TuHURA Biosciences, Inc./NV

Current report

The prices of prescription pharmaceuticals have also been the subject of considerable discussion in the United States. There have been several recent U.S. congressional inquiries, as well as proposed and enacted state and federal legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to pharmaceutical pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reduce the costs of pharmaceuticals under Medicare and Medicaid. In addition, in October 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) and the FDA published a final rule allowing states and other entities to develop a Section 804 Importation Program (“SIP””), to import certain prescription drugs from Canada into the United States. That regulation was challenged in a lawsuit by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (“PhRMA”) but the case was dismissed by a federal district court in February 2023 after the court found that PhRMA did not have standing to sue HHS. Seven states (Colorado, Florida, Maine, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Texas and Vermont) have passed laws allowing for the importation of drugs from Canada. North Dakota and Virginia have passed legislation establishing workgroups to examine the impact of a state importation program. As of May 2025, five states (Colorado, Florida, Maine, New Hampshire and New Mexico) had submitted Section 804 Importation Program proposals to the FDA. Vermont has submitted a concept letter to the HHS. On January 5, 2024, the FDA approved Florida’s plan for Canadian drug importation. That state now has authority to import certain drugs from Canada for a period of two years once certain conditions are met. Florida will first need to submit a pre-import request for each drug selected for importation, which must be approved by the FDA. The state will also need to relabel the drugs and perform quality testing of the products to meet FDA standards.

Current report

On August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”) was signed into law by President Biden. The new legislation has implications for Medicare Part D, which is a program available to individuals who are entitled to Medicare Part A or enrolled in Medicare Part B to give them the option of paying a monthly premium for outpatient prescription drug coverage. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare (beginning in 2026), with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap; imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023); and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new discounting program (beginning in 2025). The IRA permits the Secretary of HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years.

Current report

The first cycle of negotiations for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program commenced in the summer of 2023. On August 15, 2024, the HHS published the results of the first Medicare drug price negotiations for ten selected drugs that treat a range of conditions, including diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and rheumatoid arthritis. The prices of these ten drugs will become effective January 1, 2026. On October 2, 2024, in final guidance, CMS indicated that it would announce the selection of up to 15 additional drugs covered by Part D for the second cycle of negotiations by February 1, 2025. That announcement was made on January 17, 2025.

Current report

This second cycle of negotiations with participating drug companies will occur during 2025, and any negotiated prices for this second set of drugs will be effective starting January 1, 2027.

Current report

On June 6, 2023, Merck & Co. filed a lawsuit against the HHS and CMS asserting that, among other things, the IRA’s Drug Price Negotiation Program for Medicare constitutes an uncompensated taking in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. Subsequently, a number of other parties, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Bristol Myers Squibb Company, the PhRMA, Astellas, Novo Nordisk, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, AstraZeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim, also filed lawsuits in various courts with similar constitutional claims against the HHS and CMS. There have been various decisions by the courts considering these cases since they were filed. The HHS has generally won the substantive disputes in these cases, and various federal district court judges have expressed skepticism regarding the merits of the legal arguments being pursued by the pharmaceutical industry. Certain of these cases are now on appeal and, on October 30, 2024, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit heard oral argument in three of these cases. In April 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit heard argument in an additional three cases. On May 8, 2025, the Third Circuit rejected AstraZeneca’s challenge to the Medicare price negotiation program, finding that the program did not violate the company’s due process rights under the constitution since there is no protected property interest in selling goods to Medicare beneficiaries at a price higher than what the government is willing to pay in reimbursement. On May 8, 2025, the Third Circuit rejected AstraZeneca’s challenge to the Medicare price negotiation program, finding that the program did not violate the company’s due process rights under the Constitution since there is no protected property interest in selling goods to Medicare beneficiaries at a price higher than what the government is willing to pay in reimbursement. We expect that litigation involving these and other provisions of the IRA will continue, with unpredictable and uncertain results. Accordingly, while it is currently unclear how the IRA will be effectuated, we cannot predict with certainty what impact any federal or state health reforms will have on us, but such changes could impose new or more stringent regulatory requirements on our activities or result in reduced reimbursement for our products, any of which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Current report

Recent and further changes in the tariff and trade policies of the United States or of other countries could increase manufacturing and sourcing costs, decrease demand for our offerings, disrupt supply chains, or otherwise adversely affect our business and financial condition.

Current report

There is currently significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the United States and its trading partners, most significantly China, with respect to trade policies, tariffs, taxes, and similar policies affecting cross-border operations. For example, the U.S. government has made and continues to make significant additional changes in U.S. trade policy, specifically tariffs, and may continue to take future actions that could negatively impact our business. The U.S. government recently escalated tariffs on the import of goods from most U.S. trading partners. For example, since March 2025, the United States has placed an additional 20% tariff on most goods from China, imposed an additional 25% tariff on most products of Canada and Mexico (with an exception for goods that qualify for duty-free treatment under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement), and implemented 25% Section 232 tariffs on various articles of steel and aluminum. In April 2025, the U.S. government imposed 25% Section 232 tariffs on passenger vehicles and light trucks (with similar Section 232 tariffs on components for such vehicles expected to be imposed beginning in May 2025); an additional reciprocal tariff of 125% on most imports from China; and an additional reciprocal tariff of 10% on most imports from U.S. trading partners other than China, Canada, Mexico, and countries with which the U.S. does not have normal trade relations. While certain products were excluded from some of these reciprocal tariff measures, including items subject to Section 232 tariffs; certain pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical products; and certain semiconductors, computers, consumer electronics, and other products derivative of critical minerals, the scope of these exclusions is subject to change. In addition, the U.S. Department of Commerce has recently initiated Section 232 investigations into additional products, including semiconductors and related manufacturing equipment, processed critical minerals and derivative products; and medium-duty and heavy-duty trucks and parts therefor. When these investigations are complete, the U.S. government may decide to levy additional tariffs on such products.

Current report

Disruptions and changes at the United States Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”) and other government agencies from funding cuts, personnel losses and changes, regulatory reform, government shutdowns and other developments could hinder our ability to obtain guidance from the FDA regarding our clinical development program and develop and secure approval of our product candidates in a timely manner, which would negatively impact our business.

Current report

The FDA and comparable regulatory agencies in foreign jurisdictions 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 or change, 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 and changes in 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

Further, while the FDA’s review of marketing applications and other activities for new drugs and biologics is largely funded through the user fee program established under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (“PDUFA”), it remains unclear how the administration’s RIF, budget cuts and personnel changes will impact this program and the ability of the FDA to provide guidance and review our product candidates in a timely manner. For example, while the FDA RIF did not reportedly specifically target FDA reviewers, many operations, administrative and policy staff that help support such reviews were affected and those losses could lead to delays in PDUFA reviews and related activities. In addition, while currently unclear, there is a risk that the RIF and budget cutbacks could threaten the integrity of the PDUFA program itself. That is because, for the FDA to obligate user fees collected under PDUFA in the first place, a certain amount of non-user fee appropriations must be spent on the process for the review of applications plus certain other costs during the same fiscal year.

Current report

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 the ability of the SEC to timely review our public filings, to the extent such review is necessary, and our ability to access the public markets.

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 FDA’s review and processing of our regulatory submissions, including INDs and new drug applications or 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

During the three months ended March 31, 2025, we received proceeds of $0.5 million for the issuance of 125,201 shares of common stock for warrants exercised. Additionally, we issued a promissory note in the amount of $3.0 million for 1,034,836 shares of common stock for warrants exercised. Each of the common stock purchases for warrants exercised was by an “accredited investor” for the purposes of Rule 501 of Regulation D.

Current report

Item 5. Other Information.

Current report

(b) None.

Current report

(c) Director and Officer Trading Arrangements

Current report

None of our directors or officers, as defined in Rule 16a-1(f) under the Exchange Act, adopted orterminated a Rule 10b5-1 trading plan or arrangement or a non-Rule 10b5-1 trading plan or arrangement, as defined in Item 408(c) of Regulation S-K, during the three months ended March 31, 2025.

Previous report

In addition to the other information set forth in this report, you should carefully consider the factors discussed in (i) Part I, “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2024 filed with the SEC on October 7, 2024, and (ii) the section entitled “Risk Factors” in our proxy statement/prospectus filed with the SEC on August 19, 2024 (the “Proxy Statement”) in connection with our Registration Statement on S-4 related to the Merger, which are incorporate herein by reference and could materially affect our business, financial condition or future results. The risks described in our Annual Report on Form 10-K and Proxy Statement may not be the only risks facing the Company. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to the Company or that the Company currently deems to be immaterial also may materially adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition and/or operating results.