Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc
For the period ended Mar 31, 2025. Filed May 12, 2025.
View on SEC.govAbout this filing
A company's report for each of its first three quarters. The financial statements are not audited. It shows how the business has moved since the last annual report, and what management says changed.
Mar 31, 2025 · Filed May 12, 2025
KPTI$0.05-8.7%Stored close · as of Nov 6, 2026
What changed in Risk Factors?
Read the current filingPrevious report: 10-Q
Period ended 2024-09-30; filed 2024-11-05.
0000950170-24-121076
Item 1A. Risk FactorsCurrent report: 10-Q
Period ended 2025-03-31; filed 2025-05-12.
0000950170-25-069231
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 410 previous paragraphs and 434 current paragraphs.
317 unchanged; 80 reworded; 33 added; 11 removed; 2 previous and 4 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 (33)
Current report
impacts of changes in tariffs that the U.S. and other countries have announced or implemented, as well as any additional new tariffs, trade restrictions or export regulations that may be implemented or reversed in the future;
Current report
Moreover, clinical investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority may conclude that a financial relationship between us and a clinical investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the trial. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority, as the case may be, and may ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of one or more of our product candidates.
Current report
FDA review process, such as efforts to downsize the U.S. federal workforce, remove job elimination protections for U.S. federal workers, limit certain communications, and potentially interfere with user fee reauthorization;
Current report
We may also seek a Priority Review designation for one or more of our product candidates. If the FDA determines that a product candidate would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness, the FDA may designate the product candidate for priority review. A Priority Review designation means that the goal for the FDA to review an application is six months, rather than the standard review period of ten months.
Current report
The FDA and comparable regulatory agencies in foreign jurisdictions, such as the EMA and CHMP, play an important role in the development of our product candidates by providing guidance on our clinical development programs and reviewing our regulatory submissions, including Investigational New Drug applications (“INDs”), requests for special designations and marketing applications. If these oversight and review activities are disrupted, then correspondingly our ability to develop and secure timely approval of our product candidates could be impacted in a negative manner.
Current report
For example, the recent loss of FDA leadership and personnel could lead to disruptions and delays in FDA guidance, review and approval of our product candidates. Pursuant to President Trump's E.O. 14210, “Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Workforce Optimization Initiative,” the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) announced on March 27, 2025, a reorganization and Reduction in Force (“RIF”), across HHS of approximately 20,000 employees (82,000 to 62,000), with the FDA’s workforce to decrease by 3,500 full-time employees. Shortly thereafter, thousands of employees at the FDA were fired on April 1, 2025. Subsequently, there have been reports from the preliminary budget memorandum for HHS that the administration will propose an additional 30% cut in the overall budget for HHS, with a reduction of $700 million in funding at the FDA ($7.2 billion to $6.5 billion) for the 2026 federal fiscal year.
Current report
Similarly, actions by the U.S. government have significantly disrupted the operations of U.S. government agencies such as the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and FDA, which have traditionally provided funding for basic research, research and development, and clinical testing. These U.S. government actions have included, among other things, suspending, terminating and withholding of disbursements of funds owed under ongoing contracts, grants, and other financial assistance agreements; declining to continue multi-year research projects for additional annual budget periods; canceling or delaying solicitations for new contracts, grants and other financial assistance awards; canceling or delaying proposal evaluation processes and issuance of such new awards; substantially reducing federal agency staff responsible for managing contract and financial assistance programs; eliminating agency information and resources for facilitating research activity; delaying or terminating federal agency procedures for authorizing international transactions; initiating aggressive enforcement actions that may disrupt the operations of major research universities that are significant contributors to life sciences research in the U.S., and threatening access to federal agency contracts and other funding awards based on companies’ otherwise lawful corporate policies and choice of counsel. These U.S. government actions could, directly or indirectly, significantly disrupt, delay, prevent, or increase the costs of our research and product commercialization programs, including our ability to develop new product candidates, conduct clinical trials, implement research collaborations with other companies or institutions, and obtain approvals to market and sell new products.
Current report
Accordingly, if any of the foregoing developments and others impact the ability of the FDA to provide us with guidance regarding our clinical development programs or delay the agency’s review and processing of our regulatory submissions, including INDs and NDAs and biologics license applications, our business would be negatively impacted. Further, any future government shutdown could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue our operations.
Current report
In the EU, on December 13, 2021, Regulation No 2021/2282 on Health Technology Assessment (“HTA”), amending Directive 2011/24/EU, was adopted. While the Regulation entered into force in January 2022, it began to apply from January 2025 onward. The Regulation will have a phased implementation depending on the concerned products. The Regulation intends to boost cooperation among EU member states in assessing health technologies, including new medicinal products as well as certain high-risk medical devices, and provide the basis for cooperation at the EU level for joint clinical assessments in these areas. It will permit EU member states to use common HTA tools, methodologies, and procedures across the EU, working together in four main areas, including joint clinical assessment of the innovative health technologies with the highest potential impact for patients, joint scientific consultations whereby developers can seek advice from HTA authorities, identification of emerging health technologies to identify promising technologies early, and continuing voluntary cooperation in other areas. Individual EU member states will continue to be responsible for assessing non-clinical (e.g., economic, social, ethical) aspects of health technology, and making decisions on pricing and reimbursement.
Current report
At the state level, individual states are increasingly aggressive in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. In addition, regional healthcare organizations and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. These measures could reduce the ultimate demand for our products, once approved, or put pressure on our product pricing. We expect that additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures. This may be increasingly true with respect to products approved pursuant to the accelerated approval pathway. State Medicaid programs and other payers are developing strategies and implementing significant coverage barriers, or refusing to cover these products outright, arguing that accelerated approval drugs have insufficient or limited evidence despite meeting the FDA’s standards for accelerated approval.
Current report
We are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures and the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. Our operations involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological and radioactive materials. Our operations and the operations of our third-party vendors also produce hazardous waste products. We generally contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and wastes. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from our use of hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties.
Current report
The Trump Administration has recently imposed a series of tariffs on U.S. trading partners. On April 2, 2025, the President issued an Executive Order announcing a “baseline” reciprocal tariff of 10% on all U.S. trading partners effective April 5, 2025, and higher individualized reciprocal tariffs on 57 countries (with certain product exemptions for pharmaceutical-related products, among others). Previously, the administration had imposed a 25% tariff on Canada and Mexico for goods not covered by the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (“USMCA”) and tariffs equaling 20% on China. In response, several countries threatened retaliatory measures, including Canada and China, which then imposed retaliatory tariffs. Prior to when the country-specific reciprocal tariffs were scheduled to take effect, the administration delayed the effective date of such tariffs for all countries except China. The 10% baseline reciprocal tariff on all countries remains in effect, in addition to the tariffs on China (which were a minimum of 145% as of May 7, 2025) and Canada and Mexico (which were 25% as of May 7, 2025 for goods that are not covered by the USMCA). Sustained uncertainty about, or the further escalation of, trade and political tensions between the U.S. and China could result in a disadvantageous research and manufacturing environment in China, particularly for U.S. based companies, including retaliatory restrictions that hinder or potentially inhibit our ability to rely on contract development and manufacturing organizations (“CDMOs”) and other service providers that operate in China.
Current report
Separately, on April 16, 2025, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced an investigation under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 into imports of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients, including finished drug products, medical countermeasures, critical inputs such as active pharmaceutical ingredients, and key starting materials, and derivative products of those items. The investigation will examine the impact of these imports on U.S. national security culminating in a decision by the President whether to take action to remedy any identified threats, including by imposing additional tariffs. The statute provides that the Commerce Department report must be completed within 270 days of initiation of the investigation and that the President must decide whether to act within 90 days of receiving the report. Currently, the only ingredient in our selinexor products that we import from outside of the U.S. is our active pharmaceutical ingredient, which is imported from France.
Current report
Some of our manufacturers and suppliers are located in China. Trade tensions and conflicts between the U.S. and China have been escalating in recent years and, as such, we are exposed to the possibility of product supply disruption and increased costs and expenses in the event of changes to the laws, rules, regulations and policies of the governments of the U.S. or China, or due to geopolitical unrest and unstable economic conditions. Certain Chinese biotechnology companies may become subject to trade restrictions, sanctions, other regulatory requirements or proposed legislation by the U.S. government, which could restrict or even prohibit our ability to work with such entities, thereby potentially disrupting their supply of material to us. For example, in February 2024, U.S. lawmakers called for investigations into and the imposition of possible trade sanctions against certain Chinese biotechnology companies, including WuXi AppTec and WuXi Biologics (collectively “WuXi”), over alleged ties to the Chinese military. Escalating tensions between the U.S. and China may prevent or hinder the export of materials or technical information between us and our CDMO and third parties, such as pharmaceutical partners. These third parties may voluntarily require compliance or supply chain requirements that go above and beyond potential legislation to address perceived risk of “pass through,” which would make it difficult for us to operate our business.
Current report
In addition, in September 2024 during the 118th Congress, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the BIOSECURE Act (H.R. 8333). This bill names the following as biotechnology companies of concern: “BGI, MGI, Complete Genomics, WuXi AppTec, and WuXi Biologics. The Senate advanced a substantially similar bill (S. 3558) but it did not pass. The Senate bill named the following as biotechnology companies of concern: “BGI, MGI, Complete Genomics, WuXi AppTec, and any subsidiary, parent affiliate, or successor of such entities. If this legislation had been enacted into law, and while both bills had certain grandfather provision, the legislation would have potentially restricted the ability of U.S. biotechnology companies like ours to purchase services or products from, or otherwise collaborate with, specifically named Chinese biotechnology companies, including WuXi, and it would have authorized the U.S. government to impose such restrictions on entities' transactions with additional Chinese biotechnology companies as a condition of U.S. government contract, grant and loan funding. We anticipate these bills will be reintroduced during the 119th Congress but, as of February 20, 2025, they have not been introduced in either chamber. If these bills become law, or similar laws are passed, they would have the potential to severely restrict the ability of companies like ours to contract with certain Chinese biotechnology companies of concern without losing the ability to contract with, or otherwise received funding from, the U.S. government. Such disruptions could have adverse effects on the development of our product candidates and our business operations.
Current report
Any unfavorable government policies on international trade, such as export controls, capital controls or tariffs, may increase the cost of manufacturing our product candidates and platform materials, affect the demand for our drug products (if and once approved), the competitive position of our product candidates, and import or export of raw materials and finished product candidate used in our and our collaborators’ preclinical studies and clinical trials, particularly with respect to any product candidates and materials that we import from China, including pursuant to our manufacturing service arrangements with WuXi. If any new tariffs, export controls, legislation and/or regulations are implemented, or if existing trade agreements are renegotiated or, in particular, if either the U.S. or Chinese government takes retaliatory trade actions due to the recent trade tension, such changes could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Current report
We may not have the ability to raise the funds necessary to settle any conversions of or other obligations in respect of the 2029 Notes or the 2025 Notes required to be settled in cash, to repay the 2029 Notes or the 2025 Notes at maturity, to repurchase the 2029 Notes or the 2025 Notes for cash upon a fundamental change, to pay the redemption price for any 2029 Notes or 2025 Notes we redeem or to refinance the 2029 Notes or the 2025 Notes, and any future debt we incur may contain limitations on our ability to pay cash upon conversion or repurchase of the 2029 Notes or the 2025 Notes.
Current report
The 2025 Notes are scheduled to mature on October 15, 2025. The current conversion price of the 2025 Notes is approximately $237.82 per share of common stock, which is significantly above the current trading price of our common stock. Unless the 2025 Notes are converted or repurchased or we are able to engage in a transaction that retires or refinances these notes or extends their maturity, we will be required to pay the outstanding principal amount of these notes in cash at maturity. We cannot assure you that we will have the necessary cash on hand or access to other sources of funds that will allow us to repay or refinance the 2025 Notes if we are required to do so.
Current report
Raising additional capital and other equity issuances by us may cause dilution to our stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to our product candidates.
Current report
We may also issue additional equity securities in other types of transactions that result in additional significant dilution to you, for example, in connection with other strategic or financing transactions, in exchange transactions similar to the exchange transaction we completed in May 2024 or in other future exchange transactions with our lenders and convertible noteholders, to satisfy obligations to our lenders and our convertible noteholders or other creditors, as equity compensation, or for other reasons.
Current report
collaborators may pursue a clinical and/or regulatory strategy for registration outside of the U.S. that would require our assistance and we may not have the resources to meet their or the regulators’ timelines and/or expectations, which could delay or limit the development, commercialization or approval of our products outside the U.S.;
Current report
Additionally, global tensions continue to raise the possibility of nation state attacks on critical infrastructure like power, telecommunications, and water in the U.S. and around the world. Attacks on telecommunications infrastructure in particular could impact our business operations globally, and would likely be outside our ability to detect or respond to, beyond noting that telecommunications services had been impacted.
Current report
On February 25, 2025, we effected a 1-for-15 reverse stock split of our issued and outstanding shares of common stock (the “Reverse Stock Split”). On March 13, 2025 we received a letter from the Staff notifying us that we regained compliance with the Bid Price Rule for continued inclusion on the Nasdaq Global Select Market.
Current report
The liquidity of our common stock may be adversely affected by our Reverse Stock Split.
Current report
On February 25, 2025, we effected the Reverse Stock Split. The liquidity of our common stock may be adversely affected by the Reverse Stock Split given the reduced number of shares that are outstanding following the Reverse Stock Split, which may lead to reduced trading and a smaller number of market makers for our common stock. In addition, the Reverse Stock Split may have increased the number of stockholders who own “odd lots” of less than 100 shares of our common stock. Odd lot shares may be more difficult to sell, and brokerage commissions and other costs of transactions in odd lots may be higher than the costs of transactions in “round lots” of even multiples of 100 shares.
Current report
Despite the Reverse Stock Split, the resulting per-share trading price of our common stock may nevertheless fail to attract institutional investors and may not satisfy the investing guidelines of such investors and, consequently, the trading liquidity of our common stock may be adversely affected. Accordingly, the Reverse Stock Split may not achieve the desired results of increasing marketability of our common stock.
Current report
We are a “smaller reporting company,” as defined in Rule 12b-2 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. We would cease to be a smaller reporting company if (i) we have a public float of $250 million or more and have annual revenues in excess of $100 million or (ii) if we have a public float of $700 million or more, determined on an annual basis.
Current report
As a smaller reporting company, we are permitted and intend to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not smaller reporting companies. These exemptions include:
Current report
reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation;
Current report
being permitted to provide only two years of audited financial statements in our annual report on Form 10-K, with corresponding reduced “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” disclosure; and
Current report
not being required to furnish a stock performance graph in our annual report.
Current report
We cannot predict whether investors will find our common stock less attractive as a result of any reliance by us on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be more volatile.
Removed paragraphs (11)
Previous report
adverse publicity about our products or favorable publicity about competitive products;
Previous report
the ability of our sales force to meet with healthcare professionals in person.
Previous report
unexpected changes in tariffs, trade barriers or regulatory requirements;
Previous report
Finally, we or our collaborators could face heightened risks with respect to seeking marketing approval in the UK as a result of the withdrawal of the UK from the EU, commonly referred to as Brexit. The UK is no longer part of the European Single Market and EU Customs Union. As of January 1, 2021, the MHRA became responsible for supervising medicines and medical devices in Great Britain, comprising England, Scotland and Wales under domestic law, whereas Northern Ireland will continue to be subject to EU rules under the Northern Ireland Protocol. The MHRA will rely on the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/1916) (as amended) (“HMR”) as the basis for regulating medicines. The HMR has incorporated into the domestic law of the body of EU law instruments governing medicinal products that pre-existed prior to the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. Any delay in obtaining, or an inability to obtain, any marketing approvals, as a result of Brexit or otherwise, may force us or our collaborators to restrict or delay efforts to seek regulatory approval in the UK for our or their product candidates, which could significantly and materially harm our business.
Previous report
We may seek certain designations for one or more of our product candidates that could expedite review and approval by the FDA. A Breakthrough Therapy product is defined as a product that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other products, to treat a serious condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For products that have been designated as breakthrough therapies, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens.
Previous report
The FDA and Congress may further reevaluate the Orphan Drug Act and its regulations and policies. This may be particularly true in light of a decision from the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in September 2021 finding that, for the purpose of determining the scope of exclusivity, the term “same disease or condition” means the designated “rare disease or condition” and could not be interpreted by the FDA to mean the “indication or use.” Although there have been legislative proposals to overrule this decision, they have not been enacted into law. On January 23, 2023, the FDA announced that, in matters beyond the scope of that court order, the FDA will continue to apply its existing regulations tying orphan-drug exclusivity to the uses or indications for which the orphan drug was approved.
Previous report
The Trump Administration also took executive actions to undermine or delay implementation of the PPACA, including directing federal agencies with authorities and responsibilities under the PPACA to waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation of any provision of the PPACA that would impose a fiscal or regulatory burden on states, individuals, healthcare providers, health insurers, or manufacturers of pharmaceuticals or medical devices. In January 2021, however, President Biden issued a new Executive Order which directs federal agencies to reconsider rules and other policies that limit Americans’ access to health care, and consider actions that will protect and strengthen that access. Under this Executive Order, federal agencies are directed to re-examine: policies that undermine protections for people with pre-existing conditions, including complications related to COVID-19; demonstrations and waivers under Medicaid and the PPACA that may reduce coverage or undermine the programs, including work requirements; policies that undermine the health insurance marketplace or other markets for health insurance; policies that make it more difficult to enroll in Medicaid and the PPACA; and policies that reduce affordability of coverage or financial assistance, including for dependents.
Previous report
In July 2021, President Biden signed Executive Order 14063, which focuses on, among other things, the price of pharmaceuticals. The Order directs the HHS to create a plan within 45 days to combat “excessive pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals and enhance domestic pharmaceutical supply chains, to reduce the prices paid by the federal government for such pharmaceuticals, and to address the recurrent problem of price gouging.” In September 2021, the HHS released its plan to reduce pharmaceutical prices. The key features of that plan are to: (a) make pharmaceutical prices more affordable and equitable for all consumers and throughout the health care system by supporting pharmaceutical price negotiations with manufacturers; (b) improve and promote competition throughout the prescription pharmaceutical industry by supporting market changes that strengthen supply chains, promote biosimilars and generic drugs, and increase transparency; and (c) foster scientific innovation to promote better healthcare and improve health by supporting public and private research and making sure that market incentives promote discovery of valuable and accessible new treatments.
Previous report
If we do not regain compliance with the Bid Price Rule by the Compliance Date, we may be eligible for an additional 180 calendar day compliance period. To qualify, we would be required to transfer the listing of our common stock to the Nasdaq Capital Market, provided that we meet the continued listing requirements for the market value of publicly held shares and all other initial listing standards of the Nasdaq Capital Market, with the exception of its bid requirement. To effect such a transfer, among other things, we would also need to pay an application fee to Nasdaq and provide written notice to the Staff of our intention to cure the deficiency during the additional compliance period by effecting a reverse stock split, if necessary. However, as discussed above under the risk factor entitled “We may not have the ability to raise the funds necessary to settle any conversions of or other obligations in respect of the 2029 Notes or the 2025 Notes required to be settled in cash, to repurchase the 2029 Notes or the 2025 Notes for cash upon a fundamental change, to pay the redemption price for any 2029 Notes or 2025 Notes we redeem or to refinance the 2029 Notes or the 2025 Notes, and any future debt we incur may contain limitations on our ability to pay cash upon conversion or repurchase of the 2029 Notes or the 2025 Notes”, the indenture governing the 2025 Notes treats a transfer of listing to the Nasdaq Capital Market as a “fundamental change” that gives the holders of the 2025 Convertible Notes a right to require us to repurchase the 2025 Convertible Notes for cash, which may severely limit our ability to effect such a transfer and utilize the additional 180 day compliance period.
Previous report
If we do not regain compliance with the Bid Price Rule by the Compliance Date and it appears to the Staff that we will not be able to regain compliance with the Bid Price Rule during the additional compliance period, or that due to limitations in the indenture governing the 2025 Notes or for other reasons, we are otherwise not eligible for an additional compliance period at that time, the Staff will provide written notification to us that our common stock will be subject to delisting. At that time, we may appeal the Staff’s delisting determination to a Nasdaq Listing Qualifications Panel (the “Panel”). We expect that our common stock would remain listed pending the Panel’s decision. However, there can be no assurance that, if we do appeal the delisting determination by the Staff to the Panel, that such appeal would be successful.
Previous report
We intend to monitor the closing bid price of our common stock and may, if appropriate, consider available options to regain compliance with the Bid Price Rule, which could include seeking to effect a reverse stock split. However, there can be no assurances that we will be able to regain compliance with the Bid Price Rule.
Reworded paragraphs (80)
Previous wording
Our business and our ability to generate product revenue from the sales of drugs that treat cancer depend heavily on our and our collaborators’ ability to successfully commercialize our lead drug, XPOVIO®(selinexor), on a global basis in currently approved and future indications, and the level of market adoption for, and the continued use of, our products and product candidates, if approved. XPOVIO is currently approved and marketed in the U.S. in multiple hematologic malignancy indications, including in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma who have received at least one prior therapy, in combination with dexamethasone for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who have received at least four prior therapies and whose disease is refractory to at least two proteasome inhibitors, at least two immunomodulatory agents, and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody; and as a monotherapy for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (“DLBCL”), not otherwise specified, including DLBCL arising from follicular lymphoma, after at least 2 lines of systemic therapy. Efforts to drive adoption within the medical community and third-party payors based on the benefits of our products and product candidates require significant resources and may not be successful. The success of XPOVIO and any current or future product candidates, whether alone or in collaboration with third parties, including achieving and maintaining an adequate level of market adoption, depends on several factors, including:
Current wording
Our business and our ability to generate product revenue from the sales of drugs that treat cancer depend heavily on our and our collaborators’ ability to successfully commercialize our lead drug, XPOVIO®(selinexor), on a global basis in currently approved and future indications, and the level of market adoption for, and the continued use of, our products and product candidates, if approved. XPOVIO is currently approved and marketed in the U.S. in multiple hematologic malignancy indications, including in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone for the treatment of adult patients with multiple myeloma who have received at least one prior therapy; in combination with dexamethasone for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who have received at least four prior therapies and whose disease is refractory to at least two proteasome inhibitors, at least two immunomodulatory agents, and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody; and under accelerated approval as a monotherapy for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (“DLBCL”), not otherwise specified, including DLBCL arising from follicular lymphoma, after at least 2 lines of systemic therapy. Efforts to drive adoption within the medical community and third-party payors based on the benefits of our products and product candidates require significant resources and may not be successful. The success of XPOVIO and any current or future product candidates, whether alone or in collaboration with third parties, including achieving and maintaining an adequate level of market adoption, depends on several factors, including:
Previous wording
the consistency of any new data we collect and analyses we conduct with prior results, whether they support a favorable safety, efficacy and effectiveness profile of XPOVIO and any potential impact on our U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) approvals and/or FDA package insert for XPOVIO and comparable foreign regulatory approvals and package inserts;
Current wording
the consistency of any new data we collect and analyses we conduct with prior results, whether they support a favorable benefit-risk profile of XPOVIO and any potential impact on our U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) approvals and/or FDA package insert for XPOVIO and comparable foreign regulatory approvals and package inserts;
Previous wording
the willingness of the target patient population to try new therapies and of physicians to prescribe these therapies, based, in part, on their perception of our clinical trial data and/or the actual or perceived safety, tolerability and effectiveness profile;
Current wording
the willingness of the target patient population to try new therapies or new treatment paradigms such as bridging therapies and of physicians to prescribe these therapies, based, in part, on their perception of our clinical trial data and/or the actual or perceived safety, tolerability and effectiveness profile;
Previous wording
our ability to maintain compliance with existing and new health care laws and regulations, including government pricing, price reporting and other disclosure requirements related to such laws and regulations, and the potential impact of such laws and regulations on physician prescribing practices and payor coverage; and
Current wording
our ability to maintain compliance with existing and new health care laws and regulations, including government pricing, price reporting and other disclosure requirements related to such laws and regulations, and the potential impact of such laws and regulations on physician prescribing practices and payor coverage.
Previous wording
The discovery, development and commercialization of new drugs is highly competitive, particularly in the cancer field. We and our collaborators face competition with respect to XPOVIO and will face competition with respect to any product candidates that we may seek to discover and develop or commercialize in the future, from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, academic institutions and governmental agencies as well as public and private research institutions worldwide, many of which have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical studies, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than we do. There are a number of major pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that currently market and sell drugs and/or are pursuing the development of drugs for the treatment of cancer and the other disease indications for which we, and our collaborators, are developing our product candidates. Several new novel therapeutics have recently entered, and are expected to continue to enter, the multiple myeloma treatment landscape. For example, TECVAYLI™ (teclistamab-cqyv), the first bispecific T-Cell engager, was approved by the FDA in October 2022, followed by approvals of two more bispecifics, ELREXFIO™ (elranatamab-bcmm) and TALVEY™ (talquetamab-tgvs) in August 2023. Other T-cell engaging therapies, bispecifics with different targets, and immunomodulators are in clinical development and may be introduced into the multiple myeloma market in 2024 and beyond. CARVYKTI® (ciltacabtagene autoleucel; cilta-cel) and Abecma® (idecabtagene vicleucel; ide-cel) were approved in April 2024 for the treatment of multiple myeloma in earlier lines. In addition, future label expansions into earlier lines of existing therapies are anticipated in 2025 and beyond. The approval of these anti-cancer agents, or any others which may receive regulatory approval, have had a significant impact and may continue to have a significant impact on the therapeutic landscape and our product revenues. See Item 1 under the heading Business - Competition in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023 as filed with the SEC on February 29, 2024 for more information on competition.
Current wording
The discovery, development and commercialization of new drugs is highly competitive, particularly in the cancer field. We and our collaborators face competition with respect to XPOVIO and will face competition with respect to any product candidates that we may seek to discover and develop or commercialize in the future, from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, academic institutions and governmental agencies as well as public and private research institutions worldwide, many of which have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical studies, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than we do. There are a number of major pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that currently market and sell drugs and/or are pursuing the development of drugs for the treatment of cancer and the other disease indications for which we, and our collaborators, are developing our product candidates. Several new novel therapeutics have recently entered, and are expected to continue to enter, the multiple myeloma treatment landscape. For example, TECVAYLI™ (teclistamab-cqyv), the first bispecific T-Cell engager, was approved by the FDA in October 2022, followed by approvals of two more bispecifics, ELREXFIO™ (elranatamab-bcmm) and TALVEY™ (talquetamab-tgvs) in August 2023. Other T-cell engaging therapies, bispecifics with different targets, and immunomodulators are in clinical development and may be introduced into the multiple myeloma market in 2025 and beyond. CARVYKTI® (ciltacabtagene autoleucel; cilta-cel) and Abecma® (idecabtagene vicleucel; ide-cel) were approved in April 2024 for the treatment of multiple myeloma in earlier lines. In addition, new competitors and label expansions into earlier lines of existing therapies could also be approved in the future (e.g. belantamab mafodotin and linvoseltamab), which could negatively impact our product revenues. The approval of these anti-cancer agents, or any others which may receive regulatory approval, have had a significant impact and may continue to have a significant impact on the therapeutic landscape and our product revenues. See Item 1 under the heading Business - Competition in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on February 19, 2025 for more information on competition.
Previous wording
delays or failure to reach agreement with regulatory authorities on a trial design or the receipt of feedback requiring us to modify the design of our clinical trials, perform additional or unanticipated clinical trials to obtain approval or alter our regulatory strategy, as is the case in connection with the feedback we received from the FDA in February 2022 on our SIENDO trial;
Current wording
delays or failure to reach agreement with regulatory authorities on a trial design or the receipt of feedback requiring us to modify the design of our clinical trials, perform additional or unanticipated clinical trials to obtain approval or alter our regulatory strategy, as is the case in connection with the feedback we received from the FDA in February 2022 on our SIENDO trial and the feedback from the FDA that we announced in December 2024 regarding the appropriateness of our global, Phase 3 trial evaluating selinexor as a maintenance therapy following systemic therapy in patients with TP53 wild-type advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (the “EC-042 Trial”) given the evolving treatment landscape for patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer;
Previous wording
enrollment in our clinical trials may be slower than we anticipate, including as a result of competition with other ongoing clinical trials, delays in site activation, higher than expected screen failure rates, newly approved competitive products for the same indications as our product candidates or new or amended regulations; for example, in August 2024, we announced expected delays in our top-line data readout for our global, Phase 3 trial evaluating selinexor as a maintenance therapy following systemic therapy in patients with TP53 wild-type advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (the “EC-042 Study”) due primarily to higher than expected screen failure rates, requiring us to screen a larger number of patients than originally planned;
Current wording
enrollment in our clinical trials may be slower than we anticipate, including as a result of competition with other ongoing clinical trials or recently approved agents, which could decrease the overall supply of patients, or decreasing interest from selected clinical trial sites, delays in site activation, higher than expected screen failure rates, newly approved competitive products for the same indications as our product candidates or new or amended regulations; for example, in August 2024, we announced expected delays in our top-line data readout for our EC-042 Trial due primarily to higher than expected screen failure rates, which has required us to screen a larger number of patients than originally planned;
Previous wording
changes in the treatment landscape on which a clinical development plan was based, such as new therapies; for example, in recent years three new novel agents (dostarlimab-gxly, pembrolizumab and durvalumab) have been approved for treatment in patients with endometrial cancer, which may be applicable to patients eligible for our ongoing EC-042 Study, decreasing the overall supply of patients or decreasing interest from selected clinical trial sites;
Current wording
changes in the treatment landscape on which a clinical development plan was based, such as the approval of new therapies during the course of a clinical trial, can change the potential approvability of a drug even if the results of a pivotal, Phase 3 clinical trial are considered clinically meaningful and the primary endpoints achieve statistical significance since global regulatory agencies, including the FDA, often consider approvability in light of the current treatment landscape at the time of approval, and not at the time when a clinical trial is first designed; for example, in recent years three new novel agents (dostarlimab-gxly, pembrolizumab and durvalumab) have been approved for treatment in patients with endometrial cancer, which has evolved the treatment landscape;
Previous wording
strategic revisions to clinical trial designs, including a change in primary endpoints or a reduction in the total number of patients targeted for enrollment, which could negatively impact our ability to submit and/or receive regulatory approval for the indication sought; for example, we recently decreased the number of total patients to be enrolled in the ongoing Phase 3 trial evaluating selinexor in combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone versus elotuzumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma;
Current wording
strategic revisions to clinical trial designs, including a change in primary endpoints or the total number of patients targeted for enrollment, which could negatively impact our ability to submit and/or receive regulatory approval for the indication sought; for example, in 2024 we decreased the number of total patients to be enrolled in the ongoing Phase 3 trial evaluating selinexor in combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone versus elotuzumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma;
Previous wording
delays or failure in obtaining the necessary authorization from regulatory authorities or ethics committees, including institutional review boards, to permit us, our collaborators or our investigators to commence a clinical trial, conduct a clinical trial at a prospective trial site, or the suspension or termination of a clinical trial once commenced. For example, the continuation of a clinical trial in Europe with the transition to the EU Clinical Trials Regulation (“CTR”) now requires submission of ongoing and new clinical trials conducted in Europe to the Clinical Trial Information System;
Current wording
delays or failure in obtaining the necessary authorization from regulatory authorities or ethics committees, including institutional review boards, to permit us, our collaborators or our investigators to commence a clinical trial, conduct a clinical trial at a prospective trial site, or the suspension or termination of a clinical trial once commenced;
Previous wording
the number of patients required for clinical trials of our product candidates may be larger than we anticipate or participants may drop out of these clinical trials at a higher rate than we anticipate;
Current wording
the number of patients required for clinical trials of our product candidates may be larger than we anticipate or participants may drop out of these clinical trials at a higher rate than we anticipate, which can increase the cost of our trials, extend clinical trial timelines and provide competitors with additional time to seek regulatory approval for their products prior to the finalization of our trials;
Previous wording
for any biomarker driven clinical trial, the potential regulatory requirement to utilize a companion diagnostic, for example the required use of a companion diagnostic for our ongoing clinical trial evaluating selinexor in patients with TP53 wild-type advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer;
Current wording
for any biomarker driven clinical trial, the potential regulatory requirement to develop one or more companion diagnostics; for example, the required development of companion diagnostics for our ongoing clinical trial evaluating selinexor in patients with TP53 wild-type advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer;
Previous wording
If we, or our collaborators, are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our product candidates or a companion diagnostic beyond those that we currently contemplate or are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates or other testing, on a timely basis or at all, and/or if the results of these trials or tests are not positive or are only modestly positive or if there are safety concerns, we, or our collaborators, may:
Current wording
If we, or our collaborators, are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our product candidates or a companion diagnostic beyond those that we currently contemplate or are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates or other testing, on a timely basis or at all, if changes to the external landscape impact our planned patient population or current clinical trial protocols, and/or if the results of these trials or tests are not positive or are only modestly positive or if there are safety concerns, we, or our collaborators, may:
Previous wording
Further, we do not know whether clinical trials will begin as planned, will need to be restructured or will be completed on schedule, or at all. In addition, if we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies governing clinical trials, our development plans may be impacted. For example, in December 2022, with the passage of Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act (“FDORA”), Congress required sponsors to develop and submit a Diversity Action Plan (“DAP”) for each Phase 3 clinical trial or any other “pivotal study” of a new drug or biological product. These plans are meant to encourage the enrollment of more diverse patient populations in late-stage clinical trials of FDA-regulated products. In June 2024, as mandated by FDORA, the FDA issued draft guidance outlining the general requirements for DAPs. Unlike most guidance documents issued by the FDA, the DAP guidance when finalized will have the force of law because FDORA specifically dictates that the form and manner for submission of DAPs are specified in FDA guidance.
Current wording
Further, we do not know whether clinical trials will begin as planned, will need to be restructured or will be completed on schedule, or at all. In addition, if we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies governing clinical trials, our development plans may be impacted. For example, in December 2022, with the passage of Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act (“FDORA”), Congress required sponsors to develop and submit a Diversity Action Plan (“DAP”) for each Phase 3 clinical trial or any other “pivotal study” of a new drug or biological product. These plans are meant to encourage the enrollment of more diverse patient populations in late-stage clinical trials of FDA-regulated products. In June 2024, as mandated by FDORA, the FDA issued draft guidance outlining the general requirements for DAPs. Unlike most guidance documents issued by the FDA, the DAP guidance when finalized will have the force of law because FDORA specifically dictates that the form and manner for submission of DAPs are specified in FDA guidance. The applicability of statutory obligations to submit DAPs and the FDA’s current thinking on best practices for clinical development remain unclear.
Previous wording
Similarly, the regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the EU recently evolved. The CTR, which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. While the Clinical Trials Directive required a separate clinical trial application to be submitted in each member state, to both the competent national health authority and an independent ethics committee, the CTR introduces a centralized process and only requires the submission of a single application to all member states concerned. If we are not able to fulfill these new requirements, our ability to conduct clinical trials may be delayed or halted.
Current wording
Similarly, the regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the EU recently evolved. The Clinical Trials Regulation (“CTR”), which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. While the Clinical Trials Directive required a separate clinical trial application to be submitted in each member state, to both the competent national health authority and an independent ethics committee, the CTR introduces a centralized process and only requires the submission of a single application to all member states concerned.
Previous wording
Adverse events (“AEs”) in our clinical trials for selinexor to date have been generally predictable and typically manageable, including through prophylactic care or dose reductions, although some patients have experienced more serious AEs. The most common drug-related AEs in our clinical trials for selinexor include fatigue, nausea, anorexia, diarrhea, peripheral neuropathy, upper respiratory tract infection, vomiting, cytopenias, hyponatremia, weight loss, decreased appetite, cataract, dizziness, syncope, depressed level of consciousness, and mental status changes. These side effects were generally mild or moderate in severity. The most common AEs that are Grade 3 or Grade 4, meaning they are more than mild or moderate in severity, include thrombocytopenia, lymphopenia, hypophosphatemia, anemia, hyponatremia and neutropenia. To date, the most common AEs in the multiple myeloma patient population have been managed with supportive care and dose modifications. However, a number of patients have withdrawn from our clinical trials as a result of AEs and some patients across our clinical trials have experienced serious AEs deemed by us and the clinical investigator to be related to selinexor. Serious AEs generally refer to AEs that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolonging of hospitalization, or cause a significant and permanent disruption of normal life functions, congenital anomalies or birth defects, or require intervention to prevent such an outcome.
Current wording
Adverse events (“AEs”) in our clinical trials for selinexor to date have been generally predictable and typically manageable, including through prophylactic care or dose reductions, although some patients have experienced more serious AEs. The most common drug-related AEs in our clinical trials for selinexor include fatigue, nausea, anorexia, diarrhea, peripheral neuropathy, upper respiratory tract infection, vomiting, cytopenias, hyponatremia, weight loss, decreased appetite, cataract, dizziness, syncope, depressed level of consciousness, and mental status changes. These side effects were generally mild or moderate in severity. The most common AEs that are Grade 3 or Grade 4, meaning they are more than mild or moderate in severity, include thrombocytopenia, lymphopenia, hypophosphatemia, anemia, hyponatremia and neutropenia. To date, the most common AEs in the multiple myeloma patient population have been managed with supportive care and dose modifications. However, a number of patients had withdrawn from our clinical trials as a result of AEs and some patients across our clinical trials have experienced serious AEs deemed by us and the clinical investigator to be related to selinexor. Serious AEs generally refer to AEs that result in death, are life threatening, require hospitalization or prolonging of hospitalization, or cause a significant and permanent disruption of normal life functions, congenital anomalies or birth defects, or require intervention to prevent such an outcome.
Previous wording
We may publicly disclose preliminary, interim or top-line data from our clinical trials. These interim updates are based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change as further patient data become available and following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or trial. For example, on February 8, 2022, we announced positive top-line data results for our SIENDO trial. On February 25, 2022, we discussed these data with the FDA in a pre-sNDA meeting. We and the FDA meeting participants had differing views on the statistical significance of the study and the overall clinical benefit for the whole study population. For this study or any other study for which we report preliminary, interim or top-line data, we make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data. We may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data or perform all analyses or our conclusions may differ from those of the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Consequently, the interpretation of preliminary, interim or top-line data results that we report may differ from future interpretations of the same studies once additional data have been received and fully evaluated or based on differing views from regulatory agencies, such as in our SIENDO trial. Preliminary, interim or top-line data 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, these early data points should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Adverse differences between previous preliminary or interim data and future interim or final data could significantly harm our business.
Current wording
We may publicly disclose preliminary, interim or top-line data from our clinical trials. These interim updates are based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change as further patient data become available and following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or trial. For any trial for which we report preliminary, interim or top-line data, we make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data. We may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data or perform all analyses or our conclusions may differ from those of the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Consequently, the interpretation of preliminary, interim or top-line data results that we report may differ from future interpretations of the same studies once additional data have been received and fully evaluated or based on differing views from regulatory agencies. Preliminary, interim or top-line data 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, these early data points should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Adverse differences between previous preliminary or interim data and future interim or final data could significantly harm our business.
Previous wording
We are currently advancing multiple clinical development studies of selinexor, which may create a strain on our limited human and financial resources. As a result, we may not be able to provide sufficient resources to any single product candidate to permit the successful development and commercialization of such product candidate, which could result in material harm to our business. Further, because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we focus on research programs and product candidates that we identify for specific indications. As a result, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or for other indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential. For example, in January 2024, we announced that further clinical development of our eltanexor program is on hold in an effort to focus our resources on our prioritized late-stage programs. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and product candidates for specific indications may not yield any additional commercially-viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate.
Current wording
We are currently advancing multiple clinical development studies of selinexor, which may create a strain on our limited human and financial resources. As a result, we may not be able to provide sufficient resources to any single product candidate to permit the successful development and commercialization of such product candidate, which could result in material harm to our business. Further, because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we focus on research programs and product candidates that we identify for specific indications. As a result, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or for other indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential. For example, as announced in January 2024, further clinical development of our eltanexor program continues to remain on hold in an effort to focus our resources on our prioritized late-stage programs. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and product candidates for specific indications may not yield any additional commercially-viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate.
Previous wording
We have built a commercial infrastructure in the U.S. for XPOVIO, our first commercial product, in hematological malignancies and our company did not previously have any prior experience in the sales, marketing or distribution of pharmaceutical drugs. If XPOVIO or any of our product candidates is approved for additional indications beyond hematological malignancies, such as solid tumors, we may need to evolve our sales, marketing and distribution capabilities and we may not be able to do so successfully or on a timely basis. In the future, we may choose to expand our sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure to market or co-promote one or more of our product candidates, if and when they are approved, or enter into additional collaborations with respect to the sale, marketing and distribution of our product candidates. We are working with existing and potential partners to establish the commercial infrastructure to support the sale of selinexor outside of the U.S. For example, we entered into a license agreement with the Menarini Group (“Menarini”) in December 2021, and as amended in March 2023, to, among other things, develop and commercialize NEXPOVIO®(selinexor) for all human oncology indications in Europe (including the United Kingdom (“UK”)), Latin America, certain Middle East and Africa regions and other key countries. For additional risks associated with commercializing our products outside of the U.S., please see the risk factor entitled “We depend on collaborations with third parties for certain aspects of the development, marketing and/or commercialization of XPOVIO and/or our product candidates. If those collaborations are not successful, or if we are not able to maintain our existing collaborations or establish additional collaborations, we may have to alter our development and commercialization plans and may not be able to capitalize on the market potential of XPOVIO or our product candidates” below.
Current wording
We have built a commercial infrastructure in the U.S. for XPOVIO, our first commercial product, in hematological malignancies and our company did not previously have any prior experience in the sales, marketing or distribution of pharmaceutical drugs. If XPOVIO or any of our product candidates is approved for additional indications beyond hematological malignancies, such as solid tumors, we may need to evolve our sales, marketing and distribution capabilities and we may not be able to do so successfully or on a timely basis. In the future, we may choose to expand our sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure to market or co-promote one or more of our product candidates, if and when they are approved, or enter into additional collaborations with respect to the sale, marketing and distribution of our product candidates. We are working with existing and potential partners to establish the commercial infrastructure to support the sale of selinexor outside of the U.S. For example, we entered into a license agreement with the Menarini Group (“Menarini”) in December 2021, and as amended in March 2023, to, among other things, develop and commercialize NEXPOVIO® for all human oncology indications in Europe (including the United Kingdom (“UK”)), Latin America, certain Middle East and Africa regions and other key countries. For additional risks associated with commercializing our products outside of the U.S., please see the risk factor entitled “We depend on collaborations with third parties for certain aspects of the development, marketing and/or commercialization of XPOVIO and/or our product candidates. If those collaborations are not successful, or if we are not able to maintain our existing collaborations or establish additional collaborations, we may have to alter our development and commercialization plans and may not be able to capitalize on the market potential of XPOVIO or our product candidates” below.
Previous wording
economic weakness, including the uncertainty associated with worldwide economic conditions as a result of inflation, sustained high interest rates, natural disasters and military conflicts, including the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, the war between Israel and Hamas, the Palestinian group that controls the Gaza Strip, volatility in currency exchange rates, pandemics or other public health emergencies, or political instability in particular foreign economies and markets;
Current wording
economic weakness, including the uncertainty associated with worldwide economic conditions as a result of tariffs, inflation, sustained high interest rates, natural disasters and military conflicts, including the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, volatility in currency exchange rates, pandemics or other public health emergencies, or political instability in particular foreign economies and markets;
Previous wording
business interruptions resulting from geo-political actions, including war and terrorism, such as the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine, the war between Israel and Hamas, pandemics or other public health emergencies, climate change or natural disasters, including earthquakes, hurricanes, typhoons, floods and fires; and
Current wording
business interruptions resulting from geo-political actions, including war and terrorism, such as the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, pandemics or other public health emergencies, climate change or natural disasters, including earthquakes, hurricanes, typhoons, floods and fires; and
Previous wording
The FDA or other regulatory authorities may determine that (i) our product candidates are not safe and effective, only moderately effective or have undesirable or unintended side effects, toxicities or other characteristics that preclude our obtaining marketing approval or prevent or limit commercial use; (ii) the dose used in a clinical trial has not been optimized and require us to conduct additional dose optimization studies; or (iii) the comparator arm in a trial is no longer the appropriate comparator due to the evolution of the competitive landscape or subsequent data of the comparator product, even if the FDA or other regulatory authority had previously approved the trial design, and we may be required to amend the trial or we may not receive approval of the indication. For example, the FDA’s Oncology Center of Excellence has a number of projects to advance the development and regulation of medical products for patients with cancer, such as Project Optimus to reform the dose optimization and dose selection paradigm in oncology drug development to emphasize selection of an optimal dose. These projects may require sponsors to spend additional time and resources either pre- or post-approval, and our ability to complete existing trials or initiate new trials may be delayed.
Current wording
The FDA or other regulatory authorities may determine that (i) our product candidates do not have an overall positive benefit-risk profile; (ii) the dose used in a clinical trial has not been optimized and require us to conduct additional dose optimization studies; or (iii) the comparator arm and/or endpoint in a trial is no longer the appropriate comparator or endpoint due to the evolution of the competitive landscape or subsequent data of the comparator product, even if the FDA or other regulatory authority had previously approved the trial design, and we may be required to amend the trial or we may not receive approval of the indication. For example, in December 2024, we announced that we were engaged in discussions with the FDA regarding the evolving treatment landscape in advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer, particularly the approval of checkpoint inhibitors (e.g., pembrolizumab, dostarlimab-gxly and durvalumab). We have submitted to the FDA and intend to submit to other relevant global regulatory authorities an amendment to the EC-042 Trial protocol incorporating modifications, which we believe are responsive to certain of the FDA’s concerns. However, the FDA may not agree that some or all of our proposed modifications to the EC-042 Trial adequately address their concerns, which may ultimately impact approvability. In addition, the FDA’s Oncology Center of Excellence has a number of projects to advance the development and regulation of medical products for patients with cancer, such as Project Optimus to reform the dose optimization and dose selection paradigm in oncology drug development to emphasize selection of an optimal dose. These projects exemplify the emphasis the FDA is placing on various elements in the drug development process and therefore may require sponsors to spend additional time and resources either pre- or post-approval, and our ability to complete existing trials or initiate new trials may be delayed.
Previous wording
Further, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act (“PREA”), an NDA or supplement to an NDA for certain drugs must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective, unless the sponsor receives a deferral or waiver from the FDA. A deferral may be granted for several reasons, including a finding that the product or therapeutic candidate is ready for approval for use in adults before pediatric trials are complete or that additional safety or effectiveness data needs to be collected before the pediatric trials begin. The law requires the FDA to send a PREA Non-Compliance letter to sponsors who have failed to submit their pediatric assessments required under PREA, have failed to seek or obtain a deferral or deferral extension or have failed to request approval for a required pediatric formulation. It further requires the FDA to publicly post the PREA Non-Compliance letter and sponsor’s response. The applicable legislation in the EU also requires sponsors to either conduct clinical trials in a pediatric population in accordance with a Pediatric Investigation Plan approved by the Pediatric Committee of the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”) or to obtain a waiver or deferral from the conduct of these studies by this Committee. For any of our product candidates for which we or our collaborators are seeking regulatory approval in the U.S. or the EU, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain a waiver or alternatively complete any required studies and other requirements in a timely manner, or at all, which could result in an issuance and publication of a PREA Non-Compliance letter and associated reputational harm, our product candidate being considered misbranded and subject to relevant enforcement action, invalidation of the marketing application, and/or financial penalties. Our collaborators are also subject to similar requirements outside of the U.S. and the EU and thus the attendant risks and uncertainties.
Current wording
Further, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act (“PREA”), an New Drug Application (“NDA”) or supplement to an NDA for certain drugs must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective, unless the sponsor receives a deferral or waiver from the FDA. A deferral may be granted for several reasons, including a finding that the product or therapeutic candidate is ready for approval for use in adults before pediatric trials are complete or that additional safety or effectiveness data needs to be collected before the pediatric trials begin. The law requires the FDA to send a PREA Non-Compliance letter to sponsors who have failed to submit their pediatric assessments required under PREA, have failed to seek or obtain a deferral or deferral extension or have failed to request approval for a required pediatric formulation. It further requires the FDA to publicly post the PREA Non-Compliance letter and sponsor’s response. The applicable legislation in the EU also requires sponsors to either conduct clinical trials in a pediatric population in accordance with a Pediatric Investigation Plan approved by the Pediatric Committee of the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”) or to obtain a waiver or deferral from the conduct of these studies by this Committee. For any of our product candidates for which we or our collaborators are seeking regulatory approval in the U.S. or the EU, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain a waiver or alternatively complete any required studies and other requirements in a timely manner, or at all, which could result in an issuance and publication of a PREA Non-Compliance letter and associated reputational harm, our product candidate being considered misbranded and subject to relevant enforcement action, invalidation of the marketing application, and/or financial penalties. Our collaborators are also subject to similar requirements outside of the U.S. and the EU and thus the attendant risks and uncertainties.
Previous wording
Finally, our ability to develop and market new drug products may be impacted by litigation challenging the FDA’s approval of another company’s drug product. In April 2023, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas invalidated the approval by the FDA of mifepristone, a drug product which was originally approved in 2000 and whose distribution is governed by various measures adopted under a REMS. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit declined to order the removal of mifepristone from the market but did hold that plaintiffs were likely to prevail in their claim that changes allowing for expanded access of mifepristone, which the FDA authorized in 2016 and 2021, were arbitrary and capricious. In June 2024, the Supreme Court reversed that decision after unanimously finding that the plaintiffs (anti-abortion doctors and organizations) did not have standing to bring this legal action against the FDA. On October 11, 2024, the Attorneys General of three states (Missouri, Idaho and Kansas) filed an amended complaint in the district court in Texas challenging FDA’s actions. Depending on the outcome of this litigation, our ability to develop new drug product candidates and to maintain approval of existing drug products could be delayed, undermined or subject to protracted litigation.
Current wording
Our ability to develop and market new drug products may also be impacted by litigation challenging the FDA’s approval of another company’s drug product. In April 2023, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas invalidated the approval by the FDA of mifepristone, a drug product which was originally approved in 2000 and whose distribution is governed by various measures adopted under a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (“REMS”). The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit declined to order the removal of mifepristone from the market but did hold that plaintiffs were likely to prevail in their claim that changes allowing for expanded access of mifepristone, which the FDA authorized in 2016 and 2021, were arbitrary and capricious. In June 2024, the Supreme Court reversed that decision after unanimously finding that the plaintiffs (anti-abortion doctors and organizations) did not have standing to bring this legal action against the FDA. On October 11, 2024, the Attorneys General of three states (Missouri, Idaho and Kansas) filed an amended complaint in the district court in Texas challenging FDA’s actions. On January 16, 2025, the District Court agreed to allow these states to file an amended complaint and continue to pursue this challenge. Depending on the outcome of this litigation, our ability to develop new drug product candidates and to maintain approval of existing drug products could be delayed, undermined or subject to protracted litigation.
Previous wording
regulatory authorities may require more information, including additional preclinical or clinical data or trials, to support approval, as in the case of our trial for patients with TP53 wild-type advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer following discussions with the FDA in early 2022 on our SIENDO trial;
Current wording
regulatory authorities may require more information, including additional preclinical or clinical data or trials, to support approval, as in the case of our initiation of the EC-042 Study for patients with TP53 wild-type advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer following discussions with the FDA in early 2022 on our SIENDO trial;
Previous wording
the size of the patient population required to establish the efficacy of our or our collaborators’ product candidates to the satisfaction of regulatory agencies may be larger than we or they anticipated;
Current wording
the size of the patient population required to establish the effectiveness of our or our collaborators’ product candidates to the satisfaction of regulatory agencies may be larger than we or they anticipated;
Previous wording
regulatory authorities may not be able to undertake reviews, applicable inspections or approval processes in a timely manner;
Current wording
regulatory authorities may not be able to undertake reviews, applicable inspections or approval processes in a timely manner including as the result of the implementation of policies by the current Trump administration that may affect the
Previous wording
regulatory authorities may not agree with our or our collaborators’ regulatory approval strategies or components of our or their regulatory filings, such as the design or implementation of the relevant clinical trials; for example, the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities may not agree with our decision to decrease the total number of patients to be enrolled in the ongoing Phase 3 multiple myeloma trial; or
Current wording
regulatory authorities may not agree with our or our collaborators’ regulatory approval strategies or components of our or their regulatory filings, such as the design or implementation of the relevant clinical trials; for example, the FDA identified multiple risks related to our decision to decrease the total number of patients to be enrolled in our ongoing Phase 3 multiple myeloma trial, including the ability to adequately assess benefit-risk with a limited number of patients; or
Previous wording
Since a significant proportion of the regulatory framework for pharmaceutical products in the UK covering the quality, safety, and efficacy of pharmaceutical products, clinical trials, marketing authorization, commercial sales, and distribution of pharmaceutical products is derived from EU directives and regulations, Brexit may have a material impact upon the regulatory regime with respect to the development, manufacture, importation, approval and commercialization of our product candidates in the UK. For example, the UK is no longer covered by the centralized procedures for obtaining EU-wide marketing authorization from the EMA, and a separate marketing authorization will be required to market our product candidates in the UK. From January 1, 2025 on, a new international recognition procedure (“IRP”) will apply, which intends to facilitate approval of pharmaceutical products in the UK. The IRP is open to applicants that have already received an authorization for the same product from one of the MHRA’s specified Reference Regulators (“RRs”). The RRs notably include EMA and regulators in the EU/European Economic Area (“EEA”) member states for approvals in the EU centralized procedure and mutual recognition procedure as well as the FDA (for product approvals granted in the U.S.). However, the concrete functioning of the IRP is currently unclear. Any delay in obtaining, or an inability to obtain, any marketing approvals, as a result of Brexit or otherwise, may force us or our collaborators to restrict or delay efforts to seek regulatory approval in the UK for our product candidates, which could significantly and materially harm our business.
Current wording
As of January 1, 2025, a new International Recognition Procedure (“IRP”) applies, which intends to facilitate approval of pharmaceutical products in the UK. The IRP is open to applicants that have already received an authorization for the same product from one of the MHRA’s specified Reference Regulators (“RRs”). The RRs notably include EMA and regulators in the EU/European Economic Area (“EEA”) member states for approvals in the EU centralized procedure and mutual recognition procedure as well as the FDA (for product approvals granted in the U.S.). However, the concrete functioning of the IRP is currently unclear. Any delay in obtaining, or an inability to obtain, any marketing approvals, may force us or our collaborators to restrict or delay efforts to seek regulatory approval in the UK for our product candidates, which could significantly and materially harm our business.
Previous wording
There can be no assurance that the FDA or foreign regulatory agencies will agree with our, or our collaborators’, surrogate endpoints or intermediate clinical endpoints in any of our, or their, clinical trials, or that we, or our collaborators, will decide to pursue or submit any additional New Drug Applications (“NDA”) for accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval. Similarly, there can be no assurance that, after feedback from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory agencies, we, or our collaborators, will continue to pursue or apply for accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval. Furthermore, for any submission of an application for accelerated approval or application under another expedited regulatory designation, there can be no assurance that such submission or application will be accepted for filing or that any expedited development, review or approval will be granted on a timely basis, or at all.
Current wording
There can be no assurance that the FDA or foreign regulatory agencies will agree with our, or our collaborators’, surrogate endpoints or intermediate clinical endpoints in any of our, or their, clinical trials, or that we, or our collaborators, will decide to pursue or submit any additional NDA for accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval. Similarly, there can be no assurance that, after feedback from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory agencies, we, or our collaborators, will continue to pursue or apply for accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval. Furthermore, for any submission of an application for accelerated approval or application under another expedited regulatory designation, there can be no assurance that such submission or application will be accepted for filing or that any expedited development, review or approval will be granted on a timely basis, or at all.
Previous wording
In March 2023, the FDA issued draft guidance that outlines its current thinking and approach to accelerated approval. The FDA indicated that the accelerated approval pathway is commonly used for approval of oncology drugs due to the serious and life-threatening nature of cancer. Although single-arm trials have been commonly used to support accelerated approval, a randomized controlled trial is the preferred approach as it provides a more robust efficacy and safety assessment and allows for direct comparisons to an available therapy. To that end, the FDA outlined considerations for designing, conducting, and analyzing data for trials intended to support accelerated approvals of oncology therapeutics. While this guidance is currently only in draft form and will ultimately not be legally binding even when finalized, we will need to observe the FDA’s guidance closely to ensure that our products qualify for accelerated approval.
Current wording
In March 2023, the FDA issued draft guidance that outlines its current thinking and approach to accelerated approval. The FDA indicated that the accelerated approval pathway is commonly used for approval of oncology drugs due to the serious and life-threatening nature of cancer. Although single-arm trials have been commonly used to support accelerated approval, a randomized controlled trial is the preferred approach as it provides a more robust efficacy and safety assessment and allows for direct comparisons to an available therapy. To that end, the FDA outlined considerations for designing, conducting, and analyzing data for trials intended to support accelerated approvals of oncology therapeutics. Subsequently, in December 2024 and January 2025, the FDA issued additional draft guidances relating to accelerated approval. These guidances describe FDA’s latest thinking on what it means to conduct a confirmatory trial with due diligence and how the FDA plans to interpret whether such a study needs to be underway at the time of approval. While these guidances are currently only in draft form and will ultimately not be legally binding even when finalized, sponsors typically observe the FDA’s guidance closely to ensure that their investigational products qualify for accelerated approval.
Previous wording
Once marketing approval has been granted, an approved product and its manufacturer and marketer are subject to ongoing review and extensive regulation. XPOVIO and any of our product candidates for which we, or our collaborators, obtain marketing approval in the future, as well as the manufacturing processes, post-approval studies and measures, labeling, advertising and promotional activities for such drug, among other things, will be subject to continual requirements of and review by the FDA and other U.S. and foreign regulatory authorities. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration and listing requirements, requirements relating to manufacturing, quality control, quality assurance and corresponding maintenance of records and documents, and requirements regarding the distribution of samples to physicians and recordkeeping. For example, as a condition of the XPOVIO approval by the FDA for the multiple myeloma and DLBCL indications, we are required to complete certain post-marketing commitments. Even if marketing approval of a product candidate is granted, the approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which the drug may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, including the requirement to implement a REMS, which could include requirements for a restricted distribution system.
Current wording
Once marketing approval has been granted, an approved product and its manufacturer and marketer are subject to ongoing review and extensive regulation. XPOVIO and any of our product candidates for which we, or our collaborators, obtain marketing approval in the future, as well as the manufacturing processes, post-approval studies and measures, labeling, advertising and promotional activities for such drug, among other things, will be subject to continual requirements of and review by the FDA and other U.S. and foreign regulatory authorities. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration and listing requirements, requirements relating to manufacturing, quality control, quality assurance and corresponding maintenance of records and documents, and requirements regarding the distribution of samples to physicians and record keeping. For example, as a condition of the XPOVIO accelerated approvals by the FDA for the multiple myeloma and DLBCL indications, we are required to complete certain post-marketing commitments. There is no assurance that we will be able to timely complete such obligations. Failure to comply with such requirements may have an adverse impact on the accelerated approval status of selinexor in DLBCL. Even if marketing approval of a product candidate is granted, the approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which the drug may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, including the requirement to implement a REMS, which could include requirements for a restricted distribution system.
Previous wording
The FDA also imposes requirements for costly post-marketing studies or clinical trials to maintain approval of any products that received accelerated or conditional approval. For drugs approved under the FDA’s Accelerated Approval Program, the FDA typically requires post-marketing confirmatory trials to evaluate the anticipated effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. These confirmatory trials must be completed with due diligence. For example, in June 2020, the FDA approved XPOVIO to treat DLBCL under the FDA’s accelerated approval regulations and as a condition of the accelerated approval for this indication we are required to comply with a number of post-approval requirements. We may not be able to successfully and timely complete these post-approval requirements or any other post-marketing confirmatory study as required to maintain approval or achieve full approval of our products. If required post-approval studies fail to verify the clinical benefits of our products or confirm that the surrogate marker used for accelerated approval of our products showed an adequate correlation with clinical outcomes, if a sufficient number of participants cannot be enrolled, or if we fail to perform the required post-approval studies with due diligence or on a timely basis, the FDA has the authority to withdraw approval of the drug following a hearing conducted under the FDA’s regulations, which could have a material adverse impact on our business. We cannot be certain of the results of the confirmatory clinical studies for the DLBCL indication or any other future conditional approval we receive or what action the FDA may take if the results of those studies are not as expected based on clinical data that FDA has already reviewed.
Current wording
The FDA also imposes requirements for costly post-marketing studies or clinical trials to maintain approval of any products that received accelerated or conditional approval. For drugs approved under the FDA’s Accelerated Approval Program, the FDA typically requires post-marketing confirmatory trials to evaluate the anticipated effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. These confirmatory trials must be completed with due diligence. For example, in June 2020, the FDA approved XPOVIO to treat DLBCL under the FDA’s accelerated approval regulations and as a condition of the accelerated approval for this indication we are required to comply with a number of post-approval requirements. We may not be able to successfully and timely complete these post-approval requirements, obtain an extension, if needed, or complete any other post-marketing confirmatory study as required to maintain approval or achieve full approval of our products. If required post-approval studies fail to verify the clinical benefits of our products or confirm that the surrogate marker used for accelerated approval of our products showed an adequate correlation with clinical outcomes, if a sufficient number of participants cannot be enrolled, or if we fail to perform the required post-approval studies with due diligence or on a timely basis, the FDA has the authority to withdraw approval of the drug following a hearing conducted under the FDA’s regulations, which could have a material adverse impact on our business. We cannot be certain of the results of the confirmatory clinical studies for the DLBCL indication or any other future conditional approval we receive or what action the FDA may take if the results of those studies are not as expected based on clinical data that FDA has already reviewed.
Previous wording
Similar risks to those described above are also applicable to any application that we, or our collaborators, have submitted or may submit in other jurisdictions outside of the U.S., including applications submitted to the EMA to support approval of selinexor to treat heavily pretreated multiple myeloma, relapsed or refractory DLBCL, or any other cancer indication. For medicinal products where the benefit of immediate availability outweighs the risk of less comprehensive data than normally required, based on the scope and criteria defined in legislation and guidelines, it is possible to obtain a conditional marketing authorization in the EU with a 12-month validity period and annual renewal pursuant to Regulation No 507/2006. These are granted only if the EMA’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (“CHMP”) finds that all four of the following requirements are met: (i) the benefit-risk balance of the product is positive; (ii) it is likely that the sponsor will be able to provide comprehensive data; (iii) unmet medical needs will be fulfilled; and (iv) the benefit to public health of the medicinal product’s immediate availability on the market outweighs the risks due to the need for further data.
Current wording
Similar risks to those described above are also applicable to any application that we, or our collaborators, have submitted or may submit in other jurisdictions outside of the U.S., including applications submitted to the EMA to support approval of selinexor to treat patients with multiple myeloma or any other cancer indication. For medicinal products where the benefit of immediate availability outweighs the risk of less comprehensive data than normally required, based on the scope and criteria defined in legislation and guidelines, it is possible to obtain a conditional marketing authorization for a new drug in the EU with a 12-month validity period and annual renewal pursuant to Regulation No 507/2006. These are granted only if the EMA’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (“CHMP”) finds that all four of the following requirements are met: (i) the benefit-risk balance of the product is positive; (ii) it is likely that the sponsor will be able to provide comprehensive data; (iii) unmet medical needs will be fulfilled; and (iv) the benefit to public health of the medicinal product’s immediate availability on the market outweighs the risks due to the need for further data.
Previous wording
The FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities may also impose requirements for costly surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of an approved drug. The FDA and other U.S. or foreign agencies, including the DOJ, closely regulate and monitor the post-approval marketing and promotion of drugs to ensure that they are manufactured, marketed and distributed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. The FDA imposes stringent restrictions on manufacturers’ communications regarding off-label use, and if we, or our collaborators communicate about any of our product candidates for which we, or they, receive marketing approval in a way that regulators assert goes beyond their approved indications, we, or they, may be subject to warnings or enforcement action for off-label marketing. Alleged violations of the FDCA or other statutes, including the False Claims Act (the “FCA”), relating to the promotion and advertising of prescription drugs may lead to investigations or allegations of violations of federal and state health care fraud and abuse laws and state consumer protection laws.
Current wording
The FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities may also impose requirements for costly surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of an approved drug. The FDA and other U.S. or foreign agencies, including the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”), closely regulate and monitor the post-approval marketing and promotion of drugs to ensure that they are manufactured, marketed and distributed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. The FDA imposes stringent restrictions on manufacturers’ communications regarding off-label use, and if we, or our collaborators communicate about any of our product candidates for which we, or they, receive marketing approval in a way that regulators assert goes beyond their approved indications, we, or they, may be subject to warnings or enforcement action for off-label marketing. Alleged violations of the FDCA or other statutes, including the False Claims Act (the “FCA”), relating to the promotion and advertising of prescription drugs may lead to investigations or allegations of violations of federal and state health care fraud and abuse laws and state consumer protection laws.
Previous wording
We will need to carefully navigate the FDA’s various regulations, guidance and policies, along with recently enacted legislation, to ensure compliance with restrictions governing promotion of our products. In September 2021, the FDA published final regulations which describe the types of evidence that the agency will consider in determining the intended use of a drug or biologic. Moreover, with passage of the Pre-Approval Information Exchange Act in December 2022, sponsors of products that have not been approved may proactively communicate to payors certain information about products in development to help expedite patient access upon product approval. In addition, in October 2023, the FDA published draft guidance outlining the agency’s non-binding policies governing the distribution of scientific information on unapproved uses to healthcare providers. This draft guidance calls for such communications to be truthful, non-misleading, factual, and unbiased and include all information necessary for healthcare providers to interpret the strengths and weaknesses and validity and utility of the information about the unapproved use.
Current wording
We will need to carefully navigate the FDA’s various regulations, guidance and policies, along with recently enacted legislation, to ensure compliance with restrictions governing promotion of our products. In September 2021, the FDA published final regulations which describe the types of evidence that the agency will consider in determining the intended use of a drug or biologic. Moreover, with passage of the Pre-Approval Information Exchange Act in December 2022, sponsors of products that have not been approved may proactively communicate to payors certain information about products in development to help expedite patient access upon product approval. In addition, in January 2025, the FDA published final guidance outlining the agency’s non-binding policies governing the distribution of scientific information on unapproved uses to healthcare providers. This final guidance calls for such communications to be truthful, non-misleading, factual, and unbiased and include all information necessary for healthcare providers to interpret the strengths and weaknesses and validity and utility of the information about the unapproved use. If a company engages in such communications consistent with the guidance’s recommendations, the FDA indicated that it will not treat such communications as evidence of unlawful promotion of a new intended use for the approved product.
Previous wording
If we, or our collaborators, are required by the FDA, EMA or comparable regulatory authority to obtain clearance or approval of a companion diagnostic test in connection with approval of any of our product candidates or a group of therapeutic products, and we or they do not obtain or there are delays in obtaining clearance or approval of a diagnostic test, we may not be able to commercialize the product candidate and our ability to generate revenue may be materially impaired.
Current wording
If we, or our collaborators, are required by the FDA, EMA or comparable regulatory authority to obtain clearance or approval of one or more companion diagnostic tests in connection with approval of any of our product candidates or a group of therapeutic products, and we or they do not obtain or there are delays in obtaining clearance or approval of a diagnostic test, we may not be able to commercialize the product candidate and our ability to generate revenue may be materially impaired.
Previous wording
In connection with our ongoing development of a registration-enabling study of selinexor in patients whose endometrial cancer is TP53 wild-type, we are utilizing a companion diagnostic. To be successful in developing and commercializing product candidates in combination with companion diagnostics, we or our collaborators will need to address a number of scientific, technical, regulatory and logistical challenges. According to FDA guidance, if the FDA determines that a companion diagnostic device is essential to ensuring the safety and effectiveness of a novel therapeutic product or new indication, the FDA generally will not approve the therapeutic product or new therapeutic product indication if the companion diagnostic is not also approved or cleared. In certain circumstances (for example, when a therapeutic product is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition for which no satisfactory available therapy exists or when the labelling of an approved product needs to be revised to address a serious safety issue), however, the FDA may approve a therapeutic product without the prior or contemporaneous marketing authorization of a companion diagnostic. In this case, approval of a companion diagnostic may be a post-marketing requirement or commitment.
Current wording
In connection with our ongoing development of selinexor in patients whose endometrial cancer is TP53 wild-type, we are utilizing a companion diagnostic to identify patients whose tumors are TP53 wild-type. We may be required to develop a second companion diagnostic pending the ultimate patient population included in the potential label for our endometrial indication. To be successful in developing and commercializing product candidates in combination with companion diagnostics, we or our collaborators will need to address a number of scientific, technical, regulatory and logistical challenges. According to FDA guidance, if the FDA determines that a companion diagnostic device is essential to ensuring the safety and effectiveness of a novel therapeutic product or new indication, the FDA generally will not approve the therapeutic product or new therapeutic product indication if the companion diagnostic is not also approved or cleared. In certain circumstances (for example, when a therapeutic product is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition for which no satisfactory available therapy exists or when the labelling of an approved product needs to be revised to address a serious safety issue), however, the FDA may approve a therapeutic product without the prior or contemporaneous marketing authorization of a companion diagnostic. In this case, approval of a companion diagnostic may be a post-marketing requirement or commitment.
Previous wording
The PMA process, including the gathering of preclinical and clinical data and the submission and review by the FDA, can take several years or longer. It involves a rigorous pre-market review during which the sponsor must prepare and provide the FDA with reasonable assurance of the device’s safety and effectiveness and information about the device and its components regarding, among other things, device design, manufacturing, and labeling. After a device is placed on the market, it remains subject to significant regulatory requirements, including requirements governing development, testing, manufacturing, distribution, marketing, promotion, labeling, import, export, record-keeping, and adverse event reporting. Similar risks to those described above are also applicable to any companion diagnostic that we, or our collaborators, utilize in our clinical trials in connection with approval of a product candidate outside of the U.S. For example, in the EU, until May 25, 2022, in vitro diagnostic medical devices were regulated by Directive 98/79/EC (the “IVDD”), which has been repealed and replaced by Regulation (EU) No 2017/746 (the “IVDR”). The regulation of companion diagnostics is now subject to further requirements set forth in the IVDR. Companion diagnostics will have to undergo a conformity assessment by a notified body. Before it can issue an EU certificate, the notified body must seek a scientific opinion from the EMA on the suitability of the companion diagnostic to the medicinal product concerned if the medicinal product falls exclusively within the scope of the centralized procedure for the authorization of medicines, or the medicinal product is already authorized through the centralized procedure, or a marketing authorization application for the medicinal product has been submitted through the centralized procedure. As part of the process to obtain a CE-mark for the FMI FoundationOne®CDx for the purpose of determining TP53 wild-type status for use of selinexor in the maintenance treatment of TP53 wild-type endometrial cancer patients, a performance study is required which leverages our EC-042 Study (e.g., using the unapproved FoundationOne®CDx IVD to screen for TP53 wild-type patients in the EC-042 Study and using the data generated to validate the CDx itself). As the regulations are relatively new, the industry is gaining experience in the compilation of these submissions while the national Competent Authorities and the respective Ethics Committees are also gaining expertise in assessing these applications. As a result, the assessment deadlines of these performance study submissions and amendments are often not met. These new regulations have and could continue to negatively impact the pace of enrollment in our clinical trials. For example, in 2023, site activation for our Phase 3 clinical trial in endometrial cancer was delayed in the EU due to the new IVDR regulations. Consequently, the ability to use the FoundationOne®CDx in vitro diagnos…
Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.
Current wording
The PMA process, including the gathering of clinical data and the submission and review by the FDA, can take several years or longer. It involves a rigorous pre-market review during which the sponsor must prepare and provide the FDA with reasonable assurance of the device’s safety and effectiveness and information about the device and its components regarding, among other things, device design, manufacturing, and labeling. After a device is placed on the market, it remains subject to significant regulatory requirements, including requirements, such as the Quality Management System Regulation as part of 21 CFR 820, which governs development, testing, manufacturing, distribution, marketing, promotion, labeling, import, export, record-keeping, and adverse event reporting. Similar risks to those described above are also applicable to any companion diagnostic that we, or our collaborators, utilize in our clinical trials in connection with approval of a product candidate outside of the U.S. For example, in the EU, until May 25, 2022, in vitro diagnostic medical devices were regulated by Directive 98/79/EC (the “IVDD”), which has been repealed and replaced by Regulation (EU) No 2017/746 (the “IVDR”). The regulation of companion diagnostics is now subject to further requirements set forth in the IVDR. Companion diagnostics will have to undergo a conformity assessment by a notified body. Before it can issue an EU certificate, the notified body must seek a scientific opinion from the EMA on the suitability of the companion diagnostic to the medicinal product concerned if the medicinal product falls exclusively within the scope of the centralized procedure for the authorization of medicines, or the medicinal product is already authorized through the centralized procedure, or a marketing authorization application for the medicinal product has been submitted through the centralized procedure. As part of the process to obtain a CE-mark for the FMI FoundationOne®CDx for the purpose of determining TP53 wild-type status for use of selinexor in the maintenance treatment of TP53 wild-type endometrial cancer patients, a performance study is required which leverages our EC-042 Trial (e.g., using the unapproved FoundationOne®CDx IVD to screen for TP53 wild-type patients in the EC-042 Trial and using the data generated to validate the CDx itself). As the regulations are relatively new, the industry is gaining experience in the compilation of these submissions while the national Competent Authorities and the respective Ethics Committees are also gaining expertise in assessing these applications. As a result, the assessment deadlines of these performance study submissions and amendments are often not met. These new regulations have and could continue to negatively impact the pace of enrollment in our clinical trials. For example, in 2023, site activation for our Phase 3 clinical trial in endometrial cancer was delayed in the EU due to the new IVDR regulations. Consequent…
Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.
Previous wording
Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new product candidates to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA and the SEC, have had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, future government shutdowns could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue our operations.
Current wording
In addition, government funding of the SEC and other government agencies on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities, is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. For example, over the last several years, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA and the SEC, have had to furlough critical FDA, SEC and other government employees and stop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions and could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue our operations.
Showing the first 40 of 80 pairs. Open the source sections for the rest.
Rearranged current paragraphs (4)
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
Switzerland has also approved an adequacy decision in relation to the Swiss-U.S. Data Privacy Framework (which functions similarly to the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework and the U.S.-UK Data Bridge in relation to data transfers from Switzerland to the U.S.). Any changes or updates to these developments have the potential to impact our business.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
If adequate funds are not available to us on a timely basis or on attractive terms, we may be required to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development programs or any current or future commercialization efforts for one or more of our products or product candidates, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and prospects.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
Holders may require us to repurchase their 2029 Notes or 2025 Notes following a fundamental change at a cash repurchase price generally equal to the principal amount of the 2029 Notes or the 2025 Notes to be repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest. As discussed in more detail below under the risk factor entitled “If we fail to maintain compliance with the continued listing requirements of Nasdaq, our common stock could be delisted from trading, which would adversely affect the liquidity of our common stock and our ability to raise additional capital.”, the transfer of the listing of our common stock to the Nasdaq Capital Market would constitute a fundamental change under the indenture governing the 2025 Notes, which could negatively impact our financial condition. In addition, with respect to the 2025 Notes, unless we elect to deliver solely shares of our common stock to settle conversions (other than paying cash in lieu of delivering any fractional share), we must satisfy any conversion in cash.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
IL-12 in targeted therapeutics. We cannot be certain that any other patents will issue with claims that cover any of our key products, product candidates or other discoveries.
Rearranged previous paragraphs (2)
Previous report — wording carried elsewhere
Medicare Part B payments for certain physician-administered pharmaceuticals to the lowest price paid in other economically advanced countries, effective January 1, 2021. That rule, however, has been subject to a nationwide preliminary injunction and, on December 29, 2021, CMS issued a final rule to rescind it. With issuance of this rule, CMS stated that it will explore all options to incorporate value into payments for Medicare Part B pharmaceuticals and improve beneficiaries’ access to evidence-based care.
Previous report — wording carried elsewhere
We may not have the ability to raise the funds necessary to settle any conversions of or other obligations in respect of the 2029 Notes or the 2025 Notes required to be settled in cash, to repurchase the 2029 Notes or the 2025 Notes for cash upon a fundamental change, to pay the redemption price for any 2029 Notes or 2025 Notes we redeem or to refinance the 2029 Notes or the 2025 Notes, and any future debt we incur may contain limitations on our ability to pay cash upon conversion or repurchase of the 2029 Notes or the 2025 Notes.