Mirum Pharmaceuticals Inc

Previous wording

The success of our business depends, in part, on our ability to commercialize our approved medicines profitably.

Current wording

The success of our business depends, in part, on our ability to market and sell our approved medicines profitably.

Previous wording

Livmarli, Chenodal, and Cholbam are our approved medicines. The success of our business depends, in part, on our ability to commercialize our approved medicines profitably. Our successful commercialization of our approved medicines depends on a number of factors, including, among others, the following:

Current wording

The success of our business depends, in part, on our ability to commercialize our approved medicines profitably. Our successful commercialization of our approved medicines depends on a number of factors, including, among others, the following:

Previous wording

our ability to grow and maintain our sales team in the United States (“U.S.”), Canada, and certain countries in Europe, as well as scale our distribution capabilities in these locations and others where our products are available;

Current wording

•our ability to grow and maintain our sales team in the U.S., Canada, and certain countries in Europe, as well as scale our distribution capabilities in these locations and others where our products are available;

Previous wording

the effect of recent or forthcoming health care legislation and regulatory changes in the locations where our approved medicines are authorized;

Current wording

•the effect of health care legislation and regulatory changes in the locations where our approved medicines are authorized;

Previous wording

changes in federal, state or foreign government regulations or private third-party payors’ reimbursement policies;

Current wording

•changes in federal, state or foreign government regulations or private third-party payors’ reimbursement policies, including changes that may result from government administration changes;

Previous wording

A trend in the healthcare industry is cost containment. Third-party payors are developing increasingly sophisticated methods of controlling healthcare costs by, among other methods, limiting or preventing (for example via prior authorization, prior therapy or step edit requirements) coverage for particular medications, requiring drug companies to provide them with varying levels of discounts from list prices and/or challenging the value of list prices charged for medical products. Similarly, the containment of healthcare costs has become a priority for federal and state governments around the world. Coverage decisions may depend upon the size of a patient population, perceptions of clinical efficacy and economic standards that may disfavor new drug products when more established or lower cost therapeutic alternatives are already available or subsequently become available.

Current wording

A trend in the healthcare industry is cost containment. Third-party payors are developing increasingly sophisticated methods of controlling healthcare costs by, among other methods, limiting or preventing (for example via prior authorization, prior therapy or step edit requirements) coverage for particular medications, requiring drug companies to provide them with varying levels of discounts from list prices and/or challenging the value of list prices charged for medical products. Similarly, the containment of healthcare costs has become a priority for federal, national, and state governments around the world. Coverage decisions may depend upon the size of a patient population, perceptions of clinical efficacy and economic standards that may disfavor new drug products when more established or lower cost therapeutic alternatives are already available or subsequently become available.

Previous wording

In many foreign countries, including Member States of the EU, the pricing of prescription drugs is subject to governmental control and the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. In such countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after receipt of regulatory approval for a product and varies between countries. In addition, there can be considerable pressure by governments and other stakeholders on prices and reimbursement levels. For instance, governmental authorities in the EU Member States and third-party payors could base pricing and reimbursement terms on what they perceive to be comparable products, even if approved for different indications. In addition, the EU provides options for EU Member States to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. An EU Member State may approve a specific price for the medicinal product, it may refuse to reimburse a product at the price set by the manufacturer or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. These pricing and reimbursement decisions may impact the pricing and reimbursement of our approved medicines in such jurisdictions. Many EU Member States also periodically review their reimbursement procedures for medicinal products, which could have an adverse impact on reimbursement status. Moreover, political, economic and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing negotiations, and pricing negotiations often continue after coverage and reimbursement have been obtained. Reference pricing or pricing comparisons to our competitors used by various countries and parallel distribution, or arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced countries, can further reduce prices. Publication of discounts by third-party payors or authorities may lead to further pressure on the prices or reimbursement levels within the country of publication and other countries.

Current wording

In many foreign countries, including EU Member States, the pricing of prescription drugs is subject to governmental control and the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. In such countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after receipt of regulatory approval for a product and varies between countries. In addition, there can be considerable pressure by governments and other stakeholders on prices and reimbursement levels. For instance, governmental authorities in the EU Member States and third-party payors could base pricing and reimbursement terms on what they perceive to be comparable products, even if approved for different indications. In addition, EU Member States may restrict the range of medicines for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicines for human use. An EU Member State, such as France and Germany, may approve a specific price for the medicine, it may refuse to reimburse a product at the price set by the manufacturer or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicine on the market. For example, some countries like France may impose a total revenue cap on a product, limiting maximum sales potential at a certain threshold regardless of unit price. These pricing and reimbursement decisions may impact the pricing and reimbursement of our approved medicines in such jurisdictions. Many EU Member States also periodically review their reimbursement procedures for medicines, which could have an adverse impact on the reimbursement status of our approved medicines in the future. Moreover, political, economic and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing negotiations, and pricing negotiations often continue after coverage and reimbursement have been obtained. Reference pricing or pricing comparisons to our competitors used by various countries and parallel distribution, or arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced countries, can further reduce prices. Publication of discounts by third-party payors or authorities may lead to further pressure on the prices or reimbursement levels within the country of publication and other countries.

Previous wording

We expect that legislators, policymakers and healthcare insurance funds in the EU Member States will continue to propose and implement cost-containing measures, such as lower maximum prices, lower or lack of reimbursement coverage and incentives to use cheaper, usually generic, products as an alternative to branded products, and/or branded products available through parallel import to keep healthcare costs down. Moreover, in December 2021, Regulation No 2021/2282 on Health Technology Assessment, (“HTA”), amending Directive 2011/24/EU (“HTA Regulation”), was adopted in the EU. The Regulation will apply beginning January 2025. It is intended to boost cooperation among EU Member States in assessing health technologies, including new medicinal products, and providing the basis for cooperation at the EU level for joint clinical assessments in these areas. The Regulation foresees a three-year transitional period and will permit EU Member States to use common HTA tools, methodologies, and procedures across the EU, working together in four main areas, including joint clinical assessment of the innovative health technologies with the most potential impact for patients, joint scientific consultations whereby developers can seek advice from HTA authorities, identification of emerging health technologies to identify promising technologies early, and continuing voluntary cooperation in other areas. Individual EU Member States will continue to be responsible for assessing non-clinical (e.g., economic, social, ethical) aspects of health technologies, and making decisions on pricing and reimbursement. If we are unable to maintain favorable pricing and reimbursement status in EU Member States for product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatory approval, any anticipated revenue from and growth prospects for those product candidates in the EU could be negatively affected.

Current wording

We expect that legislators, policymakers and healthcare insurance funds in the EU Member States will continue to propose and implement cost-containing measures, such as lower maximum prices, lower or lack of reimbursement coverage and incentives to use cheaper, usually generic, products as an alternative to branded products, and/or branded products available through parallel import to keep healthcare costs down. Moreover, in December 2021, Regulation No 2021/2282 on Health Technology Assessment, (“HTA”), amending Directive 2011/24/EU (“HTA Regulation”), was adopted in the EU. The Regulation entered into application on January 12, 2025 through a phased implementation. It is intended to boost cooperation among EU Member States in assessing health technologies, including new medicines, and providing the basis for cooperation at the EU level for joint clinical assessments in these areas. The Regulation permits EU Member States to use common HTA tools, methodologies, and procedures across the EU, working together in four main areas, including joint clinical assessment of the innovative health technologies with the most potential impact for patients, joint scientific consultations whereby developers can seek advice from HTA authorities, identification of emerging health technologies to identify promising technologies early, and continuing voluntary cooperation in other areas. Individual EU Member States will continue to be responsible for assessing non-clinical (e.g., economic, social, ethical) aspects of health technologies, and making decisions on pricing and reimbursement. If we are unable to maintain favorable pricing and reimbursement status in EU Member States for product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatory approval, any anticipated revenue from and growth prospects for those product candidates in the EU could be negatively affected.

Previous wording

As is the case with biopharmaceuticals generally, it is likely that there may be side effects and adverse events (“AEs”) associated with our product candidates’ use. Results of our clinical trials and expanded access program could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects or unexpected characteristics. Undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The drug-related side effects could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Current wording

As is the case with biopharmaceuticals generally, it is likely that there may be side effects and adverse events (“AEs”) associated with use of our approved medicines and product candidates. Results of our clinical trials and expanded access program could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects or unexpected characteristics. Undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates by the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The drug-related side effects could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Previous wording

In clinical trials of Livmarli, the most commonly reported AEs were diarrhea, abdominal pain and vomiting, and were mostly mild to moderate in severity and transient in nature. Additionally, AEs reported in greater than 5% of patients included fat-soluble vitamin deficiency, nausea, liver transaminase increases, gastrointestinal bleeding and bone fracture. The frequency of observed AEs has not increased over time. In clinical trials of volixibat, the most common AEs reported were mild to moderate GI events observed in the volixibat groups. The most common adverse events for Cholbam (≥1%) are diarrhea, reflux esophagitis, malaise, jaundice, skin lesion, nausea, abdominal pain, intestinal polyp, urinary tract infection, and peripheral neuropathy. Related adverse events seen in one patient each from the RESTORE clinical trial assessing Chenodal in patients with CTX, included fatigue, gait disturbance, diarrhea, liver transaminase increase, bilirubin increase, ataxia, tremors, decreased appetite and psychiatric disorder.

Current wording

In clinical trials of Livmarli in ALGS, the most commonly reported AEs were diarrhea, abdominal pain and vomiting, and were mostly mild to moderate in severity and transient in nature. Additionally, AEs reported in greater than 5% of patients included fat-soluble vitamin deficiency, nausea, liver transaminase increases, and bone fracture. The frequency of observed AEs has not increased over time. In the pivotal trial of Livmarli in PFIC, adverse reactions reported in greater than 5% of patients and greater than placebo included diarrhea, abdominal pain, increased transaminases, hematochezia or rectal hemorrhage, and bone fractures. Prescribing information for Livmarli includes warnings and precautions related to monitoring for and the risk of hepatotoxicity, gastrointestinal adverse reactions, fat-soluble vitamin deficiency and risk of propylene glycol toxicity (pediatric patients less than 5 years of age). In clinical trials of volixibat, the most common AEs reported were mild to moderate GI events (diarrhea, abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting) observed in the volixibat groups. In the interim analysis of the PBC VANTAGE study, the incidence of diarrhea in patients on volixibat was 77% with all cases mild to moderate; one patient discontinued the study due to an AE of diarrhea. The most common adverse reactions for Cholbam (≥1%) are diarrhea, reflux esophagitis, malaise, jaundice, skin lesion, nausea, abdominal pain, intestinal polyp, urinary tract infection, and peripheral neuropathy. The most common (> 20%) AEs seen in patients on chenodiol in the RESTORE clinical trial included diarrhea, constipation and headache.

Previous wording

regulatory authorities may withdraw approvals of such product, including the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities withdrawing approval for the affected medicine;

Current wording

•regulatory authorities may withdraw, suspend, or vary approvals of such product, including the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities withdrawing approval for the affected medicine;

Previous wording

We participate in, or are subject to, the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, as administered by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”), and other federal and state government pricing programs in the U.S., and we may participate, or be asked to participate, in additional government pricing programs or supplemental rebates in the future. These programs generally require us to pay rebates or otherwise provide discounts to government payors in connection with drugs that are dispensed to beneficiaries/recipients of these programs. In some cases, such as with the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, the rebates are based on pricing that we report to the government agencies that administer the programs. Pricing requirements and rebate/discount calculations are complex, vary among products and programs, and are often subject to interpretation by governmental or regulatory agencies and the courts. The requirements of these programs, including, by way of example, their respective terms and scope, change frequently. For example, on March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer’s price (“AMP”), for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, effective January 1, 2024. Responding to current and future changes may increase our costs, and the complexity of compliance will be time consuming. Invoicing for rebates is provided in arrears, and there is frequently a time lag of up to several months between the sales to which rebate notices relate and our receipt of those notices, which further complicates our ability to accurately estimate and accrue for rebates related to the Medicaid program as implemented by individual states. Thus, there can be no assurance that we will be able to identify all factors that may cause our discount and rebate payment obligations to vary from period to period, and our actual results may differ significantly from our estimated allowances for discounts and rebates. Changes in estimates and assumptions may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) Office of Inspector General and other Congressional, enforcement and administrative bodies have recently increased their focus on pricing requirements for products, including, but not limited to the methodologies used by manufacturers to calculate AMP, and best price, for compliance with reporting requirements under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. Additionally, several states have a practice of asking, or are increasing activity in requesting supplemental rebates, for covered products. We are liable for errors associated with our submission of pricing data and for any overcharging of government payors. For example, failure to submit monthly/quarterly AMP and best price data on a timely basis could result in signific…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

We participate in, or are subject to, the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, as administered by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”), and other federal and state government pricing programs in the U.S., and we may participate, or be asked to participate, in additional government pricing programs or supplemental rebates in the future. These programs generally require us to pay rebates or otherwise provide discounts to government payors in connection with drugs that are dispensed to beneficiaries/recipients of these programs. In some cases, such as with the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, the rebates are based on pricing that we report to the government agencies that administer the programs. Pricing requirements and rebate/discount calculations are complex, vary among products and programs, and are often subject to interpretation by governmental or regulatory agencies and the courts. The requirements of these programs, including, by way of example, their respective terms and scope, change frequently. For example, on March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 was signed into law, which eliminated the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer’s price (“AMP”), for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, effective January 1, 2024. Responding to current and future changes may increase our costs, and the complexity of compliance will be time consuming. Invoicing for rebates is provided in arrears, and there is frequently a time lag of up to several months between the sales to which rebate notices relate and our receipt of those notices, which further complicates our ability to accurately estimate and accrue for rebates related to the Medicaid program as implemented by individual states. Thus, there can be no assurance that we will be able to identify all factors that may cause our discount and rebate payment obligations to vary from period to period, and our actual results may differ significantly from our estimated allowances for discounts and rebates. Changes in estimates and assumptions may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) Office of Inspector General and other Congressional, enforcement and administrative bodies have recently increased their focus on pricing requirements for products, including, but not limited to the methodologies used by manufacturers to calculate AMP, and best price, for compliance with reporting requirements under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. Additionally, several states have a practice of asking, or are increasing activity in requesting supplemental rebates, for covered products. We are liable for errors associated with our submission of pricing data and for any overcharging of government payors. For example, failure to submit monthly/quarterly AMP and best price data on a timely basis could result in significant civil mo…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

The FDA, European Commission, competent authorities of individual EU Member States, and comparable foreign regulatory authorities strictly regulate the marketing and promotional claims that are made about drug and biologic products. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses or indications that are not approved by the FDA, European Commission, Health Canada or comparable foreign regulatory authorities as reflected in the product’s approved labeling and comparative safety or efficacy claims cannot be made without direct comparative clinical data. For example, although Livmarli may appeal to individuals who have not been diagnosed with cholestatic pruritus associated with ALGS or suffer from other forms of cholestatic pruritus, we are only able to promote Livmarli in the U.S. for cholestatic pruritus associated with ALGS in patients three months of age and older and in the EU for the treatment of cholestatic pruritus in patients with ALGS two months of age and older. If we are found to have promoted off-label uses of our approved medicines or product candidates, we may receive warning or untitled letters and become subject to significant criminal and civil liability, which would materially harm our business. Further, both federal and state governments have levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper off-label promotion and have enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion and to undertake corrective remedies.

Current wording

The FDA, European Commission, competent authorities of individual EU Member States, and comparable foreign regulatory authorities strictly regulate the marketing and promotional claims that are made about drug and biologic products. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses or indications that are not approved by the FDA, European Commission, Health Canada or comparable foreign regulatory authorities as reflected in the product’s approved labeling and comparative safety or efficacy claims cannot be made without direct comparative clinical data. For example, although Livmarli may appeal to individuals who have not been diagnosed with cholestatic pruritus associated with ALGS or PFIC or suffer from other forms of cholestatic pruritus like those included in our PHASE 3 EXPAND trial, we are only able to promote Livmarli in the U.S. for cholestatic pruritus associated with ALGS in patients three months of age and older, for cholestatic pruritus in PFIC patients twelve months of age and older and in the EU for the treatment of cholestatic pruritus in patients with ALGS two months of age and older and for the treatment of PFIC in patients three months of age and older. Additionally, Ctexli is only indicated for adults with CTX, not for individuals under the age of 18, even though it may be prescribed by healthcare providers for that population. If we are found to have promoted off-label uses of our approved medicines or product candidates, we may receive warning or untitled letters and become subject to significant criminal and civil liability, which would materially harm our business. Further, in the U.S., both federal and state governments have levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper off-label promotion and have enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion and to undertake corrective remedies.

Previous wording

Any regulatory approvals that we receive may be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including post-market studies or clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor safety and effectiveness. The FDA may also require a REMS in order to approve a product candidate, which could entail requirements for a medication guide, physician communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. Similarly, the European Commission may require a RMP in order to collect additional information on a medicine’s safety profile which may include plans for pharmacovigilance activities and measures to minimize risks. In addition, if the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities approve a product candidate, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, post-marketing obligations, storage, advertising, promotion, import, export and recordkeeping for the approved product will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. For example, we are subject to ongoing FDA and European Commission obligations and continued regulatory review with respect to, among other things, the manufacturing, processing, labeling, packaging, distribution, AE reporting, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for Livmarli, which requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports and registration, as well as continued compliance with cGMP requirements and with the FDA’s and equivalent foreign good clinical practice (“GCP”). We are also subject to post-marketing obligations for Cholbam including the conduct and submission of registry studies.

Current wording

Any regulatory approvals that we receive may be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including post-market studies or clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor safety and effectiveness. The FDA may also require a REMS in order to approve a product candidate, which could entail requirements for a medication guide, physician communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. Similarly, the European Commission may require a RMP in order to collect additional information on a medicine’s safety profile which may include plans for pharmacovigilance activities and measures to minimize risks. In addition, if the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities approve a product candidate, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, post-marketing obligations, storage, advertising, promotion, import, export and recordkeeping for the approved product will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. For example, we are subject to ongoing FDA and European Commission obligations and continued regulatory review with respect to, among other things, the manufacturing, processing, labeling, packaging, distribution, AE reporting, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for Livmarli, which requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports and registration, as well as continued compliance with current good manufacturing practices (“cGMP”) requirements and with the FDA’s and equivalent foreign good clinical practice (“GCP”). We are also subject to post-marketing obligations for Cholbam including the conduct and submission of registry studies.

Previous wording

In addition, Livmarli was the subject of a marketing authorization granted by the European Commission under exceptional circumstances in accordance with Article 14.8 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 relating to the authorization and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a EMA. This type of authorization is reviewed annually to reassess the risk-benefit balance of the medicinal product. The purpose of any specific procedures/obligations imposed as part of the marketing authorization granted in exceptional circumstances is to contribute to the provision of information on the safe and effective use of the product. Grant of a marketing authorization in exceptional circumstances is for a renewable period of one year and will normally not lead to the completion of a full dossier/approval.

Current wording

In addition, Livmarli was the subject of a marketing authorization granted by the European Commission under exceptional circumstances in accordance with Article 14.8 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 relating to the authorization and supervision of medicines for human and veterinary use and establishing the EMA. This type of authorization is reviewed annually to reassess the risk-benefit balance of the medicine. The purpose of any specific procedures/obligations imposed as part of the marketing authorization granted in exceptional circumstances is to contribute to the provision of information on the safe and effective use of the product. Grant of a marketing authorization in exceptional circumstances is renewable for one year periods and will normally not lead to the completion of a full dossier/approval.

Previous wording

In addition, manufacturers of drug and biologic products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA, the competent authorities of the individual EU Member States, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP regulations. If we or a regulatory agency discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as AEs of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where, or processes by which, the product is manufactured, such events may result in, among other things:

Current wording

In addition, manufacturers of drug and biologic products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA, the competent authorities of the individual EU Member States, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP regulations. If we or a regulatory authority discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as AEs of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where, or processes by which, the product is manufactured, such events may result in, among other things:

Previous wording

The FDA’s, European Commission’s and comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval for our product candidates or restrict marketing of any then-approved product. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Current wording

The FDA’s, European Commission’s and comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval for our product candidates or restrict marketing of any then-approved product. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations. For example, in April 2023 the European Commission adopted a proposal for a new Directive and Regulation to revise the existing pharmaceutical legislation, and in April 2024, the Parliament adopted its related position. The proposed revisions remain to be agreed and adopted by the European Council. Moreover, on December 1, 2024, a new European Commission took office. The proposal could, therefore, still be subject to revisions. If adopted in the form proposed, the recent European Commission proposals to revise the existing EU laws governing authorization of medicinal products may result in a decrease in data and market exclusivity opportunities for our product candidates in the EU and make them open to generic or biosimilar competition earlier than is currently the case with a related reduction in reimbursement status.

Previous wording

We may pursue approval in the U.S. or certain countries in Europe using accelerated, exceptional circumstances or conditional approval pathways, which typically require commitments to complete additional clinical trials. The additional clinical trials may not confirm the treatment effect, which may result in the loss of marketing authorization under accelerated approval, exceptional circumstances or conditional approval.

Current wording

We may pursue approval in the U.S., Canada or certain countries in Europe using accelerated, exceptional circumstances or conditional approval pathways, which typically require commitments to complete additional clinical trials. The additional clinical trials may not confirm the treatment effect, which may result in the loss of marketing authorization under accelerated approval, exceptional circumstances or conditional approval.

Previous wording

Our clinical trials may not be successful and may not be completed on time or at all, and the FDA, EMA or comparable regulatory authorities may disagree with the design or implementation of our clinical trials. For example, in certain of our ongoing clinical trials, the primary efficacy endpoint is a patient-reported outcome or a caregiver-reported outcome measuring the decrease in severity of pruritus. The FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not accept such patient-reported outcomes or caregiver-reported outcomes as validated. If modifications are needed for our study design to support the submission of an application for marketing approval, incorporating such modifications may be costly and could lead to delays in obtaining approval from the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, which may significantly, adversely and materially affect our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates. Further, even if we make changes to the study design to address these considerations, the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not approve our product candidates.

Current wording

Our clinical trials may not be successful and may not be completed on time or at all, and the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with the design or implementation of our clinical trials. For example, in certain of our ongoing clinical trials, the primary efficacy endpoint is a patient-reported outcome or a caregiver-reported outcome measuring the decrease in severity of pruritus. The FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not accept such patient-reported outcomes or caregiver-reported outcomes as validated. If modifications are needed for our study design to support the submission of an application for marketing approval, incorporating such modifications may be costly and could lead to delays in obtaining approval from the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, which may significantly, adversely and materially affect our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates. Further, even if we make changes to the study design to address these considerations, the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not approve our product candidates.

Previous wording

Even if such regulatory authorities agree with the design and implementation of our clinical trials, such regulatory authorities may change their requirements in the future. In addition, even if the clinical trials are successfully completed, the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not interpret the results as we do, and more clinical trials could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval. For example, in April 2023, we submitted a variation application and data from our MARCH Phase 3 clinical trial for PFIC to the EMA seeking to extend the label for Livmarli to include the treatment of PFIC in patients two months of age or older. However, the EMA may require additional Phase 3 trials in order to expand the label or may reject expansion altogether.

Current wording

Even if such regulatory authorities agree with the design and implementation of our clinical trials, such regulatory authorities may change their requirements in the future. In addition, even if the clinical trials are successfully completed, the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not interpret the results as we do, and more clinical trials could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval.

Previous wording

Further, each indication for which we are evaluating Livmarli and volixibat is a rare cholestatic liver disease with limited patient populations from which to draw participants in clinical trials. We will be required to identify and enroll a sufficient number of patients with the disease under investigation for each of our ongoing and planned clinical trials of Livmarli and volixibat. Potential patients may not be adequately diagnosed or identified with the diseases which we are targeting or may not meet the entry criteria for our trials. In addition, patients may ultimately decide not to enroll in a particular clinical trial for reasons outside of our control. We are also conducting clinical trials in countries that have not yet had Livmarli or volixibat trials conducted and we have not yet worked with such foreign regulatory authorities. As a result, we could face patient recruitment issues in certain countries where such foreign regulatory authorities are not familiar with Livmarli or volixibat. Additionally, other pharmaceutical companies targeting these same cholestatic liver diseases are recruiting clinical trial patients from these patient populations, and have expanded access programs available, which have delayed enrollment in our clinical trials. Our inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients for any of our current or future clinical trials would result in significant delays. As a result, we may need to delay the completion of such trials beyond our expected timelines or abandon one or more clinical trials altogether.

Current wording

Further, each indication for which we are evaluating Livmarli and volixibat is a rare cholestatic liver disease with limited patient populations from which to draw participants in clinical trials. We will be required to identify and enroll a sufficient number of patients with the disease under investigation for each of our ongoing and planned clinical trials of Livmarli and volixibat. Potential patients may not be adequately diagnosed or identified with the diseases which we are targeting or may not meet the entry criteria for our trials. In addition, patients may ultimately decide not to enroll in a particular clinical trial for reasons outside of our control. We may seek to conduct clinical trials in countries in which we have not previously conducted trials for our product candidates and in which we have not yet worked with the competent regulatory authorities. As a result, we could face patient recruitment issues in certain countries where such foreign regulatory authorities are not familiar with our product candidates. Additionally, other pharmaceutical companies targeting the same cholestatic liver diseases are recruiting clinical trial patients from these patient populations, and have expanded access programs available, which have delayed enrollment in our clinical trials. Our inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients for any of our current or future clinical trials would result in significant delays. As a result, we may need to delay the completion of such trials beyond our expected timelines or abandon one or more clinical trials altogether.

Previous wording

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of a product candidate, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive preclinical testing and clinical trials that a product candidate is both safe and effective for use in each target indication. Clinical trials often fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy of the product candidate studied for the target indication. For example, in December 2023, we announced that our Phase 2b EMBARK clinical trial evaluating Livmarli in patients with BA did not meet its primary or key secondary endpoints. Most product candidates that commence clinical trials are never approved by regulatory authorities for commercialization. In the case of our product candidates, we are seeking to develop treatments for rare diseases for which there is limited clinical experience, and our planned clinical trials use novel end points and measurement methodologies, which add complexity to the conduct of and analysis of data from our clinical trials and may delay or prevent regulatory approval.

Current wording

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of a product candidate, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive preclinical testing and clinical trials that a product candidate is both safe and effective for use in each target indication. Our clinical trials have in the past and could in the future fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy of the product candidate studied for the target indication. For example, in December 2023, we announced that our Phase 2b EMBARK clinical trial evaluating Livmarli in patients with biliary atresia (“BA”) did not meet its primary or key secondary endpoints. Most product candidates that commence clinical trials are never approved by regulatory authorities for commercialization. In the case of our product candidates, we are seeking to develop treatments for rare diseases for which there is limited clinical experience, and our planned clinical trials use novel end points and measurement methodologies, which add complexity to the conduct of and analysis of data from our clinical trials and may delay or prevent regulatory approval.

Previous wording

any failure or delay in reaching an agreement with contract research organizations (“CROs”) and clinical trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and clinical trial sites;

Current wording

•any failure or delay in reaching an agreement with CROs and clinical trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and clinical trial sites;

Previous wording

obtaining approval from one or more institutional review boards (“IRBs”) or ethics committees;

Current wording

•obtaining approval from one or more institutional review boards (“IRBs”) or positive ethics committee opinions;

Previous wording

IRBs or ethics committees refusing to approve, suspending or terminating the clinical trial at an investigational site, precluding enrollment of additional subjects, or withdrawing their approval of the clinical trial;

Current wording

•IRBs or ethics committees refusing to approve or provide positive opinions, suspending or terminating the clinical trial at an investigational site, precluding enrollment of additional subjects, or withdrawing their approval of the clinical trial;

Previous wording

The clinical development, manufacturing, labeling, storage, record-keeping, advertising, promotion, import, export, marketing and distribution of our product candidates are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA in the U.S., the EU and EU Member State competent authorities in the EU and by comparable foreign regulatory authorities in other markets. In the U.S., the EU and many foreign countries, we are not permitted to market our product candidates until we receive regulatory approval from the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The process of obtaining regulatory approval is expensive, often takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and can vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidates involved, as well as the target indications and patient population. Approval policies or regulations may change, and regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the drug approval process, including the ability to delay, limit or deny approval of a product candidate for many reasons. Despite the time and expense invested in clinical development of product candidates, regulatory approval is never guaranteed.

Current wording

The clinical development, manufacturing, labeling, storage, record-keeping, advertising, promotion, import, export, marketing and distribution of our product candidates are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA in the U.S., the EU and EU Member State competent authorities and by comparable foreign regulatory authorities in other markets. In the U.S., the EU and many foreign countries, we are not permitted to market our product candidates until we receive regulatory approval from the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The process of obtaining regulatory approval is expensive, often takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and can vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidates involved, as well as the target indications and patient population. Approval policies or regulations may change, and regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the drug approval process, including the ability to delay, limit or deny approval of a product candidate for many reasons. Despite the time and expense invested in clinical development of product candidates, regulatory approval is never guaranteed.

Previous wording

Prior to obtaining approval to commercialize a product candidate in the U.S. or internationally, we must demonstrate with substantial evidence from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials, and to the satisfaction of the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, that such product candidates are safe and effective for their intended uses. Results from non-clinical studies and clinical trials can be interpreted in different ways. Even if we believe the non-clinical or clinical data for our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA, EMA or comparable regulatory authorities, as the case may be, may also require us to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials for our product candidates either prior to or post-approval, or may object to elements of our clinical development program. For example, we submitted an application for marketing authorization variation to the EMA in April 2023, based on positive data from our MARCH Phase 3 clinical trial of Livmarli in patients with PFIC. However, the EMA may not agree with our interpretation of the results and the European Commission may not grant approval.

Current wording

EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, that such product candidates are safe and effective for their intended uses. Results from non-clinical studies and clinical trials can be interpreted in different ways. Even if we believe the non-clinical or clinical data for our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, as the case may be, may also require us to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials for our product candidates either prior to or post-approval, or may object to elements of our clinical development program. If we were required to conduct such additional preclinical studies or clinical trials, the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not agree with our interpretation of the results and we may not receive approval for our product candidates or additional indications, or marketing of our approved medicines may be subject to additional requirements.

Previous wording

Even if we eventually complete clinical trials and receive approval of an NDA or equivalent EU or foreign marketing application for our product candidates, the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly additional clinical trials, including Phase 4 clinical trials, and/or the implementation of a REMS in the U.S. or RMP in the EU, which may be required to ensure safe use of the drug after approval. The FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities also may approve a product candidate for a more limited indication or patient population than we originally requested, and the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not approve the labeling that we believe is necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of a product. We are expecting a decision on the marketing authorization variation application in the EU in 2024, which may not occur on time or at all or be favorable. Any delay in obtaining, or inability to obtain, applicable regulatory approval would delay or prevent commercialization of that product candidate and would materially adversely impact our business and prospects.

Current wording

Even if we eventually complete clinical trials and receive approval of an NDA or equivalent EU or foreign marketing application for our product candidates, the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly additional clinical trials, including Phase 4 clinical trials, and/or the implementation of a REMS in the U.S. or RMP in the EU, which may be required to ensure safe use of the drug after approval. The FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities also may approve a product candidate for a more limited indication or patient population than we originally requested, and the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not approve the labeling that we believe is necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of a product. Any delay in obtaining, or inability to obtain, applicable regulatory approval would delay or prevent commercialization of that product candidate and would materially adversely impact our business and prospects.

Previous wording

Investment in biopharmaceutical product development is highly speculative because it entails substantial upfront capital expenditures and significant risk that any potential product candidate will fail to demonstrate adequate effectiveness in the targeted indication or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval and become commercially viable. While we have three medicines approved for commercial sale, we continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred net losses since our inception in May 2018. For the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, we reported a net loss of $163.4 million, $135.7 million and $84.0 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2023, we had an accumulated deficit of $556.2 million.

Current wording

Investment in biopharmaceutical product development is highly speculative because it entails substantial upfront capital expenditures and significant risk that any potential product candidate will fail to demonstrate adequate effectiveness in the targeted indication or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval and become commercially viable. While we have three medicines approved for commercial sale, we continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred net losses since our inception in May 2018. For the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, we reported a net loss of $87.9 million, $163.4 million and $135.7 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2024, we had an accumulated deficit of $644.2 million.

Previous wording

We expect to continue to incur net losses for the foreseeable future as we look to acquire products and product candidates, continue our clinical development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, our product candidates and as we continue commercializing our approved medicines in the U.S. and in certain countries in Europe. We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our business. The size of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of future growth of our expenses and our ability to generate revenue. For example, we have generated limited product revenues from our approved medicines and our approved medicines may not be successfully commercialized. Our prior net losses and expected future net losses have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with drug development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses, or when, if at all, we will be able to achieve profitability.

Current wording

We expect to continue to incur net losses for the foreseeable future as we look to acquire products and product candidates, continue our clinical development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, our product candidates and as we continue commercializing our approved medicines in the U.S., Canada and in certain countries in Europe. We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our business. The size of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of future growth of our expenses and our ability to generate revenue. Our prior net losses and expected future net losses have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with drug development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses, or when, if at all, we will be able to achieve profitability.

Previous wording

Disruptions at the FDA, EMA and other regulatory authorities caused by funding shortages or global health concerns could negatively impact our business.

Current wording

Disruptions at the FDA, EMA and other foreign regulatory authorities caused by layoffs, funding shortages or global health concerns could negatively impact our business.

Previous wording

The ability of the FDA, the competent authorities of EU Member States and other regulatory authorities to review and approve proposed clinical trials or new product candidates can be affected by a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, government budget and funding levels, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, and other events that may otherwise affect these regulatory agencies’ ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Current wording

The ability of the FDA, the competent authorities of EU Member States and other foreign regulatory authorities to review and approve proposed clinical trials or new product candidates can be affected by a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, government budget and funding levels, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, and other events that may otherwise affect these regulatory agencies’ ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, including executive and congressional priorities, the impacts of which are inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Previous wording

Disruptions at the FDA, European Commission, EMA and other regulatory authorities may also slow the time necessary for new product candidates to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary regulatory authorities, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical FDA employees and stop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, including as a result of the U.S. Congress failing to timely raise the U.S. debt ceiling, or if global health concerns continue to prevent the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Current wording

Disruptions at the FDA, European Commission, EMA and other foreign regulatory authorities may also slow the time necessary for new product candidates to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary regulatory authorities, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical FDA employees and stop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, including as a result of the U.S. Congress failing to timely raise the U.S. debt ceiling, or if global health concerns continue to prevent the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA, European Commission, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, the current U.S. administration has proposed substantial reductions in force at various U.S. government agencies that, if applied to the FDA in a material way, could significantly reduce the FDA’s capacity to perform its functions in a manner consistent with its past practices and could negatively impact our business.

Previous wording

In the U.S., certain European countries, and some other foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system, including cost-containment measures that may reduce or limit coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs and affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. For example, Germany introduced changes to its laws governing reimbursement of medicinal products that impact, among others, orphan designation medicinal products. Previously, orphan designation drugs were presumed to provide an additional benefit upon obtaining a marketing authorization and, therefore, subject to a “limited assessment” by the German authority competent for reimbursement (G-BA) as long as the sales of the orphan designation medicinal product remained under the threshold of € 50 million in 12 months. Above this threshold, an orphan designation medicinal product would be subject to a full assessment by the G-BA regarding its benefits compared to an appropriate comparator therapy, just like any other medicinal product. This threshold will be lowered to € 30 million in the future, and if we exceed this threshold, we will need to undergo a full assessment in accordance with the German laws governing reimbursement, which may impact the reimbursement of our approved medicines. Other countries may adopt similar or new approaches that may impact the reimbursement of our product(s), increase our operating costs and impact profitability. Additionally, if adopted in the form proposed, the recent European Commission proposals to revise the existing EU laws governing authorization of medicinal products may result in a decrease in data and market exclusivity for our product candidates in the EU.

Current wording

In the U.S., certain European countries, and some other foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system, including cost-containment measures that may reduce or limit coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs and affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. For example, Germany introduced changes to its laws governing reimbursement of medicines that impact, among others, orphan designation medicines. Previously, orphan designation drugs were presumed to provide an additional benefit upon obtaining a marketing authorization and, therefore, subject to a “limited assessment” by the German authority competent for reimbursement (G-BA) as long as the sales of the orphan designation medicine remained under the threshold of € 50 million in 12 months. Above this threshold, an orphan designation medicine would be subject to a full assessment by the G-BA regarding its benefits compared to an appropriate comparator therapy, just like any other medicine. This threshold will be lowered to € 30 million in the future, and if we exceed this threshold, we will need to undergo a full assessment in accordance with the German laws governing reimbursement, which may impact the reimbursement of our approved medicines. Other countries may adopt similar or new approaches that may impact the reimbursement of our product(s), increase our operating costs and impact profitability. Additionally, if adopted in the form proposed, the recent European Commission proposals to revise the existing EU laws governing authorization of medicines may result in a decrease in data and market exclusivity for our product candidates in the EU.

Previous wording

In addition, the Affordable Care Act has been subject to various health reform measures. For example, prior to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, on January 28, 2021, the Biden administration issued an executive order that initiated a special enrollment period for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplace. The executive order also instructed certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the Affordable Care Act. On August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”) into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in Affordable Care Act marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the “donut hole” under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and through a newly established manufacturer discount program. It is unclear how any additional health care reform measures of the current administration will impact the Affordable Care Act and our business.

Current wording

There have been amendments and executive, judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. In addition, the Affordable Care Act has been subject to various health reform measures. On August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”) was signed into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in Affordable Care Act marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the “donut hole” under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and through a newly established manufacturer discount program. It is unclear how any additional health care reform measures of the current presidential administration will impact the Affordable Care Act and our business.

Previous wording

Further, the IRA will, among other things, (i) allow HHS to negotiate the price of certain drugs and biologics covered under Medicare, and subject drug manufacturers to civil monetary penalties and a potential excise tax by offering a price that is not equal to or less than the negotiated “maximum fair price” under the law and (ii) impose rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation. The IRA permits HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. HHS has and will continue to issue and update guidance as these programs are implemented. These provisions take effect progressively starting in fiscal year 2023. On August 29, 2023, HHS announced the list of the first ten drugs that will be subject to price negotiations, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. It is currently unclear how the IRA will be effectuated but is likely to have a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry.

Current wording

Further, the IRA will, among other things, (i) allow HHS to negotiate the price of certain single-source drugs and biologics that have been on the market for at least 7 years covered under Medicare, and subject drug manufacturers to civil monetary penalties and a potential excise tax by offering a price that is not equal to or less than the negotiated “maximum fair price” under the law (the “Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program”) and (ii) impose rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation. The IRA permits HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. HHS has and will continue to issue and update guidance as these programs are implemented. These provisions took effect progressively starting in fiscal year 2023. On August 15, 2024, HHS announced the agreed-upon reimbursement prices for the first ten drugs that were subject to price negotiations, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. HHS will select up to fifteen additional drugs covered under Part D for price negotiation in 2025. Each year thereafter more Part B and Part D products will become subject to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program.

Previous wording

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. On August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011 was signed into law, which, among other things, included reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, including the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 and the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023, will remain in effect until 2032 unless additional Congressional action is taken. On January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. Additionally, on March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, effective January 1, 2024.

Current wording

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. On August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011 was signed into law, which, among other things, included reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, including the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 and the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023, will remain in effect until 2032 unless additional Congressional action is taken. Additionally, on March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 was signed into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, previously set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, effective January 1, 2024.

Previous wording

In July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, “Promoting Competition in the American Economy,” with multiple provisions aimed at prescription drugs. In response to Biden’s executive order, on September 9, 2021, HHS released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug pricing reform. The plan sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue as well as potential administrative actions HHS can take to advance these principles. In addition, in response to the Biden administration’s October 2022 executive order, on February 14, 2023, HHS released a report outlining three new models for testing by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation which will be evaluated on their ability to lower the cost of drugs, promote accessibility, and improve quality of care. It is unclear whether the models will be utilized in any health reform measures in the future. Further, on December 7, 2023, the Biden administration announced an initiative to control the price of prescription drugs through the use of march-in rights under the Bayh-Dole Act. On December 8, 2023, the National Institute of Standards and Technology published for comment a Draft Interagency Guidance Framework for Considering the Exercise of March-In Rights which for the first time includes the price of a product as one factor an agency can use when deciding to exercise march-in rights. While march-in rights have not previously been exercised, it is uncertain if that will continue under the new framework.

Current wording

In response to an October 2022 executive order, on February 14, 2023, HHS released a report outlining three new models for testing by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation which will be evaluated on their ability to lower the cost of drugs, promote accessibility, and improve quality of care. It is unclear whether the models will be utilized in any health reform measures in the future. Further, on December 7, 2023, an initiative to control the price of prescription drugs through the use of march-in rights under the Bayh-Dole Act was announced. On December 8, 2023, the National Institute of Standards and Technology published for comment a Draft Interagency Guidance Framework for Considering the Exercise of March-In Rights which for the first time includes the price of a product as one factor an agency can use when deciding to exercise march-in rights. While march-in rights have not previously been exercised, it is uncertain if that will continue under the new framework.

Previous wording

We expect that the Affordable Care Act, the IRA and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, more rigorous coverage criteria, new payment methodologies and additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from third-party payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our approved medicines and our product candidates, if approved.

Current wording

We expect that the Affordable Care Act, the IRA and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, more rigorous coverage criteria, new payment methodologies and additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from third-party payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our approved medicines and our product candidates, if approved. Further, the overall funding of certain government programs such as Medicaid and Medicare is uncertain and there is no guarantee that funds approved by the U.S. Congress will be made available by the current administration. We expect additional health reform measures may be implemented in the future.

Previous wording

The biopharmaceutical industry is characterized by intense competition and rapid innovation. Our potential competitors include major multinational pharmaceutical companies, established biotechnology companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, generic pharmaceutical companies and universities and other research institutions who are active in rare disease. Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial, technical and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations and well-established sales forces. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies. Competition may increase further as a result of advances in the commercial applicability of technologies and greater availability of capital for investment in these industries. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing, on an exclusive basis, drug products that are more effective or less costly than our product candidates, which may negatively affect our commercial opportunities. We believe the key competitive factors that will affect the development and commercial success of our product candidates are efficacy, safety and tolerability profile, reliability, convenience of dosing, price and reimbursement.

Current wording

The biopharmaceutical industry is characterized by intense competition and rapid innovation. Our potential competitors include major multinational pharmaceutical companies, established biotechnology companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, generic pharmaceutical companies and universities and other research institutions who are active in rare disease. Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial, technical and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations and well-established sales forces. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies. Competition may increase further as a result of advances in the commercial applicability of technologies and greater availability of capital for investment in these industries. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing, on an exclusive basis, drug products that are more effective or less costly than our product candidates, which may negatively affect our commercial opportunities. We believe the key competitive factors that will affect the development and commercial success of our product candidates are efficacy, safety and tolerability profile, reliability, convenience of dosing, price and reimbursement. There may also be competitors for our product candidates that we are unaware of at this point.