RIGEL PHARMACEUTICALS INC

Previous wording

Our future financial performance and our ability to sustain successful commercialization of our products and our ability to commercialize other product candidates that may receive regulatory approval will depend, in part, on our ability to manage any future growth effectively. In particular, as we continue to commercialize our products, we will need to support the training and ongoing activities of our sales force and will likely need to continue to expand the size of our employee base for managerial, operational, financial and other resources. To that end, we must be able to successfully:

Current wording

ability to manage any future growth effectively. In particular, as we continue to commercialize our products, we will need to support the training and ongoing activities of our sales force and will likely need to continue to expand the size of our employee base for managerial, operational, financial and other resources. To that end, we must be able to successfully:

Previous wording

Apart from our discovery efforts, we continue to seek to broaden and diversify our product portfolio through acquisition or in-licensing of a product. This strategy is dependent on our ability to successfully identify and acquire or in-license relevant product candidates. In July 2022, we entered into a license and transition services agreement with Forma for an exclusive license to develop, manufacture and commercialize olutasidenib, a proprietary inhibitor of mIDH1, for any uses worldwide, including for the treatment of AML and other malignancies. On December 1, 2022, the FDA approved REZLIDHIA capsules for the treatment of adult patients with R/R AML with a susceptible IDH1 mutations as detected by an FDA-approved test. REZLIDHIA is our second commercial product and we believe is highly synergistic with our existing hematology-oncology focused commercial and medical affairs infrastructure. Further, in February 2024, we entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement with Blueprint topurchase certain assets comprising the right to research, develop, manufacture and commercialize GAVRETO, Blueprint’s proprietary RET inhibitor of tyrosine kinase for the treatment of metastatic RET fusion-positive NSCLC and advanced thyroid cancer, in the US. Simultaneously and in connection with entering into the Asset Purchase Agreement, we also entered into certain supporting agreements with Blueprint, including a customary transition agreement, pursuant to which, during a transition period, Blueprint will transition regulatory and distribution responsibility for pralsetinib to us. On June 24, 2024, we announced the completion of the transfer of GAVRETO NDA to us, and GAVRETO became commercially available from us in the US by prescription beginning on June 27, 2024. The in-licensing and acquisition of a product is a highly competitive area, and many other companies are pursuing the same or similar product candidates to those that we may consider attractive. In particular, larger companies with more well-established and diverse revenue streams may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, financial resources and more extensive clinical development and commercialization capabilities. Furthermore, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. The success of this strategy depends partly upon our ability to identify, select and acquire or in-license promising product candidates and technologies. The process of proposing, negotiating and implementing a license or acquisition of a product candidate is lengthy and complex, and we may be unable to in-license or acquire the rights to any such products, product candidates or technologies from third parties for several reasons. We may also be unable to in-license or acquire additional relevant product candidates on acceptable terms. Further, even if we identify acquisition or in-licensing targets, we may not be able to complete the transactions or we may determine …

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

Apart from our discovery efforts, we continue to seek to broaden and diversify our product portfolio through acquisition or in-licensing of a product. This strategy is dependent on our ability to successfully identify and acquire or in-license relevant product candidates. In July 2022, we entered into a license and transition services agreement with Forma for an exclusive license to develop, manufacture and commercialize olutasidenib, a proprietary inhibitor of mIDH1, for any uses worldwide, including for the treatment of AML and other malignancies. On December 1, 2022, the FDA approved REZLIDHIA capsules for the treatment of adult patients with R/R AML with a susceptible IDH1 mutations as detected by an FDA-approved test. REZLIDHIA is our second commercial product and we believe is highly synergistic with our existing hematology-oncology focused commercial and medical affairs infrastructure. Further, in February 2024, we entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement with Blueprint topurchase certain assets comprising the right to research, develop, manufacture and commercialize GAVRETO, Blueprint’s proprietary RET inhibitor of tyrosine kinase for the treatment of metastatic RET fusion-positive NSCLC and advanced thyroid cancer, in the US. Simultaneously and in connection with entering into the Asset Purchase Agreement, we also entered into certain supporting agreements with Blueprint, including a customary transition agreement, pursuant to which, during a transition period, Blueprint will transition regulatory and distribution responsibility for pralsetinib to us. On June 24, 2024, we announced the completion of the transfer of GAVRETO NDA to us, and GAVRETO became commercially available from us in the US by prescription beginning on June 27, 2024. The in-licensing and acquisition of a product is a highly competitive area, and many other companies are pursuing the same or similar product candidates to those that we may consider attractive. In particular, larger companies with more well-established and diverse revenue streams may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, financial resources and more extensive clinical development and commercialization capabilities. Furthermore, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. The success of this strategy depends partly upon our ability to identify, select and acquire or in-license promising product candidates and technologies. The process of proposing, negotiating and implementing a license or acquisition of a product candidate is lengthy and complex, and we may be unable to in-license or acquire the rights to any such products, product candidates or technologies from third parties for several reasons. We may also be unable to in-license or acquire additional relevant product candidates on acceptable terms. Further, even if we identify

Previous wording

Our compounds in clinical trials and our future leads for potential drug compounds are subject to the risks and failures inherent in the development of pharmaceutical products. These risks include, but are not limited to, the inherent difficulty in selecting the right drug and drug target and avoiding unwanted side effects, as well as unanticipated problems relating to product development, testing, enrollment, obtaining regulatory approvals, obtaining and maintaining reimbursement in national markets and positive recommendation from HTA bodies, maintaining regulatory compliance, manufacturing, competition and costs and expenses that may exceed current estimates. In future clinical trials, we or our partners may discover additional side effects and/or a higher frequency of side effects than those observed in previously completed clinical trials. The results of preliminary and mid-stage clinical trials do not necessarily predict clinical or commercial success, and larger later-stage clinical trials may fail to confirm the results observed in the previous clinical trials. Similarly, a clinical trial may show that a product candidate is safe and effective for certain patient populations in a particular indication, but other clinical trials may fail to confirm those results in a subset of that population or in a different patient population, which may limit the potential market for that product candidate. With respect to our own compounds in development, we have established anticipated timelines with respect to the initiation of clinical trials based on existing knowledge of the compounds. However, we cannot provide assurance that we will meet any of these timelines for clinical development. Additionally, the initial results of a completed earlier clinical trial of a product candidate do not necessarily predict final results and the results may not be repeated in later clinical trials.

Current wording

Our compounds in clinical trials and our future leads for potential drug compounds are subject to the risks and failures inherent in the development of pharmaceutical products. These risks include, but are not limited to, the inherent difficulty in selecting the right drug and drug target and avoiding unwanted side effects, as well as unanticipated problems relating to product development, testing, enrollment, obtaining regulatory approvals, obtaining and maintaining reimbursement in national markets and positive recommendation from HTA bodies, maintaining regulatory compliance, manufacturing, competition and costs and expenses that may exceed current estimates. In future clinical trials, we, our partners or others may discover additional side effects and/or a higher frequency of side effects than those observed in previously completed clinical trials. The results of preliminary and mid-stage clinical trials do not necessarily predict clinical or commercial success, and larger later-stage clinical trials may fail to confirm the results observed in the previous clinical trials. Similarly, a clinical trial may show that a product candidate is safe and effective for certain patient populations in a particular indication, but other clinical trials may fail to confirm those results in a subset of that population or in a different patient population, which may limit the potential market for that product

Previous wording

Because of the uncertainty of whether the accumulated preclinical evidence (PK, pharmacodynamic, safety and/or other factors) or early clinical results will be observed in later clinical trials, we can make no assurances regarding the likely results from our future clinical trials or the impact of those results on our business. For example, we conducted a Phase 3 pivotal trial of fostamatinib in patients with wAIHA initiated in March 2019 and completed in April 2022. In June 2022, we announced top-line efficacy and safety data results of the trial, and theresults did not demonstrate statistical significance in the primary efficacy endpoint of durable hemoglobin response in the overall study population. We conducted an in-depth analysis of these data to better understand differences in patient characteristics and outcomes and submitted these findings to the FDA. In October 2022, we announced that we received guidance from the FDA’s review of these findings. Based on the result of the trial and the guidance from the FDA, we did not file an sNDA for this indication. Further, we may experience errors in the analysis of our clinical trial results. For example, we conducted our Phase 3 clinical trial to evaluate safety and efficacy of fostamatinib in hospitalized COVID-19 patients launched in November 2020 and completed enrollment in July 2022. We previously announced in November 2022 the top-line results did not meet statistical significance in the primary efficacy endpoint. Upon further analysis, we discovered an error by the biostatistical CRO in the application of a statistical stratification factor. After correcting for this statistical error, the primary endpoint of the study was met. However, given the end of the federal COVID-19 PHE in May 2023, and based on feedback from the FDA, DOD and other advisors regarding the program’s regulatory requirements, costs, timeline and potential for success, we decided not to submit an EUA or sNDA.

Current wording

Because of the uncertainty of whether the accumulated preclinical evidence (PK, pharmacodynamic, safety and/or other factors) or early clinical results will be observed in later clinical trials, we can make no assurances regarding the likely results from our future clinical trials or the impact of those results on our business. For example, we conducted a Phase 3 pivotal trial of fostamatinib in patients with wAIHA initiated in March 2019 and completed in April 2022. In June 2022, we announced top-line efficacy and safety data results of the trial, and theresults did not demonstrate statistical significance in the primary efficacy endpoint of durable hemoglobin response in the overall study population. We conducted an in-depth analysis of these data to better understand differences in patient characteristics and outcomes and submitted these findings to the FDA. In October 2022, we announced that we received guidance from the FDA’s review of these findings. Based on the result of the trial and the guidance from the FDA, we did not file an sNDA for this indication. Further, we may experience errors in the analysis of our clinical trial results. For example, we conducted our Phase 3 clinical trial to evaluate safety and efficacy of fostamatinib in hospitalized COVID-19 patients launched in November 2020 and completed enrollment in July 2022. We previously announced in November 2022 the top-line results did not meet statistical significance in the primary efficacy endpoint. Upon further analysis, we discovered an error by the biostatistical CRO in the application of a statistical stratification factor. After correcting for this statistical error, the primary endpoint of the study was met. However, given the end of the federal COVID-19 PHE in May 2023, and based on feedback from the FDA, DOD and other advisors regarding the program’s regulatory requirements, costs, timeline and potential for success, we decided not to submit an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) or sNDA.

Previous wording

Our business operations and current and future arrangements with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors and customers, may expose us to broadly applicable federal, state and foreign fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations including anti-kickback and false claims laws, data privacy and security laws, and transparency reporting laws. These laws may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we conduct our operations, including how we research, market, sell and distribute any product for which we have obtained regulatory approval, or for which we obtain regulatory approval in the future. In particular, the promotion, sales and marketing of healthcare items and services, as well as certain business arrangements in the healthcare industry, are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, bribery kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive or inappropriate practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, including promoting off-label uses of our products, certain commission compensation, certain customer incentive programs, certain patient support offerings, and other business arrangements generally. Activities subject to these laws also involve the improper use or misrepresentation of information obtained in the course of patient recruitment for clinical trials, creating fraudulent data in our preclinical studies or clinical trials or illegal misappropriation of drug product, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. See “Business – Government Regulation – Healthcare and Privacy Law and Regulation and Healthcare Reform” contained in Part I, Item 1 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023, for more information on the healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate.

Current wording

misconduct, bribery kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive or inappropriate practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, including promoting off-label uses of our products, certain commission compensation, certain customer incentive programs, certain patient support offerings, and other business arrangements generally. Activities subject to these laws also involve the improper use or misrepresentation of information obtained in the course of patient recruitment for clinical trials, creating fraudulent data in our preclinical studies or clinical trials or illegal misappropriation of drug product, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. See “Business – Government Regulation – Healthcare and Privacy Law and Regulation and Healthcare Reform” contained in Part I, Item 1 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023, for more information on the healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate.

Previous wording

We are also subject to the risk that a person or government could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental and enforcement authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law interpreting applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, disgorgement, monetary fines, imprisonment, additional reporting obligations and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely

Current wording

We are also subject to the risk that a person or government could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental and enforcement authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law interpreting applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, disgorgement, monetary fines, imprisonment, additional reporting obligations and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

Previous wording

We are subject to, or affected by, various federal, state and foreign laws, rules, directives, and regulations, as well as regulatory guidance, policies and contractual obligations relating to privacy and information security, governing the acquisition, collection, access, use, disclosure, processing, modification, retention, storage, transfer, destruction, protection, and security (collectively, “processing”) of personal information and other sensitive information about individuals. The global privacy and information security landscape is evolving rapidly, and implementation standards and enforcement practices are likely to continue to develop for the foreseeable future and may result in conflicting or inconsistent compliance obligations. Legislators and regulators are increasingly adopting or amending privacy and information security laws, rules, directives, and regulations that may create uncertainty in our business, affect our or our collaborators’, service providers’ and contractors’ ability to operate in certain jurisdictions or to process personal information, transfer data internationally, necessitate the acceptance of more onerous obligations in our contracts, result in enforcement actions, litigation or other liability or impose additional costs on us. The cost of compliance with these laws, regulations and standards is high and is likely to increase in the future. Any failure or perceived failure by us or our collaborators, service providers and contractors to comply with federal, state or foreign laws or regulations, our internal policies and procedures or our contracts governing the processing of personal information could result in negative publicity, diversion of management time and effort and proceedings against us by governmental entities or others. In many jurisdictions, enforcement actions, litigation, and other consequences for noncompliance with privacy and information security laws and regulations are rising. Compliance with applicable privacy and information security laws and regulations, as well as regulatory guidance, policies and contractual obligations, is a rigorous and time-intensive process, and we may be required to put in place additional mechanisms to ensure compliance with the new privacy and information security requirements. If we fail to comply with any such obligations, we may face significant investigations, fines, penalties and claims that could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, ability to process personal information and income from certain business initiatives.

Current wording

We are subject to, or affected by, various federal, state and foreign laws, rules, directives, and regulations, as well as regulatory guidance, policies and contractual obligations relating to privacy and information security, governing the acquisition, collection, access, use, disclosure, processing, modification, retention, storage, transfer, destruction, protection, and security (collectively, “processing”) of personal information and other sensitive information about individuals. The global privacy and information security landscape is evolving rapidly, and implementation standards and enforcement practices are likely to continue to develop for the foreseeable future and may result in conflicting or inconsistent compliance obligations. Legislators and regulators are increasingly adopting or amending privacy and information security laws, rules, directives, and regulations that may create uncertainty in our business, affect our or our collaborators’, service providers’ and contractors’ ability to operate in certain jurisdictions or to process personal information, transfer data internationally, necessitate the acceptance of more onerous obligations in our contracts, result in enforcement actions, litigation or other liability or impose additional costs on us. The cost of compliance with these laws, regulations and standards is high and is likely to increase in the future. Any failure or perceived failure by us or our collaborators, service providers and contractors to comply with federal, state or foreign laws or regulations, our internal policies and procedures or our contracts governing the processing of personal information could result in negative

Previous wording

In the US, these obligations include various federal, state, and local statutes, rules, and regulations relating to privacy and data security. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act to regulate unfair or deceptive or practices, and has used this authority to initiate enforcement actions against companies that implement inadequate controls around privacy and information security in violation of their externally facing policies. The FTC has recently brought several cases alleging violations of Section 5 of the FTC Act with respect to health information, and has proposed rulemaking on privacy and data security, including with respect to the Health Breach Notification Rule. Additionally, the FTC published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking in 2022 on commercial surveillance and data security, and may propose regulation concerning the ways in which companies collect, aggregate, protect, use, analyze, and retain consumer data, as well as transfer, share, sell, or otherwise monetize that data in the coming years. Additionally, the US federal government has also enacted statutes to address privacy and information security issues impacting particular industries or activities, including the following laws and regulations: the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA), the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, the CAN-SPAM Act, and other laws and regulations.

Current wording

In the US, these obligations include various federal, state, and local statutes, rules, and regulations relating to privacy and data security. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act to regulate unfair or deceptive or practices, and has used this authority to initiate enforcement actions against companies that implement inadequate controls around privacy and information security in violation of their externally facing policies. The FTC has recently brought several cases alleging violations of Section 5 of the FTC Act with respect to health information, and has proposed rulemaking on a variety of privacy and data security topics. The FTC published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking in 2022 on commercial surveillance and data security, and may propose regulation concerning the ways in which companies collect, aggregate, protect, use, analyze, and retain consumer data, as well as transfer, share, sell, or otherwise monetize that data in the coming years. The FTC also finalized changes to the Health Breach Notification Rule in April 2024. Moreover, the US federal government has also enacted statutes to address privacy and information security issues impacting particular industries or activities, including the following laws and regulations: the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, the CAN-SPAM Act, and other laws and regulations, and continues to consider comprehensive federal privacy legislation.

Previous wording

In addition, state legislatures have enacted statutes to address privacy and information security issues, including the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (the CCPA). For example, the CCPA, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) in 2020, establishes a privacy framework applicable to for-profit entities that are doing business in California, including an expansive definition of personal information and data privacy rights for California residents, and authorizes potentially severe statutory damages and creates a private right of action for certain data security breaches. The CCPA also requires businesses subject to the law to provide disclosures to California residents and to provide them with rights with respect to their personal information, including the right to opt out of the sale of such information. Moreover, the CPRA, among other things, impose new requirements relating to data minimization and correction, and gives California residents additional rights over their personal information, including the right to opt-out of the use of their personal information in online behavioral advertising and to opt-out of certain types of consumer

Current wording

In addition, state legislatures have enacted statutes to address privacy and information security issues, including the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (the CCPA). For example, the CCPA, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA), establishes a privacy framework applicable to for-profit entities that are doing business in California, including an expansive definition of personal information and data privacy rights for California residents (as consumers, business contacts and employees), and authorizes potentially severe statutory damages and creates a private right of action for certain data security breaches. The CCPA also requires businesses subject to the law to provide disclosures to California residents and to provide them with rights with respect to their personal information, including the right to opt out of the sale of such information. Moreover, the CPRA, among other things, impose requirements relating to data minimization and correction, and gives California residents additional rights over their personal information, including the right to opt-out of the use of their personal information in online behavioral advertising and to opt-out of certain types of consumer profiling. The CPRA also provides for penalties for CPRA violations concerning California residents under the age of 16, and establishes a new California Privacy Protection Agency to implement and enforce the law. Although there are limited exemptions for clinical trial and other research-related data under the CCPA, the CCPA could impact our business depending on how it will be interpreted by the new California Privacy Protection Agency. As we expand our operations, the CCPA may increase our compliance costs and potential liability.

Previous wording

profiling. The CPRA also provides for penalties for CPRA violations concerning California residents under the age of 16, and establishes a new California Privacy Protection Agency to implement and enforce the law. Although there are limited exemptions for clinical trial and other research-related data under the CCPA, the CCPA and other similar laws could impact our business depending on how it will be interpreted by the new California Privacy Protection Agency. As we expand our operations, the CCPA may increase our compliance costs and potential liability. Multiple other states have followed California and enacted comprehensive privacy laws. Additionally, multiple states have enacted or are considering similar legislation which will go into effect in the coming years, and Congress continues to consider federal privacy legislation. While these proposals and new laws generally include exemptions for HIPAA-covered and clinical trial data, they add layers of complexity to compliance in the US market, and could increase our compliance costs and adversely affect our business. Moreover, compliance with state laws related to health privacy may cause additional compliance costs such as the Washington My Health My Data Act and Nevada’s Consumer Health Data Privacy Law. Many states also have in place data security laws requiring companies to maintain certain safeguards with respect to the processing of personal information, and all states require companies to notify individuals or government regulators in the event of a data breach impacting such information.

Current wording

Multiple other states have followed California and enacted comprehensive privacy laws, or are considering similar legislation. While these new laws and proposals generally include exemptions for HIPAA-covered protected health information and clinical trial data, they add layers of complexity to compliance in the US market, and could increase our compliance costs and adversely affect our business. Moreover, some states have enacted laws specific to health data privacy, which may cause additional compliance costs such as the Washington My Health My Data Act and Nevada’s Consumer Health Data Privacy Law. States, such as Colorado, Utah and California, have passed or are considering legislation or regulation governing the development or use of artificial intelligence technologies, supplementing the existing consumer protection, FDA and other regulatory guidance that may apply to the use of AI technologies in our business, and which may impact our use of technology. Moreover, many states also have in place data security laws requiring companies to maintain certain safeguards with respect to the processing of personal information, and all states require companies to notify individuals or government regulators in the event of a data breach impacting such information.

Previous wording

Laws and regulations relating to privacy, data protection, consumer protection and information security are evolving and subject to potentially differing interpretations. These requirements may be interpreted and applied in a manner that varies from one jurisdiction to another and/or may conflict with other laws or regulations. New laws and regulations add additional complexity, requirements, restrictions and potential legal risk. Accordingly, compliance programs may require additional investment in resources, and could impact availability of previously useful data.

Current wording

Laws and regulations relating to privacy, data protection, consumer protection, AI and information security are evolving and subject to potentially differing interpretations. These requirements may be interpreted and applied in a manner that varies from one jurisdiction to another and/or may conflict with other laws or regulations. New laws and regulations add additional complexity, requirements, restrictions and potential legal risk. Accordingly, compliance programs may require additional investment in resources, and could impact availability of previously useful data.

Previous wording

On October 7, 2022, US President Biden introduced an Executive Order to facilitate a new Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework (DPF) and on July 10, 2023, the European Commission adopted its Final Implementing Decision granting the US adequacy (Adequacy Decision) for EU-US transfers of personal data for entities self-certified to the DPF. Entities relying on EU SCCs for transfers to the US. are also able to rely on the analysis in the Adequacy Decision as support for their TIA regarding the equivalence of US national security safeguards and redress. This may have implications for our cross-border data flows and has and may in the future result in increased compliance costs.

Current wording

DPF. Entities relying on EU SCCs for transfers to the US. are also able to rely on the analysis in the Adequacy Decision as support for their TIA regarding the equivalence of US national security safeguards and redress. This may have implications for our cross-border data flows and has and may in the future result in increased compliance costs.

Previous wording

policies and other documentation, we may at times fail to do so or may be perceived to have failed to do so. Moreover, despite our efforts, we may not be successful in achieving compliance if our employees, collaborators, contractors, service providers or vendors fail to act in accordance with our published policies and documentation. Such failures can subject us to potential foreign, local, state and federal action if they are found to be deceptive, unfair, or misrepresentative of our actual practices. Moreover, trial participants or research subjects about whom we or our partners obtain information, as well as the providers who share this information with us, may contractually limit our ability to use and disclose the information or exercise their right to do so under applicable privacy legislation. Claims that we have violated individuals’ privacy rights or failed to comply with data protection laws or applicable privacy policies and documentation, even if we are not found liable, could be expensive and time-consuming to defend and could result in adverse publicity that could harm our business.

Current wording

We publish privacy policies and other documentation regarding our collection, processing, use and disclosure of personal information and/or other confidential information. Although we endeavor to comply with our published policies and other documentation, we may at times fail to do so or may be perceived to have failed to do so. Moreover, despite our efforts, we may not be successful in achieving compliance if our employees, collaborators, contractors, service providers or vendors fail to act in accordance with our published policies and documentation. Such failures can subject us to potential foreign, local, state and federal action if they are found to be deceptive, unfair, or misrepresentative of our actual practices. Moreover, trial participants or research subjects about whom we or our partners obtain information, as well as the providers who share this information with us, may contractually limit our ability to use and disclose the information or exercise their right to do so under applicable privacy legislation. Claims that we have violated individuals’ privacy rights or failed to comply with data protection laws or applicable privacy policies and documentation, even if we are not found liable, could be expensive and time-consuming to defend and could result in adverse publicity that could harm our business.

Previous wording

In addition to data privacy requirements, cybersecurity requirements are laid down in various laws in the EU and the UK, the key ones being: (i) the GDPR (as discussed in detail above), which requires controllers and processors to implement appropriate technical and organizational measures to safeguard personal data to a level of security appropriate to the data protection risk; and (ii) the UK Network and Information Systems Regulation 2018 (NIS Regulations), and the EU Network and Information Systems Security 1 Directive (NISD1) as implemented into EU Member State law (and as updated by the EU Network and Information Systems Security 2 Directive (NISD2)).

Current wording

In addition to data privacy requirements, cybersecurity requirements are laid down in various laws in the EU and the UK, the key ones being: (i) the GDPR (as discussed in detail above), which requires controllers and processors to implement appropriate technical and organizational measures to safeguard personal data to a level of security appropriate to the data protection risk; and (ii) the UK Network and Information Systems Regulation 2018 (NIS

Previous wording

In the UK, the NIS Regulations apply to ‘operators of essential services’ (OES) and ‘relevant digital service providers’ (RDSP) and it was announced in January 2022, that the NIS Regulations will be updated to also cover ‘managed service providers’ (MSP) and potentially other digital service providers. The NIS Regulations require that appropriate and proportionate technical and organizational measures are implemented to manage the risk of network and information systems, and impose requirements related to incident handling and notification in relation to incidents with significant disruptive effect. Under the NIS Regulations, the UK’s data protection supervisory authority, the Information Commissioner’s Office, may issue fines of up to £17 million and take other action following non-compliance.

Current wording

In the UK, the NIS Regulations apply to ‘operators of essential services’ (OES) and ‘relevant digital service providers’ (RDSP) and following the UK General Election in July 2024, the new UK Government has announced it intends to introduce a Cyber Security and Resilience Bill to the UK Parliament. The NIS Regulations require that appropriate and proportionate technical and organizational measures are implemented to manage the risk of network and information systems, and impose requirements related to incident handling and notification in relation to incidents with significant disruptive effect. Under the NIS Regulations, the UK’s data protection supervisory authority, the Information Commissioner’s Office, may issue fines of up to £17 million and take other action following non-compliance.

Previous wording

In the EU, the NISD1 applies to ‘operators of essential services’ (OES) and ‘digital service providers’ (DSP) and an updated version of NISD1 has been adopted and entered into force on January 17, 2023, called NISD2. The NISD2 will take full effect following implementation into national EU Member State law (i.e., by October 17, 2024). Under the NISD1, OESs and DSPs are required to implement appropriate and proportionate technical and organizational measures to manage the risk of network and information systems, and adhere to incident handling and notification requirements regarding incidents with significant disruptive effect. Importantly, under the NISD2, more stringent cybersecurity and incident reporting requirements are imposed on ‘essential’ and ‘important’ entities, which include ICT managed service providers (MSP), cloud service providers as well as entities carrying out research and development activities of medicinal products, and certain specific medical device manufacturers. Our entities may be in scope of the NISD2 where they qualify as a MSP, cloud provider, R&D entity and/or medical device manufacturer within the meaning of NISD2 and offer those services in the EU.

Current wording

In the EU, more stringent cybersecurity and incident reporting requirements are imposed on ‘essential’ and ‘important’ entities, which include ICT managed service providers (MSP), cloud service providers as well as entities carrying out research and development activities of medicinal products, and certain specific medical device manufacturers. Our entities may be in scope of the NISD2 where they qualify as a MSP, cloud provider, R&D entity and/or medical device manufacturer within the meaning of NISD2 and offer those services in the EU.

Previous wording

In addition, the EU Critical Entities Resilience Directive (CER) entered into force on January 17, 2023 and will take full effect following implementation into national EU Member State law (i.e., by October 17, 2024 – coinciding with the NISD2). The CER is aimed at strengthening the resilience of ‘critical infrastructure’ against specific threats including cyber incidents, natural hazards, terrorist attacks, insider threats, and sabotage. The scope of CER includes entities designated as ‘critical’ under CER and includes (among other things) the health sector and the manufacturers of medical devices as ‘essential services.’ The CER imposes cybersecurity and resilience requirements in particular in relation to incidents with so-called ‘significant disruptive effects’ – which are incidents that are able to significantly impact the continuation of the critical infrastructure service offering in the EU. Requirements include to: (i) identify relevant risks that may significantly disrupt the provision of essential services (i.e., pursuant to a risk assessment); (ii) take appropriate and proportionate technical, security and organizational measures to ensure resilience (i.e., based on the outcome of the risk assessment); and (iii) notify disruptive incidents to the competent authorities within 24 hours after becoming aware of an incident. The CER is enforceable on a national EU Member State level by the competent authorities, and allows EU Member States to set penalties as long as they are effective, proportionate, and dissuasive. Our entities may be in scope of the CER where they qualify as critical entities within the meaning of CER.

Current wording

In addition, the EU Critical Entities Resilience Directive (CER) is aimed at strengthening the resilience of ‘critical infrastructure’ against specific threats including cyber incidents, natural hazards, terrorist attacks, insider threats, and sabotage. The scope of CER includes entities designated as ‘critical’ under CER and includes (among other things) the health sector and the manufacturers of medical devices as ‘essential services.’ The CER imposes cybersecurity and resilience requirements in particular in relation to incidents with so-called ‘significant disruptive effects’ – which are incidents that are able to significantly impact the continuation of the critical infrastructure service offering in the EU. Requirements include to: (i) identify relevant risks that may significantly disrupt the provision of essential services (i.e., pursuant to a risk assessment); (ii) take appropriate and proportionate technical, security and organizational measures to ensure resilience (i.e., based on the outcome of the risk assessment); and (iii) notify disruptive incidents to the competent authorities within 24 hours after becoming aware of an incident. The CER is enforceable on a national EU Member State level by the competent authorities, and allows EU Member States to set penalties as long as they are effective, proportionate, and dissuasive. Our entities may be in scope of the CER where they qualify as critical entities within the meaning of CER.

Previous wording

In the EU, a number of new laws related to digital data and AI have also recently entered into force, are expected to enter into force in the foreseeable future, or have been proposed and are being considered. We are still assessing the scope of application, impact, and risk of these recent EU laws on our business, and will continue to assess this moving forward, including for example: (i) the EU’s Data Act– came into force as of December 13, 2023 which seeks to, among other things regulate the use of, and access to, data generated through connected (or Internet-of-Things) devices and introduces a new means for public sector bodies to access, use and re-use private sector data; and (ii) the proposed European Health Data Space Regulation (EHDS) – expected to be agreed by end of 2024 – which seeks to , among other things, provide individuals with more control over their electronic health data (EHD), enable cross-border sharing of EHD between national EU healthcare systems and facilitate the sharing of EHD for secondary research purposes.

Current wording

In the EU, a number of new laws related to digital data and AI have also recently entered into force, are expected to enter into force in the foreseeable future, or have been proposed and are being considered. We are still assessing the scope of application, impact, and risk of these recent EU laws on our business, and will continue to assess this moving forward, including for example: (i) the EU’s Data Act– came into force as of December 13, 2023 which seeks to, among other things regulate the use of, and access to, data generated through connected (or Internet-of-Things)

Previous wording

The EU has also developed a standalone law to govern the offering and use of AI systems in the EU (the AI Act) which was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on July 12, 2024. The AI Act imposes regulatory requirements onto AI system providers, importers, distributors, and users of AI systems, in accordance with the level of risk involved with the AI system (“unacceptable”, “high”, “limited”, and “minimal” risk). Unacceptable-risk AI systems are banned from being offered and used in the EU, and high-risk AI systems (which include AI used as part of medical devices in certain instances) are subject to a set of regulatory requirements under the AI Act including to establish quality and post-marketing monitoring and risk assessment systems, requirements related to the training of AI systems and training data, and requirements related to human oversight. Limited-risk AI systems are subject mainly to transparency requirements only and minimal-risk AI systems are not subject to obligations under the AI Act. In the most recent iteration of the AI Act’s text, general-purpose AI systems have also been made subject to a number of requirements – mostly akin to the requirements that apply to high-risk AI systems under the AI Act.

Current wording

The EU has also developed a standalone law to govern the offering and use of AI systems in the EU (the AI Act) which was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on July 12, 2024 and entered into force on August 1, 2024. The AI Act imposes regulatory requirements on AI system providers, deployers, importers, distributors, and users of AI systems, in accordance with the level of risk involved with the AI system (“unacceptable”, “high”, “limited”, and “minimal” risk). Unacceptable-risk AI systems are banned from being offered and used in the EU, and high-risk AI systems (which include AI used as part of medical devices in certain instances) are subject to a set of regulatory requirements under the AI Act including to establish quality and post-marketing monitoring and risk assessment systems, requirements related to the training of AI systems and training data, and requirements related to human oversight. Limited-risk AI systems are subject mainly to transparency requirements only and minimal-risk AI systems are not subject to obligations under the AI Act. General-purpose AI systems have also been made subject to a number of requirements – mostly akin to the requirements that apply to high-risk AI systems under the AI Act.

Previous wording

Currently, the AI Act is expected to enter into application (i.e., be enforceable) in a gradual manner – depending on the regulatory requirement in question, and ranging anywhere from 6 to 36 months following adoption and entry into force of the AI Act (i.e., from 20 days after July 12, 2024). Non-compliance with the AI Act may be subject to regulatory fines of up to 7% of annual worldwide turnover. In parallel, the EU has proposed revisions to the EU Product Liability Directive and has introduced a new EU AI Liability Directive to facilitate claims for damages brought by EU users of AI systems.

Current wording

The AI Act will enter into application (i.e., be enforceable) in a gradual manner – depending on the regulatory requirement in question, and ranging anywhere from 6 to 36 months following adoption. Non-compliance with the AI Act may be subject to regulatory fines of up to 7% of annual worldwide turnover. In parallel, the EU has proposed revisions to the EU Product Liability Directive and has introduced a new EU AI Liability Directive to facilitate claims for damages brought by EU users of AI systems.

Previous wording

The UK had adopted a “soft law” approach to AI regulation meaning that until now it has not adopted formal legislation to regulate AI but has adopted soft law guidelines in the form of a White Paper. However, following the UK General Election in July 2024, the new UK Government has announced it intends to introduce an AI Bill to the UK Parliament.

Current wording

The UK had adopted a “soft law” approach to AI regulation meaning that until now it has not adopted formal legislation to regulate AI but has adopted soft law guidelines in the form of a White Paper and will pursue enforcement through the sector-specific regulators. However, following the UK General Election in July 2024, the new UK Government has announced it intends to introduce an AI Bill to the UK Parliament.

Previous wording

stemming from clinical studies. In the EU, the transparency framework provides EU-based parties the right to submit an access to documents request to the EMA for information included in the MAA dossier for approved medicinal products. Only very limited information is exempted from disclosure, i.e., commercially confidential information (which is construed increasingly narrowly) and protected personal data. It is possible for competitors to access and use this data in their own research and development programs anywhere in the world, once this data is in the public domain.

Current wording

Further, many jurisdictions impose mandatory clinical trial information obligations on sponsors. In the EU, such obligations arise under the Transparency Regulation No 1049/ 2001, EMA Policy 0043, EMA Policy 0070 and the Clinical Trials Regulation No 536/2014 (which the UK has not implemented, as the law entered into force following the UK’s exist from the EU), all of which impose on sponsors the obligation to make publicly available certain information stemming from clinical studies. In the EU, the transparency framework provides EU-based parties the right to submit an access to documents request to the EMA for information included in the MAA dossier for approved medicinal products. Only very limited information is exempted from disclosure, i.e., commercially confidential information (which is construed increasingly narrowly) and protected personal data. It is possible for competitors to access and use this data in their own research and development programs anywhere in the world, once this data is in the public domain.

Previous wording

To help patients afford our products, we have a manufacturer-sponsored patient assistance program that helps financially needy patients in the US access our therapies. This type of program has become the subject of enforcement scrutiny in recent years. For example, some pharmaceutical manufacturers have been named in lawsuits challenging the legality of their patient assistance programs under a variety of federal and state laws. In addition, certain state and federal enforcement authorities have pursued investigations and settlements and members of Congress have initiated inquiries about manufacturer-sponsored patient support programs, including, for example, manufacturer-sponsored patient assistance programs, co-payment assistance programs, and manufacturer contributions to independent charitable patient assistance programs. Moreover, the DHHS, Office of the Inspector General continues to publish advisory opinions and other agency guidance on the topic of patient assistance, which reflects the government’s continued scrutiny of manufacturer sponsored or supported patient assistance programs. Numerous organizations, including pharmaceutical manufacturers, have been subject to ongoing litigation, enforcement activities and settlements related to their patient support programs and certain of these organizations have entered into, or have otherwise agreed to, significant civil settlements with applicable enforcement authorities. It is possible that future legislation may be proposed that would establish requirements or restrictions with respect to these programs and/or support that would affect pharmaceutical manufacturers.

Current wording

To help patients afford our products, we have a manufacturer-sponsored patient assistance program that helps financially needy patients in the US access our therapies. This type of program has become the subject of enforcement scrutiny in recent years. For example, some pharmaceutical manufacturers have been named in lawsuits challenging the legality of their patient assistance programs under a variety of federal and state laws. In addition, certain state and federal enforcement authorities continue to pursue investigations and enter into settlements related to manufacturers’ support of patient assistance programs, and members of Congress have also initiated inquiries on topics that include, for example, manufacturer-sponsored patient assistance programs, co-payment assistance programs, and manufacturer contributions to independent charitable patient assistance programs. Moreover, the DHHS, Office of the Inspector General continues to publish advisory opinions and other agency guidance on the topic of patient assistance, which reflects the government’s continued scrutiny of manufacturer sponsored or supported patient assistance programs. Numerous organizations, including pharmaceutical manufacturers, have been subject to ongoing litigation, enforcement activities and settlements related to their patient support programs and certain of these organizations have entered into, or have otherwise agreed to, significant civil settlements with applicable enforcement authorities. It is possible that future

Previous wording

Under the FDCA, the FDA can approve an ANDA for a generic version of a branded drug without the ANDA applicant undertaking the clinical testing necessary to obtain approval to market a new drug. Generally, in place of such clinical studies, an ANDA applicant usually needs only to submit data demonstrating that its product has the same active ingredient(s), strength, dosage form and route of administration and that it is bioequivalent to the branded product. In September 2019, the FDA published product-specific bioequivalence guidance on fostamatinib disodium to let potential ANDA applicants understand the data FDA would expect to see for approval of a generic version of our products.

Current wording

Under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), the FDA can approve an ANDA for a generic version of a branded drug without the ANDA applicant undertaking the clinical testing necessary to obtain approval to market a new drug. Generally, in place of such clinical studies, an ANDA applicant usually needs only to submit data demonstrating that its product has the same active ingredient(s), strength, dosage form and route of administration and that it is bioequivalent to the branded product. In September 2019, the FDA published product-specific bioequivalence guidance on fostamatinib disodium to let potential ANDA applicants understand the data FDA would expect to see for approval of a generic version of our products.

Previous wording

In June 2022, we received a notice letter regarding an ANDA submitted to the FDA by Annora, requesting approval to market a generic version of TAVALISSE. The notice letter included a Paragraph IV certification with respect to our US Patent Nos. 7,449,458; 8,263,122; 8,652,492; 8,771,648 and 8,951,504, which are listed in the Orange Book. The notice letter asserts that these patents will not be infringed by Annora’s proposed product, are invalid and/or are unenforceable. Annora’s notice letter does not provide a Paragraph IV certification against our other patents listed in the Orange Book. On July 25, 2022, we filed a lawsuit in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey against Annora and its affiliates, Hetero Labs Ltd., and Hetero USA, Inc., for infringement of our US patents identified in Annora’s Paragraph IV certification. On September 21, 2022, Annora and its affiliates answered and counterclaimed for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of the ’458, ’122, ’492, ’648, and ’504 patents. We filed an answer to Annora’s counterclaims on October 12, 2022. Annora served invalidity and non-infringement contentions on December 31, 2022. We filed an answer to Annora’s invalidity and non-infringement contentions in March 2023. Litigation continues, and no trial date is currently set. We intend to vigorously enforce and defend our intellectual property related to TAVALISSE. We cannot be assured that such lawsuit will prevent the introduction of a generic version of TAVALISSE for any particular length of time, or at all. If an ANDA from Annora or any other generic manufacturer is approved, and a generic version of TAVALISSE is introduced, whether following the expiration of our patents, the invalidation of our patents as a result of any litigation, or the determination that the proposed generic product does not infringe on our patents, our sales of TAVALISSE would be adversely affected. In addition, we cannot predict what additional ANDAs could be filed by Annora or other potential generic competitors requesting approval to market generic forms of our products, which would require us to incur significant additional expense and result in distraction for our management team, and if approved, result in significant decreases in the revenue derived from sales of our marketed products and thereby materially harm our business and financial condition.

Current wording

In June 2022, we received a notice letter regarding an ANDA submitted to the FDA by Annora, requesting approval to market a generic version of TAVALISSE. The notice letter included a Paragraph IV certification with respect to our US Patent Nos. 7,449,458; 8,263,122; 8,652,492; 8,771,648 and 8,951,504, which are listed in the Orange Book. The notice letter asserts that these patents will not be infringed by Annora’s proposed product, are invalid and/or are unenforceable. Annora’s notice letter does not provide a Paragraph IV certification against our other patents listed in the Orange Book. On July 25, 2022, we filed a lawsuit in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey against Annora and its affiliates, Hetero Labs Ltd., and Hetero USA, Inc., for infringement of our US patents identified in Annora’s Paragraph IV certification. On September 21, 2022, Annora and its affiliates answered and counterclaimed for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of the ’458, ’122, ’492, ’648, and ’504 patents. We filed an answer to Annora’s counterclaims on October 12, 2022. Annora served invalidity and non-infringement contentions on December 31, 2022. We filed an answer to Annora’s invalidity and non-infringement contentions in March 2023. Litigation continues, and no trial date is currently set. We intend to vigorously enforce and defend our intellectual property related to TAVALISSE. We cannot be assured that such lawsuit will prevent the introduction of a generic version of TAVALISSE for any particular length of time, or at all. If an ANDA from Annora or any other generic manufacturer is approved, and a generic version of TAVALISSE is introduced, whether following the expiration of our patents, the invalidation of our patents as a result of any litigation, or the determination that the proposed generic product does not infringe on our patents, our sales of TAVALISSE would be adversely affected. In addition, we cannot predict

Previous wording

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of our products and could substantially increase our operating costs and expenses, which in turn could delay or prevent us from generating significant revenue from sale of our products.

Current wording

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of our products and could substantially increase our operating costs and expenses, which in turn could delay or prevent us from generating significant revenue from sale of our products. For example, in October 2024, we issued a Dear Healthcare Provider letter related to a new safety signal for GAVRETO. The letter advises healthcare providers to apply certain measures to protect patient safety, including enhanced ongoing monitoring for signs and symptoms of infection as well as guidance for withholding treatment to patients in the presence of active infection. This and other communications containing warnings or other safety information to physicians and pharmacies, or required updates to labeling statements, including specific warnings or contradictions, could limit the commercial success of GAVRETO or any of our other drug products.

Previous wording

Pandemics may cause significant disruption in the supply chain for our commercial products. We rely on third parties to, among other things, manufacture and ship our commercial product, raw materials and product supply for our clinical trials, perform quality testing and supply other goods and services to help manage our commercial activities, our clinical trials and our operations in the ordinary course of business. While we have engaged actively with various elements of our supply chain and distribution channel, including our customers, contract manufacturers, and logistics and transportation provider to meet demand for our products and to remain informed of any challenges within our supply chain, we may face disruptions to our supply chain and operations, and associated delays in the manufacturing and supply of our products. Such supply disruptions would adversely impact our ability to generate sales of and revenues from our products and our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects could be adversely affected.

Current wording

elements of our supply chain and distribution channel, including our customers, contract manufacturers, and logistics and transportation provider to meet demand for our products and to remain informed of any challenges within our supply chain, we may face disruptions to our supply chain and operations, and associated delays in the manufacturing and supply of our products. Such supply disruptions would adversely impact our ability to generate sales of and revenues from our products and our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects could be adversely affected.

Previous wording

We participate in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, as administered by CMS, the 340B Drug Pricing Program, as administered by the Health Resources and Services Administration, and other federal and state government drug pricing programs in the US, and we may participate in additional government pricing programs in the future. These programs generally require us to pay rebates or otherwise provide discounts to government payors and/or required covered entities in connection with drugs that are dispensed to beneficiaries/recipients of these programs. In some cases, such as with the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, the rebates are based on pricing metrics that we report on a monthly and quarterly basis to the government agencies that administer the programs. Pricing requirements and rebate/discount calculations are complex, vary among products and programs, and are often subject to interpretation by governmental or regulatory agencies and the courts. The requirements of these programs, including, by way of example, their respective terms and scope, change frequently. Responding to current and future changes may increase our costs, and the complexity of compliance will be time consuming. Invoicing for rebates is provided in arrears, and there is frequently a time lag of up to several months between the sales to which rebate notices relate and our receipt of those notices, which further complicates our ability to accurately estimate and accrue for rebates related to the Medicaid program as implemented by individual states. Thus, there can be no assurance that we will be able to identify all factors that may cause our discount and rebate payment obligations to vary from period to period, and our actual results may differ significantly from our estimated allowances for discounts and rebates. Changes in estimates and assumptions may have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Current wording

We participate in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, as administered by CMS, the 340B Drug Pricing Program, as administered by the Health Resources and Services Administration, and other federal and state government drug pricing programs in the US, and we may participate in additional government pricing programs in the future. These programs generally require us to pay rebates or otherwise provide discounts to government payors and/or required covered entities in connection with drugs that are dispensed to beneficiaries/recipients of these programs. In some cases, such as with the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, the rebates are based on pricing metrics that we report on a monthly and quarterly basis to the government agencies that administer the programs. Pricing requirements and rebate/discount calculations are complex, vary among products and programs, and are often subject to interpretation by governmental or regulatory agencies and the courts. The requirements of these programs, including, by way of example, their respective terms and scope, change frequently. Most recently, in September 2024, CMS published a final rule that included significant revisions to certain Medicaid Drug Rebate Program provisions, including, but not limited to: (i) new definitions for key terms under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, such as “covered outpatient drug” and “market date”; (ii) revised processes for identifying drug misclassifications, as well as additional penalties that can be imposed against manufacturers in connection with such misclassifications; and (iii) a new 12-quarter time limit for manufacturers to initiate disputes, hearing requests, and audits for state-invoiced rebate amounts. Responding to current and future changes may increase our costs, and the complexity of compliance will be time consuming. Invoicing for rebates is provided in arrears, and there is frequently a time lag of up to several months between the sales to which rebate notices relate and our receipt of those notices, which further complicates our ability to accurately estimate and accrue for rebates

Previous wording

In addition, the DHHS, Office of Inspector General and other governmental enforcement and administrative bodies have increased their focus on pricing requirements for products, including, but not limited to the methodologies used by manufacturers to calculate average manufacturer price and best price for compliance with reporting requirements under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. We are liable for errors associated with our submission of pricing data and for any overcharging of government payors. Failure to make necessary disclosures and/or to identify overpayments could result in allegations against us under the federal False Claims Act and other laws and regulations. Any required refunds to the US government or response to a government investigation or enforcement action would be expensive and time consuming and could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, in the event that CMS were to terminate our rebate agreement, no federal payments would be available under Medicaid for our covered outpatient drugs or under Medicare Part B for any of our products that may be reimbursed under Part B.

Current wording

In addition, the DHHS, Office of Inspector General and other governmental enforcement and administrative bodies have increased their focus, including through recent enforcement actions against manufacturers, on pricing requirements for products, including, but not limited to the methodologies used by manufacturers to calculate average manufacturer price and best price for compliance with reporting requirements under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. We are liable for errors associated with our submission of pricing data and for any overcharging of government payors. Failure to make necessary disclosures and/or to identify overpayments could result in allegations against us under the federal False Claims Act and other laws and regulations. Any required refunds to the US government or response to a government investigation or enforcement action would be expensive and time consuming and could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, in the event that CMS were to terminate our rebate agreement, no federal payments would be available under Medicaid for our covered outpatient drugs or under Medicare Part B for any of our products that may be reimbursed under Part B.

Previous wording

Finally, we may be affected by developments relating to the 340B Drug Pricing Program (340B Program). Recently, multiple manufacturers have implemented policies to reduce diversion and inappropriate claims for discounts and rebates by in-house and contract pharmacies affiliated with 340B-eligible entities. The DHHS has sent several of these manufacturers’ letters claiming that the policies violate the 340B statute and referring the manufacturers for potential enforcement action. Manufacturers have challenged these letters in federal court, and the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and the District of Columbia Circuit have ruled in favor of several manufacturers. Multiple states have recently enacted laws that require manufacturers to ship 340B drugs to certain contract pharmacies and impose penalties on manufacturers that do not comply. These laws have been challenged in federal court and many of the cases are pending. In March 2024, the US Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit upheld the Arkansas law prohibiting drug makers for restricting 340B drug discounts for providers using contract pharmacies. DHHS also issued a final rule on procedures for the 340B program’s administrative dispute resolution process in April 2024. It is unclear how the other pending litigation, recent and proposed legislation, or future administrative action relating to the 340B program will impact our business.

Current wording

Finally, we may be affected by developments relating to the 340B Drug Pricing Program (340B Program). Recently, multiple manufacturers have implemented policies to reduce diversion and inappropriate claims for discounts and rebates by in-house and contract pharmacies affiliated with 340B-eligible entities. The DHHS sent several of these manufacturers’ letters claiming that the policies violate the 340B statute and referring the manufacturers for potential enforcement action. Manufacturers challenged these letters in federal court, and the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and the District of Columbia Circuit have ruled in favor of several manufacturers, finding that the policies were consistent with the 340B statute. Multiple states have recently enacted laws that require manufacturers to ship 340B drugs to certain contract pharmacies and impose various civil and criminal penalties on manufacturers that do not comply. These laws have been challenged in federal court and many of the cases are pending. In March 2024, the US Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit upheld the Arkansas law prohibiting drug makers for restricting 340B drug discounts for providers using contract pharmacies, and plaintiffs have filed a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court, which is pending. DHHS also issued a final rule on procedures for the 340B program’s administrative dispute resolution process in April 2024. It is unclear how the other pending litigation, recent and proposed legislation, or future administrative action relating to the 340B program will impact our business.

Previous wording

if available, we will obtain financing on reasonable terms. Our ability to raise additional capital, including our ability to secure new collaborations and continue to support existing collaboration efforts with our partners, may also be adversely impacted by potential worsening global economic conditions and the recent disruptions to, and volatility in, the credit and financial markets in the US and worldwide resulting from a global pandemic and the global tensions arising from the Russia-Ukraine war and the Hamas-Israel war. Unless and until we are able to generate a sufficient amount of product, royalty or milestone revenue, which may never occur, we expect to finance future cash needs through public and/or private offerings of equity securities, debt financings or collaboration and licensing arrangements, as well as through proceeds from the exercise of stock options and interest income earned on the investment of our cash balances and short-term investments. To the extent we raise additional capital by issuing equity securities in the future, our stockholders could at that time experience substantial dilution. In addition, we have a significant number of stock options outstanding. To the extent that outstanding stock options have been or may be exercised or other shares issued, our stockholders may experience further dilution. Further, we may choose to raise additional capital due to market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. Our credit facility with MidCap includes certain covenants that may restrict our business, and any other debt financing that we are able to obtain in the future may involve operating covenants that restrict our business. To the extent that we raise additional funds through any new collaboration and licensing arrangements, we may be required to refund certain payments made to us, relinquish some rights to our technologies or product candidates or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us.

Current wording

We will continue to need additional capital and the amount of future capital needed will depend largely on the success of our commercialization of our products, and the success of our internally developed programs as they proceed in later and more expensive clinical trials, including any additional clinical trials that we may decide to conduct with respect to our products. While we intend to opportunistically seek access to additional funds through public or private equity offerings or debt financings, we do not know whether additional financing will be available when needed, or that, if available, we will obtain financing on reasonable terms. Our ability to raise additional capital, including our ability to secure new collaborations and continue to support existing collaboration efforts with our partners, may also be adversely impacted by potential worsening global economic conditions and the recent disruptions to, and volatility in, the credit and financial markets in the US and worldwide resulting from a global pandemic and the global tensions arising from the Russia-Ukraine war and the Hamas-Israel war. Unless and until we are able to generate a sufficient amount of product, royalty or milestone revenue, which may never occur, we expect to finance future cash needs through public and/or private offerings of equity securities, debt financings or collaboration and licensing arrangements, as well as through proceeds from the exercise of stock options and interest income earned on the investment of our cash balances and short-term investments. To the extent we raise additional capital by issuing equity securities in the future, our stockholders could at that time experience substantial dilution. In addition, we have a significant number of stock options outstanding. To the extent that outstanding stock options have been or may be exercised or other shares issued, our stockholders may experience further dilution. Further, we may choose to raise additional capital due to market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. Our credit facility with MidCap includes certain covenants that may restrict our business, and any other debt financing that we are able to obtain in the future may involve operating covenants that restrict our business. To the extent that we raise additional funds through any new collaboration and licensing arrangements, we may be required to refund certain payments made to us, relinquish some rights to our technologies or product candidates or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us.

Previous wording

Our Credit Agreement with MidCap contains a mandatory prepayment provision that gives MidCap and/or its agent the right to demand payment of the outstanding principal and additional interest and fees in the event of default. We may not have enough available cash or be able to obtain financing at the time we are required to repay the term loan

Current wording

Our Credit Agreement with MidCap contains a mandatory prepayment provision that gives MidCap and/or its agent the right to demand payment of the outstanding principal and additional interest and fees in the event of default. We may not have enough available cash or be able to obtain financing at the time we are required to repay the term loan with additional interest and fees prior to maturity.

Previous wording

We expect that our revenues from sales of any of our products will continue to be based in part on estimates, judgment and accounting policies. Any incorrect estimates or disagreements with regulators or others regarding such estimates or accounting policies may result in changes to our guidance, projections or previously reported results. We make estimates for provisions for sales discounts, returns and allowances. Our estimates are based on available customer and payor data received from the specialty pharmacies and distributors, as well as third party market research data. In part, our estimates are dependent on our distribution channel and payor mix. If actual results in the future vary from our estimates, we adjust these estimates, which would affect our net product revenue and earnings in the period such variances become known. Expected and actual product sales and quarterly and other results may greatly fluctuate,

Current wording

We expect that our revenues from sales of any of our products will continue to be based in part on estimates, judgment and accounting policies. Any incorrect estimates or disagreements with regulators or others regarding such estimates or accounting policies may result in changes to our guidance, projections or previously reported results. We make estimates for provisions for sales discounts, returns and allowances. Our estimates are based on available customer and payor data received from the specialty pharmacies and distributors, as well as third party market research data. In part, our estimates are dependent on our distribution channel and payor mix. If actual results in the future vary from our estimates, we adjust these estimates, which would affect our net product revenue and earnings in the period such variances become known. Expected and actual product sales and quarterly and other results may greatly fluctuate, including in the near-term, and such fluctuations can adversely affect the price of our common stock, perceptions of our ability to forecast demand and revenues, and our ability to maintain and fund our operations.

Previous wording

We do not and will not have access to all information regarding fostamatinib and product candidates we licensed to Lilly, Kissei, Grifols, Medison and Knight.

Current wording

We do not and will not have access to all information regarding our products and product candidates we licensed to our collaboration partners

Previous wording

We do not and will not have access to all information regarding fostamatinib and other product candidates, including potentially material information about commercialization plans, medical information strategies, clinical trial design and execution, safety reports from clinical trials, safety reports, regulatory affairs, process development, manufacturing and other areas known by Lilly, Kissei, Grifols, Medison and Knight. In addition, we have confidentiality obligations under our respective agreements with Lilly, Kissei, Grifols, Medison and Knight. Thus, our ability to keep our shareholders informed about the status of fostamatinib and other product candidates will be limited by the degree to which Lilly, Kissei, Grifols, Medison and/or Knight keep us informed and allows us to disclose such information to the public. If Lilly, Kissei, Grifols, Medison and/or Knight fail to keep us informed about commercialization efforts related to fostamatinib, or the status of the clinical development or regulatory approval pathway of other product candidates licensed to them, we may make operational and/or investment decisions that we would not have made had we been fully informed, which may adversely affect our business and operations.

Current wording

We do not and will not have access to all information regarding our product and other product candidates, including potentially material information about commercialization plans, medical information strategies, clinical trial design and execution, safety reports from clinical trials, safety reports, regulatory affairs, process development, manufacturing and other areas known by our collaboration partners. In addition, we have confidentiality obligations under our respective agreements with our collaboration partners. Thus, our ability to keep our shareholders informed about the status of our products and other product candidates will be limited by the degree to which our collaboration partners keep us informed and allows us to disclose such information to the public. If our collaboration partners fail to keep us informed about commercialization efforts related to our products, or the status of the clinical development or regulatory approval pathway of other product candidates licensed to them, we may make operational and/or investment decisions that we would not have made had we been fully informed, which may adversely affect our business and operations.

Previous wording

Insufficient funds may require us to delay, scale back or eliminate some or all of our commercial efforts and/or research and development programs, to reduce personnel and operating expenses, to lose rights under existing licenses or to relinquish greater or all rights to product candidates at an earlier stage of development or on less favorable terms than

Current wording

Insufficient funds may require us to delay, scale back or eliminate some or all of our commercial efforts and/or research and development programs, to reduce personnel and operating expenses, to lose rights under existing licenses or to relinquish greater or all rights to product candidates at an earlier stage of development or on less favorable terms than we would otherwise choose or may adversely affect our ability to operate as a going concern.

Previous wording

For the six months ended June 30, 2024, we recognized loss from operations of $6.5 million primarily due to higher operating and non-operating expenses, partly offset by our net product sales and collaboration revenues. We have historically incurred losses from operations each year since we were incorporated in June 1996 other than in fiscal year 2010, due in large part to the significant research and development expenditures required to identify and validate new product candidates and pursue our development efforts, and the costs of our ongoing commercial efforts for our products. We expect to continue to incur losses from operations, at least in the next 12 months, and there can be no assurance that we will generate annual operating income in the foreseeable future. Currently, our potential sources of revenues are our sales of our products, upfront payments, research and development contingent payments and royalty payments pursuant to our collaboration arrangements, which may never materialize if our collaborators do not achieve certain events or generate net sales to which these contingent payments are dependent on. If our future drug candidates fail or do not gain regulatory approval, or if our drugs do not achieve sustainable market acceptance, we may not be profitable. As of June 30, 2024, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $1.4 billion. The extent of our future losses or profitability, if any, is highly uncertain.

Current wording

For the nine months ended September 30, 2024, we recognized income from operations of $7.5 million primarily due to higher net product sales and collaboration revenues, partially offset by our operating expenses. Historically, we have incurred losses from operations each year since we were incorporated in June 1996 other than in fiscal year 2010, due in large part to the significant research and development expenditures and costs of our ongoing commercial efforts. Although we recognized income from operations for the current period, there can be no assurance that we will generate annual operating income in the foreseeable future. Currently, our potential sources of revenues include sales of our products, and upfront payments as well as milestone and royalty payments pursuant to our collaboration arrangements, all of which may never materialize if sales of our products decline or if our collaboration partners do not achieve certain events or generate net sales to which these contingent payments are dependent on. If our future drug candidates fail or do not gain regulatory approval, or if our drugs do not achieve sustainable market acceptance, we may not be profitable. As of September 30, 2024, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $1.4 billion. The extent of our future losses or profitability, if any, is highly uncertain.

Previous wording

Conflicts also might arise with collaborative partners concerning proprietary rights to particular compounds. While our existing collaborative agreements typically provide that we retain milestone payments, royalty rights and/or revenue sharing with respect to drugs developed from certain compounds or derivative compounds, any such payments or royalty rights may be at reduced rates, and disputes may arise over the application of payment provisions or derivative payment provisions to such drugs, and we may not be successful in such disputes. For example, in September 2018, BerGenBio served us with a notice of arbitration seeking declaratory relief related to the interpretation of provisions under our June 2011 license agreement, particularly as they relate to the rights and obligations of the parties in the event of the license or sale of a product in the program by BerGenBio and/or the sale of BerGenBio to a third party. The arbitration panel dismissed four of the six declarations sought by BerGenBio, and we thereafter consented to one of the remaining declarations requested by BerGenBio. On February 27, 2019, the arbitration panel issued a determination granting the declaration sought by BerGenBio on the remaining issue, and held that in the event of a sale of shares by BerGenBio’s shareholders where there is no monetary benefit to BerGenBio, we would not be entitled to a portion of the proceeds from such a sale. In this circumstance where the revenue share provision is not triggered, the milestone and

Current wording

Conflicts also might arise with collaborative partners concerning proprietary rights to particular compounds. While our existing collaborative agreements typically provide that we retain milestone payments, royalty rights and/or revenue sharing with respect to drugs developed from certain compounds or derivative compounds, any such payments or royalty rights may be at reduced rates, and disputes may arise over the application of payment provisions or derivative payment provisions to such drugs, and we may not be successful in such disputes. For example, in September 2018, BerGenBio served us with a notice of arbitration seeking declaratory relief related to the interpretation of provisions under our June 2011 license agreement, particularly as they relate to the rights and obligations of the parties in the event of the license or sale of a product in the program by BerGenBio and/or the sale of BerGenBio to a third party. The arbitration panel dismissed four of the six declarations sought by BerGenBio, and we thereafter consented to one of the remaining declarations requested by BerGenBio. On February 27, 2019, the arbitration panel issued a determination granting the declaration sought by BerGenBio on the remaining issue, and held that in the event of a sale of shares by BerGenBio’s shareholders where there is no monetary benefit to BerGenBio, we would not be entitled to a portion of the proceeds from such a sale. In this circumstance where the revenue share provision is not triggered, the milestone and royalty payment provisions remain in effect. While we do not believe that the determination will have an adverse effect on our operations, cash flows or financial condition, we can make no assurance regarding any such impact. Additionally, the management teams of our collaborators may change for various reasons including due to being acquired. Different management teams or an acquiring company of our collaborators may have different priorities which may have adverse results on the collaboration with us.

Previous wording

If conflicts arise between us and our corporate collaborators or scientific advisors, the other party may act in its self-interest and not in the interest of our stockholders. Some of our corporate collaborators are conducting multiple product development efforts within each disease area that is the subject of the collaboration with us or may be acquired or merged with a company having a competing program. In some of our collaborations, we have agreed not to conduct, independently or with any third party, any research that is competitive with the research conducted under our collaborations. Our collaborators, however, may develop, either alone or with others, products in related fields that are competitive with the products or potential products that are the subject of these collaborations. Competing products, either developed by our collaborators or to which our collaborators have rights, may result in their withdrawal of support for our product candidates.

Current wording

If conflicts arise between us and our corporate collaborators or scientific advisors, the other party may act in its self-interest and not in the interest of our stockholders. Some of our corporate collaborators are conducting multiple product development efforts within each disease area that is the subject of the collaboration with us or may be acquired or merged with a company having a competing program. In some of our collaborations, we have agreed not to conduct,

Previous wording

An adverse outcome may allow third parties to use our intellectual property without a license and/or allow third parties to introduce generic and other competing products, any of which would negatively impact our business. For example, in June 2022, we received a notice letter from Annora advising that it has filed an ANDA with the FDA for a generic version of TAVALISSE and asserting that certain patents related to TAVALISSE that are listed in the Orange Book will not be infringed by Annora’s proposed product, are invalid and/or are unenforceable. In July 2022, we filed a lawsuit in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey against Annora and its subsidiaries for infringement of those US patents. In September 2022, Annora and its subsidiaries answered and counterclaimed for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of those patents. We filed an answer to Annora’s counterclaims on October 12, 2022. Annora served invalidity and non-infringement contentions on December 31, 2022. We filed an answer to Annora’s invalidity and non-infringement contentions in March 2023. Litigation continues, and no trial date is currently set. We intend to vigorously enforce and defend our intellectual property rights related to TAVALISSE. Should Annora or any other third parties receive FDA approval of an ANDA for a generic version of fostamatinib or a 505(b)(2) NDA with respect to fostamatinib, and if our patents covering fostamatinib were held to be invalid (or if such competing generic versions of fostamatinib were found to not infringe our patents), then they could introduce generic versions of fostamatinib or other such 505(b)(2) products before our patents expire, and the resulting competition would negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Please also see the risk factor entitled, “If manufacturers obtain approval for generic versions of our products, or of products with which we compete, our business may be harmed.” In the future, there might be other claims that are subject to substantial uncertainties and unascertainable damages or other remedies, and the cost to defendmay also be significant.

Current wording

An adverse outcome may allow third parties to use our intellectual property without a license and/or allow third parties to introduce generic and other competing products, any of which would negatively impact our business. For example, in June 2022, we received a notice letter from Annora advising that it has filed an ANDA with the FDA for a generic version of TAVALISSE and asserting that certain patents related to TAVALISSE that are listed in the Orange Book will not be infringed by Annora’s proposed product, are invalid and/or are unenforceable. In July 2022, we filed a lawsuit in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey against Annora and its subsidiaries for infringement of those US patents. In September 2022, Annora and its subsidiaries answered and counterclaimed for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of those patents. We filed an answer to Annora’s counterclaims on October 12, 2022. Annora served invalidity and non-infringement contentions on December 31, 2022. We filed an answer to Annora’s invalidity and non-infringement contentions in March 2023. Litigation continues, and no trial date is currently set. We intend to vigorously enforce and defend our intellectual property rights related to TAVALISSE. Should Annora or any other third parties receive FDA approval of an ANDA for a generic version of fostamatinib or a 505(b)(2) NDA with respect to fostamatinib, and if our patents covering fostamatinib were held to be invalid (or if such competing generic versions of fostamatinib were found to not infringe our patents), then they could introduce generic versions of fostamatinib or other such 505(b)(2) products before our patents expire, and the resulting competition would negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Please also see the risk factor entitled, “If manufacturers obtain approval for generic versions of our products, or of products with which we compete, our business may be harmed.” In the future, there might be other claims that are subject to substantial uncertainties and