expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating losses for the foreseeable future. Our net losses were $89.3 million and $111.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. As of December 31, 2024, we had an accumulated deficit of $602.3 million. We have financed our operations with $671.0 million in gross proceeds from equity financings, including from pre-IPO private placements of convertible preferred stock, our initial public offering, or the IPO, and subsequent sales of common stock in public and private securities offerings, from our previous loan agreement with Silicon Valley Bank and our current loan agreement with Trinity Capital and from the option agreement dated October 21, 2022, or the Option Agreement, with Audentes Therapeutics, Inc. (d/b/a Astellas Gene Therapy), or Astellas, and the securities purchase agreement dated October 21, 2022, or the Securities Purchase Agreement (and together with the Option Agreement, the Astellas Transactions), with Astellas. We have no products approved for commercialization and have never generated any revenue from product sales.
Previous wording
As of December 31, 2023, we had cash and cash equivalents of $143.9 million. We believe that our existing cash and cash equivalents will be sufficient to fund our operating expenses and capital requirements into 2026. This estimate is based on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our available capital resources sooner than we expect. Changes may occur beyond our control that would cause us to consume our available capital before that time, including changes in and progress of our development activities, acquisitions of additional product candidates, and changes in regulation. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:
Current wording
As of December 31, 2024, we had cash and cash equivalents of $139.0 million. We believe that our existing cash and cash equivalents will be sufficient to fund our operating expenses and capital requirements into the fourth quarter of 2026. This estimate is based on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our available capital resources sooner than we expect. Changes may occur beyond our control that would cause us to consume our available capital before that time, including changes in and progress of our development activities, acquisitions of additional product candidates, and changes in regulation. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:
Previous wording
We will require additional capital to achieve our business objectives, including to conduct our ongoing and planned clinical trials of our product candidates. Additional funds may not be available on a timely basis, on favorable terms, or at all, and such funds, if raised, may not be sufficient to enable us to continue to implement our long-term business strategy. Further, our ability to raise additional capital may be adversely impacted by potential worsening global economic conditions, including decades-high inflation and concerns of a recession in the United States or other major markets, and the recent disruptions to and volatility in the credit and financial markets in the United States and worldwide, including from the COVID-19 pandemic. Weakness and volatility in the capital markets and the economy in general could also increase our costs of borrowing. If we are unable to raise sufficient additional capital, we could be forced to curtail our planned operations and the pursuit of our growth strategy.
Current wording
We will require additional capital to achieve our business objectives, including to conduct our ongoing and planned clinical trials of our product candidates. Additional funds may not be available on a timely basis, on favorable terms, or at all, and such funds, if raised, may not be sufficient to enable us to continue to implement our long-term business strategy. Further, our ability to raise additional capital may be adversely impacted by potential worsening global economic conditions, including fluctuations in inflation rates and concerns of a recession in the United States or other major markets, potential tariffs and disruptions to and volatility in the credit and financial markets in the United States and worldwide. Weakness and volatility in the capital markets and the economy in general could also increase our costs of borrowing. If we are unable to raise sufficient additional capital, we could be forced to curtail our planned operations and the pursuit of our growth strategy.
Previous wording
Our existing indebtedness contains restrictions that potentially limit our flexibility in operating our business. In addition, we may be required to make a prepayment or repay our outstanding indebtedness earlier than we expect, or we may be unable to draw down the remaining tranches under our Term Loan Agreement if we are unable to satisfy certain conditions.
Current wording
Our existing indebtedness contains restrictions that potentially limit our flexibility in operating our business. In addition, we may be required to make a prepayment or repay our outstanding indebtedness earlier than we expect under our Trinity Term Loan Agreement if we are unable to satisfy certain conditions.
Previous wording
A breach of any of these covenants could result in an event of default under the Trinity Term Loan Agreement. An event of default will also occur if, among other things, a material adverse change in our business, operations, or condition occurs, which could potentially include a material impairment of the prospect of our repayment of any portion of the amounts we owe under the Term Loan Agreement. In the case of a continuing event of default under the Trinity Term Loan Agreement, the Trinity Lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding to be immediately due and payable, proceed against the collateral in which we granted the Trinity
Current wording
A breach of any of these covenants could result in an event of default under the Trinity Term Loan Agreement. An event of default will also occur if, among other things, a material adverse change in our business, operations, or condition occurs, which could potentially include a material impairment of the prospect of our repayment of any portion of the amounts we owe under the Trinity Term Loan Agreement. In the case of a continuing event of default under the Trinity Term Loan Agreement, the Trinity Lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding to be immediately due and payable, proceed against the collateral in which we granted the
Previous wording
Lenders a security interest under the Term Loan Agreement, or otherwise exercise the rights of a secured creditor. Amounts outstanding under the Trinity Term Loan Agreement are secured by all of our existing and future assets, including intellectual property.
Current wording
Trinity Lenders a security interest under the Trinity Term Loan Agreement, or otherwise exercise the rights of a secured creditor. Amounts outstanding under the Trinity Term Loan Agreement are secured by all of our existing and future assets, including intellectual property.
Previous wording
Our results of operations could be adversely affected by general conditions in the global economy. Unfavorable conditions in the economy both in the United States and abroad, including conditions resulting from changes in gross domestic product growth in the United States or abroad, financial and credit market fluctuations, inflation, rising interest rates, international trade relations, political turmoil, natural catastrophes, outbreaks of contagious diseases, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, warfare and terrorist attacks on the United States, Europe, the Asia Pacific region or elsewhere, such as the conflict in the Middle East, could cause a decrease in business investments, disrupt the timing and cadence of key industry events, and negatively affect the growth of our business and our results of operations. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic adversely affected workforces, economies and financial markets globally, leading to a reduction in the ability of, or the inability of, partners, suppliers, vendors or other parties to meet their contractual obligations, and for a period of time, a reduction in customer spending on technology, and such conditions may reoccur in the future. The war in Ukraine and the related political and economic responses imposed on Russia such as sanctions, may also exacerbate these issues and trends especially in Europe. A severe or prolonged economic downturn could result in a variety of risks to our business, including weakened demand for our product candidates and our ability to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. A weak or declining economy could also strain our suppliers, possibly resulting in supply disruption, or cause delays in payments for our services by third-party payors or our collaborators. Any of the foregoing could harm our business and we cannot anticipate all of the ways in which the current economic climate and financial market conditions could adversely impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Current wording
Our results of operations could be adversely affected by general conditions in the global economy. Unfavorable conditions in the economy both in the United States and abroad, including conditions resulting from changes in gross domestic product growth in the United States or abroad, financial and credit market fluctuations, inflation, fluctuating interest rates, potential tariffs and other concerns regarding international trade relations, political turmoil, natural catastrophes, outbreaks of contagious diseases, warfare and terrorist attacks on the United States, Europe, the Asia Pacific region or elsewhere, such as the conflict in the Middle East, could cause a decrease in business investments, disrupt the timing and cadence of key industry events, and negatively affect the growth of our business and our results of operations. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic adversely affected workforces, economies and financial markets globally, leading to a reduction in the ability of, or the inability of, partners, suppliers, vendors or other parties to meet their contractual obligations, and for a period of time, a reduction in customer spending on technology, and such conditions may reoccur in the future. The war in Ukraine and the related political and economic responses imposed on Russia such as sanctions, may also exacerbate these issues and trends especially in Europe. A severe or prolonged economic downturn could result in a variety of risks to our business, including weakened demand for our product candidates and our ability to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. A weak or declining economy could also strain our suppliers, possibly resulting in supply disruption, or cause delays in payments for our services by third-party payors or our collaborators. Any of the foregoing could harm our business and we cannot anticipate all of the ways in which the current economic climate and financial market conditions could adversely impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Previous wording
We are currently focused on the potential development of our lead product candidate, TSHA-102. We are still developing TSHA-102 and it cannot be marketed or sold in the United States or in foreign markets until regulatory approval has been obtained from the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory agencies. The process of obtaining regulatory approval is expensive and time consuming. The FDA and foreign regulatory authorities may never approve TSHA-102 for sale and marketing, and even if TSHA-102 is ultimately approved, regulatory approval may be delayed or limited in the United States or in other jurisdictions. Even if we are authorized to sell and market TSHA-102 in one or more markets, there is no assurance that we will be able to successfully market TSHA-102 or that TSHA-102 will achieve market acceptance sufficient to generate profits. If we are unable to successfully develop and commercialize TSHA-102 due to failure to obtain regulatory approval for TSHA-102, to successfully market TSHA-102, to generate profits from the sale of TSHA-102, or due to other risk factors outlined in this report, it would have material adverse effects on our business, financial condition, and results of operations as TSHA-102 is currently our sole product candidate.
Current wording
We are currently focused on the potential development of our lead product candidate, TSHA-102. We are still developing TSHA-102 and it cannot be marketed or sold in the United States or in foreign markets until regulatory approval has been obtained from the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory agencies. The process of obtaining regulatory approval is expensive and time consuming. The FDA and foreign regulatory authorities may never approve TSHA-102 for sale and marketing, and even if TSHA-102 is ultimately approved, regulatory approval may be delayed or limited in the United States or in other jurisdictions. Even if we are authorized to sell and market TSHA-102 in one or more markets, there is no assurance that we will be able to successfully market
Previous wording
We are very early in our development efforts and all of our product candidates are in clinical or preclinical development. If we are unable to successfully develop, receive regulatory approval for and commercialize our product candidates for these or any other indications, or successfully develop any other product candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be harmed.
Current wording
All of our product candidates are in clinical or preclinical development. If we are unable to successfully develop, receive regulatory approval for and commercialize our product candidates for these or any other indications, or successfully develop any other product candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be harmed.
Previous wording
We are very early in our development efforts and all of our product candidates are still in clinical or preclinical development. Each of our programs and product candidates will require additional preclinical and/or clinical development, regulatory approval, obtaining manufacturing supply, capacity and expertise, building a commercial organization or successfully outsourcing commercialization, substantial investment and significant marketing efforts before we generate any revenue from product sales. We do not have any products that are approved for commercial sale, and we may never be able to develop or commercialize marketable products.
Current wording
All of our product candidates are still in clinical or preclinical development. Each of our programs and product candidates will require additional preclinical and/or clinical development, regulatory approval, obtaining manufacturing supply, capacity and expertise, building a commercial organization or successfully outsourcing commercialization, substantial investment and significant marketing efforts before we generate any revenue from product sales. We do not have any products that are approved for commercial sale, and we may never be able to develop or commercialize marketable products.
Previous wording
Our strategy is to identify, develop and commercialize gene therapy product candidates using an AAV9 capsid for intrathecal delivery of therapeutic transgenes to certain kinds of cells. Our future success depends on the successful development of these novel therapeutic approaches. To date, very few products that utilize gene transfer have been approved in the United States, the EU or other European countries and no gene therapy products that utilize an intrathecal method of administration have been approved. There have been a limited number of clinical trials of gene transduction technologies, with only two product candidates ever approved by the FDA.
Current wording
Our strategy is to identify, develop and commercialize gene therapy product candidates using an AAV9 capsid for intrathecal delivery of therapeutic transgenes to certain kinds of cells. Our future success depends on the successful development of these novel therapeutic approaches. To date, very few products that utilize gene transfer have been approved in the United States, the European Union or other European countries and no gene transfer therapy products that utilize an intrathecal method of administration have been approved. There have been a limited number of clinical trials of gene transduction technologies.
Previous wording
Adverse developments in preclinical studies or clinical trials conducted by others in the field of gene therapy and gene regulation products may cause the FDA, the EU, and other regulatory authorities to revise the requirements for approval of any product candidates we may develop or limit the use of products utilizing gene regulation technologies, either of which could harm our business. In addition, the clinical trial requirements of the FDA, the EU, national competent authorities of EU Member States and other regulatory authorities and the criteria these regulators use to determine the safety and efficacy of a product candidate vary substantially according to the type, complexity, novelty, and intended use and market of the potential products. The regulatory approval process for product candidates such as ours can be more expensive and take longer than for other, better known, or more extensively studied pharmaceutical or other product candidates. Further, as we are developing novel potential treatments for diseases in which, in some cases, there is little clinical experience with potential new endpoints and methodologies, there is heightened risk that the FDA, the EMA or the European Commission or other regulatory authorities may not consider the clinical trial endpoints to provide clinically meaningful results, and the resulting clinical data and results may be more difficult to analyze. In addition, we may not be able to identify or develop appropriate animal disease models to enable or support planned clinical development. Any natural history studies that we may conduct or rely upon in our clinical development may not be accepted by the FDA, EMA or the European Commission or other regulatory authorities. Regulatory authorities administering existing or future regulations or legislation may not allow production and marketing of products utilizing gene regulation technology in a timely manner or under technically or commercially feasible conditions. In addition, regulatory action or private litigation could result in expenses, delays, or other impediments to our research programs or the commercialization of resulting products. Further, approvals by one regulatory authority may not be indicative of what other regulatory authorities may require for approval.
Current wording
Adverse developments in preclinical studies or clinical trials conducted by others in the field of gene therapy and gene regulation products may cause the FDA, the European Union, and other regulatory authorities to revise the requirements for approval of any product candidates we may develop or limit the use of products utilizing gene regulation technologies, either of which could harm our business. In addition, the clinical trial requirements of the FDA, the European Union, national competent authorities of EU Member States and other regulatory authorities and the criteria these regulators use to determine the safety and efficacy of a product candidate vary substantially according to the type, complexity, novelty, and intended use and market of the potential products. The regulatory approval process for product candidates such as ours can be more expensive and take longer than for other, better known, or more extensively studied pharmaceutical or other product candidates. Further, as we are developing novel potential treatments for diseases in which, in some cases, there is little clinical experience with potential new endpoints and methodologies, there is heightened risk that the FDA, the EMA or the European Commission or other regulatory authorities may not consider the clinical trial endpoints to provide clinically meaningful results, and the resulting clinical data and results may be more difficult to analyze. In addition, we may not be able to identify or develop appropriate animal disease models to enable or support planned clinical development. Any natural history studies that we may conduct or rely upon in our clinical development may not be accepted by the FDA, EMA or the European Commission or other regulatory authorities. Regulatory authorities administering existing or future regulations or legislation may not allow production and marketing of products utilizing gene regulation technology in a timely manner or under technically or commercially feasible conditions. In addition, regulatory action or private litigation could result in expenses, delays, or other impediments to our research programs or the commercialization of resulting products. Further, approvals by one regulatory authority may not be indicative of what other regulatory authorities may require for approval.
Previous wording
In addition, even if such trials are successfully completed, we cannot guarantee that the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities will interpret the results as we do, and more trials could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval. This is particularly true for clinical trials in very rare diseases, such as with TSHA-102 for the treatment of Rett syndrome, where the very small patient population makes it difficult or impossible to conduct two traditional, adequate and well-controlled studies, and therefore the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities are required to exercise flexibility in approving therapies for such diseases. For example, in January 2023, we reported feedback from the Type B end-of-Phase 2 meeting with the FDA following receipt of the formal meeting minutes. The FDA provided additional clarity for TSHA-120 where MFM32 was acknowledged as an acceptable endpoint with a recommendation to dose additional patients in a double-blind, placebo-controlled design to support a BLA. The FDA acknowledged that our overall approach to manufacturing of commercial material was appropriate pending their review of our CMC module 3 amendment submitted for TSHA-120. Moreover, results acceptable to support approval in one jurisdiction may be deemed inadequate by another regulatory authority to support regulatory approval in that other jurisdiction. To the extent that the results of the trials are not satisfactory to the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities for support of a marketing application, we may be required to expend significant resources, which may not be available to us, to conduct additional trials in support of potential approval of our product candidates.
Current wording
In addition, even if such trials are successfully completed, we cannot guarantee that the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities will interpret the results as we do, and more trials could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval. This is particularly true for clinical trials in very rare diseases, such as with TSHA-102 for the treatment of Rett syndrome, where the very small patient population makes it difficult or impossible to conduct two traditional, adequate and well-controlled studies, and therefore the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities are required to exercise flexibility in approving therapies for such diseases. Moreover, results acceptable to support approval in one jurisdiction may be deemed inadequate by another regulatory authority to support regulatory approval in that other jurisdiction. To the extent that the results of the trials are not satisfactory to the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities for support of a marketing application, we may be required to expend significant resources, which may not be available to us, to conduct additional trials in support of potential approval of our product candidates.
Previous wording
Success in preclinical testing and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will generate the same results or otherwise provide adequate data to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of a product candidate. Preclinical tests and Phase 1 and Phase 2 clinical trials are primarily designed to test safety, to study pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics and to understand the side effects of product candidates at various doses and schedules. Success in preclinical or animal studies and early clinical trials does not ensure that later large-scale efficacy trials will be successful nor does it predict final results. For example, we may be unable to identify suitable animal disease models for our product candidates, which could delay or frustrate our ability to proceed into clinical trials or obtain marketing approval. Our product candidates may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy in clinical development despite positive results in preclinical studies or having successfully advanced through initial clinical trials. Our Phase 1/2 clinical trials of TSHA-102 will involve small patient populations. Because of the small sample sizes, the results of these trials may not be indicative of results of future clinical trials. Further, although other gene therapy clinical trials conducted by others also utilized AAV9 vectors, these trials should not be relied upon as evidence that our planned clinical trials will succeed.
Current wording
Success in preclinical testing and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will generate the same results or otherwise provide adequate data to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of a product candidate. Preclinical tests and Phase 1 and Phase 2 clinical trials are primarily designed to test safety, to study pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics and to understand the side effects of product candidates at various doses and schedules. Success in preclinical or animal studies and early clinical trials does not ensure that later large-scale efficacy trials will be successful nor does it predict final results. For example, we may be unable to identify suitable animal disease models for our product candidates, which could delay or frustrate our ability to proceed into clinical trials or obtain marketing approval. Our product candidates may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy in clinical development despite positive results in preclinical studies or having successfully advanced through initial clinical trials. Our Phase 1/2 clinical trials of TSHA-102 involve small patient populations. Because of the small sample sizes, the results of these trials may not be indicative of results of future clinical trials. Further, although other gene therapy clinical trials conducted by others also utilized AAV9 vectors, these trials should not be relied upon as evidence that our planned clinical trials will succeed.
Previous wording
From time to time, we may publish interim top-line or preliminary results from our clinical trials. Interim results from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Preliminary or top-line results also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, interim and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. For example, we have announced initial clinical observations from the first patients treated in the Phase 1/2 REVEAL trial of TSHA-102. However, those observations may not endure or be repeated in subsequently dosed patients or any age or disease severity, including patients receiving higher doses of TSHA-102. Initial clinical observations also may not translate into success on primary endpoints of the REVEAL trial through week 52. Differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects and may cause the trading price of our common stock to fluctuate significantly.
Current wording
From time to time, we may publish interim top-line or preliminary results from our clinical trials. Interim results from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Preliminary or top-line results also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, interim and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. For example, in June 2024, we announced initial clinical data from the first two pediatric patients and interim clinical data from the first two adult patients treated in the Phase 1/2 REVEAL trials of TSHA-102. However, those observations may not endure or be repeated in subsequently dosed patients or any age or disease severity, including patients receiving higher doses of TSHA-102 in either the adolescent/adult or pediatric trial. Initial clinical observations also may not translate into success on primary endpoints of the REVEAL trial. Differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects and may cause the trading price of our common stock to fluctuate significantly.
Previous wording
Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive preclinical testing and clinical trials that our product candidates are safe, pure and effective for use in each target indication, and failures can occur at any stage of testing. Preclinical studies and clinical trials often fail to demonstrate safety or efficacy of the product candidate studied for the target indication. Further, the patients evaluated in our clinical trials are often seriously ill. For example, a patient in our clinical trial of TSHA-101 succumbed to pneumonia and pleural effusion with a concomitant hospital-acquired MRSA infection, which was deemed by the principal investigator and independent DSMB not to be drug related. Any side effects or patient deaths could affect the development of our product candidates, even if deemed to not be drug related. Among the risks in any gene therapy product based on viral vectors are the risks of immunogenicity, elevated liver enzymes and insertional oncogenesis, which is the process whereby the insertion of a functional gene near a gene that is important in cell growth or division results in uncontrolled cell division, which could potentially enhance the risk of malignant transformation.
Current wording
Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive preclinical testing and clinical trials that our product candidates are safe, pure and effective for use in each target indication, and failures can occur at any stage of testing. Preclinical studies and clinical trials often fail to demonstrate safety or efficacy of the product candidate studied for the target indication. Further, the patients evaluated in our clinical trials are often seriously ill. Any side effects or patient deaths could affect the development of our product candidates, even if deemed to not be drug related. Among the risks in any gene therapy product based on viral vectors are the risks of immunogenicity, elevated liver enzymes and insertional oncogenesis, which is the process whereby the insertion of a functional gene near a gene that is important in cell growth or division results in uncontrolled cell division, which could potentially enhance the risk of malignant transformation.
Previous wording
We will need to successfully complete our ongoing and planned clinical trials, including pivotal clinical trials, in order to obtain FDA and comparable foreign regulatory approval to market our product candidates. Carrying out later-stage clinical trials and the submission of a successful BLA and comparable foreign application is a complicated process. As an organization, we have initiated Phase 1/2 clinical trials, have not previously conducted any later stage or pivotal clinical trials, but have limited experience in preparing, submitting and prosecuting regulatory filings and have not previously submitted a BLA or comparable foreign application for any product candidate. In addition, we have had limited interactions with the FDA comparable foreign regulatory authorities and cannot be certain how many additional clinical trials of our product candidates will be required or how such trials should be designed. Consequently, we may be unable to successfully and efficiently execute and complete necessary clinical trials in a way that leads to BLA submission or comparable foreign application and approval of any product candidate. We may require more time and incur greater costs than our competitors and may not succeed in obtaining regulatory approvals of product candidates that we develop. Failure to commence or complete, or delays in, our planned clinical trials, could prevent us from or delay us in commercializing our product candidates.
Current wording
We will need to successfully complete our ongoing and planned clinical trials, including pivotal clinical trials, in order to obtain FDA and comparable foreign regulatory approval to market our product candidates. Carrying out later-stage clinical trials and the submission of a successful BLA and comparable foreign application is a complicated process. As an organization, we have initiated Phase 1/2 clinical trials, have not previously conducted any later stage or pivotal clinical trials, but have limited experience in preparing, submitting and prosecuting regulatory filings and have not previously submitted a BLA or comparable foreign application for any product candidate. In addition, we have had limited interactions with the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities and cannot be certain how many additional clinical trials of our product candidates will be required or how such trials should be designed. Consequently, we may be unable to successfully and efficiently execute and complete necessary clinical trials in a way that leads to BLA submission or comparable foreign application and approval of any product candidate. We may require more time and incur greater costs than our competitors and may not succeed in obtaining regulatory approvals of product candidates that we develop. Failure to commence or complete, or delays in, our planned clinical trials, could prevent us from or delay us in commercializing our product candidates.
Previous wording
In the EU, a medicinal product can be designated as an orphan medicinal product by the European Commission if its sponsor can establish that: (i) the product is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions; (ii) either (a) such conditions affect not more than 5 in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) the product without the benefits derived from orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the EU to justify the necessary investment in developing the medicinal product; and (iii) there exists no satisfactory authorized method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of the condition that has been authorized in the EU, or even if such method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by that condition.
Current wording
In the European Union, a medicinal product can be designated as an orphan medicinal product by the European Commission if its sponsor can establish that: (i) the product is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions; (ii) either (a) such conditions affect not more than 5 in 10,000 persons in the European Union when the application is made, or (b) the product without the benefits derived from orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the European Union to justify the necessary investment in developing the medicinal product; and (iii) there exists no satisfactory authorized method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of the condition that has been authorized in the European Union, or even if such method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by that condition.
Previous wording
Orphan medicinal product designation entitles an applicant to incentives such fee reductions or fee waivers, protocol assistance, and access to the centralized marketing authorization procedure. Upon grant of a marketing authorization, orphan medicinal products are entitled to a ten-year period of market exclusivity for the approved therapeutic indication, which means that the EMA cannot accept another marketing authorization application or accept an application to extend for a similar product and the European Commission cannot grant a marketing authorization for the same indication for a period of ten years. The period of market exclusivity is extended by two years for orphan medicinal products that have also complied with an agreed PIP. The period of market exclusivity may, however, be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the product no longer meets the criteria on the basis of which it received orphan medicinal product destination, including where it can be demonstrated on the basis of available evidence that the original orphan medicinal product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity or where the prevalence of the condition has increased above the threshold. Additionally, an MA may be granted to a similar medicinal product with the same orphan indication during the 10 year period if: (i) if the applicant consents to a second original orphan medicinal product application, (ii) if the manufacturer of the original orphan medicinal product is unable to supply sufficient quantities; or (iii) if the second applicant can establish that its product, although similar, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior to the original orphan medicinal product. A company may voluntarily remove a product from the register of orphan products. Orphan medicinal product designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process. We have obtained orphan drug designation from the FDA for TSHA-120 for the treatment of GAN, TSHA-102 for the treatment of Rett syndrome, and TSHA-105 for the treatment of SLC13A5 deficiency. In addition, TSHA-118 has received orphan drug designation for the treatment of CLN1 disease from the FDA and EMA.
Current wording
Orphan medicinal product designation entitles an applicant to incentives such as fee reductions or fee waivers, protocol assistance, and access to the centralized marketing authorization procedure. Upon grant of a marketing authorization, orphan medicinal products are entitled to a ten-year period of market exclusivity for the approved therapeutic indication, which means that the EMA cannot accept another marketing authorization application or accept an application to extend for a similar product and the European Commission cannot grant a marketing authorization for the same indication for a period of ten years. The period of market exclusivity is extended by two years for orphan medicinal products that have also complied with an agreed PIP. The period of market exclusivity may, however, be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the product no longer meets the criteria on the basis of which it received orphan medicinal product destination, including where it can be demonstrated on the basis of available evidence that the original orphan medicinal product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity or where the prevalence of the condition has increased above the threshold. Additionally, an MA may be granted to a similar medicinal product with the same orphan indication during the 10 year period if: (i) if the applicant consents to a second original orphan medicinal product application, (ii) if the manufacturer of the original orphan medicinal product is unable to supply sufficient quantities; or (iii) if the second applicant can establish that its product, although similar, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior to the original orphan medicinal product. A company may voluntarily remove a product from the register of orphan products. Orphan medicinal product designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process. We have obtained orphan drug designation from the FDA for TSHA-102 for the treatment of Rett syndrome and TSHA-105 for the treatment of SLC13A5 deficiency. In addition, TSHA-118 has received orphan drug designation for the treatment of CLN1 disease from the FDA and EMA.
Previous wording
We have received rare pediatric disease designation for TSHA-102 for the treatment of Rett syndrome. However, a marketing application for TSHA-102, if approved, may not meet the eligibility criteria for a PRV or the rare pediatric disease designation program may sunset before FDA is able consider us for a voucher.
Current wording
We have received rare pediatric disease designation for TSHA-102 for the treatment of Rett syndrome. However, a marketing application for TSHA-102, if approved, may not meet the eligibility criteria for a PRV or the rare pediatric disease designation program may sunset before FDA is able to consider us for a voucher.
Previous wording
The authority for the FDA to award rare pediatric disease PRVs for drugs that have received rare pediatric disease designation prior to September 30, 2024 currently expires on September 30, 2026. Absent any extension through federal legislation, if the BLA for TSHA-102 is not approved prior to September 30, 2026 for any reason, regardless of whether it meets the criteria for a rare pediatric disease PRV, it will not be eligible for a PRV.
Current wording
The authority for the FDA to award rare pediatric disease PRVs for drugs that have received rare pediatric disease designation currently expires on September 30, 2026. Absent any extension through federal legislation, if the BLA for TSHA-102 is not approved prior to September 30, 2026 for any reason, regardless of whether it meets the criteria for a rare pediatric disease PRV, it will not be eligible for a PRVs.
Previous wording
We are currently conducting our Phase 1/2 adolescent and adult trial of TSHA-102 in Canada and plan to conduct in the future additional clinical trials for our product candidates outside the United States, and the FDA and similar foreign regulatory authorities may not accept data from such trials.
Current wording
We are currently conducting our Phase 1/2 adolescent and adult trial of TSHA-102 in Canada and our Phase 1/2 pediatric trial of TSHA-102 in the United Kingdom and Canada and plan to conduct in the future additional clinical trials for our product candidates outside the United States, and the FDA and similar foreign regulatory authorities may not accept data from such trials.
Previous wording
We are conducting our Phase adolescent and adult 1/2 clinical trial of TSHA-102 in Canada and may in the future choose to conduct additional clinical trials outside the United States, including in the United Kingdom, European Union or other foreign jurisdictions. The acceptance of trial data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States by the FDA may be subject to certain conditions. In cases where data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States are intended to serve as the sole basis for marketing approval in the United States, the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (i) the data are applicable to the United States population and United States medical practice; (ii) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and (iii) the data may be considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA or, if the FDA considers such an inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. Additionally, the FDA’s clinical trial requirements, including sufficient size of patient populations and statistical powering, must be met. Many foreign regulatory bodies have similar approval requirements. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any similar foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States or the applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA or any similar foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay aspects of our business plan, and which may result in our product candidates not receiving approval or clearance for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.
Current wording
We are conducting our Phase 1/2 adolescent and adult clinical trial of TSHA-102 in Canada and our Phase 1/2 pediatric clinical trial of TSHA-102 in the United Kingdom and Canada and may in the future choose to conduct additional clinical trials outside the United States, including in the United Kingdom, European Union or other foreign jurisdictions. The acceptance of trial data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States by the FDA may be subject to certain conditions. In cases where data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States are intended to serve as the sole basis for marketing approval in the United States, the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (i) the data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice; (ii) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and (iii) the data may be considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA or, if the FDA considers such an inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. Additionally, the FDA’s clinical trial requirements, including sufficient size of patient populations and statistical powering, must be met. Many foreign regulatory bodies have similar approval requirements. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any similar foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States or the applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA or any similar foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay aspects of our business plan, and which may result in our product candidates not receiving approval or clearance for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.
Previous wording
The United Kingdom’s, withdrawal from the EU on January 31, 2020, commonly referred to as Brexit, has changed the regulatory relationship between the United Kingdom and the EU. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, or MHRA, is now the United Kingdom’s standalone regulator for medicinal products and medical devices. Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales) is now a third country to the EU. Northern Ireland will, with regard to EU regulations, continue to follow the EU regulatory rules for now.
Current wording
The United Kingdom’s, withdrawal from the European Union on January 31, 2020, commonly referred to as Brexit, has changed the regulatory relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, or MHRA, is now the United Kingdom’s standalone regulator for medicinal products and medical devices. Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales) is now a third country to the European Union. Northern Ireland will, with regard to EU regulations, continue to follow the EU regulatory rules for now.
Previous wording
The United Kingdom regulatory framework in relation to clinical trials is governed by the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations 2004, as amended, which isderived from the CTD, as implemented into the United Kingdom national law through secondary legislation. On January 17, 2022, the MHRA launched an eight-week consultation on reframing the United Kingdom legislation for clinical trials, and which aimed to streamline clinical trials approvals, enable innovation, enhance clinical trials transparency, enable greater risk proportionality, and promote patient and public involvement in clinical trials. The United Kingdom Government published its response to the consultation on March 21, 2023 confirming that it would bring forward changes to the legislation. These resulting legislative amendments will determine how closely the United Kingdom regulations will align with the CTR. In October 2023, the MHRA announced a new Notification Scheme for clinical trials which enables a more streamlined and risk-proportionate approach to initial clinical trial applications for Phase 4 and low-risk Phase 3 clinical trial applications.
Current wording
The UK regulatory framework in relation to clinical trials is governed by the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations 2004, as amended, which isderived from the CTD, as implemented into the UK national law through secondary legislation. On January 17, 2022, the MHRA launched an eight-week consultation on reframing the UK legislation for clinical trials. The UK Government published its response to the consultation on March 21, 2023 confirming that it would bring forward changes to the legislation. These resulting legislative amendments will, if implemented in their current form, bring the UK into closer alignment with the CTR. In October 2023, the MHRA announced a new Notification Scheme for clinical trials which enables a more streamlined and risk-proportionate approach to initial clinical trial applications for Phase 4 and low-risk Phase 3 clinical trial applications.
Previous wording
The MHRA has also introduced changes to national marketing authorization procedures. This includes introduction of procedures to prioritize access to new medicines that will benefit patients, including a 150-day assessment route, a rolling review procedure and the International Recognition Procedure. Since January 1, 2024, the MHRA may rely on the International Recognition Procedure, or IRP, when reviewing certain types of marketing authorization applications. This procedure is available for applicants for marketing authorization who have already received an authorization for the same product from a reference regulator. These include the FDA, the EMA, and national competent authorities of individual EEA countries. A positive opinion from the EMA and CHMP, or a positive end of procedure outcome from the mutual recognition or decentralized procedures are considered to be authorizations for the purposes of the IRP.
Current wording
The MHRA has also introduced changes to national marketing authorization procedures. This includes introduction of procedures to prioritize access to new medicines that will benefit patients, including a 150-day assessment route, a rolling review procedure and the International Recognition Procedure. Since January 1, 2024, the MHRA may rely on the International Recognition Procedure, or IRP, when reviewing certain types of marketing authorization applications. This procedure is available for applicants for marketing authorization who have already received an authorization for the same product from a reference regulator. These include the FDA, the EMA, and national competent authorities of individual European Economic Area, or EEA, countries. A positive opinion from the EMA and CHMP, or a positive end of procedure outcome from the mutual recognition or decentralized procedures are considered to be authorizations for the purposes of the IRP.
Previous wording
There is no pre-marketing authorization orphan designation for medicinal products in the United Kingdom. Instead, the MHRA reviews applications for orphan designation in parallel to the corresponding marketing authorization application. The criteria are essentially the same as those in the EU, but have been tailored for the market. This includes the criterion that prevalence of the condition in Great Britain, rather than the EU, must not be more than five in 10,000. Upon the grant of a marketing authorization with orphan status, the medicinal product will benefit from up to 10 years of market exclusivity from similar products in the approved orphan indication. The start of this market exclusivity period will be set from the date of first approval of the product in Great Britain.
Current wording
There is no pre-marketing authorization orphan designation for medicinal products in the United Kingdom. Instead, the MHRA reviews applications for orphan designation in parallel to the corresponding marketing authorization application. The criteria are essentially the same as those in the European Union, but have been tailored for the market. This includes the criterion that prevalence of the condition in the United Kingdom, rather than the European Union, must not be more than five in 10,000. Upon the grant of a marketing authorization with orphan status, the medicinal product will benefit from up to 10 years of market exclusivity from similar products in the approved orphan indication. The start of this market exclusivity period will be set from the date of first approval of the product in the United Kingdom.
Previous wording
We currently rely on third party contract manufacturing organizations, or CMOs, including Catalent, to manufacture our product candidates. We expect to rely on third party manufacturing organizations for our manufacturing needs for the foreseeable future. To date, our manufacturing partners have met our manufacturing requirements and quality standards for our program materials, and we expect that these organizations, primarily Catalent, will be capable of providing sufficient quantities of our program materials to meet anticipated clinical trial scale demands. While we believe that there are alternate sources of supply for our program materials that can satisfy our clinical and commercial requirements, identifying and establishing relationships with such sources, if necessary, would result in delays and additional costs, both of which could be significant.
Current wording
We currently rely on third-party contract manufacturing organizations, or CMOs, including Catalent, to manufacture our product candidates. We expect to rely on CMOs for our manufacturing needs for the foreseeable future. To date, our manufacturing partners have met our manufacturing requirements and quality standards for our program materials, and we expect that these organizations, primarily Catalent, will be capable of providing sufficient quantities of our program materials to meet anticipated clinical trial scale demands. While we believe that there are alternative sources of supply for our program materials that can satisfy our clinical and commercial requirements, identifying and establishing relationships with such sources, if necessary, would result in delays and additional costs, both of which could be significant.
Previous wording
The manufacturers of pharmaceutical products must comply with strictly enforced cGMP requirements, state and federal regulations, as well as foreign requirements when applicable. Any failure of us or our CMOs to adhere to or document compliance to such regulatory requirements could lead to a delay or interruption in the availability of our program materials for clinical trials or enforcement action from the FDA, competent authorities of EU Member States or foreign regulatory authorities. If we or our manufacturers were to fail to comply with the FDA, EU or other regulatory authority requirements, it could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including clinical holds, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension, variation or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of product candidates or products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our product candidates. Our potential future dependence upon others for the manufacture of our product candidates may also adversely affect our future profit margins and our ability to commercialize any product candidates that receive regulatory approval on a timely and competitive basis.
Current wording
The manufacturers of pharmaceutical products must comply with strictly enforced cGMP requirements, state and federal regulations, as well as foreign requirements when applicable. Any failure of us or our CMOs to adhere to or document compliance to such regulatory requirements could lead to a delay or interruption in the availability of our program materials for clinical trials or enforcement action from the FDA, competent authorities of EU Member States or foreign regulatory authorities. If we or our manufacturers were to fail to comply with the FDA, European Union or other regulatory authority requirements, it could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including clinical holds, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension, variation or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of product candidates or products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our product candidates. Our potential future dependence upon others for the manufacture of our product candidates may also adversely affect our future profit margins and our ability to commercialize any product candidates that receive regulatory approval on a timely and competitive basis.
Previous wording
More restrictive government regulations or negative public opinion would have a negative effect on our business or financial condition and may delay or impair the development and commercialization of our product candidates or demand for any products once approved. For example, in 2003, trials using early versions of murine gamma-retroviral vectors, which integrate with, and thereby alter, the host cell’s DNA, have led to several well-publicized adverse events, including reported cases of leukemia. Although none of our current product candidates utilize murine gamma-retroviral vectors, our product candidates use AAV9 viral vectors. Among the risks in any gene therapy product based on viral vectors are the risks of immunogenicity, elevated liver enzymes, and insertional oncogenesis. If any of our vectors demonstrate a similar effect we may decide or be required to halt or delay further clinical development of any product candidates that utilize that vector. Adverse events in our or others’ clinical trials, even if not ultimately attributable to our product candidates, and the resulting publicity could result in increased governmental regulation, unfavorable public perception, potential regulatory delays in the testing or approval of our product candidates, stricter labeling requirements for those product candidates that are approved and a decrease in demand for any such product candidates. The risk of cancer remains a concern for gene therapy and we cannot assure that it will not occur in any of our planned or future clinical trials or in any clinical trials conducted by other companies. In addition, there is the potential risk of delayed adverse events following exposure to gene therapy products due to persistent biological activity of the genetic material or other components of products used to carry the genetic material. In addition, for our regulated gene replacement therapy candidates that require that the expression of a therapeutic transgene be tightly regulated, such as TSHA-102, we may inadvertently cause overexpression, which could lead to numerous issues, including safety and toxicity concerns. Furthermore, these regulatory gene replacement therapy candidates require the insertion of miRNA targets into the viral genome, which is a technology that to our knowledge is not present in any approved gene therapy products. If any such adverse events occur, commercialization of our product candidates or further advancement of our clinical trials could be halted or delayed, which would have a negative impact on our business and operations.
Current wording
More restrictive government regulations or negative public opinion would have a negative effect on our business or financial condition and may delay or impair the development and commercialization of our product candidates or demand for any products once approved. For example, in 2003, trials using early versions of murine gamma-retroviral vectors, which integrate with, and thereby alter, the host cell’s DNA, led to several well-publicized adverse events, including reported cases of leukemia. Although none of our current product candidates utilize murine gamma-retroviral vectors, our product candidates use AAV9 viral vectors. Among the risks in any gene therapy product based on viral vectors are the risks of immunogenicity, elevated liver enzymes, and insertional oncogenesis. If any of our vectors demonstrate a similar effect we may decide or be required to halt or delay further clinical development of any product candidates that utilize that vector. Adverse events in our or others’ clinical trials, even if not ultimately attributable to our product candidates, and the resulting publicity could result in increased governmental regulation, unfavorable public perception, potential regulatory delays in the testing or approval of our product candidates, stricter labeling requirements for those product candidates that are approved and a decrease in demand for any such product candidates. The risk of cancer remains a concern for gene therapy and we cannot assure that it will not occur in any of our planned or future clinical trials or in any clinical trials conducted by other companies. In addition, there is the potential risk of delayed adverse events following exposure to gene therapy products due to persistent biological activity of the genetic material or other components of products used to carry the genetic material. In addition, for our regulated gene replacement therapy candidates that require that the expression of a therapeutic transgene be tightly regulated, such as TSHA-102, we may inadvertently cause overexpression, which could lead to numerous issues, including safety and toxicity concerns. Furthermore, these regulatory gene replacement therapy candidates require the insertion of miRNA targets into the viral genome, which is a technology that to our knowledge is not present in any approved gene therapy products. If any such adverse events occur, commercialization of our product candidates or further advancement of our clinical trials could be halted or delayed, which would have a negative impact on our business and operations.
Previous wording
Trofinetide was approved by the FDA in March 2023 for the treatment of Rett Syndrome. We are aware that our competitors are developing product candidates for the treatment of diseases that our product candidates will target. With respect to TSHA-102, we are aware that Neurogene has a clinical stage gene therapy program for the treatment of Rett syndrome. We are also aware that Alcyone Therapeutics, the Rett Syndrome Research Trust, Amicus Therapeutics, Shape Therapeutics and Sarepta Therapeutics have disclosed the existence of discovery-stage gene therapy programs for the treatment of Rett syndrome.
Current wording
Trofinetide was approved by the FDA in March 2023 for the treatment of Rett Syndrome. We are aware that our competitors are developing product candidates for the treatment of diseases that our product candidates will target. With respect to TSHA-102, we are aware that Neurogene has a clinical stage gene therapy program for the treatment of Rett syndrome.
Previous wording
Foreign governments also have their own healthcare reimbursement systems, which vary significantly by country and region, and we cannot be sure that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be made available with respect to the treatments in which our products are used under any foreign reimbursement system. The EU provides options for EU Member States to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. An EU Member State may approve a specific price for the medicinal product, it may refuse to reimburse a product at the price set by the manufacturer or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. Many EU Member States also periodically review their reimbursement procedures for medicinal products, which could have an adverse impact on reimbursement status. Moreover, in order to obtain reimbursement for our products in some European countries, including some EU Member States, we may be required to compile additional data comparing the cost-effectiveness of our products to other available therapies. This Health Technology Assessment, or HTA, of medicinal products is becoming an increasingly common part of the pricing and reimbursement procedures in some EU Member States, including those representing the larger markets. The HTA process is the procedure to assess therapeutic, economic and societal impact of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country. The outcome of an HTA will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EU Member States. The extent to which pricing and reimbursement decisions are influenced by the HTA of the specific medicinal product currently varies between EU Member States.
Current wording
Foreign governments also have their own healthcare reimbursement systems, which vary significantly by country and region, and we cannot be sure that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be made available with respect to the treatments in which our products are used under any foreign reimbursement system. The European Union provides options for EU Member States to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. An EU Member State may approve a specific price for the medicinal product, it may refuse to reimburse a product at the price set by the manufacturer or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. Many EU Member States also periodically review their reimbursement procedures for medicinal products, which could have an adverse impact on reimbursement status. Moreover, in order to obtain reimbursement for our products in some European countries, including some EU Member States, we may be required to compile additional data comparing the cost-effectiveness of our products to other available therapies. This Health Technology Assessment, or HTA, of medicinal products is becoming an increasingly common part of the pricing and reimbursement procedures in some EU Member States, including those representing the larger markets. The HTA process is the procedure to assess therapeutic, economic and societal impact of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country. The outcome of an HTA will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EU Member States. The extent to which pricing and reimbursement decisions are influenced by the HTA of the specific medicinal product currently varies between EU Member States.
Previous wording
Legislators, policymakers and healthcare insurance funds in the EU and the United Kingdom may continue to propose and implement cost-containing measures to keep healthcare costs down, particularly due to the financial strain that the COVID-19 pandemic has placed on national healthcare systems of European countries. These measures could include limitations on the prices we would be able to charge for product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatory approval or the level of reimbursement available for these products from governmental authorities or third-party payors. Further, an increasing number of EU and other foreign countries use prices for medicinal products established in other countries as “reference prices” to help determine the price of the product in their own territory. Consequently, a downward trend in prices of medicinal products in some countries could contribute to similar downward trends elsewhere.
Current wording
Legislators, policymakers and healthcare insurance funds in the European Union and the United Kingdom may continue to propose and implement cost-containing measures to keep healthcare costs down, particularly due to the financial strain that the COVID-19 pandemic has placed on national healthcare systems of European countries. These measures could include limitations on the prices we would be able to charge for product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatory approval or the level of reimbursement available for these products from governmental authorities or third-party payors. Further, an increasing number of EU and other foreign countries use prices for medicinal products established in other countries as “reference prices” to help determine the price of the product in their own territory. Consequently, a downward trend in prices of medicinal products in some countries could contribute to similar downward trends elsewhere.
Previous wording
The term of the research funding portion of the UT Southwestern Agreement, under which we have the ability to acquire exclusive rights to additional gene therapy products for rare, monogenic CNS indications, has been extended to extend research funding pursuant to sponsored research agreements on a program-by-program basis. UT Southwestern has also entered into collaborations with third parties, including certain of our competitors, addressing targets and disease indications outside the scope of our collaboration. As a result, UT Southwestern may have competing interests with respect to their priorities and resources. We may have disagreements with UT Southwestern with respect to the interpretation of the UT Southwestern Agreement, use of resources or otherwise that could cause our relationship with UT Southwestern to deteriorate. As a result, UT Southwestern may reduce their focus on, and resources allocated to, our programs, potentially delaying or terminating our ability to advance product candidates through preclinical studies. Additionally, if either of Dr. Gray or Dr. Minassian were to leave UT Southwestern or to otherwise no longer be meaningfully involved with us, our preclinical research and development capabilities may be substantially reduced.
Current wording
The term of the research funding portion of the UT Southwestern Agreement, under which we have the ability to acquire exclusive rights to additional gene therapy products for rare, monogenic CNS indications, has been extended to expand research funding pursuant to sponsored research agreements on a program-by-program basis. UT Southwestern has also entered into collaborations with third parties, including certain of our competitors, addressing targets and disease indications outside the scope of our collaboration. As a result, UT Southwestern may have competing interests with respect to their priorities and resources. We may have disagreements with UT Southwestern with respect to the interpretation of the UT Southwestern Agreement, use of resources or otherwise that could cause our relationship with UT Southwestern to deteriorate. As a result, UT Southwestern may reduce their focus on, and resources allocated to, our programs, potentially delaying or terminating our ability to advance product candidates through preclinical studies. Additionally, if either of Dr. Gray or Dr. Minassian were to leave UT Southwestern or to otherwise no longer be meaningfully involved with us, our preclinical research and development capabilities may be substantially reduced.
Previous wording
We rely on these parties for execution of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and generally do not control their activities. Our reliance on these third parties for research and development activities will reduce our control over these activities but will not relieve us of our responsibilities. For example, we will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial. Moreover, the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory require us to comply with standards, commonly referred to as GCPs, for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. We also are required to register ongoing clinical trials and post the results of completed clinical trials on government-sponsored databases, such as ClinicalTrials.gov, within specified timeframes. Failure to do so can result in fines, adverse publicity and civil and criminal sanctions. If we or any of our CROs or other third parties, including trial sites, fail to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials complies with GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under cGMP conditions. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.
Current wording
We rely on these parties for execution of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and generally do not control their activities. Our reliance on these third parties for research and development activities will reduce our control over these activities but will not relieve us of our responsibilities. For example, we will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial. Moreover, the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities require us to comply with standards, commonly referred to as GCPs, for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. We also are required to register ongoing clinical trials and post the results of completed clinical trials on government-sponsored databases, such as ClinicalTrials.gov, within specified timeframes. Failure to do so can result in fines, adverse publicity and civil and criminal sanctions. If we or any of our CROs or other third parties, including trial sites, fail to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials complies with GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under cGMP conditions. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.
Previous wording
Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on our products for an adequate amount of time, and if we do not obtain protection under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments and similar non-United States legislation for extending the term of patents covering each of our product candidates, our business may be materially harmed.
Current wording
Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on our products for an adequate amount of time, and if we do not obtain protection under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments and similar non-U.S. legislation for extending the term of patents covering each of our product candidates, our business may be materially harmed.
Previous wording
Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. Depending upon the timing, duration and conditions of FDA marketing approval of our product candidates, one or more of our United States patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments, and similar legislation in the European Union. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent term extension of up to five years for a patent covering an approved product as compensation for effective patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. A patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval. Only one patent may be extended, and only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it, or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. However, we may not receive an extension if we fail to apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the length of the extension could be less than we request. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we can enforce our patent rights for that product will be shortened and our competitors may obtain approval to market competing products sooner. As a result, our revenue from applicable products could be reduced and could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Current wording
Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. Depending upon the timing, duration and conditions of FDA marketing approval of our product candidates, one or more of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments, and similar legislation in the European Union. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent term extension of up to five years for a patent covering an approved product as compensation for effective patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. A patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval. Only one patent may be extended, and only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it, or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. However, we may not receive an extension if we fail to apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the length of the extension could be less than we request. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we can enforce our patent rights for that product will be shortened and our competitors may obtain approval to market competing products sooner. As a result, our revenue from applicable products could be reduced and could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Previous wording
We are heavily reliant upon licenses to certain patent rights and proprietary technology for the development of our product candidates, in particular the UT Southwestern Agreement and our license agreements with Queen’s University and Abeona. These license agreements impose diligence, development and commercialization timelines and milestone payment, royalty, insurance and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with our obligations, our licensors may have the right to terminate our licenses, in which event we might not be able to develop, manufacture or market any product that is covered by the intellectual property we in-license from such licensor and may face other penalties. Such an occurrence would materially adversely affect our business prospects.
Current wording
We are heavily reliant upon licenses to certain patent rights and proprietary technology for the development of our product candidates, in particular the UT Southwestern Agreement and our license agreement with Abeona. These license agreements impose diligence, development and commercialization timelines and milestone payment, royalty, insurance and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with our obligations, our licensors may have the right to terminate our licenses, in which event we might not be able to develop, manufacture or market any product that is covered by the intellectual property we in-license from such licensor and may face other penalties. Such an occurrence would materially adversely affect our business prospects.
Previous wording
For example, on September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act included a number of significant changes to United States patent law. These included provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, has developed new and untested regulations and procedures to govern the full implementation of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, and in particular, the first to file provisions, became effective in March 2013. The Leahy-Smith Act has also introduced procedures making it easier for third parties to challenge issued patents, as well as to intervene in the prosecution of patent applications. Finally, the Leahy-Smith Act contained new statutory provisions that require the USPTO to issue new regulations for their implementation, and it may take the courts years to interpret the provisions of the new statute. It is too early to tell what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business and the protection and enforcement of our intellectual property. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our future patents. Further, the United States Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on actions by the United States Congress, the federal courts and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce patents that we have owned or licensed or that we might obtain in the future. An inability to obtain, enforce, and defend patents covering our proprietary technologies would materially and adversely affect our business prospects and financial condition.
Current wording
For example, on September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act included a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These included provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, has developed new and untested regulations and procedures to govern the full implementation of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, and in particular, the first to file provisions, became effective in March 2013. The Leahy-Smith Act has also introduced procedures making it easier for third parties to challenge issued patents, as well as to intervene in the prosecution of patent applications. Finally, the Leahy-Smith Act contained new statutory provisions that require the USPTO to issue new regulations for their implementation, and it may take the courts years to interpret the provisions of the new statute. It is too early to tell what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business and the protection and enforcement of our intellectual property. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our future patents. Further, the United States Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on actions by the United States Congress, the federal courts and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce patents that we have owned or licensed or that we might obtain in the future. An inability to obtain, enforce, and defend patents covering our proprietary technologies would materially and adversely affect our business prospects and financial condition.
Showing the first 40 of 71 pairs. Open the source sections for the rest.
Rearranged current paragraphs (9)
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
TSHA-102 or that TSHA-102 will achieve market acceptance sufficient to generate profits. If we are unable to successfully develop and commercialize TSHA-102 due to failure to obtain regulatory approval for TSHA-102, to successfully market TSHA-102, to generate profits from the sale of TSHA-102, or due to other risk factors outlined in this report, it would have material adverse effects on our business, financial condition, and results of operations as TSHA-102 is currently our sole product candidate in clinical development.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
In the United States, federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal data privacy laws, and consumer protection laws. For example, the HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, imposes specific requirements relating to the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable health information.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
Under the GDPR, companies may face temporary or definitive bans on data Processing and other corrective actions, as well as fines of up to 20 million Euros under the EU GDPR, 17.5 million pounds sterling under the UK GDPR or, in each case, 4% of the annual global revenue, whichever is greater. Further, the law allows for private litigation related to Processing of personal data brought by classes of data subjects or consumer protection groups authorized by law to represent their interests.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
States. Other jurisdictions have enacted or are considering similar cross-border personal data transfer laws and local personal data residency laws, any of which could increase the cost and complexity of doing business.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
Although there are currently various mechanisms that may be used to transfer personal data from the EEA and United Kingdom to the United States in compliance with law, such as the EEA standard contractual clauses, the UK’s International Data Transfer Agreement/Addendum, and the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework and the UK extension thereto (which allows for transfers to relevant U.S.-based organizations who self-certify compliance and participate in the Framework), these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures to lawfully transfer personal data to the United States.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
If there is no lawful manner for us to transfer personal data from the EEA, the United Kingdom or other jurisdictions to the United States, or if the requirements for a legally-compliant transfer are too onerous, we may face significant adverse consequences, including interruption or degradation of our operations, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions (such as Europe) at significant expense, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines, and penalties, the inability to transfer data and work with partners, vendors and other third parties, and injunctions against Processing or transferring personal data from Europe or elsewhere.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
Inability to import personal data to the United States may significantly and negatively impact our business operations, including by limiting our ability to conduct clinical trial activities in Europe and elsewhere; limiting our ability to collaborate with parties subject to European and other data protection laws or requiring us to increase our personal data Processing capabilities in Europe and/or elsewhere at significant expense. Additionally, companies that transfer personal data out of the EEA and United Kingdom to other jurisdictions, particularly to the United States, are subject to increased scrutiny from regulators, individual litigants, and activist groups. Some European regulators have ordered certain companies to suspend or permanently cease certain transfers out of Europe for allegedly violating the EU GDPR’s cross-border data transfer limitations.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
We publish privacy policies, whitepapers, marketing materials and other statements, such as compliance with certain certifications or self-regulatory principles, regarding data privacy and security. Regulators in the United States are increasingly scrutinizing these statements, and if these policies, materials or statements are found to be deficient, lacking in transparency, deceptive, unfair, misleading, or misrepresentative of our practices, we may be subject to investigation, enforcement actions by regulators or other adverse consequences.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
While we may be entitled to damages if our third-party service providers fail to satisfy their data privacy or security-related obligations to us, any award may be insufficient to cover our damages, or we may be unable to recover such award. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed or ongoing or planned clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and could require us to incur substantial cost to recover or reproduce such data. Security breaches and attendant consequences may prevent or cause customers to stop using our products, deter new customers for using our products, and otherwise negatively impact our ability to grow and operate our business.
Rearranged previous paragraphs (1)
Previous report — wording carried elsewhere
We have obtained orphan drug designation from the FDA for TSHA-120 for the treatment of GAN and TSHA-102 for the treatment of Rett syndrome. We may seek orphan designation for certain of our other current and future product candidates. However, we may be unsuccessful in obtaining orphan drug designation for these or other product candidates and may be unable to maintain the benefits associated with orphan drug designation. Even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for any of our product candidates, that exclusivity may not effectively protect those product candidates from competition because different drugs can be approved for the same condition, and orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities from approving the same or a different drug in another indication. Even after an orphan drug is granted orphan exclusivity and approved, the FDA can subsequently approve a later application for the same drug for the same condition before the expiration of the seven-year exclusivity period if the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer in a substantial portion of the target populations, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. In addition, a designated orphan drug may not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan designation. Moreover, orphan-drug-exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if we are unable to manufacture sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process.