Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc.

Previous wording

The commercial success of our products continues to depend on, and the commercial success of any future products would depend on, a number of factors attributable to one of our products or the products of our competitors, including, but not limited to:

Current wording

The commercial success of our products continues to depend on, and the commercial success of any future products would depend on, a number of factors attributable to our products or the products of our competitors, including, but not limited to:

Previous wording

our ability to timely comply with FDA post-marketing requirements and commitments, including through successfully conducting additional studies that confirm clinical efficacy, effectiveness and safety of our products and acceptance of the same by the FDA and medical community since continued approval of accelerated approval products may be contingent upon verification of a clinical benefit in confirmatory trials, particularly in light of FDA's expanded expedited withdrawal procedures as set forth in FDORA;

Current wording

ESSENCE trial, a confirmatory trial intended to verify the clinical benefits of our two PMO Products, VYONDYS and AMONDYS, and acceptance of the same by the FDA and medical community since continued approval of accelerated approval products or transition to traditional approval for such products may be contingent upon verification of a clinical benefit in confirmatory trials, particularly in light of FDA's expanded expedited withdrawal procedures as set forth in FDORA;

Previous wording

the development, commercialization or pricing of competing products or therapies for the treatment of Duchenne, or its symptoms, and the existence of competing clinical trials;

Current wording

the development, commercialization or pricing of competing products or therapies for the disease areas we aim to treat or their symptoms, and the existence of competing clinical trials;

Previous wording

our ability to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals to commercialize our product candidates, and to commercialize our products in markets outside of the U.S.;

Current wording

our ability to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals to commercialize our product candidates, and to commercialize our products in markets outside of the U.S., including following the topline results of our ESSENCE trial, a confirmatory trial to verify the clinical benefits of two of our PMO products: AMONDYS and VYONDYS;

Previous wording

The accelerated approvals for EXONDYS 51, VYONDYS 53 and AMONDYS 45 granted by the FDA were based on an increase in the surrogate biomarker of dystrophin in skeletal muscles observed in some patients treated with these products. The accelerated approval for ELEVIDYS in non-ambulatory patients granted by the FDA was based on an effect on the surrogate endpoint of expression of ELEVIDYS micro-dystrophin, the protein produced by ELEVIDYS. These products are subject to ongoing FDA requirements governing labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping, and we are required to submit additional safety, efficacy and other post-marketing information to the FDA.

Current wording

The accelerated approvals for EXONDYS 51, VYONDYS 53 and AMONDYS 45 granted by the FDA were based on an increase in the surrogate biomarker of dystrophin in skeletal muscles observed in some patients treated with these products. The accelerated approval for ELEVIDYS in non-ambulatory patients granted by the FDA was based on an effect on the surrogate endpoint of expression of ELEVIDYS micro-dystrophin, the protein produced by ELEVIDYS. As of the date of issuance of this Quarterly

Previous wording

Under the accelerated approval pathway, continued approval may be contingent upon verification of a clinical benefit in confirmatory trials. These post-marketing requirements and commitments may not be feasible and/or could impose significant burdens and costs on us; could negatively impact our development, manufacturing and supply of our products; and could negatively impact our financial results. Failure to meet post-approval commitments and requirements, including completion of enrollment and in particular, any failure to obtain safety and efficacy data that supports clinical benefits from our ongoing and planned studies of our products, could lead to negative regulatory action from the FDA and/or withdrawal of regulatory approval of EXONDYS 51, VYONDYS 53, AMONDYS 45 or ELEVIDYS. FDORA, enacted in 2022, has expanded FDA's expedited withdrawal procedures for drugs approved via the accelerated approval pathway if a sponsor fails to conduct any required post-approval study with due diligence.

Current wording

Under the accelerated approval pathway, continued approval may be contingent upon verification of a clinical benefit in confirmatory trials. These post-marketing requirements and commitments may not be feasible and/or could impose significant burdens and costs on us; could negatively impact our development, manufacturing and supply of our products; and could negatively impact our financial results. Failure to meet post-approval commitments and requirements, including completion of enrollment and in particular, any failure to obtain safety and efficacy data that supports clinical benefits from our ongoing and planned studies of our products, could lead to negative regulatory action from the FDA and/or withdrawal of regulatory approval of EXONDYS 51, VYONDYS 53, AMONDYS 45 or ELEVIDYS. FDORA, enacted in 2022, has expanded FDA's expedited withdrawal procedures for drugs approved via the accelerated approval pathway if a sponsor fails to conduct any required post-approval study with due diligence. For example, on November 3, 2025, we announced topline results from our ESSENCE trial, a confirmatory trial intended to verify the clinical benefits of two of our PMO Products: VYONDYS and AMONDYS, which primary endpoint did not meet statistical significance. Our analysis of the ESSENCE trial results is ongoing. However, these topline results could lead to regulatory actions from the FDA, including changes to our drug labels, revocation of accelerated approvals and directives to remove these products from the market altogether. Additionally, we intend to seek alignment with the FDA regarding the results of our ESSENCE trial and a path to traditional approval of VYONDYS and AMONDYS.

Previous wording

Further, the current administration has also undertaken significant efforts to reduce the size and spending of the federal government, including at the FDA. A significant reduction in FDA’s workforce or FDA’s budget, or other disruptions at FDA, could materially impact FDA’s ability to engage in a variety of activities that may affect our business, including routine regulatory and oversight activities. For example, any reduction in FDA’s workforce could lead to disruptions and delays in FDA’s review and oversight of our post-approval confirmatory trials.

Current wording

Further, the current administration has also undertaken significant efforts to reduce the size and spending of the federal government, including at the FDA. A significant reduction in FDA’s workforce or FDA’s budget, or other disruptions at FDA, including the government shutdown, could materially impact FDA’s ability to engage in a variety of activities that may affect our business, including routine regulatory and oversight activities. For example, any reduction in FDA’s workforce could lead to disruptions and delays in FDA’s review and oversight of our post-approval confirmatory trials.

Previous wording

Manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with FDA requirements, including cGMP regulations. Drug product manufacturers are required to continuously monitor and report adverse events from clinical trials and commercial use of the product. If we or a regulatory agency discover previously unknown adverse events or events of unanticipated severity or frequency, a regulatory agency may establish additional regulatory requirement including, among other things, labeling changes, implementation of risk evaluation and mitigation strategy program, or additional post-marketing studies or clinical trials. For example, following two patient deaths due to ALF in non-ambulatory patients associated with the use of ELEVIDYS, FDA proposed a safety label supplement for ELEVIDYS to include a boxed warning for ALI and ALF. Subsequently, on July 18, 2025, we announced a reported case of ALF resulting in death in a patient following dosing in the Company's Phase 1/2 LGMD trial for SRP-9004. As of the date of this Quarterly Report, the Company remains in ongoing discussions with FDA regarding the label supplement for ELEVIDYS. If we or a regulatory agency discover previously unknown problems with a product, such as problems with a facility where the API or drug product is manufactured or tested, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product and/or the manufacturer, including removal of specific product lots from the market, withdrawal of the product from the market, suspension of manufacturing or suspension of clinical trials using the same manufacturing materials. Sponsors of drugs approved under FDA accelerated approval provisions also are required to submit to the FDA, at least 30 days before initial use, all promotional materials intended for use after the first 120 days following marketing approval. If we or the manufacturing facilities for our products fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory agency may:

Current wording

Manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with FDA requirements, including cGMP regulations. Drug product manufacturers are required to continuously monitor and report adverse events from clinical trials and commercial use of the product. If we or a regulatory agency discover previously unknown adverse events or events of unanticipated severity or frequency, a regulatory agency may establish additional regulatory requirement including, among other things, labeling changes, implementation of risk evaluation and mitigation strategy program, or additional post-marketing studies or clinical trials. For example, following two patient deaths due to ALF in non-ambulatory patients associated with the use of ELEVIDYS, FDA proposed, and we agreed to, a safety label supplement for ELEVIDYS to include a boxed warning for ALI and ALF. Subsequently, on July 18, 2025, we announced a reported case of ALF resulting in death in a patient following dosing in the Company's Phase 1/2 LGMD trial for SRP-9004. As of the date of issuance of this Quarterly Report, the Company remains in ongoing discussions with FDA regarding the label supplement for ELEVIDYS. If we or a regulatory agency discover previously unknown problems with a product, such as problems with a facility where the API or drug product is manufactured or tested, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product and/or the manufacturer, including removal of specific product lots from the market, withdrawal of the product from the market, suspension of manufacturing or suspension of clinical trials using the same manufacturing materials. Sponsors of drugs approved under FDA accelerated approval provisions also are required to submit to the FDA, at least 30 days before initial use, all promotional materials intended for use after the first 120 days following marketing approval. If we or the manufacturing facilities for our products fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory agency may:

Previous wording

We expect that private insurers will continue to consider the efficacy, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of our products, including any new data and analyses that we are able to collect and make available in a compliant manner, in determining whether to approve reimbursement for our products and at what levels. If there are considerable delays in the generation of new evidence or if any new data and information we collect is not favorable, third party insurers may make coverage decisions that negatively impact sales of our products. For example, in light of the ELEVIDYS Suspension and ongoing discussions with FDA, certain third-party payors have restricted reimbursement for ELEVIDYS for ambulatory patients, notwithstanding FDA's recommendation that we resume shipments of ELEVIDYS to ambulatory patients in the U.S. We continue to have discussions with payors, some of which may eventually deny coverage. We may not receive approval for reimbursement of our products from additional insurers on a satisfactory rate or basis, in which case our business would be materially adversely affected. In addition, obtaining these approvals can be a time consuming and expensive process. Our business would be materially adversely affected if we are not able to maintain favorable coverage decisions and/or fail to receive additional favorable coverage decisions from third party insurers, in particular during re-authorization processes for patients that have already initiated therapy. Our business could also be adversely affected if government health programs, private health insurers, including managed care organizations, or other reimbursement bodies or payors limit the indications for which our products will be reimbursed or fail to recognize approval or accelerated approval and surrogate endpoints as clinically meaningful.

Current wording

We expect that third party payors, including private insurers and government health benefit programs, will continue to consider the efficacy, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of our products, including any new data and analyses that we are able to collect and make available in a compliant manner, in determining whether to approve reimbursement for our products and at what levels. If there are considerable delays in the generation of new evidence or if any new data and information we collect is not favorable, third party payors may make coverage decisions that negatively impact sales of our products. For example, in light of the ELEVIDYS Suspension and ongoing discussions with FDA, certain third-party payors have restricted reimbursement for ELEVIDYS for ambulatory patients, notwithstanding FDA's recommendation that we resume shipments of ELEVIDYS to ambulatory patients in the U.S. We continue to have discussions with payors, some of which may eventually deny coverage. Additionally, in early October, the New York Drug Utilization Review Board recommended that Medicaid pause coverage of ELEVIDYS and other state Medicaid programs may re-assess coverage in light of the recent developments and increasing fiscal pressures. We may not receive approval for reimbursement of our products from additional insurers on a satisfactory rate or basis, in which case our business would be materially adversely affected. In addition, obtaining these approvals can be a time consuming and expensive process. Our business would be materially adversely affected if we are not able to maintain favorable coverage decisions and/or fail to receive additional favorable coverage decisions from third party insurers, in particular during re-authorization processes for patients that have already initiated therapy. Our business could also be adversely affected if government health programs, private health insurers, including managed care organizations, or other reimbursement bodies or payors limit the indications for which our products will be reimbursed or fail to recognize approval or accelerated approval and surrogate endpoints as clinically meaningful.

Previous wording

Furthermore, we cannot predict to what extent an economic recession, changes in fiscal policy, restrictions in eligibility for government health care programs such as Medicaid or general increase in unemployment rates may disrupt global healthcare systems and access to our products or result in a widespread loss of individual health insurance coverage due to unemployment or trends in employee attrition, a shift from commercial payor coverage to government payor coverage, or an increase in demand for patient assistance and/or free drug programs, any of which would adversely affect access to our products and our net sales.

Current wording

Furthermore, we cannot predict to what extent an economic recession, changes in fiscal policy, restrictions in eligibility for or reductions in funding government health care programs such as Medicaid or general increase in unemployment rates may disrupt global healthcare systems and access to our products or result in a widespread loss of individual health insurance coverage due to unemployment or trends in employee attrition, a shift from commercial payor coverage to government payor coverage, or an increase in demand for patient assistance and/or free drug programs, any of which would adversely affect access to our products and our net sales.

Previous wording

The U.S. government and individual states continue to aggressively pursue healthcare reform, which includes ongoing attempts to manage utilization as well as control and/or lower the cost of prescription drugs and biologics. See “Item 1. Business – Government Regulation – U.S. Healthcare and Other Reform” There is no assurance that federal or state health care reform will not adversely affect our future business and financial results, and we cannot predict how future federal or state legislative, judicial or administrative changes relating to healthcare policy will affect our business.

Current wording

The U.S. government and individual states continue to aggressively pursue healthcare reform, which includes ongoing attempts to manage utilization as well as control and/or lower the cost of prescription drugs and biologics. See “Item 1. Business – Government Regulation – U.S. Healthcare and Other Reform” in our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024. There is no assurance that federal or state health care reform will not adversely affect our future business and financial results, and we cannot predict how future federal or state legislative, judicial or administrative changes relating to healthcare policy will affect our business.

Previous wording

the efficacy and safety of our other exon-skipping and gene therapy product candidates and third parties’ competitive therapies.

Current wording

the efficacy and safety of our other product candidates and third parties’ competitive therapies.

Previous wording

For example, we recently announced two reported cases of ALF resulting in death in non-ambulatory patients following treatment with ELEVIDYS. Following these announcements, FDA proposed a safety label supplement for ELEVIDYS to include a boxed warning for ALI and ALF. Subsequently, on July 18, 2025 we announced a reported case of ALF resulting in death in a patient following dosing in the Company’s Phase 1/2 LGMD trial for SRP-9004. These announcements have impacted, and may continue to, impact the market adoption of our products and create uncertainty among patients, providers, and payers. Although we have resumed shipments to ambulatory patients in the U.S., we may experience continued hesitation from patients, payers and healthcare providers which could adversely impact our business.

Current wording

For example, in March and June 2025, we announced two reported cases of ALF resulting in death in non-ambulatory patients following treatment with ELEVIDYS. Following these announcements, FDA proposed, and we agreed to, a safety label supplement for ELEVIDYS to include a boxed warning for ALI and ALF. Subsequently, on July 18, 2025 we announced a reported case of ALF resulting in death in a patient following dosing in the Company’s Phase 1/2 LGMD trial for SRP-9004. These announcements have impacted, and may continue to, impact the market adoption of our products and create uncertainty among patients, providers, and payers. Although we have resumed shipments to ambulatory patients in the U.S., we may continue to experience hesitation from patients, payers and healthcare providers, which could adversely impact our business. The degree to which such hesitation continues, and the degree to which it could adversely impact our business, is uncertain and difficult to predict.

Previous wording

More restrictive government regulations or negative public opinion would harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, financial guidance, ability to accurately forecast key financial metrics, and prospects and may delay or impair the development and commercialization of our gene therapy product candidates or demand ELEVIDYS or any other products we may develop. For example, earlier gene therapy trials of other sponsor's products led to several well-publicized adverse events, including death, and other gene therapy trials have failed to demonstrate efficacy. In addition, we recently announced two reported cases of ALF resulting in death of non-ambulatory patients following treatment with ELEVIDYS, as well as one case of ALF resulting in death of a non-ambulatory patient following dosing in the Company’s Phase 1/2 LGMD trial for our gene therapy product candidate, SRP-9004. In response to these announcements, FDA revoked the platform technology designation for the Company’s AAVrh74 Platform Technology associated with both ELEVIDYS and SRP-9004. The degree to which these events have impacted or will impact market acceptance of ELEVIDYS in ambulatory patients, or any of our other drug products, is uncertain and difficult to estimate, which may result in unpredictable variability in our financial forecasts.

Current wording

More restrictive government regulations or negative public opinion would harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, financial guidance, ability to accurately forecast key financial metrics, and prospects and may delay or impair the development and commercialization of our gene therapy product candidates or demand for ELEVIDYS or any other products we may develop. For example, earlier gene therapy trials of other sponsor's products led to several well-publicized adverse events, including death, and other gene therapy trials have failed to demonstrate efficacy. In addition, in March and June 2025 we announced two reported cases of ALF resulting in death of non-ambulatory patients following treatment with ELEVIDYS, as well as one case of ALF resulting in death of a non-ambulatory patient following dosing in the Company’s Phase 1/2 LGMD trial for our gene therapy product candidate, SRP-9004. In response to these announcements, FDA revoked the platform technology designation for the Company’s AAVrh74 Platform Technology associated with both ELEVIDYS and SRP-9004. The degree to which these events have impacted or will impact market acceptance of ELEVIDYS in ambulatory patients, or any of our other drug products, is uncertain and difficult to estimate, which may result in unpredictable variability in our financial forecasts.

Previous wording

In addition to receiving accelerated approval in the U.S., EXONDYS 51 has been approved for marketing in Israel, Libya, Kuwait, and Georgia, AMONDYS 45 in Libya, Kuwait, and Georgia, and VYONDYS 53 in Libya, Kuwait, and Georgia. We may not receive approval to commercialize these products in additional countries. Our partner for ELEVIDYS, Roche, has received certain approvals for ELEVIDYS in territories outside of the U.S. In November 2016, we submitted a MAA for eteplirsen to the EMA and the application was validated in December 2016. As we announced on June 1, 2018, the CHMP of the EMA adopted a negative opinion for eteplirsen. In September 2018, the CHMP of the EMA confirmed its negative opinion for eteplirsen, and the European Commission adopted the CHMP opinion in December 2018. During 2019, we sought follow-up EMA scientific advice for eteplirsen.

Current wording

In addition to receiving accelerated approval in the U.S., EXONDYS 51 has been approved for marketing in Israel, Libya, Kuwait, and Georgia, AMONDYS 45 in Libya, Kuwait, and Georgia, and VYONDYS 53 in Libya, Kuwait, and Georgia. We may not receive approval to commercialize these products in additional countries. Our partner for ELEVIDYS, Roche, has received certain approvals for ELEVIDYS in territories outside of the U.S. In November 2016, we submitted a MAA for eteplirsen to the EMA and the application was validated in December 2016. As we announced on June 1, 2018, the CHMP of the EMA adopted a negative opinion for eteplirsen. In September 2018, the CHMP of the EMA confirmed its negative opinion for eteplirsen, and the European Commission adopted the CHMP opinion in December 2018. During 2019, we sought follow-up EMA scientific advice for eteplirsen. Once data from our ongoing studies are available, we plan to evaluate future engagement with the EMA on potential next steps. On September 24, 2025, the European Commission refused marketing authorization under Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council for “Elevidys – delandistrogene moxeparvovec”) for ambulatory individuals aged three to seven years with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). We also announced in June 2025 that we paused our ENVISION study and such study remains paused.

Previous wording

In addition, we have granted Roche an exclusive option to obtain an exclusive license to commercialize certain products, including eteplirsen, golodirsen and casimersen, outside of the U.S. If this option is exercised, Roche will have sole control over and decision-making authority with respect to the commercialization of such products outside the U.S.

Current wording

In addition, we have granted Roche an exclusive option to obtain an exclusive license to commercialize eteplirsen, golodirsen and casimersen, outside of the U.S. If this option is exercised, Roche will have sole control over and decision-making authority with respect to the commercialization of such products outside the U.S.

Previous wording

Due to the nature of our products and product candidate pipeline, in addition to NCE exclusivity and new biologic exclusivity, orphan drug exclusivity is especially important for our products that are eligible for orphan drug designation. For eligible products, we plan to rely on orphan drug exclusivity to maintain a competitive position. If we do not have adequate patent protection for our products, then the relative importance of obtaining regulatory exclusivity is even greater. While orphan status for any of our products, if granted or maintained, would provide market exclusivity in the United States for seven years, we would not be able to exclude other companies from obtaining regulatory approval of products using the same or similar active ingredient for the same indication during or beyond the exclusivity period applicable to our product on the basis of orphan drug status. For example, the exclusivity period for EXONDYS 51 ended in September 2023. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug, nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process. A decision in 2021 by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in Catalyst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. vs. Becerra regarding interpretation of the Orphan Drug Act’s exclusivity provisions as applied to drugs and biologics approved for orphan indications narrower than the product’s orphan designation has the potential to significantly broaden the scope of orphan exclusivity for such products. While the FDA has since taken the position that it will continue to apply orphan drug exclusivity only on the basis of the specific indication, the Supreme Court’s recent decision in 2024 in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo has the potential to impact how the Agency applies the Catalyst decision. Our ability to obtain or seek to work around orphan exclusivity, as well as our ability to retain orphan exclusivity that the FDA previously has recognized for our products, may be impacted depending on how the Catalyst decision is ultimately implemented. Legislation has been introduced to amend the Orphan Drug Act in a way that may prevent these effects of the Catalyst decision, but it is unclear if or when such legislation could be enacted.

Current wording

Due to the nature of our products and product candidate pipeline, in addition to NCE exclusivity and new biologic exclusivity, orphan drug exclusivity is especially important for our products that are eligible for orphan drug designation. While orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug, nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process, orphan drug exclusivity qualifies such drug for market exclusivity—meaning that FDA is unable to approve any other marketing application for the same chemical or biological product—for seven years from the time of approval of the applicable marketing authorization. For eligible products, we plan to rely on orphan drug exclusivity to maintain a competitive position. If we do not have adequate patent protection for our products, then the relative importance of obtaining regulatory exclusivity is even greater. While orphan status for any of our products, if granted or maintained, would provide market exclusivity in the United States for seven years from the time of approval of the applicable market authorization, we would not be able to exclude other companies from obtaining regulatory approval of products using the same or similar active ingredient for the same indication during or beyond the exclusivity period applicable to our product on the basis of orphan drug status. For example, the exclusivity period for EXONDYS 51, which received initial FDA approval in September 2016, ended in September 2023. Recent litigation has raised questions about the appropriate scope of orphan drug exclusivity. A decision in 2021 by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in Catalyst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. vs. Becerra regarding interpretation of the Orphan Drug Act’s exclusivity provisions as applied to drugs and biologics approved for orphan indications narrower than the product’s orphan designation has the potential to significantly broaden the scope of orphan exclusivity for such products. Specifically, the court held that, under the statute, orphan drug exclusivity blocks approval of another company’s application for the same chemical or biological product for the entire disease or condition for which the drug is granted orphan drug designation, regardless of whether the ultimate marketing approval only covered a narrower use or indication. While the FDA has since taken the position that it will continue to apply orphan drug exclusivity only on the basis of the specific indication, the Supreme Court’s recent decision in 2024 in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo has the potential to impact how the Agency applies the Catalyst decision. Our ability to obtain or seek to work around orphan exclusivity, as well as our ability to retain orphan exclusivity that the FDA previously has recognized for our products, may be impacted depending on how the Catalyst decision is ultimately implemented. Legislation has been introduced to amend the Orph…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

Thus, other companies may have received, or could receive, approval to market a product candidate that is granted orphan drug exclusivity for the same drug or similar drug and same orphan indication as any of our product candidates for which we plan to file an NDA, BLA or MAA. If that were to happen, our prior approved orphan products may face competition and any pending NDA, BLA or MAA for our product candidate for that indication may not be approved until the competing company’s period of exclusivity has expired in the U.S. or the EU, as applicable. For example, in September 2021, the FDA issued guidance concerning its position on interpreting when gene therapy products would be considered the “same” or “different” for purposes of orphan drug exclusivity. The guidance states that if two gene therapy products have or use different vectors, the FDA generally intends to consider them to be “different” drugs. Further, according to the guidance, the FDA generally intends to consider vectors from the same viral group (e.g., AAV2 vs. AAV5) to be different, when the differences between the vectors impact factors such as tropism, immune response avoidance, or potential insertional mutagenesis. However, there is considerable uncertainty as to the interpretation of these guidelines. As illustrated by this guidance, orphan drug exclusivity as applied to gene therapy products is an evolving area subject to change and interpretation by the FDA and therefore, we cannot be certain as to how the FDA will apply those rules to ELEVIDYS or our gene therapy product candidates. Similarly, pursuant to the 2018 Commission Regulation, two gene therapy medicinal products are not considered similar when there are differences in the therapeutic sequence, viral vector, transfer system, regulatory sequences or manufacturing technology that significantly affect the biological characteristics and/or biological activity relevant for the intended therapeutic effect and/or safety attributes of the product.

Current wording

Thus, other companies may have received, or could receive, approval to market a product candidate that is granted orphan drug exclusivity for the same drug or similar drug and same orphan indication as any of our product candidates for which we plan to file an NDA, BLA or MAA. If that were to happen, our prior approved orphan products may face competition and any pending NDA, BLA or MAA for our product candidate for that indication may not be approved until the competing company’s period of exclusivity has expired in the U.S. or the EU, as applicable. For example, in September 2021, the FDA issued guidance concerning its position on interpreting when gene therapy products would be considered the “same” or “different” for purposes of orphan drug exclusivity. The guidance states that if two gene therapy products have or use different vectors, the FDA generally intends to consider them to be “different” drugs. Further, according to the guidance, the FDA generally intends to consider vectors from the same viral group (e.g., AAV2 vs. AAV5) to be different, when the differences between the vectors impact factors such as tropism, immune response avoidance, or potential insertional mutagenesis. However, there is considerable uncertainty as to the interpretation of these guidelines. As illustrated by this guidance, orphan drug exclusivity as applied to gene therapy products is an evolving area subject to change and interpretation by the FDA and therefore, we cannot be certain as to how the FDA will apply those rules to ELEVIDYS, gene therapy product candidates or our siRNA programs. Similarly, pursuant to the 2018 Commission Regulation, two gene therapy medicinal products are not considered similar when there are differences in the therapeutic sequence, viral vector, transfer system, regulatory sequences or manufacturing technology that significantly affect the biological characteristics and/or biological activity relevant for the intended therapeutic effect and/or safety attributes of the product.

Previous wording

The patient population suffering from Duchenne, LGMD, FSHD and DM1 is small and has not been established with precision. If the actual number of patients is smaller than we estimate, our revenue and ability to achieve profitability may be adversely affected.

Current wording

The patient population living with Duchenne, LGMD, FSHD and DM1 is small and has not been established with precision. If the actual number of patients is smaller than we estimate, our revenue and ability to achieve profitability may be adversely affected.

Previous wording

Duchenne and LGMD are rare, fatal genetic disorders. FSHD is a rare neuromuscular disease with an estimated U.S. prevalent population of approximately 13,000. DM1 is also a rare neuromuscular disease with an estimated U.S. prevalent population of approximately 30,000. Duchenne affects an estimated one in approximately every 3,500 to 5,000 males born worldwide, of which up to 13% are estimated to be amenable to exon 51 skipping, up to 8% are estimated to be amenable to exon 53 skipping and up to 8% are estimated to be amenable to exon 45 skipping. LGMDs as a class affect an estimated range of approximately one in every 14,500 to one in every 123,000 individuals. Our estimates of the size of these patient populations are based on a limited number of published studies as well as internal analyses. Various factors may decrease the market size of our products and product candidates, including the severity of the disease, patient demographics and the response of patients’ immune systems to our products and product candidates. If the results of these studies or our analysis of them do not accurately reflect the relevant patient population, our assessment of the market may be inaccurate, making it difficult or impossible for us to meet our revenue goals, or to maintain profitability.

Current wording

Duchenne and LGMD are rare, fatal genetic disorders. Duchenne affects an estimated one in approximately every 3,500 to 5,000 males born worldwide, of which up to 13% are estimated to be amenable to exon 51 skipping, up to 8% are estimated to be amenable to exon 53 skipping and up to 8% are estimated to be amenable to exon 45 skipping. LGMDs as a class affect an estimated range of approximately one in every 14,500 to one in every 123,000 individuals. FSHD is a rare neuromuscular disease with an estimated U.S. prevalent population of approximately 13,000. DM1 is also a rare neuromuscular disease with an estimated U.S. prevalent population of approximately 30,000. Our estimates of the size of these patient populations are based on a limited number of published studies as well as internal analyses. Various factors may decrease the market size of our products and product candidates, including the severity of the disease, patient demographics and the response of patients’ immune systems to our products and product candidates. If the results of these studies or our analysis of them do not accurately reflect the relevant patient population, our assessment of the market may be inaccurate, making it difficult or impossible for us to meet our revenue goals, or to maintain profitability.

Previous wording

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are highly competitive and subject to significant and rapid technological change, including the use of artificial intelligence (“AI”). We are aware of many pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that are actively engaged in research and development in areas in which our products and product candidates are aimed. Some of these competitors are developing or testing product candidates that now, or may in the future, compete directly with our products or product candidates. For example, we face competition in the field of Duchenne by third parties who are developing or who had once developed:

Current wording

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are highly competitive and subject to significant and rapid technological change, including the use of artificial intelligence (“AI”). We are aware of many pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that are actively engaged in research and development in areas in which our products and product candidates are aimed. Some of these competitors are developing or testing product candidates that now, or may in the future, compete directly with our products or product candidates. For example, we face competition in the fields of Duchenne, gene therapy and siRNA by third parties who are developing or who had once developed:

Previous wording

(i) exon skipping product candidates, such as Wave (targeting various exons, including 53 and 51), Nippon Shinyaku (targeting various exons, including 51 and 45, and notably for exon 53 for which it has received accelerated FDA approval for its product Viltepso (viltolarsen)), Dyne Therapeutics pursuing antibody-oligonucleotide conjugates for exons 44, 45, 51, and 53, Avidity Biosciences pursuing antibody-oligonucleotide conjugates for exons 44, 45 and 51, SQY Therapeutics and BioMarin (BMN-351 for exon 51), Entrada (notably for exon 44, 45, 50, and 51);

Current wording

(i) exon skipping product candidates, such as Wave (targeting various exons, including 53 and 51), Nippon Shinyaku (targeting various exons, including 51 and 45, and notably for exon 53 for which it has received accelerated FDA approval for its product Viltepso (viltolarsen)), Dyne Therapeutics pursuing antibody-oligonucleotide conjugates for exons 44, 45, 51, and 53, Avidity Biosciences pursuing antibody-oligonucleotide conjugates for exons 44, 45 and 51, SQY Therapeutics and BioMarin (for exon 51), Entrada (notably for exon 44, 45, 50, and 51);

Previous wording

(ii) gene therapies, such as Genethon and Solid (also in partnership with Ultragenyx), and Regenxbio;

Current wording

(ii) gene therapies, such as Genethon and Solid (also in partnership with Ultragenyx), Regenxbio and Insmed;

Previous wording

(v) other approaches that may be palliative in nature or potentially complementary with our products and product candidates and that are or were once being developed including but not limited to, Santhera (Reveragen), Capricor Therapeutics (in partnership with Nippon Shinyaku), BioPhytis, Italfarmaco (approved product Givinostat), Dystrogen and Edgewise Therapeutics. Although BioMarin announced on May 31, 2016 its intent to discontinue clinical and regulatory development of drisapersen as well as its other clinical stage candidates, BMN 044, BMN 045 and BMN 053, then-currently in Phase 2 studies for distinct forms of Duchenne, it further announced its intent to continue to explore the development of next generation oligonucleotides for the treatment of Duchenne. Indeed, BioMarin is conducting clinical trials for BMN-351, an oligonucleotide therapy. In addition, while Wave announced its intention to discontinue development of suvodirsen and suspend development of WVE-N531, it is conducting clinical trials for its exon 53 oligonucleotide, WVE-N531.

Current wording

(v) other approaches that may be palliative in nature or potentially complementary with our products and product candidates and that are or were once being developed including but not limited to, Santhera (approved product vamorolone), Capricor Therapeutics (in partnership with Nippon Shinyaku), BioPhytis, Italfarmaco (approved product Givinostat), Dystrogen and Edgewise Therapeutics. Although BioMarin announced on May 31, 2016 its intent to discontinue clinical and regulatory development of drisapersen as well as its other clinical stage candidates, BMN 044, BMN 045 and BMN 053, then-currently in Phase 2 studies for distinct forms of Duchenne, it further announced its intent to continue to explore the development of next generation oligonucleotides for the treatment of Duchenne. Indeed, BioMarin is conducting clinical trials for BMN-351, an oligonucleotide therapy. In addition, while Wave announced its intention to discontinue development of suvodirsen and suspend development of WVE-N531, it is conducting clinical trials for its exon 53 oligonucleotide, WVE-N531.

Previous wording

In addition, we are aware of many pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that are actively engaged in research and development using platform technologies that may be viewed as competing with ours beyond and including those companies mentioned immediately above, such as Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Arbutus (formerly Tekmira Pharmaceuticals Corp.), Deciphera Pharmaceuticals, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Roche Innovation Center Copenhagen (formerly Santaris Pharma A/S), Shire plc (now Takeda), Biogen, Moderna Therapeutics, Avidity, Dyne Therapeutics, Stoke Therapeutics, Ultragenyx, Sanofi and PepGen. Additionally, several companies and institutions have entered into collaborations or other agreements for the development of product candidates, including mRNA, gene therapy and gene editing (CRIPSR and AAV, among others) and small molecule therapies that are potential competitors for therapies being developed in the muscular dystrophy, neuromuscular and rare disease space, including, but not limited to, Astellas Pharma, Biogen Inc., Ionis, Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sanofi, Shire (now Takeda), Eli Lilly, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Moderna Therapeutics, Inc., Akashi, Capricor Therapeutics (in partnership with Nippon Shinyaku), Oxford University, Exonics Therapeutics (acquired by Vertex Pharmaceuticals), and Editas Medicine.

Current wording

Moderna Therapeutics, Avidity, Dyne Therapeutics, Stoke Therapeutics, Ultragenyx, Sanofi, Arrakis Therapeutics, Altay Therapeutics, Novartis, Life Edit, VectorY Therapeutics, Biogen, Arvinas, and Design Therapeutics. Additionally, several companies and institutions have entered into collaborations or other agreements for the development of product candidates, including mRNA, gene therapy and gene editing (CRISPR and AAV, among others) and small molecule therapies that are potential competitors for therapies being developed in the muscular dystrophy, neuromuscular and rare disease space, including, but not limited to, Astellas Pharma, Biogen Inc., Ionis, Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sanofi, Shire (now Takeda), Eli Lilly, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Moderna Therapeutics, Inc., Akashi, Capricor Therapeutics (in partnership with Nippon Shinyaku), Oxford University, Exonics Therapeutics (acquired by Vertex Pharmaceuticals), and Editas Medicine. Because many of our products are in various stages of preclinical and clinical development, and given the unpredictability inherent in drug development, it is difficult to predict which third parties may provide the most competition.

Previous wording

If any of our competitors are successful in obtaining regulatory approval for any of their product candidates, it may limit our ability to enter into the market, gain market share or maintain market share in the Duchenne space or other diseases targeted by our platform technologies, products and product candidate pipeline.

Current wording

If any of our competitors are successful in obtaining regulatory approval for any of their product candidates, it may limit our ability to enter into the market, gain market share or maintain market share in the Duchenne, DM1, FSHD, SCA, Huntington's, and Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis spaces or other diseases targeted by our platform technologies, products and product candidate pipeline.

Previous wording

Further, development and commercialization of ELEVIDYS and any expansion of its currently approved label, and development of our gene therapy product candidates, may compete with or supersede our current approved products, which may impact future revenues from sales of our current approved products. Our gene therapy product candidates are being developed for potential treatment of overlapping patient populations with our current approved products, and we have not determined if our gene therapy product candidates will be used in patients in combination with our existing approved products or in separate treatment regiments.

Current wording

Further, development and commercialization of ELEVIDYS and any expansion of its currently approved label, and development of our product candidates, may compete with or supersede our current approved products, which may impact future revenues from sales of our current approved products. Our product candidates are being developed for potential treatment of overlapping patient populations with our current approved products, and we have not determined if our product candidates will be used in patients in combination with our existing approved products or in separate treatment regimens.

Previous wording

Substantial overlap may exist between the addressable patient population for ELEVIDYS and the patient populations eligible for treatment with our PMO products. In the future, ELEVIDYS may be used in combination with our PMO products or may be adopted as a separate treatment regimen. Accordingly, ELEVIDYS may compete with our PMO products. As a result, successful commercialization of ELEVIDYS may reduce sales of our PMO products, potentially resulting in significant accounting charges relating to write-off of inventory if such inventory becomes in excess, obsolete or unusable.

Current wording

Substantial overlap may exist between the addressable patient population for ELEVIDYS and the patient populations eligible for treatment with our PMO products. In the future, if approved for such use, ELEVIDYS may be used in combination with our PMO products or may be adopted as a separate treatment regimen. Accordingly, ELEVIDYS may compete with our PMO products. As a result, successful commercialization of ELEVIDYS may reduce sales of our PMO products, potentially resulting in significant accounting charges relating to write-off of inventory if such inventory becomes in excess, obsolete or unusable.

Previous wording

For example, we will have limited influence and control over the development and commercialization activities of Roche in the territories in which it leads development and commercialization of ELEVIDYS, and if the exclusive option is exercised, in the territories in which it may lead commercialization of certain other products or product candidates. Roche’s development and commercialization activities in the territories where it is the lead party may adversely impact our own efforts in the U.S. Failure by Roche to meet its obligations under the Roche Agreement, to apply sufficient efforts at developing and commercializing collaboration products, or to comply with applicable legal or regulatory requirements, may materially adversely affect our business and our results of operations. In addition, to the extent we rely on Roche to commercialize any products for which we obtain regulatory approval, we will receive less revenues than if we commercialized these products ourselves.

Current wording

For example, we will have limited influence and control over the development and commercialization activities of Roche in the territories in which it leads development and commercialization of ELEVIDYS, and if the exclusive option is exercised, in the territories in which it may lead commercialization of certain other products. Roche’s development and commercialization activities in the territories where it is the lead party may adversely impact our own efforts in the U.S. Failure by Roche to meet its obligations under the Roche Agreement, to apply sufficient efforts at developing and commercializing collaboration products, or to comply with applicable legal or regulatory requirements, may materially adversely affect our business and our results of operations. In addition, to the extent we rely on Roche to commercialize any products for which we obtain regulatory approval, we will receive less revenues than if we commercialized these products ourselves.

Previous wording

denial by the regulatory agencies of permission to proceed with our planned clinical trials or any other clinical trials we may initiate, or placement of a clinical trial on hold. For example, on July 21, 2025, we announced that the FDA placed the LGMD FDA Clinical Hold following a case of ALF resulting in the death of a patient in our Phase 1/2 LGMD clinical trial for SRP-9004, which could impact the timing of a BLA submission for SRP-9003;

Current wording

denial by the regulatory agencies of permission to proceed with our planned clinical trials or any other clinical trials we may initiate, or placement of a clinical trial on hold. For example, on July 21, 2025, we announced that the FDA placed certain of our LGMD programs, including SRP-9003, on clinical hold following a case of ALF resulting in the death of a patient in our Phase 1/2 LGMD clinical trial for SRP-9004, which could impact the timing of a BLA submission for SRP-9003;

Previous wording

Further, any reduction in FDA’s workforce could delay or materially impact FDA’s feedback on our development programs, including through meetings and other informal interactions, and affect FDA’s review and oversight of our product candidates. Additionally, changes in FDA personnel under the new presidential administration may lead to changes in the regulations, policies and operations of the FDA, which may impact our clinical development plans. Any of these actions could adversely affect the development and approval of our product candidates.

Current wording

Further, any reduction in FDA’s workforce could delay or materially impact FDA’s feedback on our development programs, including through meetings and other informal interactions, and affect FDA’s review and oversight of our product candidates. Additionally, changes in FDA personnel under the new presidential administration may lead to changes in the regulations, policies and operations of the FDA, which may impact our clinical development plans. Any of these actions could adversely affect the development and approval of our product candidates. In addition, as a result of the government shutdown, the FDA staff may be unable to process and review regulatory submissions in a timely manner or at all.

Previous wording

regulators may elect to impose a clinical hold, or we or our investigators, IRBs, or ethics committees may elect to suspend or terminate clinical research or trials for various reasons, including noncompliance with regulatory requirements or a finding that the participants are being exposed to unacceptable benefit risk ratio. For example, in the past we have received clinical holds from the FDA, and, on July 21, 2025, we announced that the FDA placed the LGMD FDA Clinical Hold. Although these holds have generally not materially affected our development timelines, there is no assurance that our current hold or any future hold would not have a material adverse effect. A clinical hold, or any of the above factors, may be out of our control and could materially impair our development timelines, expenses and results of operations.

Current wording

regulators may elect to impose a clinical hold, or we or our investigators, IRBs, or ethics committees may elect to suspend or terminate clinical research or trials for various reasons, including noncompliance with regulatory requirements or a finding that the participants are being exposed to unacceptable benefit risk ratio. For example, in the past we have received clinical holds from the FDA, and, on July 21, 2025, we announced that the FDA placed certain of our LGMD programs on clinical hold. Although these holds have generally not materially affected our development timelines, there is no assurance that our current hold or any future hold would not have a material adverse effect. A clinical hold, or any of the above factors, may be out of our control and could materially impair our development timelines, expenses and results of operations.

Previous wording

We have recently reported new safety signals in the non-ambulatory population for ELEVIDYS and for our LGMD product candidate SRP-9004. For example, on March 18, 2025, Sarepta announced that a young man with Duchenne passed away following treatment with ELEVIDYS after having suffered from ALF. On June 15, 2025, Sarepta announced a second reported case of ALF resulting in death in a patient following treatment with ELEVIDYS, and that both cases of ALF occurred in non-ambulatory individuals. Such adverse events have resulted in FDA's proposal of a label supplement for ELEVIDYS to include a boxed warning for ALI and ALF. On July 18, 2025, Sarepta announced a reported case of ALF resulting in death in a patient following dosing in the Company's Phase 1/2 LGMD trial for SRP-9004.

Current wording

We have recently reported new safety signals in the non-ambulatory population for ELEVIDYS and for our LGMD product candidate SRP-9004. For example, on March 18, 2025, Sarepta announced that a young man with Duchenne passed away following treatment with ELEVIDYS after having suffered from ALF. On June 15, 2025, Sarepta announced a second reported case of ALF resulting in death in a patient following treatment with ELEVIDYS, and that both cases of ALF occurred in non-ambulatory individuals. Such adverse events have resulted in FDA's proposal of, and our agreement to, a label supplement for ELEVIDYS to include a boxed warning for ALI and ALF. On July 18, 2025, Sarepta announced a reported case of ALF resulting in death in a patient following dosing in the Company's Phase 1/2 LGMD trial for SRP-9004.

Previous wording

In addition, adverse events or new safety signals have in the past resulted and could result in the future in regulatory agency actions or cause delays in commercialization. For example, in response to two reported cases of ALF resulting in death of non-ambulatory patients, we suspended shipment of ELEVIDYS in the U.S. to non-ambulatory patients in June 2025. Additionally, in July 2025, we disclosed a reported case of ALF in a non-ambulatory patient participating in our Stage 1/2 LGMD trial for SRP-9004, who was not treated with ELEVIDYS. Thereafter, in response to a request from FDA that we voluntary stop all shipments of ELEVIDYS in the U.S., we suspended shipment of ELEVIDYS in the U.S. to ambulatory patients effective July 22, 2025. On July 28, 2025, the FDA informed the Company that it recommended the removal of the voluntary hold for ambulatory patients. In response, the Company has resumed commercial shipments of ELEVIDYS for ambulatory patients in the U.S. The suspension of shipments for non-ambulatory patients remains in effect as of the date of issuance of this Quarterly Report. It is currently unclear whether or when the Company might resume shipments of ELEVIDYS to non-ambulatory patients, or whether the FDA will pursue further actions, such as additional studies, additional product modifications or controls, or withdrawal in the future

Current wording

In addition, adverse events or new safety signals have in the past resulted and could result in the future in regulatory agency actions or cause delays in commercialization. For example, in response to two reported cases of ALF resulting in death of non-ambulatory patients, we suspended shipment of ELEVIDYS in the U.S. to non-ambulatory patients in June 2025. Additionally, in July 2025, we disclosed a reported case of ALF in a non-ambulatory patient participating in our Stage 1/2 LGMD trial for SRP-9004, who was not treated with ELEVIDYS. Thereafter, in response to a request from FDA that we voluntary stop all shipments of ELEVIDYS in the U.S., we suspended shipment of ELEVIDYS in the U.S. to ambulatory patients effective July 22, 2025. On July 28, 2025, the FDA informed the Company that it recommended the removal of the voluntary hold for ambulatory patients. In response, the Company has resumed commercial shipments of ELEVIDYS for ambulatory patients in the U.S. Further, the Company has agreed with FDA to a boxed warning for ALI and ALF and the removal of non-ambulatory population from the Indication and Usage section of the Prescribing Information. It is currently unclear whether the FDA will pursue further actions related to ELEVIDYS, such as additional studies, additional product modifications, label supplements or controls, in the future.

Previous wording

These regulatory review agencies, committees and advisory groups and the new 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 these treatment candidates or lead to significant post-approval studies, limitations or restrictions. As we advance our product candidates, we will be required to consult with these regulatory and advisory groups and comply with applicable requirements and guidelines, failure of which may lead to delayed or discontinued development of our product candidates. For example, we intend to seek FDA alignment on a clinical trial for ELEVIDYS related to the use of sirolimus immunosuppression in non-ambulatory patients. FDA may also seek additional clinical trials or studies related to ELEVIDYS, which could impact the timing of resuming shipments of ELEVIDYS to non-ambulatory patients in the U.S. and adversely impact the Company.

Current wording

These regulatory review agencies, committees and advisory groups and the new 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 these treatment candidates or lead to significant post-approval studies, limitations or restrictions. As we advance our product candidates, we will be required to consult with these regulatory and advisory groups and comply with applicable requirements and guidelines, failure of which may lead to delayed or discontinued development of our product candidates. For example, we intend to seek FDA alignment on a clinical trial for ELEVIDYS related to the use of sirolimus immunosuppression in non-ambulatory patients. FDA may also seek additional clinical trials or studies related to ELEVIDYS, which could adversely impact the Company.

Previous wording

If the anticipated or actual timing of marketing approvals for our gene therapy product candidates, or the market acceptance of these product candidates, if approved, including treatment reimbursement levels agreed to by third-party payors, do not meet the expectations of investors or public market analysts, the market price of our common stock would likely decline.

Current wording

If the anticipated or actual timing of marketing approvals for our product candidates, or the market acceptance of these product candidates, if approved, including treatment reimbursement levels agreed to by third-party payors, do not meet the expectations of investors or public market analysts, the market price of our common stock would likely decline.

Previous wording

We rely on, and expect to continue relying on for the foreseeable future, a limited number of third parties to manufacture and supply materials (including raw materials and subunits), API and drug product and to provide labeling and packaging of vials and storage of our products and product candidates. The limited number of third parties with facilities and capabilities suited for the manufacturing process of our products and product candidates creates a risk that we may not be able to obtain materials and APIs in the quantity and purity that we require. As of the date of this Quarterly Report, we have dual sourcing for the APIs and drug product for all three of our PMO commercial products and one source for ELEVIDYS drug substance and drug product manufacturing.

Current wording

We rely on, and expect to continue relying on for the foreseeable future, a limited number of third parties to manufacture and supply materials (including raw materials and subunits), API and drug product and to provide labeling and packaging of vials and storage of our products and product candidates. The limited number of third parties with facilities and capabilities suited for the manufacturing process of our products and product candidates creates a risk that we may not be able to obtain materials and APIs in the quantity and purity that we require. As of the date of issuance of this Quarterly Report, we have dual sourcing for the APIs and drug product for all three of our PMO commercial products and one source for ELEVIDYS drug substance and drug product manufacturing.

Previous wording

Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, one or more motivated third parties may file an ANDA, seeking approval of a generic copy of an innovator product approved under the NDA pathway such as our PMO Products, or an NDA under Section 505(b)(2), for a new or improved version of the original innovator products. In certain circumstances, motivated third parties may file such an ANDA or NDA under Section 505(b)(2) as early as the so-called “NCE-1” date that is one year before the expiry of the five-year period of NCE exclusivity or more generally four years after NDA approval. The third parties are allowed to rely on the safety and efficacy data of the innovator’s product, may not need to conduct clinical trials and can market a competing version of a product after the expiration or loss of patent exclusivity or the expiration or loss of regulatory exclusivity and often charge significantly lower prices. Upon the expiration or loss of patent protection or the expiration or loss of regulatory exclusivity for a product, the major portion of revenues for that product may be dramatically reduced in a very short period of time. If we are not successful in defending our patents and regulatory exclusivities, we will not derive the expected benefit from them. As such, a third party could be positioned to market an ANDA or Section 505(b)(2) product that competes with one of our products prior to the expiry of our patents if the third party successfully challenges the validity, enforceability, or scope of our patents protecting the product.

Current wording

Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, one or more motivated third parties may file an ANDA, seeking approval of a generic copy of an innovator product approved under the NDA pathway such as our PMO Products, or an NDA under Section 505(b)(2), for a new or improved version of the original innovator products. In certain circumstances, motivated third parties may file such an ANDA or NDA under Section 505(b)(2) as early as the so-called “NCE-1” date that is one year before the expiry of the five-year period of NCE exclusivity or more generally four years after NDA approval. The third parties are allowed to rely on the safety and efficacy data of the innovator’s product, may not need to conduct clinical trials and can market a competing version of a product after the expiration or loss of patent exclusivity or the expiration or loss of regulatory exclusivity and often charge significantly lower prices. Upon the expiration or loss of patent protection or the expiration or loss of regulatory exclusivity for a product, the major portion of revenues for that product may be dramatically reduced in a very short period of time. If we are not successful in defending our patents and regulatory exclusivities, we will not derive the expected benefit from them. As such, a third party could be positioned to market an

Previous wording

The number and complexity of both federal and state laws continues to increase, and additional governmental resources are being used to enforce these laws and to prosecute companies and individuals who are believed to be violating them. We anticipate that government scrutiny of pharmaceutical sales and marketing practices and other activities will continue for the foreseeable future and subject us to the risk of government investigations and enforcement actions. Given the breadth of the laws and regulations, limited guidance for certain laws and regulations, and evolving government interpretations of the laws and regulations, governmental authorities may possibly conclude that our business practices are non-compliant.

Current wording

The number and complexity of both federal and state laws continues to increase, and additional governmental resources are being used to enforce these laws and to prosecute companies and individuals who are believed to be violating them. We anticipate that government scrutiny of pharmaceutical sales and marketing practices and other activities will continue for the foreseeable future and subject us to the risk of government investigations and enforcement actions. Given the breadth of the laws and regulations, limited guidance for certain laws and regulations, and evolving government interpretations of the laws and regulations, governmental authorities may possibly conclude that our business practices are non-compliant. For example, in September 2025, FDA stated that it intends to more aggressively enforce requirements for direct-to-consumer, or DTC, drug advertising and sent more than 100 warning or untitled letters to companies for allegedly deceptive prescription drug advertising, which represents a dramatic increase in FDA actions as compared to prior years. FDA also announced plans to expand its oversight of digital and social media advertising and to initiate a rulemaking that would call for drug companies to disclose additional safety information in DTC broadcast advertisements. The nature and extent of changes to FDA regulations and enforcement approach is unclear but may impact pharmaceutical marketing efforts industry-wide, including for Sarepta, which could in turn impact our sales and operations. As another example, recent government communications indicate that the longstanding focus of federal enforcement agencies on pharmaceutical company activities will continue. In 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) issued a white collar enforcement plan identifying enforcement priorities for prosecuting corporate and white collar crime which includes health care fraud. Similarly, the DOJ-HHS

Previous wording

We have implemented a compliance program, which is based on industry best practices and is designed to ensure that our activities comply with all applicable laws, regulations and industry standards. While our compliance program is intended to detect and prevent potential non-compliance, we cannot be certain that compliance will be assured. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other laws, rules or regulations that apply to us, we will be subject to penalties, including civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Any penalties, damages, fines, curtailment or restructuring of our operations could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our financial results. Responding to government investigations, defending any claims raised, and any resulting fines, restitution, damages and penalties, settlement payments or administrative actions, as well as any related actions brought by stockholders or other third parties, could have a material impact on our reputation, business and financial condition and divert the attention of our management from operating our business. Even if we successfully defend against an action against us for violation of a law, the action and our defense could nonetheless cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business.

Current wording

We have implemented a compliance program, which is based on industry best practices and is designed to ensure that our activities comply with all applicable laws, regulations and industry standards. While our compliance program is intended to detect and prevent potential non-compliance, we cannot be certain that compliance will be assured. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other laws, rules or regulations that apply to us, we will be subject to penalties, including civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Any penalties, damages, fines, curtailment or restructuring of our operations could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our financial results. Responding to government investigations, defending any claims raised, and any resulting fines, restitution, damages and penalties, settlement payments or administrative actions, as well as any related actions brought by stockholders or other third parties, could have a material impact on our reputation, business and financial condition and divert the attention of our management from operating our business. Even if we successfully defend against an action against us for violation of a law, the action and our defense could nonetheless cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. Moreover, achieving and sustaining compliance with applicable federal and state privacy, security, fraud and reporting laws may prove costly.