Edgewise Therapeutics, Inc.

Previous wording

We have incurred significant net losses since our inception, have not generated any revenue to date and have financed our operations principally through private placements of our convertible preferred stock and public offerings of our common stock. Our net loss was $40.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025. As of March 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $419.4 million. We are advancing sevasemten and EDG-7500 in clinical development. Our other programs, including EDG-003, are in preclinical discovery and research stages. As a result, we expect that it will be several years, if ever, before we receive approval to commercialize a product and generate revenue from product sales. Even if we succeed in receiving marketing approval for and commercializing one or more of our approved product candidates, we expect that we will continue to incur substantial research and development and other expenses in order to discover, develop and market additional potential products.

Current wording

We have incurred significant net losses since our inception, have not generated any revenue to date and have financed our operations principally through private placements of our convertible preferred stock and public offerings of our common stock. Our net loss was $36.1 million and $76.9 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2025, respectively. As of June 30, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $455.5 million. We are advancing sevasemten and EDG-7500 in clinical development. Our other programs, including EDG-003, are in preclinical discovery and research stages. As a result, we expect that it will be several years, if ever, before we receive approval to commercialize a product and generate revenue from product sales. Even if we succeed in receiving marketing approval for and commercializing one or more of our approved product candidates, we expect that we will continue to incur substantial research and development and other expenses in order to discover, develop and market additional potential products.

Previous wording

As of March 31, 2025, we had $436.4 million in cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities. We expect our current cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will be sufficient to fund our current operating plan for at least the next 12 months. On May 10, 2024, we filed an automatic shelf registration statement on Form S-3ASR that allows us to undertake various equity and debt offerings. We additionally filed a prospectus supplement to the shelf registration statement and entered into a sales agreement with Leerink Partners LLC (Leerink Sales Agreement) on May 10, 2024, under which we may offer and sell shares of common stock, having aggregate sales proceeds of up to $175.0 million from time to time, through an “at the market offering” program (Leerink ATM). Pursuant to the automatic shelf registration statement, on April 3, 2025, we closed an underwritten registered direct offering of 9,935,419 shares of our common stock for net proceeds after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions but before offering expenses of $188.0 million. We have not yet offered or sold any shares of common stock related to the Leerink ATM. Our estimate as to how long we expect our existing cash, cash

Current wording

As of June 30, 2025, we had $594.0 million in cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities. We expect our current cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will be sufficient to fund our current operating plan for at least the next 12 months. On May 10, 2024, we filed an automatic shelf registration statement on Form S-3ASR that allows us to undertake various equity and debt offerings. We additionally filed a prospectus supplement to the shelf registration statement and entered into a sales agreement with Leerink Partners LLC (Leerink Sales Agreement) on May 10, 2024, under which we may offer and sell shares of common stock, having aggregate sales proceeds of up to $175.0 million from time to time, through an “at the market offering” program (Leerink ATM). Pursuant to the automatic shelf registration statement, on April 3, 2025, we closed an underwritten registered direct offering of 9,935,419 shares of our common stock for net proceeds of $187.1 million after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses. We have not yet offered or sold any shares of common stock related to the Leerink ATM. Our estimate as to how long we expect our existing cash, cash equivalents and

Previous wording

equivalents and marketable securities to be able to continue to fund our operations is based on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Changing circumstances, some of which may be beyond our control, could cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned.

Current wording

marketable securities to be able to continue to fund our operations is based on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Changing circumstances, some of which may be beyond our control, could cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned.

Previous wording

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial revenues, we will be required to obtain further funding through public or private equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations and licensing arrangements or other sources, which may dilute our stockholders or restrict our operating activities. As summarized in the risk factor entitled, “We will require substantial additional capital to finance our operations. If we are unable to raise such capital when needed, or on acceptable terms, we may be forced to delay, reduce and/or eliminate one or more of our research and drug development programs or future commercialization efforts.”, we have previously raised capital under our shelf registration statement that was filed on April 1, 2022 with the SEC that became effective on May 5, 2022 and was amended on January 19, 2024. On May 10, 2024, we filed an automatic shelf registration statement on Form S-3ASR that allows us to undertake various equity and debt offerings and entered into the Leerink Sales Agreement under which we may offer and sell shares of common stock, having aggregate sales proceeds of up to $175.0 million from time to time, through the Leerink ATM. Pursuant to the automatic shelf registration statement, on April 3, 2025, we closed an underwritten registered direct offering of 9,935,419 shares of our common stock for net proceeds after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions but before offering expenses of $188.0 million.

Current wording

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial revenues, we will be required to obtain further funding through public or private equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations and licensing arrangements or other sources, which may dilute our stockholders or restrict our operating activities. As summarized in the risk factor entitled, “We will require substantial additional capital to finance our operations. If we are unable to raise such capital when needed, or on acceptable terms, we may be forced to delay, reduce and/or eliminate one or more of our research and drug development programs or future commercialization efforts.”, we have previously raised capital under our shelf registration statement that was filed on April 1, 2022 with the SEC that became effective on May 5, 2022 and was amended on January 19, 2024. On May 10, 2024, we filed an automatic shelf registration statement on Form S-3ASR that allows us to undertake various equity and debt offerings and entered into the Leerink Sales Agreement under which we may offer and sell shares of common stock, having aggregate sales proceeds of up to $175.0 million from time to time, through the Leerink ATM. Pursuant to the automatic shelf registration statement, on April 3, 2025, we closed an underwritten registered direct offering of 9,935,419 shares of our common stock for net proceeds $187.1 million after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses.

Previous wording

We are subject to tax laws, regulations, and policies of several taxing jurisdictions. Changes in tax laws, as well as other factors, could cause us to experience fluctuations in our tax obligations and effective tax rates and otherwise adversely affect our tax positions and/or our tax liabilities. For example, in August 2022, the United States enacted the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which imposes a 1% non-deductible excise tax on certain stock buybacks and a 15% alternative minimum tax on global adjusted financial statement income. In addition, beginning in 2022, the Tax Act eliminated the option to deduct research and development expenditures currently and requires taxpayers to capitalize and amortize them over five or fifteen years, and this requirement may impact our effective tax rate and our cash tax liability in future years. When and if we achieve profitability, these changes may cause us to pay federal income taxes earlier than under prior law and may increase our total federal tax liability attributable to orphan drug programs and other research and development activities. Further, many countries, and organizations such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development have proposed implementing changes to existing tax laws, including a proposed 15% global minimum tax (Pillar Two) that has been implemented by several countries in 2024 and is being considered for implementation by other jurisdictions. However, the United States has withdrawn support for Pillar Two and has indicated that it may take action against countries with tax laws that disproportionately impact U.S. businesses, which may result in retaliatory taxes or other retaliatory actions against U.S. businesses. Any of these developments or changes

Current wording

We are subject to tax laws, regulations, and policies of several taxing jurisdictions. Changes in tax laws, as well as other factors, could cause us to experience fluctuations in our tax obligations and effective tax rates and otherwise adversely affect our tax positions and/or our tax liabilities. For example, beginning in 2022, the Tax Act eliminated the option to deduct research and development expenditures currently and requires taxpayers to capitalize and amortize them over five or fifteen years, and this requirement may impact our effective tax rate and our cash tax liability in future years. On July 4, 2025, the U.S. federal tax legislation commonly referred to as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (the “OBBB Act”) was enacted, which makes a number of changes to U.S. federal income tax law, including permanently suspending the requirement to capitalize and amortize domestic research and development expenditures and permitting such deductions on a current basis. We are currently evaluating the full impact of the OBBB Act on us. Further, many countries, and organizations such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development have proposed implementing changes to existing tax laws, including a proposed 15% global minimum tax (Pillar Two) that has been implemented by several countries in 2024 and is being considered for implementation by other jurisdictions. However, on June 28, 2025, the G7 released a joint statement that it had reached an understanding with the United States for a side-by-side system based on certain accepted principles, including that 1 U.S.-parented groups, such as ours, would be

Previous wording

in U.S. federal, state, or international tax laws or tax rulings could adversely affect our effective tax rate and our operating results.

Current wording

exempt from certain provisions of Pillar Two. Any of these developments or changes in U.S. federal or state or non-U.S. tax laws or tax rulings could adversely affect our effective tax rate and our operating results.

Previous wording

Sevasemten and EDG-7500 will require additional clinical development, expansion of manufacturing capabilities, marketing approval from government regulators, substantial investment and significant marketing efforts before we can generate any revenues from product sales. We are not permitted to market or promote sevasemten, EDG-7500, or any other product candidate before we receive marketing approval from the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never receive such marketing approvals. While we announced topline results from the Phase 2 CANYON trial of sevasemten in individuals with Becker and from the Phase 1 and Part A, Part B, and Part C of the Phase 2 CIRRUS-HCM trials of EDG-7500 in patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM), the FDA may disagree with our interpretation of the data and may require additional clinical testing before we can seek regulatory approval and begin commercialization, if at all.

Current wording

Sevasemten and EDG-7500 will require additional clinical development, expansion of manufacturing capabilities, marketing approval from government regulators, substantial investment and significant marketing efforts before we can generate any revenues from product sales. We are not permitted to market or promote sevasemten, EDG-7500, or any other product candidate before we receive marketing approval from the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never receive such marketing approvals. While we announced topline results from the Phase 2 CANYON trial of sevasemten in individuals with Becker, data from MESA, an open label extension that is providing continued access to individuals with Becker, and from Part A, Part B, and Part C of the Phase 2 CIRRUS-HCM trials of EDG-7500 in patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM) and nonobstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (nHCM), the FDA may disagree with our interpretation of the data and may require additional clinical testing before we can seek regulatory approval and begin commercialization, if at all.

Previous wording

We have experienced delays in completing our ongoing clinical trial and may experience additional delays in initiating or completing additional clinical trials including delays as a result of COVID-19. We may also experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, clinical trials that could delay or prevent receipt of marketing approval or our ability to commercialize our product candidates, including:

Current wording

We have experienced delays in completing our ongoing clinical trial and may experience additional delays in initiating or completing additional clinical trials including delays as a result of COVID-19. We may also

Previous wording

other testing in a timely manner, if the results of these trials or tests are not positive or are only modestly positive or if there are safety concerns, we may incur unplanned costs, be delayed in seeking and obtaining marketing approval, if we receive such approval at all, receive more limited or restrictive marketing approval, be subject to additional post-marketing testing requirements or have the drug removed from the market after obtaining marketing approval.

Current wording

If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our product candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate, if we are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates or other testing in a timely manner, if the results of these trials or tests are not positive or are only modestly positive or if there are safety concerns, we may incur unplanned costs, be delayed in seeking and obtaining marketing approval, if we receive such approval at all, receive more limited or restrictive marketing approval, be subject to additional post-marketing testing requirements or have the drug removed from the market after obtaining marketing approval.

Previous wording

We are developing novel biologically active small molecules for muscle related diseases. As a result, there is uncertainty as to the safety profile of product candidates we may develop. In addition, our product candidates may be used in combination with certain other therapies, including corticosteroids, which may have undesirable side effects. If our product candidates are associated with undesirable side effects or have unexpected characteristics in preclinical studies or clinical trials when used alone or in combination with other approved products or investigational new drugs we may need to interrupt, delay or abandon their development or limit development to more narrow uses or subpopulations in which the undesirable side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a risk-benefit perspective. Treatment-related side effects could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled subjects to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the affected product candidate and may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Current wording

We are developing novel biologically active small molecules for muscle related diseases. As a result, there is uncertainty as to the safety profile of product candidates we may develop. In addition, our product candidates may be used in combination with certain other therapies, including corticosteroids, which may have undesirable side effects. If our product candidates are associated with undesirable side effects or have unexpected characteristics in preclinical studies or clinical trials when used alone or in combination with other approved products or investigational new drugs we may need to interrupt, delay or abandon their development or limit development to more narrow uses or subpopulations in which the undesirable side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent,

Previous wording

of which were mild and transient. In the ARCH trial of sevasemten in adults with Becker, the most common adverse events were dizziness, fall, and arthralgia, which were mild and transient. In Part B and Part C of the Phase 2 CIRRUS-HCM trial of EDG-7500 in participants with HCM, the most frequently reported adverse events were dizziness, upper respiratory tract infection and atrial fibrillation (AF), nearly all of which were considered mild to moderate in severity. Sevasemten or other product candidates may be used in pediatric populations for which safety concerns may be particularly scrutinized by regulatory agencies. In addition, ifsevasemten is studied in combination with other therapies, it may exacerbate adverse events associated with the therapy. Patients treated with sevasemten or our other product candidates may also be undergoing other therapies which can cause side effects or adverse events that are unrelated to our product candidate but may still impact the success of our clinical trials. The inclusion of critically ill patients in our clinical trials may result in deaths or other adverse medical events due to other therapies or medications that such patients may be using or due to the gravity of such patients’ illnesses, which could occur either during the course of our clinical trials or after participating in such clinical trials.

Current wording

Patients in our ongoing and planned clinical trials may in the future suffer other adverse events or other side effects not observed in our preclinical studies or previous clinical trials. For example, in the single ascending dose (SAD) trial forsevasemten, dose limiting somnolence was observed at the 135 mg level. In addition, in the multiple ascending dose (MAD) trial forsevasemten, the most common adverse events were dizziness and somnolence, all of which were mild and transient. In the ARCH trial of sevasemten in adults with Becker, the most common adverse events were dizziness, fall, and arthralgia, which were mild and transient. No new safety concerns have been observed in either the adult or adolescent patient populations of the CANYON trial, including the GRAND CANYON pivotal cohort, or the MESA open label extension that is providing continued access to sevasemten to participants with Becker who were previously enrolled in ARCH, or completed CANYON, including the GRAND CANYON pivotal cohort, or DUNE. In Part B and Part C of the Phase 2 CIRRUS-HCM trial of EDG-7500 in participants with HCM, the most frequently reported adverse events were dizziness, upper respiratory tract infection and atrial fibrillation (AF), nearly all of which were considered mild to moderate in severity. Sevasemten or other product candidates may be used in pediatric populations for which safety concerns may be particularly scrutinized by regulatory agencies. In addition, ifsevasemten is studied in combination with other therapies, it may exacerbate adverse events associated with the therapy. Patients treated with sevasemten or our other product candidates may also be undergoing other therapies which can cause side effects or adverse events that are unrelated to our product candidate but may still impact the success of our clinical trials. The inclusion of critically ill patients in our clinical trials may result in deaths or other adverse medical events due to other therapies or medications that such patients may be using or due to the gravity of such patients’ illnesses, which could occur either during the course of our clinical trials or after participating in such clinical trials.

Previous wording

We will be required to demonstrate with substantial evidence through well-controlled clinical trials that our product candidates are safe and effective for use in a diverse population before we can seek marketing approvals for their commercial sale. Success in preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials does not mean that future clinical trials will be successful. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. Although we have announced positive results from our preclinical studies and clinical trials, we do not know whether sevasemten or EDG-7500 will perform in current or future clinical trials assevasemten or EDG-7500 has performed in preclinical studies or earlier clinical trials, nor do we know whether any product candidate in our EDG-003 cardiometabolic discovery program will perform in current or future preclinical studies or future clinical trials as it has in prior preclinical studies. For example, the primary endpoint of the GRAND CANYON cohort may not be met even though the endpoint trended towards improvement as a secondary endpoint in the earlier cohorts of the CANYON trial, and the trends observed so far in the CANYON trial may not be seen and or may not be statistically significant in the GRAND CANYON cohort. Product candidates in clinical trials may fail to demonstrate sufficient safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of the FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities despite having progressed through preclinical studies. Regulatory authorities may also limit the scope of later-stage trials until we have demonstrated satisfactory safety, which could delay regulatory

Current wording

in preclinical studies or earlier clinical trials, nor do we know whether any product candidate in our EDG-003 cardiometabolic discovery program will perform in current or future preclinical studies or future clinical trials as it has in prior preclinical studies. For example, the primary endpoint of the GRAND CANYON cohort may not be met even though the endpoint trended towards improvement as a secondary endpoint in the earlier cohorts of the CANYON trial, and the trends observed so far in the CANYON trial may not be seen and or may not be statistically significant in the GRAND CANYON cohort. Product candidates in clinical trials may fail to demonstrate sufficient safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of the FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities despite having progressed through preclinical studies. Regulatory authorities may also limit the scope of later-stage trials until we have demonstrated satisfactory safety, which could delay regulatory approval, limit the size of the patient population to which we may market our product candidates, or prevent regulatory approval.

Previous wording

For sevasemten trials, we completed our open-label ARCH trial (single site) and our CANYON Phase 2 clinical trial (multiple sites), as well as completed enrollment of the DUNE Phase 2 exercise challenge study (single site), GRAND CANYON, the pivotal cohort of our Phase 2 CANYON clinical trial in individuals with Becker (multiple sites), and the LYNX and FOX Phase 2 studies in Duchenne (multiple sites). We have also initiated an industry-sponsored, global, prospective registry investigating the natural history of adults with Becker aged 18 years and older. However, we may not be successful in achieving our goal of establishing natural history reference data points and identifying future eligibility for recruitment into our planned registrational trial in Becker. For EDG-7500 trials, we completed the Phase 1 trial in healthy subjects and the Part A single-dose arm in patients with oHCM and are continuing to enroll Part B and Part C in patients with oHCM and nHCM of the multipart Phase 2 CIRRUS-HCM trial. However, we may experience difficulty with enrollment and/or maintenance of patients in Part B, Part C, or Part D of the Phase 2 trial.

Current wording

For sevasemten trials, we completed our open-label ARCH trial (single site) and our CANYON Phase 2 clinical trial (multiple sites), as well as completed enrollment of the DUNE Phase 2 exercise challenge study (single site), GRAND CANYON, the pivotal cohort of our Phase 2 CANYON clinical trial in individuals with Becker (multiple sites), and the LYNX and FOX Phase 2 studies in Duchenne (multiple sites). We have also completed enrollment for an industry-sponsored, global, prospective registry investigating the natural history of adults with Becker aged 18 years and older. However, we may not be successful in achieving our goal of establishing natural history reference data points and identifying future eligibility for recruitment into our planned registrational trial in Becker. For EDG-7500 trials, we completed the Phase 1 trial in healthy subjects and the Part A single-dose arm in patients with oHCM and are continuing to enroll Part B and Part C in patients with oHCM and nHCM, as well as initiating enrollment of Part D of the multipart Phase 2 CIRRUS-HCM trial. However, we may experience difficulty with enrollment and/or maintenance of patients in Part B, Part C, or Part D of the Phase 2 trial.

Previous wording

We are developing product candidates for severe muscle diseases with limited patient pools from which to draw for clinical trials. Such trials may be difficult to enroll and the lack of data on these patients may negatively impact the approvability ofsevasemten. We also may encounter difficulties in identifying and enrolling subjects with a stage of disease appropriate for our planned clinical trials and monitoring such subjects adequately during and after treatment. We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials if we are unable to locate a sufficient number of eligible subjects to participate in the clinical trials required by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. In addition, the process of finding and diagnosing subjects may prove costly. Further, the treating physicians in our clinical trials may also use their medical discretion in advising patients enrolled in our clinical trials to withdraw from our studies to try alternative therapies.

Current wording

We are developing product candidates for severe muscle diseases with limited patient pools from which to draw for clinical trials. Such trials may be difficult to enroll and the lack of data on these patients may negatively impact the approvability ofsevasemten. We also may encounter difficulties in identifying and enrolling subjects with a stage of disease appropriate for our planned clinical trials and monitoring such subjects adequately during and after treatment. We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials if we are unable to locate a sufficient number of eligible subjects to participate in the clinical trials required by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. In addition, the process of finding and diagnosing subjects may prove costly. Further, the

Previous wording

We are currently focusing the majority of our resources and efforts on developing sevasemten and EDG-7500. As a result, because we have limited resources, we may forgo or delay the pursuit of opportunities for other indications or with other product candidates that may have greater commercial potential, including product candidates from our EDG-003 cardiometabolic discovery program. In addition, while we currently have multiple compounds in our programs, we are focusing our efforts on select product candidates from each of these programs to develop as lead product candidates in each program. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial drugs or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development activities forsevasemten, EDG-7500 and our EDG-003 cardiometabolic discovery program may not yield any commercially viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target markets forsevasemten, EDG-7500 or the product candidates we are currently researching, such as those from our EDG-003 cardiometabolic discovery program, we may relinquish valuable rights to our product candidates or programs through collaboration, licensing or other strategic arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate or program.

Current wording

We are currently focusing the majority of our resources and efforts on developing sevasemten and EDG-7500. As a result, because we have limited resources, we may forgo or delay the pursuit of opportunities for other indications or with other product candidates that may have greater commercial potential, including product candidates from our EDG-003 cardiometabolic discovery program. In addition, while we currently have multiple compounds in our programs, we are focusing our efforts on select product candidates from each of these programs to develop as lead product candidates in each program. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial drugs or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development activities forsevasemten, EDG-7500 and our EDG-003 cardiometabolic discovery

Previous wording

With sevasemten, we expect to face competition from existing products and products in development. Approximately 70% of patients with Duchenne are treated with corticosteroids to manage the inflammatory component of the disease. Deflazacort and prednisone are FDA-approved corticosteroids and are marketed by multiple companies. In October 2023, the FDA granted AGAMREE (vamorolone) approval in Duchenne patients aged 2 years and older and Catalyst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. announced commercialization of this product in the United States following its North America exclusive license deal with Santhera.

Current wording

With sevasemten, we expect to face competition from existing products and products in development. Approximately 70% of patients with Duchenne are treated with corticosteroids to manage the inflammatory component of the disease. Deflazacort and prednisone are FDA-approved corticosteroids and are marketed by multiple companies. In October 2023, the FDA granted AGAMREE (vamorolone) approval in Duchenne patients aged 2 years and older and Catalyst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. has commercialized this product in the United States following its North America exclusive license deal with Santhera.

Previous wording

In June 2023, the FDA approved Sarepta’s Biologics License Application seeking accelerated approval of their microdystrophin gene therapy, Elevidys (delandistrogene moxeparvovec), for the treatment of ambulant individuals with Duchenne between the ages of four to five years. In June 2024, the FDA granted Elevidys full approval for the treatment of ambulatory individuals aged 4 years and older, and accelerated approval for the treatment of non-ambulatory individuals aged 4 years and older. Other companies focused on developing genetic based therapies for Duchenne that target dystrophin mechanisms include Solid Biosciences Inc., Genethon, PepGen, Dyne Therapeutics, Avidity Biosciences, REGENXBIO, Wave Life Sciences, and Entrada Therapeutics. In June 2024, Pfizer announced its gene therapy Phase 3 trial failed to meet the primary and key secondary endpoints and is no longer under development. Gene editing treatments that are in preclinical development are also being pursued by Vertex and Sarepta Therapeutics.

Current wording

In June 2023, the FDA approved Sarepta’s Biologics License Application seeking accelerated approval of their microdystrophin gene therapy, Elevidys (delandistrogene moxeparvovec), for the treatment of ambulant individuals with Duchenne between the ages of four to five years. In June 2024, the FDA granted Elevidys full approval for the treatment of ambulatory individuals aged 4 years and older, and accelerated approval for the

Previous wording

We are also aware of several companies targeting non-dystrophin mechanisms for the treatment of Duchenne. In June 2022, Italfarmaco announced positive topline data from its completed Phase 3 trial with givinostat, a histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor, in boys with Duchenne. In March 2024, the FDA approved Duvyzat (givinostat) for the treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy in patients aged six years and older. Moreover, in June 2021, Italfarmaco released top line Phase 2 data for givinostat in Becker. Givinostat did not show a significant difference in the primary endpoint compared to placebo. The future of this program in Becker is uncertain.

Current wording

We are also aware of several companies targeting non-dystrophin mechanisms for the treatment of Duchenne. In March 2024, the FDA approved Duvyzat (givinostat) for the treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy in patients aged six years and older. Moreover, in June 2021, Italfarmaco released top line Phase 2 data for givinostat in Becker. Givinostat did not show a significant difference in the primary endpoint compared to placebo. The future of this program in Becker is uncertain. In June 2025, Capricor Therapeutics, Inc. announced that the FDA has granted ODD to Deramiocel, the company’s lead cell therapy candidate, for the potential treatment of BMD.

Previous wording

With EDG-7500, we expect to face competition from existing products and products in development. Current pharmaceutical treatment is intended to improve diastolic filling in both oHCM and nonobstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (nHCM) and reduce left ventricular outflow tract gradient in oHCM patients only. The goal of current therapies is to achieve meaningful symptom relief. Non-vasodilating beta blockers and non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers are the first-line therapies for symptomatic oHCM and nHCM patients. Commonly prescribed beta-blockers are atenolol, propranolol, and metoprolol. Verapamil and diltiazem are calcium channel blockers used in the treatment of symptomatic oHCM and nHCM. For oHCM patients who remain symptomatic, disopyramide (either Norpace, marketed by Pfizer, or a generic form marketed by several other companies) and/or Camzyos (mavacamten), a cardiac myosin inhibitor (CMI), may also be added.

Current wording

With EDG-7500, we expect to face competition from existing products and products in development. Current pharmaceutical treatment is intended to improve diastolic filling in both oHCM and nHCM and reduce left ventricular outflow tract gradient in oHCM patients only. The goal of current therapies is to achieve meaningful symptom relief. Non-vasodilating beta blockers and non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers are the first-line therapies for symptomatic oHCM and nHCM patients. Commonly prescribed beta-blockers are atenolol, propranolol, and metoprolol. Verapamil and diltiazem are calcium channel blockers used in the treatment of symptomatic oHCM and nHCM. For oHCM patients who remain symptomatic, disopyramide (either Norpace, marketed by Pfizer, or a generic form marketed by several other companies) and/or Camzyos (mavacamten), a cardiac myosin inhibitor (CMI), may also be added.

Previous wording

In the field of emerging treatments for HCM, competitors include Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Cytokinetics, Imbria Pharmaceuticals, and Celltrion. Cytokinetics is developing a CMI, aficamten (CK-274), for which positive oHCM Phase 3 results were announced in 2023. In December 2024, the FDA accepted the aficamten New Drug Application (NDA) with a Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) target action date set for September 26, 2025. In June 2023, Cytokinetics initiated another Phase 3 active-comparator clinical trial of aficamten compared to metoprolol in symptomatic oHCM patients. In the second quarter of 2024, BMS and Cytokinetics initiated a study of mavacamten and aficamten, respectively, in pediatric population with symptomatic oHCM. BMS and Cytokinetics are also exploring their respective CMIs in ongoing Phase 3 nHCM clinical trials. In April 2025, BMS reported that its Phase 3 study of mavacamten in nHCM failed to meet its dual primary endpoints. BMS is also developing a next generation CMI, MYK-224, for which a Phase 2 oHCM clinical trial is currently ongoing.

Current wording

In the field of emerging treatments for HCM, competitors include Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Cytokinetics, Imbria Pharmaceuticals, Lexicon, and Celltrion. Cytokinetics is developing a CMI, aficamten (CK-274), for which positive oHCM Phase 3 results were announced in 2023. In December 2024, the FDA accepted the aficamten New Drug Application (NDA) with a Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) target action date recently delayed from the original date of September 26, 2025 to December 26, 2025. In June 2023, Cytokinetics initiated another Phase 3 active-comparator clinical trial of aficamten compared to metoprolol in symptomatic oHCM patients. In the second quarter of 2024, BMS and Cytokinetics initiated a study of mavacamten and aficamten, respectively, in pediatric population with symptomatic oHCM. BMS and Cytokinetics are also exploring their respective CMIs in ongoing Phase 3 nHCM clinical trials. In April 2025, BMS reported that its Phase 3 study of mavacamten in nHCM failed to meet its dual primary endpoints. BMS is also developing a next generation CMI, MYK-224, for which a Phase 2 oHCM clinical trial is currently ongoing.

Previous wording

Non-myosin targeting drugs in development include ninerafaxstat/IMB-101(Imbria Pharmaceuticals), a partial fatty acid oxidation (pFOX) inhibitor, CT-G20 (Celltrion), an anti-arrhythmic cibenzoline succinate, and trientine dihydrochloride (Univar Solutions), a selective copper II chelator. In November 2023, Imbria announced Phase 2 nHCM topline results of ninerafaxstat. Imbria also announced plans to initiate a Phase 2b nHCM trial of ninerafaxstat in the second quarter of 2025. In the third quarter of 2024, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals initiated a Phase 3 trial of sotagliflozin, an SGLT1 and SGLT2 inhibitor, in patients with symptomatic oHCM and nHCM. We have limited knowledge of CT-G20’s Phase 1 oHCM trial status, while the trientine Phase 2 oHCM clinical trial is ongoing. A myosin binding protein C3-targeting gene therapy candidate, TN-201, is being developed by Tenaya Therapeutics for genetic HCM. TN-201 is currently in a Phase 1b/2 study for which interim results were announced in December 2024 with additional results presented at the 2025 American College of Cardiology Scientific Sessions. We are aware of several preclinical HCM programs including: JN-210, a microRNA activating gene therapy approach being developed by Jaan Biotherapeutics; HTX-001, an antisense oligonucleotide approach being developed by Haya Therapeutics; CDR348T and CDR641L, both are non-coding RNA-based therapies being developed by Cardior Pharmaceuticals (acquired by Novo Nordisk in May 2024). We are also aware of several early-stage preclinical HCM gene therapy assets being developed by DiNAQOR, DINA-003 and DINA-001, the latter in collaboration with BioMarin Pharmaceuticals (BMN-293/DINA-001). In August 2024, BioMarin announced the discontinuation of the development of BMN-293. We have limited knowledge of DiNAQOR’s future development plans for DINA-001/BMN-293. Another HCM gene therapy approach targeting cardiac troponin I3 (TNNI3), LX2022, is being developed by Lexeo Therapeutics. To the best of our knowledge, the program is currently in a preclinical stage.

Current wording

Non-myosin targeting drugs in development include ninerafaxstat/IMB-101(Imbria Pharmaceuticals), a partial fatty acid oxidation (pFOX) inhibitor, CT-G20 (Celltrion), an anti-arrhythmic cibenzoline succinate, and trientine dihydrochloride (Univar Solutions), a selective copper II chelator. In November 2023, Imbria announced Phase 2 nHCM topline results of ninerafaxstat, and in the second quarter of 2025, initiated a Phase 2b nHCM trial of ninerafaxstat. In the third quarter of 2024, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals initiated a Phase 3 trial of sotagliflozin, an SGLT1 and SGLT2 inhibitor, in patients with symptomatic oHCM and nHCM. We have limited knowledge of CT-G20’s Phase 1 oHCM trial status, while the trientine Phase 2 oHCM clinical trial is ongoing. A myosin binding protein C3-targeting gene therapy candidate, TN-201, is being developed by Tenaya Therapeutics for genetic HCM. TN-201 is currently in a Phase 1b/2 study for which interim results were announced in December 2024 with additional results presented at the 2025 American College of Cardiology Scientific Sessions. We are aware of several preclinical HCM programs including: JN-210, a microRNA activating gene therapy approach being developed by Jaan Biotherapeutics; HTX-001, an antisense oligonucleotide approach being developed by Haya Therapeutics for the treatment of nHCM; CDR348T and CDR641L, both are non-coding RNA-based therapies being developed by Cardior Pharmaceuticals (acquired by Novo Nordisk in May 2024). We are also aware of several early-stage preclinical HCM gene therapy assets being developed by DiNAQOR, DINA-003 and DINA-001, the latter in collaboration with BioMarin Pharmaceuticals (BMN-293/DINA-001). In August 2024, BioMarin announced the discontinuation of the development of BMN-293. We have limited knowledge of DiNAQOR’s future development plans for DINA-001/BMN-293. Another HCM gene therapy approach targeting cardiac troponin I3 (TNNI3), LX2022, is being developed by Lexeo Therapeutics. To the best of our knowledge, the program is currently in a preclinical stage.

Previous wording

approved or are in late stages of development, and collaborative arrangements in our target markets with leading companies and research institutions. Established pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies may also invest heavily to accelerate discovery and development of novel compounds or to in-license novel compounds that could make the product candidates that we develop obsolete. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. As a result of all of these factors, our competitors may succeed in obtaining approval from the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities or in discovering, developing and commercializing products in our field before we do.

Current wording

Many of these current and potential competitors have significantly greater financial, manufacturing, marketing, drug development, technical and human resources and commercial expertise than we do. Large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, in particular, have extensive experience in clinical testing, obtaining regulatory approvals, recruiting patients and manufacturing biotechnology products. These companies also have significantly greater research and marketing capabilities than we do and may also have products that have been approved or are in late stages of development, and collaborative arrangements in our target markets with leading companies and research institutions. Established pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies may also invest heavily to accelerate discovery and development of novel compounds or to in-license novel compounds that could make the product candidates that we develop obsolete. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. As a result of all of these factors, our competitors may succeed in obtaining approval from the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities or in discovering, developing and commercializing products in our field before we do.

Previous wording

From time to time, we may publicly disclose preliminary, interim or topline data from our clinical trials. For example, on April 15, 2024, we announced positive two-year topline results from the ARCH open label trial ofsevasemten in adults with Becker, on September 19, 2024, we announced positive topline data from the Phase 1 trial of EDG-7500 in healthy subjects and the Part A single-dose arm of the Phase 2 multipart CIRRUS-HCM trial in patients with oHCM, on December 16, 2024, we announced positive topline data from the Phase 2 CANYON trial of sevasemten in individuals with Becker, and, on April 2, 2025, we announced positive topline results from Part B and Part C of the Phase 2 multipart CIRRUS-HCM trial in patients with oHCM and nHCM. These interim updates are based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or trial. For example, we are continuing to evaluate additional secondary and exploratory endpoints for our CANYON trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, the topline results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Topline data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. In addition, we may report interim analyses of only certain endpoints rather than all endpoints. Interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data becomes available. Adverse changes between interim data and final data could significantly harm our business and prospects. Further, additional disclosure of interim data by us or by our competitors in the future could result in volatility in the price of our common stock.

Current wording

From time to time, we may publicly disclose preliminary, interim or topline data from our clinical trials. In sevasemten, on April 15, 2024, we announced positive two-year topline results from the ARCH open label trial ofsevasemten in adults with Becker, on December 16, 2024, we announced positive topline data from the Phase 2 CANYON trial of sevasemten in individuals with Becker, and, on June 26, 2025, weannounced encouraging topline data from our Phase 2 Duchenne trials, LYNX and FOX, and positive data from MESA, an open label extension trial that is providing continued access to sevasemten to participants with Becker who were previously enrolled in ARCH, or completed CANYON, including the GRAND CANYON pivotal cohort, or DUNE. In EDG-7500, on September 19, 2024, we announced positive topline data from the Phase 1 trial of EDG-7500 in healthy subjects and the Part A single-dose arm of the Phase 2 multipart CIRRUS-HCM trial in patients with oHCM and, on April 2, 2025, we announced positive topline results from Part B and Part C of the Phase 2 multipart CIRRUS-HCM trial in patients with oHCM and nHCM. These interim updates are based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or trial. For example, we are continuing to evaluate additional secondary and exploratory endpoints for our CANYON trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, the topline results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Topline data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. In addition, we may report interim analyses of only certain endpoints rather than all endpoints. Interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data becomes available. Adverse changes between interim data and final data could significantly harm

Previous wording

Further, others, including regulatory agencies, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate or product and our company in general. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our

Current wording

Further, others, including regulatory agencies, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate or product and our company in general. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure. If the preliminary or topline data that we report differ from late, final or actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, sevasemten, EDG-7500, product candidates from our EDG-003 cardiometabolic discovery program or any other product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Previous wording

We may develop sevasemten and potentially other programs, in combination with one or more currently approved therapies or therapies in development. Patients may not be able to tolerate sevasemten or any other product candidates in combination with other therapies or dosing ofsevasemten in combination with other therapies may have unexpected consequences. Even if any of our product candidates were to receive marketing approval or be commercialized for use in combination with other existing therapies, we would continue to be subject to the risks that the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities could revoke approval of the therapy used in combination with any of our product candidates, or safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise with these existing therapies. In addition, it is possible that existing therapies with which our product candidates are approved for use could themselves fall out of favor. This could result in the need to identify other combination therapies for our product candidates, or our own products being removed from the market or being less successful commercially.

Current wording

be commercialized for use in combination with other existing therapies, we would continue to be subject to the risks that the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities could revoke approval of the therapy used in combination with any of our product candidates, or safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise with these existing therapies. In addition, it is possible that existing therapies with which our product candidates are approved for use could themselves fall out of favor. This could result in the need to identify other combination therapies for our product candidates, or our own products being removed from the market or being less successful commercially.

Previous wording

Duchenne and Becker are rare, genetic neuromuscular disorders. We estimate that Duchenne occurs in approximately 35,000 patients in the US, EU (5) and Japan. Becker has a much lower incidence of approximately 1 in every 18,450 live male births. We estimate that Becker occurs in approximately 12,000 patients in the US, EU (5) and Japan. The approximate global prevalence of LGMDs as a group is estimated to be from 0.56 to 5.75 per 100,000. Our estimates of the size of these patient populations are based on published studies. Given the small number of patients who have the diseases that we are targeting, it is critical to our ability to grow and become profitable that we continue to successfully identify patients with these rare diseases. The effort to identify patients with diseases we seek to treat is in early stages, and we cannot accurately predict the number of patients for whom treatment might be possible. Various factors may decrease the market size of our product and product candidates, including the severity of the disease, patient demographics and the response of patients’ immune systems to our product candidates. If the results of these studies or our analysis of them do not accurately reflect the relevant

Current wording

in every 18,450 live male births. We estimate that Becker occurs in approximately 12,000 patients in the US, EU (5) and Japan. The approximate global prevalence of LGMDs as a group is estimated to be from 0.56 to 5.75 per 100,000. Our estimates of the size of these patient populations are based on published studies. Given the small number of patients who have the diseases that we are targeting, it is critical to our ability to grow and become profitable that we continue to successfully identify patients with these rare diseases. The effort to identify patients with diseases we seek to treat is in early stages, and we cannot accurately predict the number of patients for whom treatment might be possible. Various factors may decrease the market size of our product and product candidates, including the severity of the disease, patient demographics and the response of patients’ immune systems to our product candidates. If the results of these studies or our analysis of them do not accurately reflect the relevant patient population, our assessment of the market may be inaccurate, making it difficult or impossible for us to meet our revenue goals, or to obtain and maintain profitability.

Previous wording

The effort to identify patients with diseases we seek to treat is in early stages and we cannot accurately predict the number of patients for whom treatment might be possible. A newborn screening initiative was put into place with the goal of identifying and providing care for every child born with Duchenne muscular dystrophy and achieving Recommended Uniform Screening Panel (RUSP) status. An Ohio newborn screening (NBS) program was announced in April 2024 in which all newborns in the state of Ohio are screened for Duchenne. A newborn screening pilot program in New York State tested this and other aspects of a comprehensive newborn screening program at a large scale. The pilot was completed in October 2021 and screened more than 36,000 babies born in New York State over two years. Four babies were confirmed to have Duchenne/Becker muscular dystrophy, and one baby was identified as a carrier female. Two other pilot programs have been successfully conducted. In June 2022, Parent Project Muscular Dystrophy, a nonprofit organization leading the fight to end Duchenne, announced that the organization submitted a nomination package to add Duchenne to the RUSP to the Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children (ACHDNC), initiating the review process. The review process typically takes more than a year and requires two key votes of experts in NBS to move forward. In February 2023, the first key vote took place and the ACHDNC decided that more information was needed before proceeding to the second vote. The work to finalize the required additional evidence was completed and a meeting was scheduled with the ACHDNC for May 8, 2025. However, the current administration dissolved the ACHDNC before the meeting took place, leaving the process for submission and vote uncertain. The RUSP still exists, and advocates are currently seeking to understand the pathway to present the evidence package and receive approval to add Duchenne/Becker to the RUSP. Additionally, advocates at the state level are working to add Duchenne/Becker to their state level NBS programs. Ohio and Minnesota are actively screening and there are several states that are close to implementing NBS programs. Uncertainties remain, including, among other things, ascertaining the pathway for additions to the RUSP and the adequacy of the evidence package. Furthermore, even if Duchenne is added to the RUSP, all states may not be able to effectively implement a NBS program. This could reduce the identifiable patient population for the diseases we seek to treat and result in our therapies not being able to be initiated early in the course of the disease.

Current wording

The effort to identify patients with diseases we seek to treat is in early stages and we cannot accurately predict the number of patients for whom treatment might be possible. A newborn screening initiative was put into place with the goal of identifying and providing care for every child born with Duchenne muscular dystrophy and achieving Recommended Uniform Screening Panel (RUSP) status. An Ohio newborn screening (NBS) program was announced in April 2024 in which all newborns in the state of Ohio are screened for Duchenne. A newborn screening pilot program in New York State tested this and other aspects of a comprehensive newborn screening program at a large scale. The pilot was completed in October 2021 and screened more than 36,000 babies born in New York State over two years. Four babies were confirmed to have Duchenne/Becker muscular dystrophy, and one baby was identified as a carrier female. Two other pilot programs have been successfully conducted. In June 2022, Parent Project Muscular Dystrophy, a nonprofit organization leading the fight to end Duchenne, announced that the organization submitted a nomination package to add Duchenne to the RUSP to the Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children (ACHDNC), initiating the review process. The review process typically takes more than a year and requires two key votes of experts in NBS to move forward. In February 2023, the first key vote took place and the ACHDNC decided that more information was needed before proceeding to the second vote. The work to finalize the required additional evidence was completed and a meeting was scheduled with the ACHDNC for May 8, 2025. However, the current administration dissolved the ACHDNC before the meeting took place, leaving the process for submission and vote uncertain. The RUSP still exists, and advocates are currently seeking to understand the pathway to present the evidence package and receive approval to add Duchenne/Becker to the RUSP. Additionally, advocates at the state level are working to add Duchenne/Becker to their state level NBS programs. Ohio and Minnesota are actively screening and Arizona, Massachusetts, and New York have passed legislation but screening has not started. There are 12 states with pending legislation or committee hearings and 34 states with no activity. Uncertainties remain, including, among other things, ascertaining the pathway for additions to the RUSP and the adequacy of the evidence package. Furthermore, even if Duchenne is added to the RUSP, all states may not be able to effectively implement a NBS program. This could reduce the identifiable patient population for the diseases we seek to treat and result in our therapies not being able to be initiated early in the course of the disease.

Previous wording

We intend to evaluate select external opportunities to strategically expand our pipeline. While we plan to leverage our leadership team’s prior business development experience as we evaluate potential in-licensing and acquisition opportunities to expand our portfolio, we may not be able to identify suitable licensing or acquisition opportunities, and even if we do, we may not be able to successfully secure such licensing and acquisition opportunities. The licensing or acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and several more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment, or at all. If we are unable to successfully license or acquire additional product candidates to expand our portfolio, our pipeline, competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects may be materially harmed.

Current wording

We intend to evaluate select external opportunities to strategically expand our pipeline. While we plan to leverage our leadership team’s prior business development experience as we evaluate potential in-licensing and acquisition opportunities to expand our portfolio, we may not be able to identify suitable licensing or acquisition opportunities, and even if we do, we may not be able to successfully secure such licensing and acquisition opportunities. The licensing or acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and several more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These companies may have a competitive advantage over us

Previous wording

Outside the United States, the commercialization of therapeutics is generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost containment initiatives in Europe, Canada and other countries has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of therapeutics such as our product candidates. In many countries, particularly the countries of the European Union (EU), medical product prices are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after a product receives marketing approval. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product candidate to other available therapies. In general, product prices under such systems are substantially lower than in the United States. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for products but monitor and control company profits.

Current wording

and usage of therapeutics such as our product candidates. In many countries, particularly the countries of the European Union (EU), medical product prices are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after a product receives marketing approval. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product candidate to other available therapies. In general, product prices under such systems are substantially lower than in the United States. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for products but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our product candidates. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our products may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits.

Previous wording

Our ongoing clinical trials are being undertaken in the United States. We may choose to conduct additional clinical trials internationally. The acceptance of study data by the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authority from clinical trials conducted outside of their respective jurisdictions may be subject to certain conditions. In cases where data from United States clinical trials are intended to serve as the basis for marketing approval in the foreign countries outside the United States, the standards for clinical trials and approval may be different. There can be no assurance that any United States or foreign regulatory authority would accept data from trials conducted outside of its applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA, EMA or any applicable foreign regulatory

Current wording

Our ongoing clinical trials are being undertaken in the United States. We may choose to conduct additional clinical trials internationally. The acceptance of study data by the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authority from clinical trials conducted outside of their respective jurisdictions may be subject to certain conditions. In cases where data from United States clinical trials are intended to serve as the basis for marketing approval in the foreign countries outside the United States, the standards for clinical trials and approval may be different. There can be no assurance that any United States or foreign regulatory authority would accept data from trials conducted outside of its applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA, EMA or any applicable foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay aspects of our business plan, and which may result in our product candidates not receiving approval or clearance for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.

Previous wording

precautions or contraindications, and may include burdensome post-approval study or risk management requirements and regulatory inspection. For example, the FDA may require a REMS in order to approve our product candidates, which could entail requirements for a medication guide, physician training and communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. In addition, if the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities approve our product candidates, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion, import, export and recordkeeping for our product candidates will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as on-going compliance with cGMPs and GCPs for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. In addition, manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic, unannounced inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP regulations and standards. If we or a regulatory agency discover previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facilities where the product is manufactured, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product, the manufacturing facility or us, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing. In addition, failure to comply with FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory requirements may subject our company to administrative or judicially imposed sanctions, including:

Current wording

Any regulatory approvals that we may receive for our product candidates will require the submission of reports to regulatory authorities and on-going surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate, may contain significant limitations related to use restrictions for specified age groups, warnings, precautions or contraindications, and may include burdensome post-approval study or risk management requirements and regulatory inspection. For example, the FDA may require a REMS in order to approve our product candidates, which could entail requirements for a medication guide, physician training and communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. In addition, if the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities approve our product candidates, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion, import, export and recordkeeping for our product candidates will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as on-going compliance with cGMPs and GCPs for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. In addition, manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic, unannounced inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP regulations and standards. If we or a regulatory agency discover previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facilities where the product is manufactured, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product, the manufacturing facility or us, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing. In addition, failure to comply with FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory requirements may subject our company to administrative or judicially imposed sanctions, including:

Previous wording

Further, the FDA’s or other ex-U.S. regulators’ policies may change, and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Chevron doctrine, which gives deference to regulatory agencies’ statutory interpretations in litigation against federal government agencies, such as the FDA, where the law is ambiguous. This landmark Supreme Court decision may invite more companies and other stakeholders to bring lawsuits against the FDA to challenge longstanding decisions and policies of the FDA, including FDA’s statutory interpretations of market exclusivities and the “substantial evidence” requirements for drug approvals, which could undermine the FDA's authority, lead to uncertainties in the industry, and disrupt the FDA's normal operations, any of which could delay the FDA’s review of our regulatory submissions. Further, changes in the leadership of the FDA and other federal agencies under the current administration may lead to new policies and changes in the regulations that can increase our compliance costs or delay our clinical development and timelines. We cannot predict the full impact of this decision, future judicial challenges

Current wording

Further, the FDA’s or other ex-U.S. regulators’ policies may change, and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Chevron doctrine, which gives deference to regulatory agencies’ statutory interpretations in litigation against federal government agencies, such as the FDA, where the law is ambiguous. This landmark Supreme Court decision may invite more companies and other stakeholders to bring lawsuits against the FDA to challenge longstanding decisions and policies of the FDA, including FDA’s statutory interpretations of market exclusivities and the “substantial evidence” requirements for drug approvals, which could undermine the FDA's authority, lead to uncertainties in the industry, and disrupt the FDA's normal operations, any of which could delay the FDA’s review of our regulatory submissions. Further, changes in the leadership of the FDA and other federal agencies under the current administration may lead to new policies and changes in the regulations that can increase our compliance costs or delay our clinical development and timelines. We cannot predict the full impact of this decision, future judicial challenges brought against the FDA, or the nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained, which would adversely affect our business, prospects and ability to achieve or sustain profitability.

Previous wording

The FDA granted sevasemten Fast Track designation for the treatment of Duchenne in February 2024, and ODD for the treatment of Duchenne and Becker and RPDD for the treatment of Duchenne in November 2023. The FDA previously granted Fast Track designation for the investigation and development ofsevasemten for the treatment of Becker. EMA granted ODD for sevasemten for the treatment of Becker and Duchenne in April 2024. We may seek orphan drug designation for other product candidates. Even after obtaining orphan drug designation, we may not be able to obtain or maintain orphan drug exclusivity for that product candidate. We may not be the first to obtain marketing approval of any product candidate for which we have obtained orphan drug designation for the orphan-designated indication due to the uncertainties associated with developing pharmaceutical products. In addition, exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be limited if we seek approval for an indication broader than the orphan-designated indication or may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if we are unable to ensure that we will be able to manufacture sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. Further, even after obtaining orphan drug exclusivity for a product, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs with different active moieties may be approved for the same condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve the same drug with the same active moiety for the same condition if the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care or the manufacturer of the product with orphan exclusivity is unable to maintain sufficient product quantity. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the product candidate any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process or entitles the product candidate to priority review. In view of the court decision inCatalyst Pharms., Inc. v. Becerra, 14 F.4th 1299 (11th Cir. 2021), in January 2023, the FDA published a notice in the Federal Register to clarify that while the agency complies with the court’s order inCatalyst, FDA intends to continue to apply its longstanding interpretation of the regulations to matters outside of the scope of theCatalyst order – that is, the agency will continue tying the scope of orphan-drug exclusivity to the uses or indications for which a drug is approved, which permits other sponsors to obtain approval of a drug for new uses or indications within the same orphan designated disease or condition that have not yet been approved. It is unclear how future litigation, including judicial challenges in view of the Supreme Court’s overturn of theChevron

Current wording

FDA previously granted Fast Track designation for the investigation and development ofsevasemten for the treatment of Becker. EMA granted ODD for sevasemten for the treatment of Becker and Duchenne in April 2024. We may seek orphan drug designation for other product candidates. Even after obtaining orphan drug designation, we may not be able to obtain or maintain orphan drug exclusivity for that product candidate. We may not be the first to obtain marketing approval of any product candidate for which we have obtained orphan drug designation for the orphan-designated indication due to the uncertainties associated with developing pharmaceutical products. In addition, exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be limited if we seek approval for an indication broader than the orphan-designated indication or may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if we are unable to ensure that we will be able to manufacture sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. Further, even after obtaining orphan drug exclusivity for a product, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs with different active moieties may be approved for the same condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve the same drug with the same active moiety for the same condition if the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care or the manufacturer of the product with orphan exclusivity is unable to maintain sufficient product quantity. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the product candidate any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process or entitles the product candidate to priority review. In view of the court decision inCatalyst Pharms., Inc. v. Becerra, 14 F.4th 1299 (11th Cir. 2021), in January 2023, the FDA published a notice in the Federal Register to clarify that while the agency complies with the court’s order inCatalyst, FDA intends to continue to apply its longstanding interpretation of the regulations to matters outside of the scope of theCatalyst order – that is, the agency will continue tying the scope of orphan-drug exclusivity to the uses or indications for which a drug is approved, which permits other sponsors to obtain approval of a drug for new uses or indications within the same orphan designated disease or condition that have not yet been approved. It is unclear how future litigation, including judicial challenges in view of the Supreme Court’s overturn of theChevron doctrine legislation, agency decisions, and administrative actions under the current administration will impact the scope of the orphan drug exclusivity.

Previous wording

Where possible, we plan to pursue accelerated development strategies in areas of high unmet need. We may seek an accelerated approval pathway for our one or more of our product candidates. Under the accelerated approval provisions in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and the FDA’s implementing regulations, the FDA may grant accelerated approval to a product candidate designed to treat a serious or life-threatening condition that provides meaningful therapeutic benefit over available therapies upon a determination that the product candidate has an effect on a surrogate endpoint or intermediate clinical endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. The FDA considers a clinical benefit to be a positive therapeutic effect that is clinically meaningful in the context of a given disease, such as irreversible morbidity or mortality. For the purposes of accelerated approval, a surrogate endpoint is a marker, such as a laboratory measurement, radiographic image, physical sign, or other measure that is thought to predict clinical benefit, but is not itself a measure of clinical benefit. An intermediate clinical endpoint is a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. The accelerated approval pathway may be used in cases in which the advantage of a new drug over available therapy may not be a direct therapeutic advantage but is a clinically important improvement from a patient and public health perspective. If granted, accelerated approval is usually contingent on the sponsor’s agreement to conduct, in a diligent manner, additional post-approval confirmatory studies to verify and describe the drug’s clinical benefit. If such post-approval studies fail to confirm the drug’s clinical benefit, the FDA may withdraw its approval of the drug. The Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act reformed the accelerated approval pathway, such as requiring the FDA to specify conditions for post-approval study requirements and setting forth procedures for the FDA to withdraw a product on an expedited basis for non-compliance with post-approval requirements.

Current wording

Where possible, we plan to pursue accelerated development strategies in areas of high unmet need. We may seek an accelerated approval pathway for our one or more of our product candidates. Under the accelerated approval provisions in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and the FDA’s implementing regulations, the FDA may grant accelerated approval to a product candidate designed to treat a serious or life-threatening condition that provides meaningful therapeutic benefit over available therapies upon a determination that the product candidate has an effect on a surrogate endpoint or intermediate clinical endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. The FDA considers a clinical benefit to be a positive therapeutic effect that is clinically meaningful in the context of a given disease, such as irreversible morbidity or mortality. For the purposes of accelerated approval, a surrogate endpoint is a marker, such as a laboratory measurement, radiographic image, physical sign, or other measure that is thought to predict clinical benefit, but is not itself a measure of clinical benefit. An intermediate clinical endpoint is a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. The accelerated approval pathway may be used in cases in which the advantage of a new drug over available therapy may not be a direct therapeutic advantage but is a clinically important improvement from a patient and public health perspective. If granted, accelerated approval is usually contingent on the sponsor’s agreement to conduct, in a diligent manner, additional post-approval confirmatory studies to verify and describe the drug’s clinical benefit. If such post-approval studies fail to confirm the drug’s clinical benefit, the FDA may withdraw its approval of the drug. The Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act reformed the accelerated approval pathway, such as requiring the FDA to specify conditions for post-approval study requirements and

Previous wording

Existing regulatory policies may change, and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new

Current wording

Existing regulatory policies may change, and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained, and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

Previous wording

For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively, the ACA), was passed, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both the government and private insurers, and continues to significantly impact the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Since its enactment, there have been judicial and congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. In June 2021, the United States Supreme Court held that Texas and other challengers had no legal standing to challenge the ACA, dismissing the case without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Accordingly, the ACA remains in effect in its current form. It is unclear how this Supreme Court decision, future litigation, or healthcare measures promulgated by the Biden administration will impact our business, financial condition and results of operations. On January 28, 2021, the Biden administration issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace. The executive order also instructs certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the ACA. Complying with any new legislation or changes in healthcare regulation could be time-intensive and expensive, resulting in a material adverse effect on our business.

Current wording

For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively, the ACA), was passed, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both the government and private insurers, and continues to significantly impact the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Since its enactment, there have been judicial and congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. In June 2021, the United States Supreme Court held that Texas and other challengers had no legal standing to challenge the ACA, dismissing the case without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Accordingly, the ACA remains in effect in its current form. It is unclear how this Supreme Court decision, future litigation, or healthcare measures promulgated by the Biden administration will impact our business, financial condition and results of operations. On January 28, 2021, the Biden administration issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace. The executive order also instructs certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies

Previous wording

Moreover, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over the manner in which drug manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. For example, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 eliminated the statutory cap on Medicaid Drug Rebate Program rebates that manufacturers pay to state Medicaid programs. Elimination of this cap may require pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay more in rebates than it receives on the sale of products, which could have a material impact on our business. In July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, “Promoting Competition in the American Economy,” with multiple provisions aimed at increasing competition for prescription drugs. In August 2022, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which includes prescription drug provisions that have significant implications for the pharmaceutical industry and Medicare beneficiaries, including allowing the federal government to negotiate a

Current wording

Moreover, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over the manner in which drug manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. For example, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 eliminated the statutory cap on Medicaid Drug Rebate Program rebates that manufacturers pay to state Medicaid programs. Elimination of this cap may require pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay more in rebates than it receives on the sale of products, which could have a material impact on our business. In July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, “Promoting Competition in the American Economy,” with multiple provisions aimed at increasing competition for prescription drugs. In August 2022, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which includes prescription drug provisions that have significant implications for the pharmaceutical industry and Medicare beneficiaries, including allowing the federal government to negotiate a maximum fair price for certain high-priced single source Medicare drugs, imposing penalties and excise tax for manufacturers that fail to comply with the drug price negotiation requirements, requiring inflation rebates for all Medicare Part B and Part D drugs, with limited exceptions, if their drug prices increase faster than inflation, and redesigning Medicare Part D to reduce out-of-pocket prescription drug costs for beneficiaries, among other changes. Only high-expenditure single-source drugs that have been approved for at least 7 years (11 years for single-source biologics) can qualify for negotiation, with the negotiated price taking effect two years after the selection year. For 2026, CMS selected 10 high-cost Medicare Part D drugs in 2023 and the negotiated maximum fair price for each drug has been announced. CMS has selected 15 additional Medicare Part D drugs for negotiated maximum fair pricing in 2027. For 2028, up to an additional 15 drugs, which may be covered under either Medicare Part B or Part D, will be selected, and for 2029 and subsequent years, up to 20 additional Part B or Part D drugs will be selected. Various industry stakeholders, including pharmaceutical companies, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, have initiated lawsuits against the federal government asserting that the price negotiation provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act are unconstitutional. Further, the current administration has issued executive orders focused on decreasing prescription drug prices, including directing the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a mechanism through which American patients can buy …

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

Further, the UK has implemented legislation similar to the GDPR, referred to as the UK GDPR, which provides for fines of up to the greater of £17.5 million or 4% of global turnover. On June 28, 2021, the European Commission issued an adequacy decision in respect of the UK’s data protection framework, allowing personal data transfers from EU member states to the UK to continue without requiring additional contractual or other measures. This decision is subject to renewal and may be revisited by the European Commission at any time. The United Kingdom has proposed updates to its data protection framework that, if adopted, may impact the European Commission’s renewal decision. In the medium and longer terms, the relationship between the UK and EU in relation to aspects of data protection law remains unclear, which exposes us to further compliance risk. The UK also has issued its own standard contractual clauses that are required to be implemented. We may incur liabilities, expenses, costs, and other operational losses relating to the GDPR, the UK GDPR, and other laws and regulations in the EEA and UK relating to privacy and data protection, including those of applicable EU member states in connection with any measures we take to comply with them.

Current wording

Further, the UK has implemented legislation similar to the GDPR, referred to as the UK GDPR, which provides for fines of up to the greater of £17.5 million or 4% of global turnover. On June 28, 2021, the European Commission issued an adequacy decision in respect of the UK’s data protection framework, allowing personal data transfers from EU member states to the UK to continue without requiring additional contractual or other measures. This decision is subject to renewal and may be revisited by the European Commission at any time. The United Kingdom has implemented modifications to its data protection framework in the UK Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, which was enacted on June 19, 2025. These amendments may impact the European Commission’s decision with respect to its adequacy decision regarding the UK’s data protection regime. In the medium and longer terms, the relationship between the UK and EU in relation to aspects of data protection law remains unclear, which exposes us to further compliance risk. The UK also has issued its own standard contractual clauses that are required to be implemented. We may incur liabilities, expenses, costs, and other operational losses relating to the GDPR, the UK GDPR, and other laws and regulations in the EEA and UK relating to privacy and data protection, including those of applicable EU member states in connection with any measures we take to comply with them.

Previous wording

In the United States, a broad variety of data protection laws and regulations may apply to our activities such as state data breach notification laws, state personal data privacy laws (for example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA)), state health information privacy laws, and federal and state consumer protection laws. A range of enforcement agencies exist at both the state and federal levels that can enforce these laws and regulations. For example, the CCPA requires covered businesses that process personal information of California residents to disclose their data collection, use and sharing practices. Further, the CCPA provides California residents with certain data privacy rights (including the ability to opt out of certain disclosures of personal data), imposes operational requirements for covered businesses, provides for civil penalties for violations as well as a private right of action for data breaches and statutory damages (that is expected to increase data breach class action litigation and result in significant exposure to costly legal judgements and settlements). Aspects of the CCPA and its interpretation and enforcement remain uncertain. In addition, the CCPA was expanded on January 1, 2023, when the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (CPRA) became operative. The CPRA, among other things, gives California residents the ability to limit use of certain sensitive personal information, establishes restrictions on the retention of personal information, expand the types of data breaches subject to the CCPA’s private right of action, provides for increased penalties for CPRA violations concerning California residents under the age of 16, and establishes a California Privacy Protection Agency to implement and enforce the legislation. Although there are limited exemptions for clinical trial data under the CCPA, the CCPA and other similar laws could impact our business activities, depending on their interpretation. Additionally, other state legislatures have enacted or are currently contemplating, and may pass, their own data privacy and security laws, with potentially greater penalties and more rigorous compliance requirements relevant to our business. Many of these laws are comprehensive privacy statutes that impose obligations similar to the CCPA. For example, Colorado enacted a Colorado Privacy

Current wording

In the United States, a broad variety of data protection laws and regulations may apply to our activities such as state data breach notification laws, state personal data privacy laws (for example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA)), state health information privacy laws, and federal and state consumer protection laws. A range of enforcement agencies exist at both the state and federal levels that can enforce these laws and regulations. For example, the CCPA requires covered businesses that process personal information of California residents to disclose their data collection, use and sharing practices. Further, the CCPA provides California residents with certain data privacy rights (including the ability to opt out of certain disclosures of personal data), imposes operational requirements for covered businesses, provides for civil penalties for violations as well as a private right of action for data breaches and statutory damages (that is expected to increase data breach class action litigation and result in significant exposure to costly legal judgements and settlements). Aspects of the CCPA and its interpretation and enforcement remain uncertain. In addition, the CCPA was expanded on January 1, 2023, when the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (CPRA) became operative. The CPRA, among other things, gives California residents the ability to limit use of certain sensitive personal information, establishes restrictions on the retention of personal information, expand the types of data breaches subject to the CCPA’s private right of action, provides for increased penalties for CPRA violations concerning California residents under the age of 16, and establishes a California Privacy Protection Agency to implement and enforce the legislation. Although there are limited exemptions for clinical trial data under the CCPA, the CCPA and other similar laws could impact our business activities, depending on their interpretation. Additionally, other state legislatures have enacted or are currently contemplating, and may pass, their own data privacy and security laws, with potentially greater penalties and more rigorous compliance requirements relevant to our business. Many of these laws are comprehensive

Previous wording

Act (CPA) in June 2021 that went into effect on July 1, 2023, with enforcement commencing on the same date. The Colorado Attorney General released its rules implementing the CPA on March 15, 2023. Connecticut, Utah and Virginia have also enacted legislation similar to the CCPA and the CPA that took effect in 2023; Florida, Montana, Oregon and Texas have enacted similar legislation that took effect in 2024; Delaware, Iowa, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Nebraska and Tennessee have enacted similar legislation that has taken or will take effect in 2025; and Indiana, Kentucky and Rhode Island have enacted similar legislation that will take effect in 2026.

Current wording

privacy statutes that impose obligations similar to the CCPA. For example, Colorado enacted a Colorado Privacy Act (CPA) in June 2021 that went into effect on July 1, 2023, with enforcement commencing on the same date. The Colorado Attorney General released its rules implementing the CPA on March 15, 2023. Connecticut, Utah and Virginia have also enacted legislation similar to the CCPA and the CPA that took effect in 2023; Florida, Montana, Oregon and Texas have enacted similar legislation that took effect in 2024; Delaware, Iowa, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Nebraska and Tennessee have enacted similar legislation that has taken or will take effect in 2025; and Indiana, Kentucky and Rhode Island have enacted similar legislation that will take effect in 2026. The U.S. government also has instituted new rules, effective April 8, 2025, that prohibit or restrict transactions involving certain types and amounts of sensitive data between U.S. persons and foreign persons associated with specific countries of concern, including China. Among other things, these new rules require U.S. businesses to seek assurances from certain foreign parties with which they share sensitive data (under certain types of agreements) that those parties will not further share that data with parties in countries of concern.