Skip to main content

PLUS THERAPEUTICS, INC.

For the period ended Dec 31, 2025. Filed Mar 12, 2026.

View on SEC.gov

About this filing

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

FY2025 · Filed Mar 12, 2026

CNSY$0.64-4.1%Stored close · as of Nov 6, 2026

What changed in Risk Factors?

Read the current filing

Previous report: 10-K

Period ended 2024-12-31; filed 2025-03-31.

0000950170-25-047698

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Current report: 10-K

Period ended 2025-12-31; filed 2026-03-12.

0001193125-26-104258

Item 1A. Risk Factors

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

Compared 340 previous paragraphs and 350 current paragraphs.

245 unchanged; 51 reworded; 54 added; 43 removed; 1 previous and 0 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 (54)

Current report

In March 2024, we received notice from the Listing Qualifications staff of Nasdaq (the “Staff”), notifying us that we no longer maintained at least $2.5 million in stockholders’ equity, as required under Nasdaq Listing Rule 5550(b)(1) (the “Minimum Stockholders’ Equity Requirement”), and also did not meet any other alternative standard. On October 22, 2024, we held our first hearing before a Nasdaq panel, as a result of which we received additional time, or until March 4, 2025, to regain compliance.

Current report

A second hearing was held on July 15, 2025. On July 22, 2025, the panel for our second hearing issued a decision granting our request for continued listing on Nasdaq, subject to us demonstrating compliance with (1) the Minimum Stockholders’ Equity Requirement by August 14, 2025; and (2) the Minimum Bid Requirement (as defined below) by September 8, 2025. On August 22, 2025, we received a letter (the “August 2025 Letter”) from Nasdaq confirming our compliance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5550(b). Specifically, the August 2025 Letter confirmed that we were in compliance with both (1) Nasdaq Listing Rule 5550(b)(2), which requires a market value of listed securities of at least $35 million and (2) the alternative stockholders’ equity threshold under Nasdaq Listing Rule 5550(b)(1), which is the Minimum Stockholders’ Equity Requirement. The August 2025 Letter also provided that, solely with respect to the Minimum Stockholders’ Equity Requirement, we remain subject to a one-year panel monitoring period, through August 22, 2026. If, within that one-year monitoring period, the Staff determines that we no longer satisfy the Minimum Stockholders’ Equity Requirement (and we are not then in compliance with one of the alternative standards under Nasdaq Listing Rule 5550(b)), we will not be permitted to provide the Staff with a plan of compliance and the Staff is not permitted to grant additional time to regain compliance with the Minimum Stockholders’ Equity Requirement nor will we be afforded an applicable cure or compliance period. Instead, the Staff will issue a delist determination letter, and we will have an opportunity to request a new hearing before the Nasdaq Hearings Panel, which request would stay any further action by the Staff pending the ultimate outcome of the hearing.

Current report

On May 16, 2025, we received notice from Nasdaq that, because the closing bid price for our common stock had fallen below $1.00 per share for 30 consecutive business days, we no longer complied with the minimum bid price requirement pursuant to Nasdaq Listing Rule 5550(a)(2) (the “Minimum Bid Requirement”). We were provided an initial compliance period of 180 calendar days, or until November 12, 2025, to regain compliance with the Minimum Bid Requirement. To regain compliance, the closing bid price of our common stock must meet or exceed $1.00 per share for a minimum of 10 consecutive business days prior to November 12, 2025.

Current report

On November 13, 2025, we received a second letter from the Nasdaq Staff advising that we had been granted an additional 180 calendar days, or until May 11, 2026, to regain compliance with the Minimum Bid Requirement, in accordance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5810(c)(3)(A).

Current report

We intend to continue to actively monitor the closing bid price of our common stock and will evaluate available options to regain compliance with the Minimum Bid Requirement. Specifically, we have confirmed to Nasdaq that, if necessary, we will implement a reverse stock split of our outstanding common stock to attempt to regain compliance. If we do not regain compliance within the additional compliance period, Nasdaq will provide notice that our common stock will be subject to delisting. We would then be entitled to appeal that determination to a Nasdaq hearings panel. There can be no assurance that we will regain compliance with the Minimum Bid Requirement during the 180-day additional compliance period or maintain compliance with the other Nasdaq listing requirements.

Current report

Potential Consequences of Delisting

Current report

There is no assurance that we will be able to meet Nasdaq’s listing requirements or comply with the requisite Nasdaq requirements to maintain our listing of common stock on Nasdaq. In the event that our common stock is delisted from Nasdaq, as a result of our failure to comply with the Minimum Stockholders’ Equity Requirement or the Minimum Bid Requirement or as a result of our failure to continue to comply with any other requirement for continued listing on Nasdaq, and we are not able to list our securities on Nasdaq or any other national securities exchange, we could face significant material adverse consequences, including:

Current report

a decline of the market price of our common stock;

Current report

reduced liquidity for our common stock;

Current report

a limited amount of news and analyst coverage for us;

Current report

the incurring of additional costs under state blue sky laws in connection with any sales of our securities.

Current report

As of the date of this Annual Report, we require additional funding to develop our product candidates, conduct future operations, and repay our outstanding obligations. If we are unable to obtain the funds necessary to do so because our common stock is not listed on any national securities exchange, we may be required to delay, scale back or eliminate our product development activities, and we may be unable to continue our business operations.

Current report

If our common stock is delisted by Nasdaq, our common stock may be eligible to trade on an over-the-counter quotation system where an investor may find it more difficult to sell our stock or obtain accurate quotations as to the market value of our common stock. In the event our common stock is delisted from Nasdaq, we may not be able to list our common stock on another national securities exchange or obtain quotation on an over-the-counter quotation system.

Current report

Since acquiring the CNSide Platform in 2024, we have established infrastructure to support a scalable and centralized testing laboratory in Houston, TX that will service the U.S. market. We have been executing on our commercial market access strategy, which includes prioritized state licensure, proprietary reimbursement codes, commercial and government payor coverage, and value-based pricing to optimize revenue. We re-introduced the CNSide Platform first in Texas in August of 2025, signed national agreements to provide the CNSide Test with UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company and Humana, Inc., and obtained state licensure for 49 of 50 US states by January 2026, with the remaining license for the state of New York on track for 2027.

Current report

On May 6, 2024, the FDA issued a final rule amending the definition of an in vitro diagnostic (“IVD”) device to include tests manufactured by a clinical laboratory. This rule would have required LDTs manufactured by a laboratory to comply with the same general regulatory requirements as other medical devices. Two lawsuits challenging FDA’s authority to regulate LDTs—one by the American

Current report

Clinical Laboratory Association and the other by the Association for Molecular Pathology— were filed in federal district courts in Texas in 2024 and were subsequently consolidated.

Current report

On March 31, 2025, the court issued an order vacating the final rule, thereby overturning the rulemaking’s associated requirements. The district court ruled that FDA lacks jurisdiction to regulate LDTs because they do not meet the definition of a medical device under the FDC Act. The government did not appeal.

Current report

Legislative proposals addressing the FDA’s oversight of LDTs have been previously introduced. For example, the VALID Act, introduced in 2021, 2023 and again in 2025, would have established a new risk-based regulatory framework for in vitro clinical tests (IVCTs), a category which would have included IVDs, LDTs, collection devices and instruments used with such tests. It is unclear whether the court decision will renew interest in a legislative path for LDT regulation.

Current report

If the regulatory framework for LDTs changes in the future, CNSide Diagnostics may also be required to comply with these FDA or other, different regulations. Failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements may trigger a range of enforcement actions, and may disqualify or delay a company from launching an LDT product, or prevent a company with an LDT on the marketing from continuing to sell their test.

Current report

There can be no assurance that we will be able to generate or grow sales of the CNSide Test or that we will develop or commercialize any other diagnostic products or services that will generate significant revenue. The commercial success of our tests, our successful commercialization of any new diagnostic products and our ability to generate revenues will depend on a variety of factors, including the following:

Current report

acceptance in the medical community;

Current report

inclusion in healthcare guidelines and recommendations;

Current report

inclusion in quality measures;

Current report

recommendations and studies that may be published by government agencies, professional organizations, academic or medical journals or other key opinion leaders;

Current report

patient acceptance and demand;

Current report

patient compliance with orders for our tests by healthcare providers, and patient adherence to recommendations regarding periodic re-testing;

Current report

effective marketing and educational programs, including successful direct-to-patient marketing such as television advertising and social media;

Current report

sufficient coverage and reimbursement by payers;

Current report

the existence of federal or state laws that mandate coverage for CNS cancers and other types of screening, the extent to which those laws mandate coverage of our tests and the enforcement of those laws;

Current report

the amount and nature of competition from other products and procedures;

Current report

maintaining regulatory licensure, clearance, authorization, or approvals to legally market our products and services; and

Current report

the ease of use of our ordering process for healthcare providers.

Current report

If we are unable to generate or grow sales of the CNSide Test, we are delayed or limited in doing so, or we are unable to successfully commercialize the CNSide Test, our business prospects, financial condition, and results of operations would be adversely affected.

Current report

emergence of dosing issues;

Current report

The FDA has historically taken the position that it has the authority to regulate LDTs as IVD devices under the FDCA, although it has generally exercised enforcement discretion with regard to LDTs. This means that even though the FDA believes it can impose regulatory requirements on LDTs, such as requirements to obtain premarket approval, de novo classification or clearance of LDTs, it has generally chosen not to enforce those requirements.

Current report

On May 6, 2024, the FDA issued a final rule amending the definition of an IVD to include tests manufactured by a clinical laboratory. This rule would have required LDTs to comply with the same general regulatory requirements as other medical devices. Two lawsuits challenging FDA’s authority to regulate LDTs—one by the American Clinical Laboratory Association and the other by the Association for Molecular Pathology— were filed in federal district courts in Texas in 2024 and were subsequently consolidated. On March 31, 2025, the court issued an order vacating the final rule, thereby overturning the rulemaking’s associated requirements. The district court ruled the FDA lacks jurisdiction to regulate LDTs because they do not meet the definition of a medical device under the FDC Act. The government did not appeal.

Current report

Legislative proposals addressing the FDA’s oversight of LDTs have been previously introduced. For example, the VALID Act, introduced in 2021, 2023 and again in 2025, would have established a new risk-based regulatory framework for in vitro clinical tests (IVCTs), a category which would have included IVDs, LDTs, collection devices and instruments used with such tests. It is unclear whether the court decision will renew interest in a legislative path for LDT regulation.

Current report

If the regulatory framework for LDTs changes in the future, CNSide Diagnostics may also be required to comply with these FDA or other, different regulations. Failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements may trigger a range of enforcement actions, and may disqualify or delay a company from launching an LDT product, or prevent a company with an LDT on the marketing from continuing to sell their test.

Current report

If the regulatory framework for LDTs changes in the future, CNSide Diagnostics may also be required to comply with these FDA or other, different regulations. Failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements may trigger a range of enforcement actions, and may disqualify or delay a company from launching an LDT product, or prevent a company with an LDT on the marketing from continuing to sell their test.

Current report

Healthcare reform measures could hinder or prevent the commercial success of our LDTs or any product candidate for which we obtain regulatory approval.

Showing the first 40 of 54 passages. Open the source sections for the rest.

Removed paragraphs (43)

Previous report

Nasdaq requires listed issuers to comply with certain standards in order to remain listed on its exchange. These requirements include, among other things, maintaining a closing bid price for our common stock of $1.00 per share and meeting one of the following three requirements: maintaining at least $2.5 million in stockholders’ equity (the “Minimum Stockholders’ Equity Requirement”); maintaining $35 million of market value of listed securities; or having $500,000 in net income over the prior two years or two of the prior three years. In March 2024, we received notice from the Listing Qualifications staff of Nasdaq (the “Staff”), notifying us that we no longer complied with the Minimum Stockholders' Equity Requirement under Nasdaq Listing Rule 5550(b)(1).

Previous report

On September 5, 2024, Nasdaq notified us that we had not regained compliance with the Minimum Stockholders’ Equity Requirement and that, as a result, unless we timely requested an appeal of this determination to a Nasdaq Hearings Panel (the “Panel”), Nasdaq would move to suspend trading of our common stock and to have our shares of common stock delisted from The Nasdaq Capital Market. The Company timely requested a hearing before the Panel, and the hearing was held on October 22, 2024. On October 30, 2024, Nasdaq provided us until March 4, 2025, to notify Nasdaq that we were in compliance with the Minimum Stockholders’ Equity

Previous report

Requirement. We regained compliance with the Minimum Stockholders’ Equity Requirement in connection with the private placement we closed on March 4, 2025. For more information regarding the private placement, see “Liquidity and Capital Resources” below.

Previous report

Pursuant to Nasdaq Listing Rule 5815(d)(4)(B), we will be subject to a Mandatory Panel Monitor until March 7, 2026. If the Staff finds we are again out of compliance with the Minimum Stockholders’ Equity Requirement before that date, we will not be permitted to provide the Staff with a plan of compliance with respect to that deficiency and the Staff would not be permitted to grant additional time for us to regain compliance with respect to that deficiency, nor would we be afforded an applicable cure or compliance period. Instead, the Staff would issue a “Delist Determination Letter” and we would have an opportunity to request a Nasdaq hearing panel regarding our continued listing.

Previous report

In the event that our common stock is delisted from Nasdaq, as a result of our failure to comply with the Minimum Stockholders’ Equity Requirement, or as a result of our failure to continue to comply with any other requirement for continued listing on Nasdaq, we may have to pursue trading on a less recognized or accepted market, such as the over the counter markets, our stock may be traded as a “penny stock,” which would make transactions in our common stock more difficult and cumbersome, and we may be unable to access capital on favorable terms or at all, as companies trading on alternative markets may be viewed as less attractive investments with higher associated risks, such that existing or prospective institutional investors may be less interested in, or prohibited from, investing in our common stock. This may also cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

Previous report

Borrowings under our line of credit have the effect of limiting our use of cash and marketable securities.

Previous report

We have an existing margin loan facility under a line of credit (the “Pershing Credit Facility”) with Pershing LLC (“Pershing”), an affiliate of The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation. The available credit line limit under this facility fluctuates based on our request for extensions from time to time, subject to the value of the collateralized marketable securities we hold with Pershing, provided that the amount available to draw under the facility cannot exceed 91.5% of the value of the collateralized marketable securities deposited with Pershing. Depending on the value of the marketable securities we hold with Pershing, Pershing may require us from time-to-time to deposit additional funds or marketable securities in order to restore the level of collateral to an acceptable level, and the amounts borrowed under the facility are due on demand. Volatility in the global markets could cause the interest rate to fluctuate from time to time increasing our costs, or could cause Pershing to terminate our ability to borrow funds. In addition, borrowings under the Pershing Credit Facility have the effect of limiting our use of cash and marketable securities.

Previous report

During the quarter ended June 30, 2023, we recognized immaterial grant revenue related to reimbursable development costs incurred in the fourth quarter of 2022 and the first quarter of 2023 that were eligible for revenue recognition in those respective prior periods. These costs were eligible for reimbursement under our CPRIT Grant, but were not correctly recognized in prior period grant revenue due to management’s view that insufficient progress had been made in the ReSPECT-LM clinical trial, despite no performance specific milestones in the grant outside of a reasonableness test for reimbursement of expenses. Management has concluded that the correction to grant revenue in the prior periods did not cause a material misstatement of our financial statements.

Previous report

We did not have adequate controls to apply appropriate accounting principles to significant and unusual grant revenue transactions. Specifically, controls over identification of significant and/or unusual transactions requiring technical analysis were not operating effectively. Management evaluated the impact of this deficiency on our disclosure controls and procedures and concluded that the control deficiency represents a material weakness. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the Company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.

Previous report

In the first quarter of fiscal year 2024, the Company completed the testing of the design and operating effectiveness of the controls over application of appropriate accounting principles to significant and unusual grant revenue transaction. Management has determined that the controls are adequately designed and are operating effectively, and concluded that the material weakness identified in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2023 had been remediated.

Previous report

Furthermore, if our remediation of the material weakness is not effective, or if we experience additional material weaknesses in the future or otherwise fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls in the future, we may not be able to accurately or timely report our financial condition or results of operations, which may adversely affect investor confidence in us and, as a result, the value of our common stock.

Previous report

In addition, the FDA historically exercised enforcement discretion with respect to LDTs and did not require these tests to be cleared or approved by FDA as long as they complied with CLIA standards. However, on May 6, 2024, the FDA issued a final rule in which it announced it was phasing out its general enforcement discretion approach so that LDTs manufactured by a laboratory will generally fall under the same enforcement approach as other medical devices. According to the final rule this phase out will take place over a period of several years. As a result, CNSide Diagnostics may also be required to comply with these FDA regulations if FDA implements and enforces the final LDT rule, including, among other things, registration and listing, quality system regulations, and premarket authorization. Failure to comply with applicable FDA regulatory requirements may trigger a range of enforcement actions by the FDA, and may disqualify or delay a company from launching an LDT product, or prevent a company with an LDT on the marketing from continuing to sell their test.

Previous report

emerging of dosing issues;

Previous report

there are no assurances that our product candidates will not have safety or effectiveness problems occurring after the drugs reach the market;

Previous report

there are no assurances that regulatory authorities will not take steps to prevent or limit further marketing of the drug due to safety concerns; and

Previous report

Historically, the FDA has exercised enforcement discretion for LDTs, allowing labs to offer tests with little input from the agency. However, on May 6, 2024, the FDA issued a final rule in which it announced it was phasing out its general enforcement discretion approach so that LDTs manufactured by a laboratory will generally fall under the same enforcement approach as medical devices. If implemented, this phase out of enforcement discretion will take place over several years.

Previous report

Congress is also working on legislative language that would clarify the FDA’s authority with respect to LDTs – and if enacted, would potentially supersede the final rule. In this regard, the “Verifying Accurate Leading-edge IVCT Development Act,” or VALID Act, was most recently introduced in March 2023. The bill proposes a risk-based approach that would subject many LDTs to FDA regulation by creating a new in vitro clinical test, or IVCT, category of regulated products. As proposed, the bill would grandfather many existing LDTs from the proposed premarket approval, quality systems, and labeling requirements, respectively, but would require such tests to comply with other regulatory requirements (e.g., registration/listing, adverse event reporting). To market a high-risk IVCT, reasonable assurance of analytical and clinical validity for the intended use would be needed to be established. Under VALID, a precertification process would be established that would allow a laboratory to establish that the facilities, methods, and controls used in the development of its IVCTs meet quality system requirements. If pre-certified, low-risk IVCTs developed by the laboratory and falling within the scope of the FDA’s precertification order would not be subject to test-specific pre-market review. The new regulatory framework would include quality control and post-market reporting requirements. The FDA would have the authority to withdraw approvals for IVCTs for various reasons, including (for example) if there were a reasonable likelihood that the test would cause death or serious adverse health consequences. However, we cannot predict if this (or any other bill) will be enacted in its current (or any other) form and cannot quantify the effect of such proposals on our business.

Previous report

To the extent that the FDA ultimately regulates certain LDTs, whether via final rule, final guidance, or as instructed by Congress, our LDTs may be subject to certain additional regulatory requirements. Complying with the FDA’s requirements may be expensive, time-consuming, and subject us to significant or unanticipated delays. Insofar as we may be required to obtain premarket clearance or approval to perform an LDT, we cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain such authorization. Even if we obtain regulatory clearance or approval where required, such authorization may not be for the intended uses that we believe are commercially attractive or are critical to the commercial success of our tests. As a result, the application of the FDA’s requirements to our tests could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Previous report

Risks associated with the new landscape of LDTs include but are not limited to:

Previous report

Our inability to implement quality standards included in the new guidelines

Previous report

Our inability to implement all FDA requirements for medical device LDTs

Previous report

Backlog at the FDA for review of submission

Previous report

Additional regulations being adopted by the FDA

Previous report

Increased timeline to product launch, delaying revenue for the company

Previous report

Increased regulatory oversight resulting in delays for product launch

Previous report

Increased costs of product development and regulatory compliance, including:

Previous report

More expansive validation study design

Previous report

Hiring additional regulatory compliance talent o

Previous report

Hiring additional statistical experts

Previous report

Other unanticipated costs

Previous report

On May 6, 2024, the FDA issued a final rule in which it announced it was phasing out its general enforcement discretion approach so that LDTs manufactured by a laboratory will generally fall under the same enforcement approach as medical devices. At this time it is unclear whether the current Administration will rescind, revise, or continue with this regulatory scheme or if it will be superseded by Congressional action. Complying with these FDA requirements, or adapting to revised requirements applicable to LDTs, may be costly and may cause delays in our plans to commercialize the CNSide TM Test.

Previous report

Stockholders will suffer substantial additional dilution if certain provisions in the outstanding March 2025 Warrants are utilized.

Previous report

On March 4, 2025, we entered into a securities purchase agreement (the “March 2025 Purchase Agreement”) with accredited investors, including certain of our existing stockholders, identified on the signature page thereto (collectively, the “March 2025 Private Placement Purchasers”) for a private placement of securities (the “March 2025 Private Placement”) for gross proceeds of approximately $15.0 million. Pursuant to the March 2025 Purchase Agreement, we issued an aggregate of 4,069,738 shares (the “March 2025 Private Placement Shares”) of our common stock and 23,972,400 Prefunded Warrants, with each March 2025 Private Placement Share or Prefunded Warrant accompanied by (i) a Series A common warrant (the “March 2025 Series A Warrants”) to purchase one share of common stock and (ii) one Series B common warrant (the “March 2025 Series B Warrants” and together with the March 2025 Series A Warrants, the “March 2025 Warrants”) to purchase one share of common stock.

Previous report

Certain provisions in our outstanding March 2025 Warrants may result in significant dilution. The exercise price of the March 2025 Warrants will reset to a price equal to the greater of (i) the floor price of $0.132 (the “Floor Price”), and (ii) the lowest volume weighted average price (“VWAP”) during a period commencing on the first trading day immediately following the later of (x) the earlier of (A) the first trading day after the initial registration statement that we are required to file to register the resale of the securities in the March 2025 Private Placement, or (B) the first trading day after the date on which the holder of those securities can sell them pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, without restriction or limitation, or (y) the first trading day after stockholder approval of certain provisions of the March 2025 Warrants is obtained, and the number of shares issuable upon exercise will be proportionately adjusted such that the aggregate exercise price will remain unchanged.

Previous report

Subject to certain exceptions, if we sell any common stock (or securities convertible into or exercisable into common stock) at a price per share (or conversion or exercise price, as applicable) less than the exercise price of the March 2025 Series A Warrants then in effect, then the exercise price of the March 2025 Series A Warrants will be reduced to such lower price, but no lower than the Floor Price, and the number of shares issuable upon exercise will be proportionately adjusted such that the aggregate exercise price will remain unchanged.

Previous report

Under the alternative cashless exercise option of the March 2025 Series B Warrant, a holder has the right to receive an aggregate number of shares equal to three times the aggregate number of shares of common stock that would be issuable upon a cash exercise of the March 2025 Series B Warrant, without any further payment to us.

Previous report

Finally, if at any time there occurs any share split, share dividend, share combination recapitalization or other similar transaction involving our common stock and the lowest daily VWAP during the period commencing on the trading day immediately following the applicable date of share combination event and ending on the fifth trading day immediately following such date is less than the exercise price of the March 2025 Warrants then in effect, then the exercise price of the March 2025 Warrants will be reduced to the lowest daily VWAP during such period (subject to a minimum exercise price of the Floor Price), and the number of shares issuable upon exercise will be proportionately adjusted such that the aggregate exercise price will remain unchanged.

Showing the first 40 of 43 passages. Open the source sections for the rest.

Reworded paragraphs (51)

Previous wording

We have generated negative cash flows from operations and have incurred net operating losses each year since we started business. For the year ended December 31, 2024, we incurred net losses of $13.0 million and our net cash used in operating activities was $10.6 million. As of December 31, 2024, our accumulated deficit was $493.5 million. We expect to continue to incur net losses and negative cash flow from operating activities for at least the next twelve months. As our focus on development of nanomedicine and the development of therapeutic applications has increased, losses have resulted primarily from expenses associated with research and development and clinical trial-related activities, as well as general and administrative expenses. We expect to continue operating in a loss position and expect that recurring operating expenses will be at higher levels for the year ending December 31, 2025 as we perform clinical trials and other development activities for our nanomedicine product candidates.

Current wording

We have generated negative cash flows from operations and have incurred net operating losses each year since we started business. For the year ended December 31, 2025, we incurred net losses of $22.4 million and our net cash used in operating activities was $20.8 million. As of December 31, 2025, our accumulated deficit was $515.9 million. We expect to continue to incur net losses and negative cash flow from operating activities for at least the next twelve months. As our focus on development of nanomedicine and the development of therapeutic applications has increased, losses have resulted primarily from expenses associated with research and development and clinical trial-related activities, as well as general and administrative expenses. We expect to continue operating in a loss position and expect that recurring operating expenses will be at higher levels for the year ending December 31, 2026 as we perform clinical trials and other development activities for our nanomedicine product candidates.

Previous wording

Uncertainties relating to our ability to fund our operations for at least the next 12 months raises substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

Current wording

Uncertainties relating to our ability to fund our operations raises substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

Previous wording

As of December 31, 2024, we had an accumulated stockholders’ deficit of approximately $493.5 million, a working capital deficit of approximately $10.3 million, and approximately $3.6 million of cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments to fund our operations and capital requirements. We do not currently have sufficient available liquidity to fund our operations for at least the next 12 months. Consequently, absent further actions, these matters raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that the financial statements in this Form 10-K are issued.

Current wording

We received net proceeds of approximately $13.3 million, in the public offering that closed on January 15, 2026, allowing the Company to maintain a cash runaway until approximately 2027. As of December 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $515.9 million, working capital of approximately $2.9 million, and approximately $13.1 million of cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, and short-term investments to fund our operations and capital requirements. Absent further actions, these matters raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

Previous wording

We could be delisted from Nasdaq for failure to comply with the minimum stockholders’ equity continued listing requirement or other applicable continued listing requirements and standards of Nasdaq, which would seriously harm the liquidity of our stock and our ability to raise capital.

Current wording

We could be delisted from Nasdaq for failure to comply with the Minimum Stockholders’ Equity Requirement, the Minimum Bid Requirement or other applicable continued listing requirements and standards of Nasdaq, which would seriously harm the liquidity of our stock and our ability to raise capital.

Previous wording

Depending on the type and the terms of any financing we pursue, stockholders’ rights and the value of their investment in our common stock could be reduced. A financing could involve one or more types of securities including common stock, preferred stock, convertible debt or warrants to acquire common stock. These securities could be issued at or below the then prevailing market price for our common stock or with terms or conditions that provide new investors with rights that are superior to those held by our existing stockholders or that have a negative impact on the value of securities held by our existing stockholders. For example, the terms of our recent offerings resulted in substantial dilution to our existing stockholders and significant protections to new investors that are not available to stockholders who invested prior to the offerings. In addition, if we issue secured debt securities, the holders of the debt would have a claim to our assets that would be prior to the rights of stockholders until the debt is paid. Interest on these debt securities would increase costs and negatively impact operating results. If the issuance of new securities results in diminished rights to holders of our common stock, the market price of our common stock could be negatively impacted.

Current wording

Depending on the type and the terms of any financing we pursue, stockholders’ rights and the value of their investment in our common stock could be reduced. A financing could involve one or more types of securities including common stock, preferred stock, convertible debt or warrants to acquire common stock. These securities could be issued at or below the then prevailing market price for our common stock or with terms or conditions that provide new investors with rights that are superior to those held by our existing stockholders or that have a negative impact on the value of securities held by our existing stockholders. For example, the terms of our recent offerings resulted in substantial dilution to our existing stockholders. In addition, if we issue secured debt securities, the holders of the debt would have a claim to our assets that would be prior to the rights of stockholders until the debt is paid. Interest on these debt securities would increase costs and negatively impact operating results. If the issuance of new securities results in diminished rights to holders of our common stock, the market price of our common stock could be negatively impacted.

Previous wording

Actual events involving limited liquidity, defaults, non-performance or other adverse developments that affect financial institutions, or other companies in the financial services industry or the financial services industry generally, or concerns or rumors about any events of these kinds or other similar risks, have in the past and may in the future lead to market-wide liquidity problems. The majority of our cash is held in accounts at U.S. banking institutions that we believe are of high quality. Cash held in depository accounts may exceed the $250,000 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) insurance limits. If such banking institutions were to fail, we could lose all or a portion of those amounts held in excess of such insurance limitations. By way of example, the FDIC took control of Silicon Valley Bank (“SVB”) on March 10, 2023. Similarly, on March 12, 2023, Signature Bank and Silvergate Capital Corp. were each swept into receivership. Although depositors at SVB received access to their funds, uncertainty and liquidity concerns in the broader financial services industry remain. Inflation and rapid increases in interest rates have led to a decline in the trading value of previously issued government securities with interest rates below current market interest rates. The U.S. Department of Treasury, FDIC and Federal Reserve Board have announced a program to provide up to $25 billion of loans to financial institutions secured by such government securities held by financial institutions to mitigate the risk of potential losses on the sale of such instruments. However, widespread demands for customer withdrawals or other needs of financial institutions for immediate liquidity may exceed the capacity of such program. There is no guarantee that the U.S. Department of Treasury, FDIC and Federal Reserve Board will provide access to uninsured funds in the future in the event of the closure of other banks or financial institutions in a timely fashion or at all. Additionally, in the future, our access to our cash in amounts adequate to finance our operations could be significantly impaired by the financial institutions with which we have arrangements directly facing liquidity constraints or failures. Any material loss that we may experience in the future could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and could materially impact our ability to pay our operational expenses or make other payments.

Current wording

Our cash held in non-interest-bearing and interest-bearing accounts exceeds the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) insurance limits. If such banking institutions were to fail, we could lose all or a portion of those amounts held in excess of such insurance limitations.

Previous wording

Our future success is in large part dependent upon our ability to successfully develop our nanomedicine platform and commercialize REYOBIQ™ and 188 RNL-BAM and any failure to do so could significantly harm our business and prospects.

Current wording

Our future success is in large part dependent upon our ability to successfully develop our nanomedicine platform and commercialize rhenium (186 Re) obisbemeda and 188 RNL-BAM and any failure to do so could significantly harm our business and prospects.

Previous wording

Our ability to successfully develop and commercialize REYOBIQ™ and 188 RNL-BAM is subject to a number of risks, including the following:

Current wording

Our ability to successfully develop and commercialize rhenium (186 Re) obisbemeda and 188 RNL-BAM is subject to a number of risks, including the following:

Previous wording

we do not have substantive drug development, manufacturing, and commercialization experience, and thus we may be required to hire and rely on significant numbers of scientific, quality, regulatory and other technical personnel with the experience and expertise necessary to develop, manufacture, and commercialize our nanomedicine product candidates. We may be unable to identify, hire and retain personnel with the requisite experience to conduct the operations necessary to obtain regulatory approval and commercialize our RNL product candidates, in which case our business would be materially harmed;

Current wording

we do not have substantive drug development, manufacturing, and commercialization experience, and thus we may be required to hire and rely on significant numbers of scientific, quality, regulatory and other technical personnel with the experience and expertise necessary to develop, manufacture, and commercialize our nanomedicine product candidates. We may be unable to identify, hire and retain personnel with the requisite experience to conduct the operations necessary to obtain regulatory clearance, authorization or approval and commercialize our RNL product candidates, in which case our business would be materially harmed;

Previous wording

In the United States, before we can market a new medical device, we must first receive either clearance under Section 510(k) of the FDCA or premarket approval (“PMA”), from the FDA, unless an exemption applies. In the process of obtaining either premarket clearance or approval, following these routes respectively, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is either substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device with similar intended uses and the same technological characteristics or technological characteristics that do not raise different questions of safety or effectiveness , or that it is safe and effective for its intended use, based, in part, on extensive data, including, but not limited to, technical, preclinical, clinical, manufacturing and labeling data. The PMA process is typically required for devices that are deemed to pose the greatest risk, such as life sustaining, life supporting or implantable devices.

Current wording

In the United States, before we can market a new medical device, we must first receive either clearance under Section 510(k) of the FDCA, de novo authorization, or premarket approval (“PMA”), from the FDA, unless an exemption applies. In the process of obtaining either premarket clearance, authorization, or approval, following these routes respectively, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is either substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device with similar intended uses and the same technological characteristics or technological characteristics that do not raise different questions of safety or effectiveness , that a device is either low or moderate risk and its benefits outweigh its risks, or that it is has a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness for its intended use, based, in part, on extensive data, which may include, but is not limited to, technical, preclinical, clinical, manufacturing and labeling data. The PMA process is typically required for devices that are deemed to pose the greatest risk, such as life sustaining, life supporting or implantable devices.

Previous wording

Modifications to products that are approved through a PMA generally require FDA approval of the modifications through a PMA supplemental application. Both the PMA approval and the 510(k) clearance process can be expensive, lengthy and uncertain. The process of obtaining a PMA is particularly costly and uncertain and generally takes from one to three years, or even longer, from the time the application is submitted to the FDA. In addition, a PMA generally requires the performance of one or more clinical studies. Despite the time, effort and cost, a medical device may not be approved by the FDA. Any delay or failure to obtain necessary regulatory approvals could harm our business. Furthermore, even if we are granted regulatory approvals, they may include significant limitations on the approved and labeled indications for use for the device, which may limit the market for the device.

Current wording

Modifications to products that are approved through a PMA generally require FDA approval of the modifications through a PMA supplemental application. The PMA approval, de novo authorization, and the 510(k) clearance processes can be expensive, lengthy and uncertain. The processes of obtaining a PMA and a de novo are particularly costly and uncertain and can take a year or even longer, from the time the application is submitted to the FDA. In addition, a PMA and a de novo generally require the performance of one or more clinical studies. Despite the time, effort and cost, a medical device may not be approved by the FDA. Any delay or failure to obtain necessary regulatory clearance, authorization or approvals could harm our business. Furthermore, even if we are granted regulatory clearance, authorization or approvals, they may include significant limitations on the cleared, authorized, approved and labeled indications for use for the device, which may limit the market for the device.

Previous wording

We recently acquired the CNSide TMdiagnostic portfolio, and we may not be successful in our efforts to develop, fully utilize and monetize it.

Current wording

We recently acquired the CNSide Portfolio, and we may not be successful in our efforts to develop, fully utilize and monetize it.

Previous wording

Our success depends in substantial part on our ability to obtain regulatory approvals for our RNL product candidates. However, we cannot be certain that we will receive regulatory approval for these product candidates or our other product candidates.

Current wording

Our success depends in substantial part on our ability to obtain regulatory clearance, authorization or approval for our RNL product candidates. However, we cannot be certain that we will receive regulatory clearance, authorization or approval for these product candidates or our other product candidates.

Previous wording

We have a limited number of product candidates in development, and our business depends substantially on their successful development and commercialization. Our product candidates will require development, regulatory review and approval in multiple jurisdictions, substantial investment, access to sufficient commercial manufacturing capacity and significant marketing efforts before we can generate any revenue from sales of our product candidates. The research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, approval, sale, marketing and distribution of products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory authorities in the United States and other countries, whose regulations differ from country to country.

Current wording

We have a limited number of product candidates in development, and our business depends substantially on their successful development and commercialization. Our product candidates will require development, regulatory review and clearance, authorization or approval in multiple jurisdictions, substantial investment, access to sufficient commercial manufacturing capacity and significant marketing efforts before we can generate any revenue from sales of our product candidates. The research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, approval, sale, marketing and distribution of products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory authorities in the United States and other countries, whose regulations differ from country to country.

Previous wording

We are not permitted to market our product candidates in the United States until we receive approval from the FDA, or in any foreign countries until we receive the requisite approval from the regulatory authorities of such countries (including centralized marketing authorization from the European Commission), and we may never receive such regulatory approvals. Obtaining regulatory approval for a product candidate is a lengthy, expensive and uncertain process, and may not be obtained. Any failure to obtain regulatory approval of any of our product candidates would limit our ability to generate future revenue (and any failure to obtain such approval for all of the indications and labeling claims we deem desirable could reduce our potential revenue), would potentially harm the development prospects of our product candidates and would have a material and adverse impact on our business.

Current wording

We are not permitted to market our product candidates in the United States until we receive clearance, authorization or approval from the FDA, or in any foreign countries until we receive the requisite clearance, authorization or approval from the regulatory authorities of such countries (including centralized marketing authorization from the European Commission), and we may never receive such regulatory clearance, authorization or approvals. Obtaining regulatory clearance, authorization or approval for a product candidate is a lengthy, expensive and uncertain process, and may not be obtained. Any failure to obtain regulatory clearance, authorization or approval of any of our product candidates would limit our ability to generate future revenue (and any failure to obtain such clearance, authorization or approval for all of the indications and labeling claims we deem desirable could reduce our potential revenue), would potentially harm the development prospects of our product candidates and would have a material and adverse impact on our business.

Previous wording

Even if we successfully obtain regulatory approvals to market our product candidates, our revenue will be dependent, in part, on our ability to commercialize such products as well as the size of the markets in the territories for which we gain regulatory approval. If the markets for our product candidates are not as significant as we estimate, our business and prospects will be harmed.

Current wording

Even if we successfully obtain regulatory clearance, authorization or approvals to market our product candidates, our revenue will be dependent, in part, on our ability to commercialize such products as well as the size of the markets in the territories for which we gain regulatory clearance, authorization or approval. If the markets for our product candidates are not as significant as we estimate, our business and prospects will be harmed.

Previous wording

If a product candidate is not approved in a timely fashion on commercially viable terms, or if development of any product candidate is terminated due to difficulties or delays encountered in the regulatory approval process, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, and we may become more dependent on the development of other proprietary products and/or our ability to successfully acquire other products and technologies. There can be no assurance that any product candidate will receive regulatory approval in a timely manner, or at all.

Current wording

If a product candidate is not cleared, authorized or approved in a timely fashion on commercially viable terms, or if development of any product candidate is terminated due to difficulties or delays encountered in the regulatory clearance, authorization or approval process, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, and we may become more dependent on the development of other proprietary products and/or our ability to successfully acquire other products and technologies. There can be no assurance that any product candidate will receive regulatory approval in a timely manner, or at all.

Previous wording

On March 29, 2020, we entered into an exclusive license agreement with NanoTx for the global rights to develop and commercialize NanoTx’s glioblastoma treatment, REYOBIQ™. Under the license agreement with NanoTx, we are required to use commercial reasonable efforts to develop the REYOBIQ™ product candidate acquired under the license agreement. Further, we are subject to future milestone, earn-out and other payments to NanoTx all of which are tied to our commercialization and sale activities for product candidates. If we are unsuccessful in our efforts to develop these assets, or if NanoTx and we were to enter into a dispute over the terms of our agreement, then our business could be seriously harmed.

Current wording

On March 29, 2020, we entered into an exclusive license agreement with NanoTx for the global rights to develop and commercialize NanoTx’s glioblastoma treatment, rhenium (186 Re) obisbemeda. Under the license agreement with NanoTx, we are required to use commercial reasonable efforts to develop the rhenium (186 Re) obisbemeda product candidate acquired under the license agreement. Further, we are subject to future milestone, earn-out and other payments to NanoTx all of which are tied to our commercialization and sale activities for product candidates. If we are unsuccessful in our efforts to develop these assets, or if NanoTx and we were to enter into a dispute over the terms of our agreement, then our business could be seriously harmed.

Previous wording

we do not have prior experience with obtaining regulatory, reimbursement, or other approvals for product candidates such as REYOBIQ™ and 188 RNL-BAM or the CNSide™ Test;

Current wording

we do not have prior experience with obtaining regulatory, reimbursement, or other approvals for product candidates such as rhenium (186 Re) obisbemeda and 188 RNL-BAM or the CNSide Test;

Previous wording

Competitors may have greater experience in developing drugs and clinical laboratory tests, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory clearances or approvals, manufacturing and commercialization. It is possible that competitors may obtain patent protection, approval, or clearance from the FDA or achieve commercialization earlier than we can, any of which could have a substantial negative effect on our business. Many of our potential competitors have substantially greater:

Current wording

Competitors may have greater experience in developing drugs and clinical laboratory tests, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory clearances or approvals, manufacturing and commercialization. It is possible that competitors may obtain patent protection, approval, authorization, or clearance from the FDA or achieve commercialization earlier than we can, any of which could have a substantial negative effect on our business. Many of our potential competitors have substantially greater:

Previous wording

We expect the product candidates in our pipeline, if approved, to compete on the basis of, among other things, product efficacy and safety, time to market, price, coverage, and reimbursement by third-party payers, extent of adverse side effects, and convenience of treatment procedures. One or more of our competitors may develop other products that compete with ours, obtain necessary approvals for such products from the FDA, the European Commission, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare or other agencies, if required, more rapidly than we do or develop alternative products or therapies that are safer, more effective and/or more cost effective than any products developed by us. The competition that we encounter with respect to any of our product candidates that receive the requisite regulatory approval and classification and are marketed may have an effect on our product prices, market share, and results of operations. We may not be able to differentiate any products that we are able to market from those of our competitors, successfully develop or introduce new products that are less costly or offer better results than those of our competitors, or offer purchasers of our products payment and other commercial terms as favorable as those offered by our competitors.

Current wording

We expect the product candidates in our pipeline, if approved, to compete on the basis of, among other things, product efficacy and safety, time to market, price, coverage, and reimbursement by third-party payers, extent of adverse side effects, and convenience of treatment procedures. One or more of our competitors may develop other products that compete with ours, obtain necessary clearance, authorization, or approvals for such products from the FDA, the European Commission, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare or other agencies, if required, more rapidly than we do or develop alternative products or therapies that are safer, more effective and/or more cost effective than any products developed by us. The competition that we encounter with respect to any of our product candidates that receive the requisite regulatory clearance, authorization, or approval and classification and are marketed may have an effect on our product prices, market share, and results of operations. We may not be able to differentiate any products that we are able to market from those of our competitors, successfully develop or introduce new products that are less costly or offer better results than those of our competitors, or offer purchasers of our products payment and other commercial terms as favorable as those offered by our competitors.

Previous wording

As a result of these factors, our competitors may obtain regulatory approval of their products more quickly than we are able to or may obtain patent protection or other intellectual property rights that limit or block us from developing or commercializing our product candidates. Our competitors may also develop products that are more effective, more useful, better tolerated, subject to fewer or less severe side effects, more widely prescribed or accepted, or less costly than ours and may also be more successful than we are in manufacturing and marketing their products. If we are unable to compete effectively with the marketed therapeutics of our competitors or if such competitors are successful in developing products that compete with any of our product candidates that are approved, our business, results of operations, financial condition, and prospects may be materially adversely affected.

Current wording

As a result of these factors, our competitors may obtain regulatory clearance, authorization, or approval of their products more quickly than we are able to or may obtain patent protection or other intellectual property rights, including regulatory exclusivities, that limit or block us from developing or commercializing our product candidates. Our competitors may also develop products that are more effective, more useful, better tolerated, subject to fewer or less severe side effects, more widely prescribed or accepted, or less costly than ours and may also be more successful than we are in manufacturing and marketing their products. If we are unable to compete effectively with the marketed therapeutics of our competitors or if such competitors are successful in developing products that compete with any of our product candidates that are cleared, authorized, or approved, our business, results of operations, financial condition, and prospects may be materially adversely affected.

Previous wording

Pre-clinical studies and preliminary and interim data from clinical trials of our product candidates are not necessarily predictive of the results or success of ongoing or future clinical trials of our product candidates.

Current wording

Preclinical studies and preliminary and interim data from clinical trials of our product candidates are not necessarily predictive of the results or success of ongoing or future clinical trials of our product candidates.

Previous wording

Pre-clinical studies and any positive preliminary and interim data from our clinical trials of our product candidates may not necessarily be predictive of the results of ongoing or later clinical trials. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, including us and many other companies with greater resources and experience than us, have suffered significant setbacks in clinical trials, even after seeing promising results in prior pre-clinical studies and clinical trials. Preclinical studies and Phase 1 clinical trials are primarily designed and operate to test safety, to study pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics and to understand the side effects of product candidates at various doses and schedules. Even if we are able to complete our planned clinical trials of our product candidates according to our current development timeline, initial positive results from pre-clinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be replicated in subsequent clinical trials. The design of our later stage clinical trials could differ in significant ways (e.g., inclusion and exclusion criteria, endpoints, statistical analysis plan) from our earlier stage clinical trials, which could cause the outcomes of the later stage trials to differ from those of our earlier stage clinical trials. If we fail to produce positive results in our planned clinical trials of any of our product candidates, the development timeline and regulatory approval and commercialization prospects for our product candidates, and, correspondingly, our business and financial prospects, could be materially adversely affected. If we fail to produce positive results in our planned clinical trials of any of our product candidates, the development timeline and regulatory approval and commercialization prospects for such product candidates, and, correspondingly, our business and financial prospects, could be materially adversely affected.

Current wording

Preclinical studies and any positive preliminary and interim data from our clinical trials of our product candidates may not necessarily be predictive of the results of ongoing or later clinical trials. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, including us and many other companies with greater resources and experience than us, have suffered significant setbacks in clinical trials, even after seeing promising results in prior preclinical studies and clinical trials. Preclinical studies and Phase 1 clinical trials are primarily designed and operate to test safety, to study pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics and to understand the side effects of product candidates at various doses and schedules. Even if we are able to complete our planned clinical trials of our product candidates according to our current development timeline, initial positive results from preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be replicated in subsequent clinical trials. The design of our later stage clinical trials could differ in significant ways (e.g., inclusion and exclusion criteria, endpoints, statistical analysis plan) from our earlier stage clinical trials, which could cause the outcomes of the later stage trials to differ from those of our earlier stage clinical trials. If we fail to produce positive results in our planned clinical trials of any of our product candidates, the development timeline and regulatory approval and commercialization prospects for our product candidates, and, correspondingly, our business and financial prospects, could be materially adversely affected. If we fail to produce positive results in our planned clinical trials of any of our product candidates, the development timeline and regulatory approval and commercialization prospects for such product candidates, and, correspondingly, our business and financial prospects, could be materially adversely affected.

Previous wording

We are an early-stage company with limited resources and revenues. The product candidates we currently have under development will require significant development, pre-clinical and clinical testing and investment of significant funds before their commercialization. Because of this, we must make strategic decisions regarding resource allocations and which product candidates to pursue. There can be no assurance that we will be able to develop all potentially promising product candidates that we may identify. Based on preliminary results, we may choose to advance a particular product candidate that later fails to be successful, and simultaneously forgo or defer further investment in other product candidates that later are discovered to demonstrate greater promise in terms of clinical and commercial success. If we make resource allocation decisions that later are shown to be inaccurate, our business and prospects could be harmed.

Current wording

We are an early-stage company with limited resources and revenues. The product candidates we currently have under development will require significant development, preclinical and clinical testing and investment of significant funds before their commercialization. Because of this, we must make strategic decisions regarding resource allocations and which product candidates to pursue. There can be no assurance that we will be able to develop all potentially promising product candidates that we may identify. Based on preliminary results, we may choose to advance a particular product candidate that later fails to be successful, and simultaneously forgo or defer further investment in other product candidates that later are discovered to demonstrate greater promise in terms of clinical and commercial success. If we make resource allocation decisions that later are shown to be inaccurate, our business and prospects could be harmed.

Previous wording

Even if our clinical trials are successfully completed as planned, the results may not support approval of our product candidates under the laws and regulations of the FDA or other regulatory authorities outside the United States. The clinical trial process may fail to demonstrate that our product candidates are both safe and/or effective for their intended uses. Pre-clinical and clinical data and analyses are often able to be interpreted in different ways. Even if we view our results favorably, if a regulatory authority has a different view, we may still fail to obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates. The FDA may also require us to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials for our product candidates either prior to or post-approval, or it may object to elements of our clinical development program, requiring their alteration. This, in turn, would significantly adversely affect our business prospects.

Current wording

Even if our clinical trials are successfully completed as planned, the results may not support approval of our product candidates under the laws and regulations of the FDA or other regulatory authorities outside the United States. The clinical trial process may fail to demonstrate that our product candidates are both safe and/or effective for their intended uses. Preclinical and clinical data and analyses are often able to be interpreted in different ways. Even if we view our results favorably, if a regulatory authority has a different view, we may still fail to obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates. The FDA may also require us to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials for our product candidates either prior to or post-approval, or it may object to elements of our clinical development program, requiring their alteration. This, in turn, would significantly adversely affect our business prospects.

Previous wording

We rely on third parties in the performance of many of the clinical trial functions, including CROs, which help execute our clinical trials, the hospitals and clinics at which our trials are conducted, the clinical investigators at the trial sites, and other third-party service providers. Failure of any third-party service provider to adhere to applicable trial protocols, laws and regulations in the conduct of one of our clinical trials could adversely affect the conduct and results of such trial (including possible data integrity issues), which could seriously harm our business. As a result, results from our clinical trials may be delayed, which in turn would have a material adverse impact on our clinical trial plans and timelines and impair our ability to successfully complete clinical development, obtain regulatory approval, or commercialize our product candidates. This in turn would substantially harm our business and operations.

Current wording

We rely on third parties in the performance of many of the clinical trial functions, including CROs, which help execute our clinical trials, the hospitals and clinics at which our trials are conducted, the clinical investigators at the trial sites, and other third-party service providers. Failure of any third-party service provider to adhere to applicable trial protocols, GCP, laws and regulations in the conduct of one of our clinical trials could adversely affect the conduct and results of such trial (including possible data integrity issues), which could seriously harm our business. As a result, results from our clinical trials may be delayed, which in turn would have a material adverse impact on our clinical trial plans and timelines and impair our ability to successfully complete clinical development, obtain regulatory approval, or commercialize our product candidates. This in turn would substantially harm our business and operations.

Previous wording

drug manufacturers are subject to ongoing periodic unannounced inspection by the FDA and other government agencies to ensure compliance with cGMP and other government regulations and corresponding foreign standards. We do not have control over third-party manufacturers’ compliance with these regulations and standards, but we may ultimately be responsible for any of their failures;

Current wording

drug manufacturers are subject to ongoing periodic unannounced inspection by the FDA and other government agencies to ensure compliance with cGMP and other government regulations and corresponding foreign standards. We do not have control over third-party manufacturers’ compliance with these regulations and standards, but we are responsible for ensuring compliance with these requirements, and any failure to maintain compliance with applicable regulatory standards by our third-party manufacturers could delay or harm our ability to obtain approval for our products;

Previous wording

Before any new drugs may be introduced to the U.S. market, the manufacturer generally must obtain FDA approval through either an ANDA process for generic drugs off patent that allow for bioequivalence to an existing RLD or the lengthier NDA process, which typically requires multiple successful and successive clinical trials to generate clinical data supportive of safety and efficacy along with extensive pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic preclinical testing to demonstrate safety. Our RNL product candidates are subject to the FDA’s 505(b)(1) NDA process. NDA drugs can take significant time due to the preclinical and clinical trial requirements.

Current wording

Before any new drugs may be introduced to the U.S. market, the manufacturer generally must obtain FDA approval, which typically requires multiple successful and successive clinical trials to generate clinical data supportive of safety and efficacy along with extensive pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic preclinical testing to demonstrate safety.

Previous wording

our nanomedicine product candidates, if approved, will still be subject to post-market reporting requirements for instances where the drug may have caused or contributed to the death or serious injury, or serious adverse events;

Current wording

our nanomedicine product candidates, if approved, will still be subject to post-market reporting requirements for instances where the drug may have caused or contributed to the death or serious injury, or serious adverse events; and

Previous wording

The future regulatory processes that will be applicable to Laboratory Developed Tests (LDTs) are uncertain and may prevent us from obtaining required authorizations for the commercialization of our products and/or introduce additional costs associated with those products.

Current wording

The future regulatory processes that will be applicable to LDTs are uncertain and may prevent us from obtaining required authorizations for the commercialization of our products and/or introduce additional costs associated with those products.

Previous wording

Within the laboratory, most tests can be divided into two categories: in vitro diagnostics (IVDs) and laboratory developed tests (LDTs). IVDs are commercially manufactured assays and make up the majority of clinical laboratory tests, such as those in a comprehensive metabolic panel (CMP) and a complete blood count (CBC). LDTs, on the other hand, are developed by individual laboratories and overseen by highly trained and qualified laboratory directors. We plan to offer an LDT in the U.S. beginning in 2025.

Current wording

Within the laboratory, most tests can be divided into two categories: in vitro diagnostics (IVDs) and laboratory developed tests (LDTs). IVDs are commercially manufactured assays and make up the majority of clinical laboratory tests, such as those in a comprehensive metabolic panel (CMP) and a complete blood count (CBC). LDTs, on the other hand, are developed by individual laboratories and overseen by highly trained and qualified laboratory directors. We re-introduced an LDT, the CNSide Test, in the U.S. in August 2025. If FDA were to determine that the CNSide Test is not an LDT or that it includes components or accessories that are medical devices, then FDA could try to regulate the test or its components/accessories as medical devices.

Previous wording

Compliance with the FDCA for a medical device includes, among other things, registration and listing, quality system regulations, and premarket authorization. Failure to comply with applicable FDA regulatory requirements may trigger a range of enforcement actions by the FDA, including warning letters, civil monetary penalties, injunctions, criminal prosecution, recall or seizure, operating restrictions, partial suspension or total shutdown of operations, and denial of or challenges to applications for clearance or approval, as well as significant adverse publicity.

Current wording

Compliance with the FDCA for a medical device includes, among other things, registration and listing, quality management system regulations, and premarket authorization. Failure to comply with applicable FDA regulatory requirements may trigger a range of enforcement actions by the FDA, including warning letters, civil monetary penalties, injunctions, criminal prosecution, recall or seizure, operating restrictions, partial suspension or total shutdown of operations, and denial of or challenges to applications for clearance or approval, as well as significant adverse publicity.

Previous wording

Our nanoparticle and microparticle technologies and pipeline oncology products and laboratory test are being developed under existing government criteria, which are subject to change in the future. Clinical and/or pre-clinical criteria and cGMP manufacturing requirements may change and additional regulatory burdens may be imposed. Any regulatory review committees and advisory groups and any contemplated new guidelines may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional studies, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of our product candidates or lead to significant post-approval limitations or restrictions. As we advance our product candidates, we may be required to consult with these regulatory and advisory groups and comply with applicable guidelines. If we fail to do so, we may be required to delay or discontinue development of our product candidates. Delay or failure to obtain, or unexpected costs in obtaining, the regulatory approval necessary to bring a product candidate to market could decrease our ability to generate sufficient revenue to maintain our business. Divergence in regulatory criteria for different regulatory agencies in international jurisdictions could result in the repeat of clinical studies and/or preclinical studies to satisfy local territory requirements, resulting in the repeating of studies and/or delays in the regulatory process. Some territories may require clinical data in their indigenous population, resulting in the repeat of clinical studies in whole or in part. Some territories may object to the formulation ingredients in the final finished product and may require reformulation to modify or remove objectionable components; resulting in delays in regulatory approvals. Such objectionable reformulations include, but are not limited to, human or animal components, Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and/or Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy risks, banned packaging components, prohibited chemicals, and banned substances. There can be no assurances that the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities will accept our pre-clinical and/or clinical data.

Current wording

Our nanoparticle and microparticle technologies and pipeline oncology products and laboratory test are being developed under existing government criteria, which are subject to change in the future. Clinical and/or preclinical criteria and cGMP manufacturing requirements may change and additional regulatory burdens may be imposed. Any regulatory review committees and advisory groups and any contemplated new guidelines may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional studies, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of our product candidates or lead to significant post-approval limitations or restrictions. As we advance our product candidates, we may be required to consult with these regulatory and advisory groups and comply with applicable guidelines. If we fail to do so, we may be required to delay or discontinue development of our product candidates. Delay or failure to obtain, or unexpected costs in obtaining, the regulatory approval necessary to bring a product candidate to market could decrease our ability to generate sufficient revenue to maintain our business. Divergence in regulatory criteria for different regulatory agencies in international jurisdictions could result in the repeat of clinical studies and/or preclinical studies to satisfy local territory requirements, resulting in the repeating of studies and/or delays in the regulatory process. Some territories may require clinical data in their indigenous population, resulting in the repeat of clinical studies in whole or in part. Some territories may object to the formulation ingredients in the final finished product and may require reformulation to modify or remove objectionable components; resulting in delays in regulatory approvals. Such objectionable reformulations include, but are not limited to, human or animal components, Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and/or Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy risks, banned packaging components, prohibited chemicals, and banned substances. There can be no assurances that the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities will accept our preclinical and/or clinical data.

Previous wording

Third party payors increasingly examine the cost-effectiveness of pharmaceutical products, in addition to their safety and efficacy, when making coverage and reimbursement decisions. We may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic and/or clinical studies in order to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of our products. If our competitors offer their products at prices that provide purportedly lower treatment costs than our products, or otherwise suggest that their products are safer, more effective or more cost-effective than our products, this may result in a greater level of access for their products relative to our products, which would reduce our sales and harm our results of operations. In some cases, for example, third party payors try to encourage the use of less expensive generic products through their prescription benefit coverage and reimbursement and co-pay policies. Because some of our product candidates, once commercialized, may compete in a market with both branded and generic products, obtaining and maintaining access and reimbursement coverage for our products may be more challenging than for products that are new chemical entities for which no therapeutic alternatives exist. If our competitors offer a clinical lab test that competes with our CNSide TM Test but is viewed by clinicians or payers as being more cost effective or having greater clinical utility, we may not be able to realize the expected benefits of our test.

Current wording

Third party payors increasingly examine the cost-effectiveness of pharmaceutical products, in addition to their safety and efficacy, when making coverage and reimbursement decisions. We may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic and/or clinical studies in order to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of our products. If our competitors offer their products at prices that provide purportedly lower treatment costs than our products, or otherwise suggest that their products are safer, more effective or more cost-effective than our products, this may result in a greater level of access for their products relative to our products, which would reduce our sales and harm our results of operations. In some cases, for example, third party payors try to encourage the use of less expensive generic products through their prescription benefit coverage and reimbursement and co-pay policies. Because some of our product candidates, once commercialized, may compete in a market with both branded and generic products, obtaining and maintaining access and reimbursement coverage for our products may be more challenging than for products that are new chemical entities for which no therapeutic alternatives exist. If our competitors offer a clinical lab test that competes with our CNSide Test but is viewed by clinicians or payers as being more cost effective or having greater clinical utility, we may not be able to realize the expected benefits of our test.

Previous wording

In September 2020, the FDA granted both orphan drug designation and Fast Track designation to REYOBIQ™ for the treatment of patients with GBM. In November 2021, the FDA granted Fast Track designation to REYOBIQ™ for the treatment of patients with LM. In March 2025, the FDA granted orphan drug designation to REYOBIQ™ for the treatment of LM in patients with lung cancer. A product candidate that receives orphan drug designation can benefit from potential commercial benefits following approval. Under the U.S. Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a product candidate as an orphan drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as affecting a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States. In the EU, the EMA’s Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products grants orphan drug designation to promote the development of products that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition affecting not more than 10,000 persons in the EU. Currently, this designation makes the product eligible for market exclusivity in the U.S. and the EU for seven years and ten years, respectively, if a product is the first such product approved for such orphan indication. This market exclusivity does not, however, pertain to indications other than those for which the drug is indicated for, which can be narrower than the orphan drug designation, nor does it prevent drug products containing a different active moiety from receiving orphan designations or approvals in these same indications. Further, even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve a drug with similar chemical structure for the same indication if the FDA concludes that the new drug is clinically superior to the orphan product or a market shortage occurs. In the EU, orphan exclusivity may be reduced to six years if the drug no longer satisfies the original designation criteria or can be lost altogether if the marketing authorization holder consents to a second orphan drug application or cannot supply enough drug, or when a second applicant demonstrates its drug is “clinically superior” to the original orphan drug. Notwithstanding orphan drug designation for some of our product candidates, we may not enjoy market exclusivity in a particular market, and if we fail to obtain or maintain orphan drug designation or other regulatory exclusivity for some of our product candidates, our competitive position would be harmed.

Current wording

In September 2020, the FDA granted orphan drug designation to rhenium (186 Re) obisbemeda for the treatment of patients with GBM. In March 2025, the FDA granted orphan drug designation to rhenium (186 Re) obisbemeda for the treatment of LM in patients with lung cancer. A product candidate that receives orphan drug designation can benefit from potential commercial benefits following approval. Under the U.S. Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a product candidate as an orphan drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as affecting a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States. In the EU, the EMA’s Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products grants orphan drug designation to promote the development of products that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition affecting not more than 10,000 persons in the EU. Currently, this designation makes the product eligible for market exclusivity in the U.S. and the EU for seven years and ten years, respectively, if a product is the first such product approved for such orphan indication. This market exclusivity does not, however, block indications other than those for which the drug is designated and indicated for, which can be narrower than the orphan drug designation, nor does it prevent drug products containing a different active moiety from receiving orphan designations or approvals in these same indications. Further, even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve a drug with similar chemical structure for the same indication if the FDA concludes that the new drug is clinically superior to the orphan product or a market shortage occurs. In the EU, orphan exclusivity may be reduced to six years if the drug no longer satisfies the original designation criteria or can be lost altogether if the marketing authorization holder consents to a second orphan drug application or cannot supply enough drug, or when a second applicant demonstrates its drug is “clinically superior” to the original orphan drug. Notwithstanding orphan drug designation for some of our product candidates, we may not enjoy market exclusivity in a particular market, and if we fail to obtain or maintain orphan drug designation or other regulatory exclusivity for some of our product candidates, our competitive position would be harmed.

Previous wording

The manufacture of our product candidates is, and the manufacture of any future drug, device, and/or cell-related therapeutic products would be, subject to periodic inspection by regulatory authorities and distribution partners. The manufacture of drug and device products for human use is subject to extensive regulation and inspection from time to time by the FDA for compliance with the FDA’s cGMP, the Quality System Regulation (“QSR”), as well as equivalent requirements and inspections by state and foreign. regulatory authorities. There can be no assurance that the FDA or other authorities will not, during the course of an inspection of existing or new facilities, identify what they consider to be deficiencies in our compliance with QSRs or other requirements and request, or seek remedial action.

Current wording

The manufacture of our product candidates is, and the manufacture of any future drug, device, and/or cell-related therapeutic products would be, subject to periodic inspection by regulatory authorities and distribution partners. The manufacture of drug and device products for human use is subject to extensive regulation and inspection from time to time by the FDA for compliance with the FDA’s cGMP, the QMSR, as well as equivalent requirements and inspections by state and foreign. regulatory authorities. There can be no assurance that the FDA or other authorities will not, during the course of an inspection of existing or new facilities, identify what they consider to be deficiencies in our compliance with the QMSRs or other requirements and request, or seek remedial action.

Previous wording

Failure to comply with such regulations or a potential delay in attaining compliance may adversely affect our manufacturing activities and could result in, among other things, injunctions, civil penalties, FDA refusal to grant pre- market approvals or clearances of future or pending product submissions, fines, recalls, import or seizures of products, total or partial suspensions of production and criminal prosecution. There can be no assurance that after such occurrences that we will be able to obtain additional necessary regulatory approvals or clearances on a timely basis, if at all. Delays in receipt of or failure to receive such approvals or clearances, or the loss of previously received approvals or clearances could have a substantial negative effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

Current wording

Failure to comply with such regulations or a potential delay in attaining compliance may adversely affect our manufacturing activities and could result in, among other things, injunctions, civil penalties, FDA refusal to grant pre- market approvals, authorizations, or clearances of future or pending product submissions, fines, recalls, import or seizures of products, total or partial suspensions of production and criminal prosecution. There can be no assurance that after such occurrences that we will be able to obtain additional necessary regulatory approvals, authorizations, or clearances on a timely basis, if at all. Delays in receipt of or failure to receive such approvals, authorizations, or clearances, or the loss of previously received approvals, authorizations, or clearances could have a substantial negative effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

Previous wording

The clinical use of our product candidates exposes us to the risk of product liability claims. This risk exists even if a product or product candidate is approved for commercial sale by applicable regulatory authorities and manufactured in facilities regulated by such authorities. Our product candidates are designed to affect important bodily functions and processes. Any side effects, manufacturing defects, misuse, or abuse associated with our product candidates could result in injury to a patient or even death. For example, REYOBIQ™ and 188 RNL-BAM are cytotoxic, or toxic to living cells, and, if incorrectly or defectively manufactured or labeled, or incorrectly dosed or otherwise used in a manner not contemplated by its label, could result in patient harm and even death. In addition, a liability claim may be brought against us even if our product candidates merely appear to have caused an injury.

Current wording

The clinical use of our product candidates exposes us to the risk of product liability claims. This risk exists even if a product or product candidate is approved for commercial sale by applicable regulatory authorities and manufactured in facilities regulated by such authorities. Our product candidates are designed to affect important bodily functions and processes. Any side effects, manufacturing defects, misuse, or abuse associated with our product candidates could result in injury to a patient or even death. For example, rhenium (186 Re) obisbemeda and 188 RNL-BAM are cytotoxic, or toxic to living cells, and, if incorrectly or defectively manufactured or labeled, or incorrectly dosed or otherwise used in a manner not contemplated by its label, could result in patient harm and even death. In addition, a liability claim may be brought against us even if our product candidates merely appear to have caused an injury.

Previous wording

We recently acquired the CNSide TMPortfolio, and we may not be successful in our efforts to develop, fully utilize and monetize it.

Current wording

We may not be successful in our efforts to develop, fully utilize and monetize the CNSide diagnostic portfolio.

Showing the first 40 of 51 pairs. Open the source sections for the rest.

Rearranged previous paragraphs (1)

Previous report — wording carried elsewhere

In April 2024, we completed the acquisition of substantially all of the right, title and interest in the CNSide TM Platform, including the CNSide TM Test, which is designed to detect, quantify, and monitor tumor status in LM. We are currently evaluating and developing our business plan for developing the CNSide TMPortfolio alongside our lead radio therapeutic candidate, REYOBIQ™, and seeking partnering and financing opportunities for CNSide TM. We are planning for the CNSide TM Test to be re-introduced to the U.S. market starting in the second quarter of 2025. However, there can be no assurances that we will be able to develop the technology to allow for commercial applications, or successfully utilize and fully integrate the CNSide TM Portfolio into our operations. We may not generate revenues from or realize the anticipated benefits of the CNSide TM Platform within our expected timeline or at all. Contingent on our launch are a number of steps related to certifications, state licensures, payor coverages and reimbursement codes are completed.