Jazz Pharmaceuticals plc

Previous wording

Historically, our business was substantially dependent on Xyrem, and our financial results were significantly influenced by sales of Xyrem. Our current operating plan assumes that Xywav, with 92% lower sodium compared to high-sodium oxybates (depending on the dose) and absence of a sodium warning, will remain the #1 branded oxybate treatment for narcolepsy; the position it held based on revenue in the fourth quarter of 2024. While we expect that our business will continue to be meaningfully dependent on oxybate revenues, there is no guarantee that oxybate revenues will remain at current levels. In this regard, our ability to maintain oxybate revenues and realize the anticipated benefits from our investment in Xywav are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties as discussed in greater detail below, including: those related to thecommercialization of Xywav for the treatment of IH in adults and adoption in that indication; competition from the introduction of AG versions of high-sodium oxybate and branded products, such as Avadel’s once-nightly dose, high-sodium oxybate branded product Lumryz, for treatment of cataplexy and/or EDS in adults with narcolepsy in the U.S. market, as well as potential future competition from additional AG and generic versions of high-sodium oxybate and from other competitors; increased pricing pressure from, changes in policies by, or restrictions on reimbursement imposed by, third party payors, including our ability tomaintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for Xywav and Xyrem; increased rebates required to maintain access to our products; challenges to our intellectual property around Xyrem and/or Xywav, including from pending antitrust and intellectual property litigation; andcontinued acceptance of Xywav and Xyrem by physicians and patients. In addition, a wholly owned subsidiary of Hikma launched its AG version of high-sodium oxybate in January 2023 and Amneal launched its AG version of high-sodium oxybate in July 2023. For a discussion of risks associated with maintaining the AG royalty revenue from these AG products, see the risk factor below titled “The introduction of new products in the U.S. market that compete with, or otherwise disrupt the market for, our oxybate products has adversely affected and may continue to adversely affect sales of our oxybate products.” We have seen a negative impact and expect to see a further negative impact on our oxybate revenues as a result of these AG products and Avadel’s Lumryz and any generic products and new branded products. A substantial decline in oxybate revenues could cause us to reduce our operating expenses or seek to raise additional funds and would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects, including on our ability to acquire, in-license or develop new products to grow our business.

Current wording

Historically, our business was substantially dependent on Xyrem, and our financial results were significantly influenced by sales of Xyrem. Our current 2026 operating plan assumes that Xywav, with 92% lower sodium compared to high-sodium oxybates (depending on the dose) and absence of a sodium warning, will remain the #1 branded oxybate treatment for narcolepsy; the position it held based on revenue in the fourth quarter of 2025. While we expect that our business will continue to be meaningfully dependent on oxybate revenues, there is no guarantee that oxybate revenues will remain at current levels. In this regard, our ability to maintain oxybate revenues and realize the anticipated benefits from our investment in Xywav are subject to a number of risks and uncertaintiesas discussed in greater detail below, including: those related to thecommercialization of Xywav for the treatment of IH in adults and adoption in that indication; competition from the introduction of AG versions of high-sodium oxybate and branded products, such as Alkermes’ once-nightly dose, high-sodium oxybate branded product Lumryz (acquired through its acquisition of Avadel), for treatment of cataplexy and/or EDS in adults with narcolepsy in the U.S. market, as well as potential future competition from generic versions of high-sodium oxybate, including a generic version of high-sodium oxybate from Amneal approved in September 2025, from Ascent approved in November 2025, and from other competitors; increased pricing pressure from, changes in policies by, or restrictions on reimbursement imposed by, third party payors, including our ability tomaintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for Xywav; increased rebates required to maintain access to our products; challenges to our intellectual property around Xyrem and/or Xywav, including from pending intellectual property litigation; andcontinued acceptance of Xywav by physicians and patients. For a discussion of risks associated with maintaining the AG royalty revenue from the Hikma AG, see the risk factor below titled “The introduction of new products in the U.S. market that compete with, or otherwise disrupt the market for, our oxybate products has adversely affected and may continue to adversely affect sales of our oxybate products.” We have seen a negative impact and expect to see a further negative impact on our oxybate revenues as a result of AG products and Alkermes’ Lumryz and any generic products and new branded products that may compete with our oxybate products. A substantial decline in oxybate revenues could cause us to reduce our operating expenses or seek to raise additional funds and would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects, including on our ability to acquire, in-license or develop new products to grow our business.

Previous wording

Ten companies have sent us notices that they had filed ANDAs seeking approval to market a generic version of Xyrem. We filed patent lawsuits against all ten companies and have settled with all ten of the companies. To date, FDA has approved or tentatively approved four of these ANDAs, and we believe that it is likely that FDA will approve or tentatively approve some or all of the others. Pursuant to our patent litigation settlement with the first filer, Hikma launched its AG version of high-sodium oxybate in the U.S. beginning on January 1, 2023. Accordingly, beginning in January 2023, Xywav and Xyrem face competition from an AG version of high-sodium oxybate. We also granted Hikma a license to launch its own generic high-sodium oxybate product but, if it elects to launch its own generic product, Hikma will no longer have the right to sell the Hikma AG product. In our settlements with Amneal, Lupin, and Par, we granted each party the right to sell a limited volume of an AG product in the U.S. beginning on July 1, 2023 and ending on December 31, 2025, with royalties to be paid to us. Amneal launched its AG version of high-sodium oxybate in July 2023. At this time, Amneal has rights to sell a low-single-digit percentage of historical Xyrem sales over each 6-month sales period. At this time, Lupin and Par have elected not to launch an AG product. AG products are distributed through the same REMS as Xywav and Xyrem. We also granted each of Amneal, Lupin and Par a license to launch its own generic high-sodium oxybate product under its ANDA on or after December 31, 2025, or earlier under certain circumstances, including the circumstance where Hikma elects to launch its own generic product. If Amneal, Lupin or Par elects to launch its own generic product under such circumstance, it will no longer have the right to sell an AG product. In our settlements with each of six other ANDA filers, we granted each a license to launch its own generic high-sodium oxybate product under its ANDA on or after December 31, 2025, or earlier under certain circumstances, including circumstances where Hikma launches its own generic high-sodium oxybate product. It is possible that additional companies may file ANDAs seeking to market a generic version of Xyrem which could lead to additional patent litigation or challenges with respect to Xyrem and/or additional competition for our oxybate products.

Current wording

Ten companies have sent us notices that they had filed ANDAs seeking approval to market a generic version of Xyrem. We filed patent lawsuits against all ten companies and have settled with all ten of the companies. To date, FDA has approved or tentatively approved four of these ANDAs, and we believe that it is likely that FDA will approve or tentatively approve some or all of the others. Pursuant to our patent litigation settlement with the first filer, Hikma launched its AG version of high-sodium oxybate in the U.S. beginning on January 1, 2023. Accordingly, beginning in January 2023, Xywav and Xyrem face competition from an AG version of high-sodium oxybate. We also granted Hikma a license to launch its own generic high-sodium oxybate product but, if it elects to launch its own generic product, Hikma will no longer have the right to sell the Hikma AG product. In our settlements with Amneal, Lupin, and Par, we granted each party the right to sell a limited volume of an AG product in the U.S. beginning on July 1, 2023 and ending on December 31, 2025, with royalties to be paid to us. Amneal launched its AG version of high-sodium oxybate in July 2023. Amneal had rights to sell a low-single-digit percentage of historical Xyrem sales over each 6-month sales period. Lupin and Par never elected to launch an AG product. AG products are distributed through the same REMS as Xywav and Xyrem. We also granted each of Amneal, Lupin and Par a license to launch its own generic high-sodium oxybate product under its ANDA on or after December 31, 2025, or earlier under certain circumstances, including the circumstance where Hikma elects to launch its own generic product. In September 2025, Amneal received FDA approval for a generic version of high-sodium oxybate. In addition, in November 2025, Ascent received FDA approval for a generic version of high-sodium oxybate. As of December 31, 2025, Amneal’s rights to sell its AG version of high-sodium oxybate terminated. In our settlements with each of six other ANDA filers, we granted each a license to launch its own generic high-sodium oxybate product under its ANDA on or after December 31, 2025, or earlier under certain circumstances, including circumstances where Hikma launches its own generic high-sodium oxybate product. It is possible that additional companies may file ANDAs seeking to market a generic version of Xyrem which could lead to additional patent litigation or challenges with respect to Xyrem and/or additional competition for our oxybate products.

Previous wording

Other companies may develop sodium oxybate products for the treatment of narcolepsy, using an alternative formulation or a different delivery technology, and seek approval in the U.S. using an NDA approval pathway under Section 505(b)(2) and referencing the safety and efficacy data for Xyrem. For example, we face competition from branded products for treatment of cataplexy and/or EDS in narcolepsy, such as Avadel’s Lumryz. On May 1, 2023, Avadel announced that it had received FDA approval and ODE through May 1, 2030 for Lumryz, a fixed-dose, high-sodium oxybate which uses its proprietary technology for the treatment of EDS and cataplexy in patients with narcolepsy. For additional information on litigation involving this matter, see "FDA Litigation" in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies-Legal Proceedings of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part IV of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K. Xyrem and Xywav also face increased competition from other branded entrants to treat EDS in narcolepsy such as pitolisant and Sunosi. Other companies have announced that they have product candidates in various phases of development to treat the symptoms of narcolepsy, such as Axsome’s reboxetine, and various companies are performing research and development on orexin agonists for the treatment of sleep disorders.

Current wording

Other companies may develop sodium oxybate products for the treatment of narcolepsy, using an alternative formulation or a different delivery technology, and seek approval in the U.S. using an NDA approval pathway under Section 505(b)(2) and referencing the safety and efficacy data for Xyrem. For example, we face competition from branded products for treatment of cataplexy and/or EDS in narcolepsy, such as Alkermes’ Lumryz (acquired through its acquisition of Avadel). On May 1, 2023, Avadel announced that it had received FDA approval and ODE through May 1, 2030 for Lumryz, a fixed-dose, high-sodium oxybate which uses its proprietary technology for the treatment of EDS and cataplexy in patients with narcolepsy. On September 3, 2025, Avadel announced plans to develop and commercialize with XWPharma Ltd. a no salt, once nightly valiloxybate product for the treatment of narcolepsy and IH. Xyrem and Xywav also face increased competition from other branded entrants to treat EDS in narcolepsy such as Wakix and Sunosi, which we sold to Axsome in 2022. Other companies have announced that they have product candidates in various phases of development to treat the symptoms of narcolepsy, such as Axsome’s reboxetine, and various companies are performing R&D on orexin 2 receptor agonists for the treatment of sleep disorders, including narcolepsy and IH, which companies include Takeda, Merck & Co., Inc., Eisai Co., Ltd., Centessa Pharmaceuticals plc and Alkermes. In this regard, Alkermes acquired Avadel in February 2026, the strategic rationale for which Alkermes has stated includes the combined companies supporting a broad development strategy for Alkermes’ portfolio of orexin 2 receptor agonists and supporting the advancement of clinical studies to support potential label expansion opportunities for Lumryz.

Previous wording

We expect that Xywav for the treatment of both cataplexy and EDS in patients with narcolepsy will continue to face competition from generic or AG high-sodium oxybate products or branded entrants in narcolepsy, such as Avadel’s Lumryz, notwithstanding FDA recognizing ODE for Xywav. For example, we received notices in June 2021 and February 2023, that Lupin and Teva, respectively, filed ANDAs for generic versions of Xywav. On October 13, 2023, Lupin announced that it has received tentative approval for its application to market a generic version of Xywav. We have filed patent infringement suits against these ANDA filers. For additional information see “Xywav Patent Litigation” in Note 13, Commitments and

Current wording

We expect that Xywav for the treatment of both cataplexy and EDS in patients with narcolepsy will continue to face competition from generic or AG high-sodium oxybate products or branded entrants in narcolepsy, such as Alkermes’ Lumryz, notwithstanding FDA recognizing ODE for Xywav. For example, we received notices in June 2021, February 2023 and July 2025 that Lupin, Teva and Granules, respectively, filed ANDAs for generic versions of Xywav. On October 13, 2023, Lupin announced that it has received tentative approval for its application to market a generic version of Xywav. In addition, in July 2025, we received notice from Granules that it has filed with FDA an ANDA for a generic version of Xywav. Furthermore, in January 2026, we received notices from Tris Pharma that it had filed with FDA a Section 505(b)(2) NDA for generic versions of Xyrem and Xywav. We have filed patent infringement suits against these ANDA filers. For additional information see “Xywav Patent Litigation” and “Tris Pharma Patent Litigation” in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies—Legal Proceedings of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part IV of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K. Additional companies may file ANDAs seeking to market a generic version of Xywav which could lead to additional patent litigation or challenges with respect to Xywav and/or additional competition.

Previous wording

Moreover, generic or AG high-sodium oxybate products or branded high-sodium oxybate entrants in narcolepsy, such as Avadel’s Lumryz, as well as non-oxybate products intended for the treatment of EDS or cataplexy in narcolepsy or IH including new market entrants, even if not directly competitive with Xywav or Xyrem, have had and may continue to have the effect of changing treatment regimens and payor or formulary coverage of Xywav or Xyrem in favor of other products, and indirectly adversely affect sales of Xywav and Xyrem. Examples of such new market entrants of non-oxybate products include pitolisant, a drug that was approved by FDA in 2019 for the treatment of EDS in adult patients with narcolepsy and approved by FDA in 2020 for an adult cataplexy indication in the U.S. Pitolisant has also been approved and marketed in Europe to treat adult patients with narcolepsy, with or without cataplexy, and to treat EDS in obstructive sleep apnea. Harmony Biosciences has announced a phase 3 study for pitolisant for IH after receiving a refusal to file from FDA in February 2025. In addition, we are also aware that prescribers often prescribe branded or generic medications for cataplexy and IH, before or instead of prescribing oxybate therapy including Xywav and Xyrem, and that payors often require patients to try such medications before they will cover Xywav or Xyrem, even if they are not approved for this use. Examples of such products are described in “Business—Competition” in Part I, Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K.

Current wording

Moreover, generic or AG high-sodium oxybate products or branded high-sodium oxybate entrants in narcolepsy, such as Alkermes’ Lumryz, as well as non-oxybate products intended for the treatment of EDS or cataplexy in narcolepsy or IH including new market entrants, even if not directly competitive with Xywav or Xyrem, have and may continue to have the effect of changing treatment regimens and payor or formulary coverage of Xywav or Xyrem in favor of other products, and indirectly adversely affect sales of Xywav and Xyrem. Examples of such new market entrants of non-oxybate products include Wakix, a drug that was approved by FDA in 2019 for the treatment of EDS in adult patients with narcolepsy and approved by FDA in 2020 for an adult cataplexy indication in the U.S. Wakix has also been approved and marketed in Europe to treat adult patients with narcolepsy, with or without cataplexy, and to treat EDS in obstructive sleep apnea. Harmony Biosciences announced a phase 3 study for pitolisant for IH after receiving a refusal to file from FDA in February 2025. In addition, Alkermes acquired Avadel in February 2026, which may strengthen both companies and we may experience increased competition from the combined company. We are also aware that prescribers often prescribe branded or generic medications for cataplexy and IH, before or instead of prescribing oxybate therapy including Xywav and Xyrem, and that payors often require patients to try such medications before they will cover Xywav or Xyrem, even if they are not approved for this use. Examples of such products are described in “Business—Competition” in Part I, Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K.

Previous wording

We expect that the approval and launch of AG products or other generic versions of Xyrem or Xywav and the approval and launch of any other sodium oxybate product, such as Avadel’s Lumryz, or alternative product that treats narcolepsy will continue to have a negative impact on, and could have a material adverse effect on, our sales of Xywav and Xyrem and on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Current wording

We expect that the approval and launch of AG products or other generic versions of Xyrem or Xywav and the approval and launch of any other sodium oxybate product, such as Alkermes’ Lumryz, or alternative product that treats narcolepsy will continue to have a negative impact on, and could have a material adverse effect on, our sales of Xywav and Xyrem and on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Previous wording

In its approval of Hikma’s ANDA, FDA waived the requirement of a single shared REMS with the Xywav and Xyrem REMS, approving Hikma’s ANDA with a generic high-sodium oxybate REMS separate from the Xywav and Xyrem REMS, except for the requirement that the high-sodium oxybate REMS program pharmacies contact the Xywav and Xyrem REMS by phone to verify and report certain information. The generic high-sodium oxybate REMS was approved with the condition that it be open to all future sponsors of ANDAs or NDAs for high-sodium oxybate products. In its approval of Avadel’s high-sodium oxybate product, FDA also approved a separate REMS for that product, also with a requirement that the pharmacies in the Avadel-sponsored REMS contact the Xywav and Xyrem REMS to verify and report certain information. Administration of multiple sodium oxybate REMS systems could increase the risks associated with oxybate distribution, could make it more difficult or expensive for us to distribute Xywav and Xyrem and disrupt patient access to Xywav or Xyrem. Because patients, consumers and others may not differentiate other high-sodium oxybate products from our sodium oxybate products or differentiate between the different REMS programs, any negative outcomes, including risks to the public, caused by or otherwise related to a separate high-sodium oxybate REMS, could have a significant negative impact in terms of product liability, our reputation and good will, public acceptance of Xywav or Xyrem as a treatment for cataplexy and EDS in narcolepsy or Xywav for the treatment of IH, and prescribers’ willingness to prescribe, and patients’ willingness to take, Xywav or Xyrem, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Current wording

In its approval of Hikma’s ANDA, FDA waived the requirement of a single shared REMS with the Xywav and Xyrem REMS, approving Hikma’s ANDA with a generic high-sodium oxybate REMS separate from the Xywav and Xyrem REMS, except for the requirement that the high-sodium oxybate REMS program pharmacies contact the Xywav and Xyrem REMS by phone to verify and report certain information. The generic high-sodium oxybate REMS was approved with the condition that it be open to all future sponsors of ANDAs or NDAs for high-sodium oxybate products. In its approval of Avadel’s high-sodium oxybate product, FDA also approved a separate REMS for that product, also with a requirement that the pharmacies in the Avadel (now Alkermes) -sponsored REMS contact the Xywav and Xyrem REMS to verify and report certain information. Administration of multiple sodium oxybate REMS systems could increase the risks associated with oxybate distribution, could make it more difficult or expensive for us to distribute Xywav and Xyrem and disrupt patient access to Xywav or Xyrem. Because patients, consumers and others may not differentiate other high-sodium oxybate products from our sodium oxybate products or differentiate between the different REMS programs, any negative outcomes, including risks to the public, caused by or otherwise related to a separate high-sodium oxybate REMS, could have a significant negative impact in terms of product liability, our reputation and goodwill, public acceptance of Xywav or Xyrem as a treatment for cataplexy and EDS in narcolepsy or Xywav for the treatment of IH, and prescribers’ willingness to prescribe, and patients’ willingness to take, Xywav or Xyrem, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Previous wording

REMS programs have increasingly drawn public scrutiny from the U.S. Congress, the FTC, the USPTO, and FDA, with allegations that such programs are used as a means of improperly blocking or delaying competition. In December 2019, as part of the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2020, the U.S. Congress passed legislation known as the CREATES. CREATES is intended to prevent companies from using REMS and other restricted distribution programs as a means to deny potential competitors access to product samples that are reasonably necessary to conduct testing in support of an application that references a listed drug or biologic, and provides such potential competitors a potential private right of action if the innovator fails to timely provide samples upon request. CREATES also grants FDA additional authority regarding generic products with REMS. A further example of continued interest in REMS oversight came from the USPTO in collaboration with FDA in November 2022, when they published an RFC in the Federal Register that asked, “What policy considerations or concerns should the USPTO and FDA explore in relation to the patenting of REMS associated with certain FDA-approved products?” The comments for this RFC closed on February 6, 2023.

Current wording

REMS programs have increasingly drawn public scrutiny from the U.S. Congress, the FTC, the USPTO, and FDA, with allegations that such programs are used as a means of improperly blocking or delaying competition. In December 2019, as part of the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2020, U.S. Congress passed legislation known as the CREATES. CREATES is intended to prevent companies from using REMS and other restricted distribution programs as a means to deny potential competitors access to product samples that are reasonably necessary to conduct testing in support of an application that references a listed drug or biologic, and provides such potential competitors a potential private right of action if the innovator fails to timely provide samples upon request. CREATES also grants FDA additional authority regarding generic products with REMS. A further example of continued interest in REMS oversight came from the USPTO in collaboration with FDA in November 2022, when they published an RFC in the Federal Register that asked, “What policy considerations or concerns should the USPTO and FDA explore in relation to the patenting of REMS associated with certain FDA-approved products?” The comments for this RFC closed on February 6, 2023.

Previous wording

It is possible that the FTC, FDA or other governmental authorities could claim that, or launch an investigation into whether, we are using our REMS programs in an anticompetitive manner or have engaged in other anticompetitive practices, whether under CREATES or otherwise. The Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act further states that a REMS ETASU shall not be used by an NDA holder to block or delay generic drugs or drugs covered by an application under Section 505(b)(2) from entering the market. In its 2015 letter approving the Xyrem REMS, FDA expressed concern that we were aware that the Xyrem REMS is blocking competition. From June 2020 to May 2022, we were served with a number of lawsuits that included allegations that we had used the Xyrem REMS to delay approval of generic high-sodium oxybate. In December 2020, these cases were centralized and transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, where the multidistrict litigation will proceed for the purpose of discovery and pre-trial proceedings. For additional information on these lawsuits, see "Xyrem Antitrust Litigation" (and for other litigation involving our listing of our REMS patent in FDA's publication “Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,” or Orange Book, see "Avadel Litigation") in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies—Legal Proceedings of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part IV of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K. It is possible that additional lawsuits will be filed against us making similar or related allegations or that governmental authorities could commence an investigation. We cannot predict the outcome of these or potential additional lawsuits; however, if the plaintiffs were to be successful in their claims, they may be entitled to injunctive relief or we may be required to pay significant monetary damages, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Current wording

It is possible that the FTC, FDA or other governmental authorities could claim that, or launch an investigation into whether, we are using our REMS programs in an anticompetitive manner or have engaged in other anticompetitive practices, whether under CREATES or otherwise. The Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act further states that a REMS ETASU shall not be used by an NDA holder to block or delay generic drugs or drugs covered by an application under Section 505(b)(2) from entering the market. In its 2015 letter approving the Xyrem REMS, FDA expressed concern that we were aware that the Xyrem REMS is blocking competition. From June 2020 to May 2022, we were served with a number of lawsuits that included allegations that we had used the Xyrem REMS to delay approval of generic high-sodium oxybate. In December 2020, these cases were centralized and transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, where the multidistrict litigation will proceed for the purpose of discovery and pre-trial proceedings. As of October 2025, we have resolved the entirety of the Xyrem Antitrust Litigation. For additional information on these lawsuits, as well as a class settlement agreement with respect thereto, see "Xyrem Antitrust Litigation" (and for other litigation and settlement involving our listing of our REMS patent in the Orange Book), see "Avadel Litigation" in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies—Legal Proceedings of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part IV of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K. It is possible that additional lawsuits will be filed against us making similar or related allegations or that governmental authorities could commence an investigation. We cannot predict the outcome of any potential additional lawsuits; however, if the plaintiffs were to be successful in their claims, they may be entitled to injunctive relief or we may be required to pay significant monetary damages, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Previous wording

Our ability to maintain or increase sales of Epidiolex/Epidyolex (cannabidiol) is subject to many risks. There are many factors that could cause the commercialization of Epidiolex to be unsuccessful, including a number of factors that are outside our control. The commercial success of Epidiolex depends on the extent to which patients and physicians accept and adopt Epidiolex as a treatment for seizures associated with LGS, DS and TSC, and we do not know whether our or others’ estimates in this regard will be accurate. Physicians may not prescribe Epidiolex and patients may be unwilling to use Epidiolex if coverage is not provided or reimbursement is inadequate to cover a significant portion of the cost. Additionally, any negative development for Epidiolex in the market, in clinical development for additional indications, or in regulatory processes in other jurisdictions, may adversely impact the commercial results and potential of Epidiolex. In the future, we expect Epidiolex to face competition from generic cannabinoids. In November and December 2022, we received notices from various ANDA filers that they have each filed with FDA an ANDA for a generic version of Epidiolex (cannabidiol) oral solution. In January 2023, we filed patent infringement suits against these ANDA filers. For additional information see “Epidiolex Patent Litigation” in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies—Legal Proceedings of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part IV of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K. Additional companies may file ANDAs seeking to market a generic version of Epidiolex which could lead to additional patent litigation or challenges with respect to Epidiolex.

Current wording

Our ability to maintain or increase sales of Epidiolex/Epidyolex (cannabidiol) is subject to many risks. There are many factors that could cause the commercialization of Epidiolex to be unsuccessful, including a number of factors that are outside our control. The commercial success of Epidiolex depends on the extent to which patients and physicians accept and adopt Epidiolex as a treatment for seizures associated with LGS, DS and TSC. Physicians may not prescribe Epidiolex and patients may be unwilling to use Epidiolex if coverage is not provided or reimbursement is inadequate to cover a significant portion of the cost. Additionally, any negative development for Epidiolex in the market, in clinical development for additional indications, or in regulatory processes in other jurisdictions, may adversely impact the commercial results and potential of Epidiolex. In the future, we expect Epidiolex to face competition from generic cannabinoids. We have settled patent litigation with each of the ten companies seeking to market a generic version of Epidiolex in the U.S. by granting each of the Epidiolex ANDA Filers a license to manufacture, market, and sell its own generic version of Epidiolex beginning in the very late 2030s, or earlier under certain circumstances, including but not limited to the launch of another generic Epidiolex product or a final decision that all unexpired claims of the Epidiolex patents are not infringed, or are invalid and/or unenforceable. However, these settlements do not prevent other third parties from filing additional ANDAs seeking to market a generic version of Epidiolex in the future. Any such filings could result in additional patent litigation or challenges with respect to Epidiolex and could require substantial financial resources. An adverse outcome in any such litigation, or the entry into additional settlement agreements, could result in the approval and commercialization of generic versions of Epidiolex earlier than anticipated and may have a material adverse effect on our businesses, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Previous wording

In addition to Xywav, Epidiolex/Epidyolex and our other neuroscience products and product candidates, we are commercializing a portfolio of products, including our other lead marketed products, Zepzelca, Rylaze and Ziihera. An inability to effectively commercialize our other lead marketed products and to maximize their potential where possible through successful research and development activities could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Current wording

In addition to Xywav, Epidiolex/Epidyolex and our other neuroscience products and product candidates, we are commercializing a portfolio of products, including our other lead marketed products, Ziihera, Modeyso, Zepzelca and Rylaze. An inability to effectively commercialize our other lead marketed products and to maximize their potential where possible through successful R&D activities could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Previous wording

Our ability to realize the anticipated benefits from our investment in Zepzelca is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including: our ability to successfully commercialize Zepzelca in the U.S. and Canada; adequate supply of Zepzelca to meet demand; availability of favorable treatment pathway designations pricing and adequate coverage and reimbursement; the potential for negative trial data read-outs in ongoing or future Zepzelca clinical trials; our and PharmaMar’s, ability to maintain accelerated approval or successfully complete a confirmatory study of Zepzelca; competition from a newly approved product for the treatment of extensive-stage metastatic SCLC; and patients’ access to lung cancer screening, diagnosis and treatment. In July and August 2024, we received notices from Zepzelca ANDA filers. On September 11, 2024, we and PharmaMar filed a patent infringement suit against the Zepzelca ANDA Filers in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. For additional information see “Zepzelca Patent Litigation” in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies—Legal Proceedings of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part IV of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K. Additional companies may file ANDAs seeking to market a generic version of Zepzelca which could lead to additional patent litigation or challenges with respect to Zepzelca.

Current wording

Our ability to realize the anticipated benefits from our investment in Zepzelca is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including: our ability to successfully commercialize Zepzelca in the U.S. and Canada; adequate supply of Zepzelca to meet demand; availability of favorable treatment pathway designations pricing and adequate coverage and reimbursement; the potential for negative trial data read-outs in ongoing or future Zepzelca clinical trials; our and PharmaMar’s, ability to maintain accelerated approval or successfully complete a confirmatory study of Zepzelca; competition from Amgen Inc.’s tarlatamab, a product approved for the treatment of extensive-stage metastatic SCLC in May 2024; and patients’ access to lung cancer screening, diagnosis and treatment. In July and August 2024, we received notices from Zepzelca ANDA filers. On September 11, 2024, we and PharmaMar filed a patent infringement suit against the Zepzelca ANDA Filers in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. For additional information see “Zepzelca Patent Litigation” in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies—Legal Proceedings of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part IV of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K. Additional companies may file ANDAs seeking to market a generic version of Zepzelca which could lead to additional patent litigation or challenges with respect to Zepzelca.

Previous wording

Our ability to realize the anticipated benefits from our investments in Rylaze is subject to a number of uncertainties, including our ability to successfully commercialize Rylaze including creating awareness among health care professionals and ensuring that patients with ALL or LBL will be given the appropriate course of therapy and dosing regimen based on the currently approved label. Our ability to realize the anticipated benefits from our investments in Ziihera is subject to a number of uncertainties, including our ability to successfully commercialize Ziihera in BTC and clinical development of potential future indications in HER2+ solid tumors.

Current wording

Our ability to realize the anticipated benefits from our investments in Rylaze is subject to a number of uncertainties, including our ability to successfully commercialize Rylaze including creating awareness among health care professionals and ensuring that patients with ALL or LBL will be given the appropriate course of therapy and dosing regimen based on the currently approved label. Our ability to realize the anticipated benefits from our investments in Ziihera is subject to a number of uncertainties, including our ability to successfully commercialize Ziihera in BTC and clinically develop potential future indications in HER2+ solid tumors, including in GEA and our ability to successfully complete regulatory activities and approvals for Ziihera in other indications.

Previous wording

The current administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government including at HHS, FDA, CMS and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. These actions may include directives to reduce agency workforce, rescinding a Biden administration executive order tasking the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation to consider new payment and healthcare models to limit drug spending and eliminating the Biden administration’s executive order that directed HHS to establish an AI task force and develop a strategic plan. Additionally, in its June 2024 decision in Loper Bright, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the longstanding Chevron doctrine, under which courts were required to give deference to regulatory agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous federal statutes. The Loper Bright decision could result in additional legal challenges to current regulations and guidance issued by federal agencies applicable to our operations, including those issued by FDA. Finally, Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program created under the IRA. We cannot predict which additional measures may be adopted or the impact of current and additional measures on the marketing, pricing and demand for our products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Current wording

The current administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government including at HHS, FDA, CMS and related agencies. These actions, primarily directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. For example, on September 30, 2025, the current administration announced the first several agreements with major pharmaceutical companies that requires drug manufacturers to offer, through a direct-to-consumer platform, U.S. patients and Medicaid programs prescription drug MFN pricing equal to or lower than those paid in other developed nations, with additional mandates for direct-to-patient discounts and repatriation of foreign revenues, in exchange for tariff relief. Other recent actions, for example, include (1) directing agencies to reduce agency workforce and cut programs; (2) directing HHS and other agencies to lower prescription drug costs through a variety of initiatives, including by improving upon the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program and establishing MFN pricing for pharmaceutical products; (3) imposing tariffs on imported pharmaceutical products; and (4) as part of the MAHA Commission’s Strategy Report released in September 2025, working across government agencies to increase enforcement on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. Additionally, the current administration recently called on U.S. Congress to enact "The Great Healthcare Plan," to codify and expand MFN pricing, lower government subsidies to private insurance companies, increase healthcare price transparency, expand pharmaceutical drugs available for over-the-counter purchase, and enact restrictions on PBM payment methodologies, among other things. These actions and policies may significantly reduce U.S. drug prices, potentially impacting manufacturers’ global pricing strategies and profitability, while increasing their operational costs and compliance risks. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision greatly reduced judicial deference to regulatory agencies, which could increase successful legal challenges to federal regulations affecting our operations. Finally, U.S. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program created under the IRA as well as PBMs. We cannot predict which additional measures may be adopted or the impact of current and additional measures on the marketing, pricing and demand for our products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Previous wording

Adequate coverage and reimbursement from third party payors may not be available for our products and we may be unable to successfully contract for coverage from pharmacy benefit managers and other organizations; conversely, to secure coverage from these organizations, we may be required to pay rebates or other discounts or other restrictions to reimbursement, either of which could diminish our sales or adversely affect our ability to sell our products profitably.

Current wording

Adequate coverage and reimbursement from third party payors may not be available for our products and we may be unable to successfully contract for coverage from PBMs and other organizations; conversely, to secure coverage from these organizations, we may be required to pay rebates or other discounts or other restrictions to reimbursement, either of which could diminish our sales or adversely affect our ability to sell our products profitably.

Previous wording

As part of the overall trend toward cost containment, third party payors often require prior authorization for, and require reauthorization for continuation of, prescription products or impose step edits, which require prior use of another medication, usually a generic or preferred brand, prior to approving coverage for a new or more expensive product. Such restrictive conditions for reimbursement and an increase in reimbursement-related activities can extend the time required to fill prescriptions and may discourage patients from seeking treatment. We cannot predict actions that third party payors may take, or whether they will limit the access and level of reimbursement for our products or refuse to provide any approvals or coverage. From time to time, third party payors have refused to provide reimbursement for our products, and others may do so in the future.

Current wording

As part of the overall trend toward cost containment, third party payors often require prior authorization for, and require reauthorization for continuation of, prescription products or alternatively impose step edits, which require prior use of another medication, usually a generic or preferred brand, prior to approving coverage for a new or more expensive product. Such restrictive conditions for reimbursement and an increase in reimbursement-related activities can extend the time required to fill prescriptions and may discourage patients from seeking treatment. We cannot predict actions that third party payors may take, or whether they will limit the access and level of reimbursement for our products or refuse to provide any approvals or coverage. From time to time, third party payors have refused to provide reimbursement for our products, and others may do so in the future.

Previous wording

Third party PBMs, other similar organizationsand payors can limit coverage to specific products on an approved list, or formulary, which might: not include all of the approved products for a particular indication, exclude drugs from their formularies in favor of competitor drugs or alternative treatments, place drugs on formulary tiers with higher patient co-pay obligations, and/or mandate stricter utilization criteria. Formulary exclusion effectively encourages patients and providers to seek alternative treatments, make a complex and time-intensive request for medical exemptions, or pay 100% of the cost of a drug. In addition, in many instances, certain PBMs, other similar organizations and third party payors may exert negotiating leverage by requiring incremental rebates, discounts or other concessions from manufacturers in order to maintain formulary positions, which could continue to result in higher gross to net deductions for affected products. The market for PBM services has become highly concentrated and vertically integrated, giving these entities further leverage in negotiating rebates, discounts or other concessions. In this regard, we have entered into agreements with PBMs and payor accounts to provide rebates to those entities related to formulary coverage for our products, but we cannot guarantee that we will be able to agree to coverage terms with other PBMs and other third party payors. Payors could decide to exclude our products from formulary coverage lists, impose step edits that require patients to try alternative, including generic, treatments before authorizing payment for our products, limit the types of diagnoses for which coverage will be provided or impose a moratorium on coverage for products while the payor makes a coverage decision. An inability to maintain adequate formulary positions could increase patient cost-sharing for our products and cause some patients to determine not to use our products. Any delays or unforeseen difficulties in reimbursement approvals could limit patient access, depress therapy adherence rates, and adversely impact our ability to successfully commercialize our products. In addition, PBMs and other third-party payors could implement alternative funding programs that could have an impact on product revenue. If we are unsuccessful in maintaining broad coverage for our products, our anticipated revenue from and growth prospects for our products could be negatively affected.

Current wording

Third party PBMs, other similar organizationsand payors can limit coverage to specific products on an approved list, or formulary, which might: not include all of the approved products for a particular indication; exclude drugs from their formularies in favor of competitor drugs or alternative treatments; place drugs on formulary tiers with higher patient co-pay obligations; and/or mandate stricter utilization criteria. Formulary exclusion effectively encourages patients and providers to seek alternative treatments, make a complex and time-intensive request for medical exemptions, or pay 100% of the cost of a drug. In addition, in many instances, certain PBMs, other similar organizations and third party payors may exert negotiating leverage by requiring incremental rebates, discounts or other concessions from manufacturers in order to maintain formulary positions, which could continue to result in higher gross to net deductions for affected products. The market for PBM services has become highly concentrated and vertically integrated, giving these entities further leverage in negotiating rebates, discounts or other concessions. In this regard, we have entered into agreements with PBMs and payor accounts to provide rebates to those entities related to formulary coverage for our products, but we cannot guarantee that we will be able to agree to coverage terms with other PBMs and other third party payors. Payors could decide to exclude our products from formulary coverage lists, impose step edits that require patients to try alternative, including generic, treatments before authorizing payment for our products, limit the types of diagnoses for which coverage will be provided or impose a moratorium on coverage for products while the payor makes a coverage decision. An inability to maintain adequate formulary positions could increase patient cost-sharing for our products and cause some patients to determine not to use our products. Any delays or unforeseen difficulties in reimbursement approvals could limit patient access, depress therapy adherence rates, and adversely impact our ability to successfully commercialize our products. In addition, PBMs and other third-party payors could implement alternative funding programs that could have an impact on our product revenue. If we are unsuccessful in maintaining broad coverage for our products, our anticipated revenue from and growth prospects for our products could be negatively affected.

Previous wording

In many countries outside the U.S., procedures to obtain price approvals, coverage and reimbursement can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing authorization. Many European countries periodically review their reimbursement of medicinal products, which could have an adverse impact on reimbursement status. In addition, we expect that legislators, policymakers and healthcare insurance funds in the EU member states will continue to propose and implement cost-containing measures, such as lower maximum prices, lower or lack of reimbursement coverage and incentives to use cheaper, usually generic, products as an alternative to branded products, and/or branded products available through parallel import to keep healthcare costs down. Moreover, in order to obtain reimbursement for our products in some European countries, including some EU member states, we may be required to compile additional data comparing the cost-effectiveness of our products to other available therapies. HTA of medicinal products is becoming an increasingly common part of the pricing and reimbursement procedures in some EU member states, including those representing the larger markets. The HTA process, which is currently governed by national laws in each EU member state, is the procedure to assess therapeutic, economic and societal impact of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country. The outcome of an HTA will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EU member states. The extent to which pricing and reimbursement decisions are influenced by the HTA of the specific medicinal product currently varies between EU member states. In January 2025, the EU HTA regulation entered into application. This regulation aims to harmonize the clinical benefit assessment of HTA across the EU. Under this regulation, EU member states must use common HTA tools, methodologies, and procedures across the EU. However, individual member states remain responsible for determining the overall value of a new health technology within their healthcare systems, as well as making pricing and reimbursement decisions. If we are unable to maintain favorable pricing and reimbursement status in EU member states that represent significant markets, our anticipated revenue from and growth prospects for our products in the EU could be negatively affected. For example, the EC granted marketing authorization for Enrylaze in September 2023, and, as part of our rolling launch of Enrylaze in Europe, we are making pricing and reimbursement submissions in European countries. If we experience setbacks or unforeseen difficulties in obtaining favorable pricing and reimbursement decisions, including as a result of regulatory review delays, planned launches in the affected EU member states would be delayed, which could negatively impact anticipated revenue from and growth prospects for Enryl…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

In many countries outside the U.S., procedures to obtain price approvals, coverage and reimbursement can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing authorization. Many European countries periodically review their reimbursement of medicinal products, which could have an adverse impact on reimbursement status or financial conditions. In addition, we expect that legislators, policymakers and healthcare insurance funds in the EU member states will continue to propose and implement cost-containing measures, such as lower maximum prices, lower or lack of reimbursement coverage and incentives to use cheaper, usually generic, products as an alternative to branded products, and/or branded products available through cross border trade to keep healthcare costs down. Moreover, in order to obtain reimbursement for our products in some European countries, including some EU member states, we may be required to compile additional data comparing the cost-effectiveness of our products to other available therapies. HTA of medicinal products is becoming an increasingly common part of the pricing and reimbursement procedures in some EU member states, including those representing the larger markets. The HTA process is the procedure to assess therapeutic, economic and societal impact of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country. The outcome of an HTA will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of other individual EU member states. In January 2025, the HTA Regulation 2021/2282 entered into application. This regulation aims to harmonize the clinical benefit assessment of health technologies across the EU by creating a framework of rules, procedures and methodologies for conducting Joint Clinical Assessments at the EU level. Under this regulation, EU member states must use common HTA tools, methodologies, and procedures across the EU. However, individual member states remain responsible for determining the overall value of a new health technology within their respective healthcare systems, as well as making pricing and reimbursement decisions. If we are unable to maintain favorable pricing and reimbursement status in EU member states that represent significant markets for us, our anticipated revenue from and growth prospects for our products in the EU could be negatively affected.

Previous wording

Political, economic and regulatory influences are subjecting the healthcare industry in the U.S. to fundamental changes, particularly given the current atmosphere of mounting criticism of prescription drug costs in the U.S. We expect there will continue to be legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that could impact our ability to sell our products profitably, as governmental oversight and scrutiny of biopharmaceutical companies is increasing. For example, we anticipate that the U.S. Congress, state legislatures, and federal and state regulators may adopt or accelerate adoption of new healthcare policies and reforms intended to curb healthcare costs, such as federal and state controls on reimbursement for drugs (including under Medicare, Medicaid and commercial health plans), new or increased requirements to pay prescription drug rebates and penalties to government health care programs, and additional pharmaceutical cost transparency policies that aim to require drug companies to justify their prices through required disclosures. This includes efforts by individual states in the U.S. to pass legislation and implement regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including by establishing Prescription Drug Affordability Boards (or similar entities) to review high-cost drugs and, in some cases, set upper payment limits and implementing marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures. Further, the IRA, among other things, requires the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary to negotiate, with respect to Medicare units and subject to a specified cap, the price of a set number of certain high Medicare spend drugs and biologicals per year starting in 2026, penalizes manufacturers of certain Medicare Parts B and D drugs for price increases above inflation, and makes several changes to the Medicare Part D benefit, including a limit on annual out-of-pocket costs and a change in manufacturer liability under the program, which could negatively affect our business and financial condition. The CMS has issued final guidance implementing the Drug Price Negotiation Program in which it finalized certain policies governing the selection of drugs for negotiation. Among other things, CMS finalized definitions of “qualifying single source drug” and “marketed” that, especially if they persist, could further disincentivize innovation. In addition, under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, rebates owed by manufacturers are no longer subject to a cap on the rebate amount effective January 1, 2024, which may adversely affect our rebate liability.

Current wording

Political, economic and regulatory influences are subjecting the healthcare industry in the U.S. to fundamental changes, particularly given the current atmosphere of mounting criticism of prescription drug costs in the U.S. We expect there will continue to be legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that could impact our ability to sell our products profitably, as governmental oversight and scrutiny of biopharmaceutical companies is increasing. For example, we anticipate that U.S. Congress, state legislatures, and federal and state regulators may adopt or accelerate adoption of new healthcare policies and reforms intended to curb healthcare costs, such as federal and state controls on reimbursement for drugs (including under Medicare, Medicaid and commercial health plans), new or increased requirements to pay prescription drug rebates and penalties to government health care programs, and additional pharmaceutical cost transparency policies that aim to require drug companies to justify their prices through required disclosures. In addition, policymakers and federal agencies, including the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation, are advancing new drug pricing models to implement MFN reference pricing, which has been a focus of the Trump Administration’s health policy agenda. These initiatives, if finalized and implemented, could reduce the net prices for certain products, exert downward pricing pressure, and adversely affect our revenues and profitability. This includes efforts by individual states in the U.S. to pass legislation and implement regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including by establishing Prescription Drug Affordability Boards (or similar entities) to review high-cost drugs and, in some cases, set upper payment limits and implementing marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures. Further, HHS imposes rebates on many Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D products to penalize price increases that outpace inflation on an annual basis. HHS has also been empowered to negotiate the price of certain single-source drugs that have been on the market for at least 7 years covered under Medicare as part of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Each year up to twenty (20) products will be selected by HHS for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Products subject to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program are expected to experience a significant reduction in reimbursement from the Medicare program on a per unit basis. In addition, under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, rebates owed by manufacturers are no longer subject to a cap on the rebate amount effective January 1, 2024, which may adversely affect our rebate liability. The foregoing may negatively impact our overall rebate and discount liability, which would have a negative adverse effect on our revenues.

Previous wording

Legislative and regulatory proposals that have recently been considered include, among other things, proposals to limit the terms of patent litigation settlements with generic sponsors, to define certain conduct around patenting and new product development as unfair competition, to address the scope of orphan drug exclusivity and to facilitate the importation of drugs into the U.S. from other countries. Legislative and regulatory proposals to reform the regulation of the pharmaceutical industry and reimbursement for pharmaceutical drugs are continually changing, and all such considerations may adversely affect our business and industry in ways that we cannot accurately predict.

Current wording

Legislative and regulatory proposals that have recently been considered include, among other things, proposals to limit the terms of patent litigation settlements with generic sponsors, to define certain conduct around patenting and new product development as unfair competition, to address the scope of orphan drug exclusivity and to facilitate the importation of drugs into the U.S. from other countries.

Previous wording

There is also ongoing activity related to health care coverage. The Affordable Care Act substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. These changes impacted previously existing government healthcare programs and have resulted in the development of new programs, including Medicare payment-for-performance initiatives. Further, federal and state policy makers have taken and may continue to try to take steps regarding health care coverage beyond the Affordable Care Act, which could have ramifications for the pharmaceutical industry. Additional legislative changes, regulatory changes, or guidance could be adopted, which may impact the marketing approvals and reimbursement for our products and product candidates. For example, there has been increasing legislative, regulatory, and enforcement interest in the U.S. with respect to drug pricing practices. There have been several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation and regulatory initiatives designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, evaluate the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government healthcare program reimbursement methodologies for drug products beyond the changes enacted by the IRA.

Current wording

There is also ongoing activity related to health care coverage. The ACA substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. These changes impacted previously existing government healthcare programs and have resulted in the development of new programs, including Medicare payment-for-performance initiatives. Further, federal and state policy makers have taken and may continue to try to take steps regarding health care coverage beyond the ACA, which could have ramifications for the pharmaceutical industry. Additional legislative changes, regulatory changes, or guidance could be adopted, which may impact the marketing approvals and reimbursement for our products and product candidates. For example, there has been increasing legislative, regulatory, and enforcement interest in the U.S. with respect to drug pricing practices. There have been several U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation and regulatory initiatives designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, evaluate the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government healthcare program reimbursement methodologies for drug products beyond the changes enacted by the IRA.

Previous wording

If new healthcare policies or reforms intended to curb healthcare costs are adopted or if we experience negative publicity with respect to pricing of our products or the pricing of pharmaceutical drugs generally, the prices that we charge for our products may be affected, our commercial opportunity may be limited and/or our revenues from sales of our products may be negatively impacted. We have periodically increased the price of our products, including Xywav and Xyrem most recently in January 2025, and there is no guarantee that we will make similar price adjustments to our products in the future or that price adjustments we have taken or may take in the future will not negatively affect our sales volumes and revenues. There is no guarantee that such price adjustments will not negatively affect our reputation and our ability to secure and maintain reimbursement coverage for our products, which could limit the prices that we charge for our products, limit the commercial opportunities for our products and/or negatively impact revenues from sales of our products.

Current wording

If new healthcare policies or reforms intended to curb healthcare costs are adopted or if we experience negative publicity with respect to pricing of our products or the pricing of pharmaceutical drugs generally, the prices that we charge for our products may be affected, our commercial opportunity may be limited and/or our revenues from sales of our products may be negatively impacted. We have periodically increased the price of our products, including Xywav and Xyrem most recently in January 2026, and there is no guarantee that we will not make similar price adjustments to our products in the future or that price adjustments we have taken or may take in the future will not negatively affect our sales volumes and revenues. There is no guarantee that such price adjustments will not negatively affect our reputation and our ability to secure and maintain reimbursement coverage for our products, which could limit the prices that we charge for our products, limit the commercial opportunities for our products and/or negatively impact revenues from sales of our products.

Previous wording

We expect that legislators, policymakers and healthcare insurance funds in Europe and other international markets will continue to propose and implement cost-containing measures to keep healthcare costs down. These measures could include limitations on the prices we will be able to charge for our products or the level of reimbursement available for these products from governmental authorities or third party payors as well as clawbacks and revenue caps. For example, in the U.K., the cap on NHS spending on branded medicines agreed between the U.K. government and industry for 2019 to 2023 has remained unaltered despite higher than expected growth in NHS use of branded medicines, resulting in significant increases to the industry level revenue clawback rate payable on sales of branded medicines to the NHS. In the EU, a trend in some EU member states is for medicinal products to be reimbursed based on competitor products and not in relation with the value or the cost of the product. On April 26, 2023, the EC adopted proposals for a new Directive and a new Regulation, which revise and replace the existing EU general pharmaceutical legislation. This proposal includes increased transparency on research and development costs or public contributions to these costs with a view to strengthen the negotiating position of national competent authorities of the EU member states responsible for pricing and reimbursement, as well as reinforced cooperation with these authorities on pricing and reimbursement matters. On April 10, 2024, the European Parliament adopted its position on the proposals, whose legislative processes are expected to continue in 2025. Further, an increasing number of European and other foreign countries use prices for medicinal products established in other countries as “reference prices” to help determine the price of the product in their own territory. Consequently, a downward trend in prices of medicinal products in some countries could contribute to similar downward trends elsewhere.

Current wording

We expect that legislators, policymakers and healthcare insurance funds in Europe and other international markets will continue to propose and implement cost-containing measures to keep healthcare costs down. These measures could include limitations on the prices we will be able to charge for our products or the level of reimbursement available for these products from governmental authorities or third party payors as well as clawbacks and revenue caps. For example, in the U.K., the Voluntary Pricing Access and Growth scheme on NHS spending on branded medicines agreed between the U.K. government and industry for 2019 to 2023 has remained unaltered despite higher than expected growth in NHS use of branded medicines, resulting in significant increases to the industry level revenue clawback rate payable on sales of branded medicines to the NHS. In the EU, a trend in some EU member states is for reimbursement price of medicinal products to be assessed against the relative price and cost of treatment of existing standard of care and competitor products, which may hinder the inclusion of newer innovative products in reimbursement lists. In December 2025, the European Parliament and the Council of the EU reached a provisional agreement on the comprehensive revision of the existing EU general pharmaceutical legislation. This new legislation includes increased transparency on R&D costs or public contributions to these costs with a view to strengthen the negotiating position of national competent authorities of the EU member states responsible for pricing and reimbursement, as well as reinforced cooperation with these authorities on pricing and reimbursement matters. The provisional agreement is still subject to the formal approval by the European Parliament and the Council of the EU and subsequent publication in the Official Journal of the EU. Further, an increasing number of European and other foreign countries use prices for medicinal products established in other countries as “reference prices” to help determine the price of the product in their own territory. Consequently, a downward trend in prices of medicinal products in some countries could contribute to similar downward trends elsewhere.

Previous wording

The manufacture of pharmaceutical products requires significant expertise and capital investment, including the development of process controls required to consistently produce the API and the finished product in sufficient quantities while meeting detailed product specifications on a repeated basis. We and our suppliers may encounter difficulties in production, including difficulties with the supply of manufacturing materials, production costs and yields, process controls, quality control and quality assurance, including testing of stability, impurities and impurity levels and other product specifications by validated test methods, and compliance with strictly enforced U.S., state and non-U.S. regulations. In addition, we and our suppliers are subject to FDA’s cGMP requirements, federal and state controlled substances obligations and equivalent rules and regulations prescribed by non-U.S. regulatory authorities. If we or any of our suppliers encounter manufacturing, quality or compliance difficulties with respect to any of our products, whether due to the ongoing military conflict in Ukraine and related sanctions imposed against Russia (including as a result of disruptions of global shipping, the transport of products, energy supply, cybersecurity incidents and banking systems as well as of our ability to control input costs) or otherwise, we may be unable to obtain or maintain regulatory approval or meet commercial demand for such products, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. In addition, we could be subject to enforcement action by regulatory authorities for our failure to comply with cGMP with respect to the products we manufacture in our facilities as well as for our failure to adequately oversee compliance with cGMP by any of our third party suppliers operating under contract. Moreover, failure to comply with applicable legal and regulatory requirements subjects us and our suppliers to possible regulatory action, including restrictions on supply or shutdown, which may adversely affect our or a supplier’s ability to supply the ingredients or finished products we need.

Current wording

The manufacture of pharmaceutical products requires significant expertise and capital investment, including the development of process controls required to consistently produce the API and the finished product in sufficient quantities while meeting detailed product specifications on a repeated basis. We and our suppliers may encounter difficulties in production, including difficulties with the supply of manufacturing materials, production costs and yields, process controls, quality control and quality assurance, including testing of stability, impurities and impurity levels and other product specifications by validated test methods, and compliance with strictly enforced U.S. federal, state and non-U.S. regulations. In addition, we and our suppliers are subject to FDA’s cGMP requirements, federal and state controlled substances obligations and equivalent rules and regulations prescribed by non-U.S. regulatory authorities. If we or any of our suppliers encounter manufacturing, quality or compliance difficulties with respect to any of our products, whether due to the ongoing military conflict in Ukraine and related sanctions imposed against Russia (including as a result of disruptions of global shipping, the transport of products, energy supply, cybersecurity incidents and banking systems as well as of our ability to control input costs) or otherwise, we may be unable to obtain or maintain regulatory approval or meet commercial demand for such products, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. In addition, we could be subject to enforcement actions by regulatory authorities for our failure to comply with cGMP requirements with respect to the products we manufacture in our facilities as well as for our failure to adequately oversee compliance with cGMP by any of our third party suppliers operating under contract. Moreover, failure to comply with applicable legal and regulatory requirements subjects us and our suppliers to possible regulatory action, including restrictions on supply or shutdown, which may adversely affect our or our supplier’s ability to supply the ingredients or finished products we need.

Previous wording

We are responsible for the manufacture and supply of Epidiolex/Epidyolex for commercial use and for use in clinical trials. The manufacturing of Epidiolex/Epidyolex necessitates compliance with GMP, and other regulatory requirements in jurisdictions internationally. Our ability to successfully manufacture Epidiolex/Epidyolex involves cultivation of botanical raw material from specific cannabinoid plants, extraction and purification processes, manufacture of finished products and labeling and packaging, which includes product information, tamper evidence and anti-counterfeit features, under tightly controlled processes and procedures. In addition, we must ensure chemical consistency among our batches, including clinical batches and, if approved, marketing batches. Demonstrating such consistency may require typical manufacturing controls as well as clinical data. We must also ensure that our batches conform to complex release specifications. We have a second site at which we can grow the specific cannabinoid plants that produce the CBD used in Epidiolex/Epidyolex and a second site at which we can crystallize the purified CBD from the liquid plant extract. If we are unable to manufacture Epidiolex/Epidyolex in accordance with regulatory specifications, including GMP, or if there are disruptions in our manufacturing process due to damage, loss or otherwise, or failure to pass regulatory inspections of our manufacturing facilities, we may not be able to meet current demand or supply sufficient product for use in clinical trials, and this may also harm our ability to commercialize Epidiolex/Epidyolex on a timely or cost-competitive basis, if at all. Our manufacturing program requires significant time and resources and may not be successful, may lead to delays, interruptions to supply or may prove to be more costly than anticipated.

Current wording

We are responsible for the manufacture and supply of Epidiolex/Epidyolex for commercial use and for use in clinical trials. The manufacturing of Epidiolex/Epidyolex necessitates compliance with GMP, and other regulatory requirements in jurisdictions internationally. Our ability to successfully manufacture Epidiolex/Epidyolex involves cultivation of botanical raw material from specific cannabinoid plants, extraction and purification processes, manufacture of finished products and labeling and packaging, which includes product information, tamper evidence and anti-counterfeit features, under tightly controlled processes and procedures. In addition, we must ensure chemical consistency among our batches, including clinical batches and, if approved, marketing batches. Demonstrating such consistency may require typical manufacturing controls as well as clinical data. We must also ensure that our batches conform to complex release specifications. We have a second site at which we can grow the specific cannabis plants that produce the CBD used in Epidiolex/Epidyolex and a second site at which we can crystallize the purified CBD from the liquid plant extract. If we are unable to manufacture Epidiolex/Epidyolex in accordance with regulatory specifications, including cGMP, or if there are disruptions in our manufacturing process due to damage, loss or otherwise, or failure to pass regulatory inspections of our manufacturing facilities, we may not be able to meet current demand or supply sufficient product for use in clinical trials, and this may also harm our ability to commercialize Epidiolex/Epidyolex on a timely or cost-competitive basis, if at all. Our manufacturing program requires significant time and resources and may not be successful, may lead to delays, interruptions to supply or may prove to be more costly than anticipated.

Previous wording

Vyxeos is manufactured by Simtra, which is a sole source supplier from a single site location. Moreover, the proprietary technology that supports the manufacture of Vyxeos is not easily transferable. Consequently, engaging an alternate manufacturer may be difficult, costly and time-consuming. If we fail to obtain a sufficient supply of Vyxeos in accordance with applicable specifications on a timely basis, our sales of Vyxeos, our future maintenance and potential growth of the market for this product, our ability to conduct ongoing and future clinical trials of Vyxeos, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects could be materially adversely affected.

Current wording

Vyxeos is manufactured by Simtra, which is a sole source supplier from a single site location. Moreover, the proprietary technology that supports the manufacture of Vyxeos is not easily transferable. Consequently, engaging an alternate manufacturer may be difficult, costly and time-consuming. If we fail to obtain a sufficient supply of Vyxeos in accordance with applicable specifications on a timely basis, our sales of Vyxeos, our future maintenance and potential growth of the market for this product, and our ability to conduct ongoing and future clinical trials of Vyxeos, could be materially adversely affected.

Previous wording

We currently rely on WuXi, a company based in the PRC, as the sole supplier of Ziihera. Accordingly, there is a risk that supplies of Ziihera may be significantly delayed by, or may become unavailable as a result of, manufacturing, equipment, process, regulatory or business-related issues affecting that company. We may also face additional manufacturing and supply-chain risks due to the regulatory and political structure of the PRC, or as a result of the international relationship between the PRC and the U.S., including but not limited to potential trade restrictions,sanctions, other regulatory requirements, or proposed legislation imposed by the U.S. government, which could restrict or even prohibit our ability to work with WuXi. For example, the House of Representatives of the prior Congress (the 118 th Congress) passed the BIOSECURE Act, which proposed targeting U.S. government contracts, grants and loans for entities that use biotechnology equipment or services from certain named Chinese biotechnology companies, including WuXi, and potentially other biotechnology companies designated in the future. The language of the proposed BIOSECURE Act would, among other things, prohibit U.S. federal agencies from entering into or renewing any contract with any entity that uses biotechnology equipment or services produced or provided by a “biotechnology company of concern.” The version of the bill passed by the prior House of Representatives included a “grandfathering” provision, which provided that the BIOSECURE Act’s prohibitions would not apply to pre-existing contracts and agreements entered into prior to the legislation’s effective date until 2032. The BIOSECURE Act did not become law in the 118 th Congress. It is unclear whether the current Congress (the 119 th Congress) will introduce the BIOSECURE Act or similar legislation in this congressional session and, if so, how the scope, prohibitions, or designated biotechnology companies of concern may differ from the version of the BIOSECURE Act passed by the House in the prior 118 th Congress. Although to date there has been no impact on our ability to obtain supply of Ziihera, there can be no assurance that operations would not be impacted in the future with a negative impact on Ziihera supply.

Current wording

We currently rely on WuXi (Hong Kong), a company based in the PRC and subsidiary of WuXi, as the sole supplier of Ziihera. Accordingly, there is a risk that supplies of Ziihera may be significantly delayed by, or may become unavailable as a result of, manufacturing, equipment, process, regulatory or business-related issues affecting that company. We may also face additional manufacturing and supply-chain risks due to the regulatory and political structure of the PRC, or as a result of the international relations between the PRC and the U.S., including but not limited to potential trade restrictions, sanctions, other regulatory requirements, or proposed legislation imposed by the U.S. government, which could restrict or even prohibit our ability to work with WuXi. For example, the House of Representatives of the prior U.S. Congress (the 118th U.S. Congress) passed the BIOSECURE Act, which proposed to ban U.S. government contracts, grants, and loans from being used towards biotechnology equipment and services produced or provided by certain named Chinese biotechnology companies, including WuXi, and would authorize the U.S. government to name additional Chinese biotechnology companies of concern. The legislation did not pass the U.S. Congress in 2024, however, on December 18, 2025, the BIOSECURE Act was passed as part of the final Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act. Although the statutory language in the NDAA does not explicitly name WuXi, or any other companies, like the BIOSECURE Act, it bans federal procurement or funding associated with “biotechnology companies of concern” and restricting use of their equipment and services in federal contracts, grants, and loans. The implementation of the act will be phased in over a period of years, and could severely restrict the ability of companies to work with certain Chinese biotechnology companies of concern without losing the ability to contract with, or otherwise receive funding from, the U.S. government. Although to date there has been no impact on our ability to obtain supply of Ziihera, there can be no assurance that operations would not be impacted in the future with a negative impact on Ziihera supply.

Previous wording

Global trade issues and changes in and uncertainties with respect to trade policies and export regulations, including import and export license requirements, trade sanctions, tariffs and international trade disputes, could adversely impact our business and operations, and reduce the competitiveness of our products and services relative to local and global competitors.

Current wording

Global trade issues and changes in and uncertainties with respect to trade policies and export regulations, including import and export license requirements, trade sanctions, tariffs and international trade disputes, could increase our costs, reduce the competitiveness of our products and otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Previous wording

There is inherent risk, based on the complex relationships among the U.S. and the countries in which we conduct our business, that political, diplomatic, and national security factors can lead to global trade restrictions and changes in trade policies and export regulations that may adversely affect our business and operations. Compliance with applicable regulatory requirements regarding the export of our products may create delays in the introduction of our products in international markets or, in some cases, prevent the export of our products to some countries altogether. Furthermore, U.S. export control laws and economic sanctions prohibit the provision of certain products and services to countries, governments and persons targeted by U.S. sanctions. The U.S. and other countries have imposed and may continue to impose new trade restrictions and export regulations, have levied tariffs and taxes on certain goods, and could significantly increase tariffs on a broad array of goods. For example, on February 1, 2025, President Donald Trump signed executive orders imposing a 25% tariff on certain imports from Mexico and Canada, and a 10% tariff on certain imports from China, which were to take effect on February 4, 2025. A 30-day pause was granted to Mexico and Canada. However, these newly proposed and imposed tariffs have resulted in retaliatory tariffs, and threats thereof, against U.S. goods. The ultimate impact of these potential and actual tariffs on our business and financial condition is unknown. In addition, ongoing changes in U.S. and foreign government trade policies, including potential modifications to existing trade agreements, could introduce additional uncertainty. Trade restrictions and export regulations, or increases in tariffs (including tariffs on imports from Europe) and additional taxes, including any retaliatory measures, can negatively impact end-user demand, increase our supply chain complexity and our manufacturing costs, decrease margins, reduce the competitiveness of our products, or restrict our ability to sell products, provide services or purchase necessary equipment and supplies, any or all of which could have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations, or financial condition and, given the nature of our products, relocating the manufacturing supply can be a complex, costly and time-consuming process making it difficult to react quickly to a changing environment.

Current wording

There is inherent risk, based on the complex relationships among the U.S. and the countries in which we conduct our business, that political, diplomatic, and national security factors can lead to global trade restrictions and changes in trade policies and export regulations that may adversely affect our business and operations. Compliance with applicable regulatory requirements regarding the export of our products may create delays in the introduction of our products in international markets or, in some cases, prevent the export of our products to some countries altogether. Furthermore, U.S. export control laws and economic sanctions prohibit the provision of certain products and services to countries, governments and persons targeted by U.S. sanctions. The U.S. and other countries have imposed and may continue to impose new trade restrictions and export regulations, have levied tariffs and taxes on certain goods, and could continue to significantly increase tariffs on a broad array of goods, including pharmaceutical and biological products.

Previous wording

Even if we receive regulatory approval of a product, regulatory authorities may impose significant labeling restrictions or requirements, including limitations on the dosing of the product, requirements around the naming or strength of a product, restrictions on indicated uses for which we may market the product, the imposition of a boxed warning or other warnings and precautions, and/or the requirement for a REMS or equivalent obligation imposed in a European or other foreign country to ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh the risks. FDA requires a REMS and a boxed warning for Xywav and Xyrem, and similar restrictions could be imposed on other products in the future. Our receipt of approval for narrower indications than sought, restrictions on marketing through a REMS or equivalent obligation imposed in a European or other foreign country, or significant labeling restrictions or requirements in an approved label such as a boxed warning, could have a negative impact on our ability to recoup our research and development costs and to successfully commercialize that product, any of which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Current wording

Even if we receive regulatory approval of a product, regulatory authorities may impose significant labeling restrictions or requirements, including limitations on the dosing of the product, requirements around the naming or strength of a product, restrictions on indicated uses for which we may market the product, the imposition of a boxed warning or other warnings and precautions, and/or the requirement for a REMS or equivalent obligation imposed in a European or other foreign country to ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh the risks. FDA requires a REMS and a boxed warning for Xywav and Xyrem, and similar restrictions could be imposed on other products in the future. Our receipt of approval for narrower indications than sought, restrictions on marketing through a REMS or equivalent obligation imposed in a European or other foreign country, or significant labeling restrictions or requirements in an approved label such as a boxed warning, could have a negative impact on our ability to recoup our R&D costs and to successfully commercialize that product, any of which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Previous wording

Regulatory authorities may also impose post-marketing obligations as part of their approval, which may lead to additional costs and burdens associated with commercialization of the product and may pose a risk to maintaining approval of the product. We are subject to certain post-marketing requirements and commitments in connection with the approval of certain of our products, including Epidiolex/Epidyolex, Defitelio, Vyxeos, Rylaze, Zepzelca and Ziihera. These post-marketing requirements and commitments include satisfactorily conducting multiple post-marketing trials and safety studies. Failure to comply with these post-marketing requirements could result in withdrawal of our marketing approvals for the applicable product and/or other civil or criminal penalties. If a product is approved under accelerated approval, continued approval may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in a confirmatory trial. For example, FDA granted accelerated approval to Zepzelca for relapsed SCLC based on data from a Phase 2 trial, which approval is contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in a post-marketing clinical trial. While we and our licensor PharmaMar have reached agreement with FDA regarding a confirmatory clinical development program, our inability to confirm its clinical benefit in the second-line treatment setting for SCLC could result in the withdrawal of approval of Zepzelca, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. In addition, FDA granted accelerated approval to Ziihera for previously treated, unresectable or metastatic HER2-positive BTC based on data from a Phase 2 trial. Continued approval for this indication may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in a confirmatory trial. While a Phase 3 confirmatory trial is ongoing to evaluate zanidatamab in combination with standard-of-care therapy versus standard-of-care therapy alone in the first-line setting for patients with HER2-positive BTC, our inability to confirm its clinical benefit in the first-line setting for patients with HER2-positive BTC could result in the withdrawal of approval of Ziihera, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. In any event, if we are unable to comply with our post-marketing obligations imposed as part of the marketing approvals in the U.S., the EU, or other countries, our approval may be varied, suspended or revoked, product supply may be delayed and our sales of our products could be materially adversely affected.

Current wording

Regulatory authorities may also impose post-marketing obligations as part of their approval, which may lead to additional costs and burdens associated with commercialization of the product and may pose a risk to maintaining approval of the product. We are subject to certain post-marketing requirements and commitments in connection with the approval of certain of our products, including Epidiolex/Epidyolex, Zepzelca, Rylaze, Ziihera, Modeyso, Vyxeos and Defitelio. These post-marketing requirements and commitments include satisfactorily conducting multiple post-marketing trials and safety studies. Failure to comply with these post-marketing requirements could result in withdrawal of our marketing approvals for the applicable product and/or other civil or criminal penalties. If a product is approved under accelerated approval, continued approval may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in a confirmatory trial. For example, FDA granted accelerated approval to Zepzelca for relapsed SCLC based on data from a Phase 2 trial, which approval is contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in a post-marketing clinical trial. In addition, FDA granted accelerated approval to Ziihera for previously treated, unresectable or metastatic HER2-positive BTC based on data from a Phase 2 trial. Continued approval for this indication may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in a confirmatory trial. While a Phase 3 confirmatory trial is ongoing to evaluate zanidatamab in combination with standard-of-care therapy versus standard-of-care therapy alone in the first-line setting for patients with HER2-positive BTC, our inability to confirm its clinical benefit in the first-line setting for patients with HER2-positive BTC could result in the withdrawal of approval of Ziihera, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. Furthermore, FDA granted accelerated approval to Modeyso for adult and pediatric patients 1 year of age and older with diffuse midline glioma harboring an H3 K27M mutation with progressive disease following prior therapy based on data from a Phase 2 trial, which approval is contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in a post-marketing clinical trial. While the Phase 3 ACTION confirmatory trial is ongoing to evaluate Modeyso in first-line setting for patients with H3 K27M-mutant diffuse glioma, our inability to confirm its clinical benefit in the first-line setting for patients with diffuse midline glioma harboring an H3 K27M mutation could result in the withdrawal of approval of Modeyso, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. In any event, if we are unable to comply with our post-marketing obligations imposed as part of the marketing approvals in the U.S., the EU, or other countries, our appro…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

Any new data relating to Epidiolex/Epidyolex, including from adverse event reports and post-marketing studies in the U.S. and Europe, and from other ongoing clinical trials, may result in changes to the product label and/or imposition of a REMS and may adversely affect sales, or result in withdrawal of Epidiolex/Epidyolex from the market. FDA, EMA and regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions may also consider the new data in reviewing Epidiolex/Epidyolex marketing applications for indications beyond its currently approved uses or impose additional post-approval requirements. If any of these actions were to occur, it could result in significant expense and delay or limit our ability to generate sales of Epidiolex/Epidyolex.

Current wording

Any new data relating to Epidiolex/Epidyolex, including from adverse event reports and post-marketing studies in the U.S. and Europe, and from other ongoing clinical trials, may result in changes to the product label and/or imposition of a REMS and may adversely affect sales, or result in withdrawal of Epidiolex/Epidyolex from the market. FDA, EMA and regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions may also consider the new data in reviewing Epidiolex/Epidyolex MAAs for indications beyond its currently approved uses or impose additional post-approval requirements. If any of these actions were to occur, it could result in significant expense and delay or limit our ability to generate sales of Epidiolex/Epidyolex.

Previous wording

In addition to continued investment in our research and development pipeline, we intend to grow our business by acquiring or in-licensing, and developing, including with collaboration partners, additional products and product candidates that we believe are highly differentiated and have significant commercial potential. However, we may be unable to identify or consummate suitable acquisition or in-licensing opportunities, andthis inability could impair our ability to grow our business. Other companies, many of which may have substantially greater financial, sales and marketing resources, compete with us for these opportunities. Even if appropriate opportunities are available, we may not be able to successfully identify them, or we may not have the financial resources necessary to pursue them.

Current wording

In addition to continued investment in our R&D pipeline, we intend to grow our business by acquiring or in-licensing, and developing, including with collaboration partners, additional products and product candidates that we believe are highly differentiated and have significant commercial potential. However, we may be unable to identify or consummate suitable acquisition or in-licensing opportunities, andthis inability could impair our ability to grow our business. Other companies, many of which may have substantially greater financial, sales and marketing resources, compete with us for these opportunities. Even if appropriate opportunities are available, we may not be able to successfully identify them, or we may not have the financial resources necessary to pursue them.

Previous wording

Even if we are able to successfully identify and acquire, in-license or develop additional products or product candidates, we may not be able to successfully manage the risks associated with integrating any products or product candidates into our portfolio or the risks arising from anticipated and unanticipated problems in connection with an acquisition or in-licensing or from financial difficulties of our collaborators. Further, while we seek to mitigate risks and liabilities of potential acquisitions and in-licensing transactions through, among other things, due diligence, there may be risks and liabilities that such due diligence efforts fail to discover, that are not disclosed to us, or that we inadequately assess. Any failure in identifying and managing these risks, liabilities and uncertainties effectively, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, product and product candidate acquisitions, particularly when the acquisition takes the form of a merger or other business consolidation, such as our acquisition of GW have required, and any similar future transactions also will require, significant efforts and expenditures, including with respect to transition and integration activities. We may encounter unexpected difficulties, or incur substantial costs, in connection with potential acquisitions and similar transactions, which include:

Current wording

Even if we are able to successfully identify and acquire, in-license or develop additional products or product candidates, we may not be able to successfully manage the risks associated with integrating any products or product candidates into our portfolio or the risks arising from anticipated and unanticipated problems in connection with an acquisition or in-licensing or from financial difficulties of our collaborators. Further, while we seek to mitigate risks and liabilities of potential acquisitions and in-licensing transactions through, among other things, due diligence, there may be risks and liabilities that such due diligence efforts fail to discover, that are not disclosed to us, or that we inadequately assess. Any failure in identifying and managing these risks, liabilities and uncertainties effectively, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, product and product candidate acquisitions, particularly when the acquisition takes the form of a merger or other business consolidation, such as the Chimerix Acquisition has required, and any similar future transactions also will require, significant efforts and expenditures, including with respect to transition and integration activities. We may encounter unexpected difficulties, or incur substantial costs, in connection with potential acquisitions and similar transactions, which include:

Previous wording

As a result of these or other factors, products or product candidates we acquire, or obtain licenses to, may not produce the revenues, earnings or business synergies that we anticipated, may not result in regulatory approvals, and may not perform as expected. For example, in May 2021, we made a substantial investment in Epidiolex and certain other products and technologies acquired in our acquisition of GW. The total consideration paid by us for the entire issued share capital of GW was $7.2 billion. The success of our acquisition of GW will depend, in part, on our ability to realize the anticipated benefits from the acquisition, which benefits may not be realized at the expected levels within the expected timeframe, or at all, or may take longer to realize or cost more than expected, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. In this regard, in the third quarter of 2022, we recorded a $133.6 million asset impairment charge as a result of the decision to discontinue the nabiximols program that we acquired as part of our acquisition of GW. In any event, failure to manage effectively our growth through acquisitions or in-licensing transactions could adversely affect our growth prospects, business, results of operations and financial condition.

Current wording

As a result of these or other factors, products or product candidates we acquire, or obtain licenses to, may not produce the revenues, earnings or business synergies that we anticipated, may not result in regulatory approvals, and may not perform as expected.

Previous wording

In June 2021, we received notice from Lupin that it has filed with FDA an ANDA for a generic version of Xywav. The notice from Lupin included a “paragraph IV certification” with respect to ten of our patents listed in FDA’s Orange Book for Xywav on the date of our receipt of the notice. A paragraph IV certification is a certification by a generic applicant that patents covering the branded product are invalid, unenforceable, and/or will not be infringed by the manufacture, use or sale of the generic product. In April 2022, we received notice from Lupin that it had filed a paragraph IV certification regarding a newly-issued patent listed in the Orange Book for Xywav. In February 2023, we received notice from Teva that it had filed an ANDA seeking approval to market a generic version of Xywav, which notice included a paragraph IV certification with respect to certain of our patents listed in FDA’s Orange Book for Xywav. For additional information on litigation involving these matters, see Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies—Legal Proceedings of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part IV of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K.

Current wording

In June 2021, we received notice from Lupin that it has filed with FDA an ANDA for a generic version of Xywav. The notice from Lupin included a “paragraph IV certification” with respect to ten of our patents listed in FDA’s Orange Book for Xywav on the date of our receipt of the notice. A paragraph IV certification is a certification by a generic applicant that patents covering the branded product are invalid, unenforceable, and/or will not be infringed by the manufacture, use or sale of the generic product. In April 2022, we received notice from Lupin that it had filed a paragraph IV certification regarding a newly-issued patent listed in the Orange Book for Xywav. In February 2023, we received notice from Teva that it had filed an ANDA seeking approval to market a generic version of Xywav, which notice included a paragraph IV certification with respect to certain of our patents listed in FDA’s Orange Book for Xywav. In July 2025, we received notice from Granules that it has filed with FDA an ANDA for a generic version of Xywav, which notice included a paragraph IV certification with respect to fourteen of our patents listed in FDA’s Orange Book for Xywav on the date of the receipt of the notice. In January 2026, we received notices from Tris Pharma that it had filed with FDA a Section 505(b)(2) NDA seeking approval for generic versions of Xyrem and Xywav, which notices included a paragraph IV certification with respect to seven patents listed in FDA’s Orange Book for Xyrem and fifteen patents listed in FDA’s Orange Book for Xywav, respectively. For additional information on litigation involving these matters, see Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies—Legal Proceedings of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part IV of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Previous wording

On May 13, 2021, we filed a patent infringement suit against Avadel and several of its corporate affiliates in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The suit alleges that Avadel’s product candidate FT218 will infringe five of our patents related to controlled release formulations of oxybate and the safe and effective distribution of oxybate. In March 2024, the jury upheld the validity of both of our asserted patents and awarded us damages for infringement for past sales of Lumryz in the U.S. For additional information on litigation involving this matter, see “Avadel Litigation” in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies—Legal Proceedings of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part IV of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K.

Current wording

We have entered into a settlement agreement with Avadel, which as of February 2026, is a subsidiary of Alkermes, involving, among other matters, our patent infringement suit against Avadel and several of its corporate affiliates in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. For additional information on litigation involving this matter, see “Avadel Litigation” in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies—Legal Proceedings of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part IV of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Previous wording

In July and August 2024, Zepzelca ANDA filers sent us notices that they had filed ANDAs seeking approval to market a generic version of Zepzelca (lurbinectedin), which notices each included a paragraph IV certification with respect to our Orange Book listed patent for Zepzelca on the date of the receipt of the applicable notice. In September 2024, we filed patent infringement suits against these ANDA filers. For additional information on litigation involving this matter, see “Zepzelca Patent Litigation” in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies—Legal Proceedings of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part IV of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K.

Current wording

In July and August 2024, Zepzelca ANDA filers sent us notices that they had filed ANDAs seeking approval to market a generic version of Zepzelca, which notices each included a paragraph IV certification with respect to our Orange Book listed patent for Zepzelca. In September 2024, we filed patent infringement suits against these ANDA filers. In September 2025, we filed an additional lawsuit against each of the Zepzelca ANDA Filers, alleging that, by filing its ANDA, each party infringed the newly-issued patent related to a method of treatment using Zepzelca. For additional information on litigation involving this matter, see “Zepzelca Patent Litigation” in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies—Legal Proceedings of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part IV of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Previous wording

Our ability, and that of our partners, to successfully commercialize any approved products will depend, in part, on our ability to obtain patents, enforce those patents and operate without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. If we choose to go to court to stop a third party from infringing our patents, our licensed patents or our partners’ patents, that third party has the right to ask the court or an administrative agency to rule that these patents are invalid and/or should not be enforced. These lawsuits and administrative proceedings are expensive and consume time and other resources, and we may not be successful in these proceedings or in stopping infringement. In addition, the IPR or a post-grant review process under the

Current wording

Our ability, and that of our partners, to successfully commercialize any approved products will depend, in part, on our ability to obtain patents, enforce those patents and operate without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. If we choose to go to court to stop a third party from infringing our patents, our licensed patents or our partners’ patents, that third party has the right to ask the court or an administrative agency to rule that these patents are invalid and/or should not be enforced. For example, we are pursuing patent infringement proceedings in Germany initiated by Chimerix against a supplier in contravention of certain patents acquired in connection with the Chimerix Acquisition. These lawsuits and administrative proceedings are expensive and consume time and other resources, and we may not be successful in these proceedings or in stopping infringement. In addition, the IPR or a post-grant review process under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act permits any person, whether they are accused of infringing the patent at issue or not, to challenge the validity of certain patents through a proceeding before the PTAB.

Previous wording

Litigation involving patent matters is frequently settled between the parties, rather than continuing to a court ruling. The FTC has publicly stated that, in its view, certain types of agreements between branded and generic pharmaceutical companies related to the settlement of patent litigation or the manufacture, marketing and sale of generic versions of branded drugs violate the antitrust laws and has commenced investigations and brought actions against some companies that have entered into such agreements. In particular, the FTC has expressed its intention to take aggressive action to challenge settlements that include an alleged transfer of value from the brand company to the generic company (so-called “pay for delay” patent litigation settlements). The U.S. Congress and state legislatures have also identified pharmaceutical patent litigation settlements as potential impediments to generic competition and have introduced, and in states like California passed, legislation to regulate them. Third party payors have also challenged such settlements on the grounds that they increase drug prices. Because there is currently no precise legal standard with respect to the lawfulness of such settlements, many pharmaceutical companies, including us, have faced extensive litigation over whether patent litigation settlements they have entered into are reasonable and lawful. From June 2020 to May 2022, several lawsuits were filed on behalf of purported direct and indirect Xyrem purchasers, alleging that the patent litigation settlement agreements we entered with Hikma and other ANDA filers violate state and federal antitrust and consumer protection laws. For additional information on these lawsuits, see "Xyrem Antitrust Litigation" in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies—Legal Proceedings of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part IV of this Annual Report on Form 10‑K. It is possible that additional lawsuits will be filed against us making similar or related allegations. We cannot predict the outcome of these or potential additional lawsuits; however, if the plaintiffs in the class action complaints were to be successful in their claims, they may be entitled to injunctive relief or we may be required to pay significant monetary damages, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Current wording

Litigation involving patent matters is frequently settled between the parties, rather than continuing to a court ruling. The FTC has publicly stated that, in its view, certain types of agreements between branded and generic pharmaceutical companies related to the settlement of patent litigation or the manufacture, marketing and sale of generic versions of branded drugs violate the antitrust laws and has commenced investigations and brought actions against some companies that have entered into such agreements. In particular, the FTC has expressed its intention to take aggressive action to challenge settlements that include an alleged transfer of value from the brand company to the generic company (so-called “pay for delay” patent litigation settlements). The U.S. Congress and state legislatures have also identified pharmaceutical patent litigation settlements as potential impediments to generic competition and have introduced, and in states like California passed, legislation to regulate them. Third party payors have also challenged such settlements on the grounds that they increase drug prices. Because there is currently no precise legal standard with respect to the lawfulness of such settlements, many pharmaceutical companies, including us, have faced extensive litigation over whether patent litigation settlements they have entered into are reasonable and lawful. From June 2020 to May 2022, several lawsuits were filed on behalf of purported direct and indirect Xyrem purchasers, alleging that the patent litigation settlement agreements we entered with Hikma and other ANDA filers violate state and federal antitrust and consumer protection laws. As of October 2025, we have resolved the entirety of the Xyrem Antitrust Litigation. For additional information on these lawsuits, as well as a class settlement agreement with respect thereto, see "Xyrem Antitrust Litigation" in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies—Legal Proceedings of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Part IV of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. It is possible that additional lawsuits will be filed against us making similar or related allegations. We cannot predict the outcome of any potential additional lawsuits; however, if the plaintiffs were to be successful in their claims, they may be entitled to injunctive relief or we may be required to pay significant monetary damages, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.