Skip to main content

BridgeBio Pharma, Inc.

For the period ended Sep 30, 2026. Filed Oct 29, 2026.

View on SEC.gov

About this filing

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

Sep 30, 2026 · Filed Oct 29, 2026

BBIO$77.93+4.9%Stored close · as of Nov 9, 2026

What changed in Risk Factors?

Read the current filing

Previous report: 10-Q

Period ended 2026-06-30; filed 2026-08-10.

0001743881-26-000027

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Current report: 10-Q

Period ended 2026-09-30; filed 2026-10-29.

0001743881-26-000034

Item 1A. Risk Factors

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

Compared 615 previous paragraphs and 617 current paragraphs.

557 unchanged; 57 reworded; 3 added; 1 removed; 0 previous and 0 current paragraphs rearranged.

Tables are not compared: 0 previous and 0 current tables excluded. Dates, whitespace, punctuation and numbering changes are ignored; changes to financial figures remain significant.

A changed paragraph is not evidence that risk increased or decreased. An unchanged paragraph does not establish that risk stayed the same.

Added paragraphs (3)

Current report

Healthcare reform efforts have been and may continue to be subject to scrutiny and legal challenge. In 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the latest judicial challenge to the ACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. As another example, revisions to regulations under the federal anti-kickback statute would remove protection for traditional Medicare Part D discounts offered by pharmaceutical manufacturers to pharmacy benefit managers and health plans. Pursuant to court order, the removal was delayed and subsequent legislation imposed a moratorium on implementation of the rule until January 2032. The IRA drug price negotiation program has also been challenged in litigation filed by various pharmaceutical manufacturers and industry groups.

Current report

Individual states have also been increasingly active in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. In addition, regional health care authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other health care programs. We expect that additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, particularly in light of the current presidential administration, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services.

Current report

The costs of prescription pharmaceuticals have also been the subject of considerable discussion in the United States. To date, there have been several recent U.S. congressional inquiries, as well as proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, reduce the costs of drugs under Medicare and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products.
Removed paragraphs (1)

Previous report

Parties making claims against us may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation or administrative proceedings, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have material adverse effect on ability to raise additional funds or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.
Reworded paragraphs (57)

Previous wording

There have been, and likely will continue to be, legislative and regulatory proposals at the foreign, federal and state levels directed at containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize Attruby and Beyonttra and our product candidates, if approved. Such reforms could have an adverse effect on anticipated revenue from product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatory approval and may affect our overall financial condition and ability to develop product candidates. For example, the current administration is pursuing a two-fold strategy to reduce drug costs in the U.S. While it is unclear whether and how the current administration’s proposals will be implemented, these policies are likely to have a negative impact on the pharmaceutical industry and on our ability to receive adequate revenues for our products. The current administration published significant tariffs on certain pharmaceutical products and ingredients, effective in mid-2026, applying to companies that have not negotiated with the current administration to adopt pricing policies such as most-favored-nation pricing, which would tie the price for drugs in the U.S. to the lowest price in a group of other countries. On the other hand, the current administration is pursuing traditional regulatory pathways to impose drug pricing policies and published two proposed regulations in December 2025, referred to as GLOBE and GUARD. If finalized, these regulations would implement mandatory payment models under which manufacturers of eligible drugs would be required to pay rebates to the federal government on a portion of the units of their drugs that are reimbursed by Medicare, with the rebate amount based on most-favored-nation pricing. Imposing a rebate in the U.S. that is based on drug prices outside the U.S. would mark a drastic and unprecedented shift in the U.S. pharmaceutical market, and while the impact of the GLOBE and GUARD proposed regulations, if finalized, cannot yet be determined, it is likely to be significant depending on the final language. Even regulatory proposals or executive actions that are ultimately deemed unlawful could negatively impact the U.S. pharmaceutical sector and our business. We cannot predict the initiatives that may be adopted in the future. The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of healthcare and/or impose price controls may adversely affect:

Current wording

There have been, and likely will continue to be, legislative and regulatory proposals at the foreign, federal and state levels directed at containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize Attruby and Beyonttra and our product candidates, if approved. Such reforms could have an adverse effect on anticipated revenue from product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatory approval and may affect our overall financial condition and ability to develop product candidates. For example, the current administration is pursuing a range of strategies to reduce drug costs in the U.S., including voluntary most-favored-nation pricing agreements with manufacturers, the GENEROUS (GENErating cost Reductions fOr U.S. Medicaid) Model, a voluntary model that launched in January 2026, implementing most-favored-nation pricing in Medicaid, and pharmaceutical trade measures. The administration is also pursuing traditional regulatory pathways to impose drug pricing policies and published two proposed regulations in December 2025, the Global Benchmark for Efficient Drug Pricing (“GLOBE”) for Medicare Part B and the Guarding U.S. Medicare Against Rising Drug Costs (“GUARD”) for Medicare Part D. On October 2, 2026, CMS finalized the GLOBE regulation, effective November 30, 2026 and set to begin January 1, 2027, as a mandatory CMS Innovation Center payment model under Section 1115A of the Social Security Act. GUARD remains a proposed regulation that has not been finalized. GLOBE, along with GUARD, if finalized, implements a mandatory payment model under which manufacturers of eligible drugs would be required to pay rebates to the federal government on a portion of their units that are reimbursed by Medicare, with the rebate amount based on most-favored-nation pricing. Imposing a rebate in the U.S. that is based on drug prices outside the U.S. would mark a drastic and unprecedented shift in the U.S. pharmaceutical market, and while the impact of the GLOBE and GUARD regulations, if GUARD is finalized, cannot yet be fully determined, it is likely to be significant depending on the final language and whether any exemptions from the regulations apply. Even regulatory proposals or executive actions that are ultimately deemed unlawful could negatively impact the U.S. pharmaceutical sector and our business. We cannot predict the initiatives that may be adopted in the future. The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of healthcare and/or impose price controls may adversely affect:

Previous wording

On May 12, 2025, the current administration issued an executive order calling on pharmaceutical manufacturers to voluntarily reduce the prices of medicines in the U.S. and directing the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to communicate most-favored-nation (“MFN”) price targets to pharmaceutical manufacturers to align prices with those in comparably developed nations and, in the event significant progress towards MFN pricing is not delivered, to propose rulemaking to impose MFN pricing.

Current wording

The Trump Administration has issued executive orders and supported proposed regulatory initiatives in 2025 that could have a significant impact on the prices that we, or any collaborators, may receive for any approved products. On May 12, 2025, the current administration issued an executive order calling on pharmaceutical manufacturers to voluntarily reduce the prices of medicines in the U.S. and directing the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to communicate most-favored-nation (“MFN”) price targets to pharmaceutical manufacturers to align prices with those in comparably developed nations and, in the event significant progress towards MFN pricing is not delivered, to propose rulemaking to impose MFN pricing.

Previous wording

Since the May 12, 2025 order, the current administration has continued to exert pressure on drug manufacturers to implement MFN pricing, including by publishing tariffs, effective in mid-2026, that in part depend on whether manufacturers reach agreements with the administration to implement MFN pricing. Further, in November 2025, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) introduced the GENEROUS (GENErating cost Reductions fOr U.S. Medicaid) Model, a voluntary Medicaid payment initiative under which participating drug manufacturers may voluntarily offer supplemental rebates to participating state Medicaid programs that are intended to provide such Medicaid programs with an MFN price for the manufacturers’ products. Additionally, in December 2025, CMS announced proposals for new mandatory demonstration payment models through two proposed rules under its Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (“CMMI”) authority, the Global Benchmark for Efficient Drug Pricing (“GLOBE”) for Medicare Part B and Guarding U.S. Medicare Against Rising Drug Costs (“GUARD”) for Medicare Part D. If finalized, these models would impose additional mandatory rebates on manufacturers of certain Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D drugs, for select Medicare populations intended to represent 25% of Medicare patients, if the Medicare prices for such products exceed those paid in economically comparable countries. Both the GLOBE and GUARD models have proposed seven-year testing periods, with the GLOBE model proposed to begin on October 1, 2026 and the GUARD model proposed to begin on January 1, 2027.

Current wording

Since the May 12, 2025 order, the current administration has continued to exert pressure on drug manufacturers to implement MFN pricing, including by encouraging manufacturers to enter into voluntary MFN agreements and implementing trade measures. In August 2026, we entered into a voluntary MFN agreement with the Administration, which will expand state Medicaid access to Attruby via the GENEROUS Model. We expect any pricing commitment for future medicines under the agreement to exclude medicines approved exclusively for orphan indications. If under the MFN agreement, or subject to other policy developments, our currently marketed or future medicines become subject to additional MFN pricing obligations, this may affect our pricing and commercialization strategies. Further, in November 2025, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) introduced the GENEROUS Model, a voluntary Medicaid payment initiative under which participating drug manufacturers may voluntarily offer supplemental rebates to participating state Medicaid programs that are intended to provide such Medicaid programs with an MFN price for the manufacturers’ products. The GENEROUS Model launched in January 2026, and CMS has announced that all state Medicaid programs, along with the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, have applied to participate in the model. Additionally, in December 2025, CMS announced proposals for new mandatory demonstration payment models through two proposed rules under its Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (“CMMI”) authority, the GLOBE for Medicare Part B and the GUARD for Medicare Part D. On October 2, 2026, CMS finalized the GLOBE regulation, effective November 30, 2026, as a mandatory CMS Innovation Center payment model under Section 1115A of the Social Security Act. As finalized, GLOBE will require manufacturers of specified single source drugs and sole source biologics, within designated therapeutic classes and that have incurred more than $100.0 million of Medicare Part B spending over a 12-month period, to pay incremental rebates based on an alternative, internationally benchmarked calculation of the existing Medicare Part B drug inflation rebate. The GLOBE model will begin on January 1, 2027 with the collection of voluntary manufacturer-submitted international drug net pricing data, and will be tested over five performance years, running from April 1, 2027 through March 31, 2032. The associated payment period will run from April 1, 2027 through March 31, 2034. GLOBE excludes orphan-only drugs, cell and gene therapy products, plasma-derived products, and drugs with an effective Medicare-negotiated maximum fair price. GUARD remains a proposed regulation that has not been finalized and, as proposed, would similarly mandate manufacturer rebates for qualifying sole source drugs where the Medicare net price exceeds an MFN benchmark derived from international reference pricing methodologies, with its performance period proposed to begin in …

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

If the GLOBE and GUARD models are finalized as proposed under CMMI authority, we could be required to pay additional rebates on products reimbursed by Medicare for the covered populations during the applicable model periods. In addition, if MFN pricing or similar reference pricing policies are enacted or implemented in the U.S. outside of the CMMI framework and applied more broadly, we could be required to pay rebates on products utilization by a broader portion of U.S. patients to align with prices in certain reference countries. We currently derive the substantial portion of our revenue from U.S. sales, and any requirement to pay additional rebates in the U.S. to match international reference prices would impact our overall net product revenue.

Current wording

If the GLOBE model is implemented as finalized and the GUARD model is finalized as proposed under CMMI authority and if exemptions do not apply to our products, we could be required to pay additional rebates on products reimbursed by Medicare for the covered populations during the applicable model periods. In addition, if MFN pricing or similar reference pricing policies are enacted or implemented in the U.S. outside of the CMMI framework and applied more broadly, we could be required to pay rebates on product utilization by a broader portion of U.S. patients to align with prices in certain reference countries. We currently derive the substantial portion of our revenue from U.S. sales, and any requirement to pay additional rebates in the U.S. to match international reference prices would impact our overall net product revenue.

Previous wording

MFN pricing models in the U.S. could also affect our international pricing strategy and future decisions on reimbursement and commercialization in certain jurisdictions. If our U.S. pricing becomes tied to international reference prices, especially in light of our licensing agreements with Bayer and Alexion, we may face decisions regarding pricing in foreign markets that could result in reduced patient access internationally, affect our relationships with foreign regulatory authorities and payers, or impact our ability to obtain or maintain reimbursement approvals in ex-U.S. markets. These reforms remain subject to change, potential legal challenges, or expansion through additional rulemaking or sub regulatory guidance, creating uncertainty for our overall pricing strategy. It remains to be seen whether and how these drug pricing initiatives will apply to our products, how they will affect the broader pharmaceutical industry, and whether similar reform measures may be adopted in the future.

Current wording

MFN pricing models in the U.S. could also affect our international pricing strategy and future decisions on reimbursement and commercialization in certain jurisdictions. If our U.S. pricing becomes tied to international reference prices, especially in light of our licensing agreements with Bayer and Alexion, we may face decisions regarding pricing in foreign markets that could result in reduced patient access internationally, affect our relationships with foreign regulatory authorities and payers, or impact our ability to obtain or maintain reimbursement approvals in ex-U.S. markets. The GLOBE model and the proposed GUARD model remain subject to potential legal challenges, and the proposed GUARD model remains subject to change, potential finalization, or expansion through additional rulemaking or sub regulatory guidance, creating uncertainty for our overall pricing strategy. It remains to be seen whether and how these drug pricing initiatives will apply to our products, how they will affect the broader pharmaceutical industry, and whether similar reform measures may be adopted in the future.

Previous wording

We face competition in the U.S. for Attruby and may face competition for our product candidates if approved, from therapies sourced from foreign countries that have placed price controls on pharmaceutical products. In the U.S., the Medicare Modernization Act contains provisions that may change U.S. importation laws and expand pharmacists’ and wholesalers’ ability to import cheaper versions of an approved drug and competing products from Canada, where there are government price controls. The FDA also issued a final guidance document outlining a pathway for manufacturers to obtain an additional National Drug Code (“NDC”) for an FDA-approved drug that was originally intended to be marketed in a foreign country and that was authorized for sale in that foreign country. See the section titled, “Business-Government Regulation-Current and Future Legislation” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025 filed with the SEC on February 24, 2026 for more information regarding legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system directed at broadening the availability of healthcare, improving the quality of healthcare, and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. If certain of these changes are implemented, importation of drugs from Canada may materially and adversely affect the price we receive for any of our product candidates. The regulatory and market implications of the final rule and guidance are unknown at this time. Proponents of drug reimportation may attempt to pass legislation that would directly allow reimportation under certain circumstances. Legislation or regulations allowing the reimportation of drugs, if enacted, could decrease the price we receive for any products that we may develop and adversely affect our future revenues and prospects for profitability. We will continue to monitor developments and their potential effect on our business.

Current wording

We face competition in the U.S. for Attruby and may face competition for our product candidates if approved, from therapies sourced from foreign countries that have placed price controls on pharmaceutical products. In the U.S., the Medicare Modernization Act contains provisions that may change U.S. importation laws and expand pharmacists’ and wholesalers’ ability to import lower priced versions of an approved drug and competing products from Canada, where there are government price controls. The FDA also issued a final guidance document outlining a pathway for manufacturers to obtain an additional National Drug Code (“NDC”) for an FDA-approved drug that was originally intended to be marketed in a foreign country and that was authorized for sale in that foreign country. See the section titled, “Business - Government Regulation - Current and Future Legislation” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025 filed with the SEC on February 24, 2026 for more information regarding legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system directed at broadening the availability of healthcare, improving the quality of healthcare, and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. If certain of these changes are implemented, importation of drugs from Canada may materially and adversely affect the price we receive for any of our product candidates. The regulatory and market implications of the final rule and guidance are unknown at this time. Proponents of drug reimportation may attempt to pass legislation that would directly allow reimportation under certain circumstances. Legislation or regulations allowing the reimportation of drugs, if enacted, could decrease the price we receive for any products that we may develop and adversely affect our future revenues and prospects for profitability. We will continue to monitor developments and their potential effect on our business.

Previous wording

Many of our current or potential competitors, either alone or with their strategic partners, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, and marketing approved products than we do.

Current wording

Many of our current or potential competitors, either alone or with their strategic partners, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, nonclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, and marketing approved products than we do.

Previous wording

•inability to generate sufficient preclinical, toxicology or otherin vivo orin vitro data to support the initiation or continuation of clinical trials;

Current wording

•inability to generate sufficient nonclinical, toxicology or otherin vivo orin vitro data to support the initiation or continuation of clinical trials;

Previous wording

•delays in confirming target engagement, patient selection or other relevant biomarkers to be utilized in preclinical and clinical product candidate development;

Current wording

•delays in confirming target engagement, patient selection or other relevant biomarkers to be utilized in nonclinical and clinical product candidate development;

Previous wording

•delays in clinical trial enrollment or clinical trial initiation resulting from any global health emergency, such as the COVID-19 pandemic;

Current wording

•delays in clinical trial enrollment or clinical trial initiation resulting from any global health emergency;

Previous wording

We could also encounter delays if an ongoing or planned clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the data safety monitoring board (“DSMB”), or by the FDA or other regulatory authority, or if the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted suspend or terminate the participation of their clinical investigators and sites subject to their review. Such authorities may suspend or terminate a clinical trial due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a product candidate, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. We have in the past received, and may receive in the future, partial or full clinical hold notices from the FDA or other regulatory authorities, which have required, and may in the future require, us to conduct additional studies, generate additional data, amend our clinical trial protocols and/or delay or halt the initiation or continuation of our clinical trials. We may be required or may voluntarily determine to place one or more of our product candidates on clinical hold in the future for various reasons, which could delay or otherwise impair our clinical development efforts and ability to obtain regulatory approval for any such product candidate. Additionally, the FDA may determine, upon review of an IND submission, that we have not provided sufficient information needed to assess the risks to subjects of the proposed studies, or that our IND submission is otherwise insufficient to support initiation of a clinical trial. There is no guarantee that the FDA will agree that our responses are sufficient, and we may be required to conduct additional preclinical studies or manufacturing steps before the FDA allows our proposed clinical trials to proceed.

Current wording

We could also encounter delays if an ongoing or planned clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the data safety monitoring board (“DSMB”), or by the FDA or other regulatory authority, or if the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted suspend or terminate the participation of their clinical investigators and sites subject to their review. Such authorities may suspend or terminate a clinical trial due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a product candidate, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. We have in the past received, and may receive in the future, partial or full clinical hold notices from the FDA or other regulatory authorities, which have required, and may in the future require, us to conduct additional studies, generate additional data, amend our clinical trial protocols and/or delay or halt the initiation or continuation of our clinical trials. We may be required or may voluntarily determine to place one or more of our product candidates on clinical hold in the future for various reasons, which could delay or otherwise impair our clinical development efforts and ability to obtain regulatory approval for any such product candidate. Additionally, the FDA may determine, upon review of an IND submission, that we have not provided sufficient information needed to assess the risks to subjects of the proposed studies, or that our IND submission is otherwise insufficient to support initiation of a clinical trial. There is no guarantee that the FDA will agree that our responses are sufficient, and we may be required to conduct additional nonclinical studies or manufacturing steps before the FDA allows our proposed clinical trials to proceed.

Previous wording

The results of nonclinical and preclinical studies and clinical trials may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials, and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. In addition, for certain of our product candidates that we acquired, we did not undertake the preclinical studies and clinical trials ourselves. The results of preclinical studies and clinical trials in one set of patients or disease indications, or from preclinical studies or clinical trials that we did not lead, may not be predictive of those obtained in another. In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety or efficacy results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial procedures set forth in protocols, differences in the size and type of the patient populations, changes in and adherence to the dosing regimen and other clinical trial protocols and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. In addition, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to various interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy profile despite having progressed through nonclinical studies and initial clinical trials. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, despite promising results in earlier studies, and we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. Even if early-stage clinical trials are successful, we may need to conduct additional clinical trials of our product candidates in additional patient populations or under different treatment conditions before we are able to seek approvals from the FDA and regulatory authorities outside the U.S. to market and sell these product candidates. Our failure to obtain marketing approval for our product candidates for commercially viable indications, or at all, would substantially harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Current wording

The results of nonclinical studies and clinical trials may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials, and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. In addition, for certain of our product candidates that we acquired, we did not undertake the nonclinical studies and clinical trials ourselves. The results of nonclinical studies and clinical trials in one set of patients or disease indications, or from nonclinical studies or clinical trials that we did not lead, may not be predictive of those obtained in another. In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety or efficacy results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial procedures set forth in protocols, differences in the size and type of the patient populations, changes in and adherence to the dosing regimen and other clinical trial protocols and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. In addition, nonclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to various interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in nonclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy profile despite having progressed through nonclinical studies and initial clinical trials. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, despite promising results in earlier studies, and we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. Even if early-stage clinical trials are successful, we may need to conduct additional clinical trials of our product candidates in additional patient populations or under different treatment conditions before we are able to seek approvals from the FDA and regulatory authorities outside the U.S. to market and sell these product candidates. Our failure to obtain marketing approval for our product candidates for commercially viable indications, or at all, would substantially harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Previous wording

Moreover, if our product candidates are associated with undesirable side effects in preclinical studies or clinical trials or have characteristics that are unexpected, we may elect to abandon their development or limit their 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, which may limit the commercial expectations for the product candidate if approved. We may also be required to modify or terminate our study plans based on findings in our preclinical studies or clinical trials. AEs that we may observe in our ongoing and future preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates could require us to delay, modify or abandon our development plans for the affected product candidate or other product candidates that share properties of the affected product candidate. Many product candidates that initially show promise in early-stage testing may later be found to cause side effects that prevent further development. As we work to advance existing product candidates and to identify new product candidates, we cannot be certain that later testing or trials of product candidates that initially showed promise in early testing will not be found to cause similar or different unacceptable side effects that prevent their further development.

Current wording

Moreover, if our product candidates are associated with undesirable side effects in nonclinical studies or clinical trials or have characteristics that are unexpected, we may elect to abandon their development or limit their 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, which may limit the commercial expectations for the product candidate if approved. We may also be required to modify or terminate our study plans based on findings in our nonclinical studies or clinical trials. AEs that we may observe in our ongoing and future nonclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates could require us to delay, modify or abandon our development plans for the affected product candidate or other product candidates that share properties of the affected product candidate. Many product candidates that initially show promise in early-stage testing may later be found to cause side effects that prevent further development. As we work to advance existing product candidates and to identify new product candidates, we cannot be certain that later testing or trials of product candidates that initially showed promise in early testing will not be found to cause similar or different unacceptable side effects that prevent their further development.

Previous wording

Additionally, if any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, the FDA could impose a boxed warning in the labeling of our product and could require us to adopt a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (“REMS”), and could apply elements to assure safe use to ensure that the benefits of the product outweigh its risks, which may include, among other things, a Medication Guide outlining the risks of the product for distribution to patients and a communication plan to health care practitioners. Furthermore, if we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates once approved, several potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Current wording

Additionally, if any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, the FDA could impose a boxed warning in the labeling of our product and could require us to adopt a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (“REMS”), and could apply elements to assure safe use to ensure that the benefits of the product outweigh its risks, which may include, among other things, a Medication Guide outlining the risks of the product for distribution to patients and a communication plan to healthcare practitioners. Furthermore, if we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates once approved, several potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Previous wording

From time to time, we have and may in the future publish or report preliminary, interim or topline data from our clinical trials, such as the release of our topline results for our Phase 3 study of encaleret in autosomal dominant hypocalcemia type 1. Preliminary, interim or topline data from clinical trials may not be indicative of the final results of the trial and are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and/or more patient data become available. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trial, and favorable data from interim analysis do not ensure the final results of a trial will be favorable. Preliminary, interim or topline data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary, interim or topline data we previously published. As a result, preliminary, interim or topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Material adverse changes between preliminary, interim or topline data and final data could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Current wording

From time to time, we have and may in the future publish or report preliminary, interim or topline data from our clinical trials, such as the release of our topline results from PROPEL 3, our Phase 3 study of oral infigratinib in children with achondroplasia. Preliminary, interim or topline data from clinical trials may not be indicative of the final results of the trial and are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and/or more patient data become available. The results of nonclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trial, and favorable data from interim analysis do not ensure the final results of a trial will be favorable. Preliminary, interim or topline data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary, interim or topline data we previously published. As a result, preliminary, interim or topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Material adverse changes between preliminary, interim or topline data and final data could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Previous wording

Although we have obtained marketing authorization for Attruby, we have multiple product candidates in our development pipeline that are still in preclinical or clinical development, which is a lengthy and expensive process with uncertain outcomes and the potential for substantial delays. We cannot give any assurance that any of our pipeline product candidates will receive regulatory approval, which is necessary before they can be commercialized.

Current wording

Although we have obtained marketing authorization for Attruby, we have multiple product candidates in our development pipeline that are still in nonclinical or clinical development, which is a lengthy and expensive process with uncertain outcomes and the potential for substantial delays. We cannot give any assurance that any of our pipeline product candidates will receive regulatory approval, which is necessary before they can be commercialized.

Previous wording

Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of our product candidates, we must conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product candidates in humans. We cannot be certain that any clinical trials will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. Our inability to successfully complete preclinical and clinical development could result in additional costs to us and negatively impact our ability to generate revenue. Our future success is dependent on our ability to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for, and then successfully commercialize product candidates.

Current wording

Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of our product candidates, we must conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product candidates in humans. We cannot be certain that any clinical trials will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. Our inability to successfully complete nonclinical and clinical development could result in additional costs to us and negatively impact our ability to generate revenue. Our future success is dependent on our ability to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for, and then successfully commercialize product candidates.

Previous wording

Our product candidates require additional development; management of preclinical, clinical and manufacturing activities; and regulatory approval. In addition, we will need to obtain adequate manufacturing supply; complete the build-out of a commercial organization; commence product candidate-specific marketing efforts; and obtain reimbursement before we generate any significant revenue from commercial product sales from such product candidates, if ever. Some of our product candidates are in early-stage research or translational phases of development, and the risk of failure for these programs is high. We cannot be certain that our product candidates will be successful in clinical trials or receive regulatory approval. Further, our product candidates may not receive regulatory approval even if they are successful in clinical trials. If we are not able to successfully commercialize an approved drug or if we do not receive additional regulatory approvals for our product candidates, we and our subsidiaries may not be able to continue operations, which may result in us winding down and dissolving the subsidiary, selling or out-licensing the technology or pursuing an alternative strategy.

Current wording

Our product candidates require additional development; management of nonclinical, clinical and manufacturing activities; and regulatory approval. In addition, we will need to obtain adequate manufacturing supply; complete the build-out of a commercial organization; commence product candidate-specific marketing efforts; and obtain reimbursement before we generate any significant revenue from commercial product sales from such product candidates, if ever. Some of our product candidates are in early-stage research or translational phases of development, and the risk of failure for these programs is high. We cannot be certain that our product candidates will be successful in clinical trials or receive regulatory approval. Further, our product candidates may not receive regulatory approval even if they are successful in clinical trials. If we are not able to successfully commercialize an approved drug or if we do not receive additional regulatory approvals for our product candidates, we and our subsidiaries may not be able to continue operations, which may result in us winding down and dissolving the subsidiary, selling or out-licensing the technology or pursuing an alternative strategy.

Previous wording

We cannot commercialize a product until the appropriate regulatory authorities have reviewed and approved the product candidate. Approval by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities is lengthy and unpredictable, and depends upon numerous factors, including substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. Approval policies, regulations or the type and amount of nonclinical or clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s development and may vary among jurisdictions, which may cause delays in the approval or the decision not to approve an application. In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court’s July 2024 decision to overturn prior established case law giving deference to regulatory agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous statutory language has introduced uncertainty regarding the extent to which the FDA’s regulations, policies and decisions may become subject to increasing legal challenges, delays, and/or changes. It is possible that our current product candidates and any other product candidates which we may seek to develop in the future will not ever obtain regulatory approval. Although Attruby and Beyonttra received regulatory approval for commercial sale in the U.S., EU, UK and Japan, we cannot be certain that any of our product candidates will receive regulatory approval or if approved, will be successfully commercialized.

Current wording

We cannot commercialize a product until the appropriate regulatory authorities have reviewed and approved the product candidate. Approval by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities is lengthy and unpredictable, and depends upon numerous factors, including substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. Approval policies, regulations or the type and amount of nonclinical or clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s development and may vary among jurisdictions, which may cause delays in the approval or the decision not to approve an application. In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court’s July 2024 decision to overturn prior established case law giving deference to regulatory agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous statutory language has introduced uncertainty regarding the extent to which the FDA’s regulations, policies and decisions may become subject to increasing legal challenges, delays, and/or changes. It is possible that our current product candidates and any other product candidates which we may seek to develop in the future will not ever obtain regulatory approval. Although Attruby and Beyonttra received regulatory approval for commercial sale in the U.S., EU, UK, Brazil, Australia and Japan, we cannot be certain that any of our product candidates will receive regulatory approval or if approved, will be successfully commercialized.

Previous wording

•the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require additional preclinical studies or clinical trials beyond those that we currently anticipate;

Current wording

•the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require additional nonclinical studies or clinical trials beyond those that we currently anticipate;

Previous wording

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive nonclinical studies, preclinical studies and clinical trials that the applicable product candidate is both safe and effective for use in each target indication, and in the case of our product candidates regulated as biological products, that the product candidate is safe, pure, and potent for use in its targeted indication. Each product candidate must demonstrate an adequate risk versus benefit profile in its intended patient population and for its intended use.

Current wording

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive nonclinical studies, and clinical trials that the applicable product candidate is both safe and effective for use in each target indication, and in the case of our product candidates regulated as biological products, that the product candidate is safe, pure, and potent for use in its targeted indication. Each product candidate must demonstrate an adequate risk versus benefit profile in its intended patient population and for its intended use.

Previous wording

We cannot be certain that our current clinical trials or any other future clinical trials will be successful. Additionally, any safety concerns observed in any one of our clinical trials in our targeted indications could limit the prospects for regulatory approval of our product candidates in those and other indications, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, even if such clinical trials are successfully completed, we cannot guarantee that the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will interpret the results as we do, and more trials could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval. Success in clinical trials in a particular indication does not ensure that a product candidate will be successful in other indications. Similarly, approval of a product candidate in a particular indication does not ensure that that the product candidate will be successful in other indications. Moreover, results acceptable to support approval in one jurisdiction may be deemed inadequate by another regulatory authority to support regulatory approval in that other jurisdiction. To the extent that the results of the trials are not satisfactory to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for support of a marketing application, we may be required to expend significant resources, which may not be available to us, to conduct additional trials in support of potential approval of our product candidates. Even if regulatory approval is secured for a product candidate, the terms of such approval may limit the scope and use of the specific product candidate, which may also limit its commercial potential.

Current wording

We cannot be certain that our current clinical trials or any other future clinical trials will be successful. Additionally, any safety concerns observed in any one of our clinical trials in our targeted indications could limit the prospects for regulatory approval of our product candidates in those and other indications, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, even if such clinical trials are successfully completed, we cannot guarantee that the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will interpret the results as we do, and more trials could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval. Success in clinical trials in a particular indication does not ensure that a product candidate will be successful in other indications. Similarly, approval of a product candidate in a particular indication does not ensure that the product candidate will be successful in other indications. Moreover, results acceptable to support approval in one jurisdiction may be deemed inadequate by another regulatory authority to support regulatory approval in that other jurisdiction. To the extent that the results of the trials are not satisfactory to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for support of a marketing application, we may be required to expend significant resources, which may not be available to us, to conduct additional trials in support of potential approval of our product candidates. Even if regulatory approval is secured for a product candidate, the terms of such approval may limit the scope and use of the specific product candidate, which may also limit its commercial potential.

Previous wording

We have conducted and plan to conduct clinical trials outside the U.S., including in Europe. The acceptance by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority of study data from clinical trials conducted outside the U.S. or another jurisdiction may be subject to certain conditions or may not be accepted at all. In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the basis for marketing approval in the U.S., the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (i) the data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice; (ii) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to GCP regulations; and (iii) the data may be considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA or, if the FDA considers such as inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. Additionally, the FDA’s clinical trial requirements, including sufficient size of patient populations and statistical powering, must be met. Many foreign regulatory authorities have similar approval requirements. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the U.S. or the applicable jurisdiction, and the FDA has discussed proposals to increase user fees for marketing applications containing certain foreign clinical data. If the FDA or any comparable 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 product candidates that we may develop not receiving approval or clearance for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.

Current wording

We have conducted and plan to conduct clinical trials outside the U.S., including in Europe. The acceptance by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority of study data from clinical trials conducted outside the U.S. or another jurisdiction may be subject to certain conditions or may not be accepted at all. In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the basis for marketing approval in the U.S., the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (i) the data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice; (ii) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to GCP regulations; and (iii) the data may be considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA or, if the FDA considers such as inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. Additionally, the FDA’s clinical trial requirements, including sufficient size of patient populations and statistical powering, must be met. Many foreign regulatory authorities have similar approval requirements. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the U.S. or the applicable jurisdiction, and the FDA has discussed proposals to increase user fees for marketing applications containing certain foreign clinical data. In addition, the FDA recently signaled increased scrutiny of foreign clinical trial data submitted in support of marketing applications, indicating plans for increased foreign site inspections and increased transparency of inspection results. If the FDA or any comparable 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 product candidates that we may develop not receiving approval or clearance for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.

Previous wording

In order to market any products outside of the U.S., we must establish and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries regarding safety and effectiveness. Clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and regulatory approval in one country does not mean that regulatory approval will be obtained in any other country. Approval processes vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and validation and additional or different administrative review periods from those in the U.S., including additional preclinical studies or clinical trials, as clinical trials conducted in one jurisdiction may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions. In many jurisdictions outside the U.S., a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that jurisdiction. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for our products, once approved is also subject to approval.

Current wording

In order to market any products outside of the U.S., we must establish and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries regarding safety and effectiveness. Clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and regulatory approval in one country does not mean that regulatory approval will be obtained in any other country. Approval processes vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and validation and additional or different administrative review periods from those in the U.S., including additional nonclinical studies or clinical trials, as clinical trials conducted in one jurisdiction may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions. In many jurisdictions outside the U.S., a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that jurisdiction. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for our products, once approved is also subject to approval.

Previous wording

Seeking foreign regulatory approval could result in difficulties and costs and require additional nonclinical studies or clinical trials which could be costly and time-consuming. Regulatory requirements can vary widely from country to country and could delay or prevent the introduction of our product candidates in those countries. The foreign regulatory approval process may include all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA approval. While we previously had two products approved for sale in the U.S., we do not have any product candidates approved for sale in international markets, and we have only limited experience in obtaining regulatory approval in international markets. If we fail to comply with regulatory requirements in international markets or to obtain and maintain required approvals, or if regulatory approval in international markets is delayed, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of any approved products will be harmed.

Current wording

Seeking and maintaining foreign regulatory approval could result in difficulties and costs and require additional nonclinical studies or clinical trials which could be costly and time-consuming. Regulatory requirements can vary widely from country to country and could delay or prevent the introduction of our product candidates in those countries. The foreign regulatory approval process may include all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA approval. While we previously had two products approved for sale in the U.S., we only have one product approved for sale in international markets, and we have only limited experience in obtaining regulatory approval in international markets. If we fail to comply with regulatory requirements in international markets or to obtain and maintain required approvals, or if regulatory approval in international markets is delayed, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of any approved products will be harmed.

Previous wording

The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2026 reauthorized the FDA’s authority to award priority review vouchers to sponsors of new products intended to treat rare pediatric diseases through September 30, 2029. Under current law, after September 30, 2029, the FDA may not award any rare pediatric disease priority review vouchers, although the FDA’s authority to do so could be extended by Congress in the future.

Current wording

The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2026 reauthorized the FDA’s authority to award priority review vouchers to sponsors of new products intended to treat rare pediatric diseases through September 30, 2029. Under current law, after September 30, 2029, the FDA may not award any rare pediatric disease priority review vouchers, although the FDA’s authority to do so could be extended by Congress in the future. Accordingly, there is no guarantee that we will be granted PRVs for any of our existing or future product candidates.

Previous wording

We may seek approval of our product candidates using the FDA’s accelerated approval pathway. This pathway may not lead to a faster development, regulatory review or approval process and does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval. A product may be eligible for accelerated approval if it treats a serious or life-threatening condition, generally provides a meaningful advantage over available therapies, and demonstrates an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require that a sponsor of a product receiving accelerated approval perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing confirmatory clinical trials. These confirmatory trials must be completed with due diligence. Under the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act of 2022 (“FDORA”), the FDA is permitted to require, as appropriate, that a post-approval confirmatory trial or trials be underway prior to approval or within a specified time period after the date accelerated approval was granted. FDORA also requires sponsors to send updates to the FDA every 180 days on the status of such studies, including progress toward enrollment targets, and the FDA must promptly post this information publicly. Furthermore, under FDORA, the FDA is empowered to take action, such as issuing fines, against companies that fail to conduct with due diligence any post-approval confirmatory trial or submit timely reports to the agency on their progress. In addition, for products under consideration for accelerated approval, the FDA currently requires, unless otherwise requested by the agency, pre-approval of promotional materials prior to dissemination or publication, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product. Thus, even if we seek to utilize the accelerated approval pathway, we may not be able to obtain accelerated approval and, even if we do, we may not experience a faster development, regulatory review or approval process for that product. In addition, receiving accelerated approval does not assure that the product’s accelerated approval will eventually be converted to a traditional approval.

Current wording

We may seek approval of our product candidates using the FDA’s accelerated approval pathway. This pathway may not lead to a faster development, regulatory review or approval process and does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval. A product may be eligible for accelerated approval if it treats a serious or life-threatening condition, generally provides a meaningful advantage over available therapies, and demonstrates an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require that a sponsor of a product receiving accelerated approval perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing confirmatory clinical trials. These confirmatory trials must be completed with due diligence. Under the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act of 2022 (“FDORA”), the FDA is permitted to require, as appropriate, that a post-approval confirmatory trial or trials be underway prior to approval or within a specified time period after the date accelerated approval was granted. FDORA also requires sponsors to send updates to the FDA every 180 days on the status of such studies, including progress toward enrollment targets, and the FDA must promptly post this information publicly. Furthermore, under FDORA, the FDA is empowered to take action, such as issuing fines, against companies that fail to conduct with due diligence any post-approval confirmatory trial or submit timely reports to the agency on their progress. In addition, for products under consideration for accelerated approval, the FDA currently requires, unless otherwise requested by the agency, pre-approval of promotional materials prior to dissemination or publication, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product. Thus, even if we seek to utilize the accelerated approval pathway, we may not be able to obtain accelerated approval and, even if we do, we may not experience a faster development or regulatory review or approval process for that product. In addition, receiving accelerated approval does not assure that the product’s accelerated approval will eventually be converted to a traditional approval.

Previous wording

We may rely on third parties for the design, development and manufacture of companion diagnostic tests for our therapeutic product candidates that may require such tests. If we enter into such collaborative agreements, we will be dependent on the sustained cooperation and effort of our future collaborators in developing and obtaining approval for these companion diagnostics. It may be necessary to resolve issues such as selectivity/specificity, analytical validation, reproducibility, or clinical validation of companion diagnostics during the development and regulatory approval processes. Moreover, even if data from preclinical studies and early clinical trials appear to support development of a companion diagnostic for a product candidate, data generated in later clinical trials may fail to support the analytical and clinical validation of the companion diagnostic. We and our future collaborators may encounter difficulties in developing, obtaining regulatory approval for, manufacturing and commercializing companion diagnostics similar to those we face with respect to our therapeutic candidates and therapeutics themselves, including issues with achieving regulatory clearance or approval, production of sufficient quantities at commercial scale and with appropriate quality standards, and in gaining market acceptance. If we are unable to successfully develop companion diagnostics for these therapeutic product candidates, or experience delays in doing so, the development of these therapeutic product candidates may be adversely affected, these therapeutic product candidates may not obtain marketing approval, and we may not realize the full commercial potential of any of these therapeutics that have or may obtain marketing approval. As a result, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially harmed. In addition, a diagnostic company with whom we contract may decide to discontinue selling or manufacturing the companion diagnostic test that we anticipate using in connection with development and commercialization of our product candidates or our relationship with such diagnostic company may otherwise terminate. We may not be able to enter into arrangements with another diagnostic company to obtain supplies of an alternative diagnostic test for use in connection with the development and commercialization of our product candidates or do so on commercially reasonable terms, which could adversely affect and/or delay the development or commercialization of our therapeutic candidates.

Current wording

We may rely on third parties for the design, development and manufacture of companion diagnostic tests for our therapeutic product candidates that may require such tests. If we enter into such collaborative agreements, we will be dependent on the sustained cooperation and effort of our future collaborators in developing and obtaining approval for these companion diagnostics. It may be necessary to resolve issues such as selectivity/specificity, analytical validation, reproducibility, or clinical validation of companion diagnostics during the development and regulatory approval processes. Moreover, even if data from nonclinical studies and early clinical trials appear to support development of a companion diagnostic for a product candidate, data generated in later clinical trials may fail to support the analytical and clinical validation of the companion diagnostic. We and our future collaborators may encounter difficulties in developing, obtaining regulatory approval for, manufacturing and commercializing companion diagnostics similar to those we face with respect to our therapeutic candidates and therapeutics themselves, including issues with achieving regulatory clearance or approval, production of sufficient quantities at commercial scale and with appropriate quality standards, and in gaining market acceptance. If we are unable to successfully develop companion diagnostics for these therapeutic product candidates, or experience delays in doing so, the development of these therapeutic product candidates may be adversely affected, these therapeutic product candidates may not obtain marketing approval, and we may not realize the full commercial potential of any of these therapeutics that have or may obtain marketing approval. As a result, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially harmed. In addition, a diagnostic company with whom we contract may decide to discontinue selling or manufacturing the companion diagnostic test that we anticipate using in connection with development and commercialization of our product candidates or our relationship with such diagnostic company may otherwise terminate. We may not be able to enter into arrangements with another diagnostic company to obtain supplies of an alternative diagnostic test for use in connection with the development and commercialization of our product candidates or do so on commercially reasonable terms, which could adversely affect and/or delay the development or commercialization of our therapeutic candidates.

Previous wording

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively, the “ACA”), includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”), which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed. During this 12-year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a BLA for the competing product containing the sponsor’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity, and potency of the other company’s product.

Current wording

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively, the “ACA”), includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”), which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed. During this 12-year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a BLA for the competing product containing the sponsor’s own nonclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity, and potency of the other company’s product.

Previous wording

•our ability to initiate and conduct our preclinical studies and clinical trials for our product candidates, and otherwise progress our business could be materially and adversely impacted if our single-source suppliers upon which we rely were to experience any significant business challenges, disruption or failures due to issues such as financial difficulties or bankruptcy, issues relating to regulatory or quality compliance, or other legal or reputational issues.

Current wording

•our ability to initiate and conduct our nonclinical studies and clinical trials for our product candidates, and otherwise progress our business could be materially and adversely impacted if our single-source suppliers upon which we rely were to experience any significant business challenges, disruption or failures due to issues such as financial difficulties or bankruptcy, issues relating to regulatory or quality compliance, or other legal or reputational issues.

Previous wording

If we enter into R&D collaborations during the early phases of product development, success will in part depend on the performance of research collaborators. We will not directly control the amount or timing of resources devoted by research collaborators to activities related to product candidates. Research collaborators may not commit sufficient resources to our R&D programs. If any research collaborator fails to commit sufficient resources, the preclinical or clinical development programs related to the collaboration could be delayed or terminated. Also, collaborators may pursue existing or other development-stage products or alternative technologies in preference to those being developed in collaboration with us. Finally, if we fail to make required milestone or royalty payments to collaborators or to observe other obligations in agreements with them, the collaborators may have the right to terminate or stop performance of those agreements.

Current wording

If we enter into R&D collaborations during the early phases of product development, success will in part depend on the performance of research collaborators. We will not directly control the amount or timing of resources devoted by research collaborators to activities related to product candidates. Research collaborators may not commit sufficient resources to our R&D programs. If any research collaborator fails to commit sufficient resources, the nonclinical or clinical development programs related to the collaboration could be delayed or terminated. Also, collaborators may pursue existing or other development-stage products or alternative technologies in preference to those being developed in collaboration with us. Finally, if we fail to make required milestone or royalty payments to collaborators or to observe other obligations in agreements with them, the collaborators may have the right to terminate or stop performance of those agreements.

Previous wording

We expect to rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials and some aspects of our research and preclinical testing, and those third parties may not perform satisfactorily, including failing to meet deadlines for the completion of such trials, research or testing.

Current wording

We expect to rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials and some aspects of our research and nonclinical testing, and those third parties may not perform satisfactorily, including failing to meet deadlines for the completion of such trials, research or testing.

Previous wording

We currently rely and expect to continue to rely on third parties, such as CROs, clinical data management organizations, medical institutions and clinical investigators, to conduct some aspects of research and preclinical testing and clinical trials. Any of these third parties may terminate their engagements with us or be unable to fulfill their contractual obligations. If any of our relationships with these third parties terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative third parties on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements, it will delay our product development activities.

Current wording

We currently rely and expect to continue to rely on third parties, such as CROs, clinical data management organizations, medical institutions and clinical investigators, to conduct some aspects of research and nonclinical testing and clinical trials. Any of these third parties may terminate their engagements with us or be unable to fulfill their contractual obligations. If any of our relationships with these third parties terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative third parties on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements, it will delay our product development activities.

Previous wording

If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols, we will not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, marketing approvals for any product candidates we may develop and will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize our medicines. Our failure or the failure of these third parties to comply applicable regulatory requirements or our stated protocols could also subject us to enforcement action.

Current wording

If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols, we will not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, marketing approvals for any product candidates we may develop and will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize our medicines. Our failure or the failure of these third parties to comply with applicable regulatory requirements or our stated protocols could also subject us to enforcement action.

Previous wording

Similarly, the EMA conducts the scientific evaluation marketing authorization applications for gene therapies in the European Union and the EMA or other relevant authorities may issue new guidelines concerning the development and marketing authorization for gene therapy products and require that we comply with these new guidelines.

Current wording

Similarly, the EMA conducts the scientific evaluation of marketing authorization applications for gene therapies in the European Union and the EMA or other relevant authorities may issue new guidelines concerning the development and marketing authorization for gene therapy products and require that we comply with these new guidelines.

Previous wording

With the change in the U.S. Presidential Administration in 2025, there continues to be substantial uncertainty as to whether and how the current administration will seek to modify or revise the requirements and policies of the FDA and other regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over our product candidates and any products for which we obtain approval. This uncertainty could present new challenges as we navigate development and approval of our product candidates. Some of these efforts have manifested to date in the form of personnel cuts and measures that could impact the FDA’s ability to hire and retain key personnel, which could result in delays or limitations on our ability to obtain guidance from the FDA on our product candidates in development and obtain the requisite regulatory approvals in the future. There remains general uncertainty regarding future activities. The current administration could issue or promulgate executive orders, regulations, policies or guidance that adversely affect us or create a more challenging or costly environment to pursue the development of new therapeutic products. Alternatively, state governments may attempt to address or react to changes at the federal level with changes to their own regulatory frameworks in a manner that is adverse to our operations. If we become negatively impacted by future governmental orders, regulations, policies or guidance as a result of the current Administration, there could be a material adverse effect on us and our business.

Current wording

With the change in the U.S. Presidential Administration in 2025, there continues to be substantial uncertainty as to whether and how the current administration will seek to modify or revise the requirements and policies of the FDA and other regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over our product candidates and any products for which we obtain approval. This uncertainty could present new challenges as we navigate development and approval of our product candidates. Some of these efforts have manifested to date in the form of personnel cuts and measures that could impact the FDA’s ability to hire and retain key personnel, which could result in delays or limitations on our ability to obtain guidance from the FDA on our product candidates in development and obtain the requisite regulatory approvals in the future. There remains general uncertainty regarding future activities. The current administration could issue or promulgate executive orders, regulations, policies or guidance that adversely affect us or create a more challenging or costly environment to pursue the development of new therapeutic products. Alternatively, state governments may attempt to address or react to changes at the federal level with changes to their own regulatory frameworks in a manner that is adverse to our operations. If we become negatively impacted by future governmental orders, regulations, policies or guidance as a result of the current administration or otherwise, there could be a material adverse effect on us and our business.

Previous wording

As of June 30, 2026, we had 999 full-time employees and 4 part-time employees. While we believe our structure enables us to reduce certain infrastructure costs, the small size of our central team, consisting of employees engaged in providing administrative, research and development and other services across our entire organization, may cause us to be unable to devote adequate personnel, time and resources to support the operations of all of our subsidiaries, including their research and development activities, employee recruiting and retention efforts and the management of financial and accounting and reporting matters. From time to time, members of our central team may not have access to adequate information regarding aspects of the business and operations of our subsidiaries to sufficiently manage these affairs. Additionally, because our dedicated subsidiary-level employees and management are primarily incentivized at the subsidiary level, these employees and management team members may not be sufficiently incentivized to maximize the overall value of our entire organization. If our central team fails to provide adequate administrative, research and development or other services across our entire organization, or our subsidiary-level employees and management do not perform in a manner that aligns with the interests of our entire organization, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be harmed.

Current wording

As of September 30, 2026, we had 1,081 full-time employees and 4 part-time employees. While we believe our structure enables us to reduce certain infrastructure costs, the small size of our central team, consisting of employees engaged in providing administrative, research and development and other services across our entire organization, may cause us to be unable to devote adequate personnel, time and resources to support the operations of all of our subsidiaries, including their research and development activities, employee recruiting and retention efforts and the management of financial and accounting and reporting matters. From time to time, members of our central team may not have access to adequate information regarding aspects of the business and operations of our subsidiaries to sufficiently manage these affairs. Additionally, because our dedicated subsidiary-level employees and management are primarily incentivized at the subsidiary level, these employees and management team members may not be sufficiently incentivized to maximize the overall value of our entire organization. If our central team fails to provide adequate administrative, research and development or other services across our entire organization, or our subsidiary-level employees and management do not perform in a manner that aligns with the interests of our entire organization, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be harmed.

Previous wording

As of June 30, 2026, we had 999 full-time employees and 4 part-time employees across all of our affiliates and controlled entities. As we mature, we expect to expand our full-time employee base and to hire more consultants and contractors. Our management may need to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from our day-to-day activities and devote a substantial amount of time toward managing these growth activities. We may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations, which may result in weaknesses in our infrastructure, operational mistakes, loss of business opportunities, loss of employees and reduced productivity among remaining employees. Our expected growth could require significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the commercialization of our product candidates, if approved and development of additional product candidates. If our management is unable to effectively manage our growth, our expenses may increase more than expected, our ability to generate and/or grow revenues could be reduced, and we may not be able to implement our business strategy. Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize product candidates if approved, and compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth.

Current wording

As of September 30, 2026, we had 1,081 full-time employees and 4 part-time employees across all of our affiliates and controlled entities. As we mature, we expect to expand our full-time employee base and to hire more consultants and contractors. Our management may need to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from our day-to-day activities and devote a substantial amount of time toward managing these growth activities. We may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations, which may result in weaknesses in our infrastructure, operational mistakes, loss of business opportunities, loss of employees and reduced productivity among remaining employees. Our expected growth could require significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the commercialization of our product candidates, if approved, and development of additional product candidates. If our management is unable to effectively manage our growth, our expenses may increase more than expected, our ability to generate and/or grow revenues could be reduced, and we may not be able to implement our business strategy. Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize product candidates if approved, and compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth.

Previous wording

As a public company, we are required to maintain internal control over financial reporting and to report any material weaknesses in such internal controls. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”), requires that we evaluate and determine the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and, pursuant to Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes Oxley Act (“Section 404”) provide a management report on internal control over financial reporting. In addition, we are required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. Any failure to develop or maintain effective controls, or any difficulties encountered in their implementation or improvement, could harm our results of operations, cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations, result in a restatement of our financial statements for prior periods, or adversely affect the results of management evaluations and independent registered public accounting firm audits of our internal control over financial reporting that we will eventually be required to include in our periodic reports that will be filed with the SEC.

Current wording

As a public company, we are required to maintain internal control over financial reporting and to report any material weaknesses in such internal controls. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”), requires that we evaluate and determine the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and, pursuant to Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“Section 404”) provide a management report on internal control over financial reporting. In addition, we are required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. Any failure to develop or maintain effective controls, or any difficulties encountered in their implementation or improvement, could harm our results of operations, cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations, result in a restatement of our financial statements for prior periods, or adversely affect the results of management evaluations and independent registered public accounting firm audits of our internal control over financial reporting that we will be required to include in our periodic reports that will be filed with the SEC.

Previous wording

In addition, any further deterioration in the macroeconomic economy or financial services industry could lead to losses or defaults by our collaboration partners, suppliers or other parties with whom we do business, which in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our current and/or projected business operations and results of operations and financial condition. Any bankruptcy or insolvency of a collaboration partner, supplier or other party with whom we do business, or the failure of any such party to make payments when due, or any breach or default by any such party, or the loss of any significant business relationships, could result in material losses to us and may have a material adverse impact on our business.

Current wording

In addition, any further deterioration in macroeconomic conditions or the financial services industry could lead to losses or defaults by our collaboration partners, suppliers or other parties with whom we do business, which in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our current and/or projected business operations and results of operations and financial condition. Any bankruptcy or insolvency of a collaboration partner, supplier or other party with whom we do business, or the failure of any such party to make payments when due, or any breach or default by any such party, or the loss of any significant business relationships, could result in material losses to us and may have a material adverse impact on our business.

Showing the first 40 of 57 pairs. Open the source sections for the rest.