Rapport Therapeutics, Inc.

Previous wording

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history. We were formed in February 2022 and our operations to date have been limited to organizing and staffing our company, business planning, raising capital, developing our receptor associated protein (“RAP”) technology platform and technology, identifying potential product candidates, securing intellectual property rights, and planning and undertaking preclinical studies and clinical trials. Substantially all of our product candidates were initially developed by Janssen Pharmaceutical NV (“Janssen”), which we in-licensed pursuant to the option and license agreement with Janssen (the “Janssen License”), entered into shortly after our formation. We have not yet demonstrated an ability to generate revenues, obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture any product on a commercial scale or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Our limited operating history as a company makes any assessment of our future success and viability subject to significant uncertainty. We will encounter risks and difficulties frequently experienced by early-stage biotechnology companies in rapidly evolving fields, and we have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully overcome such risks and difficulties. If we do not address these risks and difficulties successfully, our business will suffer.

Current wording

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history. We were formed in February 2022 and our operations to date have been limited to organizing and staffing our company, business planning, raising capital, developing our RAP technology platform and technology, identifying potential product candidates, securing intellectual property rights, and planning and undertaking preclinical studies and clinical trials. Substantially all of our product candidates were initially developed by Janssen, which we in-licensed pursuant to the Janssen License, entered into shortly after our formation. We have not yet demonstrated an ability to generate revenues, obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture any product on a commercial scale or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Our limited operating history as a company makes any assessment of our future success and viability subject to significant uncertainty. We will encounter risks and difficulties frequently experienced by early-stage biotechnology companies in rapidly evolving fields, and we have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully overcome such risks and difficulties. If we do not address these risks and difficulties successfully, our business will suffer.

Previous wording

The success of our business depends primarily upon our ability to identify, develop, and commercialize product candidates based on our RAP technology platform. We do not know whether we will be able to develop any product candidates that succeed through preclinical and clinical development or products of commercial value. We have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales to date. We will continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our preclinical and clinical development and ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred losses in each period since our inception. Net losses and negative cash flows have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital. Our net losses totaled $78.3 million and $34.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. As of December 31, 2024, we have not yet generated revenues and had an accumulated deficit of $123.7 million. We expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect these losses to increase as we continue our research and development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, our product candidates.

Current wording

The success of our business depends primarily upon our ability to identify, develop, and commercialize product candidates based on our RAP technology platform. We do not know whether we will be able to develop any product candidates that succeed through preclinical and clinical development or products of commercial value. We have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales to date. We will continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our preclinical and clinical development and ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred losses in each period since our inception. Net losses and negative cash flows have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital. Our net losses totaled $111.5 million and $78.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. As of December 31, 2025, we have not yet generated revenues and had an accumulated deficit of $235.2 million. We expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect these losses to increase as we continue our research and development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, our product candidates.

Previous wording

seek to identify, acquire and develop additional product candidates using our RAP technology platform, including through business development efforts to invest in or in-license other technologies or product candidates;

Current wording

seek to identify, acquire and develop additional product candidates, including through business development efforts to invest in or in-license other technologies or product candidates;

Previous wording

Additionally, our expenses could increase beyond our expectations if we are required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”), European Medicines Agency (“EMA”), Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”) or other comparable regulatory authorities to perform clinical trials in addition to those that we currently expect, or if there are any delays in establishing appropriate manufacturing arrangements for or in completing our clinical trials or the development of any of our product candidates.

Current wording

Additionally, our expenses could increase beyond our expectations if we are required by the FDA, EMA, MHRA or other comparable regulatory authorities to perform clinical trials in addition to those that we currently expect, or if there are any delays in establishing appropriate manufacturing arrangements for or in completing our clinical trials or the development of any of our product candidates.

Previous wording

Developing biotechnology products, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, is a very time-consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete. We expect our expenses to continue to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we conduct clinical trials of, and seek regulatory and marketing approval for, our product candidates. Even if our current or future product candidates are approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate. To date, we have funded our operations principally through private financings and our initial public offering (“IPO”) and concurrent private placement, which closed in June 2024. We expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we continue the clinical and preclinical development of our product candidates, continue to identify additional targets using our RAP technology platform, commence additional preclinical studies and clinical trials, and continue to identify and develop additional product candidates either through internal development or through acquisitions or in-licensing product candidates.

Current wording

Developing biotechnology products, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, is a very time-consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete. We expect our expenses to continue to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we conduct clinical trials of, and seek regulatory and marketing approval for, our product candidates. Even if our current or future product candidates are approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate. To date, we have funded our operations principally through private financings, our initial public offering (“IPO”) and concurrent private placement, which closed in June 2024, and our underwritten public offering in September 2025. We expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we continue the clinical and preclinical development of our product candidates, continue to identify additional targets, commence additional preclinical studies and clinical trials, and continue to identify and develop additional product candidates either through internal development or through acquisitions or in-licensing product candidates.

Previous wording

As of December 31, 2024, we had $305.3 million of cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments, excluding restricted cash. Based upon our current operating plan, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements through the end of 2026. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could utilize our available capital resources sooner than we expect. We may also raise additional financing on an opportunistic basis in the future. For example, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. Attempting to secure additional financing may divert our management from our day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop our product candidates. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:

Current wording

As of December 31, 2025, we had $490.5 million of cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments, excluding restricted cash. Based upon our current operating plan, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements into the second half of 2029. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could utilize our available capital resources sooner than we expect. We may also raise additional financing on an opportunistic basis in the future. For example, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. Attempting to secure additional financing may divert our management from our day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop our product candidates. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:

Previous wording

the number of clinical trials required for regulatory approval of our current or future product candidates;

Current wording

the number of preclinical studies and clinical trials required for regulatory approval of our current or future product candidates;

Previous wording

the costs and timing of future commercialization activities, including manufacturing, marketing, sales and distribution, for any of our product candidates for which we receive marketing approval;

Current wording

the costs and timing of future commercialization activities, marketing, sales and distribution, for any of our product candidates for which we receive marketing approval;

Previous wording

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenue, we expect to finance our operations with our existing cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments, any future equity or debt financings and upfront and milestone and royalty payments, if any, received under any future licenses or collaborations. If we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, or issue any equity or convertible debt securities in connection with a collaboration agreement or other contractual arrangement, the ownership interests of our stockholders will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of our stockholders. In addition, the possibility of such issuance may cause the market price of our common stock to decline. Debt financing, if available, may result in increased fixed payment obligations and involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, declaring dividends or acquiring, selling or licensing intellectual property rights or assets, which could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business.

Current wording

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenue, we expect to finance our operations with our existing cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments, any future equity or debt financings, upfront and milestone and royalty payments, if any, received under any future licenses, collaborations, or royalty agreements. If we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, or issue any equity or convertible debt securities in connection with a collaboration agreement or other contractual arrangement, the ownership interests of our stockholders will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of our stockholders. In addition, the possibility of such issuance may cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

Previous wording

The obligations from our license agreement with Janssen may be a drain on our cash resources, or may cause us to incur debt obligations to satisfy the payment obligations.

Current wording

The obligations from our license agreement with Janssen may be a drain on our cash resources, or may cause us to incur debt obligations or equity dilution to satisfy the payment obligations.

Previous wording

Our business is highly dependent on the success of our product candidates, particularly RAP-219 for focal epilepsy. If we are unable to successfully complete clinical development, obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize one or more of our product candidates, or if we experience delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

Current wording

Our business is highly dependent on the success of our product candidates, particularly RAP-219 for FOS. If we are unable to successfully complete clinical development, obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize one or more of our product candidates, or if we experience delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

Previous wording

product-related adverse events (“AEs”) experienced by subjects in our clinical trials, including unexpected toxicity results, or by individuals using drugs or therapeutic biologics similar to our product candidates;

Current wording

product-related AEs experienced by subjects in our clinical trials, including unexpected toxicity results, or by individuals using drugs or therapeutic biologics similar to our product candidates;

Previous wording

delays in submitting an Investigational New Drug (“IND”) application or other regulatory submission to the FDA, EMA, MHRA or other comparable regulatory authorities, or delays or failure in obtaining the necessary approvals from regulators to commence a clinical trial or a suspension or termination, or hold, of a clinical trial once commenced;

Current wording

delays in submitting an IND application or other regulatory submission to the FDA, EMA, MHRA or other comparable regulatory authorities, or delays or failure in obtaining the necessary approvals from regulators to commence a clinical trial or a suspension or termination, or hold, of a clinical trial once commenced;

Previous wording

failure to receive the necessary regulatory approvals or a delay in receiving such approvals, which, among other things, may be caused by patients who fail the trial screening process, slow enrollment in clinical trials, patients dropping out of trials, patients lost to follow-up, length of time to achieve trial endpoints, additional time requirements for data analysis or New Drug Application (“NDA”) or similar foreign application preparation, discussions with the FDA, EMA, MHRA or other comparable regulatory authority an FDA, EMA, MHRA or other comparable regulatory request for additional preclinical or clinical data (such as long-term toxicology studies) or unexpected safety or manufacturing issues;

Current wording

failure to receive the necessary regulatory approvals or a delay in receiving such approvals, which, among other things, may be caused by patients who fail the trial screening process, slow enrollment in clinical trials, patients dropping out of trials, patients lost to follow-up, length of time to achieve trial endpoints, additional time requirements for data analysis or NDA or similar foreign application preparation, discussions with the FDA, EMA, MHRA or other comparable regulatory authority an FDA, EMA, MHRA or other comparable regulatory request for additional preclinical or clinical data (such as long-term toxicology studies) or unexpected safety or manufacturing issues;

Previous wording

For example, in the fourth quarter of 2024, we were notified by the FDA that the IND submitted by us for the initiation of a Phase 2a proof-of-concept trial of RAP-219 in diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (“DPNP”) was placed on clinical hold. The FDA requested additional information and amendments specific to the protocol design. We are working with the FDA to provide the requested information. Should our response to the clinical hold not be satisfactory to the FDA, the clinical hold may not be lifted on a timely basis, or at all. Furthermore, in December 2023, we withdrew the development of another TARPg 8 targeted molecule (RAP-482) in-licensed from Janssen that received a full clinical hold from the FDA prior to initiation of a Phase 1 trial, in order to prioritize development of our lead product candidate, RAP-219, and our other development candidates and programs. Furthermore, the length of time necessary to complete clinical trials and submit an application for marketing approval for a final decision by a regulatory authority varies significantly from one product candidate to the next and from one country or jurisdiction to the next and may be difficult to predict.

Current wording

For example, in the fourth quarter of 2024, we were notified by the FDA that the IND submitted by us for the initiation of a Phase 2 proof-of-concept trial of RAP-219 in diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (“DPNP”) was placed on clinical hold. The FDA requested additional information and amendments specific to the protocol design. Following further interactions with the FDA in December 2025, the FDA removed its clinical hold on the DPNP IND. Furthermore, the length of time necessary to complete clinical trials and submit an application for marketing approval for a final decision by a regulatory authority varies significantly from one product candidate to the next and from one country or jurisdiction to the next and may be difficult to predict.

Previous wording

In addition, if any of our product candidates receive marketing approval, we will be subject to significant regulatory obligations regarding the submission of safety and other post-marketing information and reports and registration, and will need to continue to comply (or ensure that our third-party providers comply) with current Good Manufacturing Practices (“cGMPs”) and Good Clinical Practices (“GCPs”) for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. In addition, there is always the risk that we, a regulatory authority or a third party might identify previously unknown problems with a product post-approval, such as AEs of unanticipated severity or frequency. Compliance with these requirements is costly, and any failure to comply or other issues with our product candidates post-approval could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Current wording

In addition, if any of our product candidates receive marketing approval, we will be subject to significant regulatory obligations regarding the submission of safety and other post-marketing information and reports and registration, and will need to continue to comply (or ensure that our third-party providers comply) with current cGMPs in manufacturing our products and with GCPs for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. In addition, there is always the risk that we, a regulatory authority or a third party might identify previously unknown problems with a product post-approval, such as AEs of unanticipated severity or frequency. Compliance with these requirements is costly, and any failure to comply or other issues with our product candidates post-approval could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Previous wording

At the state level, numerous U.S. states have enacted comprehensive privacy laws that impose certain obligations on covered businesses, many of which differ from each other in significant ways, thus complicating compliance efforts, including providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording individuals certain rights concerning their personal data. For example, in California, the California Consumer Protection Act, or CCPA, established a comprehensive privacy framework for covered businesses by creating an expanded definition of personal information, establishing data privacy rights for consumers in the State of California, imposing special rules on the collection of consumer data from minors, and creating a new and potentially severe statutory damages framework for violations of the CCPA and for businesses that fail to implement reasonable security procedures and practices to prevent data breaches. While clinical trial data and information governed by HIPAA are currently exempt from the current version of the CCPA, other personal information may be applicable and possible changes to the CCPA may broaden its scope.

Current wording

At the state level, numerous U.S. states have enacted comprehensive privacy laws that impose certain obligations on covered businesses, many of which differ from each other in significant ways, thus complicating compliance efforts, including providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording individuals certain rights concerning their personal data. For example, in California, the California Consumer Privacy Act, or CCPA, established a comprehensive privacy framework for covered businesses by creating an expanded definition of personal information, establishing data privacy rights for consumers in the State of California, imposing special rules on the collection of consumer data from minors, and creating a new and potentially severe statutory damages framework for violations of the CCPA and for businesses that fail to implement reasonable security procedures and practices to prevent data breaches. While clinical trial data and information governed by HIPAA are exempt from the CCPA, other personal information may be applicable and periodic changes to the CCPA continue to broaden its scope.

Previous wording

Similar laws have been passed and proposed in numerous states, as well as at the federal and local levels, and we expect more states to pass similar laws in the future. Such proposed legislation, if enacted, may add additional complexity, variation in requirements, restrictions and potential legal risk, require additional investment of resources in compliance programs, impact strategies and the availability of previously useful data and could result in increased compliance costs and/or changes in business practices and policies. The existence of comprehensive privacy laws in different states in the country would make our compliance obligations more complex and costly and may increase the likelihood that we may be subject to enforcement actions or otherwise incur liability for noncompliance. While these states exempt some data processed in the context of clinical trials, these developments may further complicate compliance efforts, and increase legal risk and compliance costs for us and the third parties upon whom we rely.

Current wording

Similar laws have been passed and proposed in numerous states, as well as at the federal and local levels, and we expect more states to pass similar laws in the future. Such proposed legislation, if enacted, may add additional complexity, variation in requirements, restrictions and potential legal risk, require additional investment of resources in compliance programs, impact strategies and the availability of previously useful data and could result in increased compliance costs and/or changes in business practices and policies. The existence of comprehensive privacy laws in different states in the country makes our compliance obligations more complex and costly and increases the likelihood that we may be subject to enforcement actions or otherwise incur liability for noncompliance. While these states exempt some data processed in the context of clinical trials, these developments may further complicate compliance efforts, and increase legal risk and compliance costs for us and the third parties upon whom we rely.

Previous wording

Regulators and legislators in the U.S. are increasingly scrutinizing and restricting certain personal data transfers and transactions involving foreign countries. For example, the Biden Administration’s executive order Preventing Access to Americans’ Bulk Sensitive Personal Data and United States Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern as implemented by Department of Justice regulations issued in December 2024, prohibits data brokerage transactions involving certain sensitive personal data categories, including health data, genetic data, and biospecimens, to countries of concern, including China. The regulations also restrict certain investment agreements, employment agreements and vendor agreements involving such data and countries of concern, absent specified cybersecurity controls. Actual or alleged violations of these regulations may be punishable by criminal and/or civil sanctions, and may result in exclusion from participation in federal and state programs.

Current wording

Regulators and legislators in the U.S. are increasingly scrutinizing and restricting certain personal data transfers and transactions involving foreign countries. For example, certain regulations prohibit certain transactions involving bulk human ‘omic data or human biospecimens from which human ‘omic data can be derived, as well as data brokerage transactions involving certain sensitive personal data categories, including health data, genetic data, and biospecimens, to countries of concern, including China. These regulations also restrict certain investment agreements, employment agreements and vendor agreements involving such data and countries of concern, absent specified cybersecurity controls and the rule does not exempt key-coded or otherwise anonymized, pseudonymized, de-identified, or encrypted data. Actual or alleged violations of such rules may be punishable by criminal and/or civil sanctions, and may result in exclusion from participation in federal and state programs.

Previous wording

Outside the United States, an increasing number of laws, regulations, and industry standards may govern privacy and data security. For example, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (“EU GDPR”) and the United Kingdom’s GDPR (“UK GDPR”) impose strict requirements for processing personal data.

Current wording

Outside the United States, an increasing number of laws, regulations, and industry standards govern privacy and data security. For example, the EU GDPR and UK GDPR impose strict requirements for processing personal data.

Previous wording

The EU GDPR and the UK GDPR (together, “GDPR”) establish stringent requirements regarding the processing of personal data, including strict requirements relating to processing sensitive data (such as health data), ensuring there is a legal basis or condition to justify the processing of personal data, where required obtaining consent from individuals, transparent disclosures about how personal data is to be used, limitations on retention of information, implementing safeguards to protect the security and confidentiality of personal data, where required providing notification of data breaches, maintaining records of processing activities and documenting data protection impact assessments where there is high risk processing and taking certain measures when engaging third-party processors.

Current wording

The EU GDPR and the UK GDPR (together, “GDPR”) establish stringent requirements regarding the processing of personal data, including strict requirements relating to processing sensitive data (such as health data), ensuring there is a legal basis or condition to justify the processing of personal data, obtaining consent from individuals, transparent disclosures about how personal data is to be used, limitations on retention of information, implementing safeguards to protect the security and confidentiality of personal data, providing notification of data breaches, maintaining records of processing activities and documenting data protection impact assessments where there is high risk processing and taking certain measures when engaging third-party processors.

Previous wording

Under GDPR, companies may face temporary or definitive bans on data processing and other corrective activities, fines of up to €20 million (£17.5 million GBP) or 4% of annual global revenues, whichever is greater, and private litigation related to processing of personal data brought by data subjects or consumer protection organizations authorized at law to represent their interests. Non-compliance could also result in a material adverse effect on our business, financial position and results of operations.

Current wording

Under GDPR, companies may face temporary or definitive bans on data processing and other corrective activities, fines of up to €20 million (approximately £17.5 million GBP) or 4% of annual global revenues, whichever is greater, and private litigation related to processing of personal data brought by data subjects or consumer protection organizations authorized at law to represent their interests. Non-compliance could also result in a material adverse effect on our business, financial position and results of operations.

Previous wording

In addition, we may be unable to transfer personal data from Europe and other jurisdictions to the United States or other countries due to data localization requirements or limitations on cross-border data flows. Europe and other jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring data to be localized or limiting the transfer of personal data to other countries. In particular, the European Economic Area (“EEA”) and the UK have restricted the transfer of personal data to the United States and other countries whose privacy laws are considered to provide adequate protection. Other jurisdictions may adopt similarly stringent interpretations of their data localization and cross-border data transfer laws. Although there are currently various mechanisms that may be used to transfer personal data from the EEA and UK to the United States in compliance with law, such as the EEA’s standard contractual clauses, the UK’s International Data Transfer Agreement / Addendum, and the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework and the UK extension thereto (which allows for transfers to relevant U.S.-based organizations who self-certify compliance and participate in the Framework), these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures to lawfully transfer personal data to the United States. If there is no lawful manner for us to transfer personal data from the EEA, the UK, or other jurisdictions to the United States, or if the requirements for a legally-compliant transfer are too onerous, we could face significant adverse consequences, including the interruption or degradation of our operations, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions (such as Europe) at significant expense, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and penalties, the inability to transfer data and work with partners, vendors and other third parties, and injunctions against our processing or transferring of personal data necessary to operate our business. Additionally, companies that transfer personal data out of the EEA and UK to other jurisdictions, particularly to the United States, are subject to increased scrutiny from regulators, individual litigants, and activist groups. Some European regulators have ordered certain companies to suspend or permanently cease certain transfers of personal data out of Europe for allegedly violating the GDPR’s cross-border data transfer limitations.

Current wording

In addition, we may be unable to transfer personal data from Europe and other jurisdictions to the United States or other countries due to data localization requirements or limitations on cross-border data flows. Europe and other jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring data to be localized or limiting the transfer of personal data to other countries. In particular, the EEA and the UK have restricted the transfer of personal data to the United States and other countries based on whether those jurisdictions’ privacy laws are considered to provide adequate protection. Other jurisdictions may adopt similarly stringent interpretations of their data localization and cross-border data transfer laws. Although there are currently various mechanisms that may be used to transfer personal data from the EEA and UK to the United States in compliance with law, such as the EEA’s standard contractual clauses, the UK’s International Data Transfer Agreement / Addendum, and the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework and the UK extension thereto (which allows for transfers to relevant U.S.-based organizations who self-certify compliance and participate in the Framework), these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures to lawfully transfer personal data to the United States. If there is no lawful manner for us to transfer personal data from the EEA, the UK, or other jurisdictions to the United States, or if the requirements for a legally-compliant transfer are too onerous, we could face significant adverse consequences, including the interruption or degradation of our operations, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions (such as Europe) at significant expense, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and penalties, the inability to transfer data and work with partners, vendors and other third parties, and injunctions against our processing or transferring of personal data necessary to operate our business. Additionally, companies that transfer personal data out of the EEA and UK to other jurisdictions, particularly to the United States, are subject to increased scrutiny from regulators, individual litigants, and activist groups. Some European regulators have ordered certain companies to suspend or permanently cease certain transfers of personal data out of Europe for allegedly violating the GDPR’s cross-border data transfer limitations.

Previous wording

Although the UK is regarded as a third country under the EU GDPR, the European Commission has issued an adequacy decision recognizing the UK as providing adequate data protection and, therefore, transfers of personal data originating in the EEA to the UK remain unrestricted. Likewise, the UK government has confirmed that personal data transfers from the UK to the EEA remain free flowing. However, the UK government is planning to reform its data protection law with the Data (Use and Access) Bill, which it has introduced to Parliament on 24 October 2024. These potential future changes to UK data protection laws may alter the similarities between the UK and EEA data protection regime and threaten the UK adequacy decision from the European Commission. The potential of the EU GDPR and UK GDPR further diverging in the future creates additional regulatory challenges and uncertainties for us. The lack of clarity on future UK laws and regulations and their interaction with EU laws and regulations could add legal risk, uncertainty, complexity and cost to our handling of European personal data and our privacy and data security compliance programs and could require us to implement different compliance measures for the UK and the EEA.

Current wording

Although the UK is regarded as a third country under the EU GDPR, the European Commission has issued an adequacy decision recognizing the UK as providing adequate data protection and, therefore, transfers of personal data originating in the EEA to the UK remain unrestricted. The UK government has confirmed that personal data transfers from the UK to the EEA remain free flowing. The respective provisions and enforcement of the EU GDPR and UK GDPR may further diverge in the future and create additional regulatory challenges and uncertainties. This lack of clarity on future UK laws and regulations and their interaction with EU laws and regulations could add legal risk, complexity and cost to our handling of personal data and our privacy and data security compliance programs and could require us to implement different compliance measures for the UK and the EEA.

Previous wording

Obligations related to privacy and data security (and consumers’ data privacy expectations) are quickly changing, becoming increasingly stringent, and creating uncertainty. Additionally, these obligations may be subject to differing applications and interpretations, which may be inconsistent or conflict among jurisdictions. Preparing for and complying with these obligations requires us to devote significant resources and may necessitate changes to our services, information technologies, systems, and practices and to those of any third parties that process personal data on our behalf. All of these evolving compliance and operational requirements impose significant costs, such as costs related to organizational changes, implementing additional protection technologies, training employees and engaging consultants and legal advisors, which are likely to increase over time. In addition, such requirements may require us to modify our data processing practices and policies, utilize management’s time and/or divert resources from other initiatives and projects.

Current wording

Obligations related to privacy and data security (and consumers’ data privacy expectations) are quickly changing, becoming increasingly stringent, and creating uncertainty. Additionally, these obligations may be subject to differing applications and interpretations, which may be inconsistent or conflict among jurisdictions. Preparing for and complying with these obligations requires us to devote significant resources and may necessitate changes to our services, information technologies, systems, and practices and to those of any third parties that process personal data on our behalf. All of these evolving compliance and operational requirements impose significant costs, such as costs related to organizational changes, implementing additional protection technologies, training employees and engaging consultants and legal advisors, which are likely to increase over time.

Previous wording

We may at times fail (or be perceived to have failed) in our efforts to comply with our privacy and data security obligations. Moreover, despite our efforts, our personnel or third parties on whom we rely may fail to comply with such obligations, which could negatively impact our business operations. If we or the third parties on which we rely fail, or are perceived to have failed, to address or comply with applicable privacy and data security obligations, we could face significant consequences, including but not limited to: government enforcement actions (e.g., investigations, fines, penalties, audits, inspections, and similar); litigation (including class-action claims) and mass arbitration demands; additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; bans on processing personal data; and orders to destroy or not use personal data. In particular, plaintiffs have become increasingly more active in bringing privacy-related claims against companies, including class claims and mass arbitration demands. Some of these claims allow for the recovery of statutory damages on a per violation basis, and, if viable, carry the potential for monumental statutory damages, depending on the volume of data and the number of violations. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, or financial condition, including but not limited to: loss of customers; interruptions or stoppages in our business operations (including, as relevant, clinical trials); inability to process personal data or to operate in certain jurisdictions; limited ability to develop or commercialize our products; expenditure of time and resources to defend any claim or inquiry; adverse publicity; or substantial changes to our business model or operations.

Current wording

We may at times fail (or be perceived to have failed) in our efforts to comply with our privacy and data security obligations. Moreover, despite our efforts, our personnel or third parties on whom we rely may fail to comply with such obligations, which could negatively impact our business operations. If we or the third parties on which we rely fail, or are perceived to have failed, to address or comply with applicable privacy and data security obligations, we could face significant consequences, including but not limited to: government enforcement actions (e.g., investigations, fines, penalties, audits, inspections, and similar); litigation (including class-action claims) and mass arbitration demands; additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; bans on processing personal data; and orders to destroy or not use personal data. In particular, plaintiffs have become increasingly active in bringing privacy-related claims against companies, including class claims and mass arbitration demands. Some of these claims allow for the recovery of statutory damages on a per violation basis, and, if viable, carry the potential for monumental statutory damages, depending on the volume of data and the number of violations. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, or financial condition, including but not limited to: loss of customers; interruptions or stoppages in our business operations (including, as relevant, clinical trials); inability to process personal data or to operate in certain jurisdictions; limited ability to develop or commercialize our products; expenditure of time and resources to defend any claim or inquiry; adverse publicity; or substantial changes to our business model or operations.

Previous wording

The risk of a cyber-attack, cybersecurity incident, breach, compromise, or other interruption has generally increased as the number, intensity and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. Such risks come from a variety of evolving threats, including but not limited to, social-engineering attacks (including through deep fakes, which may be increasingly more difficult to identify as fake, and phishing attacks), malicious code (such as viruses and worms), malware (including as a result of advanced persistent threat intrusions), denial-of-service attacks, credential stuffing, credential harvesting, personnel misconduct or error, ransomware attacks, supply-chain attacks, software bugs, server malfunctions, software or hardware failures, loss of data or other information technology assets, adware, attacks enhanced or facilitated by artificial intelligence (“AI”), telecommunications failures, earthquakes, fires, floods, and other similar threats.

Current wording

The risk of a cyber-attack, cybersecurity incident, breach, compromise, or other interruption has generally increased as the number, intensity and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. Such risks come from a variety of evolving threats, including but not limited to, social engineering attacks (including through deep fakes, which may be increasingly difficult to identify as fake, and phishing attacks), malicious code (such as viruses and worms), malware (including as a result of advanced persistent threat intrusions), denial-of-service attacks, credential stuffing, credential harvesting, personnel misconduct or error, ransomware attacks, supply-chain attacks, software bugs, server malfunctions, software or hardware failures, loss of data or other information technology assets, adware, attacks enhanced or facilitated by artificial intelligence (“AI”), telecommunications failures, earthquakes, fires, floods, and other similar threats. Use of generative AI models in our internal or third-party systems may create new attack surfaces or methods for adversaries, which could impact us and our vendors. Any cybersecurity incidents or data breaches related to our use of AI applications could adversely affect our reputation and results of operations.

Previous wording

We have in the past experienced threats and security incidents related to our data and systems, and we may in the future experience additional threats, compromises, breaches or incidents. If we, or a third party upon whom we rely, experience a cyber-attack, cybersecurity incident, breach, compromise, or other interruption, or are perceived to have experienced a cyber-attack, cybersecurity incident, breach, compromise, or other interruption, we may experience adverse consequences, such as government enforcement actions (for example, investigations, fines, penalties, audits, and inspections); additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; restrictions on processing sensitive information (including personal data); litigation (including individual and group claims); indemnification obligations; negative publicity; reputational harm; monetary fund diversions; interruptions in our operations (including availability of data); financial loss; and other potentially significant harms. Our contracts may not contain limitations of liability, and even where they do, there can be no assurance that limitations of liability in our contracts are sufficient to protect us from liabilities, damages, or claims related to our privacy and data security obligations.

Current wording

We have in the past experienced threats and security incidents related to our data and systems, and we may in the future experience additional threats, compromises, breaches or incidents. If we, or a third party upon whom we rely, experience a cyber-attack, cybersecurity incident, breach, compromise, or other interruption, or are perceived to have experienced a cyber-attack, cybersecurity incident, breach, compromise, or other interruption, we may experience adverse consequences, such as government enforcement actions (for example, investigations, fines, penalties, audits, and inspections); additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; restrictions on processing sensitive information (including personal data); litigation (including individual and group claims); indemnification obligations; negative publicity; reputational harm; monetary fund diversions; interruptions in our operations (including availability of data); financial loss; and other potentially significant harms. Our contracts may not contain limitations of liability, and even where they do, there can be no assurance that limitations of liability in our contracts are sufficient to protect us from liabilities, damages, or claims related to our privacy and data security obligations. Cyber liability insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities related to any experienced cybersecurity incident or breach.

Previous wording

The use of new and evolving technologies, such as AI and machine learning (“ML”), in our operations, and the operations of third parties upon which we rely, may result in spending additional resources and present new risks and challenges that can impact our business including by posing security and other risks to our sensitive data, and as a result we may be exposed to reputational harm, other adverse consequences, and liability.

Current wording

The use of new and evolving technologies, such as AI and machine learning (“ML”), in our operations, and the operations of third parties upon which we rely, may result in spending additional resources and present new risks and challenges that can impact our business including by posing security and other risks to our sensitive data. As a result, we may be exposed to reputational harm, other adverse consequences, and liability.

Previous wording

The use of new and evolving technologies, such as AI/ML, in our operations, and the operations of third parties upon which we rely presents new risks and challenges that could negatively impact our business. The use of certain AI/ML technologies can give rise to intellectual property risks, including compromises to proprietary intellectual property and intellectual property infringement. Additionally, several jurisdictions around the globe, including Europe and certain U.S. states, have proposed, enacted, or are considering, laws governing the development and use of AI/ML, such as the European Union’s AI Act — the world’s first comprehensive AI law — which has entered into force on August 1, 2024 and most provisions of which will become effective on August 2, 2026. This legislation imposes significant obligations on providers and deployers of high risk artificial intelligence systems, and encourages providers and deployers of artificial intelligence systems to account for EU ethical principles in their development and use of these systems.

Current wording

The use of new and evolving technologies, such as AI/ML, in our operations, and the operations of third parties upon which we rely presents new risks and challenges that could negatively impact our business, including cybersecurity, data privacy, IT, intellectual property, regulatory, legal, operational, competitive, reputational, and other risks and challenges. Specifically, risks related to bias, AI hallucinations, discrimination, harmful content, misinformation, fraud, scams, targeted attacks such as model poisoning or data poisoning, surveillance, data leakage, loss of consensus reality, inequality, environmental harms, and other harms may flow from our development, use, or deployment of AI technologies. The use of certain AI/ML technologies can also give rise to intellectual property risks, including compromises to proprietary intellectual property and intellectual property infringement. Additionally, several jurisdictions around the globe, including Europe and certain U.S. states, have proposed, enacted, or are considering, laws governing the development and use of AI/ML. Such laws in the EU impose significant obligations on providers and deployers of high risk artificial intelligence systems, and encourage providers and deployers of artificial intelligence systems to account for EU ethical principles in their development and use of these systems.

Previous wording

Likewise, in the U.S., several states, including Colorado and California, passed laws that will take effect in 2026, to regulate various uses of artificial intelligence, including to make consequential decisions. In addition, various federal regulators have issued guidance and focused enforcement efforts on the use of AI in regulated sectors. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, for example, issued guidance on the use of artificial intelligence in medical devices, requiring detailed risk management and review processes to obtain approvals. If we develop or use AI systems governed by these laws or regulations, we will need to meet higher standards of data quality, transparency, monitoring and human oversight, and we would need to adhere to specific and potentially burdensome and costly ethical, accountability, and administrative requirements, with the potential for significant enforcement or litigation in the event of any perceived non-compliance. Additionally, certain privacy laws extend rights to consumers (such as the right to delete certain personal data) and regulate automated decision making, which may be incompatible with our use of AI/ML. These obligations may make it harder for us to conduct our business using AI/ML, lead to regulatory fines or penalties, require us to change our business practices, retrain our AI/ML, or prevent or limit our use of AI/ML. For example, the Federal Trade Commission has required other companies to turn over (or disgorge) valuable insights or trainings generated through the use of AI/ML where they allege the company has violated privacy and consumer protection laws. If we cannot use AI/ML or that use is restricted, our business may be less efficient, or we may be at a competitive disadvantage.

Current wording

Likewise, such legislative developments in the United States have introduced emerging compliance obligations for companies that develop or deploy AI technologies, which will impose novel risks on AI developers and users. Recently, states have advanced, and in some cases passed, dozens of laws focused on AI governance and regulation, including on deployment of AI in healthcare settings. These state-level initiatives reflect a growing trend toward AI regulation in the absence of federal legislation. As a result, we may face a fragmented and evolving compliance landscape that could increase operational complexity, regulatory scrutiny, and legal exposure associated with our use or development of AI technologies. If we develop or use AI systems governed by these laws or regulations, we will need to meet higher standards of data quality, transparency, monitoring and human oversight, and we would need to adhere to specific and potentially burdensome and costly ethical, accountability, and administrative requirements, with the potential for significant enforcement or litigation in the event of any perceived non-compliance. Additionally, certain privacy laws extend rights to consumers (such as the right to delete certain personal data) and regulate automated decision making, which may be incompatible with our use of AI/ML. These obligations may make it harder for us to conduct our business using AI/ML, lead to regulatory fines or penalties, require us to change our business practices, retrain our AI/ML, or prevent or limit our use of AI/ML. For example, the Federal Trade Commission has required other companies to turn over (or disgorge) valuable insights or trainings generated through the use of AI/ML where they allege the company has violated privacy and consumer protection laws. If we cannot use AI/ML or that use is restricted, our business may be less efficient, or we may be at a competitive disadvantage.

Previous wording

The rapid evolution of AI/ML will require the application of significant resources to design, develop, test and maintain our products and services to help ensure that AI/ML is implemented in accordance with applicable law and regulation and in a socially responsible manner and to minimize any real or perceived unintended harmful impacts. Our vendors may in turn incorporate AI/ML tools into their own offerings, and the providers of these AI/ML tools may not meet existing or rapidly evolving regulatory or industry standards, including with respect to privacy and data security. Further, bad actors around the world use increasingly sophisticated methods, including the use of AI/ML, to engage in illegal activities involving the theft and misuse of sensitive data. Any of these effects could damage our reputation, result in the loss of valuable property and information, cause us to breach applicable laws and regulations, and adversely impact our business.

Current wording

The rapid evolution of AI/ML will require the application of significant resources to design, develop, test and maintain our products and services to help ensure that AI/ML is implemented in accordance with applicable law and regulation and in a socially responsible manner and to minimize any real or perceived unintended harmful impacts. Our vendors may in turn incorporate AI/ML tools into their own offerings, and the providers of these AI/ML tools may not meet existing or rapidly evolving regulatory or industry standards, including with respect to privacy and data security. Further, bad actors around the world use increasingly sophisticated methods, including the use of AI/ML, to engage in cyber-attacks, cyber espionage campaigns, exploitation of expanded attack surfaces, and other illegal activities involving the theft and misuse of sensitive data. Any of these effects could damage our reputation, result in the loss of valuable property and information, cause us to breach applicable laws and regulations, and adversely impact our business.

Previous wording

The results observed from preclinical studies or early-stage clinical trials of our product candidates may not necessarily be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials that we conduct. Similarly, positive results from such preclinical studies or early-stage clinical trials may not be replicated in our subsequent preclinical studies or clinical trials. For instance, results seen in preclinical animal models of epilepsy or pain may not translate to similar results in patients, and results from our Phase 2a proof-of-concept trial in refractory focal epilepsy may not translate to clinical seizures. Furthermore, our product candidates may not be able to demonstrate similar activity or adverse event profiles as other product candidates that we believe may have similar profiles.

Current wording

The results observed from preclinical studies or early-stage clinical trials of our product candidates may not necessarily be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials that we conduct. Similarly, positive results from such preclinical studies or early-stage clinical trials may not be replicated in our subsequent preclinical studies or clinical trials. Furthermore, our product candidates may not be able to demonstrate similar activity or adverse event profiles as other product candidates that we believe may have similar profiles.

Previous wording

There can be no assurance that any of our clinical trials will ultimately be successful or support further clinical development of any of our product candidates. There is a high failure rate for drugs proceeding through clinical trials. Many companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials after achieving positive results in early-stage development, and we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, preclinical findings made while clinical trials were underway or safety or efficacy observations made in preclinical studies and clinical trials, including previously unreported adverse effects or AEs.

Current wording

In addition, in our planned future clinical trials, we may utilize clinical trial designs or dosing regimens that have not been tested in prior clinical trials. There can also be no assurance that any of our clinical trials will ultimately be successful or support further clinical development of any of our product candidates. There is a high failure rate for drugs proceeding through clinical trials. Many companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials after achieving positive results in early-stage development, and we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, preclinical findings made while clinical trials were underway or safety or efficacy observations made in preclinical studies and clinical trials, including previously unreported adverse effects or AEs.

Previous wording

Additionally, we may utilize an “open-label” clinical trial design. An “open-label” clinical trial is one where both the patient and investigator know whether the patient is receiving the investigational product candidate or either an existing approved drug or placebo. Our Phase 2a proof-of-concept trial in refractory focal epilepsy is an open label study. Most open-label clinical trials test only the investigational product candidate and sometimes may do so at different dose levels. Open-label clinical trials are subject to various limitations that may exaggerate any therapeutic effect as patients in open-label clinical trials are aware when they are receiving treatment. Open-label clinical trials may be subject to a “patient bias” where patients perceive their symptoms to have improved merely due to their awareness of receiving an experimental treatment. In addition, open-label clinical trials may be subject to an “investigator bias” where those assessing and reviewing the physiological outcomes of the clinical trials are aware of which patients have received treatment and may interpret the information of the treated group more favorably given this knowledge. The results from an open-label trial may not be predictive of future clinical trial results of a product candidate when studied in a controlled environment with a placebo or active control.

Current wording

Additionally, we have and will continue to utilize an “open-label” clinical trial design in some of our clinical trials. An “open-label” clinical trial is one where both the patient and investigator know whether the patient is receiving the investigational product candidate or either an existing approved drug or placebo. Our Phase 2a proof-of-concept trial in drug-resistant FOS was an open label study. Most open-label clinical trials test only the investigational product candidate and sometimes may do so at different dose levels. Open-label clinical trials are subject to various limitations that may exaggerate any therapeutic effect as patients in open-label clinical trials are aware when they are receiving treatment. Open-label clinical trials may be subject to a “patient bias” where patients perceive their symptoms to have improved merely due to their awareness of receiving an experimental treatment. In addition, open-label clinical trials may be subject to an “investigator bias” where those assessing and reviewing the physiological outcomes of the clinical trials are aware of which patients have received treatment and may interpret the information of the treated group more favorably given this knowledge. The results from an open-label trial may not be predictive of future clinical trial results of a product candidate when studied in a controlled environment with a placebo or active control.

Previous wording

Our failure to successfully initiate and complete clinical trials and to demonstrate the efficacy and safety necessary to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates would significantly harm our business. Our product candidate development costs will also increase if we experience delays in testing or regulatory approvals and we may be required to obtain additional funds to complete clinical trials. There can be no assurance that our clinical trials will begin as planned or be completed on schedule, if at all, or that we will not need to restructure or otherwise modify our trials after they have begun. For example, in the fourth quarter of 2024, we were notified by the FDA that the IND submitted by us for the initiation of a Phase 2a proof-of-concept trial of RAP-219 in DPNP was placed on clinical hold. The FDA requested additional information and amendments specific to the protocol design. We are working with the FDA to provide the requested information. Should our response to the clinical hold not be satisfactory to the FDA, the clinical hold may not be lifted on a timely basis, or at all. Significant clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do and impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, which may harm our business and results of operations. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, delays of clinical trials may ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.

Current wording

Our failure to successfully initiate and complete clinical trials and to demonstrate the efficacy and safety necessary to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates would significantly harm our business. Our product candidate development costs will also increase if we experience delays in testing or regulatory approvals and we may be required to obtain additional funds to complete clinical trials. There can be no assurance that our clinical trials will begin as planned or be completed on schedule, if at all, or that we will not need to restructure or otherwise modify our trials after they have begun. For example, in the fourth quarter of 2024, we were notified by the FDA that the IND submitted by us for the initiation of a Phase 2 proof-of-concept trial of RAP-219 in DPNP was placed on clinical hold. The FDA requested additional information and amendments specific to the protocol design. Following further discussions with the FDA in December 2025, the FDA removed its clinical hold on the DPNP IND. Significant clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do and impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, which may harm our business and results of operations. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, delays of clinical trials may ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.

Previous wording

We may observe safety or tolerability issues beyond those we anticipate with our product candidates in ongoing or future clinical trials. For example, while no Grade 3 or higher AEs have been observed to date, it is possible that such events may occur in our ongoing RAP-219 clinical program or in our clinical programs for other product candidates. Additionally, it is possible that human subjects with focal epilepsy, bipolar disorder and peripheral neuropathic pain may experience greater side effects in our clinical program for RAP-219 than observed in healthy volunteers. We continue to learn more about our product candidates, and unfavorable pharmacology profiles, including extended half-lives, could lead to adverse outcomes or concerns by the FDA, EMA, MHRA or other comparable regulatory authorities.

Current wording

We continue to learn more about our product candidates, and unfavorable pharmacology profiles, including extended half-lives, could lead to adverse outcomes or concerns by the FDA, EMA, MHRA or other comparable regulatory authorities.

Previous wording

We have focused our research and development efforts on addressing disorders of the brain and nervous system. Efforts by pharmaceutical companies in this field have faced certain challenges in drug development. In particular, many neurological disorders, such as focal epilepsy, bipolar disorder and peripheral neuropathic pain, rely on subjective patient-reported outcomes as key endpoints. This makes them more difficult to evaluate than indications with more objective endpoints. For example, in our Phase 2a proof-of-concept trial in refractory focal epilepsy, we are using change in clinical seizure frequency (measured by patient-recorded paper diaries) as a secondary endpoint. Furthermore, these indications are often subject to a placebo effect, which may make it more challenging to isolate the effects of our product candidates. There can be no guarantee that we will successfully overcome these challenges with RAP-219, even with the use of the RNS system from NeuroPace Inc. (“NeuroPace”) for primary and secondary endpoints in our Phase 2a proof-of-concept trial in refractory focal epilepsy, or our bipolar mania and diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain candidates or that we will not encounter other challenges in the development of our product candidates. Moreover, given the history of clinical failures in this field, future clinical or regulatory failures by us or others may have result in further negative perception of the likelihood of success in this field, which may significantly and adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

Current wording

We have focused our research and development efforts on addressing disorders of the brain and nervous system. Efforts by pharmaceutical companies in this field have faced certain challenges in drug development. In particular, many neurological and psychiatric disorders such as FOS and bipolar disorder rely on subjective patient-reported outcomes as key endpoints. This makes them more difficult to evaluate than indications with more objective endpoints. These indications are often subject to a placebo effect, which may make it more challenging to isolate the effects of our product candidates. There can be no guarantee that we will successfully overcome these challenges with RAP-219 in our ongoing and future trials for FOS or bipolar mania candidates or that we will not encounter other challenges in the development of our product candidates. Moreover, given the history of clinical failures in this field, future clinical or regulatory failures by us or others may have result in further negative perception of the likelihood of success in this field, which may significantly and adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

Previous wording

Our pipeline includes product candidates for a variety of neuroscience diseases. There is no precise method of establishing the actual number of patients with any of these disorders in any geography over any time period. With respect to many of the indications in which we have developed, are developing, or plan to develop our product candidates, we have estimates of the prevalence of the disease or disorder. Our estimates as to prevalence may not be accurate, and the actual prevalence or addressable patient population for some or all of those indications, or any other indication that we elect to pursue, may be significantly smaller than our estimates. In estimating the potential prevalence of indications we are pursuing, or may in the future pursue, including our estimates as to the prevalence of focal epilepsy, bipolar disorder and peripheral neuropathic pain, we apply assumptions to available information that may not prove to be accurate. In each case, there is a range of estimates in the published literature and in marketing studies, which include estimates within the range that are lower than our estimates. The actual number of patients with these disease indications may, however, be significantly lower than we believe. Even if our prevalence estimates are correct, our product candidates may be developed for only a subset of patients with the relevant disease or disorder or our product candidates, if approved, may be indicated for or used by only a subset. In the event the number of patients with the diseases and disorders we are studying is significantly lower than we expect, we may have difficulties in enrolling patients in our clinical trials, which may delay or prevent development of our product candidates. If any of our product candidates are approved and our prevalence estimates with respect to any indication or our other market assumptions are not accurate, the markets for our product candidates for these indications may be smaller than we anticipate, which could limit our revenues and our ability to achieve profitability or to meet our expectations with respect to revenues or profits.

Current wording

Our pipeline includes product candidates for a variety of neuroscience diseases. There is no precise method of establishing the actual number of patients with any of these disorders in any geography over any time period. With respect to many of the indications in which we have developed, are developing, or plan to develop our product candidates, we have estimates of the prevalence of the disease or disorder. Our estimates as to prevalence may not be accurate, and the actual prevalence or addressable patient population for some or all of those indications, or any other indication that we elect to pursue, may be significantly smaller than our estimates. In estimating the potential prevalence of indications we are pursuing, or may in the future pursue, including our estimates as to the prevalence of FOS and bipolar disorder, we apply assumptions to available information that may not prove to be accurate. In each case, there is a range of estimates in the published literature and in marketing studies, which include estimates within the range that are lower than our estimates. The actual number of patients with these disease indications may, however, be significantly lower than we believe. Even if our prevalence estimates are correct, our product candidates may be developed for only a subset of patients with the relevant disease or disorder or our product candidates, if approved, may be indicated for or used by only a subset. In the event the number of patients with the diseases and disorders we are studying is significantly lower than we expect, we may have difficulties in enrolling patients in our clinical trials, which may delay or prevent development of our product candidates. If any of our product candidates are approved and our prevalence estimates with respect to any indication or our other market assumptions are not accurate, the markets for our product candidates for these indications may be smaller than we anticipate, which could limit our revenues and our ability to achieve profitability or to meet our expectations with respect to revenues or profits.

Previous wording

Our success depends upon the continued contributions of our key management and scientific personnel, many of whom have been instrumental for us and have substantial experience with developing therapies, identifying potential product candidates and building the technologies related to the clinical development of our product candidates. Given the specialized nature of brain diseases and our approach, there is an inherent scarcity of experienced personnel in these fields. As we continue developing our product candidates in our pipeline, we will require personnel with medical, scientific, or technical qualifications specific to each program. The loss of key personnel, in particular our Chief Scientific Officer, neuropharmacologists and neuroscientists, would delay our research and development activities. We currently do not have “key person” insurance on any of our employees. Despite our efforts to retain valuable employees, members of our team may terminate their employment with us on short notice. The competition for qualified personnel in the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries is intense, and our future success depends upon our ability to attract, retain, and motivate highly skilled scientific, technical and managerial employees. We face competition for personnel from other companies, universities, public and private research institutions, and other organizations. If our recruitment and retention efforts are unsuccessful in the future, it may be difficult for us to implement our business strategy, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

Current wording

Our success depends upon the continued contributions of our key management and scientific personnel, many of whom have been instrumental for us and have substantial experience with developing therapies, identifying potential product candidates and building the technologies related to the clinical development of our product candidates. Given the specialized nature of neurological and psychiatric disorders and our approach, there is an inherent scarcity of experienced personnel in these fields. As we continue developing our product candidates in our pipeline, we will require personnel with medical, scientific, or technical qualifications specific to each program. The loss of key personnel would delay our research and development activities. We currently do not have “key person” insurance on any of our employees. Despite our efforts to retain valuable employees, members of our team may terminate their employment with us on short notice. The competition for qualified personnel in the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries is intense, and our future success depends upon our ability to attract, retain, and motivate highly skilled scientific, technical and managerial employees. We face competition for personnel from other companies, universities, public and private research institutions, and other organizations. If our recruitment and retention efforts are unsuccessful in the future, it may be difficult for us to implement our business strategy, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.