Skip to main content

Revolution Medicines, Inc.

For the period ended Dec 31, 2025. Filed Feb 25, 2026.

View on SEC.gov

About this filing

A company's yearly report to the SEC, with audited financial statements. It is the fullest account a company gives of its business, its finances and the risks it sees.

FY2025 · Filed Feb 25, 2026

RVMD$192.28+8.2%Stored close · as of Nov 6, 2026

What changed in Risk Factors?

Read the current filing

Previous report: 10-K

Period ended 2024-12-31; filed 2025-02-26.

0000950170-25-027736

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Current report: 10-K

Period ended 2025-12-31; filed 2026-02-25.

0001193125-26-071563

Item 1A. Risk Factors

The baseline is this issuer’s latest earlier reporting period of the same form that was filed before the current report. A previous 10-Q is a different quarter, not a year-over-year comparison. Amendments are excluded.

Compared 542 previous paragraphs and 553 current paragraphs.

451 unchanged; 63 reworded; 34 added; 26 removed; 2 previous and 5 current paragraphs rearranged.

Tables are not compared: 0 previous and 0 current tables excluded. Dates, whitespace, punctuation and numbering changes are ignored; changes to financial figures remain significant.

A changed paragraph is not evidence that risk increased or decreased. An unchanged paragraph does not establish that risk stayed the same.

Added paragraphs (34)

Current report

If we need to raise additional capital to fund our operations, funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to obtain adequate financing when needed, we may have to:

Current report

The Royalty Pharma Agreements place restrictions on our operating and financial flexibility. If we fail to comply with certain covenants in the Royalty Pharma Agreements, our financial condition and results of operations may be harmed.

Current report

In June 2025, we entered into the Royalty Purchase Agreement with Royalty Pharma and the Loan Agreement with an affiliate of Royalty Pharma and Wilmington Trust, National Association, as the administrative agent (collectively, the Royalty Pharma Agreements). The Royalty Pharma Agreements contain various customary covenants that impose on us certain obligations with respect to payment, reporting, intellectual property, certain license agreements, and certain other actions, as well as indemnification obligations. Compliance with these covenants may limit our flexibility in operating our business and our ability to take actions that might otherwise be advantageous to us and our stockholders.

Current report

Under the Royalty Purchase Agreement, we have diligence obligations with respect to certain clinical trials, regulatory submissions and marketing approvals. There are also covenants that, among other things and subject to certain conditions, limit our ability to create or incur certain liens or dispose of certain assets related to the RMC-6236 Products. Pursuant to the Royalty Purchase Agreement, we have granted to Royalty Pharma a back-up security interest in certain assets to secure our obligations under the Royalty Purchase Agreement. If we are unable to comply with our obligations, Royalty Pharma may be entitled to take possession of such assets, which could significantly harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Current report

The Loan Agreement also subjects us to various customary covenants that limit our ability to, among other activities (but subject to certain customary exceptions): (i) pay dividends, redeem stock or make other distributions or investments; (ii) incur additional debt; (iii) transfer or sell assets; (iv) create liens; (v) engage in certain transactions with affiliates; (vi) create restrictions on dividends or other payments by our subsidiaries; and (vii) merge, consolidate or effect other fundamental changes.

Current report

Any indebtedness we incur, including under the Loan Agreement, combined with our other financial obligations and contractual commitments could have significant adverse consequences, including:

Current report

requiring us to dedicate a portion of our cash resources to the payment of interest and principal, reducing money available to fund working capital, capital expenditures, product candidate development and other general corporate purposes;

Current report

increasing our vulnerability to adverse changes in general economic, industry and market conditions;

Current report

subjecting us to restrictive covenants that may reduce our ability to take certain corporate actions or obtain further debt or equity financings;

Current report

increasing our need to meet minimum net sales requirements when our future sales are uncertain;

Current report

limiting our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and the industry in which we compete; and

Current report

placing us at a competitive disadvantage compared to our competitors that have less debt or better debt servicing options.

Current report

We intend to satisfy our current and future debt service obligations with our then-existing cash and cash equivalents. However, we may not have sufficient funds, and may be unable to arrange for additional financing, to pay the amounts due under the Loan Agreement or any other debt instruments. Failure to satisfy our current and future debt obligations, including covenants to take or avoid specific actions, under the Loan Agreement could result in an event of default and, as a result, the lender(s) could accelerate all of the amounts due, and the lender(s) could seek to enforce their security interests in any collateral securing such indebtedness. The lender(s) under the Loan Agreement have rights senior to our stockholders in receiving proceeds from a liquidation. In addition, the covenants under the Loan Agreement, and the pledge of our assets (including our intellectual property) as collateral could limit our ability to obtain additional debt financing. If we raise any additional debt financing, the terms of such additional debt could further restrict our operating and financial flexibility.

Current report

the timing and level of royalty payments under the Royalty Purchase Agreement;

Current report

We are aware of several pharmaceutical companies developing products in the same class as our investigational products. See “Item 1. Business—Competition” for additional information regarding our competitors.

Current report

The U.S. presidential administration has stated that it is pursuing a two-fold strategy to reduce drug costs in the U.S. While it is unclear whether and how these proposals will be implemented, they are likely to have a negative impact on the pharmaceutical industry and on our ability to receive adequate revenues for any product candidate that we commercialize. On the one hand, the administration has threatened to impose significant tariffs on pharmaceutical manufacturers that do not adopt pricing policies such as most favored nation pricing, which would tie the price for drugs in the U.S. to the lowest price in a group of other countries. In response, multiple manufacturers have reportedly entered into confidential pricing agreements with the federal government. On the other hand, the administration is pursuing traditional regulatory pathways to impose drug pricing policies, and published two proposed regulations in December 2025, referred to as Globe and Guard. If finalized, these regulations would implement mandatory payment models under which manufacturers of eligible drugs would be required to pay rebates to the federal government on a portion of the units of their drugs that are reimbursed by Medicare, with the rebate amount based on most favored nation pricing. Imposing a rebate in the U.S. that is based on drug prices outside the U.S. would mark a drastic and unprecedented shift in the U.S. pharmaceutical market, and while the impact of the Globe and Guard proposed regulations, if finalized, cannot yet be determined, it is likely to be significant. Even if such initiatives are modified, delayed, or challenged, the uncertainty surrounding these policy proposals may impair our ability to forecast revenues, plan commercial launch activities, negotiate favorable contracts with payors, or make investment decisions regarding manufacturing scale-up and commercialization infrastructure.

Current report

We have received a Commissioner’s National Priority Voucher (CNPV) from FDA for daraxonrasib, but we may not realize any benefit from our participation in the FDA’s CNPV Pilot Program, and any changes to or termination of the CNPV Pilot Program could delay or adversely affect development and review of our product candidates.

Current report

In June 2025, the FDA announced the CNPV Pilot Program to test an expedited review process for certain drugs and biologics that are designed to address certain national priorities identified by the FDA, including drugs of biologics that are intended to address a U.S. public health crisis, deliver more innovative cures for the American people, address a large unmet medical need, onshore drug development and manufacturing, or increase affordability. Drugs or biologics accepted into the CNPV Pilot Program will receive a CNPV, which according to the FDA, entitles the recipient to accelerated FDA review of a marketing application or supplement for a drug or biologic that aligns with the CNPV Pilot Program’s goals, along with enhanced communication through the application review process, multidisciplinary team-based evaluation and potential for accelerated approval, if the relevant requirements are met. As described by the FDA, CNPVs may not be transferred, and must be applied within two years of being issued. Further, CNPVs do not change the FDA’s standards for review and approval of a Biologics License Application, NDA or supplement, as applicable. In October 2025, the FDA included daraxonrasib in its initial group of CNPV recipients.

Current report

The CNPV program, however, is new, limited in scope, and subject to evolving guidance, and available FDA resources. The FDA retains broad discretion to modify the criteria, processes, or benefits of the pilot and may rescind participation or alter timelines or the intended benefits at any time.

Current report

In addition, the CNPV for daraxonrasib is non-transferable and requires that we meet specific procedural and data-submission milestones; failure to do so could eliminate anticipated benefits or result in revocation or expiration of the CNPV. Accordingly, participation in the CNPV Pilot Program does not ensure that our product candidates will be accepted for filing, reviewed on a shortened timeline, or ultimately approved. If FDA modifies or terminates the CNPV Pilot Program for any reason, or if we are unable to comply with its requirements, our current development plans and anticipated timelines could be adversely affected.

Current report

In the United States, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs and reduce prescription drug spending. These initiatives may increase pricing pressure, reduce the amounts we are able to charge and receive for any products we may commercialize, limit the availability and level of reimbursement from third-party payors (including government payors), require us to provide additional discounts or rebates, and otherwise adversely affect patient access and demand.

Current report

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which was enacted in July 2025, imposes significant reductions in the funding of the Medicaid program. Such reductions are expected to decrease the number of persons enrolled in Medicaid and reduce the services covered by Medicaid, which could adversely affect our sales of any product candidate that we commercialize.

Current report

The U.S. presidential administration has stated that it is pursuing a two-fold strategy to reduce drug costs in the U.S. See “Even if we are able to commercialize any product candidates, such products may become subject to unfavorable pricing regulations or third-party coverage and reimbursement policies” above for more information.

Current report

Our business may be affected by the evolving regulatory framework for artificial intelligence, machine learning, and automated decision-making technologies, as well as the operational, cybersecurity and confidentiality risks associated with our use of such technologies.

Current report

We use artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, and automated decision-making technologies (collectively, AI Technologies) throughout our business, and are making investments in this area. We expect that increased investment will be required in the future to continuously improve our use of AI Technologies. As with many technological innovations, there are significant risks involved in developing, maintaining and deploying these technologies, including that AI-generated content, analyses, or recommendations we utilize could be deficient, that our competitors may more quickly or effectively adopt AI capabilities, or that our use of AI or other emerging technologies increases regulatory, cybersecurity and other significant risks. In addition, the use of certain AI Technologies, including third-party solutions, may involve the input, processing or storage of proprietary, confidential or personal information, and any failure to appropriately protect such information, or any unauthorized disclosure or use of such information, could adversely affect our business, harm our reputation and subject us to liability. There can be no assurance that the usage of or our investments in such technologies will always enhance our products or services or be beneficial to our business, including our efficiency or profitability.

Current report

In particular, if the models underlying our AI Technologies are incorrectly designed or implemented; trained or reliant on incomplete, inadequate, inaccurate, biased or otherwise poor quality data, or on data to which we do not have sufficient rights or in relation to which we and/or the providers of such data have not implemented sufficient legal compliance measures; used without sufficient oversight and governance to ensure their responsible use; and/or adversely impacted by unforeseen defects, technical challenges, cybersecurity threats or material performance issues, the performance of our products, services and business, as well as our reputation, could suffer or we could incur liability resulting from the violation of laws or contracts to which we are a party or civil claims. We are in varying stages of development in relation to our products and internal business processes involving AI Technologies. The continuous development, maintenance and operation of our AI Technologies is expensive and complex, and may involve unforeseen difficulties including material performance problems, undetected defects or errors. For instance, the models underlying AI Technologies can experience decay (also known as “model drift”) in which their performance and accuracy decreases over time without further human intervention to correct such decay.

Current report

We may not be successful in our ongoing development and maintenance of these technologies in the face of novel and evolving technical, reputational and market factors. Our efforts to develop proprietary AI models could increase our operating costs. Our ability to develop proprietary AI models may be limited by our access to processing infrastructure or training data, and we may be dependent on third-party providers for such resources.

Current report

The regulatory framework for AI Technologies is rapidly evolving as many federal, state, and foreign government bodies and agencies have introduced or are currently considering additional laws and regulations. Additionally, existing laws and regulations may be interpreted in ways that would affect the operation of our AI Technologies. As a result, implementation standards and enforcement practices are likely to remain uncertain for the foreseeable future, and we cannot yet determine the impact future laws, regulations, standards, or market perception of their requirements may have on our business and may not always be able to anticipate how to respond to these laws or regulations. Failure to appropriately respond to this evolving landscape may result in reputational, competitive and business harm as well as litigation and regulatory action and fines, penalties and expenses related thereto.

Current report

It is possible that new laws and regulations will be adopted in the United States and in other non-U.S. jurisdictions, or that existing laws and regulations, including competition and antitrust laws, may be interpreted in ways that would limit our ability to use AI Technologies for our business, or require us to change the way we use AI Technologies in a manner that negatively affects the performance of our products, services, and business and the way in which we use AI Technologies. We may need to expend resources to adjust our products or services in certain jurisdictions if the laws, regulations, or decisions are not consistent across jurisdictions. Further, the cost to comply with such laws, regulations, or decisions and/or guidance interpreting existing laws, could be significant and would increase our operating expenses (such as by imposing additional reporting obligations regarding our use of AI Technologies). Such an increase in operating expenses, as well as any actual or perceived failure to comply with such laws and regulations, could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Current report

Additionally, in recent years, U.S. legislative and policy initiatives have increasingly focused on the national security implications of foreign involvement in biotechnology, particularly with respect to China. For example, in January 2024, there was Congressional activity, including the introduction of the BIOSECURE Act in the House of Representatives and a substantially similar Senate bill. In September 2024, the House of Representatives of the prior Congress (the 118th Congress) passed the BIOSECURE Act, but the Senate never voted on it. In 2025, Congress revisited the BIOSECURE Act concept. A revised version of the legislation was proposed as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2026. This updated draft removed specific company names previously targeted and instead would rely on an existing Department of Defense list of companies with national security concerns. Congress ultimately included the BIOSECURE provisions in the finalized NDAA, effectively making the restrictions part of law as of December 2025, subject to further regulatory implementation and designation processes.

Current report

Under the enacted provisions, agencies are prohibited from procuring biotechnology equipment or services from entities designated as “biotechnology companies of concern” and may impose limitations on recipients of federal funding that engage such entities. The statute authorizes the Office of Management and Budget to identify companies of concern based on existing Department of Defense lists of military-linked firms and other criteria tied to national security risk, including ties to foreign adversaries and sensitive data risks.

Current report

We currently do business with companies in China, including some that have been referenced in earlier versions of the BIOSECURE Act and related policy discussions, and certain counterparties could be impacted by these legislative actions or regulatory lists. Changes in laws, regulations, or executive orders — or the issuance of lists identifying covered entities — could materially affect our collaborations, supply chains, research partnerships, manufacturing relationships, and access to certain services or technologies.

Current report

any adverse developments or disagreements or perceived adverse developments or disagreements with our partners;

Current report

As of the filing of this report, the last reported sales price of our common stock has exceeded $89.93 per share for at least 20 trading days within a 30-trading day period, satisfying the conditions that would permit us to redeem outstanding public and private warrants at a price of $0.10 per warrant as described in clause (B) above. We may elect to exercise this redemption right at any time that it remains available to us, in our sole discretion, subject to the notice and other procedural requirements set forth in the warrant agreement, including at a time and under circumstances that we believe are in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders, even if doing so is disadvantageous to warrant holders.
Removed paragraphs (26)

Previous report

Historically, direct inhibition of any RAS protein has been challenging due to a lack of tractable, or “druggable,” binding pockets. Given this approach is unproven, it may not be successful.

Previous report

Historically, direct inhibition of any RAS protein has been challenging due to a lack of tractable, or “druggable,” binding pockets. Our tri-complex technology has enabled us to design potent, cell-active inhibitors of multiple mutant RAS(ON) proteins. We are not aware of any programs in clinical development that have successfully targeted any RAS(ON) protein. We cannot be certain that our approach will lead to the development of approvable or marketable products, alone or in combination with other therapies.

Previous report

There are several programs in clinical development targeting KRAS G12C, including programs directed at KRAS(OFF) G12C being conducted by Amgen Inc., Betta Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd., Bristol Myers Squibb Company, Chengdu Huajian Future Technology Co. Ltd., D3 BIO, Inc., Eli Lilly, GenEros Biopharma Ltd., Genhouse Bio Co. Ltd., Guangzhou BeBetter Medicine Technology Co., Ltd., HUYA Bioscience, Innovent Biologics, Inc. (licensed to Genfleet Therapeutics), InventisBio, Jacobio Pharmaceuticals Co. Ltd., Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd., Merck, Sharpe & Dohme LLC, Roche, Shanghai Junshi Biosciences Co., Ltd., Shanghai YingLi Pharmaceutical, Shouyao Holdings (Beijing) Co. Ltd. and Suzhou Zelgen Biopharmaceuticals. BridgeBio Pharma, Inc. and Frontier Medicines each have a dual KRAS(ON/OFF) G12C program in the clinic. There are also several clinical programs directed at KRAS G12D, including those being conducted by Astellas Pharma Inc., AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Incyte Corporation, Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals Company Ltd, Quanta Therapeutics, Tyligand Bioscience and Zelgen Biopharmaceuticals. In addition, there are a few clinical programs directed at KRAS G12V, including those being conducted by Affini-T Therapeutics and Yingkai Saiwei (Beijing) Biotechnology. Other clinical programs directed at mutant RAS, including pan-RAS inhibitors and Plk1 inhibitors, are being conducted, including those by Alaunos Therapeutics, Inc., BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardiff Oncology, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Eli Lilly, Elicio Therapeutics, Gritstone bio, Inc., Moderna, Inc., Pfizer, Inc., Quanta Therapeutics, RasCal Therapeutics, Shanghai YingLi Pharmaceutical, Silenseed Ltd., Silexion Therapeutics and Targovax ASA. There are several programs in clinical development targeting SHP2, including those being conducted by Betta Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd., Etern BioPharma (Shanghai) Co. Ltd., Genhouse Bio Co. Ltd., Hutchmed Ltd., HUYA Bioscience, InnoCare Pharma Ltd., Jacobio Pharmaceuticals Co. Ltd., Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd., Nanjing Sanhome Pharmaceutical, Navire Pharma, Inc., a BridgeBio company (licensed to Bristol Myers Squibb Company), Novartis AG, Relay Therapeutics, Inc. (licensed to Roche), Shanghai Gopherwood Biotech Co., Ltd., and Shanghai Ringene Biopharma Co., Ltd. The above list includes corporate competitors that we are currently aware of and that are currently conducting clinical trials or marketing in geographies where we currently anticipate conducting clinical trials for our product candidates. However, companies operating in other geographies, smaller companies and companies with earlier stage programs may also prove to be significant competitors. In addition, academic research departments and public and private research institutions may be conducting research on compounds that could prove to be competitive.

Previous report

Some of our programs focus on the discovery and development of “Beyond Rule of 5” small molecules. Such molecules can be associated with longer development timelines and greater costs compared to traditional small molecule drugs. Our “Beyond Rule of 5” product candidates may take longer to develop and/or manufacture relative to traditional small molecules, and we may not be able to formulate “Beyond Rule of 5” candidates for certain routes of administration.

Previous report

We enlist various technologies and capabilities that give us chemical access to challenging sites on target proteins that generally are not accessible using conventional small molecule drug discovery approaches. For each target, we consider the specific structural, physico-chemical, functional and dynamic properties of the target and deploy the approach or approaches that appear most likely to yield viable development candidates. The “Rule of 5” is a set of criteria used in pharmaceutical drug development to determine whether chemical compounds have certain physico-chemical properties that make them likely to be orally active drugs in humans. In some instances, the compounds we discover and develop are traditional small molecules (i.e., less than 500 daltons) with properties that generally satisfy conventional pharmaceutical “Rule of 5” criteria, while in other cases, they are larger (i.e., more than 500 daltons) “Beyond Rule of 5” (BRo5) compounds that do not satisfy these criteria. For example, our mTORC1 program and our RAS(ON) inhibitors each include pursuit of BRo5 compounds.

Previous report

BRo5 compounds have been successfully pursued by many pharmaceutical companies. Examples of BRo5 compounds include natural products and semi-synthetic derivatives, peptidomimetics, macrocycles and degraders. However, larger molecular weight small molecules often cannot be formulated into orally absorbed drugs and also often face solubility, potency, bioavailability and stability challenges, among others. In addition, many of the commonly used predictive and other drug development tools are designed specifically for traditional “Rule of 5” small molecule drugs rather than BRo5 molecules, contributing to the difficulty and uncertainty of development of BRo5 compounds.

Previous report

Due to their size and complexity, drug development of our BRo5 compounds may be slower and/or more expensive than drug development of traditional “Rule of 5” compounds, resulting in program delays, increased costs or failure to obtain regulatory approval in a commercially reasonable timeframe, if at all. Our competitors developing traditional small molecules in areas where we are developing BRo5 compounds could obtain regulatory approval and reach the market before we do. Even if we succeed in generating an approved drug from a BRo5 compound, it may be less convenient to administer, have higher grade and/or more frequent side effects or be more costly to manufacture and formulate than competing products on the market. The discovery and development of BRo5 small molecules may pose risks to us such as:

Previous report

BRo5 small molecules may present difficult synthetic chemistry and manufacturing challenges, including with any scale-up of our product candidates in sufficient quality and quantity;

Previous report

BRo5 small molecules may be challenging to purify, including with any scale-up of our product candidates in sufficient quality and quantity;

Previous report

BRo5 small molecules may present solubility challenges;

Previous report

BRo5 small molecules may present oral absorption challenges due to low passive permeability, and may not achieve acceptable oral bioavailability for development and may result in poor pharmaceutical properties for formulation development;

Previous report

BRo5 small molecules may present cell permeability challenges, especially with regards to lipophilicity, hydrogen bond donor and rotatable bond count, and high topological polar surface area;

Previous report

BRo5 small molecules may have a propensity to be substrates for efflux proteins such as the adenosine triphosphate (ATP) binding cassette (ABC) transporter protein family, including multidrug resistance protein 1. Cancer cells may overexpress these transporter proteins causing an increase in expulsion of BRo5 small molecules from the cell. For example, as the site of action of our RAS(ON) inhibitors is inside the cell, expulsion by these transporter proteins may decrease the effective concentration in the cell sufficiently to reduce target inhibition and thereby render a RAS-dependent tumor less susceptible to the inhibitory activity of a BRo5 small molecule, such as our product candidates;

Previous report

BRo5 small molecules may present central nervous system (CNS) penetration challenges due to low passive permeability and/or interaction with efflux transporters at the blood-brain barrier and this could limit sensitivity of CNS tumors to BRo5 small molecules;

Previous report

BRo5 small molecules may present formulation vehicle challenges for administration, such as intravenous and subcutaneous administration, due to aspects such as solubility and hydrophobicity;

Previous report

BRo5 small molecules may present stability and shelf-life limitations due to the incorporation of labile functionality in their scaffolds, including for example in the development of RMC-5552 which currently requires a cold chain storage of zero degrees Celsius; and

Previous report

BRo5 small molecules may present off-target toxicities due to physico-chemical properties such as lipophilicity, which is the ability to dissolve fats, oils and lipids, the presence of off-target pharmacophores in the molecule that can interact with other cellular proteins, or other characteristics that have not been fully characterized within a novel chemical scaffold or platform.

Previous report

These and other risks related to our research and development of BRo5 small molecules may result in delays in development, an increase in development costs and/or the failure to develop any BRo5 small molecule to approval. As a result, our competitors may develop products more rapidly and cost effectively than we do if they are able to target the same indications as our product candidates using conventional small molecules. In particular, competitors may develop and commercialize products that compete with our RAS(ON) inhibitor product candidates.

Previous report

The market opportunities for any of our current or future product candidates, if and when approved, may be limited to those patients who are ineligible for established therapies or for whom prior therapies have failed, and may be small.

Previous report

Cancer therapies are sometimes characterized as first-line, second-line or third-line. When cancer is detected early enough, first-line therapy— usually chemotherapy, hormone therapy, surgery, radiation therapy or a combination of these— is sometimes adequate to cure the cancer or prolong life without a cure. Second- and third-line therapies are administered to patients when prior therapy is not effective. We expect to initially seek approval of our product candidates as a therapy for patients who have received one or more prior treatments. Subsequently, for those products that prove to be sufficiently beneficial, if any, we would expect to seek approval potentially as a first-line therapy, but there is no guarantee that our product candidates, even if approved, would be approved for first-line therapy, and, prior to any such approvals, we may have to conduct additional clinical trials.

Previous report

In the United States, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the ACA) was passed, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both government and private insurers, and significantly impacts the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. The ACA, among other things, increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and extended the rebate program to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations, established annual fees and taxes on manufacturers of certain branded prescription drugs.

Previous report

Since its enactment, there have been judicial, executive and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. In June 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the ACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA.

Previous report

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. In March 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 was signed into law, which eliminated the statutory cap on the Medicaid drug rebate beginning January 1, 2024. The rebate was previously capped at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price.

Previous report

Additionally, in January 2024, there was Congressional activity, including the introduction of the BIOSECURE Act in the House of Representatives and a substantially similar Senate bill. In September 2024, the House of Representatives of the prior Congress (the 118th Congress) passed the BIOSECURE Act, but the Senate never voted on it. It is unclear whether the current Congress (the 119th Congress) will introduce the BIOSECURE Act or similar legislation in this congressional session and, if so, how the scope, prohibitions or designated biotechnology companies of concern may differ from the version of the BIOSECURE Act passed by the House in the prior 118th Congress. If these bills became law, or similar laws are passed, they would have the potential to severely restrict the ability of U.S. biopharmaceutical companies like us to purchase services or products from, or otherwise collaborate with, certain Chinese biotechnology companies “of concern” without losing the ability to contract with, or otherwise receive funding from, the U.S. government. We do business with companies in China, including some named in these bills, and it is possible some of our contractual counterparties could be impacted by the legislation described above.

Previous report

Our current shares outstanding and resulting market valuation do not reflect shares of our common stock issuable upon the exercise of warrants that are exercisable at the discretion of the holders of such warrants. If we sell shares of our common stock in future financings, stockholders may experience immediate dilution and, as a result, our stock price may decline.

Previous report

We have issued in the past, and may from time to time issue, additional shares of common stock at a discount from the current trading price of our common stock. As a result, our stockholders would experience immediate dilution upon the purchase of any shares of our common stock sold at such discount. In addition, as opportunities present themselves, we may enter into financing or similar arrangements in the future, including the issuance of debt securities, preferred stock or common stock. For example, in August 2024, we entered into a sales agreement with TD Securities (USA) LLC (TD Cowen), to sell shares of our common stock, from time to time, with aggregate gross proceeds of up to $500 million, through an at-the-market equity offering program (the 2024 ATM) under which TD Cowen agreed to act as our sales agent. During the year ended December 31, 2024, we sold an aggregate of 1,147,893 shares of common stock under the 2024 ATM, resulting in gross proceeds of $60.4 million. In November 2023, we completed the EQRx Acquisition, which was an all-stock transaction pursuant to which we (i) issued shares of our common stock according to a blended formula, resulting in substantial dilution to our stockholders, and (ii) assumed public and private warrants to purchase shares of our common stock. Additionally, in December 2024, we completed an underwritten public offering that included the sale of pre-funded warrants to purchase 2,173,917 shares of our common stock. Until exercised, the shares issuable upon the exercise of the warrants are not included in the number of our outstanding shares of common stock. If we issue common stock or securities convertible into common stock in the future, our common stockholders would experience additional dilution and, as a result, our stock price may decline.
Reworded paragraphs (63)

Previous wording

Since our inception, we have incurred significant net losses. Our net losses were $600.1 million, $436.4 million and $248.7 million, for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, respectively. As of December 31, 2024, we had an accumulated deficit of $1.7 billion. We have funded our operations to date primarily with proceeds from the sale of common stock and preferred stock, as well as upfront payments and research and development cost reimbursement received under our collaboration agreement with Genzyme Corporation, an affiliate of Sanofi (the Sanofi Agreement). The Sanofi Agreement was terminated in June 2023, and Sanofi has no further reimbursement obligations following this termination. To date, we have devoted substantially all of our resources to organizing and staffing our company, business planning, raising capital, acquiring and discovering development programs, securing intellectual property rights and conducting discovery, research and development activities for our programs. We have not yet demonstrated our ability to successfully complete any clinical trials, including pivotal clinical trials, obtain marketing approvals, manufacture a commercial-scale product, or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Our product candidates will require substantial additional development time and resources before we will be able to apply for or receive regulatory approvals and, if approved, begin generating revenue from product sales. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating losses for the foreseeable future.

Current wording

Since our inception, we have incurred significant net losses. Our net losses were $1.1 billion, $600.1 million and $436.4 million, for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023, respectively. As of December 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $2.9 billion. We have funded our operations to date primarily with proceeds from the sale of common stock and preferred stock, the acquisition of EQRx, and the Royalty Purchase Agreement, as well as upfront payments and research and development cost reimbursement received under the Sanofi Agreement. The Sanofi Agreement was terminated in June 2023, and Sanofi has no further reimbursement obligations following this termination. To date, we have devoted substantially all of our resources to organizing and staffing our company, business planning, raising capital, acquiring and discovering development programs, securing intellectual property rights and conducting discovery, research and development activities for our programs. We have not yet demonstrated our ability to successfully complete any clinical trials, including pivotal clinical trials, obtain marketing approvals, manufacture a commercial-scale product, or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Our product candidates will require additional development time and resources before we will be able to apply for or receive regulatory approvals and, if approved, begin generating revenue from product sales. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating losses for the foreseeable future.

Previous wording

Our ability to generate revenue from product sales and achieve profitability depends on our ability, alone or with our collaboration partners, to successfully complete the development of, and obtain the regulatory approvals necessary to commercialize, our development programs. We do not anticipate generating revenue from product sales for the next several years, if ever. Our ability to generate future revenue from product sales depends heavily on our, and any potential future collaborators’, success in:

Current wording

We have never generated revenue from product sales and our ability to generate future revenue from product sales and achieve profitability depends heavily on our, and any potential future collaborators’, success in:

Previous wording

Even if one or more of our product candidates is approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate, including prior to a potential launch of any approved product candidate. Our expenses could increase beyond expectations if we are required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the FDA), the European Medicines Agency (the EMA) or other regulatory agencies to perform clinical trials or studies in addition to those that we currently anticipate. Even if we are able to generate revenue from the sale of any approved products, we may not become profitable and may need to obtain additional funding to continue operations.

Current wording

Even if one or more of our product candidates is approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate, including prior to a potential launch of any approved product candidate. Our expenses could increase beyond expectations if we are required by the FDA, the European Medicines Agency (the EMA) or other regulatory agencies to perform clinical trials or studies in addition to those that we currently anticipate. Even if we are able to generate revenue from the sale of any approved products, we may not become profitable and may need to obtain additional funding to continue operations.

Previous wording

Preclinical studies, clinical trials and additional research and development activities will require substantial funds to complete. As of December 31, 2024, we had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of $2.3 billion. Through December 31, 2024, we have raised $2.1 billion in underwritten public offerings, net of underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses and have completed sales generating $246.4 million in gross proceeds pursuant to at-the-market equity offering programs. Our acquisition of EQRx, Inc. (the EQRx Acquisition) added $1.1 billion to our working capital in 2023. We expect to continue to spend substantial amounts to continue the preclinical and clinical development of our current and future programs and to prepare for their potential commercialization. If we are able to gain marketing approval for our product candidates, we will require significant additional amounts of cash in order to launch and commercialize our product candidates, if approved, to the extent that their launch and commercialization are not the responsibility of another collaborator that we may contract with in the future. In addition, other unanticipated costs may arise. Because the design and outcome of our current, planned and potential future clinical trials is highly uncertain, we cannot reasonably estimate the actual amounts necessary to successfully complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates.

Current wording

Preclinical studies, clinical trials and additional research and development activities will require substantial funds to complete. As of December 31, 2025, we had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of $2.0 billion. Through December 31, 2025, we have raised $2.1 billion in underwritten public offerings, net of underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses and have completed sales generating $599.9 million in gross proceeds pursuant to at-the-market equity offering programs. In June 2025, we received $250.0 million of gross proceeds under the Royalty Purchase Agreement, and subject to our meeting certain terms and conditions, including certain commercial milestones and other trigger events, additional capital may be available under the Loan Agreement and the Royalty Purchase Agreement (see “Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” contained in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for more information).The EQRx Acquisition added $1.1 billion to our working capital in 2023. We expect to continue to spend substantial amounts to continue the preclinical and clinical development of our current and future programs and to prepare for their potential commercialization. If we are able to gain marketing approval for our product candidates, we will require significant additional amounts of cash in order to launch and commercialize our product candidates, if approved, to the extent that their launch and commercialization are not the responsibility of another collaborator that we may contract with in the future. In addition, other unanticipated costs may arise. Because the design and outcome of our current, planned and potential future clinical trials is highly uncertain, we cannot reasonably estimate the actual amounts necessary to successfully complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates.

Previous wording

the cost of commercialization activities for any of our product candidates, whether alone or in collaboration, including marketing, sales and distribution costs if any product candidate is approved for sale;

Current wording

the cost of commercialization activities for our product candidates, whether alone or in collaboration, including marketing, sales and distribution costs if any product candidate is approved for sale;

Previous wording

the timing, receipt and amount of sales of, profit share or royalties on, our future products, if any;

Current wording

the timing, receipt and amount of sales of, profit share or royalties on, our product candidates, if approved;

Previous wording

We will require substantial additional financing for our development efforts for our current and future programs and to prepare for their potential commercialization. We do not have any committed external source of funds or other support for these activities, and we expect to finance our cash needs through a combination of public or private equity offerings, debt financings, credit or loan facilities, acquisitions, collaborations, strategic alliances, licensing arrangements and other marketing or distribution arrangements. In addition, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans.

Current wording

We will require substantial additional funds for our development efforts for our current and future programs and to prepare for their potential commercialization. Other than the Royalty Purchase Agreement and the Term Loan Facility (which provide for additional funding subject to certain terms and conditions and trigger events), we do not have any committed external source of funds or other support for these activities, and we may finance our cash needs through additional funding under the Royalty Purchase Agreement, the Term Loan Facility and/or a combination of public or private equity offerings, debt financings, other credit or loan facilities, acquisitions, collaborations, strategic alliances, licensing arrangements and other marketing or distribution arrangements. In addition, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. See “Item 1. Management’s Discussion and Analysis—Liquidity and Capital Resources” for additional information.

Previous wording

Our ability to raise additional funds will depend on financial, economic and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. Additional funds may not be available when we need them, on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all. If adequate funds are not available to us on a timely basis, we may be required to:

Current wording

Our ability to raise additional funds will depend on financial, economic and other factors, many of which are beyond our control.

Previous wording

the cost of manufacturing, as well as building out our supply chain, which may vary depending on the quantity of productions, and the terms of any agreements we enter into with third-party suppliers;

Current wording

the cost of manufacturing, as well as building out our supply chain, which may vary depending on the quantity of productions, the terms of any agreements we enter into with third-party suppliers and tariffs that may apply;

Previous wording

Our business is dependent on the successful development of our current and future product candidates. We are evaluating certain of our product candidates in exploratory clinical trials, both as monotherapy and in combination regimens, and currently plan to conduct pivotal clinical trials for our RAS(ON) inhibitors, including the RASolute 302 study and the RASolve 301 study with daraxonrasib, both of which we recently initiated. The remainder of our programs are in the preclinical stage, and the clinical development of these programs is subject to our continuing assessment of our portfolio priorities. The success of our business, including our ability to finance our company and generate revenue from products in the future, which we do not expect will occur for several years, if ever, will depend heavily on the successful development and eventual commercialization of our product candidates, which may never occur. Our current product candidates, and any of our future product candidates, will require additional preclinical and clinical development, management of clinical, preclinical and manufacturing activities, marketing approval in the United States and other markets, demonstrating effectiveness to pricing and reimbursement authorities, obtaining sufficient manufacturing supply for both clinical development and commercial production, building of a commercial organization, and substantial investment and significant marketing efforts before we generate any revenues from product sales.

Current wording

Our business is dependent on the successful development of our current and future product candidates. We are evaluating certain of our product candidates in both exploratory and pivotal clinical trials, both as monotherapy and in combination regimens, including the RASolute 302, RASolute 303, RASolute 304, RASolute 305, and RASolve 301. The remainder of our programs are in the preclinical stage, and the clinical development of these programs is subject to our continuing assessment of our portfolio priorities. The success of our business, including our ability to finance our company and generate revenue from products in the future, which we do not expect will occur for several years, if ever, will depend heavily on the successful development and eventual commercialization of our product candidates, which may never occur. Our current product candidates, and any of our future product candidates, will require additional preclinical and clinical development, management of clinical, preclinical and manufacturing activities, marketing approval in the United States and other markets, demonstrating effectiveness to pricing and reimbursement authorities, obtaining sufficient manufacturing supply for both clinical development and commercial production, building of a commercial organization, and substantial investment and significant marketing efforts before we generate any revenues from product sales.

Previous wording

We recently initiated the RASolute 302 study and the RASolve 301 study with daraxonrasib, and are currently planning additional registrational clinical trials for RMC-6236 and our other RAS(ON) inhibitors. These studies may not produce results that are consistent with expectations or that are predicted by our earlier clinical observations for these compounds. Our plans for these and future planned registrational trials are, and will be based on our observations from the results of early-stage clinical trials using the same product candidates. Based on data from early-stage clinical trials, we will select, subject to regulatory feedback, the proposed indication, line of therapy, study design and dose and dose schedule for our registrational studies. However, these registrational studies, if initiated, may not be successful and may not produce results that are consistent with our expectations, based on our earlier clinical observations, including because other trial designs may have greater likelihood of development success.

Current wording

We are evaluating our product candidates in registrational trials, including RASolute 302, RASolute 303, RASolute 304, RASolute 305, and RASolve 301, and are currently planning additional registrational clinical trials for daraxonrasib and our other RAS(ON) inhibitors. These studies may not produce results that are consistent with expectations or that are predicted by our earlier clinical observations for these compounds. Our plans for these and future planned registrational trials are, and will be based on our observations from the results of early-stage clinical trials using the same product candidates. Based on data from early-stage clinical trials, we will select, subject to regulatory feedback, the proposed indication, line of therapy, study design and dose and dose schedule for our registrational studies. However, these registrational studies, if initiated, may not be successful and may not produce results that are consistent with our expectations, based on our earlier clinical observations, including because other trial designs may have greater likelihood of development success.

Previous wording

the ability of clinical trial investigators to enroll patients in cases of outbreak of disease, geopolitical or other conflicts or natural disasters, including as a result of the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine or escalation of conflicts in the Middle East.

Current wording

the ability of clinical trial investigators to enroll patients in cases of outbreak of disease, geopolitical or other conflicts or natural disasters, including as a result of the ongoing conflicts between Russia and Ukraine or in the Middle East.

Previous wording

In addition, our clinical trials will compete with approved therapies, including sotorasib and adagrasib, as well as other clinical trials for product candidates that are in the same therapeutic areas (and that seek to evaluate patients with cancer cells having the same mutations), particularly for patients having KRAS G12C or KRAS G12D mutations, as our current and potential future product candidates. This competition and competition with approved therapies will reduce the number and types of patients available for clinical trials involving our product candidates, because some patients who might have opted to enroll in our trials may instead opt to pursue a treatment regimen using an approved therapy or enroll in a trial conducted by one of our competitors. Because the number of qualified clinical investigators is limited, we conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which will reduce the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials at such sites. Moreover, because our current and potential future product candidates may represent a departure from more commonly used methods for cancer treatment, potential patients and their doctors may be inclined to use conventional therapies, such as chemotherapy, rather than enroll patients in our ongoing or any future clinical trials.

Current wording

In addition, our clinical trials will compete with approved therapies, including sotorasib and adagrasib, as well as other clinical trials for product candidates that are in the same therapeutic areas (and that seek to evaluate patients with cancer cells having the same mutations), particularly for patients having KRAS G12C, KRAS G12D, KRAS G12V mutations, as our current and potential future product candidates. See “Item 1. Business—Competition” for additional information regarding our competitors. This competition and competition with approved therapies will reduce the number and types of patients available for clinical trials involving our product candidates, because some patients who might have opted to enroll in our trials may instead opt to pursue a treatment regimen using an approved therapy or enroll in a trial conducted by one of our competitors. Because the number of qualified clinical investigators is limited, we conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which will reduce the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials at such sites. Moreover, because our current and potential future product candidates may represent a departure from more commonly used methods for cancer treatment, potential patients and their doctors may be inclined to use conventional therapies, such as chemotherapy, rather than enroll patients in our ongoing or any future clinical trials.

Previous wording

Some of our or our collaborators’ development efforts involve combinations of our product candidates with therapeutics that have been approved for marketing by the FDA. For example, the development of our RAS(ON) inhibitors includes combinations with existing therapies, including chemotherapy agents, an anti-EGFR agent and a PD-1 inhibitor. In the future our product candidates may be developed in combination with one or more additional approved therapies. Even if any of our product candidates were to receive marketing approval or be commercialized for use in combination with other existing therapies, we would continue to be subject to the risks that the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside of the United States could revoke approval of the other therapy used in combination with our product candidate, or that safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise with these other therapies. Combination therapies are commonly used for the treatment of cancer, and we would be subject to similar risks if we develop any of our product candidates for use in combination with other drugs or for indications other than cancer. This could result in our own products being removed from the market or being less successful commercially. In addition, developing combination therapies using approved therapeutics, which we are doing and may continue to do for our product candidates, exposes us to additional clinical risks, such as the requirement that we demonstrate the safety and efficacy of each active component of any combination regimen we may develop, including any incremental benefits associated with our product candidates, which may prove challenging.

Current wording

Some of our or our collaborators’ development efforts involve combinations of our product candidates with their own product candidates and therapeutics that have been approved for marketing by the FDA. For example, the development of our RAS(ON) inhibitors includes combinations with existing therapies, including chemotherapy agents, a PD-1/VEGF bispecific antibody, PRMT5 inhibitors, an anti-EGFR agent and a PD-1 inhibitor. In the future our product candidates may be developed in combination with one or more additional approved therapies. Even if any of our product candidates were to receive marketing approval or be commercialized for use in combination with other existing therapies, we would continue to be subject to the risks that the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside of the United States could revoke approval of the other therapy used in combination with our product candidate, or that safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise with these other therapies. Combination therapies are commonly used for the treatment of cancer, and we would be subject to similar risks if we develop any of our product candidates for use in combination with other drugs or for indications other than cancer. This could result in our own products being removed from the market or being less successful commercially. In addition, developing combination therapies using approved therapeutics, which we are doing and may continue to do for our product candidates, exposes us to additional clinical risks, such as the requirement that we demonstrate the safety and efficacy of each active component of any combination regimen we may develop, including any incremental benefits associated with our product candidates, which may prove challenging.

Previous wording

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe effects, are more convenient, have a broader label, are marketed more effectively, are reimbursed or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA, EMA or other marketing approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. Even if our product candidates achieve marketing approval, they may be priced at a significant premium over competitive products if any have been approved by then, resulting in reduced competitiveness.

Current wording

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe effects, are more convenient, have a broader label, are marketed more effectively, are reimbursed or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other marketing approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. Even if our product candidates achieve marketing approval, they may be priced at a significant premium over competitive products if any have been approved by then, resulting in reduced competitiveness.

Previous wording

The time required to obtain approval by the FDA, the EMA and comparable foreign authorities is unpredictable but typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. In addition, approval policies, regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. We have not obtained regulatory approval for any product candidate, and it is possible that none of our current or future product candidates will ever obtain regulatory approval.

Current wording

The time required to obtain approval by the FDA and comparable foreign authorities is unpredictable but typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. In addition, approval policies, regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. We have not obtained regulatory approval for any product candidate, and it is possible that none of our current or future product candidates will ever obtain regulatory approval.

Previous wording

the FDA, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may find deficiencies with or fail to approve the manufacturing processes or facilities of third-party manufacturers with which we contract for clinical and commercial supplies; and

Current wording

the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may find deficiencies with or fail to approve the manufacturing processes or facilities of third-party manufacturers with which we contract for clinical and commercial supplies; and

Previous wording

This lengthy approval process as well as the unpredictability of clinical trial results may result in our or our future collaborators’ failure to obtain regulatory approval to market any of our product candidates. The FDA, the EMA and other comparable foreign authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process, and determining when or whether regulatory approval will be obtained for any product candidate that we develop. Even if we believe the data collected from future clinical trials of our product candidates are promising, this data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA, the EMA or any other regulatory authority.

Current wording

This lengthy approval process as well as the unpredictability of clinical trial results may result in our or our future collaborators’ failure to obtain regulatory approval to market any of our product candidates. The FDA, the EMA and other comparable foreign authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process, and determining when or whether regulatory approval will be obtained for any product candidate that we develop. Even if we believe the data collected from future clinical trials of our product candidates are promising, this data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA or any other regulatory authority.

Previous wording

The United Kingdom’s (UK) regulatory framework in relation to clinical trials is derived from pre-existing EU legislation (as implemented into UK law, through secondary legislation). Whether the regulation of clinical trials in the UK will mirror the (EU) CTR in the long term is not yet certain; however, in December 2024, the UK government introduced a legislative proposal, the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Amendment Regulations 2024, that, if implemented, will replace the current regulatory framework for clinical trials in the UK. The legislative proposal aims to provide a more flexible regime to make it easier to conduct clinical trials in the UK, increase the transparency of clinical trials conducted in the UK and make clinical trials more patient centered. The UK government has provided the legislative proposal to the UK Parliament for its review and approval. Once the legislative proposal is approved (with or without amendment), it will be adopted into UK law which is expected in early 2026. A decision by the UK government not to closely align any new legislation with the new approach that has been adopted in the EU may have an effect on the cost of conducting clinical trials in the UK as opposed to countries in the EU.

Current wording

The United Kingdom’s (UK) regulatory framework in relation to clinical trials is derived from pre-existing EU legislation (as implemented into UK law, through secondary legislation). In April 2025, the UK government the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Amendment Regulations 2024. The amendment, which will take full effect from April 2026, aims to provide a more flexible regime to make it easier to conduct clinical trials in the UK, increase the transparency of clinical trials conducted in the UK and make clinical trials more patient centered.

Previous wording

The process of obtaining marketing approvals, both in the United States and abroad, is expensive, may take many years if additional clinical trials are required, if approval is obtained at all, and can vary substantially based upon a variety of factors, including the type, complexity, and novelty of the product candidates involved. Changes in marketing approval policies during the development period, changes in or the enactment of additional statutes or regulations, or changes in regulatory review for each submitted product application, may cause delays in the approval or rejection of an application. For instance, the EU pharmaceutical legislation is currently undergoing a complete review process, in the context of the Pharmaceutical Strategy for Europe initiative, launched by the European Commission in November 2020. The European Commission’s proposal for revision of several legislative instruments related to medicinal products was published in April 2023, and would, among other things, potentially reduce the duration of regulatory data protection and revise the eligibility for expedited pathways. The proposed revisions remain to be agreed and adopted by the European Parliament and European Council and the proposals may therefore be substantially revised before adoption, which is not anticipated before early 2026. The revisions may, however, have a significant long-term impact on the biopharmaceutical industry.

Current wording

The process of obtaining marketing approvals, both in the United States and abroad, is expensive, may take many years if additional clinical trials are required, if approval is obtained at all, and can vary substantially based upon a variety of factors, including the type, complexity, and novelty of the product candidates involved. Changes in marketing approval policies during the development period, changes in or the enactment of additional statutes or regulations, or changes in regulatory review for each submitted product application, may cause delays in the approval or rejection of an application. For instance, the EU pharmaceutical legislation has been undergoing a complete review process, in the context of the Pharmaceutical Strategy for Europe initiative, launched by the European Commission in November 2020. The European Commission’s proposal for revision of several legislative instruments related to medicinal products was published on April 26 2023. The proposed changes were since discussed and negotiated by the European Parliament and the Council of the EU as part of the EU ordinary legislative process. A provisional agreement was reached by the European Parliament and Council of the EU on the proposed revisions in December 2025. The proposed revisions (affecting the duration of regulatory data protection and market protection, including for orphan medicinal products and revising the eligibility for expedited pathways) remain to be formally adopted by the two institutions, which is not anticipated before early 2026. The proposed changes are not expected to enter into application before 2028 and may, however, have a significant long-term impact on the biopharmaceutical industry.

Previous wording

We have limited technical, managerial and financial resources to determine which of our potential assets, including our RAS(ON) inhibitors, should be advanced into further preclinical development, initial clinical trials, later-stage clinical development and potential commercialization. From our RAS(ON) inhibitors, we have selected RMC-6236, our RAS(ON) multi-selective inhibitor, RMC-6291, our RAS(ON) G12C-selective inhibitor and RMC-9805, our inhibitor targeting KRAS(ON) G12D as the first RAS(ON) inhibitor candidates for clinical evaluation. In making these prioritization decisions and selecting development candidates from our preclinical assets, we may make incorrect determinations. Our decisions to allocate our research and development, management and financial resources toward particular development candidates or therapeutic areas, including the RASolute 302 study, the RASolve 301 study and other pivotal trials, may not lead to the development of viable commercial products and may divert resources from better opportunities. Similarly, our decisions to delay or terminate development programs may also be incorrect and could cause us to miss valuable opportunities.

Current wording

We have limited technical, managerial and financial resources to determine which of our potential assets, including our RAS(ON) inhibitors, should be advanced into further preclinical development, initial clinical trials, later-stage clinical development and potential commercialization. From our RAS(ON) inhibitors, we have selected daraxonrasib, elironrasib and zoldonrasib for clinical evaluation. In making these prioritization decisions and selecting development candidates from our preclinical assets, we may make incorrect determinations. Our decisions to allocate our research and development, management and financial resources toward particular development candidates or therapeutic areas, including RASolute 302, RASolute 303, RASolute 304, RASolute 305, RASolve 301 and other pivotal trials, may not lead to the development of viable commercial products and may divert resources from better opportunities. Similarly, our decisions to delay or terminate development programs may also be incorrect and could cause us to miss valuable opportunities.

Previous wording

We may also seek breakthrough therapy designation for our product candidates. A breakthrough therapy is defined as a drug that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over currently existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For product candidates that have been designated as breakthrough therapies, increased interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens. Drugs and biologics designated as breakthrough therapies also receive the same benefits associated with fast track designation, including eligibility for rolling review of a submitted NDA, if the relevant criteria are met. Like fast track designation, breakthrough therapy designation is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe one of our product candidates meets the criteria for designation as a breakthrough therapy, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. In any event, the receipt of breakthrough therapy designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to drugs considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if a product candidate qualifies as a breakthrough therapy, the FDA may later decide that the drug no longer meets the conditions for qualification and rescind the designation.

Current wording

We may also seek breakthrough therapy designation for our product candidates. A breakthrough therapy is defined as a drug that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over currently existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For product candidates that have been designated as breakthrough therapies, increased interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens. Drugs and biologics designated as breakthrough therapies also receive the same benefits associated with fast track designation, including eligibility for rolling review of a submitted NDA, if the relevant criteria are met. Like fast track designation, breakthrough therapy designation is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe one of our product candidates meets the criteria for designation as a breakthrough therapy, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. We have received multiple break through therapy designations for our product candidates: daraxonrasib has been granted breakthrough therapy designation in previously treated, metastatic PDAC patients with KRAS G12 mutations, zoldonrasib was granted breakthrough therapy designation for the treatment of adult patients with KRAS G12D-mutated locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC who have been previously treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy and platinum-based chemotherapy; and elironrasib was granted breakthrough therapy designation for the treatment of adult patients with KRAS G12C-mutated locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC who have received prior chemotherapy and immunotherapy but have not been previously treated with a KRAS G12C inhibitor. The receipt of these breakthrough therapy designation (and any future designations we may receive for a product candidate) may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to drugs considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if a product candidate qualifies as a breakthrough therapy, the FDA may later decide that the drug no longer meets the conditions for qualification and rescind the designation.

Previous wording

As part of our business strategy, we may seek orphan drug designation for our product candidates. Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs or, in the EU, orphan medicinal products. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a drug as an orphan drug if it is a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals annually in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States. In the United States, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user-fee waivers.

Current wording

As part of our business strategy, we may seek orphan drug designation for our product candidates. Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs or, in the EU, orphan medicinal products. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a drug as an orphan drug if it is a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals annually in the

Previous wording

Generally, if a drug with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the drug is entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA or foreign authorities from approving another marketing application for the same drug for the same disease or condition for that time period, except in limited circumstances. The applicable period is seven years in the United States and ten years in the EU. The European exclusivity period can be reduced to six years if a drug no longer meets the criteria for orphan drug designation or if the drug is sufficiently profitable such that market exclusivity is no longer justified.

Current wording

Generally, if a drug with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the drug is entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA or foreign authorities from approving another marketing application for the same drug for the same approved use or indication within such disease or condition for that time period, except in limited circumstances. The applicable period is seven years in the United States and ten years in the EU. The European exclusivity period can be reduced to six years if a drug no longer meets the criteria for orphan drug designation or if the drug is sufficiently profitable such that market exclusivity is no longer justified.

Previous wording

We may be unsuccessful in obtaining orphan drug designation for our product candidates. In addition, even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product candidate, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product candidate from competition because different therapies can be approved for the same disease or condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA or comparable foreign authorities can subsequently approve the same drug for the same disease or condition if the FDA or comparable foreign authorities conclude that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. In addition, a designated orphan drug may not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the disease or condition for which it received orphan designation. Moreover, orphan drug exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process. While we may seek orphan drug designation for applicable indications for our current and any future product candidates, we may never receive such designations. Even if we do receive such designations, there is no guarantee that we will enjoy the benefits of those designations, including marketing exclusivity.

Current wording

We may be unsuccessful in obtaining orphan drug designation for our product candidates. In addition, while the FDA has granted orphan drug designation to daraxonrasib for the treatment of pancreatic cancer, the corresponding marketing exclusivity for such designation (and any future designations we may receive for a product candidate) may not effectively protect the product candidate from competition because different therapies can be approved for the same approved use or indication within the applicable disease or condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA or comparable foreign authorities can subsequently approve the same drug for the same approved use or indication within the relevant disease or condition if the FDA or comparable foreign authorities conclude that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. In addition, a designated orphan drug may not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the disease or condition for which it received orphan designation. Moreover, orphan drug exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug to meet the needs relating to the approved use or indication of patients with the relevant rare disease or condition. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process. While we may seek orphan drug designation for applicable indications for our current and any future product candidates, we may never receive such designations. Even if we do receive such designations, there is no guarantee that we will enjoy the benefits of those designations, including marketing exclusivity.

Previous wording

Moreover, payment methodologies may be subject to changes in healthcare legislation and regulatory initiatives. In August 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) was signed into law. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare (beginning in 2026), with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap; imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023); and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new manufacturer discounting program (which began in 2025). The IRA permits the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. HHS has and will continue to issue and update guidance as these programs are implemented. In August 2024, HHS announced the negotiated prices for the initial ten drugs, which will first be effective in 2026, and in January 2025, HHS announced the second set of drugs that will be subject to price negotiations. Because the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges, and for other reasons, it is currently unclear how the IRA will be effectuated, and the impact of the IRA on our business and the pharmaceutical industry cannot yet be fully determined.

Current wording

For example, in August 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) was signed into law. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare, with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap; imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023); and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new manufacturer discounting program (which began in 2025). The IRA permits the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. HHS has and will continue to issue and update guidance as these programs are implemented. HHS announced the negotiated prices for the initial ten drugs, which became effective in 2026, and the subsequent 15 drugs, which will first be effective in 2027. Because the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges, and for other reasons, it is currently unclear how the IRA will be effectuated, and the impact of the IRA on our business and the pharmaceutical industry cannot yet be fully determined.

Previous wording

Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies caused by funding shortages, staffing levels or global health concerns could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, prevent new products and services from being developed or commercialized in a timely manner or otherwise prevent those agencies from performing normal business functions on which the operation of our business may rely, which could negatively impact our business.

Current wording

Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies caused by funding shortages, staffing limitations or global health concerns could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, prevent new products and services from being developed or commercialized in a timely manner or otherwise prevent those agencies from performing normal business functions on which the operation of our business may rely, which could negatively impact our business.

Previous wording

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, in recent years, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities. Separately, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA postponed most inspections of domestic and foreign manufacturing facilities at various points. More recently, there have been layoffs and resignations at the FDA and other federal agencies. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs or the FDA or other agencies experiences other delays due to staffing shortages or otherwise, it could significantly impact the ability of those agencies to timely review and process our regulatory submissions.

Current wording

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, in recent years, including in 2025, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities. In addition, the current U.S. Presidential administration has issued certain policies and Executive Orders directed towards reducing the employee headcount and costs associated with U.S. administrative agencies, including the FDA, which have led to substantial personnel changes, and it remains unclear the degree to which these efforts may limit or otherwise adversely affect the FDA’s ability to conduct routine activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs or the FDA or other agencies experience other delays due to funding shortages, staffing shortages or otherwise, it could significantly impact the ability of those agencies to timely review and process our regulatory submissions.

Previous wording

As our operations and business grow, we may become subject to or affected by new or additional data protection laws and regulations and face increased scrutiny or attention from regulatory authorities. In the United States, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) imposes, among other things, certain standards relating to the privacy, security, transmission and breach reporting of individually identifiable health information. We may obtain health information from third parties (including research institutions from which we obtain clinical trial data) that are subject to privacy and security requirements under HIPAA. While we do not believe that we are currently acting as a covered entity or business associate under HIPAA and thus are not directly regulated under HIPAA, any person may be prosecuted under HIPAA’s criminal provisions either directly or under aiding-and-abetting or conspiracy principles. Consequently, depending on the facts and circumstances, we could face substantial criminal penalties if we knowingly receive individually identifiable health information from a HIPAA-covered healthcare provider or research institution that has not satisfied HIPAA’s requirements for disclosure of individually identifiable health information.

Current wording

As our operations and business grow, we may become subject to or affected by new or additional data protection laws and regulations and face increased scrutiny or attention from regulatory authorities. In the United States, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) imposes, among other things, certain standards relating to the privacy, security, transmission and breach reporting of individually identifiable health information. We may obtain health information from third parties (including research institutions from which we obtain clinical trial data) that are subject to privacy and security requirements under HIPAA. While we do not believe that we are currently acting as a covered entity or business associate under HIPAA and thus are not directly regulated under HIPAA, any person may be prosecuted under HIPAA’s criminal provisions either directly or under aiding-and-abetting or conspiracy principles. Consequently, depending on the facts and circumstances, we could face substantial criminal penalties if we knowingly receive individually identifiable health information from a HIPAA-covered healthcare provider or research institution that has not satisfied HIPAA’s requirements for disclosure of individually identifiable health information. Additionally in the U.S., the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and many state Attorneys General continue to enforce federal and state consumer protection laws against companies for online collection, use, dissemination and security practices that appear to be unfair or deceptive. Further, in 2024, the National Security Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a rule in 2024—referred to as the “Data Security Program” (DSP)—to implement Executive Order 14117 aimed at preventing access to “bulk U.S. sensitive personal data” and “government-related data” by “countries of concern” (including China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and Venezuela) and “covered persons” (as all such terms are defined in the DSP). Effective as of April 2025, and fully enforceable as of July 2025, the DSP imposes stringent obligations on companies within its scope and prohibits or restricts “covered data transactions” that grant countries of concern or covered persons access to bulk U.S. sensitive personal data or any amount of government-related data. The DSP is new, complex and has yet to be enforced, and as such, there is a risk that our interpretation of its applicability, scope, and requirements is incorrect, incomplete, or misapplied. Compliance with the DSP may require us to invest heavily in data security and compliance measures, such as implementing and complying with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency’s guidelines and other burdensome recordkeeping, reporting, and auditing requirements. It may also require us to implement new processes, stop or restrict certain data transfers, alter the geographic scope of our operations, cease doing business with certain third parties …

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

Further, various states have implemented certain data privacy and security laws and regulations that impose restrictive requirements regulating the use and disclosure of health-related and other personal information. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act (collectively, the CCPA) requires certain businesses that process personal information of California residents to, among other things: provide certain disclosures to California residents regarding the business’s collection, use, and disclosure of their personal information; receive and respond to requests from California residents to access, delete and correct their personal information, or opt-out of certain disclosures of their personal information; and enter into specific contractual provisions with service providers that process California resident personal information on the business’s behalf. Similar laws have been passed in other states, and are continuing to be proposed at the state and the federal level, reflecting a trend toward more stringent privacy legislation in the United States. The enactment of such laws could have potentially conflicting requirements that would make compliance challenging. In the event that we are subject to or affected by HIPAA or the CCPA or other domestic privacy and data protection laws, any liability from failure to comply with the requirements of these laws could adversely affect our financial condition.

Current wording

In addition, various states have implemented certain data privacy and security laws and regulations that impose restrictive requirements regulating the use and disclosure of health-related and other personal information. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act (collectively, the CCPA) requires certain businesses that process personal information of California residents to, among other things: provide certain disclosures to California residents regarding the business’s collection, use, and disclosure of their personal information; receive and respond to requests from California residents to access, delete and correct their personal information, or opt-out of certain disclosures of their personal information; and enter into specific contractual provisions with service providers that process California resident personal information on the business’s behalf. Similar laws have been passed in other states, and are continuing to be proposed at the state and the federal level, reflecting a trend toward more stringent privacy legislation in the United States. The enactment of such laws could have potentially conflicting requirements that would make compliance challenging. In the event that we are subject to or affected by HIPAA or the CCPA or other domestic privacy and data protection laws, any liability from failure to comply with the requirements of these laws could adversely affect our financial condition.

Previous wording

In addition to fines and penalties imposed upon violators, some of these state laws also afford private rights of action to individuals who believe their personal information has been misused. The interplay of federal and state laws may be subject to varying interpretations by courts and government agencies, creating complex compliance issues for us and data we receive, use and share, potentially exposing us to additional expense, adverse publicity and liability. Legal requirements relating to the collection, storage, handling, and transfer of personal information and personal data continue to evolve and may result in increased public scrutiny and escalating levels of enforcement, sanctions and increased costs of compliance.

Current wording

State laws and regulations are not necessarily preempted by federal laws and regulations, such as HIPAA, particularly if a state affords greater protection to individuals than federal law. Where state laws are more protective, we must comply with the stricter provisions. In addition to fines and penalties imposed upon violators, some of these state laws also afford private rights of action to individuals who believe their personal information has been misused. The interplay of federal and state laws may be subject to varying interpretations by courts and government agencies, creating complex compliance issues for us and data we receive, use and share, potentially exposing us to additional expense, adverse publicity and liability. Legal requirements relating to the collection, storage, handling, and transfer of personal information and personal data continue to evolve and may result in increased public scrutiny and escalating levels of enforcement, sanctions and increased costs of compliance.

Previous wording

The processing of personal data in the European Economic Area (EEA) is governed by the General Data Protection Regulation (the GDPR). The GDPR imposes stringent requirements for controllers and processors of personal data. The GDPR applies extraterritorially, and we may be subject to the GDPR because of our data processing activities that involve the personal data of individuals located in the EEA, or in the context of our activities within the EEA, such as in connection with any EEA clinical trials. The GDPR may impose additional obligations and liability in relation to the personal data that we process, and we may be required to put in place additional mechanisms to ensure compliance with its requirements. This may be onerous and may interrupt or delay our development activities. If we or our vendors fail to comply with the GDPR and the applicable national data protection laws of the EEA member states, or if regulators assert we have failed to comply with these laws, it may lead to regulatory enforcement actions, which can result in, among other things, monetary penalties of up to €20,000,000 or up to 4% of the total worldwide annual turnover of the noncompliant undertaking for the preceding financial year, whichever is higher, and other administrative penalties. The GDPR also imposes strict rules on the transfer of personal data out of the EEA to the United States and other third countries that have not been found to provide adequate protection to such personal data, and the efficacy and longevity of current transfer mechanisms between the EEA and the United States remains uncertain. Case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union states that reliance on the standard contractual clauses – a standard form of contract approved by the European Commission as an adequate personal data transfer mechanism – alone may not necessarily be sufficient in all circumstances, and that transfers must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.

Current wording

The processing of personal data in the European Economic Area (EEA) is governed by the General Data Protection Regulation (the GDPR). The GDPR imposes stringent requirements for controllers and processors of personal data. The GDPR applies extraterritorially, and we may be subject to the GDPR because of our data processing activities that involve the personal data of individuals located in the EEA, or in the context of our activities within the EEA, such as in connection with any EEA clinical trials. The GDPR imposes comprehensive data privacy compliance obligations in relation to our collection and use of personal data, including a principle of accountability and the obligation to demonstrate compliance through policies, procedures, training and audit. If we or our vendors fail to comply with the GDPR and the applicable national data protection laws of the EEA member states, or if regulators assert we have failed to comply with these laws, it may lead to regulatory enforcement actions, which can result in, among other things, monetary penalties of up to €20,000,000 or up to 4% of the total worldwide annual turnover of the noncompliant undertaking for the preceding financial year, whichever is higher, and other administrative penalties. The GDPR also imposes strict rules on the transfer of personal data out of the EEA to the United States and other third countries that have not been found to provide adequate protection to such personal data, and the efficacy and longevity of current transfer mechanisms between the EEA and the United States remains uncertain. Case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union states that reliance on the standard contractual clauses – a standard form of contract approved by the European Commission as an adequate personal data transfer mechanism – alone may not necessarily be sufficient in all circumstances, and that transfers must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.

Previous wording

The European Commission adopted its Adequacy Decision in relation to the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework (the DPF) in July 2023, rendering the DPF effective as a GDPR transfer mechanism to U.S. entities self-certified under the DPF. We currently rely in part on the EU standard contractual clauses and the UK Addendum to the EU standard contractual clauses, as relevant, to transfer personal data outside the EEA and the UK, including to the United States. We expect the existing legal complexity and uncertainty regarding international personal data transfers to continue. In particular, we expect the DPF Adequacy Decision to be challenged and international transfers to the U.S. and to other jurisdictions more generally to continue to be subject to enhanced scrutiny by regulators. As a result, we may have to make certain operational changes, and we will have to implement revised standard contractual clauses and other relevant documentation for existing data transfers within required timeframes.

Current wording

The European Commission adopted its Adequacy Decision in relation to the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework (the DPF) in July 2023, rendering the DPF effective as a GDPR transfer mechanism to U.S. entities self-certified under the DPF. We currently rely in part on the EU standard contractual clauses and the UK Addendum to the EU standard contractual clauses, as relevant, to transfer personal data outside the EEA and the UK, including to the United States. We expect the existing legal complexity and uncertainty regarding international personal data transfers to continue and international transfers to the U.S. and to other jurisdictions more generally to continue to be subject to enhanced scrutiny by regulators. As the regulatory guidance and enforcement landscape in relation to data transfers continue to develop, we could suffer additional costs, we may have to make operational changes and/or it could adversely affect our business, operations and financial condition.

Previous wording

Our business and operations, or those of our CROs or other third parties, may suffer in the event of information technology system failures, cyberattacks or deficiencies in our cybersecurity, which could materially affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Current wording

Our business and operations, or those of our CROs or other third parties, may suffer in the event of information technology system failures, cyberattacks or deficiencies in our cybersecurity, which could materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Previous wording

Information). We face a number of risks related to protecting the information technology systems we rely on and this Confidential Information, including loss of access risk, inappropriate use or disclosure, inappropriate modification and the risk of our being unable to adequately monitor, audit and modify our controls over our Confidential Information. This risk extends to the information technology systems and information of any collaboration partners, medical institutions, clinical investigators, CROs, contract laboratories and other third parties involved in our business. There can be no assurance that our cybersecurity risk management program and processes, including our policies, controls or procedures, will be fully implemented, complied with or effective in protecting our systems and Confidential Information.

Current wording

We receive, generate and store significant and increasing volumes of sensitive information, such as health-related information, clinical trial data, proprietary business information and the personal information of our employees and contractors (collectively, Confidential Information). We face a number of risks related to protecting the information technology systems we rely on and this Confidential Information, including loss of access risk, inappropriate use or disclosure, inappropriate modification and the risk of our being unable to adequately monitor, audit and modify our controls over our Confidential Information. This risk extends to the information technology systems and information of any collaboration partners, medical institutions, clinical investigators, CROs, contract laboratories and other third parties involved in our business. There can be no assurance that our cybersecurity risk management program and processes, including our policies, controls or procedures, will be fully implemented, complied with or effective in protecting our systems and Confidential Information.

Previous wording

Despite the implementation of security measures, our information technology systems, as well as those of CROs or other third parties with which we have relationships, are vulnerable to attack, interruption and damage from computer viruses and malware (e.g., ransomware), malicious code, misconfigurations, “bugs” or other vulnerabilities, unauthorized access, natural and manmade disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures, malfeasance by external or internal parties, fraud, denial or degradation of service attacks, sophisticated nation-state and nation-state-supported actors and human error (e.g., social engineering and phishing). Attacks upon information technology systems are increasing in their frequency, levels of persistence, sophistication and intensity, and are being conducted by sophisticated and organized groups and individuals with a wide range of motives and expertise. Furthermore, because the technologies used to obtain unauthorized access to, or to sabotage or disrupt, systems change frequently and often are not recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures. We may also experience security breaches that may remain undetected for an extended period. We may not be able to anticipate all types of security threats, and, even if identified, we may be unable to adequately investigate or remediate incidents or breaches due to attackers increasingly using tools and techniques that are designed to circumvent controls, to avoid detection, and to remove or obfuscate forensic evidence. We may also face increased cybersecurity risks due to our reliance on internet technology and the number of our and our service providers’ employees who are (and may continue to be) working remotely, which may create additional opportunities for cybercriminals to exploit vulnerabilities. The White House, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) and other regulators have also increased their focus on companies’ cybersecurity vulnerabilities and risks. Further, although we have implemented policies regarding limited permitted use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) by our employees, Confidential Information could be leaked, disclosed or revealed as a result of or in connection with our employees’ use of generative AI technologies.

Current wording

Despite the implementation of security measures, our information technology systems, as well as those of CROs or other third parties with which we have relationships, are vulnerable to attack, interruption and damage from computer viruses and malware (e.g., ransomware), malicious code, misconfigurations, “bugs” or other vulnerabilities, unauthorized access, natural and manmade disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures, malfeasance by external or internal parties, fraud, denial or degradation of service attacks, sophisticated nation-state and nation-state-supported actors and human error (e.g., social engineering and phishing). Attacks upon information technology systems are increasing in their frequency, levels of persistence, sophistication and intensity, and are being conducted by sophisticated and organized groups and individuals with a wide range of motives and expertise. Furthermore, because technologies (such as AI) that are used to obtain unauthorized access to, or to sabotage or disrupt, systems change frequently and often are not recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures. We may also experience security breaches that may remain undetected for an extended period. We may not be able to anticipate all types of security threats, and, even if identified, we may be unable to adequately investigate or remediate incidents or breaches due to attackers increasingly using tools and techniques that are designed to circumvent controls, to avoid detection, and to remove or obfuscate forensic evidence. We may also face increased cybersecurity risks due to our reliance on internet technology and the number of our and our service providers’ employees who are (and may continue to be) working remotely, which may create additional opportunities for cybercriminals to exploit vulnerabilities. The White House, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) and other regulators have also increased their focus on companies’ cybersecurity vulnerabilities and risks.

Previous wording

We, our CROs and certain of our service providers are, from time to time, subject to cyberattacks and security incidents. While we have not to our knowledge experienced any significant system failure, accident or security breach to date, if such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our or our critical third parties’ operations, it could result in delays and/or material disruptions of our research and development programs, our operations and ultimately, our financial results. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed, ongoing or planned clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. Likewise, we rely on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates and to conduct clinical trials, and similar events relating to their information technology systems could also adversely impact our business. Further, due to the current political uncertainty involving Russia and Ukraine, there is an increased likelihood that the tensions could result in cyberattacks or cybersecurity incidents that could either directly or indirectly impact our or our critical third parties’ operations. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of or damage to data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of Confidential Information, the costs associated with the investigation, remediation and potential notification of the breach to counterparties and data subjects could be material, we could incur liability due to delays in the development and commercialization of our product candidates or other business activities, and we may be exposed to reputational harm, litigation, regulatory investigations and enforcement, fines and penalties, or increased costs of compliance and system remediation.

Current wording

We, our CROs and certain of our service providers are, from time to time, subject to cyberattacks and security incidents that threaten the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information technology systems and Confidential Information. While we have not to our knowledge experienced any significant system failure, accident or security breach to date, if such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our or our critical third parties’ operations, it could result in delays and/or material disruptions of our research and development programs, our operations and ultimately, our financial results. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed, ongoing or planned clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. Likewise, we rely on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates and to conduct clinical trials, and similar events relating to their information technology systems could also adversely impact our business. Further, due to the current political uncertainty involving Russia and Ukraine, there is an increased likelihood that the tensions could result in cyberattacks or cybersecurity incidents that could either directly or indirectly impact our or our critical third parties’ operations. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of or damage to data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of Confidential Information, the costs associated with the investigation, remediation and potential notification of the breach to counterparties and data subjects could be material, we could incur liability due to delays in the development and commercialization of our product candidates or other business activities, and we may be exposed to reputational harm, litigation (including class actions), regulatory investigations and enforcement, fines and penalties, or increased costs of compliance and system remediation.

Previous wording

In order to conduct clinical trials of product candidates, we will need to have them manufactured in potentially large quantities. Our third-party manufacturers may be unable to successfully increase the manufacturing capacity for any of our clinical drug supplies (including key starting and intermediate materials) in a timely or cost-effective manner, or at all. In addition, quality issues may arise during scale-up activities and at any other time. For example, ongoing data on the stability of our product candidates may shorten the expiry of our product candidates and lead to clinical trial material supply shortages, and potentially clinical trial delays. If these third-party manufacturers are unable to successfully scale up the manufacture of our product candidates in sufficient quality and quantity, the development, testing and clinical trials of that product candidate may be delayed or infeasible, and regulatory approval or commercial launch of that product candidate may be delayed or not obtained.

Current wording

In order to conduct clinical trials of product candidates, we will need to have them manufactured in potentially large quantities. Our third-party manufacturers may be unable to successfully increase the manufacturing capacity for any of our clinical drug supplies (including key starting and intermediate materials) in a timely or cost-effective manner, or at all. In addition, quality issues may arise during scale-up activities and at any other time. For example, ongoing data on the stability of our product candidates may shorten the expiry of our product candidates and lead to clinical trial material supply shortages, and potentially clinical trial delays. Further, the current U.S. Presidential administration has announced significant tariffs on imports from other countries on a wide range of goods. Any such tariffs that apply to drug supplies that we or our third-party suppliers import would result in our clinical trials being more costly to run than anticipated, and could have a substantial impact on our financial projections as well as timelines and plans for our clinical trials and commercialization efforts. If these third-party manufacturers are unable to successfully scale up the manufacture of our product candidates in sufficient quality and quantity, the development, testing and clinical trials of that product candidate may be delayed or infeasible, and regulatory approval or commercial launch of that product candidate may be delayed or not obtained.

Previous wording

The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and our patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. We may be subject to a third-party pre-issuance submission of prior art to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (the USPTO) or become involved in opposition, derivation, revocation, reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review or interference proceedings challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others, or other proceedings in the USPTO or applicable foreign offices that challenge priority of invention or other features of patentability. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could result in loss of exclusivity or freedom to operate, patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, or limits on the scope or duration of the patent protection of our product candidates, all of which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical product candidates or technology to compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications were threatened, regardless of the outcome, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future product candidates, or could negatively impact our ability to raise funds necessary to continue our research programs or clinical trials. Such proceedings could also result in substantial cost and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us.

Current wording

The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and our patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. We may be subject to a third-party pre-issuance submission of prior art to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (the USPTO) or applicable foreign offices or become involved in opposition, derivation, revocation, reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review or interference proceedings challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others, or other proceedings in the USPTO or applicable foreign offices that challenge priority of invention or other features of patentability. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could result in loss of exclusivity or freedom to operate, patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, or limits on the scope or duration of the patent protection of our product candidates, all of which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical product candidates or technology to compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications were threatened, regardless of the outcome, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future product candidates, or could negatively impact our ability to raise funds necessary to continue our research programs or clinical trials. Such proceedings could also result in substantial cost and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us.

Previous wording

In addition, if any of the research resulting in certain of our owned and/or in-licensed patent rights and technology were funded in part by the U.S. federal or state governments, the government would have certain rights, including march-in rights, to such patent rights and technology. When new technologies are developed with government funding, the government generally obtains certain rights in any resulting patents, including a non-exclusive license authorizing the government to use the invention for noncommercial purposes. These rights may permit the government to disclose our confidential information to third parties or allow third parties to use our licensed technology. The government can exercise its march-in rights if it determines that action is necessary because we fail to achieve practical application of the government-funded technology, because action is necessary to alleviate health or safety needs, to meet requirements of federal regulations, or to give preference to U.S. industry. In addition, our rights in such inventions may be subject to certain requirements to manufacture products embodying such inventions in the United States. Any of the foregoing could harm our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Current wording

In addition, some of the intellectual property rights we have in-licensed, including certain rights licensed in the agreements described above, may have been generated through the use of U.S. government funding. If any of the research resulting in certain of our owned and/or in-licensed patent rights and technology were funded in part by the U.S. federal or state governments, the government would have certain rights, including march-in rights, to such patent rights and technology. When new technologies are developed with government funding, the government generally obtains certain rights in any resulting patents, including a non-exclusive license authorizing the government to use the invention for noncommercial purposes. These rights may permit the government to disclose our confidential information to third parties or allow third parties to use our licensed technology. The government can exercise its march-in rights if it determines that action is necessary because we fail to achieve practical application of the government-funded technology, because action is necessary to alleviate health or safety needs, to meet requirements of federal regulations, or to give preference to U.S. industry. In addition, a failure to comply with specific administrative requirements and deadlines under the Bayh-Dole Act can result in government taking title to the invention. In addition, our rights in such inventions may be subject to certain requirements to manufacture products embodying such inventions in the United States. Any of the foregoing could harm our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Showing the first 40 of 63 pairs. Open the source sections for the rest.

Rearranged current paragraphs (5)

Current report — wording carried from elsewhere

United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States. In the United States, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user-fee waivers.

Current report — wording carried from elsewhere

Further, any integration of AI in our or any third party’s operations, products or services is expected to pose new or unknown cybersecurity risks and challenges. Although we have implemented policies regarding limited permitted use of generative AI by our employees, Confidential Information could be leaked, disclosed or revealed as a result of or in connection with our employees’ use of generative AI Technologies.

Current report — wording carried from elsewhere

If we were to initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent directed to our product candidates, or one of our future product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that our patent is invalid or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United

Current report — wording carried from elsewhere

If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to, or independently developed by, a competitor or other third party, our competitive position would be materially and adversely harmed.

Current report — wording carried from elsewhere

“at-will” employees. We currently do not have “key person” insurance on any of our employees. The loss of the services of one or more of our key personnel might impede the achievement of our research, development and commercialization objectives.
Rearranged previous paragraphs (2)

Previous report — wording carried elsewhere

State laws and regulations are not necessarily preempted by federal laws and regulations, such as HIPAA, particularly if a state affords greater protection to individuals than federal law. Where state laws are more protective, we must comply with the stricter provisions.

Previous report — wording carried elsewhere

We receive, generate and store significant and increasing volumes of sensitive information, such as health-related information, clinical trial data, proprietary business information and the personal information of our employees and contractors (collectively, Confidential