Skip to main content

Rapport Therapeutics, Inc.

For the period ended Mar 31, 2026. Filed May 7, 2026.

View on SEC.gov

About this filing

A company's report for each of its first three quarters. The financial statements are not audited. It shows how the business has moved since the last annual report, and what management says changed.

Mar 31, 2026 · Filed May 7, 2026

RAPP$24.44+3.0%Stored close · as of Nov 6, 2026

What changed in Risk Factors?

Read the current filing

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 493 previous paragraphs and 492 current paragraphs.

405 unchanged; 77 reworded; 8 added; 11 removed; 0 previous and 2 current paragraphs rearranged.

Tables are not compared: 0 previous and 1 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 (8)

Current report

We previously entered into a common stock sales agreement (the “Sales Agreement”), dated July 1, 2025, by and between the Company and Leerink Partners LLC and Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., acting as sales agents, which established an at-the-market offering program pursuant to which we may offer and sell shares of our common stock from time to time (the “ATM Program”). In March 2026, we filed an automatic shelf registration statement on Form S-3ASR ( the “2026 Registration Statement”), containing (i) a base prospectus, which covers the offering, issuance and sale from time to time in one or more offerings of common stock, preferred stock, debt securities, warrants and/or units; and (ii) a sales agreement prospectus for the offering and issuance and sale of up to a maximum aggregate offering price of $150.0 million of common stock, to be issued pursuant to the Sales Agreement. As of March 31, 2026, we have not sold any shares pursuant to our ATM program.

Current report

Our lead product candidate, RAP-219, is in clinical development for focal onset seizures (“FOS”), primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures (“PGTCS”) and bipolar mania, and we continue to develop a long-acting injectable (“LAI”) formulation. Additionally, we have two advanced discovery-stage nAChR programs stemming from our RAP technology platform. The first is our α6ß4 nAChR agonist development candidate, RAP-641, a genetically validated precision target that we are pursuing as a potential novel non-opiate, non-CNS approach for chronic pain and migraine, and the second comprises modulators of the α9α10 nAChR which third-party preclinical genetic data suggest could be an attractive target in treating hearing and vestibular disorders.

Current report

Similarly, China’s Personal Information Protection Law (“PIPL”), which is enforced by the Cyberspace Administration of China (“CAC”), imposes comprehensive requirements on the processing of personal information, including restrictions on the export of sensitive personal information outside of China. PIPL requires data handlers to satisfy specified conditions, such as obtaining certification or entering into standard contractual arrangements prescribed by the CAC, before transferring personal information abroad. If our partners or collaborators operating in China, including Tenacia, are deemed to be in violation of PIPL's cross-border data transfer restrictions, the CAC or other competent authorities could order the suspension or cessation of such data transfers, which could prevent or materially delay the sharing of clinical trial data and other sensitive information with us and adversely affect our ability to advance the development and regulatory approval of our product candidates.

Current report

We may observe safety or tolerability issues beyond those we anticipate with our product candidates in ongoing or future RAP-219 clinical trials or in clinical programs for other product candidates. Additionally, it is possible that patients in our trials may experience greater side effects than observed in healthy volunteers. Additionally, adverse safety effects observed with AMPAR-inhibitors could adversely impact future labeling FDA may require for RAP-219. For example, perampanel’s FDA-approved label is accompanied by a black box warning for serious psychiatric and behavioral reactions, including aggression, hostility and homicidal ideation and threats. Furthermore, significant drug-drug interactions were reported for perampanel. The concomitant use with the other ASMs carbamazepine, phenytoin and oxcarbazepine decreased plasma levels of perampanel by approximately 50 to 67 percent. In addition, perampanel at a dose of 12 mg per day reduced exposure of levonorgestrel, an oral contraceptive, by approximately 40 percent. While we believe there are critical differences between perampanel and RAP-219, the FDA could impose similar warnings and labeling requirements on RAP-219, if approved, in the future.

Current report

For example, we will depend on Tenacia for the development and commercialization of RAP-219 in China. Under the terms of the Tenacia License Agreement, Tenacia is responsible for the development and commercialization of RAP-219 in China. Tenacia will participate in the conduct of certain clinical trials for RAP-219 in Greater China and, as a result, we will depend on Tenacia for the enrollment of patients and the conduct of such clinical trials for RAP-219 in Greater China. We do not control the individual efforts of Tenacia, and any failure by Tenacia to devote sufficient time and effort to the development of RAP-219, including enrolling patients and conducting clinical trials for RAP-219 in Greater China, or to meet their respective obligations to us, could adversely impact our ability to complete our planned clinical studies on our anticipated timelines. We depend on Tenacia to comply with all applicable local laws relative to the development and commercialization of RAP-219. If Tenacia violates, or is alleged to have violated, any laws or regulations during the performance of its obligations for us, it is possible that we could suffer financial and reputational harm or other negative outcomes, including possible legal consequences. In the case of any termination of the Tenacia License Agreement, we may be required to devote additional efforts and to incur additional costs associated with pursuing the development and commercialization of RAP-219 in China, which could result in delays to our RAP-219 clinical program. Alternatively, we may attempt to identify and transact with a new sublicensee, but there can be no assurance that we would be able to identify a suitable sublicensee or transact on terms that are favorable to us.

Current report

Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our product candidates may be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. Certain endpoint data we hope to include in any approved product labeling also may not make it into such labeling, including exploratory or secondary endpoint data such as patient-reported outcome measures. The FDA may also require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (“REMS”) program as a condition of approval of our product candidates, which could entail requirements for long-term patient follow-up, a medication guide, physician communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. In addition, if the FDA, EMA, MHRA or other comparable regulatory authority approves our product candidates, we will have to comply with requirements including submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports and registration.

Current report

Changes in the FDA, other government agencies or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, prevent new products and services from being developed or commercialized in a timely manner or otherwise prevent those agencies from performing normal business functions on which the operation of our business may rely, which could negatively impact our business.

Current report

(c) During the quarter ended March 31, 2026, the following directors and officers (as defined in Rule 16a-1(f) under the Exchange Act) adopted certain trading plans intended to satisfy the requirements of Rule 10b5-1(c):
Removed paragraphs (11)

Previous report

The risk factors denoted with a “*” are newly added or have been materially updated from those included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 (our “Annual Report”).

Previous report

We have completed phase 1 clinical development of our lead product candidate, RAP-219 in multiple indications and announced positive topline results from the Phase 2a trial of RAP-219 in patients with drug-resistant focal onset seizures in September 2025. We plan to hold an end-of-Phase 2 meeting with the FDA in the fourth quarter of 2025, and move into two Phase 3 trials, with initiation expected in the third quarter of 2026. Our Phase 2 proof-of-concept trial in bipolar mania is currently enrolling patients, with topline results expected in the first half of 2027, and next steps for our RAP-219 diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain program are expected to be determined in the first quarter of 2026. Our other product candidates and programs are at various stages of preclinical development. We seek to rapidly advance discovery and development of transformational small molecule medicines for patients suffering from central nervous system disorders.

Previous report

In addition, in our planned future clinical trials, we may utilize clinical trial designs or dosing regimens that have not been tested in prior clinical trials. For instance, our Phase 2a proof-of-concept trial in drug-resistant focal onset seizures utilized a novel study design due to the biomarker-based primary endpoint, intracranial electroencephalography (“iEEG”) data. Specifically, iEEG data is recorded by an implanted responsive neurostimulation (“RNS”) system, which includes an electrode that monitors intracranial brain waves and detects the magnitude, duration and frequency of electrographic activity associated with clinical seizures. We are not aware of any other trials that have used iEEG data as a primary endpoint and have not engaged and do not plan to engage with the FDA on the use of this endpoint in our Phase 2a proof-of-concept trial, as this trial will not be used as a registrational trial. Accordingly, the FDA, EMA, MHRA or other comparable regulatory authorities may have questions around the interpretability of this data, and iEEG data may not be translatable to a clinical seizure endpoint in future registrational trials.

Previous report

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

Previous report

We may seek to establish collaborations and, if we are not able to establish them on commercially reasonable terms, we may have to alter our development and commercialization plans.

Previous report

At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

Previous report

For example, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (the “IRA”) includes several provisions that will impact our business to varying degrees, including provisions that allow the U.S. government to negotiate Medicare Part B and Part D pricing for certain high-cost drugs and biologics without generic or biosimilar competition, among others. All of our disclosed product candidates are small molecule drugs and certain of them are being developed in indications that may rely heavily on Medicare reimbursement, such as peripheral neuropathic pain. Accordingly, these new price-negotiation provisions may have a negative impact on our future revenue and profits. The IRA also exempts orphan drugs from price negotiation if they have received only one orphan designation and are approved solely for that rare disease. However, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 (“OBBBA”) revised this exemption: now, all orphan drugs—regardless of the number of orphan designations—are exempt from the price negotiation program, so long as the drug’s approved indications are exclusively for the designated rare disease(s). While this revision may broaden the exemption for certain products, its effect on our future pipeline remains uncertain.

Previous report

Further, the IRA also imposed rebates with respect to certain drugs and biologics covered under Medicare Part B or Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could further limit our revenue generated from the sale of any approved products.

Previous report

The OBBBA also included significant reforms to Medicaid, including an estimated $1 trillion in reduced federal Medicaid spending from 2025 through 2034, the imposition of work requirements for certain adult enrollees, more frequent eligibility redeterminations, and increased cost-sharing for beneficiaries. These changes are expected to reduce overall Medicaid enrollment and access to care. Although the effect on our business is currently unknown, any decrease in the number of insured patients or reimbursement levels for our products could adversely affect our revenue and commercial prospects.

Previous report

Payments made to physicians in certain EU Member States must be publicly disclosed. Moreover, agreements with physicians often must be the subject of prior notification and approval by the physician’s employer, his or her competent professional organization and/or the regulatory authorities of the individual EU Member States. These requirements are provided in the national laws, industry codes or professional codes of conduct, applicable in the EU Member States. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in reputational risk, public reprimands, administrative penalties, fines or imprisonment.

Previous report

We are subject to the periodic reporting requirements of the Exchange Act. We must design our disclosure controls and procedures to reasonably assure that information we must disclose in reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to management, and recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. We believe that any disclosure controls and procedures, no matter how well-conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. For example, our directors or executive officers could inadvertently fail to disclose a new relationship or arrangement causing us to fail to make a required related party transaction disclosure. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people or by an unauthorized override of the controls. Accordingly, because of the inherent limitations in our control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.
Reworded paragraphs (77)

Previous wording

The success of our business depends primarily upon our ability to identify, develop, and commercialize product candidates based on our RAP technology platform. We do not know whether we will be able to develop any product candidates that succeed through preclinical and clinical development or products of commercial value. We have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales to date. We will continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our preclinical and clinical development and ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred losses in each period since our inception. Net losses and negative cash flows have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital. Our net losses totaled $77.7 million and $58.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively. As of September 30, 2025, we have not yet generated revenues and had an accumulated deficit of $201.5 million. We expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect these losses to increase as we continue our research and development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, our product candidates.

Current wording

The success of our business depends primarily upon our ability to identify, develop, and commercialize product candidates based on our RAP technology platform. We do not know whether we will be able to develop any product candidates that succeed through preclinical and clinical development or products of commercial value. We have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales to date. We will continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our preclinical and clinical development and ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred losses in each period since our inception. Net losses and negative cash flows have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital. Our net losses totaled $19.9 million and $24.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, respectively. As of March 31, 2026, we have not yet generated revenues and had an accumulated deficit of $255.1 million. We expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect these losses to increase as we continue our research and development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, our product candidates.

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

Developing biotechnology products, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, is a very time-consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete. We expect our expenses to continue to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we conduct clinical trials of, and seek regulatory and marketing approval for, our product candidates. Even if our current or future product candidates are approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate. To date, we have funded our operations principally through private financings, our initial public offering (“IPO”) and concurrent private placement, which closed in June 2024, and our underwritten public offering of 11,057,692 shares of common stock, including full exercise of the underwriters’ option to purchase additional shares, at a public offering price of $26.00 per share in September 2025. We expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we continue the clinical and preclinical development of our product candidates, continue to identify additional targets using our RAP technology platform, commence additional preclinical studies and clinical trials, and continue to identify and develop additional product candidates either through internal development or through acquisitions or in-licensing product candidates.

Current wording

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

Previous wording

As of September 30, 2025, we had $513.0 million of cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments, excluding restricted cash. Based upon our current operating plan, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements into the second half of 2029. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could utilize our available capital resources sooner than we expect. We may also raise additional financing on an opportunistic basis in the future. For example, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. Attempting to secure additional financing may divert our management from our day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop our product candidates. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:

Current wording

As of March 31, 2026, we had $476.8 million of cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments, excluding restricted cash. Based upon our current operating plan, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements into the second half of 2029. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could utilize our available capital resources sooner than we expect. We may also raise additional financing on an opportunistic basis in the future. For example, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions, including through our at-the-market program, or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. Attempting to secure additional financing may divert our management from our day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop our product candidates. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

In addition, clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and regulatory approval in one country does not guarantee regulatory approval in any other country. Although the FDA may accept data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States, acceptance of this data is subject to conditions imposed by the FDA, and there can be no assurance that the FDA will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States. If the FDA does not accept the data from any trial that we conduct outside the United States, it would likely result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and could delay or permanently halt our development of the applicable product candidates.

Current wording

In addition, clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and regulatory approval in one country does not guarantee regulatory approval in any other country. Although the FDA may accept data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States, acceptance of this data is subject to conditions imposed by the FDA, and there can be no assurance that the FDA will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States. Additionally, recent policy proposals in the U.S., if enacted in the future, may make acceptance by the FDA or inclusion in a marketing application of foreign data more difficult or costly. If the FDA does not accept the data from any trial that we conduct outside the United States, it would likely result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and could delay or permanently halt our development of the applicable product candidates.

Previous wording

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

Current wording

For example, in the fourth quarter of 2024, we were notified by the FDA that the IND submitted by us for the initiation of a Phase 2 proof-of-concept trial of RAP-219 in diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (“DPNP”) was placed on clinical hold. The FDA requested additional information and amendments specific to the protocol design. Following further interactions with the FDA, the FDA removed its clinical hold on the DPNP IND in December 2025 and we deferred further investment in the program.

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

Due to the significant resources required for the development of our product candidates, we must decide which product candidates and indications to pursue and advance and the amount of resources to allocate to each. Our decisions concerning the allocation of research, development, collaboration, management and financial resources toward particular product candidates, therapeutic areas or indications may not lead to the development of viable commercial products and may divert resources away from better opportunities. If we make incorrect determinations regarding the viability or market potential of any of our product candidates or misread trends in the pharmaceutical industry, in particular for disorders of the nervous system, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. As a result, we may fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities, be required to forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or other diseases and disease pathways that may later prove to have greater commercial potential than those we choose to pursue, or relinquish valuable rights to such product candidates through collaboration, licensing or royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been advantageous for us to invest additional resources to retain sole development and commercialization rights.

Current wording

Due to the significant resources required for the development of our product candidates, we must decide which product candidates and indications to pursue and advance and the amount of resources to allocate to each. For example, we deferred further investment in our DPNP program for RAP-219. Our decisions concerning the allocation of research, development, collaboration, management and financial resources toward particular product candidates, therapeutic areas or indications may not lead to the development of viable commercial products and may divert resources away from better opportunities. If we make incorrect determinations regarding the viability or market potential of any of our product candidates or misread trends in the pharmaceutical industry, in particular for disorders of the nervous system, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. As a result, we may fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities, be required to forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or other diseases and disease pathways that may later prove to have greater commercial potential than those we choose to pursue, or relinquish valuable rights to such product candidates through collaboration, licensing or royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been advantageous for us to invest additional resources to retain sole development and commercialization rights.

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

Additionally, we may be subject to new laws governing the privacy of consumer health data. For example, Washington’s My Health My Data Act, which went into effect on March 31, 2024 broadly defines consumer health data, creates a private right of action to allow individuals to sue for violations of the law, imposes stringent consent requirements and grants consumers certain rights with respect to their health data, including to request deletion of their information. Connecticut and Nevada have also passed similar laws regulating consumer health data. These various privacy and data security laws may impact our business activities, including our identification of research subjects, relationships with business partners and ultimately the marketing and distribution of our products. In addition, other states have proposed and/or passed legislation that regulates the privacy and/or security of certain other specific types of information. For example, a small number of states have passed laws that regulate biometric data specifically. State laws are changing rapidly and there have been a number of proposals in the U.S. Congress for a new comprehensive federal data privacy law to which we may likely become subject to, if enacted.

Current wording

Additionally, we may be subject to new laws governing the privacy of consumer health data. For example, Washington’s My Health My Data Act, which applies broadly to the processing of consumer health data, creates a private right of action to allow individuals to sue for violations of the law, imposes stringent consent requirements and grants consumers certain rights with respect to their health data, including to request deletion of their information. Connecticut and Nevada have also passed similar laws regulating consumer health data. These various privacy and data security laws may impact our business activities, including our identification of research subjects, relationships with business partners and ultimately the marketing and distribution of our products. In addition, other states have proposed and/or passed legislation that regulates the privacy and/or security of certain other specific types of information. For example, a small number of states have passed laws that regulate biometric data specifically. State laws are changing rapidly and there have been a number of proposals in the U.S. Congress for a new comprehensive federal data privacy law to which we may likely become subject to, if enacted.

Previous wording

Regulators and legislators in the U.S. are increasingly scrutinizing and restricting certain personal data transfers and transactions involving foreign countries. For example, the Biden Administration’s executive order Preventing Access to Americans’ Bulk Sensitive Personal Data and United States Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern as implemented by the Department of Justice's Final Rule issued in December 2024, effective April 8, 2025, prohibits certain transactions involving bulk human ‘omic data or human biospecimens from which human ‘omic data can be derived, as well as data brokerage transactions involving certain sensitive personal data categories, including health data, genetic data, and biospecimens, to countries of concern, including China. The Final Rule also restricts certain investment agreements, employment agreements and vendor agreements involving such data and countries of concern, absent specified cybersecurity controls. The Final Rule does not exempt key-coded or otherwise anonymized, pseudonymized, de-identified, or encrypted data. Actual or alleged violations of the Final Rule may be punishable by criminal and/or civil sanctions, and may result in exclusion from participation in federal and state programs.

Current wording

Regulators and legislators in the U.S. are increasingly scrutinizing and restricting certain personal data transfers and transactions involving foreign countries. For example, the Department of Justice’s January 8, 2025, Rule on Preventing Access to U.S. Sensitive Personal Data and Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern or Covered Persons, prohibits transfers of certain types of data, including health data, genetic data, and biospecimens, to countries of concern, including China. The rule also prohibits covered businesses from engaging in certain investment agreements, employment agreements and vendor agreements involving such data and countries of concern, absent specified cybersecurity controls and the rule does not exempt key-coded or otherwise anonymized, pseudonymized, de-identified, or encrypted data. Actual or alleged violations of such rules may be punishable by criminal and/or civil sanctions, result in exclusion from participation in federal and state programs, or restrict our ability to use certain vendors, sites, investigators, or service providers in global clinical trials.

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

Additionally in the EU, the NIS 2 Directive (“NIS 2”) is replacing the cybersecurity legal framework under the current NIS framework in the EU, aiming to ensure a high level of cybersecurity in the region. NIS 2 brings new medium and large organizations providing services in the EU within scope of the legal framework. It extends to additional sectors and expands the list of in-scope healthcare organizations, including to certain providers engaged in research and development of medicinal products. The new regime imposes direct obligations on management in respect of an in-scope organization’s compliance with NIS 2, requires covered organizations to put in place certain cyber risk management measures, strengthens incident reporting requirements and provides supervisory authorities with a greater supervision ability compliance. The majority of obligations will come into force when national legislation implementing NIS 2 becomes effective in the relevant EU Member State. EU Member States had until October 17, 2024 to transpose NIS 2 into national legislation, although many countries have still not completed the transposition. As such, the cybersecurity regulatory landscape in the EU is currently fragmented and uncertain. To the extent we are subject to NIS 2, we will require additional investment of our resources in compliance programs. Under NIS 2 companies may be subject to administrative fines of up to the higher amount of €10 million or 2% of worldwide turnover.

Current wording

Additionally in the EU, the NIS 2 Directive (“NIS 2”) is replacing the cybersecurity legal framework under the current NIS framework in the EU, aiming to ensure a high level of cybersecurity in the region. NIS 2 brings new medium and large organizations providing services in the EU within scope of the legal framework. It extends to additional sectors and expands the list of in-scope healthcare organizations, including to certain providers engaged in research and development of medicinal products. The new regime imposes direct obligations on management in respect of an in-scope organization’s compliance with NIS 2, requires covered organizations to put in place certain cyber risk management measures, strengthens incident reporting requirements and provides supervisory authorities with a greater supervision ability compliance. The majority of obligations will come into force when national legislation implementing NIS 2 becomes effective in the relevant EU Member State. EU Member States had until October 17, 2024 to transpose NIS 2 into national legislation, although some countries have still not completed the transposition. As such, the cybersecurity regulatory landscape in the EU is currently fragmented and uncertain. To the extent we are subject to NIS 2, we will require additional investment of our resources in compliance programs. Under NIS 2 companies may be subject to administrative fines of up to the higher amount of €10 million or 2% of worldwide turnover.

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

In addition, we rely in part on preclinical data using earlier generation TARPg 8 NAMs and third-party published data with other TARPg 8 NAMs for support of RAP-219. While we believe it is an accepted scientific practice to reference preclinical data generated using other molecules of the same class, it is possible that similar studies with RAP-219 would not have generated entirely consistent results and, as such, the studies performed with other molecules of the same class may not be reflective of the therapeutic potential of RAP-219.

Current wording

In addition, we rely in part on preclinical data using earlier generation TARPγ8 NAMs and third-party published data with other TARPγ8 NAMs for support of RAP-219. While we believe it is an accepted scientific practice to reference preclinical data generated using other molecules of the same class, it is possible that similar studies with RAP-219 would not have generated entirely consistent results and, as such, the studies performed with other molecules of the same class may not be reflective of the therapeutic potential of RAP-219.

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

regulators, IRBs, ethics committees or other reviewing bodies may not authorize us or our investigators to commence a clinical trial, or to conduct or continue a clinical trial at a prospective or specific trial site;

Current wording

regulators, institutional review boards (“IRBs”), ethics committees or other reviewing bodies may not authorize us or our investigators to commence a clinical trial, or to conduct or continue a clinical trial at a prospective or specific trial site;

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

If unacceptable side effects arise in the development of our product candidates, we, the FDA, EMA, MHRA or other comparable regulatory authorities, the IRBs, or independent ethics committees at the institutions in which our trials are conducted, could suspend, limit or terminate our clinical trials, or the independent safety monitoring committee could recommend that we suspend, limit or terminate our trials, or the FDA, EMA, MHRA or other comparable regulatory authorities could order us to cease clinical trials or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. We may be unable to overcome any such suspensions or holds that are placed on our clinical trials. Treatment-emergent side effects that are deemed to be drug-related could delay recruitment of clinical trial subjects or may cause subjects that enroll in our clinical trials to discontinue participation in our clinical trials. In addition, these side effects may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff. We may need to train medical personnel using our product candidates to understand the side effect profiles for our clinical trials and upon any commercialization of any of our product candidates. Inadequate training in recognizing or managing the potential side effects of our product candidates could result in harm to patients that are administered our product candidates. Any of these occurrences may adversely affect our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Current wording

If unacceptable side effects arise in the development of our product candidates, we, the FDA, EMA, MHRA or other comparable regulatory authorities, the IRBs, or the independent ethics committees at the institutions in which our trials are conducted, could suspend, limit or terminate our clinical trials, or the independent safety monitoring committee could recommend that we suspend, limit or terminate our trials, or the FDA, EMA, MHRA or other comparable regulatory authorities could order us to cease clinical trials or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. We may be unable to overcome any such suspensions or holds that are placed on our clinical trials. Treatment-emergent side effects that are deemed to be drug-related could delay recruitment of clinical trial subjects or may cause subjects that enroll in our clinical trials to discontinue participation in our clinical trials. In addition, these side effects may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff. We may need to train medical personnel using our product candidates to understand the side effect profiles for our clinical trials and upon any commercialization of any of our product candidates. Inadequate training in recognizing or managing the potential side effects of our product candidates could result in harm to patients that are administered our product candidates. Any of these occurrences may adversely affect our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

Competitive products may reduce or eliminate the commercial opportunity for our product candidates, if approved. If our competitors develop technologies or product candidates more rapidly than we do, or their technologies or product candidates are more effective or safer than ours, our ability to develop and successfully commercialize our product candidates may be adversely affected.

Current wording

Competitive products may reduce or eliminate the commercial opportunity for our product candidates, if approved. If our competitors develop technologies or product candidates more rapidly than we do, or if their technologies or product candidates are more effective or safer than ours, our ability to develop and successfully commercialize our product candidates may be adversely affected.

Previous wording

We currently have no marketing, sales or distribution capabilities. We intend to establish a sales and marketing organization, either on our own or in collaboration with third parties, with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize one or more of our product candidates that may receive regulatory approval in key territories. These efforts will require substantial additional resources, some or all of which may be incurred in advance of any approval of the product candidate. Any failure or delay in the development of our or third parties’ internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact the commercialization of our product candidates.

Current wording

We currently have no marketing, sales or distribution capabilities. We intend to establish a sales and marketing organization, either on our own or in collaboration with third parties, with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize one or more of our product candidates that may receive regulatory approval in key territories. These efforts will require substantial additional resources, some or all of which may be incurred in advance of any approval of a product candidate. Any failure or delay in the development of our or third parties’ internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact the commercialization of our product candidates.

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Showing the first 40 of 77 pairs. Open the source sections for the rest.

Rearranged current paragraphs (2)

Current report — wording carried from elsewhere

Furthermore, the length of time necessary to complete clinical trials and submit an application for marketing approval for a final decision by a regulatory authority varies significantly from one product candidate to the next and from one country or jurisdiction to the next and may be difficult to predict.

Current report — wording carried from elsewhere

The ability of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and statutory, regulatory, and policy changes. Average review times at the FDA have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies or comparable foreign regulatory authorities on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities, is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.