Dyne Therapeutics, Inc.
For the period ended Dec 31, 2025. Filed Mar 2, 2026.
View on SEC.govAbout 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 Mar 2, 2026
What changed in Risk Factors?
Read the current filingPrevious report: 10-K
Period ended 2024-12-31; filed 2025-02-27.
0000950170-25-028356
Item 1A. Risk FactorsCurrent report: 10-K
Period ended 2025-12-31; filed 2026-03-02.
0001193125-26-084178
Item 1A. Risk FactorsThe baseline is this issuer’s latest earlier reporting period of the same form that was filed before the current report. A previous 10-Q is a different quarter, not a year-over-year comparison. Amendments are excluded.
Compared 530 previous paragraphs and 558 current paragraphs.
446 unchanged; 72 reworded; 30 added; 9 removed; 3 previous and 10 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 (30)
Current report
Our Loan Agreement contains restrictive and financial covenants that may limit our operating flexibility.
Current report
On June 27, 2025, we entered into the Loan Agreement with Hercules and the other lenders party thereto, which we refer to as the Lenders, providing for term loans in an aggregate principal amount of up to $275.0 million available as follows: (i) an initial term loan tranche funded on June 27, 2025 in an aggregate principal amount of $100.0 million; (ii) subject to the achievement of specified clinical, regulatory and commercial milestones, three additional term loan tranches totaling up to $115.0 million; and (iii) subject to approval by the Lenders’ investment committee in their discretion, a final term loan tranche of up to $60.0 million. In December 2025, we entered into the First Amendment, pursuant to which a second term loan tranche was funded in an aggregate principal amount of $50.0 million. Following entry into the First Amendment and the borrowing of the second term loan tranche, we have two additional term loan tranches we may borrow pursuant to the Loan Agreement, totaling up to $75.0 million, which are available subject to the achievement of specified clinical, regulatory and commercial milestones, and a final term loan tranche of up to $50.0 million, which is available subject to approval by the Lenders’ investment committee in their discretion. Our obligations under the Loan Agreement are secured by a first-priority security interest in substantially all of our property, inclusive of intellectual property, subject to customary permitted liens and other exceptions set forth in the Loan Agreement.
Current report
The Loan Agreement contains customary representations and warranties, events of default and affirmative and negative covenants, including a minimum cash covenant, which we refer to as the Minimum Cash Covenant, requiring that we maintain specified levels of cash in accounts subject to a control agreement in favor of Hercules, or the Qualified Cash, during the period commencing on January 1, 2027. The Minimum Cash Covenant will initially be set at 60% of the then outstanding obligations under the Loan Agreement, is subject to adjustment and will not be tested at any time when our market capitalization is greater than $1.65 billion. We are also required to maintain minimum net product revenue from the sale of z-rostudirsen and z-basivarsen starting nine months after FDA approval of z-rostudirsen or z-basivarsen, which we refer to as the Minimum Revenue Covenant, if the outstanding obligations under the Loan Agreement exceed $100.0 million. The Minimum Revenue Covenant will not be tested for any month to the extent that for each day during such month either (i) Qualified Cash is at least 100% of our outstanding obligations under the Loan Agreement or (ii) our market capitalization is greater than $1.65 billion and Qualified Cash is at least 50% of our outstanding obligations under the Loan Agreement. Certain negative covenants under the Loan Agreement limit our ability, among other things, to incur future debt, grant liens, make investments, make acquisitions, distribute dividends, enter into transactions with affiliates, make payments on other indebtedness and sell assets, subject in each case to certain exceptions. Our business may be adversely affected by these restrictions on our ability to operate our business. If we raise any additional debt financing, as permitted by the Loan Agreement, the terms of such additional indebtedness could further restrict our operating and financial flexibility.
Current report
We may not be able to generate sufficient cash flow or sales to meet the Minimum Cash Covenant or the Minimum Revenue Covenant or pay the outstanding obligations under the Loan Agreement when due. Furthermore, our future working capital, borrowings or equity financings could be unavailable to repay or refinance the amounts outstanding under the Loan Agreement. In the event of a liquidation of our business, we would be required to repay all outstanding obligations under the Loan Agreement prior to the distribution of assets to unsecured creditors, and the holders of our common stock would receive a portion of any liquidation proceeds only if all of our creditors then existing, including the lenders under our Loan Agreement with Hercules, were first repaid in full.
Current report
If we fail to comply with the Minimum Cash Covenant, the Minimum Revenue Covenant or the other covenants under the Loan Agreement, it will result in an event of default. Upon the occurrence of an event of default, and subject to any specified cure periods, all amounts owed under the Loan Agreement may be declared immediately due and payable by the Lenders, and the Lenders may foreclose on collateral.
Current report
Our failure to comply with the covenants or other terms of the Loan Agreement, including as a result of events beyond our control, could result in a default under the Loan Agreement that could materially and adversely affect our business.
Current report
We may be required to repay the outstanding indebtedness under the Loan Agreement if an event of default occurs under the Loan Agreement or, if applicable, any future debt facility. The Loan Agreement includes customary events of default, including payment defaults, breaches of covenants following any applicable cure period, the occurrence of certain events that could reasonably be expected to have a “material adverse effect” as set forth in the Loan Agreement and cross acceleration. We may not have enough available cash or be able to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings to repay such indebtedness at the time any such event of default occurs. In this case, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or commercialization efforts or grant to others rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves. Our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected as a result of any of these events.
Current report
On January 27, 2025, in response to an executive order issued by President Trump on January 21, 2025 on diversity, equity and inclusion programs, the FDA removed the draft DAP guidance from its website. Subsequently, in July 2025, pursuant to a court order, the FDA restored the draft DAP guidance to its website with a statement that “information on this page may be modified and/or removed in the future subject to the terms of the court’s order and implemented consistent with applicable law.” Accordingly, in light of these ongoing actions, there is considerable uncertainty surrounding the draft DAP guidance and how the FDA will consider diversity action plans in connection with its review of applications for marketing approval.
Current report
Further, as of January 1, 2025, a new international recognition procedure, or IRP, will apply, which intends to facilitate approval of pharmaceutical products in the UK. The IRP is open to applicants that have already received an authorization for the same product from one of the MHRA’s specified Reference Regulators, or RRs. The RRs notably include EMA and regulators in the EU/European Economic Area, or EEA, member states for approvals in the EU centralized procedure and mutual recognition procedure as well as the FDA (for product approvals granted in the United States). However, the concrete functioning of the IRP is currently unclear. Any delay in obtaining, or an inability to obtain, any marketing approvals, as a result of Brexit or otherwise, may force us or our collaborators to restrict or delay efforts to seek regulatory approval in the UK for our product candidates, which could significantly and materially harm our business.
Current report
On June 17, 2025, the FDA announced the creation of a new voucher program to expedite the development and approval of new drug products. Vouchers issued under the new program, which is known as the Commissioner’s National Priority Voucher, or CNPV, Program, may reportedly be redeemed by sponsors to shorten the review time of a BLA from approximately 10 to 12 months to 1 to 2 months. The FDA has indicated that the new CNPV process will convene experts from the FDA’s offices for a team-based review rather than using the standard review system of a drug application being sent to numerous FDA offices. Clinical information will be reviewed by a multidisciplinary team of physicians and scientists who will pre-review the submitted information and convene for a 1-day meeting. Vouchers under this program will reportedly be given to companies aligned with U.S. national priorities. On October 16, 2025, the FDA announced nine voucher recipients under the CNPV Program.
Current report
Further, on September 9, 2025, the President issued a Memorandum directing the Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, to "ensure transparency and accuracy in direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising, including by increasing the amount of information regarding any risks associated with the use of any such prescription drug required to be provided in prescription drug advertisements." The same day, the FDA declared that it will no longer tolerate what it characterized as "deceptive practices" in prescription drug advertising and that the agency would "aggressively deploy" its available enforcement tools, with "heightened scrutiny" of fair balance and disclosures in social media promotions. The FDA issued a generic "notice letter" to a substantial number of companies directing such companies to "remove any noncompliant advertising and bring all promotional communications into compliance." When and if our products are approved, we will need to maintain a robust compliance program and processes designed to ensure that all such advertising activities are performed in a legal and compliant manner.
Current report
Since adoption of the IRA, the Trump Administration has taken a number of actions to reduce the costs of pharmaceutical products. For example, on April 15, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order which directs HHS to take steps to reduce the prices of pharmaceutical products. Further, on May 12, 2025, President Trump issued an additional Executive Order calling on pharmaceutical manufacturers to voluntarily reduce the prices of medicines in the United States. The Order provides that if such actions do not lower the costs of pharmaceuticals, the Secretary of HHS would pursue other actions, including proposing a rulemaking that imposes most favored nation, or MFN, pricing in the United States. Thereafter, on July 31, 2025, the President issued letters to 17 pharmaceutical companies reiterating the requirements of the May 12, 2025 Executive Order and demanding that such companies extend MFN pricing to Medicaid patients. Virtually all of these pharmaceutical companies have entered into agreements with the administration to provide for lower prices on certain pharmaceuticals.
Current report
On December 23, 2025, CMS, through its Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation, proposed two five-year pilot programs to implement a “reference pricing” regime for drugs paid for under Medicare for 25% of covered beneficiaries. The programs are referred to as the Global Benchmark for Efficient Drug Pricing Model for Medicare Part B drugs and the Guarding U.S. Medicare Against Rising Drug Costs for Medicare Part D drugs. Under the proposed pilot programs, a manufacturer would owe rebates to Medicare if prices for their drugs exceeded the prices paid by other economically comparable reference countries, defined in the proposed regulations as the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries with a gross domestic product, or GDP, of $400 billion and a per capita GDP that is at least 60% of the U.S. per capita GDP (an initial list of 19 reference countries is included in the proposed rule). The pilot programs are proposed to go into effect beginning October 1, 2026.
Current report
There are also increased restrictions at the federal level relating to transferring sensitive data outside of the United States to certain foreign countries. For example, in 2024, Congress passed H.B. 815, which included the Protecting Americans’ Data from Foreign Adversaries Act of 2024. This law creates certain restrictions for entities that disclose sensitive data (including potential health data) to countries such as China. Failure to comply with these rules can lead to a potential FTC enforcement action. Additionally, the DOJ recently finalized a rule implementing Executive Order 14117, which implements the DOJ’s Data Security Program, or DSP, and creates similar restrictions related to the transfer of sensitive U.S. data to countries such as China. Violations of the DSP can lead to both civil and criminal penalties, and it is unclear how aggressively the DOJ will enforce the new program. These data transfer restrictions (and others that may pass in the future) may create operational challenges and legal risks for our business.
Current report
Changes in and uncertainty surrounding United States trade policy could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Current report
The Trump administration, in 2025, initiated a series of tariff-related actions against U.S. trading partners. On April 2, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order announcing a “baseline” reciprocal tariff of 10% on all U.S. trading partners effective April 5, 2025, and higher individualized reciprocal tariffs on 57 countries (with certain product exemptions for pharmaceutical-related products, among others). Previously, the administration had imposed a 25% tariff on Canada and Mexico for goods not covered by the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA, and tariffs equaling 20% on China. In response, several countries threatened retaliatory measures, including Canada and China, which then imposed retaliatory tariffs. Prior to when the country-specific reciprocal tariffs were scheduled to take effect, the administration delayed the effective date of such tariffs for all countries except China to August 1, 2025. Several countries have reached deals with the United States that include reduced tariff rates to varying levels and other measures, including the United Kingdom, Vietnam, Indonesia, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, Thailand, Malaysia, Cambodia, China, El Salvador, Argentina, Ecuador, Guatemala, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Taiwan and countries in the European Union.
Current report
The United States and China reached a framework agreement that resulted in the suspension of the higher reciprocal tariffs on China, and the two countries later conducted high-level talks in November 2025 that resulted in a framework deal holding tariffs at 20%. Sustained uncertainty about, or the further escalation of, trade and political tensions between the United States and China could result in a disadvantageous research and manufacturing environment in China, particularly for U.S. based companies, including retaliatory restrictions that hinder or potentially inhibit our ability to rely on contract development and manufacturing organizations and other service providers that operate in China.
Current report
Regarding Canada and Mexico, as of October 31, 2025, the rate remained 25% for goods that are not covered by the USMCA for Mexico and, effective August 1, 2025, was increased to 35% on imports from Canada that are not covered by the USMCA. Certain other countries, including Japan, South Korea and the United Kingdom, as well as the European Union, have reached agreements with the United States that cap pharmaceutical tariffs at 15%.
Current report
Separately, in April 2025, the U.S. Department of Commerce initiated an investigation under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 into the impact on U.S. national security of the imports of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients, including finished drug products, medical countermeasures, critical inputs such as active pharmaceutical ingredients, and key starting materials, and derivative products of those items. On September 25, 2025, via a post on Truth Social, President Trump announced that, beginning October 1, 2025, all branded or patented drugs imported in the United States would face a 100% tariff. At the same time, Trump indicated that these tariffs could be avoided by building pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities in the United States. Thereafter, Trump delayed the October 1, 2025 effective date of the tariffs, announcing that the Administration had now "begun preparing" tariffs on manufacturers that do not build in the United States or enter into a MFN drug pricing agreement with the Trump administration.
Current report
As a result of changes in tariffs that have been announced and/or implemented, and the underlying uncertainty currently surrounding international trade, we could experience a negative impact on our costs of materials and production processes, and supply chain disruptions and delays as a result of any new tariff policies or trade restrictions. If we are unable to obtain necessary raw materials or product components in sufficient quantity and in a timely manner due to disruptions in the global supply chain caused by macroeconomic events and conditions, the development, testing and clinical trials of our product candidates may be delayed or infeasible, and regulatory approval or commercial launch of any resulting product may be delayed or not obtained, which could significantly harm our business. We cannot yet predict the effect of the recently imposed U.S. tariffs on imports, or the extent to which other countries will impose quotas, duties, tariffs, taxes or other similar restrictions upon imports or exports in the future, nor can we predict future trade policy or the terms of any renegotiated trade agreements and their impact on our business.
Current report
Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies from funding cuts, personnel losses, regulatory reforms, government shutdowns and other developments could hinder our ability to obtain guidance from the FDA regarding our clinical development programs and develop and secure approval of our product candidates in a timely manner, which would negatively impact our business.
Current report
The FDA and comparable regulatory agencies in foreign jurisdictions, such as the EMA and CHMP, play an important role in the development of our product candidates by providing guidance on our clinical development programs and reviewing our regulatory submissions, including INDs, requests for special designations and marketing applications. If these oversight and review activities are disrupted, then correspondingly our ability to develop and secure timely approval of our product candidates could be impacted in a negative manner.
Current report
For example, the recent loss and retirement of FDA leadership and personnel could lead to disruptions and delays in FDA guidance, review and approval of our product candidates. Pursuant to President Trump's executive order 14210, “Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Workforce Optimization Initiative,” the Secretary of HHS announced on March 27, 2025, a reorganization and Reduction in Force, or RIF, across HHS of approximately 20,000 employees (82,000 to 62,000), with the FDA’s workforce of approximately 20,000 to decrease by 3,500 full-time employees. Subsequently, the FDA indicated that roughly a quarter of those employees who received RIF notices had been reinstated. On July 14, 2025, following litigation reaching the U.S. Supreme Court, the administration began to carry out these layoffs across HHS, including the FDA. In November 2025, a Congressional Continuing Resolution ended the government shutdown, providing full-year funding for the FDA for the 2026 fiscal year through September 30, 2026 at approximately $7 billion with a slight increase in user fees for drug and device companies.
Current report
While the FDA’s review of marketing applications and other activities for new drugs and biologics is largely funded through the user fee program established under the Prescription Drug User Free Act, or PDUFA, it remains unclear how the administration’s RIF and budget cuts will impact this program and the ability of the FDA to provide guidance and review our product candidates in a timely manner. For example, while the FDA’s RIF did not reportedly specifically target FDA reviewers, many operations, administrative and policy staff that help support such reviews were affected and those losses could lead to delays in PDUFA reviews and related activities. There has been at least one report in which the FDA failed to meet a PDUFA goal date for approval of an NDA due to heavy workload and limited resources. In addition, while currently unclear, there is a risk that the RIF and budget cutbacks could threaten the integrity of the PDUFA program itself. That is because, for the FDA to obligate user fees collected under PDUFA in the first place, a certain amount of non-user fee appropriations must be spent on the process for the review of applications plus certain other costs during the same fiscal year.
Current report
There is also substantial uncertainty as to how regulatory reform measures being implemented by the Trump administration across the government will impact the FDA and other federal agencies with jurisdiction over our activities. For example, since taking office, President Trump has issued a number of executive orders that could have a significant impact on the manner in which the FDA conducts its operations and engages in regulatory and oversight activities. These include executive order 14192, “Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation,” January 31, 2025; executive order 14212, “Establishing the President’s Make America Healthy Again Commission,” February 13, 2025; and executive order 14219, Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency' Deregulatory Initiative,” February 21, 2025. If these or other orders or executive actions impose constraints on the FDA’s ability to engage in oversight and implementation activities in the normal course, our business may be negatively impacted.
Current report
Similarly, actions by the U.S. government have significantly disrupted the operations of U.S. government agencies such as the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the FDA, which have traditionally provided funding for basic research, research and development, and clinical testing. These U.S. government actions have included, among other things, suspending, terminating and withholding of disbursements of funds owed under ongoing contracts, grants, and other financial assistance agreements; declining to continue multi-year research projects for additional annual budget periods; canceling or delaying solicitations for new contract, grant and other financial assistance awards; canceling or delaying proposal evaluation processes and issuance of such new awards; substantially reducing federal agency staff responsible for managing contract and financial assistance programs; eliminating agency information and resources for facilitating research activity; delaying or terminating federal agency procedures for authorizing international transactions; initiating aggressive enforcement actions that may disrupt the operations of major research universities that are significant contributors to life sciences research in the United States, and threatening access to federal agency contracts and other funding awards based on companies’ otherwise lawful corporate policies and choice of counsel. These U.S. government actions could, directly or indirectly, significantly disrupt, delay, prevent, or increase the costs of our research and product commercialization programs, including our ability to develop new product candidates, conduct clinical trials, implement research collaborations with other companies or institutions, and obtain approvals to market and sell new products.
Current report
For example, the federal government shut down on October 1, 2025. With the shutdown, the FDA issued a public notice stating that agency operations would continue to the extent permitted by law, such as activities necessary to address imminent threats to the safety of human life and activities funded by carryover user fee funds. At the same time, the FDA declared that, during the shutdown period, it does not have legal authority to accept user fees assessed for fiscal year 2026 until an appropriation or continuing resolution for the FDA is enacted for such fiscal year. As a result, the FDA will not be able to accept any regulatory submissions for fiscal year 2026 that require a fee payment and that are submitted during the lapse period.
Current report
At the same time, disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies may result from public health events similar to the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, during the pandemic, a number of companies announced receipt of complete response letters due to the FDA’s inability to complete required inspections for their applications. In the event of a similar public health emergency in the future, the FDA may not be able to continue its current pace and review timelines could be extended. Regulatory authorities outside the United States facing similar circumstances may adopt similar restrictions or other policy measures in response to a similar public health emergency and may also experience delays in their regulatory activities.
Current report
Accordingly, if any of the foregoing developments or others impact the ability of the FDA to provide us with guidance regarding our clinical development programs or delay the FDA’s review and processing of our regulatory submissions, including INDs and BLAs, our business would be negatively impacted. Further, any future government shutdown could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue our operations.
Removed paragraphs (9)
Previous report
DAPs are specified in FDA guidance. On January 27, 2025, in response to an Executive Order issued by President Trump on January 21, 2025, on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion programs, the FDA removed this draft guidance from its website. This action raises questions about the applicability of statutory obligations to submit DAPs and the FDA’s current thinking on best practices for clinical development.
Previous report
Finally, with the change in presidential administrations in 2025, there is substantial uncertainty as to how the new administration will seek to modify or revise the requirements and policies of the FDA and other regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over our product candidates. This uncertainty could present new challenges or potential opportunities as we navigate the clinical development and approval process for our product candidates.
Previous report
In addition, the United Kingdom is no longer part of the European Single Market and EU Customs Union. As of January 1, 2021, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, or the MHRA, became responsible for supervising medicines and medical devices in Great Britain, comprising England, Scotland and Wales under domestic law whereas under the terms of the Northern Ireland Protocol, Northern Ireland is currently subject to EU rules. The United Kingdom and EU have however agreed to the Windsor Framework which fundamentally changes the existing system under the Northern Ireland Protocol, including with respect to the regulation of medicinal products in the United Kingdom. Beginning on January 1, 2025, the changes introduced by the Windsor Framework will see the MHRA be responsible for approving all medicinal products destined for the United Kingdom market (i.e., Great Britain and Northern Ireland), and the EMA will no longer have any role in approving medicinal products destined for Northern Ireland.
Previous report
In January 2023, FDA announced that, in matters beyond the scope of the court’s order, FDA will continue to apply its existing regulations tying orphan-drug exclusivity to the uses or indications for which the orphan drug was approved. We do not know if, when, or how the FDA or Congress may change the orphan drug regulations and policies in the future, and it is uncertain how any changes might affect our business. Depending on what changes the FDA may make to its orphan drug regulations and policies, our business could be adversely impacted.
Previous report
In July 2021, President Biden signed Executive Order 14063, which focuses on, among other things, the price of pharmaceuticals. The Order directed the HHS to create a plan within 45 days to combat “excessive pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals and enhance domestic pharmaceutical supply chains, to reduce the prices paid by the federal government for such pharmaceuticals, and to address the recurrent problem of price gouging.” In September 2021, HHS released its plan to reduce pharmaceutical prices. The key features of that plan are to: (1) make pharmaceutical prices more affordable and equitable for all consumers and throughout the health care system by supporting pharmaceutical price negotiations with manufacturers; (2) improve and promote competition throughout the prescription pharmaceutical industry by supporting market changes that strengthen supply chains, promote biosimilars and generic drugs, and increase transparency; and (3) foster scientific innovation to promote better healthcare and improve health by supporting public and private research and making sure that market incentives promote discovery of valuable and accessible new treatments.
Previous report
Additionally, with the change in presidential administration in 2025, there is uncertainty with respect to United States relations with the rest of the world, including with respect to taxes, trade policies and tariffs. For example, the Trump administration announced plans to implement or increase tariffs, particularly on products manufactured in China, Canada and Mexico, though it remains unclear what specific actions will be taken. The imposition of such tariffs may strain international trade relations and increase the risk that foreign governments implement retaliatory tariffs on goods imported from the United States.
Previous report
New income, sales, use or other tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be enacted at any time, which could adversely affect our business or financial condition. Further, existing tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be interpreted, changed, modified or applied adversely to us. For example, on December 22, 2017, the U.S. government enacted the Tax Act, as amended by the CARES Act, which reduces the corporate tax rate from a top marginal rate of 35% to a flat rate of 21% and, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2020, imposes a limit on the deduction for NOLs arising in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 to 80% of current year taxable income (though any such NOLs may be carried forward indefinitely). In addition, beginning in 2022, the Tax Act eliminates the option to deduct research and development expenditures currently and generally requires corporations to capitalize and amortize them over five years or 15 years (for expenditures attributable to foreign research).
Previous report
Inadequate funding for the FDA , the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, and other government agencies, including from government shut downs, or other disruptions to these agencies’ operations, 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 report
The ability of the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities to review and approve or certify new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees and statutory, regulatory and policy changes. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. Disruptions at the FDA, other agencies and authorities may also slow the time necessary for new product candidates to be reviewed and/or approved, which would adversely affect our business. In addition, government funding of the SEC and other government agencies on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities, is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.
Reworded paragraphs (72)
Previous wording
Since inception, we have incurred significant operating losses. Our net losses were $317.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2024 and $235.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. As of December 31, 2024, we had an accumulated deficit of $949.9 million. To date, we have financed our operations with the proceeds raised from the sale of equity securities. We have devoted substantially all of our financial resources and efforts to research and development. We are still in the early stages of development of our programs and product candidates. Our product candidates are in varying stages of preclinical and clinical development and we have not completed clinical development of any product candidate. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating losses for the foreseeable future. Our operating expenses and net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if and as we:
Current wording
Since inception, we have incurred significant operating losses. Our net losses were $446.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2025 and $317.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2024. As of December 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $1.4 billion. To date, we have financed our operations with the proceeds raised from the sale of equity securities and borrowing under the Loan Agreement with Hercules. We have devoted substantially all of our financial resources and efforts to research and development. Our product candidates are in varying stages of preclinical and clinical development and we have not completed clinical development of any product candidate. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating losses for the foreseeable future. Our operating expenses and net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if and as we:
Previous wording
advance our product candidates for DM1, DMD, FSHD and Pompe and any additional product candidates we may develop;
Current wording
advance our product candidates for DMD, DM1, FSHD and Pompe and any additional product candidates we may develop;
Previous wording
Our product candidates are in varying stages of preclinical and clinical development. We have not completed clinical development of any product candidate, and we expect that it will be at least a couple of years, if ever, before we have a product candidate ready for commercialization. To become and remain profitable, we must succeed in developing, obtaining the necessary regulatory approvals for, and eventually commercializing a product or products that generate significant revenue. The ability to achieve this success will require us to be effective in a range of challenging activities, including:
Current wording
Our product candidates are in varying stages of preclinical and clinical development. We have not completed clinical development of any product candidate, and we do not expect to have a product candidate ready for commercialization at least until 2027, if ever. To become and remain profitable, we must succeed in developing, obtaining the necessary regulatory approvals for, and eventually commercializing a product or products that generate significant revenue. The ability to achieve this success will require us to be effective in a range of challenging activities, including:
Previous wording
We expect our expenses to increase substantially in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we advance the clinical development of DYNE-101 and DYNE-251, and the preclinical and clinical development of DYNE-302, our FSHD product candidate, and DYNE-401, our Pompe disease product candidate and any additional product candidates we may develop, and arrange for the manufacturing of, and potentially seek marketing approval for any product candidates we may develop. In addition, if we obtain marketing approval for any product candidates we may develop, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product manufacturing, marketing, sales and distribution. Accordingly, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations. If we are unable to raise capital when needed, on attractive terms or at all, we may be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development programs or future commercialization efforts.
Current wording
We expect our expenses to increase substantially in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we advance the clinical development of z-rostudirsen and z-basivarsen, and the preclinical and clinical development of DYNE-302, our FSHD product candidate, DYNE-401, our Pompe disease product candidate, and DYNE-253, DYNE-245, DYNE-244 and DYNE-255, our product candidates for DMD amenable to skipping exons 53, 45, 44 and 55, respectively, and any additional product candidates we may develop, and arrange for the manufacturing of, and potentially seek marketing approval for any product candidates we may develop. In addition, if we obtain marketing approval for any product candidates we may develop, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product manufacturing, marketing, sales and distribution. Accordingly, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations. If we are unable to raise capital when needed, on attractive terms or at all, we may be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development programs or future commercialization efforts.
Previous wording
As of December 31, 2024, we had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of $642.3 million. In addition, in the first quarter of 2025, we issued and sold an aggregate of 10,660,159 shares of our common stock under our at-the-market offering program for aggregate net proceeds of $140.6 million, after deducting commissions and offering expenses payable by us. We believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities, including the net proceeds from sales of common stock under our at-the-market offering program during the first quarter of 2025, will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements at least into the second half of 2026. However, we have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and our operating plan may change as a result of many factors currently unknown to us. As a result, we could deplete our capital resources sooner than we currently expect and could be forced to seek additional funding sooner than planned.
Current wording
We believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will enable us to fund our operating expenses, debt service obligations and capital expenditure requirements into the first quarter of 2028. However, we have based these estimates on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and our operating plan may change as a result of many factors currently unknown to us. As a result, we could deplete our capital resources sooner than we currently expect and could be forced to seek additional funding sooner than planned.
Previous wording
Any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our operations. We cannot be certain that additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, when needed or at all. We have no committed source of additional capital and, if we are unable to raise additional capital in sufficient amounts, when needed or on terms acceptable to us, we may be required to significantly curtail, delay or discontinue one or more of our research or development programs or the commercialization of any product candidates we may develop, or be unable to expand our operations or otherwise capitalize on our business opportunities, as desired, which could materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. We could be required to seek collaborators for product candidates at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable or on terms that are less favorable than might otherwise be available or relinquish or license on unfavorable terms our rights to product candidates in markets where we otherwise would seek to pursue development or commercialization ourselves. Any of the above events could significantly harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations and cause the price of our common stock to decline.
Current wording
Any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our operations. We cannot be certain that additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, when needed or at all. Other than the Loan Agreement with Hercules, we have no committed source of additional capital and, if we are unable to raise additional capital in sufficient amounts, when needed or on terms acceptable to us, we may be required to significantly curtail, delay or discontinue one or more of our research or development programs or the commercialization of any product candidates we may develop, or be unable to expand our operations or otherwise capitalize on our business opportunities, as desired, which could materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. We could be required to seek collaborators for product candidates at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable or on terms that are less favorable than might otherwise be available or relinquish or license on unfavorable terms our rights to product candidates in markets where we otherwise would seek to pursue development or commercialization ourselves. Any of the above events could significantly harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations and cause the price of our common stock to decline.
Previous wording
Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenues, we expect to finance our cash needs through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations, strategic alliances and/or licensing arrangements. We do not have any committed external source of funds. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, our stockholders’ ownership interests will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of common stockholders. Any debt financing or preferred equity financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, selling or licensing our assets, making capital expenditures, declaring dividends or encumbering our assets to secure future indebtedness.
Current wording
Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenues, we expect to finance our cash needs through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations, strategic alliances and/or licensing arrangements, and terms loans under our Loan Agreement with Hercules. For example, in June 2025, we entered into the Loan Agreement with Hercules providing for term loans in an aggregate principal amount of up to $275.0 million under multiple tranches, available as follows: (i) an initial term loan tranche funded on the closing date of the Loan Agreement in aggregate principal amount of $100.0 million; (ii) subject to the achievement of specified clinical, regulatory and commercial milestones, three additional term loan tranches totaling up to $115.0 million; and (iii) subject to approval by the Lenders’ investment committee in their discretion, a final term loan tranche of up to $60.0 million. In December 2025, we entered into the First Amendment to the Loan Agreement, or the First Amendment, pursuant to which a second term loan tranche was funded in an aggregate principal amount of $50.0 million. Following entry into the First Amendment and the borrowing of the second term loan tranche, we have two additional term loan tranches we may borrow pursuant to the Loan Agreement, totaling up to $75.0 million, which are available subject to the achievement of specified clinical, regulatory and commercial milestones, and a final term loan tranche of up to $50.0 million, which is available subject to approval by the Hercules investment committee in its discretion. However, if we do not satisfy the specified clinical, regulatory and commercial milestones or the Lenders do not otherwise approve the discretionary tranche, we may not have access to the remaining amounts under the term loans. Other than the Loan Agreement with Hercules, we do not have any committed external source of funds. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, our stockholders’ ownership interests will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of common stockholders. Any debt financing or preferred equity financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, selling or licensing our assets, making capital expenditures, declaring dividends or encumbering our assets to secure future indebtedness.
Previous wording
Our limited operating history may make it difficult to evaluate our technology and industry and predict our future performance. Our limited history as an operating company makes any assessment of our future success or viability subject to significant uncertainty. We will encounter risks and difficulties frequently experienced by early stage companies in rapidly evolving fields. If we do not address these risks successfully, our business will suffer.
Current wording
Our limited operating history may make it difficult to evaluate our technology and industry and predict our future performance. Our limited history as an operating company makes any assessment of our future success or viability subject to significant uncertainty. We will encounter risks and difficulties frequently experienced by clinical-stage companies in rapidly evolving fields. If we do not address these risks successfully, our business will suffer.
Previous wording
We have a history of cumulative losses and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses in the foreseeable future; thus, we do not know whether or when we will generate taxable income necessary to utilize our net operating losses, or NOLs, or research and development tax credit carryforwards. As of December 31, 2024, we had federal NOL carryforwards of $315.7 million and state NOL carryforwards of $332.2 million.
Current wording
We have a history of cumulative losses and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses in the foreseeable future; thus, we do not know whether or when we will generate taxable income necessary to utilize our net operating losses, or NOLs, or research and development tax credit carryforwards. As of December 31, 2025, we had federal NOL carryforwards of $981.6 million and state NOL carryforwards of $1.0 billion.
Previous wording
generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in its equity ownership by certain stockholders over a three-year period, is subject to limitations on its ability to utilize its pre-change NOLs and pre-change research and development tax credit carryforwards to offset post-change taxable income. We completed a Section 382 study of transactions in our stock through January 25, 2021 and concluded that we have experienced ownership changes since inception that we believe under Sections 382 and 383 of the Code will result in limitation on our ability to use certain pre-change NOLs and credits. With additional stock issuances during 2024, the Company continues to analyze the impacts of Section 382. In the future, we may experience additional ownership changes as a result of equity offerings or other changes in the ownership of our stock, some of which are beyond our control. As a result, if, and to the extent that, we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our NOL carryforwards and research and development tax credit carryforwards to offset such taxable income may be subject to limitations.
Current wording
In general, under Sections 382 and 383 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, and corresponding provisions of state law, a corporation that undergoes an “ownership change,” generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in its equity ownership by certain stockholders over a three-year period, is subject to limitations on its ability to utilize its pre-change NOLs and pre-change research and development tax credit carryforwards to offset post-change taxable income. We completed a Section 382 study of transactions in our stock through December 10, 2025 and concluded that we have experienced ownership changes since inception that we believe under Sections 382 and 383 of the Code will result in limitations in our ability to use certain pre-change NOLs and credits. We will continue to analyze the impacts of Section 382 from future transactions in our stock. In the future, we may experience additional ownership changes as a result of equity offerings or other changes in the ownership of our stock, some of which are beyond our control. As a result, if, and to the extent that, we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our NOL carryforwards and research and development tax credit carryforwards to offset such taxable income may be subject to limitations.
Previous wording
There is also a risk that due to regulatory changes, such as suspensions on the use of NOLs, or other unforeseen reasons, our existing NOLs could expire or otherwise become unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. As described below in “Changes in tax laws or regulations or in their implementation or interpretation may adversely affect our business and financial condition,” legislation enacted in 2017, informally titled the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or the Tax Act, as amended by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or CARES Act, includes changes to U.S. federal tax rates and the rules governing NOL carryforwards that may significantly impact our ability to utilize our NOLs to offset taxable income in the future. In addition, state NOLs generated in one state cannot be used to offset income generated in another state. For these reasons, even if we attain profitability, we may be unable to use a material portion of our NOLs and other tax attributes.
Current wording
There is also a risk that due to regulatory changes, such as suspensions on the use of NOLs, or other unforeseen reasons, our existing NOLs could expire or otherwise become unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. In addition, state NOLs generated in one state cannot be used to offset income generated in another state. For these reasons, even if we attain profitability, we may be unable to use a material portion of our NOLs and other tax attributes.
Previous wording
Our product candidates are in varying stages of preclinical and clinical development and we have not completed clinical development of any product candidate. As a result it will be at least a couple of years before we commercialize a product candidate, if ever. If we are unable to identify and advance product candidates through preclinical studies and clinical trials, obtain marketing approval and ultimately commercialize them, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.
Current wording
Our product candidates are in varying stages of preclinical and clinical development and we have not completed clinical development of any product candidate. We do not expect to complete the commercialization of any product candidate at least until 2027, if ever. If we are unable to identify and advance product candidates through preclinical studies and clinical trials, obtain marketing approval and ultimately commercialize them, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.
Previous wording
We have focused our efforts to date on developing our platform, identifying our programs and conducting the clinical development of our product candidates. Our product candidates are in varying stages of preclinical and clinical development, and we have not completed clinical development of any product candidate. Our ability to generate product revenue, which we do not expect will occur for at least a couple of years, if ever, will depend heavily on the successful development and eventual commercialization of our product candidates, which may never occur. We currently generate no revenue from sales of any product, and we may never be able to develop or commercialize a marketable product.
Current wording
We have focused our efforts to date on developing our platform, identifying our programs and conducting the clinical development of our product candidates. Our product candidates are in varying stages of preclinical and clinical development, and we have not completed clinical development of any product candidate. Our ability to generate product revenue, which we do not expect will occur until at least 2027, if ever, will depend heavily on the successful development and eventual commercialization of our product candidates, which may never occur. We currently generate no revenue from sales of any product, and we may never be able to develop or commercialize a marketable product.
Previous wording
Commencing clinical trials in the United States is subject to acceptance by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, of an IND and finalizing the trial design based on discussions with the FDA and other regulatory authorities. In the event that the FDA requires us to complete additional preclinical studies or we are required to satisfy other FDA requests prior to commencing clinical trials, the start of any future clinical trials may be delayed. Even after we receive and incorporate guidance from the FDA, the FDA could disagree that we have satisfied their requirements to commence any clinical trial or change their position on the acceptability of our trial design or the clinical endpoints selected, which may require us to complete additional preclinical studies or clinical trials or impose stricter approval conditions than we currently expect.
Current wording
Commencing clinical trials in the United States is subject to acceptance by the FDA, of an IND and finalizing the trial design based on discussions with the FDA and other regulatory authorities. In the event that the FDA requires us to complete additional preclinical studies or we are required to satisfy other FDA requests prior to commencing clinical trials, the start of any future clinical trials may be delayed. Even after we receive and incorporate guidance from the FDA, the FDA could disagree that we have satisfied their requirements to commence any clinical trial or change their position on the acceptability of our trial design or the clinical endpoints selected, which may require us to complete additional preclinical studies or clinical trials or impose stricter approval conditions than we currently expect.
Previous wording
For example, the FDA placed on clinical hold our IND application to initiate a clinical trial of DYNE-251 in patients with DMD amenable to skipping exon 51. We received a clinical hold letter from the FDA in January 2022 requesting additional clinical and non-clinical information for DYNE-251, which we submitted before the FDA ultimately cleared the IND in July 2022.
Current wording
For example, the FDA placed on clinical hold our IND application to initiate a clinical trial of z-rostudirsen in patients with DMD amenable to skipping exon 51. We received a clinical hold letter from the FDA in January 2022 requesting additional clinical and non-clinical information for z-rostudirsen, which we submitted before the FDA ultimately cleared the IND in July 2022.
Previous wording
In addition, if we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies governing clinical trials, our development plans may be impacted. For example, in December 2022, with the passage of Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act, or FDORA, Congress required sponsors to develop and submit a Diversity Action Plan, or DAP, for each phase 3 clinical trial or any other “pivotal study” of a new drug or biological product. These plans are meant to encourage the enrollment of more diverse patient populations in late-stage clinical trials of FDA-regulated products. In June 2024, as mandated by FDORA, the FDA issued draft guidance outlining the general requirements for the DAPs. Unlike most guidance documents issued by the FDA, the DAP guidance, when finalized, will have the force of law as FDORA specifically dictates that the form and manner for submission of
Current wording
In addition, if we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies governing clinical trials, our development plans may be impacted. For example, in December 2022, with the passage of FDORA, Congress required sponsors to develop and submit a Diversity Action Plan, or DAP, for each phase 3 clinical trial or any other “pivotal study” of a new drug or biological product. These plans are meant to encourage the enrollment of more diverse patient populations in late-stage clinical trials of FDA-regulated products. In June 2024, as mandated by FDORA, the FDA issued draft guidance outlining the general requirements for the DAPs. Unlike most guidance documents issued by the FDA, the DAP guidance, when finalized, will have the force of law as FDORA specifically dictates that the form and manner for submission of DAPs are specified in FDA guidance.
Previous wording
The regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the EU has also evolved. The EU Clinical Trials Regulation, or CTR, which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. While the Clinical Trials Directive required a separate clinical trial application, or CTA, to be submitted in each member state, to both the competent national health authority and an independent ethics committee, the CTR introduces a centralized process and only requires the submission of a single application to all member states concerned. If we are not able to fulfill these new requirements, our ability to conduct clinical trials may be delayed or halted.
Current wording
The regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the European Union has also evolved. The EU Clinical Trials Regulation, or CTR, which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. While the Clinical Trials Directive required a separate clinical trial application, or CTA, to be submitted in each member state, to both the competent national health authority and an independent ethics committee, the CTR introduced a centralized process and only requires the submission of a single application to all member states concerned. If we are not able to fulfill these requirements, our ability to conduct clinical trials may be delayed or halted.
Previous wording
We have not completed clinical development of any product candidate. As a result, our belief in the capabilities of our platform, including our belief that we have demonstrated proof of concept of our FORCE platform, is based on early research, preclinical studies and data from clinical trials of our product candidates. However, the results of preclinical studies may not be predictive of the results of later preclinical studies or clinical trials, and the initial results of any clinical trials, such as initial results of ACHIEVE and DELIVER that we have reported, may not be predictive of the final results of those trials or the results of any later clinical trials, and may also not be predictive of results of clinical trials in other indications. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of their products. Further, certain of our hypotheses regarding the potential benefits of our product candidates compared to alternative therapies and treatments are based on cross-trial comparisons of results that were not derived from head-to-head clinical trials. Such clinical trial data may not be directly comparable due to differences in study protocols, conditions and patient populations. Accordingly, these cross-trial comparisons may not be reliable predictors of the relative efficacy or other benefits of our product candidates compared to other product candidates that may have been approved previously.
Current wording
We have not completed clinical development of any product candidate. As a result, our belief in the capabilities of our platform, including our belief that we have demonstrated proof of concept of our FORCE platform, is based on early research, preclinical studies and data from clinical trials of our product candidates. However, the results of preclinical studies may not be predictive of the results of later preclinical studies or clinical trials, and the initial results of any clinical trials, such as initial results of DELIVER and ACHIEVE that we have reported, may not be predictive of the final results of those trials or the results of any later clinical trials, and may also not be predictive of results of clinical trials in other indications. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of their products. Further, certain of our hypotheses regarding the potential benefits of our product candidates compared to alternative therapies and treatments are based on cross-trial comparisons of results that were not derived from head-to-head clinical trials. Such clinical trial data may not be directly comparable due to differences in study protocols, conditions and patient populations. Accordingly, these cross-trial comparisons may not be reliable predictors of the relative efficacy or other benefits of our product candidates compared to other product candidates that may have been approved previously.
Previous wording
Although other oligonucleotide therapeutics have received regulatory approval, our approach for our DM1, DMD and FSHD programs, which combine oligonucleotides with a Fab, is a novel approach to oligonucleotide therapy. As a result, there is uncertainty as to the safety profile of product candidates we may develop compared to more well-established classes of therapies, or oligonucleotide therapeutics on their own. Moreover, there have been only a limited number of clinical trials involving the use of conjugated oligonucleotide therapeutics.
Current wording
Although other oligonucleotide therapeutics have received regulatory approval, our approach for our DMD and DM1 programs, which combine oligonucleotides with a Fab, is a novel approach to oligonucleotide therapy. As a result, there is uncertainty as to the safety profile of product candidates we may develop compared to more well-established classes of therapies, or oligonucleotide therapeutics on their own. Moreover, there have been only a limited number of clinical trials involving the use of conjugated oligonucleotide therapeutics.
Previous wording
We do not expect to independently conduct all aspects of our product manufacturing, or our research and preclinical and clinical testing. We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties with respect to many of these items, including contract manufacturing organizations, or CMOs, for the manufacturing of any product candidates we test in preclinical or clinical development, as well as CROs for portions of our animal testing, preclinical research and for the conduct of our clinical trials. Any of these third parties may terminate their engagements with us at any time. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements, it could delay our product development activities.
Current wording
We do not expect to independently conduct all aspects of our product manufacturing, or our research and preclinical and clinical testing. We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties with respect to many of these items, including CMOs, for the manufacturing of any product candidates we test in preclinical or clinical development, as well as CROs for portions of our animal testing, preclinical research and for the conduct of our clinical trials. Any of these third parties may terminate their engagements with us at any time. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements, it could delay our product development activities.
Previous wording
We may from time to time depend on single-source suppliers for some of the components and materials used in any product candidate we may develop. For instance, we currently use a single supplier for each of our Fab, linkers and payloads. We cannot ensure that these suppliers or service providers will remain in business, have sufficient capacity or supply to meet our needs or that they will not be purchased by one of our competitors or another company that is not interested in continuing to work with us. Our use of single-source suppliers of raw materials, components, key processes and finished goods could expose us to several risks, including disruptions in supply, price increases or late deliveries. There are, in general, relatively few alternative sources of supply for substitute components. These vendors may be unable or unwilling to meet our future demands for our clinical trials or commercial sale. Establishing additional or replacement suppliers for these components, materials and processes could take a substantial amount of time and it may be difficult to establish replacement suppliers who meet regulatory requirements. Any disruption in supply from any single-source supplier or service provider could lead to supply delays or interruptions which would damage our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Current wording
We may from time to time depend on single-source suppliers for some of the components and materials used in any product candidate we may develop. For instance, we currently use a single or limited number of suppliers for each of our Fab, linkers and payloads. We cannot ensure that these suppliers or service providers will remain in business, have sufficient capacity or supply to meet our needs or that they will not be purchased by one of our competitors or another company that is not interested in continuing to work with us. Our use of single-source suppliers of raw materials, components, key processes and finished goods could expose us to several risks, including disruptions in supply, price increases or late deliveries. There are, in general, relatively few alternative sources of supply for substitute components. These vendors may be unable or unwilling to meet our future demands for our clinical trials or commercial sale. Establishing additional or replacement suppliers for these components, materials and processes could take a substantial amount of time and it may be difficult to establish replacement suppliers who meet regulatory requirements. Any disruption in supply from any single-source supplier or service provider could lead to supply delays or interruptions which would damage our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Previous wording
Currently, patients with DMD are treated with corticosteroids to manage the inflammatory component of the disease. EMFLAZA (deflazacort) is an FDA-approved corticosteroid marketed by PTC Therapeutics, Inc., or PTC. A novel steroid, AGAMREE (vamorolone) was also recently approved by the FDA for treatment of DMD in patients 2 years of age and older and is marketed by Catalyst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Givinostat, an HDAC inhibitor, received FDA approval for treatment of DMD in patients 6 years of age and older and is marketed in the U.S. by ITF Therapeutics, LLC. In addition, there are four FDA-approved exon skipping drugs: EXONDYS 51 (eteplirsen), VYONDYS 53 (golodirsen) and AMONDYS 45 (casimersen), which are naked PMOs approved for the treatment of DMD patients amenable to exon 51, exon 53 and exon 45 skipping, respectively, and are marketed by Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc., or Sarepta, and VILTEPSO (vitolarsen), a naked PMO approved for the treatment of DMD patients amenable to exon 53 skipping, which is marketed by Nippon Shinyaku Co. Ltd. Additionally, there is one FDA-approved gene therapy for patients with a confirmed mutation in the dystrophin gene, ELEVIDYS (delandistrogene moxeparvovec-rokl), which is marketed by Sarepta. Companies focused on developing treatments for DMD that target dystrophin mechanisms, as does our DMD program, include Wave Life Sciences Ltd. with WVE-N531, a stereopure oligonucleotide being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial for patients amenable to exon 53 skipping; Entrada Therapeutics, Inc. with ENTR-601-44, an endosomal escape vehicle technology for the treatment of DMD patients amenable to exon 44 skipping currently being evaluated in a Phase 1 clinical trial; Pepgen, Inc., with EDO51, a peptide-linked PMO for patients amenable to exon 51 skipping which is being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial; BioMarin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. with BMN 351, an oligonucleotide therapy that targets dystrophin production which is being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial and Avidity with AOC 1044, an antibody oligonucleotide conjugate that targets dystrophin production for patients amenable to exon 44 skipping being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial. In addition, several companies are developing gene therapies to treat DMD, including Milo Biotechnology (AAV1-FS344), Sarepta (SRP-9001 and Galgt2 gene therapy program), Solid Biosciences Inc. (SGT-003), REGENXBIO Inc. (RGX-202), Genethon (GNT-0004), and Insmed (INS1201). Gene editing treatments that are in preclinical development are also being pursued by Vertex and Sarepta. We are also aware of several companies targeting non-dystrophin mechanisms for the treatment of DMD.
Current wording
Inc.. A novel steroid, AGAMREE (vamorolone) has also been approved by the FDA for treatment of DMD in patients 2 years of age and older and is marketed by Catalyst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Givinostat, an HDAC inhibitor, received FDA approval for treatment of DMD in patients 6 years of age and older and is marketed in the United States by ITF Therapeutics, LLC. In addition, there are four FDA-approved exon skipping drugs: EXONDYS 51 (eteplirsen), VYONDYS 53 (golodirsen) and AMONDYS 45 (casimersen), which are naked PMOs approved for the treatment of DMD patients amenable to exon 51, exon 53 and exon 45 skipping, respectively, and are marketed by Sarepta, and VILTEPSO (vitolarsen), a naked PMO approved for the treatment of DMD patients amenable to exon 53 skipping, which is marketed by Nippon Shinyaku Co. Ltd. Additionally, there is one FDA-approved gene therapy for patients with a confirmed mutation in the dystrophin gene, ELEVIDYS (delandistrogene moxeparvovec-rokl), which is marketed by Sarepta. Companies focused on developing treatments for DMD that target dystrophin mechanisms, as does our DMD program, include Wave Life Sciences Ltd. with WVE-N531, a stereopure oligonucleotide being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial for patients amenable to exon 53 skipping; Entrada Therapeutics, Inc. with ENTR-601-44, an endosomal escape vehicle technology for the treatment of DMD patients amenable to exon 44 and exon 45 skipping, respectively, currently being evaluated in Phase 1/2 clinical trials; BioMarin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. with BMN-351, an ASO for patients amenable to exon 51 skipping which is being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial; SQY Therapeutics with SQY-51, a PMO for patients amenable to exon 51 skipping, which is also being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial; NS Pharma, Inc. with NS-050/NCNP-03 and NS-089/NCNP-02, which are PMOs in Phase 1/2 and Phase 2 clinical trials for exon-50 and exon 44 skipping amenable DMD respectively; and Avidity with delpacibart zotadirsen (formerly known as AOC-1044), an antibody oligonucleotide conjugate for patients amenable to exon 44 skipping being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial, which recently reported positive topline data and intent to file for accelerated approval with the FDA in 2026. In addition, gene therapies to treat DMD are in clinical development, including Solid Biosciences Inc. (SGT-003), REGENXBIO Inc. (RGX-202), Genethon (GNT-0004), and Insmed Inc. (INS1201). Gene editing treatments that are in preclinical development are also being pursued by Vertex and Sarepta. We are also aware of several companies targeting non-dystrophin mechanisms for the treatment of DMD.
Previous wording
There are currently no approved therapies to treat the underlying cause of DM1. Product candidates currently in clinical development to treat DM1 include: tideglusib, a GSK3-ß inhibitor in late-stage clinical development by AMO Pharma Ltd. for children and adults with DM1; pitolisant, a selective histamine 3 receptor antagonist / inverse agonist being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial for non-muscular symptoms of DM1 by Harmony Biosciences Holdings, Inc.; Delpacibart etedesiran (formerly AOC-1001), an antibody linked siRNA being evaluated in a Phase 3 clinical trial by Avidity Biosciences, Inc., or Avidity; PGN-EDODM1, a peptide-linked PMO currently being evaluated in a Phase 1 clinical trial by Pepgen, Inc.; ARO-DM1, a peptide-linked siRNA being evaluated in a Phase 1/2a clinical trial in Australia and New Zealand by Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; ATX-01, a lipophilic peptide conjugated anti-miR designed to target microRNA 23b currently being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial by ARTHEx Biotech S.L.; and VX-670, an endosomal escape vehicle technology with a CUG steric blocker oligonucleotide by Entrada Therapeutics, Inc. in collaboration with Vertex being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial in Canada, the United Kingdom, the European Union and Australia.
Current wording
There are currently no approved therapies to treat the underlying cause of DM1. Product candidates currently in clinical development to treat DM1 include: tideglusib, a GSK3-ß inhibitor in late-stage clinical development by AMO Pharma Ltd. for children and adults with DM1; pitolisant, a selective histamine 3 receptor antagonist / inverse agonist being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial for non-muscular symptoms of DM1 by Harmony Biosciences Holdings, Inc.; delpacibart etedesiran (formerly AOC-1001), an antibody-linked siRNA being evaluated in a Phase 3 clinical trial by Avidity; PGN-EDODM1, a peptide-linked PMO, currently being evaluated in a Phase 1 clinical trial by Pepgen, Inc.; ARO-DM1, a peptide-linked siRNA being evaluated in a Phase 1/2a clinical trial in Australia and New Zealand by Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; ATX-01, a lipophilic peptide conjugated anti-miR designed to target microRNA 23b currently being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial by ARTHEx Biotech S.L.; VX-670, an endosomal escape vehicle technology with a CUG steric blocker oligonucleotide by Entrada Therapeutics, Inc. in collaboration with Vertex being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial in Canada, the United Kingdom, the European Union and Australia; SAR446268, an AAV-medicated gene therapy currently being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial by Sanofi in the United States and Argentina; and JUV-161, an AKT-signaling activator currently in a Phase 1 single-ascending dose clinical trial in healthy volunteers by Juvena in Australia.
Previous wording
There are currently no therapies approved to treat FSHD. Products currently in development for FSHD include: ARO-DUX4, an siRNA therapy being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial and licensed by Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc. to Sarepta; delpacibart braxlosiran(formerly AOC-1020), an antibody oligonucleotide conjugate being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial by Avidity and RO7204239, an anti-latent myostatin antibody by Roche Pharmaceuticals that is in a Phase 2 clinical trial. Additionally, satralizumab, an anti-IL-6 antibody, is being evaluated in a Phase 1 clinical trial by the University Hospital of Nice and clenbuterol, a beta (2) agonist, is being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial by Springbok Analytics, Inc.
Current wording
There are currently no therapies approved to treat FSHD. Products currently in development for FSHD include: ARO-DUX4, an siRNA therapy being evaluated in a Phase 3 clinical trial and licensed by Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc. to Sarepta; delpacibart braxlosiran (formerly AOC-1020), an antibody oligonucleotide conjugate being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial by Avidity and RO7204239, an anti-latent myostatin antibody by Roche Pharmaceuticals that is in a Phase 2 clinical trial. Satralizumab, an anti-IL-6 antibody, is being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial by the University Hospital of Nice. EpiCrispr Bio is developing an AAV-delivered CRISPR epigenome modification therapy targeting DUX4 that is currently in Phase 1/2 clinical trials. Scholar Rock Holding Corporation cleared its IND application for apitegromab in FSHD with Phase 2 study initiation and patient dosing expected mid-2026. Several other companies have therapies targeting DUX4 in preclinical development (e.g., Facio Biotherapies Pty Ltd, Kate Therapeutics Inc. (acquired by Novartis), Souffle Therapeutics, and Ionis).
Previous wording
There are three currently approved medicines for Pompe disease, all of which are enzyme replacement therapies: Myozyme/Lumizyme (alglucosidase alfa) and Nexviazyme/Nexviadyme (avalglucosidase alfa) by Sanofi, and Pombiliti + Opfolda (cipaglucosidase alfa-atga in combination with miglustat) by Amicus Therapeutics, Inc. Beyond these marketed products, the Pompe clinical pipeline consists of early-stage product candidates that aim to address Pompe disease via alternative strategies. ACTUS-101, a gene therapy delivered to the liver for continuous, endogenous production of GAA currently being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial by AskBio, Inc. and AT-845, a muscle-targeted gene therapy currently being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial Astellas Pharma US, Inc. ABX-1100 by ARO Biotherapeutics Co. and MZE-001 by Maze Therapeutics, Inc. are substrate reduction therapies in Phase 1 clinical trials.
Current wording
There are three currently approved medicines for Pompe disease, all of which are enzyme replacement therapies: Myozyme/Lumizyme (alglucosidase alfa) and Nexviazyme/Nexviadyme (avalglucosidase alfa) by Sanofi, and Pombiliti + Opfolda (cipaglucosidase alfa-atga in combination with miglustat) by Amicus Therapeutics, Inc. Beyond these marketed products, the Pompe clinical pipeline consists of several clinical-stage product candidates that aim to address Pompe disease via alternative strategies. ACTUS-101, a gene therapy delivered to the liver for continuous, endogenous production of GAA currently being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial by AskBio. AskBio, which is wholly owned by Bayer AG, also has its AB-1009 gene therapy program that is in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial in the United States for LOPD. AT-845 is a muscle-targeted gene therapy currently being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial by Astellas Pharma US, Inc. for LOPD. In addition, ABX-1100 by ARO Biotherapeutics Co. and MZE-001 by Maze Therapeutics, Inc. are substrate reduction therapies in Phase 1 clinical trials. Denali Therapeutics, Inc. also announced plans to initiate a Phase 1 trial for its enzyme replacement therapy in January 2026.
Previous wording
We also expect to compete more generally with other companies developing alternative scientific and technological approaches to the treatment of muscle diseases, including other companies working to develop conjugates with oligonucleotides for extra-hepatic delivery, including Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Aro Biotherapeutics, Inc., Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Avidity, Denali Therapeutics, Inc., Novo Nordisk A/S, DTx Pharma, Inc., Gennao Bio, Inc., Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Sarepta, as well as gene therapy and gene editing approaches.
Current wording
We also expect to compete more generally with other companies developing alternative scientific and technological approaches to the treatment of muscle diseases, including other companies working to develop conjugates with oligonucleotides for extra-hepatic delivery, including Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Aro Biotherapeutics, Inc., Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Avidity, Novo Nordisk A/S, DTx Pharma, Inc., Gennao Bio, Inc., Ionis and Sarepta, as well as gene therapy and gene editing approaches.
Previous wording
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Amendment, or the ACA, includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. In December 2022, Congress clarified through The Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act that the FDA may approve multiple first interchangeable biosimilar biological products so long as the products are all approved on the first day on which such a product is approved as interchangeable with the reference product.
Current wording
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Amendment, or the ACA, includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. In December 2022, Congress clarified through FDORA that the FDA may approve multiple first interchangeable biosimilar biological products so long as the products are all approved on the first day on which such a product is approved as interchangeable with the reference product.
Previous wording
There is a risk that any product candidates we may develop that are approved as a biological product under a BLA would not qualify for the 12-year period of exclusivity or that this exclusivity could be shortened due to U.S. congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider any product candidates we may develop to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for generic competition sooner than anticipated. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, will be substituted for any one of our reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for nonbiological products is not yet clear, and will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing.
Current wording
Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, will be substituted for any one of our reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for nonbiological products is not yet clear, and will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing.
Previous wording
Our success depends in large part on our and our licensors’ ability to obtain and maintain patent and other intellectual property protection in the United States and other jurisdictions. We currently own and license patents and patent applications relating to our FORCE platform technology, including our Fabs, payloads and Fab-payload conjugates, as well as aspects of our manufacturing and methods of treatment. We and our licensors have sought, and will seek, to protect our proprietary position by filing additional patent applications in the United States and abroad related to certain technologies and our platform that are important to our business. However, while much of our patent portfolio is at an early stage, we own thirty-six issued U.S. patents and three granted foreign patents, and exclusively license three issued U.S. patents and one issued European patent. Moreover, there can be no assurance as to whether or when our patent applications will issue as granted patents. Our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, marketing, offering to sell, importing and commercializing any product candidates we may develop and our technology is dependent upon the extent to which we have rights under valid and enforceable patents and other intellectual property that cover our platform and technology. If we are unable to secure, maintain, defend and enforce patents and other intellectual property with respect to any product candidates we may develop and technology, it would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Current wording
Our success depends in large part on our and our licensors’ ability to obtain and maintain patent and other intellectual property protection in the United States and other jurisdictions. We currently own and license patents and patent applications relating to our FORCE platform technology, including our Fabs, payloads and Fab-payload conjugates, as well as aspects of our manufacturing and methods of treatment. We and our licensors have sought, and will seek, to protect our proprietary position by filing additional patent applications in the United States and abroad related to certain technologies and our platform that are important to our business. However, while much of our patent portfolio is at an early stage, we own 54 issued U.S. patents and fourteen granted foreign patents, and exclusively license three issued U.S. patents and one issued European patent. Moreover, there can be no assurance as to whether or when our patent applications will issue as granted patents. Our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, marketing, offering to sell, importing and commercializing any product candidates we may develop and our technology is dependent upon the extent to which we have rights under valid and enforceable patents and other intellectual property that cover our platform and technology. If we are unable to secure, maintain, defend and enforce patents and other intellectual property with respect to any product candidates we may develop and technology, it would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Previous wording
Our pending Patent Cooperation Treaty, or PCT, patent applications are not eligible to become issued patents until, among other things, we file a national stage patent application within 30 to 32 months, depending on the jurisdiction, from such application’s priority date in the jurisdictions in which we are seeking patent protection. Similarly, our pending provisional patent applications are not eligible to become issued patents until, among other things, we file a non-provisional patent application within 12 months of such provisional patent application’s filing date. If we do not timely file such national stage patent applications or non-provisional patent applications, we may lose our priority date with respect to such PCT or provisional patent applications, respectively, and any patent protection on the inventions disclosed in such PCT or provisional patent applications, respectively. While we and our licensors intend to timely file national stage and non-provisional patent applications relating to our PCT and provisional patent applications, respectively, we cannot predict whether any such patent applications will result in the issuance of patents. If we or our licensors do not successfully obtain issued patents, or, if the scope of any patent protection we or our licensors obtain is not sufficiently broad, we will be unable to prevent others from using any product candidates we may develop or our technology or from developing or commercializing technology and products similar or identical to ours or other competing products and technologies. Any failure to obtain or maintain patent protection with respect to our product candidates or our FORCE platform would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Current wording
Our pending Patent Cooperation Treaty, or PCT, patent applications are not eligible to become issued patents until, among other things, we file a national stage patent application within 30 to 32 months, depending on the jurisdiction, from such application’s priority date in the jurisdictions in which we are seeking patent protection. Similarly, our pending provisional patent applications are not eligible to become issued patents until, among other things, we file a non-provisional patent application within 12 months of such provisional patent application’s filing date. If we do not timely file such national stage patent applications or non-provisional patent applications, we may lose our priority date with respect to such PCT or provisional patent applications, respectively, and any patent protection on the inventions disclosed in such PCT or provisional patent applications, respectively. While we and our licensors intend to timely file selected national stage and non-provisional patent applications relating to our PCT and provisional patent applications, respectively, we cannot predict whether any such patent applications will result in the issuance of patents. If we or our licensors do not successfully obtain issued patents, or, if the scope of any patent protection we or our licensors obtain is not sufficiently broad, we will be unable to prevent others from using any product candidates we may develop or our technology or from developing or commercializing technology and products similar or identical to ours or other competing products and technologies. Any failure to obtain or maintain patent protection with respect to our product candidates or our FORCE platform would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Previous wording
The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and has, in recent years, been the subject of much litigation. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future owned and licensed patent applications may not result in patents being issued which protect our technology or product candidates, effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and product or otherwise provide any competitive advantage. In fact, patent applications may not issue as patents at all, and even if such patent applications do issue as patents, they may not issue in a form, or with a scope of claims, that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent others from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. In addition, the scope of claims of an issued patent can be reinterpreted after issuance, and changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other jurisdictions may diminish the value of our patent rights or narrow the scope of our patent protection. Furthermore, our competitors or other third parties may be able to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner.
Current wording
In fact, patent applications may not issue as patents at all, and even if such patent applications do issue as patents, they may not issue in a form, or with a scope of claims, that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent others from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. In addition, the scope of claims of an issued patent can be reinterpreted after issuance, and changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other jurisdictions may diminish the value of our patent rights or narrow the scope of our patent protection. Furthermore, our competitors or other third parties may be able to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner.
Previous wording
We are and expect to continue to be reliant upon third-party licensors for certain patent and other intellectual property rights that are important or necessary to the development of our technology and product candidates. For example, we are party to a license from the University of Mons, or UMONS, to certain patent rights and know-how of UMONS. Our license agreement with UMONS imposes, and we expect that any future license agreement will impose, specified diligence, milestone payment, royalty, commercialization, development and other obligations on us and require us to meet development timelines, or to exercise diligent or commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize licensed products, in order to maintain the licenses. For more information on the terms of the license agreement with UMONS, see Item 1. “Business—Intellectual Property—License Agreement with the University of Mons” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Current wording
We are and expect to continue to be reliant upon third-party licensors for certain patent and other intellectual property rights that are important or necessary to the development of our technology and product candidates. For example, we are party to a license from the UMONS to certain patent rights and know-how of UMONS. Our license agreement with UMONS imposes, and we expect that any future license agreement will impose, specified diligence, milestone payment, royalty, commercialization, development and other obligations on us and require us to meet development timelines, or to exercise diligent or commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize licensed products, in order to maintain the licenses. For more information on the terms of the license agreement with UMONS, see Item 1. “Business—Intellectual Property—License Agreement with the University of Mons” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Previous wording
Additionally, many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain jurisdictions, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement, misappropriation or other violation of our patent and other intellectual property rights or marketing of competing products in violation of our intellectual property rights generally. For example, an April 2019 report from the Office of the United States Trade Representative identified a number of countries, including China, Russia, Argentina, Chile and India, where challenges to the procurement and enforcement of patent rights have been reported. Proceedings to enforce our or our licensors’ patent and other intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patent and other intellectual property rights at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We or our licensors may not prevail in any lawsuits that we or our licensors initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our
Current wording
Additionally, many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain jurisdictions, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement, misappropriation or other violation of our patent and other intellectual property rights or marketing of competing products in violation of our intellectual property rights generally. For example, an April 2019 report from the Office of the United States Trade Representative identified a number of countries, including China, Russia, Argentina, Chile and India, where challenges to the procurement and enforcement of patent rights have been reported. Proceedings to enforce our or our licensors’ patent and other intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patent and other intellectual property rights at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We or our licensors may not prevail in any lawsuits that we or our licensors initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.
Previous wording
As another example, the complexity and uncertainty of European patent laws have also increased in recent years. In Europe, a new unitary patent system went into effect on June 1, 2023, which significantly impacts European patents, including those granted before the introduction of such system. Under the unitary patent system, European applications have the option, upon grant of a patent, of becoming a Unitary Patent which will be subject to the jurisdiction of the Unitary Patent Court (UPC). Existing European patents and published applications may be opted out of the jurisdiction of the UPC at any time before the end of a transitional period (at least seven years from the UPC Agreement which went into effect on June 1, 2023), unless an action has already been brought before the UPC in which case an opt-out request cannot be filed. As the UPC is a new court system, there is no precedent for the court, increasing the uncertainty of any litigation. Patents granted before the implementation of the UPC will have the option of opting out of the jurisdiction of the UPC and remaining as national patents in the UPC countries. Patents that remain under the jurisdiction of the UPC will be potentially vulnerable to a single UPC-based revocation challenge that, if successful, could invalidate the patent in all countries who are signatories to the UPC. We cannot predict with certainty the long-term effects of any potential changes.
Current wording
As another example, the complexity and uncertainty of European patent laws have also increased in recent years. In Europe, a new unitary patent system went into effect on June 1, 2023, which significantly impacts European patents, including those granted before the introduction of such system. Under the unitary patent system, European applications have the option, upon grant of a patent, of becoming a Unitary Patent which will be subject to the jurisdiction of the Unitary Patent Court (UPC). Existing European patents and published applications may be opted out of the jurisdiction of the UPC at any time before the end of a transitional period (at least seven years from the UPC Agreement which went into effect on June 1, 2023), unless an action has already been brought before the UPC in which case an opt-out request cannot be filed. As the UPC is a new court system, there is no precedent for the court, increasing the uncertainty of any litigation. Patents granted before the implementation of the UPC will have the option of opting out of the jurisdiction of the UPC and remaining as national patents in the UPC countries. Patents that remain under the jurisdiction of the UPC will be potentially vulnerable to a single
Previous wording
In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable or that we elect not to patent, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our product candidate discovery and development processes that involve proprietary know-how, information or technology that is not covered by patents. However, trade secrets can be difficult to protect and some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. We seek to protect our proprietary technology and processes, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, scientific advisors, contractors and other parties who have access to such technology and processes. However, we may not be able to prevent the unauthorized disclosure or use of our technical know-how or other trade secrets by the parties to these agreements. Monitoring unauthorized uses and disclosures is difficult, and we do not know whether the steps we have taken to protect our proprietary technologies will be effective. If any of the collaborators, scientific advisors, employees and consultants who are parties to these agreements breach or violate the terms of any of these agreements, we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach or violation. As a result, we could lose our trade secrets and third parties could use our trade secrets to compete with any product candidates we may develop and our technology. Additionally, we cannot guarantee that we have entered into such agreements with each party that may have or has had access to our trade secrets or proprietary technology and processes.
Current wording
In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable or that we elect not to patent, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our product candidate discovery and development processes that involve proprietary know-how, information or technology that is not covered by patents. However, trade secrets can be difficult to protect and some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. We seek to protect our proprietary technology and processes, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, scientific advisors, contractors and other parties who have access to such technology and processes. However, we may not be able to prevent the unauthorized disclosure or use of our technical know-how or other trade secrets by the parties to these agreements. Monitoring unauthorized uses and disclosures is difficult, and we do not know whether the steps we have taken to protect our proprietary technologies will be effective. If any of the collaborators, scientific advisors, employees and consultants who are parties to these agreements breach or violate the terms of any of these agreements, we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach or violation. In such circumstances, third parties could potentially use our trade secrets to compete with any product candidates we may develop and our technology. Additionally, we cannot guarantee that we have entered into such agreements with each party that may have or has had access to our trade secrets or proprietary technology and processes.
Previous wording
In addition, while it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the conception or development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who, in fact, conceives or develops intellectual property that we regard as our own. Moreover, even when we obtain agreements assigning intellectual property to us, the assignment of intellectual property rights may not be self-executing or the assignment agreements may be breached, and we may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims that they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property. Furthermore, individuals executing agreements with us may have pre-existing or competing obligations to a third party, such as an academic institution, and thus an agreement with us may be ineffective in perfecting ownership of inventions developed by that individual. Disputes about the ownership of intellectual property that we own may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Current wording
In addition, while it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the conception or development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who, in fact, conceives or develops intellectual property that we regard as our own. Moreover, even when we obtain agreements assigning intellectual property to us, the assignment of intellectual property rights may not be self-executing or the assignment agreements may be breached, and we may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims that they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property. Furthermore, individuals executing agreements with us may have pre-existing or competing obligations to a third party, such as an academic institution, and thus an agreement with us may be ineffective in perfecting ownership of inventions developed by that individual.
Previous wording
Further, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, a new drug application, or NDA, a BLA or supplement to an NDA or BLA for certain drugs and biological products must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug or biological product in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective, unless the sponsor receives a deferral or waiver from the FDA. A deferral may be granted for several reasons, including a finding that the product or therapeutic candidate is ready for approval for use in adults before pediatric trials are complete or that additional safety or effectiveness data needs to be collected before the pediatric trials begin. The applicable legislation in the EU also requires sponsors to either conduct clinical trials in a pediatric population in accordance with a Pediatric Investigation Plan approved by the Pediatric Committee of the EMA, or to obtain a waiver or deferral from the conduct of these studies by the Pediatric Committee of the EMA. For any of our product candidates for which we seek regulatory approval in the United States or the EU, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain a waiver or alternatively complete any required studies and other requirements in a timely manner, or at all, which could result in associated reputational harm and subject us to enforcement action.
Current wording
Further, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, a new drug application, or NDA, a BLA or supplement to an NDA or BLA for certain drugs and biological products must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug or biological product in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective, unless the sponsor receives a deferral or waiver from the FDA. A deferral may be granted for several reasons, including a finding that the product or therapeutic candidate is ready for approval for use in adults before pediatric trials are complete or that additional safety or effectiveness data needs to be collected before the pediatric trials begin. The applicable legislation in the European Union also requires sponsors to either conduct clinical trials in a pediatric population in accordance with a Pediatric Investigation Plan approved by the Pediatric Committee of the EMA, or to obtain a waiver or deferral from the conduct of these studies by the Pediatric Committee of the EMA. For any of our product candidates for which we seek regulatory approval in the United States or the European Union, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain a waiver or alternatively complete any required studies and other requirements in a timely manner, or at all, which could result in associated reputational harm and subject us to enforcement action.
Previous wording
On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit declined to order the removal of mifepristone from the market, finding that a challenge to the FDA’s initial approval in 2000 is barred by the statute of limitations. But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit did hold that plaintiffs were likely to prevail in their claim that changes allowing for expanded access of mifepristone that FDA authorized in 2016 and 2021 were arbitrary and capricious and in violation of federal law. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed and remanded that decision after unanimously finding that the plaintiffs did not have standing to bring this legal action against the FDA. On October 11, 2024, the Attorneys General of three states filed an amended complaint in the district court in Texas challenging the FDA's actions. Depending on the outcome of this litigation, if it continues, our ability to develop new drug product candidates and to maintain approval of any then-existing drug products could be at risk and could be delayed, undermined or subject to protracted litigation.
Current wording
In addition, our ability to develop and market new drug products may be impacted by litigation challenging the FDA’s approval of mifepristone. In April 2023, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas invalidated the approval by the FDA of mifepristone, a drug product which was originally approved in 2000 and whose distribution is governed by various measures adopted under a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy. On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that plaintiffs were likely to prevail in their claim that changes allowing for expanded access of mifepristone that FDA authorized in 2016 and 2021 were arbitrary and capricious and in violation of federal law. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed and remanded that decision after unanimously finding that the plaintiffs did not have standing to bring this legal action against the FDA. Thereafter, the Attorneys General of three states filed an amended complaint in the district court in Texas challenging the FDA's actions. On September 30, 2025, the district court declined to dismiss the case and, instead, transferred it to the federal district court in the Eastern District of Missouri. Depending on the outcome of this litigation, if it continues, our ability to develop new drug product candidates and to maintain approval of any then-existing drug products could be at risk and could be delayed, undermined or subject to protracted litigation.
Previous wording
In March 2023, the FDA issued draft guidance that outlines its current thinking and approach to accelerated approval. The FDA indicated that the accelerated approval pathway is commonly used for approval of oncology drugs due to the serious and life-threatening nature of cancer. Although single-arm trials have been commonly used to support accelerated approval, a randomized controlled trial is the preferred approach as it provides a more robust efficacy and safety assessment and allows for direct comparisons to an available therapy. To that end, the FDA outlined considerations for designing, conducting, and analyzing data for trials intended to support accelerated approvals of oncology therapeutics. Subsequently, in December 2024, the FDA issued additional draft guidance relating to accelerated approval. While this guidance is currently only in draft form and will ultimately not be legally binding even when finalized, we will need to observe the FDA’s guidance closely to ensure that our products qualify for accelerated approval.
Current wording
In March 2023, the FDA issued draft guidance that outlines its current thinking and approach to accelerated approval. The FDA indicated that the accelerated approval pathway is commonly used for approval of oncology drugs due to the serious and life-threatening nature of cancer. Although single-arm trials have been commonly used to support accelerated approval, a randomized controlled trial is the preferred approach as it provides a more robust efficacy and safety assessment and allows for direct comparisons to an available therapy. To that end, the FDA outlined considerations for designing, conducting, and analyzing data for trials intended to support accelerated approvals of oncology therapeutics. Subsequently, in December 2024 and January 2025, the FDA issued additional draft guidances relating to accelerated approval. While these guidances are currently only in draft form and will ultimately not be legally binding even when finalized, we will need to observe the FDA’s guidances closely to ensure that our products qualify for accelerated approval.
Previous wording
Additionally, we could face heightened risks with respect to seeking marketing approval in the United Kingdom as a result of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, commonly referred to as Brexit.
Current wording
Additionally, we could face heightened risks with respect to obtaining marketing authorization in the United Kingdom as a result of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, commonly referred to as Brexit. The United Kingdom is no longer part of the European Single Market and EU Customs Union. As of January 1, 2025, the MHRA is responsible for approving all medicinal products destined for the United Kingdom market (i.e., Great Britain and Northern Ireland). On April 28, 2025, the U.K. Parliament adopted amendments to improve and strengthen the U.K.’s clinical trials regulatory regime; they will take effect on April 28, 2026. These changes were needed since the current U.K. requirements are based upon the now-repealed EU Clinical Trials Directive (2001/20/EC), which has been replaced by the European Clinical Trials Regulation (Regulation EU No 536/2014). Since the United Kingdom left the European Union prior to the date on which the EU CTR took effect, the UK legal framework did not benefit from the same revisions as occurred at EU level.
Showing the first 40 of 72 pairs. Open the source sections for the rest.
Rearranged current paragraphs (10)
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
As of December 31, 2025, we had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of $1.1 billion.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
Currently, patients with DMD are treated with corticosteroids to manage the inflammatory component of the disease. EMFLAZA (deflazacort) is an FDA-approved corticosteroid marketed by PTC Therapeutics,
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
There is a risk that any product candidates we may develop that are approved as a biological product under a BLA would not qualify for the 12-year period of exclusivity or that this exclusivity could be shortened due to U.S. congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider any product candidates we may develop to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for generic competition sooner than anticipated. Further, the FDA may revise the standards governing approval of biosimilars so as to bring such products to the market more quickly. For example, in October 2025, the FDA issued draft guidance which proposes to eliminate the need for sponsors of biosimilar products to conduct comparative human clinical efficacy studies, allowing them to rely instead on analytical testing to demonstrate product differences from a reference product.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and has, in recent years, been the subject of much litigation. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future owned and licensed patent applications may not result in patents being issued which protect our technology or product candidates, effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and product or otherwise provide any competitive advantage.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
UPC-based revocation challenge that, if successful, could invalidate the patent in all countries who are signatories to the UPC. We cannot predict with certainty the long-term effects of any potential changes.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
Disputes about the ownership of intellectual property that we own may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
Notwithstanding the regulatory restrictions on off-label promotion, the FDA and other regulatory authorities allow companies to engage in truthful, non-misleading, and non-promotional scientific communications concerning their products in certain circumstances. For example, in January 2025, the FDA published final guidance outlining the agency’s non-binding policies governing the distribution of scientific information on unapproved uses to healthcare providers. This final guidance calls for such communications to be truthful, non-misleading, factual, and unbiased and include all information necessary for healthcare providers to interpret the strengths and weaknesses and validity and utility of the information about the unapproved use. If a company engages in such communications consistent with the guidance's recommendations, the FDA indicated that it will not treat such communications as evidence of unlawful promotion of a new intended use for the approved product.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
Nonetheless, since CMS may establish a maximum price for these products in price negotiations, we would be fully at risk of government action if our products are the subject of Medicare price negotiations. Moreover, given the risk that could be the case, these provisions of the IRA may also further heighten the risk that we would not be able to achieve the expected return on our drug products or full value of our patents protecting our products if prices are set after such products have been on the market for nine years.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
The first cycle of negotiations for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program commenced in the summer of 2023 with the negotiated prices for ten selected drug products becoming effective on January 1, 2026. The second cycle of negotiations with participating drug companies occurred during 2025, and the negotiated prices for this second set of fifteen drugs will become effective on January 1, 2027. On January 27, 2026, CMS published the list of fifteen drugs selected for the third cycle of negotiations. These negotiated prices will become effective on January 1, 2028.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
Following the July 2020 Court of Justice of the European Union judgment invalidating the so-called EU-U.S. Privacy Shield, the European Commission adopted an adequacy decision for the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework in July 2023. This adequacy decision permits U.S. companies who self-certify under the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework to rely on it as a valid data transfer mechanism for data transfers from the European Union to the United States. However, some privacy advocacy groups have already suggested that they will be challenging the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework, and there is currently one pending litigation against the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework before the CJEU, C-703/25 P –Latombe v Commission. If these challenges are successful, they may not only impact the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework, but also further limit the viability of the so-called standard contractual clauses and other data transfer mechanisms.
Rearranged previous paragraphs (3)
Previous report — wording carried elsewhere
In general, under Sections 382 and 383 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, and corresponding provisions of state law, a corporation that undergoes an “ownership change,”
Previous report — wording carried elsewhere
In addition, our ability to develop and market new drug products may be impacted by litigation challenging the FDA’s approval of mifepristone. In April 2023, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas invalidated the approval by the FDA of mifepristone, a drug product which was originally approved in 2000 and whose distribution is governed by various measures adopted under a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy.
Previous report — wording carried elsewhere
The America Invents Act also includes a number of significant changes that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and also may affect patent litigation. These include allowing third party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in United States federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the