PTC THERAPEUTICS, INC.

Previous wording

There is significant risk that we will be unable to obtain approval for our product candidates on a timely basis or at all, and we may be required to perform additional clinical trials, non-clinical studies or CMC assessments, work, or analyses at significant cost. Product development is expensive, difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete and is uncertain as to outcome. This is especially true for rare and/or complicated diseases and new or novel products. A failure of one or more clinical or preclinical trials, or manufacturing development can occur at any stage. Preclinical and clinical studies may also reveal unfavorable product candidate characteristics, including safety concerns, or may not demonstrate product candidate efficacy. There can be significant variability in results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors. The outcome of preclinical testing and early clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later clinical trials, and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing authorization of their products.

Current wording

significant cost. Product development is expensive, difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete and is uncertain as to outcome. This is especially true for rare and/or complicated diseases and new or novel products. A failure of one or more clinical or preclinical trials, or manufacturing development can occur at any stage. Preclinical and clinical studies may also reveal unfavorable product candidate characteristics, including safety concerns, or may not demonstrate product candidate efficacy. There can be significant variability in results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors. The outcome of preclinical testing and early clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later clinical trials, and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing authorization of their products.

Previous wording

In response to changes in the regulatory environment or requests from regulators, we may elect, or be obliged, to postpone a regulatory submission to include additional analyses, which could cause delays in getting our products to market and substantially increase our costs. Securing marketing authorization also requires the submission of information about the product manufacturing process to, and inspection or conduct of remote regulatory assessments of manufacturing facilities by, the regulatory authorities. Changes to manufacturers, product candidate formulation, manufacturing processes and other product candidate attributes, such as the method of delivery, during product candidate development may also require additional studies to demonstrate the comparability of the product candidate using prior processes, formulation, or manufacturers, or with the prior attributes, to the product candidate using new the processes, formulation, or manufacturers, or with the new attributes.

Current wording

In response to changes in the regulatory environment or requests from regulators, we may elect, or be obliged, to postpone a regulatory submission to include additional analyses, which could cause delays in getting our products to market and substantially increase our costs. Changes in the regulatory environment or new requests from regulators may also result in our applications for marketing approval being rejected by the applicable regulatory authorities. Securing marketing authorization also requires the submission of information about the product manufacturing process to, and inspection (remotely or in person) of manufacturing facilities by, the regulatory authorities. Changes to manufacturers, product candidate formulation, manufacturing processes and other product candidate attributes, such as the method of delivery, during product candidate development may also require additional studies to demonstrate the comparability of the product candidate using prior processes, formulation, or manufacturers, or with the prior attributes, to the product candidate using new the processes, formulation, or manufacturers, or with the new attributes.

Previous wording

Additionally, the CHMP’s negative opinion for Translarna and potential loss of the Translarna marketing authorization in the EEA may influence regulatory entities in other jurisdictions in which Translarna has been approved to reassess such approvals. For example, certain countries reference or depend on the determination by the EMA when considering the grant of a marketing authorization. There is substantial risk that we would be unable to maintain our marketing authorizations in these countries in the event the EC decides not to renew or otherwise varies, suspends or withdraws our marketing authorization in the EEA. Even in countries where our marketing authorization is maintained, there may be an impact on pricing and reimbursement of Translarna within those countries. Any potential reassessments or scheduled renewals of our marketing authorizations or impacts to pricing and reimbursement may lead to additional regulatory costs, requirements to complete additional clinical trials, restrictions on or removal of our marketing authorizations or loss of a significant portion of our revenue for Translarna in other jurisdictions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Current wording

risk that we will be unable to maintain our marketing authorizations in these countries. Even in countries where our marketing authorization is maintained, there may be an impact on pricing and reimbursement of Translarna within those countries. Any potential reassessments or scheduled renewals of our marketing authorizations or impacts to pricing and reimbursement may lead to additional regulatory costs, requirements to complete additional clinical trials, restrictions on or removal of our marketing authorizations or loss of a significant portion of our revenue for Translarna in other jurisdictions, which could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Previous wording

In the United States, we may pursue the accelerated approval pathway for certain of our product candidates. However, the FDA may find that our product candidates do not qualify for accelerated approval. Moreover, even if we do ultimately receive accelerated approval, we would need to meet certain post approval requirements, such as completing a post-approval study confirming our product candidates’ clinical benefit that may require substantial time, effort, and funds. The FDA must specify the conditions for the required post approval studies, including enrollment targets, the study protocol, milestones, and target completion dates, by the time of approval and the FDA may require that the post-approval studies be commenced before the date of approval. If this study does not confirm the product’s clinical benefit or if the study is not conducted in accordance with the FDA’s requirements, it would be subject to the risk of expedited FDA withdrawal. Additional regulatory requirements also include the pre-submission of promotional materials to the FDA and potential restrictions, such as distribution restrictions, to assure the product’s safe use. In recent years, the accelerated approval pathway has come under significant governmental and public scrutiny. Accordingly, depending on the results of our studies, the FDA may be more conservative in granting accelerated approval or, if granted, may be more apt to withdrawal approval if clinical benefit is not confirmed. Due to these and other uncertainties, we are unable to estimate the timing or potential for product candidates for which we may use the accelerated approval pathway or the cost or effort required to receive FDA approval. Further, even if we receive accelerated approval, there is no guarantee that we would be able to maintain such approval. For instance, our confirmatory studies may not confirm a product’s clinical benefit, in which case, the FDA could withdraw the product from the market, we may choose to voluntarily withdraw the product from the market, or we may need to conduct further studies to determine whether the product has a clinical benefit.

Current wording

In the United States, we may pursue the accelerated approval pathway for certain of our product candidates. However, the FDA may find that our product candidates do not qualify for accelerated approval. Moreover, even if we do ultimately receive accelerated approval, we would need to meet certain post approval requirements, such as completing a post-approval study confirming our product candidates’ clinical benefit that may require substantial time, effort, and funds. The FDA must specify the conditions for the required post approval studies, including enrollment targets, the study protocol, milestones, and target completion dates, by the time of approval and the FDA may, and frequently does, require that the post-approval studies be commenced before the date of approval. If this study does not confirm the product’s clinical benefit or if the study is not conducted in accordance with the FDA’s requirements, it would be subject to the risk of expedited FDA withdrawal. Additional regulatory requirements also include the pre-submission of promotional materials to the FDA, periodic reporting, and potential restrictions, such as distribution restrictions, to assure the product’s safe use. In recent years, the accelerated approval pathway has come under significant governmental and public scrutiny. Accordingly, depending on the results of our studies, the FDA may be more conservative in granting accelerated approval, may require a different study design or statistical analysis, or, if granted, may be more apt to withdrawal approval if clinical benefit is not confirmed. Due to these and other uncertainties, we are unable to estimate the timing or potential for product candidates for which we may use the accelerated approval pathway or the cost or effort required to receive FDA approval. Further, even if we receive accelerated approval, there is no guarantee that we would be able to maintain such approval. For instance, our confirmatory studies may not confirm a product’s clinical benefit, in which case, the FDA could withdraw the product from the market, we may choose to voluntarily withdraw the product from the market, or we may need to conduct further studies to determine whether the product has a clinical benefit.

Previous wording

These risks may be increased for product candidates intended for the treatment of diseases for which there is little clinical experience, where we are using new endpoints or methodologies, or where the product candidates are new or novel. For example, there are no marketed therapies approved to treat the underlying cause of nmDMD and there is limited clinical trial experience with respect to drugs to treat nmDMD and other diseases that we are studying or have studied. As a result, the design and conduct of clinical trials for these diseases, particularly for drugs to address the underlying nonsense mutations causing these diseases in some subsets of patients, is subject to increased risk. Furthermore, because gene therapy products are a relatively new development, less is known about such products and product candidates and, accordingly there is an increased risk that such products may not perform as expected. Regulatory review agencies and the requirements and guidelines they promulgate may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional or larger studies, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of our product candidates or lead to significant post-approval studies, limitations or restrictions.

Current wording

These risks may be increased for product candidates intended for the treatment of diseases for which there is little clinical experience, where we are using new endpoints or methodologies, or where the product candidates are new or novel. For example, there are no marketed therapies approved to treat the underlying cause of HD and there is limited clinical trial experience with respect to drugs to treat HD and other diseases that we are studying or have studied. As a result, the design and conduct of clinical trials for these diseases, particularly for drugs to address the underlying nonsense mutations causing these diseases in some subsets of patients, is subject to increased risk. Furthermore, because gene therapy products are a relatively new development, less is known about such products and product candidates and, accordingly there is an increased risk that such products may not perform as expected. Regulatory review agencies and the requirements and guidelines they promulgate may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional or larger studies, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of our product candidates or lead to significant post-approval studies, limitations or restrictions.

Previous wording

In the event that a study’s primary endpoint is not met, companies may undertake certain analyses to further understand the data and potential reasons for the study results, including retrospective, post-hoc, and subgroup analyses. Because these analyses are not pre-planned and studies may not be adequately designed for these analyses, they may not be reliable and typically will not form the basis for regulatory approval. For example, after determining that we did not achieve the primary efficacy endpoint with the pre-specified level of statistical significance in our completed ACT DMD and Phase 2b clinical trials of Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD, we performed subgroup, retrospective, and meta-analyses. We submitted these analyses to the FDA as part of our NDA, taking the position that the totality of clinical data from these trials support the clinical benefit of Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD. The FDA, however, did not agree that these analyses supported approval.

Current wording

In the event that a study’s primary endpoint is not met, companies may undertake certain analyses to further understand the data and potential reasons for the study results, including retrospective, post-hoc, and subgroup analyses. Because these analyses are not pre-planned and studies may not be adequately designed for these analyses, they may not be reliable and typically will not form the basis for regulatory approval. An unfavorable view of our data and analyses by regulatory authorities has and could continue to negatively impact our ability to obtain or maintain marketing authorizations, which would have a material adverse effect on our revenue and would materially harm our business, financial results and results of operations.

Previous wording

substantially limit the effectiveness of the treatment. Depending on the vector, additional manufacturing, clinical, and preclinical testing may be required, as well as additional analyses, assessments, and potential long-term patient and clinical study subject monitoring and sample testing and associated regulatory reporting. Serious adverse events in our clinical trials, or other clinical trials involving gene therapy products or our competitors’ products, even if not ultimately attributable to the relevant product candidates, and the resulting publicity, could further adversely impact our product candidates in the form of increased government regulation, unfavorable public perception, potential regulatory delays, stricter labeling requirements, and a decrease in demand.

Current wording

There have been several significant adverse side effects in gene therapy treatments in the past, including reported cases of leukemia, immune- and complement-mediated responses, and death seen in other trials using other vectors. While new recombinant vectors have been developed to potentially reduce these side effects, gene therapy is still a relatively new approach to disease treatment and additional adverse side effects could develop. For instance, possible adverse side effects that could occur include an immunologic or complement-mediated reactions early after administration which, could substantially limit the effectiveness of the treatment. Depending on the vector, additional manufacturing, clinical, and preclinical testing may be required, as well as additional analyses, assessments, and potential long-term patient and clinical study subject monitoring and sample testing and associated regulatory reporting. Serious adverse events in our clinical trials, or other clinical trials involving gene therapy products or our competitors’ products, even if not ultimately attributable to the relevant product candidates, and the resulting publicity, could further adversely impact our product candidates in the form of increased government regulation, unfavorable public perception, potential regulatory delays, stricter labeling requirements, and a decrease in demand.

Previous wording

The manufacture of drugs, and especially biologic and gene therapy products is technically complex, requires extreme precision to meet specification requirements and necessitates substantial expertise and capital investment. Production difficulties caused by unforeseen events, even if seemingly minimal, may delay the availability of material for clinical studies and commercial product. For example, given the nature of biologics manufacturing, there is a risk of contamination. Any contamination could materially adversely affect our ability to produce our gene therapy product candidates on schedule and could, therefore, harm our results of operations and cause reputational damage.

Current wording

The manufacture of drugs, and especially biologic and gene therapy products is technically complex, requires extreme precision to meet specification requirements and necessitates substantial expertise and capital investment. Production difficulties caused by unforeseen events, even if seemingly minimal, may delay the availability of material for clinical studies and commercial product. For example, given the nature of biologics manufacturing, there is a risk of contamination. Any contamination could materially adversely affect our ability to produce our gene therapy product on schedule and could, therefore, harm our results of operations and cause reputational damage.

Previous wording

In the United States, third-party payers, including government payers such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs and biologics will be covered and reimbursed. Expensive specialty drugs in particular are often subject to restriction. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payers and government payers develop their coverage and reimbursement policies. We cannot be assured that Medicare or Medicaid will cover our product candidates that may be approved or provide reimbursement without restriction and at adequate levels to realize a sufficient return on our investment. Our rebate payments may increase or our prices be adjusted under value-based purchasing arrangements based on evidence-based measures or outcomes-based measures for a patient or beneficiary based on use of our drug. Moreover, reimbursement agencies in the EU may be more conservative than CMS. It is difficult to predict what third-party payers will decide with respect to the coverage

Current wording

In the United States, third-party payers, including government payers such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs and biologics will be covered and reimbursed. Expensive specialty drugs in particular are often subject to restriction. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payers and government payers develop their coverage and reimbursement policies. We cannot be assured that Medicare or Medicaid will cover our product candidates that may be approved or provide reimbursement without restriction and at adequate levels to realize a sufficient return on our investment. Our rebate payments may increase or our prices be adjusted under value-based purchasing arrangements based on evidence-based measures or outcomes-based measures for a patient or beneficiary based on use of our drug. Additionally, policymakers and federal agencies, including the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation, have signaled interest in testing or advancing new drug pricing models—such as so-called “most favored nation” or international reference pricing approaches—that would tie United States reimbursement levels to prices in foreign markets. Any such initiatives, if implemented, could reduce reimbursement for certain products, exert downward pricing pressure, and materially affect our business and financial results. Moreover, reimbursement agencies in the EU may be more conservative than CMS. It is difficult to predict what third-party payers will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for our products for which we obtain marketing approval. Additionally, within Europe, each country has its own reimbursement regime employing various health technology assessment, or HTA, approaches to assess the cost-effectiveness of the product (for example, in the United Kingdom a HTA assessment is conducted by NICE) which may significantly affect the effective access to the market. While there is increased harmonization of this process as a result of Regulation 2021/2282 on HTAs, variation remains.

Previous wording

A substantial portion of our commercial sales currently occurs in territories outside of the United States which subjects us to additional business risks that could adversely affect our revenue and results of operations.

Current wording

A significant portion of our commercial sales currently occurs in territories outside of the United States which subjects us to additional business risks that could adversely affect our revenue and results of operations.

Previous wording

We commercialize Translarna, Upstaza, Tegsedi and Waylivra outside of the United States. We have operations in multiple European countries, Latin America and other territories. We expect that we will continue to expand our international operations in the future, including in emerging growth markets, pending successful completion of the applicable regulatory processes. International operations inherently subject us to a number of risks and uncertainties, including:

Current wording

We commercialize Sephience, Translarna, Upstaza, Tegsedi and Waylivra outside of the United States. We have operations in multiple European countries, Latin America, Japan and other territories. We expect that we will continue to expand our international operations in the future, including in emerging growth markets, pending successful completion of the applicable regulatory processes. International operations inherently subject us to a number of risks and uncertainties, including:

Previous wording

In addition, some countries in which a product candidate is not approved allow patients access to the product candidate through other legal mechanisms, including court intervention or EAP programs, if the product is approved in another jurisdiction. The price that is ultimately approved by governmental authorities in any country pursuant to commercial

Current wording

In addition, some countries in which a product candidate is not approved allow patients access to the product candidate through other legal mechanisms, including court intervention or EAP programs, if the product is approved in another jurisdiction. The price that is ultimately approved by governmental authorities in any country pursuant to commercial pricing and reimbursement processes may be significantly lower than the price we are able to charge for sales under such legal mechanisms and we may become obligated to repay such excess amount.

Previous wording

Some of the countries in which our products are available for sale are in emerging markets. Some countries within emerging markets, including those in Latin America, may be especially vulnerable to periods of global or regional financial instability or may have very limited resources to spend on. We also may be required to increase our reliance on third-party agents within less developed markets. In addition, many emerging market countries have currencies that fluctuate substantially and if such currencies devalue and we cannot offset the devaluations, our financial performance within such countries could be adversely affected.

Current wording

Some of the countries in which our products are available for sale are in emerging markets. Some countries within emerging markets, including those in Latin America, may be especially vulnerable to periods of global or regional financial instability or may have very limited resources to spend on. We also may be required to increase our reliance on third-party agents within less developed markets. In addition, many emerging market countries have currencies that fluctuate

Previous wording

Furthermore, in some countries, including Brazil and Russia, orders for named patient sales may be for multiple months of therapy, which can lead to an unevenness in orders which could result in significant fluctuations in quarterly net product sales. Other factors may also contribute to fluctuations in quarterly net product sales including a product’s availability in any particular territory, government actions, economic pressures, political unrest and other factors. Net product sales are impacted by factors such as the timing of decisions by regulatory authorities and our ability to successfully negotiate favorable pricing and reimbursement processes on a timely basis in the countries in which we have or may obtain regulatory approval, including the United States, EEA and other territories.

Current wording

Furthermore, in some countries, orders for named patient sales may be for multiple months of therapy, which can lead to an unevenness in orders which could result in significant fluctuations in quarterly net product sales. Other factors may also contribute to fluctuations in quarterly net product sales including a product’s availability in any particular territory, government actions, economic pressures, political unrest and other factors. Net product sales are impacted by factors such as the timing of decisions by regulatory authorities and our ability to successfully negotiate favorable pricing and reimbursement processes on a timely basis in the countries in which we have or may obtain regulatory approval, including the United States, EEA and other territories.

Previous wording

Many countries, including the United States, restrict the export or import of products to or from certain countries through, for example, bans, sanction programs, and boycotts. Such restrictions may preclude us from supplying products or generating revenue in certain countries or may require an export license prior to the export of the controlled item. Various laws, regulations and executive orders also restrict the use and dissemination outside of the United States, or the sharing with certain non-U.S. nationals, of information classified for national security purposes, as well as certain products and technical data relating to those products. Furthermore, if we, or third parties acting on our behalf, do not comply with these restrictions, we may be subject to substantial civil and criminal penalties and suspension or debarment from government contracting.

Current wording

Many countries, including the United States, restrict the export or import of products to or from certain countries through, for example, bans, sanction programs, and embargoes. Such restrictions may preclude us from supplying products or generating revenue in certain countries or may require an export license prior to the export of the controlled item. Various laws, regulations and executive orders also restrict the use and dissemination outside of the United States, or the sharing with certain non-U.S. nationals, of information classified for national security purposes, as well as certain products and technical data relating to those products. Furthermore, if we, or third parties acting on our behalf, do not comply with these restrictions, we may be subject to substantial civil and criminal penalties and suspension or debarment from government contracting.

Previous wording

If approved, sepiapterin could face competition from Kuvan (sapropterin dihydrochloride), including generic versions, and Palynziq (pegvaliase-pqpz), each of which is approved for the treatment of PKU. Other companies are also pursuing product candidates for the treatment of PKU, including Otsuka Pharmaceutical (JNT-517), SOM Biotech (SOM-1311), Maze Therapeutics (MZE-782) and Agios (AG-181).

Current wording

Sephience faces competition from Kuvan (sapropterin dihydrochloride), including generic versions, and Palynziq (pegvaliase-pqpz), each of which is approved for the treatment of PKU. Other companies are also pursuing product candidates for the treatment of PKU, including Otsuka Pharmaceutical (JNT-517), SOM Biotech (SOM-1311), Maze Therapeutics (MZE-782) and Agios Pharmaceuticals (AG-181).

Previous wording

There is currently no marketed therapy specifically for nmDMD, other than Translarna in the EEA. Santhera Pharmaceuticals has received approval of Agramee (vamorolone) in the United States for DMD patients ages 2 and up and in the EU and United Kingdom for patients ages 4 years and older. Sarepta Therapeutics has received approval of Elevidys for DMD patients 4 to 5 years of age with a confirmed mutation in the “DMD gene” in the United States and United Arab Emirates and Qatar. Sarepta Therapeutics has also received approval in the United States for two treatments (Exondys 51 (eteplirsen) and Vyondys 53 (golodirsen)) addressing the underlying cause of disease for different mutations in the DMD gene. Additionally, the FDA granted accelerated approval to Viltepso (viltolarsen) from NS Pharma for the treatment of DMD in patients with exon 53 skipping and Sarepta (Casimersen (SRP 4045) for the treatment of DMD in patients with exon 45 skipping. Viltepso (viltolarsen) from NS Pharma is also approved in Japan. Other biopharmaceutical companies are developing treatments addressing the underlying cause of disease for different mutations in the DMD gene, including, Dyne Therapeutics (DYNE-251), Wave Life Sciences (WVE-N53), Daiichi Sankyo (DS 5141)), Nippon Shinyaku (Viltolarsen (NS 065/NCNP 01) and NS 089/NCNP 02)), and Astellas (AT 702). Additionally, other pharmaceutical companies are developing micro dystrophin gene therapies for patients with DMD regardless of genotype, including Pfizer (PF 06939926) and Solid Biosciences (SGT 001).

Current wording

Other than geographies where Translarna is approved or otherwise commercialized, there is currently no marketed therapy specifically for nmDMD. Santhera Pharmaceuticals has received approval of Agramee (vamorolone) in the United States for DMD patients ages 2 and up and in the EU and United Kingdom for patients ages 4 years and older. Sarepta Therapeutics has received approval of Elevidys for DMD patients 4 to 5 years of age with a confirmed mutation in the “DMD gene” in the United States and United Arab Emirates and Qatar. Sarepta Therapeutics has also received approval in the United States for two treatments (Exondys 51 (eteplirsen) and Vyondys 53 (golodirsen)) addressing the underlying cause of disease for different mutations in the DMD gene. Additionally, the FDA granted accelerated approval to Viltepso (viltolarsen) from NS Pharma for the treatment of DMD in patients with exon 53 skipping and Sarepta (Casimersen (SRP 4045) for the treatment of DMD in patients with exon 45 skipping. Viltepso (viltolarsen) from NS Pharma is also approved in Japan. Other biopharmaceutical companies are developing treatments addressing the underlying cause of disease for different mutations in the DMD gene, including, Dyne Therapeutics (DYNE-251), Wave Life Sciences (WVE-N53), Daiichi Sankyo (DS 5141)), and Nippon Shinyaku (Viltolarsen (NS 065/NCNP 01) and NS 089/NCNP 02)). Additionally, other pharmaceutical companies are developing micro dystrophin gene therapies for patients with DMD regardless of genotype, including Solid Biosciences (SGT 003) and REGENXBIO Inc. (RGX-202).

Previous wording

With the expiration of Emflaza’s orphan exclusivity for treatment of DMD in patients five years and older in February 2024, we face competition from generic versions of Emflaza for this indication. Although the FDA has not approved a corticosteroid specifically for DMD in the United States other than Emflaza, we face competition in the United States in the DMD market from prednisone/prednisolone, which, while not approved for DMD in the United States, is generically available and has been prescribed off label for DMD patients. Santhera has received approval of Agramee (vamorolone), in the United States for DMD patients ages 2 and up and in the European Union and United Kingdom for patients ages 4 years and older.

Current wording

We face competition from generic versions of Emflaza for DMD. Although the FDA has not approved a corticosteroid specifically for DMD in the United States other than Emflaza, we face competition in the United States in the DMD market from prednisone/prednisolone, which, while not approved for DMD in the United States, is generically available and has been prescribed off label for DMD patients. Santhera has received approval of Agramee (vamorolone), in the United States for DMD patients ages 2 and up and in the European Union and United Kingdom for patients ages 4 years and older.

Previous wording

There are several pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies engaged in the development or commercialization of products against targets that are also targets of Tegsedi and Waylivra. For example, Ionis is developing Olezarsen for the treatment of FCS. Additionally, Waylivra faces competition from Myalept (metreleptin) produced by Chesi Farmaceutica, Inc., which is currently approved in Brazil for use in generalized lipodystrophy patients. Tegsedi faces competition from drugs like Onpattro (patisiran) which was launched by Alnylam Pharmaceuticals in the United States in 2018 and received approval in Brazil for the treatment of hATTR amyloidosis in 2020 as was well as AMVUTTRA (vutrisiran) which Alnylam Pharmaceuticals received approval for in the United States and Brazil in 2022 for the treatment of the polyneuropathy of hATTR amyloidosis in adults. Vyndaqel (tafamids meglumine) and Vyndamax (tafamidis) are commercialized in the United States, EU and some countries in Latin America by Pfizer. Other companies are also pursuing product candidates for the treatment of ATTR Amyloidosis with polyneuropathy including BridgeBio Pharma (AG 10), Intellia Therapeutics (NTLA2001), Proclara Biosciences (NPT 189) and SOM Biotech (tolcapone). For Waylivra, Ionis is developing Olezarsen for the treatment of FCS. Waylivra also faces competition from Myalept, (metreleptin) produced by Cheisi Farmaceutica, Inc., currently approved in Brazil for use in generalized lipodystrophy patients.

Current wording

There are several pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies engaged in the development or commercialization of products against targets that are also targets of Tegsedi and Waylivra. For example, Ionis is developing Olezarsen for the treatment of FCS. Additionally, Waylivra faces competition from Myalept (metreleptin) produced by Chesi Farmaceutica, Inc., which is currently approved in Brazil for use in generalized lipodystrophy patients. Tegsedi faces competition from drugs like Onpattro (patisiran) which was launched by Alnylam Pharmaceuticals in the United States in 2018 and received approval in Brazil for the treatment of hATTR amyloidosis in 2020 as was well as AMVUTTRA (vutrisiran) which Alnylam Pharmaceuticals received approval for in the United States and Brazil in 2022 for the treatment of the polyneuropathy of hATTR amyloidosis in adults. Vyndaqel (tafamids meglumine) and Vyndamax (tafamidis) are commercialized in the United States, EU and some countries in Latin America by Pfizer. Other companies are also pursuing product candidates for the treatment of ATTR Amyloidosis with polyneuropathy including BridgeBio Pharma (AG 10), Intellia Therapeutics (NTLA2001), Proclara Biosciences (NPT 189) and SOM Biotech (tolcapone).

Previous wording

Evrysdi, an orally bioavailable treatment, faces competition from treatments that are not orally bioavailable, including Spinraza (nusinersen), a drug developed by Ionis and marketed by Biogen, which is approved to treat SMA and Zolgensma (onasemnogene abeparvovec), a gene therapy drug developed by AveXis, Inc., (acquired by Novartis in 2018), which is approved in the United States and Japan for the treatment of SMA in patients under 2 years of age and in Europe for babies and young children who weigh up to 21 kilograms. Novartis is also developing OAV-101, an intrathecal administration of

Current wording

Evrysdi, an orally bioavailable treatment, faces competition from treatments that are not orally bioavailable, including Spinraza (nusinersen), a drug developed by Ionis and marketed by Biogen, which is approved to treat SMA and Zolgensma (onasemnogene abeparvovec), a gene therapy drug developed by AveXis, Inc., (acquired by Novartis in 2018), which is approved in the United States and Japan for the treatment of SMA in patients under 2 years of age and in Europe for babies and young children who weigh up to 21 kilograms. Novartis is also developing OAV-101, an intrathecal administration of Zolgensma, for SMA patients ages ≥ 2 to < 18 years of age. Biogen is developing a higher dose regimen of nusinersen with potential for improved efficacy and evaluating an implantable medical device to enable subcutaneous delivery of nusinersen. Other companies are also pursuing product candidates for the treatment of SMA, including Scholar Rock (apitegromab, SRK-015), Biohaven (Taldefgrobep alfa), Roche Pharmaceuticals (RO-7204239/GYM-329), Biogen / Ionis (BIIB-115/ION-306) and NMD Pharma (NMD-670).

Previous wording

The regulations and practices that govern marketing authorizations, pricing, coverage and reimbursement for new drug products vary widely from country to country. Current and future legislation may significantly change the approval requirements in ways that could involve additional costs and cause delays in obtaining approvals. Some countries, including almost all of the member states of the EEA, require approval of the sale (list) price of a drug before it can be marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or product licensing approval is granted. In some ex-U.S. markets, including the European market, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. As a result, we might obtain marketing authorization for a product in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations, in some countries at national as well as regional levels, that delay our commercial launch of the product, possibly for lengthy time periods, and negatively impact the

Current wording

The regulations and practices that govern marketing authorizations, pricing, coverage and reimbursement for new drug products vary widely from country to country. Current and future legislation may significantly change the approval requirements in ways that could involve additional costs and cause delays in obtaining approvals. Some countries, including almost all of the member states of the EEA, require approval of the sale (list) price of a drug before it can be marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or product licensing approval is granted. In some ex-U.S. markets, including the European market, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. As a result, we might obtain marketing authorization for a product in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations, in some countries at national as well as regional levels, that delay our commercial launch of the product, possibly for lengthy time periods, and negatively impact the revenues we are able to generate from the sale of the product in that country. Adverse pricing limitations may hinder our ability to recoup our investment in one or more products or other product candidates, even following marketing authorization.

Previous wording

Our ability to successfully commercialize our products or product candidates that may receive marketing authorization will depend in large part on the extent to which coverage and reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers, managed healthcare organizations and other third-party payors and organizations. Government authorities and other third-party payors, such as private health insurers and managed healthcare organizations, decide which medications they will pay for and establish reimbursement conditions and rates. A primary trend in the EU and U.S. healthcare industries and elsewhere is cost containment. Government authorities, including the United States government and state legislatures, and other third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. Prices at which our products are reimbursed can be subject to challenge, reduction or denial by the government and other payers. Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with discounts off the products’ sale (list) prices and are challenging the prices manufacturers charge for medical products. We cannot be sure that coverage will be available for any product or product candidate that we may commercialize and, if coverage is available, the level of reimbursement is also uncertain.

Current wording

Our ability to successfully commercialize our products or product candidates that may receive marketing authorization will depend in large part on the extent to which coverage and reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers, managed healthcare organizations and other third-party payors and organizations. Government authorities and other third-party payors, such as private health insurers and managed healthcare organizations, decide which medications they will pay for and establish reimbursement conditions and rates. A primary trend in the EU and U.S. healthcare industries and elsewhere is cost containment. Government authorities, including the United States government and state legislatures, and other third-party payors have

Previous wording

In the United States, third-party payors include federal healthcare programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE, and Veterans Health Administration programs; managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations. Several of the U.S. federal healthcare programs establish ceiling prices or require that drug manufacturers extend discounts or pay rebates to certain programs in order for their products to be covered and reimbursed. For example, the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program requires pharmaceutical manufacturers of covered outpatient drugs to enter into and have in effect a national rebate agreement with the federal government as a condition for coverage of the manufacturer’s covered outpatient drug(s) by state Medicaid programs. The amount of the rebate for each product is based on a statutory formula and may be subject to an additional discount if certain pricing increases more than inflation. State Medicaid programs and Medicaid managed care plans can seek additional “supplemental” rebates from manufacturers in connection with states’ establishment of preferred drug lists. A further requirement for Medicaid coverage is that manufacturers of single source

Current wording

In the United States, third-party payors include federal healthcare programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE, and Veterans Health Administration programs; managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations. Several of the U.S. federal healthcare programs establish ceiling prices or require that drug manufacturers extend discounts or pay rebates to certain programs in order for their products to be covered and reimbursed. For example, the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program requires pharmaceutical manufacturers of covered outpatient drugs to enter into and have in effect a national rebate agreement with the federal government as a condition for coverage of the manufacturer’s covered outpatient drug(s) by state Medicaid programs. The amount of the rebate for each product is based on a statutory formula and may be subject to an additional discount if certain pricing increases more than inflation. State Medicaid programs and Medicaid managed care plans can seek additional “supplemental” rebates from manufacturers in connection with states’ establishment of preferred drug lists. A further requirement for Medicaid coverage is that manufacturers of single source and innovator multiple source drugs enter into a Master agreement and Federal Supply Schedule, or FSS, agreement with the Secretary for Veterans Affairs and charge no more than statutory ceiling prices to the Department of Veteran Affairs, the Department of Defense and certain other federal agencies.

Previous wording

Emflaza is also eligible for reimbursement under the Medicare Part D program. Under Part D, Medicare beneficiaries may enroll in prescription drug plans offered by private entities, which will provide coverage of outpatient prescription drugs. Part D prescription drug formularies are required to include drugs within each therapeutic category and class of covered Part D drugs, though not necessarily all the drugs in each category or class. Any negotiated prices for our products covered by a Part D prescription drug plan likely will be lower than the prices we might otherwise obtain, and payment of Medicare Coverage Gap discounts may further reduce realization on Part D drugs. Further, CMS is proposing to relax Part D coverage requirements to give plans more leverage in negotiating their formularies.

Current wording

Sephience and Emflaza are also eligible for reimbursement under the Medicare Part D program. Under Part D, Medicare beneficiaries may enroll in prescription drug plans offered by private entities, which will provide coverage of outpatient prescription drugs. Part D prescription drug formularies are required to include drugs within each therapeutic category and class of covered Part D drugs, though not necessarily all the drugs in each category or class. Any negotiated prices for our products covered by a Part D prescription drug plan likely will be lower than the prices we might otherwise obtain, and payment of Medicare Coverage Gap discounts may further reduce realization on Part D drugs. In 2020, CMS also relaxed Part D coverage requirements to give plans more leverage in negotiating their formularies.

Previous wording

With respect to drugs eligible for reimbursement under Medicare Part B, on November 27, 2020, CMS issued an interim final rule implementing a Most Favored Nations payment model under which reimbursement for certain Medicare Part B drugs and biologicals will be based on a price that reflects the lowest per capita Gross Domestic Product-adjusted (GDP-adjusted) price of any non-U.S. member country of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) with a GDP per capita that is at least sixty percent of the U.S. GDP per capita. This rule now has been rescinded but other measures, including the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, have been enacted to address the costs of pharmaceuticals. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 requires manufacturers of selected drugs to negotiate discounted prices with the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Failure to reach an agreement can subject manufacturers to an excise tax or withdraw of all drug products from coverage under Medicare and Medicaid. Drug price negotiations and other program implementation measures could potentially be affected by the Executive Order,*Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions,*issued on January 20, 2025 and/or the anticipated change in leadership at Health and Human Services and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) under the new administration. Such rules and any additional healthcare reform measures could further constrain our business or limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in additional pricing pressures.

Current wording

With respect to drugs eligible for reimbursement under Medicare Part B, on November 27, 2020, CMS issued an interim final rule implementing a Most Favored Nations payment model under which reimbursement for certain Medicare Part B drugs and biologicals will be based on a price that reflects the lowest per capita Gross Domestic Product-adjusted (GDP-adjusted) price of any non-U.S. member country of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) with a GDP per capita that is at least sixty percent of the U.S. GDP per capita. This rule now has been rescinded but other measures, including the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, have been enacted to address the costs of pharmaceuticals. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 requires manufacturers of selected drugs to negotiate discounted prices with the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Failure to reach an agreement can subject manufacturers to an excise tax or withdraw of all drug products from coverage under Medicare and Medicaid. Drug price negotiations and other program implementation measures could potentially be affected by the change in leadership at Health and Human Services and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) under the new administration. Such rules and any additional healthcare reform measures could further constrain our business or limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in additional pricing pressures.

Previous wording

In addition, U.S. private health insurers often rely upon Medicare coverage policies and payment limitations in setting their own coverage and reimbursement policies. Any such coverage or payment limitations may result in a similar reduction in payments from non-governmental payors. Payment by private payors is also subject to payor-determined coverage and reimbursement policies that vary considerably and are subject to change without notice. We expect that coverage and reimbursement of Emflaza in the United States will vary from commercial payor to commercial payor. Many commercial payors, such as managed care plans, manage access to prescription drugs partly to control costs to their plans, and may use drug formularies and medical policies to limit their exposure. Exclusion from policies can directly reduce product usage in the payor’s patient population and may negatively impact utilization in other payor plans, as well.

Current wording

In addition, U.S. private health insurers often rely upon Medicare coverage policies and payment limitations in setting their own coverage and reimbursement policies. Any such coverage or payment limitations may result in a similar reduction in payments from non-governmental payors. Payment by private payors is also subject to payor-determined coverage and reimbursement policies that vary considerably and are subject to change without notice. We expect that coverage and reimbursement of Sephience and Emflaza in the United States will vary from commercial payor to commercial payor. Many commercial payors, such as managed care plans, manage access to prescription drugs partly to control costs to their plans, and may use drug formularies and medical policies to limit their exposure. Exclusion from policies can directly reduce product usage in the payor’s patient population and may negatively impact utilization in other payor plans, as well.

Previous wording

There has been recent negative publicity and increasing legislative and public scrutiny around pharmaceutical drug pricing in the U.S., in particular with respect to orphan drugs and specifically with respect to Emflaza. Moreover, U.S. government authorities and third-party payors are increasingly attempting to limit or regulate drug prices and reimbursement, often with particular focus on orphan drugs. For example, certain drugs with an orphan designation may become subject to price negotiations under the IRA. These dynamics may give rise to heightened attention and potential negative reactions to pricing decisions for Emflaza and products for which we may receive regulatory approval in the future, possibly limiting our ability to generate revenue and attain profitability.

Current wording

There has been recent negative publicity and increasing legislative and public scrutiny around pharmaceutical drug pricing in the U.S., in particular with respect to orphan drugs and specifically with respect to Emflaza. Moreover, U.S. government authorities and third-party payors are increasingly attempting to limit or regulate drug prices and reimbursement, often with particular focus on orphan drugs. For example, certain drugs with an orphan designation may become subject to price negotiations under the IRA. These dynamics may give rise to heightened attention and potential negative reactions to pricing decisions for Sephience and Emflaza and products for which we may receive regulatory approval in the future, possibly limiting our ability to generate revenue and attain profitability.

Previous wording

reimbursement for healthcare items and services covered by the federal and state healthcare programs as well as plans in the private health insurance market. The so-called “individual mandate” was repealed as part of tax reform legislation adopted in December 2017. Legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act continue to arise and there may be future efforts to modify, repeal, or otherwise invalidate all, or certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act. We cannot assure that the Affordable Care Act, as currently enacted or as amended in the future, will not adversely affect our business and financial results and we cannot predict how future federal or state legislative or administrative changes relating to healthcare reform will affect our business.

Current wording

Moreover, in 2017, the U.S. Congress modified and amended certain provisions of the 2010 U.S. healthcare reform legislation (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, known collectively as the Affordable Care Act), which impacts coverage and reimbursement for healthcare items and services covered by the federal and state healthcare programs as well as plans in the private health insurance market. The so-called “individual mandate” was repealed as part of tax reform legislation adopted in December 2017. Legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act continue to arise and there may be future efforts to modify, repeal, or otherwise invalidate all, or certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act. We cannot assure that the Affordable Care Act, as currently enacted or as amended in the future, will not adversely affect our business and financial results and we cannot predict how future federal or state legislative or administrative changes relating to healthcare reform will affect our business.

Previous wording

Additionally, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress. Failure of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to reach required deficit reduction goals triggered the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This legislation resulted in aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect in April 2013 and will remain in effect through 2031. However, pursuant to the CARES Act and subsequent legislation, these Medicare sequester reductions were suspended through the end of March 2022 and from April 2022 through June 2022, a 1% cut was in effect, with the full 2% cut remaining thereafter. The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding and otherwise affect the prices we may obtain for any of our product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval or the frequency with which any such product candidates is prescribed or used.

Current wording

legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This legislation resulted in aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect in April 2013 and will remain in effect through 2031. However, pursuant to the CARES Act and subsequent legislation, these Medicare sequester reductions were suspended through the end of March 2022 and from April 2022 through June 2022, a 1% cut was in effect, with the full 2% cut remaining thereafter. The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding and otherwise affect the prices we may obtain for any of our product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval or the frequency with which any such product candidates are prescribed or used.

Previous wording

In the EU, reference pricing systems and other measures may lead to cost containment and reduced prices with respect to Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD, Upstaza for the treatment of AADC deficiency and other product candidates that might receive marketing authorization in the future. Our inability to promptly obtain coverage and profitable payment rates from both government-funded and private payors for our product or any of our product candidates that may receive marketing authorization, or a reduction in coverage for payment rates for our product or any such product candidates, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, in the EU, an authorized trader, such as a wholesaler, can purchase a medicine in one EU member state and obtain a license to import the product into another EU member state. This process is called “parallel distribution”. As a result, a purchaser in one EU member state may seek to import Translarna from another EU member state where Translarna is sold at a lower price. This could have a negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth.

Current wording

In the EU, reference pricing systems and other measures may lead to cost containment and reduced prices with respect to Sephience for the treatment of PKU, Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD, Upstaza for the treatment of AADC deficiency and other product candidates that might receive marketing authorization in the future. Our inability to promptly obtain coverage and profitable payment rates from both government-funded and private payors for our product or any of our product candidates that may receive marketing authorization, or a reduction in coverage for payment rates for our product or any such product candidates, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, in the EU, an authorized trader, such as a wholesaler, can purchase a medicine in one EU member state and obtain a license to import the product into another EU member state. This process is called “parallel distribution”. As a result, a purchaser in one EU member state may seek to import Sephience from another EU member state where Sephience is sold at a lower price. This could have a negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth.

Previous wording

Similarly, sales of Emflaza or our other products in the United States could also be reduced if they, or products similar to them, are imported into the United States from lower-priced markets, whether legally or illegally. For example, in the United States, prices for pharmaceuticals are generally higher than in the bordering nations of Mexico and Canada. In October 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, and the FDA published a final rule allowing states and other entities to develop a Section 804 Importation Program, or SIP, to import certain prescription drugs from Canada into the United States. Certain states have passed laws allowing for the importation of drugs from Canada with the intent of developing SIPs for review and approval by the FDA. Florida received approval for its SIP from the FDA. Further, on November 20, 2020, HHS finalized a regulation removing safe harbor protection for price reductions from pharmaceutical manufacturers to plan sponsors under Part D, either directly or through pharmacy benefit managers, unless the price reduction is required by law. The rule also creates a safe harbor for price reductions reflected at the point-of-sale, as well as a new safe harbor for certain fixed fee arrangements between pharmacy benefit managers and manufacturers. The effective date of the new safe harbors and the revision to the discount safe harbor was delayed by court order until January 1, 2023. Recent legislation further delayed implementation of the new safe harbors and the revision to the discount safe harbor until January 1, 2032.

Current wording

Similarly, sales of Sephience, Emflaza or our other products in the United States could also be reduced if they, or products similar to them, are imported into the United States from lower-priced markets, whether legally or illegally. For example, in the United States, prices for pharmaceuticals are generally higher than in the bordering nations of Mexico and Canada. In October 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, and the FDA published a final rule allowing states and other entities to develop a Section 804 Importation Program, or SIP, to import certain prescription drugs from Canada into the United States. Certain states have passed laws allowing for the importation of drugs from Canada with the intent of developing SIPs for review and approval by the FDA. Florida received approval for its SIP from the FDA. Further, on November 30, 2020, HHS finalized a regulation removing safe harbor protection for price reductions from pharmaceutical manufacturers to plan sponsors under Part D, either directly or through pharmacy benefit managers, unless the price reduction is required by law. The rule also creates a safe harbor for price reductions reflected at the point-of-sale, as well as a new safe harbor for certain fixed fee arrangements between pharmacy benefit managers and manufacturers. The effective date of the new safe harbors and the revision to the discount safe harbor was delayed by court order until January 1, 2023. Recent legislation further delayed implementation of the new safe harbors and the revision to the discount safe harbor until January 1, 2032.

Previous wording

There may be future changes in legal and regulatory requirements that may materially impact our results of operation.

Current wording

There may be future and have been changes in legal and regulatory requirements that may materially impact our results of operation.

Previous wording

legal and regulatory risk or uncertainty and require the expenditure of additional resources to ensure that we are able to comply. Such actions could also adversely restrict our business and operations. There could also be changes in the FDA’s approval standards that could impact our ability to obtain product approval and market our product candidates within the currently anticipated timeframes or otherwise impact the competitive market for our product candidates. Such changes may necessitate the conduct of additional development work, including preclinical and clinical trials, and manufacturing development. By example, for products intended for rare and serious diseases with unmet medical needs, the FDA is authorized to exercise regulatory flexibility when making a medical risk-benefit judgment. It is possible that whether and how the FDA exercises any regulatory flexibility, including with respect to specialized pathways, such as accelerated approval, may change, which could impact our ability to obtain product approval. Further, legal and regulatory changes may impact how we may market and sell our products in the future, if they are approved, as well as how they are reimbursed. Moreover, there could be changes in the federal workforce and agency policies that may result in regulatory delays, including with respect to the FDA’s review of marketing applications and other submissions, and that may impact the ability to communicate with and obtain guidance from the agencies. At this time, it is too early to predict the exact nature of any changes that may take place or whether and how they may impact our business and results of operation.

Current wording

Changes in legal and regulatory requirements may introduce new risks into our operations and future prospects, which we are not able to currently anticipate. By example, changes taking place in the United States associated with the current federal administration, as well as changes in legal standards, including the reduced level of judicial deference due to administrative agencies following a 2024 Supreme Court decision, may introduce uncertainties with respect to our current and future operations and our future likelihood of success. New federal or state laws or regulations may be, and have been, passed, or laws and regulations may be, and have been, enforced differently than they were before, which may expose us to additional legal and regulatory risk or uncertainty and require the expenditure of additional resources to ensure that we are able to comply. Such actions could also adversely restrict our business and operations. There could also be changes in the FDA’s approval standards that could impact our ability to obtain product approval and market our product candidates within the currently anticipated timeframes or otherwise impact the competitive market for our product candidates. Such changes may necessitate the conduct of additional development work, including preclinical and clinical trials, and manufacturing development. By example, for products intended for rare and serious diseases with unmet medical needs, the FDA is authorized to exercise regulatory flexibility when making a medical risk-benefit judgment. It is possible that whether and how the FDA exercises any regulatory flexibility in any particular case, including with respect to specialized

Previous wording

Since inception, we have incurred significant operating losses. As of December 31, 2024, we had an accumulated deficit of $3,646.9 million. We have financed our operations to date primarily through the private offerings of convertible senior notes, public and “at the market offerings” of common stock, proceeds from royalty purchase agreements, net proceeds from our borrowing under our credit agreement with Blackstone, private placements of our convertible preferred stock and common stock, collaborations, bank and institutional lender debt, other convertible debt, grant funding and clinical trial support from governmental and philanthropic organizations and patient advocacy groups in the disease area addressed by our product candidates. We have relied on revenue generated from net sales of Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD in territories outside of the United States since 2014, Emflaza for the treatment of DMD in the United States since 2017, and Upstaza for the treatment of AADC deficiency in the EEA since May 2022. We have also relied on revenue associated with milestone and royalty payments from Roche pursuant to the SMA License Agreement under our SMA program andrevenue generated from net sales of Tegsedi and Waylivra in Latin America and the Caribbean. Based on our current commercial, research and development plans, we expect to continue to incur significant operating expenses for the foreseeable future, which we anticipate will be partially offset by revenues generated from the sale of our products and our collaboration and royalty revenues. We expect to continue to generate operating losses through 2025 and, while we anticipate that operating losses generated in future periods should decline versus prior periods, we may never generate profits from operations or maintain profitability. The net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from period to period.

Current wording

Since inception, we have incurred significant operating losses. As of December 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $2,964.2 million. We have financed our operations to date primarily through the private offerings of convertible senior notes, public and “at the market offerings” of common stock, proceeds from royalty purchase agreements, private placements of our convertible preferred stock and common stock, collaborations, bank and institutional lender debt, other convertible debt, grant funding and clinical trial support from governmental and philanthropic organizations and patient advocacy groups in the disease areas addressed by our product candidates. We have historically relied on revenue generated from net sales of Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD in territories outside of the United States since 2014, Emflaza for the treatment of DMD in the United States since 2017, Upstaza/Kebilidi for the treatment of AADC deficiency in the EEA and U.S. since 2022 and 2025, respectively, and Sephience for the treatment of PKU since 2025. We have also relied on revenue associated with milestone and royalty payments from Roche pursuant to the SMA License Agreement under our SMA program andrevenue generated from net sales of Tegsedi and Waylivra in Latin America and the Caribbean, and license revenues related to performance obligations already completed pursuant to the Novartis Agreement. Based on our current commercial, research and development plans, we expect to continue to incur significant operating expenses for the foreseeable future, which we anticipate will be partially offset by revenues generated from the sale of our products and our collaboration and royalty revenues. We may continue to generate operating losses through 2026 and, while we anticipate that operating losses generated in future periods should decline versus prior periods, we may never generate profits from operations or maintain profitability. The net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from period to period. There is a substantial risk that as a result of the EC’s adoption of the CHMP’s negative opinion we will lose a significant portion of our ability to generate revenue from sales of Translarna in the EEA.

Previous wording

We anticipate that we will continue to incur significant expenses in connection with our commercialization efforts in the United States, the EEA, Latin America and other territories, including expenses related to our commercial infrastructure and corresponding sales and marketing, legal and regulatory, and distribution and manufacturing undertakings as well as administrative and employee-based expenses. In addition to the foregoing, we expect to continue to incur significant costs in connection with ongoing, planned and potential future clinical trials and studies for sepiapterin and our splicing and inflammation and ferroptosis programs as well as studies in our products for maintaining authorizations, label extensions and additional indications. We continue to seek marketing authorization for Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD in territories that we do not currently have marketing authorization in and we are exploring other potential mechanisms by which we may provide Translarna to nmDMD patients in the EEA if the EC adopts the CHMP’s negative opinion for Translarna. We also submitted an MAA to the EMA for sepiapterin for the treatment of PKU in March 2024, an NDA to the FDA for sepiapterin for the treatment of PKU in the third quarter of 2024, and an NDA to the FDA for vatiquinone for the treatment of FA in the fourth quarter of 2024. These efforts may significantly impact the timing and extent of our commercialization and manufacturing expenses.

Current wording

We anticipate that we will continue to incur significant expenses in connection with our commercialization efforts in the United States, the EEA, Latin America, Japan and other territories, including expenses related to our commercial infrastructure and corresponding sales and marketing, legal and regulatory, and distribution and manufacturing undertakings as well as administrative and employee-based expenses. In addition to the foregoing, we expect to continue to incur significant costs in connection with ongoing, planned and potential future clinical trials and studies for our splicing and inflammation and ferroptosis programs as well as studies in our products for maintaining authorizations, label extensions and additional indications.

Previous wording

With respect to our outstanding 1.50% convertible senior notes due September 15, 2026, or the 2026 Convertible Notes, cash interest payments are payable on a semi-annual basis in arrears, which will require total funding of $4.3 million annually.

Current wording

With respect to our outstanding 1.50% convertible senior notes due September 15, 2026, or the 2026 Convertible Notes, cash interest payments are payable on a semi-annual basis in arrears, which will require total funding of $4.3 million annually. Additionally, the notes are currently convertible and will mature and become due and payable on September 15, 2026 unless earlier redeemed or converted.

Previous wording

If a corporation undergoes an “ownership change” within the meaning of Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or Sections 382 and 383, the corporation’s ability to utilize any net operating losses, or NOLs, and certain tax credits and other tax attributes generated before such an ownership change, is limited. We believe that we have in the past experienced ownership changes within the meaning of Sections 382 and 383 that have resulted in limitations under Sections 382 and 383 (and similar state provisions) on the use of our NOLs and other tax attributes.

Current wording

If a corporation undergoes an “ownership change” within the meaning of Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or Sections 382 and 383, the corporation’s ability to utilize any net operating losses, or NOLs, and certain tax credits and other tax attributes generated before such an ownership change, is limited. We believe that we

Previous wording

On December 22, 2017, the United States government enacted the 2017 Tax Act, which significantly reformed the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code. The Tax Act, among other things, contained significant changes to corporate taxation. As part of Congress’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, economic relief legislation was enacted in 2020 and 2021. Such legislation contains numerous tax provisions. In addition, the IRA was signed into law in August 2022. The IRA introduced new tax provisions, including a 1% excise tax imposed on certain stock repurchases by publicly traded corporations. The 1% excise tax generally applies to any acquisition by the publicly traded corporation (or certain of its affiliates) of stock of the publicly traded corporation in exchange for money or other property (other than stock of the corporation itself), subject to ade minimis exception. Thus, the excise tax could apply to certain transactions that are not traditional stock repurchases.

Current wording

The IRA was signed into law in August 2022, and the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, or OBBBA, was signed into law in July 2025. The IRA introduced new tax provisions, including a 1% excise tax imposed on certain stock repurchases by publicly traded corporations. The 1% excise tax generally applies to any acquisition of stock by the publicly traded corporation (or certain of its affiliates) from a stockholder of the corporation in exchange for money or other property (other than stock of the corporation itself), subject to certain exceptions. Thus, the excise tax could apply to certain transactions that are not traditional stock repurchases. The OBBBA contains numerous tax provisions that we are currently in the process of evaluating, and which may significantly affect our business or financial condition. The recent changes under the OBBBA include tax rate extensions and changes to the business interest deduction limitation, the expensing of domestic research and development expenditures (in contrast to the continued capitalization and amortization of foreign research and development expenditures), the bonus depreciation deduction rules, and the international tax framework.

Previous wording

Regulatory guidance under the 2017 Tax Act, the IRA, and such additional legislation is and continues to be forthcoming, and such guidance could ultimately increase or lessen the impact of these laws on our business and financial condition. In addition, it is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to the 2017 Tax Act, the IRA, and additional tax legislation.

Current wording

Regulatory guidance under the IRA, the OBBBA, and other tax-related legislation is and continues to be forthcoming, and such guidance could ultimately increase or lessen the impact of these laws on our business and financial condition. In addition, it is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to changes to federal tax legislation.

Previous wording

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the EU and the United States, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. We have obtained orphan drug designations from the EMA and from the FDA for Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD, Upstaza/Kebilidi for the treatment of AADC, Evrysdi for the treatment of SMA, sepiapterin for the treatment of patients with hyperphenylalaninemia, including hyperphenylalaninemia caused by PKU and vatiquinone for the treatment of FA. The FDA has also granted an orphan drug designation to Emflaza for the treatment of DMD. We may also seek orphan drug designation and exclusivity for other product candidates, if we believe that the product candidate may qualify. We, however, may not be able to obtain orphan drug designation in the future for

Current wording

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States and the EU, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. We have obtained orphan drug designations from the FDA and the EMA for Sephience for the treatment of patients with hyperphenylalaninemia, including hyperphenylalaninemia caused by PKU, Translarna for the treatment of nmDMD, Upstaza/Kebilidi for the treatment of AADC, Evrysdi for the treatment of SMA, and vatiquinone for the treatment of FA. The FDA has also granted an orphan drug designation to Emflaza for the treatment of DMD. We may also seek orphan drug designation and exclusivity for other product candidates, if we believe that the product candidate may qualify. We, however, may not be able to obtain orphan drug designation in the future for any of our other product candidates and, even if we obtain designation, we may ultimately not be able to obtain orphan drug exclusivity. Obtaining orphan drug exclusivity, both in the United States and the EU, may be important to a product candidate’s future success.