ITEM 1. BUSINESS
Overview
We are a late clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company discovering and developing novel therapeutics for the treatment of rare diseases and those with limited treatment options, with a focus on conditions resulting from dysfunction of the immune system.
Our lead clinical candidate is mavorixafor, a small molecule antagonist of chemokine receptor CXCR4, that is being developed as an oral, once-daily therapy. Due to its ability to increase the mobilization of mature, functional white blood cells from the bone marrow into the bloodstream, we believe that mavorixafor has the potential to provide therapeutic benefit across a variety of chronic neutropenic disorders, including WHIM (Warts, Hypogammaglobulinemia, Infections, and Myelokathexis) syndrome, a rare, primary immunodeficiency.
Following announcement of positive top-line data from our global, pivotal, Phase 3 clinical trial, we are currently preparing a United States regulatory submission seeking approval of oral, once-daily mavorixafor in the treatment of people aged 12 years and older with WHIM syndrome. We are also currently advancing mavorixafor in a Phase 2 clinical trial in people with certain chronic neutropenic disorders following positive results from a Phase 1b clinical trial of mavorixafor in people with idiopathic, cyclic or congenital neutropenia.
We believe that successfully developing mavorixafor and providing new therapeutic options to individuals in the United States diagnosed with certain chronic neutropenic disorders has the potential to revolutionize the treatment landscape, which is principally served by injectable therapies that are frequently associated with treatment-limiting adverse events.
Our Focus
We have developed a pipeline of small-molecule, oral antagonists of the chemokine receptor CXCR4. CXCR4, or C-X-C receptor type 4, is a cell receptor that helps regulate the movement of immune cells within the body. CXCR4 receptor stimulation by its cognate ligand, CXCL12, has been shown to play a key role in the maturation and mobilization of white blood cells such as neutrophils, lymphocytes (including both B cells and T cells), and monocytes, into the bloodstream. Because antagonism of the CXCR4 receptor has been shown to increase the trafficking of white blood cells, we believe that therapeutic inhibition of the CXCR4/CXCL12 axis holds the potential to benefit people with a wide variety of diseases where there remain significant unmet needs, including chronic neutropenic disorders and certain types of cancer.
Chronic neutropenic disorders are rare blood conditions where people of all ages experience low levels of neutrophils and tend to be at greater risk of developing infections and certain types of cancer. Depending on the levels of circulating neutrophils in the blood, neutropenia can be categorized as mild, moderate, or severe.
We are currently focused on advancing our lead clinical candidate, mavorixafor, for the treatment of a number of chronic neutropenia indications, including WHIM syndrome, while also pursuing partnership opportunities to further advance our previous work in oncology indications.
Our Pipeline
Our deep understanding of the biology of the CXCR4 pathway has enabled us to discover and develop multiple small-molecule CXCR4 antagonists. To date, we have advanced our lead candidate, mavorixafor, into late-stage clinical development. Mavorixafor is an orally available, small-molecule CXCR4 antagonist designed to facilitate the mobilization of white blood cells from the bone marrow into the blood, to increase levels of circulating neutrophils, lymphocytes, and monocytes, and to improve immune system function.
To date, more than 200 patients in clinical trials have been dosed with mavorixafor, which has demonstrated a favorable tolerability profile. In these trials, we have observed drug exposure in patients, a 22-hour half-life, and bioavailability of mavorixafor to support once-daily oral dosing, which we believe would provide convenient dosing and better patient compliance for chronic or life-long use, if approved. The manufacturing process for mavorixafor utilizes well established, small-molecule chemistry, creating the potential for a commercial product that can be supported by specialty pharmacy distribution.
We have successfully advanced mavorixafor through a pivotal, Phase 3 clinical trial, referred to as the 4WHIM trial, in people with WHIM (Warts, Hypogammaglobulinemia, Infections, and Myelokathexis) syndrome, a rare, primary immunodeficiency, through a Phase 1b clinical trial in people with congenital, idiopathic, or cyclic neutropenia, and through a Phase 1b clinical trial of mavorixafor in combination with the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib in people with a rare B-cell lymphoma called Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia (“Waldenström’s”).
We have also developed two pre-clinical candidates: X4P-003, a second-generation CXCR4 antagonist designed to have enhanced properties relative to mavorixafor, potentially enabling broader opportunities in CXCR4-dependent disorders and primary immunodeficiencies; and X4P-002, a CXCR4 antagonist with a unique distribution profile and a demonstrated ability to cross the blood-brain barrier.
* Programs only being advanced through partnership
Following our July 2022 announced strategic re-prioritization, we are now advancing mavorixafor solely in chronic neutropenic disorder indications, including WHIM syndrome, while pausing our pre-clinical programs and only progressing our oncology programs upon completion of strategic partnership(s).
About WHIM Syndrome
WHIM syndrome is both a rare combined immunodeficiency and a congenital neutropenic disorder in which the body’s immune system does not function properly and has trouble fighting infections. In many patients, WHIM is caused by “gain of function” variations in the single gene that encodes for the CXCR4 receptor. In healthy individuals, the CXCR4 receptor is typically internalized into the cell after CXCL12 binds to it, enabling the receptor to be appropriately “recycled” and the signaling to be diminished. In most WHIM patients, however, a genetic variation in the receptor gene prevents the post-binding internalization (“normal recycling”) of the receptor. As a result, the CXCR4 receptor is maintained on the surface of the cell and is exposed to the ligand, which creates a perpetual “on” signal and retention of white blood cells in the bone marrow where they are produced, leading to the chronic peripheral neutropenia, lymphopenia, and monocytopenia that are the clinical hallmarks of WHIM syndrome.
Genetic testing is typically used to diagnose WHIM syndrome to confirm the presence of a genetic variation in the CXCR4 receptor. The diagnosis of WHIM syndrome may occur at any age: about one-half of reported patients are diagnosed as children, primarily before of at the age of 18 years, with the other half diagnosed as adults, mostly between 18 and 40 years of age.
WHIM syndrome is named for its four common clinical findings, although not all patients experience all symptoms, and not all symptoms are required for a diagnosis: Warts, related to infection with the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV), Hypogammaglobulinemia, a condition of low immunoglobulin (“IG”) levels, Infections, including both bacterial and fungal infections, and Myelokathexis, a hyper-dense population of immune cells in the bone marrow. These conditions reduce the body’s ability to achieve a healthy immune response. Approximately 30-40% of people with WHIM syndrome develop HPV-associated cancers as they age.
The incidence and prevalence of WHIM syndrome are not well established. We believe that this is due to the relatively recent elucidation of the genetics underlying WHIM syndrome, lack of universal or accessible genetic testing, and limited medical education and awareness of the disease, which is in part driven by the lack of available disease-modifying treatments. Based on a preliminary U.S market research study sponsored by us and conducted by a third-party research firm, we believe that the prevalence of WHIM syndrome worldwide is significantly higher than previous registries suggest.
•The study solicited input from community-based physicians of different specialties, including physicians focused on non-malignant hematology, immunology, dermatology, pulmonology, and infectious diseases, who are known to manage and/or treat patients with WHIM syndrome.
•The 212 physicians across these specialties identified to participate in this study reported more than 1,700 patients in the United States with genetically confirmed or highly probable WHIM syndrome.
In addition, we have also completed a study using artificial intelligence, interrogating a database of approximately 300 million American lives that included up to 10 years of insurance claims on diagnoses, drug treatments, procedures, and treatment pathways. This study suggests that there may be as many as 3,700 WHIM patients in the United States based on the WHIM-like phenotypes described.
The first CXCR4 genetic variation determined to cause WHIM syndrome was identified in 2003. Since then, several CXCR4 variations have been identified as “gain of function” variations causing WHIM syndrome. Our research has subsequently identified a number of new genetic variations, among them a new missense variation, called D84H, that is relatively frequent in the general population. The D84H mutation is the first mutation to be identified outside of the C-terminus of the CXCR4 receptor showing gain-of-function signaling and WHIM disease phenotype. We believe that the frequency of the D84H variation, as derived from broad population genomic databases, further supports our current WHIM prevalence estimate. Our research into additional WHIM-causing genetic variations is ongoing and we are continuing to identify novel pathogenic variants, further expanding our understanding of the clinical phenotype of people with WHIM syndrome.
In partnership with Invitae, a genetic information company, we sponsor a no-charge genetic testing and counseling program called PATH4WARD for individuals who may carry a genetic variation known to be associated with chronic neutropenia or primary immunodeficiency disorders (“PIDs”), including WHIM syndrome. The genetic panel looks at more than 550 genes known to be associated with PIDs; to date, the program has proven helpful not only in identifying WHIM patients, but also providing a better understanding of novel genetic variants causing PIDs and assisting participant enrollment in X4-sponsored clinical trials.
We plan to continue to increase awareness of WHIM syndrome among patients, physicians, and their support systems through our partnerships with key patient foundations and registries, including the Jeffrey Modell Foundation, University of Washington, Immune Deficiency Foundation, and Hopitaux Universitaires Est Parisien (Trousseau La Roche-Guyon).
We have also deployed of a field force of Medical Science Liaisons (“MSLs”) and Patient Diagnostic Liaisons (“PDLs”) in the United States to further drive education and awareness of WHIM syndrome and to assist in identifying WHIM patients.
Limited Current Treatment Landscape for WHIM Syndrome
Currently, there are no approved therapies for the treatment of WHIM syndrome and care is limited to the treatment of the syndrome’s different symptoms, mainly the prevention and management of infections. None of these symptomatic treatments, however, address the underlying cause of this multi-faceted disease. Current symptoms and their treatment limitations are as follows:
•Warts: The presence of warts in WHIM syndrome is driven by an underlying HPV infection. Standard treatments, such as topical therapies (for example, imiquimod and salicylic acid), cryotherapy and laser therapy, as well as more aggressive approaches, such as cauterization or surgical removal, have been ineffective in providing durable treatment of warts associated with chronic HPV infections. As WHIM patients generally have limited response to vaccines, the HPV vaccine appears to have limited effectiveness. The number, size, and severity of visible warts in WHIM patients can have a significant negative impact on the patient’s quality of life and result in social anxiety issues. Left untreated, chronic HPV-infections are also known to increase the risk of cancer.
•Hypogammaglobulinemia: Intravenous or subcutaneous IG administration, referred to as IVIG or SCIG, respectively, can be administered to patients with low IG levels. In WHIM patients, the administration of IG therapies raises IG levels, but has shown no impact on circulating white blood cells and limited or no impact on immune responses. IG treatment of patients with WHIM syndrome is based on empirical and anecdotal evidence, and there are no clinical data demonstrating the efficacy of IG treatment for WHIM syndrome. IG treatment also does not treat or protect against HPV-associated symptoms and diseases, such as warts and certain cancers. Furthermore, IG administration is costly and time consuming.
•Infections: Bacterial infections are managed with antibiotics. Acute infections usually resolve, although we are aware of reports from clinicians citing death due to pneumonia or sepsis in young WHIM patients. Importantly, even with antibiotic use, infections are known to recur more frequently and persist longer in patients with WHIM syndrome. Further, the toll of multiple, chronic infections in WHIM patients has been known to lead to devastating irreversible pathologies such as hearing loss, due to chronic ear infections and bronchiectasis, or damaged lung airways. Patients are sometimes given granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (“G-CSF”) to increase neutrophil counts, but G-CSF has demonstrated little, if any, impact on lymphopenia or the incidence of infections in WHIM patients. Side effects of G-CSF have been reported to include disabling bone pain, which can be more severe in certain age groups. Additional, less common, treatment-limiting complications of chronic G-CSF administration include myelofibrosis and leukemia.
•Myelokathexis: G-CSF is also sometimes used to treat the myelokathexis characteristic of WHIM syndrome to try to increase the number of neutrophils outside of the bone marrow, but G-CSF has no effect on lymphocytes and other types of white blood cells.
While the costs of managing the chronic impact of WHIM syndrome are unknown, the per-patient cost of treating primary immunodeficiencies that are similar to WHIM syndrome, based on drug costs alone, exceeds $100,000 per year in the United States for therapies such as antibiotics, IVIG, SCIG and/or G-CSF, despite the limited effectiveness of these treatments. Beyond these estimated direct costs, other costs associated with direct and indirect management of the disease, such as repeated immunization, physician visits, or hospitalizations, have not been quantified but are likely to be significant. We believe that there is a significant need for a treatment targeting the underlying excessive signaling caused by genetic variations to the CXCR4 receptor, which is the established cause of WHIM syndrome.
Our approach to treating WHIM syndrome involves addressing the underlying cause of the disease by blocking CXCR4 signaling using mavorixafor, which has been shown to bind to the CXCR4 receptor in a manner that inhibits the receptor from being stimulated by CXCL12, enabling white blood cells to properly mature and release into the bloodstream and improving immune cell numbers and function.
Clinical Development of Mavorixafor in WHIM Syndrome
In January 2017, we initiated a Phase 2 clinical trial of mavorixafor for the treatment of people with WHIM syndrome. This trial was an open-label, dose-escalation trial in eight WHIM patients conducted at two sites in the United States and Australia pursuant to an Investigational New Drug (“IND”) application that we submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) in June 2016.
The primary objective of the Phase 2 clinical trial was to determine the safety and tolerability of mavorixafor and to determine the dose of mavorixafor for exploration in a pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial. The secondary objective of the Phase 2 trial was to evaluate the potential efficacy of mavorixafor in people with WHIM syndrome by measuring biomarkers, specifically absolute neutrophil (“ANC”) and lymphocyte (“ALC”) counts, over 24-hour dosing cycles. The frequency of infections, antibiotic use, hospitalizations, severity of warts lesions, and vaccine titer levels, among other metrics, were also examined. To be included in the trial, participants must have had a confirmed genetic diagnosis of WHIM syndrome, be at least 18 years of age, and have a neutrophil count equal to or less than 400 cells per microliter or a lymphocyte count equal to or less than 650 cells per microliter.
In the trial, participants received escalating doses of mavorixafor starting at 50 mg once daily to up to 400 mg once daily. Participants were dose-escalated from their starting dose based on an in-hospital 24-hour measurement of ANC and ALC above or below the pre-defined target thresholds of 600 cells per microliter and 1,000 cells per microliter, respectively.
We completed the dose-titration portion of the Phase 2 clinical trial in March 2018 and, based on the reported results, the Data Review Committee recommended the Phase 3 dose of 400 mg administered orally once daily. The choice of time above threshold for absolute neutrophil count (“TAT-ANC”), defined as the number of hours during which the absolute neutrophil count is raised above a 500 cells per microliter threshold, was selected as the primary endpoint of the Phase 3 clinical trial.
Following completion of the dose-titration portion of the Phase 2 clinical trial, participants were allowed to continue on study drug in a Phase 2 open-label extension trial. In June 2020, we announced the following positive data from the open-label extension portion of the Phase 2 clinical trial:
•Sustained, dose-dependent increases in white blood cells, ANC, and ALC were achieved; higher doses of mavorixafor were shown to increase the TAT-ANC at least 4.5-fold versus the TAT-ANC at lower doses.
•These long-term hematological improvements correlated with fewer infections and reduced numbers of cutaneous warts.
•A decreased yearly infection rate from 4.63 [95%CI 3.3,6.3] events in the 12 months prior to the trial, to 2.27 [95%CI 1.4, 3.5] events when treated with mavorixafor at higher doses once daily; notably, deeper reductions in yearly infection rates correlated with increased time on treatment.
•The participants with cutaneous warts on hands and/or feet at baseline achieved an average 75% reduction in the number of warts.
•Mavorixafor was well tolerated for the extended duration of up to more than two years without any attributable serious adverse effects.
In December 2021, we announced the following additional data from the Phase 2 open-label extension trial of mavorixafor in people with WHIM syndrome:
•Mavorixafor continued to show durable increases in neutrophils, lymphocytes, and monocytes, sustained improvements in infections and warts, and was well tolerated (median treatment duration = 148.4 weeks).
•Decreases in mean annualized infection rates correlated well with TAT-ANC.
•Standardized participant interviews revealed that long-term treatment with mavorixafor was well tolerated and continued to demonstrate beneficial treatment effects, including decreased frequency, severity, and duration of infections and fewer hospital/doctor visits.
In June 2019, we initiated 4WHIM, a pivotal, global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter Phase 3 clinical trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mavorixafor in people with genetically confirmed WHIM syndrome. Originally designed to enroll 18-28 patients, the trial achieved full enrollment in September 2021, with 31 participants aged 12 and older receiving either 200-400 mg mavorixafor or placebo orally once daily for 52 weeks; all participants then became eligible to receive treatment with mavorixafor in an open-label trial extension.
The primary endpoint of the 4WHIM trial is a clinically relevant reduction of duration of severe neutropenia as measured by the increase in TAT-ANC (500 cells per microliter) in peripheral blood. Secondary endpoints include time above threshold-absolute lymphocyte count (TAT-ALC) of ≥ 1,000 cells per microliter over a 24-hour period, a composite clinical efficacy endpoint for mavorixafor based on total infection score and total wart change score, total wart change score for mavorixafor based on central blinded, independent review of 3 target skin regions, total infection score for mavorixafor based on number and severity of infections adjudicated by a blinded, independent adjudication committee; and a number of quality-of-life measurements and other exploratory endpoints.
In November 2022, we reported positive top-line results from the Phase 3 4WHIM trial:
•4WHIM met its primary endpoint, with mavorixafor achieving clinical and statistical superiority over placebo (P<0.0001) when measuring the length of time that participants’ ANC remained above a clinically meaningful threshold of 500 cells per microliter (severe neutropenia), over 24-hour periods at 4 time points throughout the 52-week trial.
•4WHIM also met a key secondary endpoint, with mavorixafor achieving clinical and statistical superiority over placebo (P<0.0001) when measuring the length of time that participants’ ALC remained above a clinically meaningful threshold of 1,000 cells per microliter (lymphopenia), over 24-hour periods at 4 time points throughout the 52-week trial.
•Mavorixafor was generally well tolerated in the trial, with no treatment-related serious adverse events reported and no discontinuations for safety events.
Additional data review and analysis of the secondary and exploratory endpoints of the 4WHIM trial are ongoing, with plans to present detailed results at a medical meeting in the second quarter of 2023. Given these positive results to date, we are targeting submission to the FDA of a New Drug Application (“NDA”) early in the second half of 2023, with the goal of obtaining approval for mavorixafor for the treatment of people in the United States, aged 12 and older, with WHIM syndrome.
Mavorixafor has received multiple special designations from global regulatory authorities in WHIM syndrome, including Breakthrough Therapy Designation, Fast Track Designation, and Rare Pediatric Designation in the United States, and Orphan Drug Status in both the United States and European Union. In addition, upon approval of an NDA, we are eligible to receive a Priority Review Voucher (“PRV”) as a result of mavorixafor’s Rare Pediatric Designation in the United States.
About Chronic Neutropenic Disorders
Due to its demonstrated ability to durably elevate levels of circulating white blood cells across multiple clinical trials, we believe that mavorixafor may be useful in the treatment of people with a variety of chronic neutropenic disorders.
Chronic neutropenia is defined as periods lasting more than three months persistently or intermittently where there are abnormally low levels of neutrophils circulating in the blood, and may be idiopathic (of unknown origin), cyclic (episodes typically occurring every three weeks), or congenital (of genetic causation). Similar to WHIM syndrome, chronic neutropenia disorders are rare blood conditions similarly characterized by increased risks of infections and cancer due to abnormally low levels of neutrophils in the body. In all cases, the CXCL12/CXCR4 pathway is the key regulator of neutrophil release from the bone marrow.
The incidence and prevalence of chronic neutropenic disorders are not well established. In December 2022, we presented results from what we believe was the first study examining the prevalence of chronic neutropenia disorders (including idiopathic, cyclic, and congenital neutropenia) in the United States; we believe that determining the estimated projected prevalence of chronic neutropenic disorders is a key step to understanding the extent of existing unmet medical needs in this patient population.
•Using a retrospective analysis of a large U.S. claims database, the analysis included people with a diagnosis code for neutropenia during the calendar years 2018, 2019, and 2021 (the year 2020 was excluded from this analysis owing to anticipated reduced claims during the COVID-19 pandemic).
•People with a diagnostic, procedural, or product code for neutropenia resulting from secondary causes including chemotherapy, drug exposure, infection, solid organ transplantation, myelodysplastic syndrome, and end-stage renal disease within 24-month period prior to selection were excluded.
•A 13- to 24-month lookback period prior to index date was used to confirm chronic status.
•The analysis used longitudinal prescription data and office-based claims data from an IQVIA claims database that included 93% of retail prescription claims, 77% of mail-in prescription claims, and had more than 1.5 billion office-based claims per year.
•This retrospective analysis projected that in 2021, up to 48,000 people in the United States were living with a diagnosis of chronic neutropenia, with the most common type of chronic neutropenic disorder being idiopathic (~40,000), followed by cyclic (~5,000), and congenital (~3,000), and with the majority of affected people being female adults.
In 2022, we also completed an electronic medical records study to better understand the risk of serious or severe infection in people with chronic neutropenia in the United States, analyzing the medical records of 44 healthcare organizations treating approximately 66 million patients. The analysis examined patients who had experienced at least two Serious Infections Events (“SIEs”) following documentation of chronic neutropenia in each calendar year compared with those who did not have neutropenia. SIEs are defined as infections requiring hospitalization or intravenous antibiotics or that result in disability or death.
•The results of this analysis indicated that the incidence rate of SIEs per 100,000 person days was increased for all levels of chronic neutropenia: it was two times greater for patients with any chronic neutropenia (ANC less than 1,500 cells per microliter) and four times greater for patients with severe congenital neutropenia (ANC less than 500 cells per microliter).
•The risk of serious infection increased with the worsening of neutropenia.
•Approximately 25% of patients with chronic neutropenia had at least 2 SIEs in the latest calendar year examined, which was 2019.
People living with chronic neutropenia have few treatment options and may be treated with G-CSF, an injectable therapy approved in the United States for the treatment of severe, chronic neutropenia. G-CSF is used to stimulate the bone marrow to produce neutrophils. Side effects of G-CSF include disabling bone pain, which can be more severe in certain age groups. Additional, less common, treatment-limiting complications of chronic G-CSF administration include myelofibrosis and leukemia. In chronic neutropenia cases that are unresponsive to G-CSF, or if leukemia has developed, bone marrow transplants have been made with varying degrees of success. Bone marrow transplantation is often applied to severe neutropenia from bone marrow failure. Bone marrow transplants bring additional risks into the management of the disorders.
Clinical Development of Mavorixafor in Chronic Neutropenic Disorders
In 2022, we conducted a proof-of-concept Phase 1b open-label, multicenter study designed to assess the safety and tolerability of oral mavorixafor, with or without injectable G-CSF, in participants with chronic neutropenic disorders, including idiopathic, cyclic, and congenital neutropenia. Participants received a single dose of 400 mg oral mavorixafor to assess the magnitude of treatment response.
In September 2022, we announced positive results from the Phase 1b clinical trial:
•A total of 25 participants were enrolled in the study.
•100% of study participants responded to treatment with a single dose of 400 mg of mavorixafor, alone or dosed concurrently with G-CSF:
◦Participants achieved a mean ANC increase at peak of >3,000 cells per microliter.
◦Consistent responses were seen across all of the chronic neutropenic disorders studied – idiopathic, cyclic, and congenital neutropenia.
•All neutropenic participants (n=14) reached normalized ANC levels (>1,500 cells per microliter):
◦When assessed as a monotherapy in participants with severe chronic neutropenia who were not being treated with G-CSF (n=6), a single dose of mavorixafor led to normalized ANC levels in all participants within 2 hours, with a mean ANC increase at peak of ~2,500 cells per microliter.
◦When assessed in participants with moderate or severe neutropenia, despite being treated with G-CSF (n=8), 100% reached normalized ANC levels, suggesting the potential of mavorixafor to both normalize the neutrophil counts in patients with partial response to G-CSF and also to potentially enable the reduction or elimination of G-CSF dosing.
•When assessed in participants with chronic neutropenia with normalized ANC counts on chronic G-CSF (n=11), all participants experienced a consistent and sustained increase in ANC, suggesting mavorixafor’s potential to reduce or possibly eliminate G-CSF treatment in these patients.
•Mavorixafor was well tolerated in the study; all treatment-related adverse events were deemed to be low grade, consistent with previous clinical studies in WHIM syndrome, and no treatment-related serious adverse events were reported.
Following these positive results, an amendment to the Phase 1b clinical trial was initiated aiming to evaluate the use of daily oral mavorixafor with or without injectable G-CSF for up to 6 months in participants with chronic neutropenic disorders as a Phase 2 clinical trial. The Phase 2 trial is expected to assess the durability of ANC responses, the potential of mavorixafor to enable patients to taper down dosing with G-CSF, and to evaluate the tolerability of mavorixafor in combination with G-CSF in chronic use. Participants are now being enrolled in this Phase 2 clinical trial and we expect to provide an update on clinical results in the
second or third quarter of 2023.
Concurrent with this Phase 2 trial execution, we are advancing our plans to conduct a Phase 3 program of mavorixafor in people with certain chronic neutropenic disorders in the event the Phase 2 results are positive. We expect this trial will be a randomized, placebo-controlled trial assessing the safety and efficacy of mavorixafor, with or without concomitant G-CSF, in people with idiopathic, cyclic, or congenital neutropenia. We expect to provide more clarity on the scope and timing of this potential clinical program in the second or third quarter of 2023.
Oncology Programs
In previous clinical and research studies, CXCR4 antagonism has been proven to increase the maturation and mobilization of white blood cells in all those dosed, including healthy volunteers, increase circulating neutrophils, lymphocytes, and monocytes, reduce bacterial and viral infections, and reduce lymphoma burden in combination with approved oncology therapeutics.
As a result of these previous studies, we conducted several clinical programs exploring the potential utility of mavorixafor in the treatment of certain cancers. Any further development of mavorixafor or other pipeline candidate(s) for any oncology indication will be subject to completion of a strategic partnership.
Mavorixafor in Waldenström's macroglobulinemia
Waldenström’s is a rare form of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and B-cell lymphoproliferative disorder most often caused by genetic variations in an immune-signaling gene called MYD88. Approximately 30-40% of people with Waldenström’s have been shown to have a second genetic variation, a somatic WHIM-like activating variation in the CXCR4 gene in the cancer cells that define this rare form of lymphoma. Patients with the CXCR4 genetic variation have higher serum immunoglobulin M (“IgM”) levels and greater incidence of symptomatic hyperviscosity. These patients also have a worse prognosis and weaker responses to treatment with Bruton tyrosine kinase (“BTK”) inhibitors.
In December 2022, we completed a Phase 1b, open-label, multicenter, single-arm study evaluating the safety and efficacy of mavorixafor in combination with the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib in adult participants (either treatment naïve or relapsed/refractory) with Waldenström’s and confirmed MYD88 and CXCR4 genetic variations. The Phase 1b clinical trial examined intra-patient dose escalation, safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of mavorixafor plus ibrutinib in participants aged 18 years or older.
Interim results of the clinical trial were announced in August 2022; full clinical trial results are expected to be submitted to an appropriate medical journal for publication in the future. As of June 2022:
•A total of 16 participants were enrolled; all were dosed with oral, once-daily doses of ibrutinib (420 mg) and escalating doses (200 mg, 400 mg, 600 mg) of oral mavorixafor, also once daily.
•Ten of the 11 evaluable participants (91%) had achieved a major response (“MR”) to therapy, or a greater than 50% reduction in serum IgM from baseline:
◦In relapsed/refractory participants, 7 of 7 (100%) achieved a MR.
◦In treatment-naïve patients, 3 of 4 (75%) achieved a MR.
•Adding mavorixafor to ibrutinib was associated with a higher MR rate at 3, 6, 9, 12, and 24 months compared to previously reported MR rates achieved with ibrutinib monotherapy.
•In addition, patients achieved elevations in ANC, with no neutropenic events reported; patients also experienced fewer infections over time with chronic dosing.
•No major safety signals had been identified in the trial as of the data cut-off; mavorixafor in combination with ibrutinib showed a safety profile similar to ibrutinib monotherapy (N=16, including 8 patients escalated to the 600 mg dose of mavorixafor).
The Phase 1b clinical trial of mavorixafor in Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia trial was conducted as part of a collaboration with The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society (“LLS”) to accelerate the development of mavorixafor for the treatment of Waldenström’s. Mavorixafor was selected for LLS’s Therapy Acceleration Program®, a strategic initiative where LLS builds business alliances and collaborations with biotechnology companies and academic researchers to speed the development of new therapies for blood cancers.
In June 2022, mavorixafor was granted Orphan Drug Designation by the FDA for the treatment of patients with Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia, regardless of CXCR4 genetic variant status.
Mavorixafor in Immuno-Oncology Indications
In solid tumors, the tumor micro-environment (“TME”) consists of the tumor cells and cancer associated fibroblasts (“CAFs”), each of which overproduce growth factors and chemokines to support immune-suppression and malignant cell proliferation and growth. Evidence suggests that the pro-tumor signals between tumor cells and CAFs occur, in part, through chemokine signaling, including through the over-production of CXCL12.
The CXCL12/CXCR4 pathway has been shown to be overstimulated in more than 20 solid and blood-derived tumor types. Excessive stimulation of CXCR4 due to high concentrations of CXCL12 influences the trafficking of immune cells, including myeloid-derived suppressor cells (“MDSCs”), CD4+ regulatory T cells (“Tregs”), CD8+ T cells (“killer T cells”), and mature dendritic cells. We believe that blocking CXCR4 overstimulation can lead to improved immune-cell trafficking and increase the absolute number of CD8+ T-cells, thereby also increasing the ratio of CD8+ T-cells to Tregs in the TME, turning the TME from an immunosuppressive environment to an immunostimulatory one.
Previously, we completed three clinical trials in solid tumors (two in clear cell renal cell carcinoma, one in melanoma) to explore the impact of mavorixafor on relevant tumor biomarkers and clinical responses. In all studies, combination of mavorixafor with standard of care proved to be well tolerated and showed favorable impact on key immune-response biomarkers (e.g. increased proliferation of CD8+ T-cells and CD8+ T-cells to Treg ratios in the TME) and improvement in clinical metrics (response rates) vs. historical controls of single-agent standards of care.
Ongoing trials in triple-negative breast cancer are being undertaken by Abbisko, our strategic partner for development and commercialization in greater China. Future development and potential commercialization of mavorixafor in potential immuno-oncology indications in markets outside of greater China will be pursued only as part of additional potential strategic collaboration(s).
Competition
The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition, and a strong emphasis on proprietary products. We face potential competition from many different sources, including major pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies, and public and private research institutions. Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future.
Many of our competitors may 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. Other firms also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient enrollment for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and diagnostic industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors with us, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.
Our commercial opportunities could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize therapeutics that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain marketing approvals for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for our products, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. In addition, our ability to compete may be affected because in some cases insurers or other third-party payors, including government programs, seek to encourage the use of generic products. This may have the effect of making branded products less attractive to buyers from a cost perspective.
We are aware of other companies that are developing CXCR4 inhibitors that are in a similar stage of development as mavorixafor, including BioLineRx (motixafortide), Noxxon (NOXA12), Upsher-Smith, Polyphor (Balixafortide), and Glycomimetics (GMI1359). To our knowledge, there do not appear to be any competitors with programs in development for WHIM syndrome or chronic neutropenia. With respect to chronic neutropenia, filgrastim injections (human G-CSF) and two biosimilars (Zarxio and Nivestym) are FDA approved to reduce the incidence and duration of after-effects of severe neutropenia (e.g. fever‚ infections‚ oropharyngeal ulcers) in symptomatic patients with severe neutropenia.
In Waldenström’s, there are several treatment approaches currently being developed, including targeted therapies and immunotherapies (as monotherapies and combination therapies), chemotherapy, stem cell transplantation, and cancer vaccines. To our knowledge, only mavorixafor is targeting the CXCR4 pathway. Development of a Bristol Myers’ anti-CXCR4 antibody was discontinued.
Manufacturing
We do not own or operate, and currently have no plans to establish, manufacturing facilities for the production of clinical or commercial quantities of mavorixafor or any of our other product candidates. We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of any of our product or product candidates.
We currently have a master services agreement (“the Aptuit Agreement”) in place with Aptuit (Oxford) Ltd (“Aptuit”), pursuant to which Aptuit develops and manufactures the active pharmaceutical ingredient (“API”) for mavorixafor. The term of the Aptuit Agreement expires in February 2024 unless terminated by us and/or Aptuit. Aptuit is our sole supplier for mavorixafor drug substance and is currently manufacturing mavorixafor drug substance at a commercially relevant scale to support our ongoing and anticipated future supply needs.
We also have a master services agreement in place with Catalent Inc., formerly Mayne Pharma Inc. (“Catalent”), which is our sole manufacturer for the final capsule drug product formulation of mavorixafor. The term of the master services agreement with Catalent expires on September 10, 2023, and may be terminated by (1) us upon 30 days-notice to Catalent or (2) by either party following a material breach by the other party that remains uncured for 30 days.
We obtain the supplies of our drug products from Aptuit and Catalent pursuant to typical industry standard clinical supply agreements. We believe that both manufacturers have the capability and capacity to manufacture currently projected clinical trial supply and commercial volumes of mavorixafor. We expect to extend both of these manufacturing agreements beyond their current expiration dates.
Sales and Marketing
We intend to build a commercial infrastructure to support sales of any of our approved products. We expect to manage sales, marketing and distribution through internal resources and third-party relationships. While we may commit significant financial and management resources to commercial activities, we will also consider collaborating with one or more pharmaceutical companies to enhance our commercial capabilities.
License Agreements
License Agreement with Genzyme
In July 2014, we entered into a license agreement with Genzyme, a wholly owned subsidiary of Sanofi, pursuant to which we were granted an exclusive license to certain patent applications and other intellectual property owned or controlled by Genzyme related to the CXCR4 receptor to develop and commercialize products containing licensed compounds, including but not limited to mavorixafor. Genzyme has retained the non-exclusive right to conduct preclinical research involving compounds in any field, including any fields licensed to us, but has not retained rights to conduct any clinical development or commercialization of those compounds identified in the agreement in any of the fields licensed to us. We are primarily responsible for the preparation, filing, prosecution and maintenance of all patent applications and patents covering the intellectual property licensed to us under the agreement at our sole expense.
We are obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize licensed products for use in the field in the United States and at least one other major market country. We have the right to grant sublicenses of the licensed rights that cover mavorixafor to third parties. If we wish to grant a sublicense to any licensed product other than mavorixafor, we are obligated to first offer the sublicense to Genzyme. If Genzyme expresses written interest for the sublicense, then we will negotiate exclusively with Genzyme for a certain stated period to obtain a license to such rights, after which Genzyme shall have no further rights with respect to such licensed product and we will be free to negotiate a sublicense with respect to such licensed product with any third party.
We are obligated to pay Genzyme milestone payments in the aggregate amount of up to $25 million, contingent upon our achievement of certain late-stage regulatory and sales milestones with respect to licensed products, and tiered royalties based on net sales of licensed products that we commercialize under the Genzyme agreement. Our obligation to pay royalties for each licensed product expires on a country-by-country basis on the latest of (i) the expiration of licensed patent rights that cover that licensed product in that country, (ii) the expiration of regulatory exclusivity in that country and (iii) ten years after the first commercial sale of such licensed product in that country. Royalty rates are subject to reduction under the agreement in specified circumstances, including in any country if we are required to obtain a license from any third party to the extent our patent rights might infringe the third party’s patent rights, if a licensed product is not covered by a valid claim in that country or if sales of generic products reach certain thresholds in that country. Sublicenses that we enter into under the Genzyme agreement, including our license agreement with Abbisko obligate us to pay Genzyme a percentage of certain upfront, maintenance fees, milestone payments and royalty payments paid to us by the sublicensee.
The term of the Genzyme Agreement will continue until the later of the expiration of the last to expire valid claim of the patents licensed under the agreement that cover any licensed product, the expiration of regulatory exclusivity applicable to any licensed product and 10 years from the date of first commercial sale of any licensed product. Either we or Genzyme may terminate the Genzyme Agreement in the event of the bankruptcy or uncured material breach by the other party. Genzyme may terminate the Genzyme Agreement if we or our affiliates initiate a patent challenge of the patents licensed under the agreement. We may terminate the Genzyme Agreement immediately upon notice to Genzyme if we reasonably believe that the development or commercialization of a licensed compound or product under the Genzyme agreement would result in a material safety issue for
patients.
License Agreement with Georgetown University
In December 2016, we entered into a license agreement with the Georgetown University (“Georgetown”) pursuant to which we obtained an exclusive, worldwide license to practice certain methods, and to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale and import products, covered by licensed patent rights co-owned by Georgetown. The rights licensed to us are for all therapeutic, prophylactic and diagnostic uses in all disease indications in humans and animals. We have the right to grant sublicenses of the licensed rights to third parties to the extent consistent with the terms of the Georgetown agreement.
Under the terms of the Georgetown agreement we paid a one-time only, upfront fee of $50 thousand, and we may be required to pay milestone payments of up to an aggregate of $800 thousand related to commercial sales of a licensed product. We are responsible for all patent prosecution costs incurred with respect to the licensed patents. We are obligated under the agreement to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize licensed product, to make licensed product reasonably available to the public, to obtain government approvals for licensed product and to market licensed product in quantities sufficient to meet the market demand.
The term of the Georgetown agreement will continue until the expiration of the last valid claim within the patent rights covering the licensed products. Georgetown may terminate the Georgetown agreement or convert our license to non-exclusive in the event (i) we fail to pay any amount and fail to cure such failure within 30 days after receipt of notice, (ii) we default in our obligation to obtain and maintain insurance and fail to remedy such breach within 45 days after receipt of notice, (iii) we declare insolvency or bankruptcy or (iv) we materially default in the performance of any material obligations under the Georgetown agreement which is not cured within a certain period from the date of written notice of such default. We may terminate the Georgetown agreement at any time upon at least 60 days’ written notice.
License Agreement with Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
In December 2016, we entered into a license agreement with Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (“BIDMC”) pursuant to which we obtained an exclusive, worldwide license to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale and import of licensed products and certain processes covered by licensed patent rights co-owned by BIDMC and a nonexclusive royalty-free right to use certain information pertaining to any invention claimed in the licensed patents that is owned by BIDMC to develop, make, have made, use, have used, sell, have sold and commercialize such licensed products and processes. The rights licensed to us are for all fields of use. We have the right to grant sublicenses of the licensed rights to third parties to the extent consistent with the terms of the BIDMC agreement.
Under the terms of the BIDMC agreement we paid a one-time only, upfront fee of $20 thousand and we are responsible for all future patent prosecution costs.
The term of the BIDMC agreement will continue until the expiration of the last valid claim within the patent rights covering the licensed product. BIDMC may terminate the agreement in the event (i) we fail to pay any amount and fail to cure such failure within 15 days after receipt of notice, (ii) the insurance coverage that we are obligated to maintain under the agreement is terminated and we fail to obtain replacement insurance within a certain period of time following notice to BIDMC, or (iii) we declare insolvency or bankruptcy. In addition, if we are in material breach of any material provisions of the BIDMC agreement and fail to remedy such breach within 60 days after receipt of notice, BIDMC may terminate the BIDMC agreement or terminate any licenses granted under the BIDMC agreement with respect to the country or countries in which such material breach has occurred. We may terminate the BIDMC agreement at any time upon at least 90 days’ written notice.
License Agreement with Dana Farber Cancer Institute
In November 2020, we entered into a license agreement with Dana Farber Cancer Institute (“DFCI”) pursuant to which we obtained a non-exclusive, worldwide license to use, make, have made, develop, market, import, distribute, sell and have sold licensed products and certain processes covered by licensed patent rights owned by DFCI. The rights licensed to us are for the therapeutic use of our CXCR4 antagonists for the treatment of Waldenström’s in combination with BTK inhibitors, including ibrutinib. We have the right to grant sublicenses of the licensed rights to third parties to the extent consistent with the terms of the DFCI agreement.
Under the terms of the DFCI agreement we paid a one-time, upfront fee of $25 thousand and we are responsible for the reimbursement of certain future patent prosecution cost and the payment of an annual maintenance fee. We are obligated to pay DFCI milestone payments in the aggregate amount of up to approximately $32 million, contingent upon our achievement of certain regulatory and sales milestones with respect to licensed products, and a flat royalty based on net sales of licensed products that we commercialize under the DFCI agreement.
The term of the DFCI agreement will continue until the expiration of the last valid claim within the patent rights covering the licensed product. DFCI may terminate the DFCI agreement in the event (i) we fail to pay any amount and fail to cure such failure within 30 days after receipt of notice, (ii) we cease to carry on our business with respect to the licensed products or process, (iii) the insurance coverage that we are obligated to maintain under the DCFI agreement is terminated and we fail to obtain replacement insurance within a certain period of time following notice to DFCI, (iv) we fail to comply with certain diligence obligations and cure any such default within 60 days after receipt of written notice, (v) we have granted a sublicense without notifying DFCI or on terms inconsistent with the terms required of sublicenses under the DCFI agreement, (vi) an officer of our company, an affiliate or sublicensee is convicted of a felony relating to the manufacture, use, sale or importation of a licensed product, (vii) we or any of our affiliates, sublicensees or sublicensees’ affiliates initiate a patent challenge of the patents licensed under the DFCI agreement or assists others in doing so or (viii) we declare insolvency or bankruptcy. In addition, if we are in material breach of any material obligations under the DFCI agreement and fail to remedy such breach within 90 days after receipt of notice, DFCI may terminate the DFCI agreement or terminate any licenses granted under the agreement. We may terminate the DFCI agreement at any time upon at least 90 days’ written notice.
Abbisko Agreement
In July 2019, we entered into a license agreement with Abbisko. Under the terms of the agreement, we granted Abbisko the exclusive right to develop, manufacture and commercialize mavorixafor in mainland China, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau. The agreement provides Abbisko with the exclusive rights in this territory to develop and commercialize mavorixafor in combination with checkpoint inhibitors or other agents in oncology indications. Pancreatic cancer, ovarian cancer and triple negative breast cancer will be explored initially. We retain the full rest-of-world rights to develop and commercialize mavorixafor outside of Greater China for all indications and the ability to utilize data generated pursuant to the Abbisko collaboration for rest-of-world development. In addition, Abbisko has the right of first refusal if we determine to pursue additional products in the Abbisko Territory, as defined in the agreement. We entered into a separate agreement in April 2020 whereby we will provide Abbisko with a clinical supply and, if the product is commercialized in the territory licensed by Abbisko, we intend to enter into a commercial supply of the licensed compound.
Pursuant to the agreement with Abbisko, upon the closing of a qualified financing of Abbisko, as defined in the agreement, which occurred in March 2020, Abbisko made a one-time, non-refundable, non-creditable financial milestone payment of $3 million to us. We are also eligible to receive potential development, regulatory and commercial milestone payments of up to $214 million, which will vary based on the ultimate sales, if any, of the approved licensed products. Upon commercialization of mavorixafor in the Abbisko Territory, we are eligible to receive a tiered royalty, with a percentage range in the low double-digits, on net sales of approved licensed products. Abbisko is obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize mavorixafor in the Abbisko Territory. Abbisko has responsibility for all activities and costs associated with the further development, manufacture and commercialization of mavorixafor in the Abbisko Territory.
Intellectual Property
Our ability to commercialize our product candidates depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain intellectual property protection for our product candidates, including mavorixafor, and our preclinical compounds and core technologies. Our policy is to seek to protect our intellectual property position by, among other methods, filing U.S. and foreign patent applications related to the technology, inventions and improvements that are important to the development and implementation of our business strategy. We also rely on trade secrets, know-how and continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our proprietary position.
We file patent applications directed to our product candidates, preclinical compounds and related technologies to establish intellectual property positions on these compounds and their uses in disease. As of December 31, 2022, we owned or exclusively licensed 18 issued U.S. patents, 14 pending U.S. non-provisional patent applications, eight pending U.S. provisional patent application, and approximately 175 PCT and foreign patents and patent applications in the following foreign jurisdictions: Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, European Patent Office, France, Germany, Great Britain, Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Italy, Israel, Japan, Lichtenstein, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland.
As of December 31, 2022, our in-licensed intellectual property portfolio for mavorixafor included three issued U.S. patents and one pending U.S. patent application directed to mavorixafor, including one issued U.S. patent with claims directed to a crystalline salt form of mavorixafor, one issued U.S. patent directed to pharmaceutical compositions of mavorixafor in unit dosage form, and one issued U.S. patents directed to methods of making mavorixafor and key intermediates. These in-licensed patents are expected to expire between 2024 and 2027. We also had four issued U.S. patents directed to compositions and methods of making chemical compounds related to the X4P-001 program. Approximately 61 corresponding foreign patents directed to compositions of matter and related chemical compounds as well as methods of making and methods of use were issued or pending. All of the above patents and patent applications were exclusively licensed to us pursuant to the terms of the Genzyme agreement.
Additionally, we have filed our own patent applications with respect to the mavorixafor and X4P-002 product candidates. Some of these patent applications are co-owned with Genzyme, BIDMC or Georgetown, with their rights exclusively licensed to us. As of December 31, 2022, our independently generated intellectual property portfolio included seven granted U.S. patents, ten pending U.S. non-provisional patent applications, four pending U.S. provisional patent applications, and approximately 72 pending PCT and foreign patent applications related to our mavorixafor clinical programs in cancer and primary immunodeficiencies. In addition, we have four granted U.S. patents, four pending U.S. non-provisional patent applications, four pending provisional applications and approximately 38 pending PCT and foreign patent applications related to our preclinical compounds and X4P-002 in glioblastoma. Patents issuing from these applications, if any, are expected to expire between 2036 and 2043.
The term of individual patents depends upon the legal term of the patents in the countries in which they are obtained. In most countries, including the United States, the patent term is 20 years from the earliest filing date of a non-provisional patent application. In the United States, a patent’s term may be lengthened by patent term adjustment, which compensates a patentee for administrative delays by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, (the “USPTO”), in examining and granting a patent, or may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over an earlier filed patent. The term of a U.S. patent that covers a drug or biological product may also be eligible for patent term extension when approval from the FDA is granted, provided statutory and regulatory requirements are met. In the future, if our product candidates receive approval from the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities, we expect to apply for patent term extensions on issued patents covering those products, depending upon the length of the clinical trials for each drug and other factors. There can be no assurance that any of our pending patent applications will issue or that we will benefit from any patent term extension or other favorable adjustment to the term of any of our patents.
As with other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, our ability to maintain and solidify our proprietary and intellectual property position for our product candidates, including mavorixafor, and our preclinical compounds, and our core technologies will depend on our success in obtaining effective patent claims and enforcing those claims if granted. However, patent applications that we may file or license from third parties may not result in the issuance of patents. We also cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be allowed or enforced in our patents. Any issued patents that we may receive in the future may be challenged, invalidated or circumvented. For example, prior to March 16, 2013, in the United States, patent applications were subject to a “first to invent” rule of law. Applications filed after March 16, 2013 (except for certain applications claiming the benefit of earlier-filed applications) are subject to a “first to file” rule of law.
Discoveries reported in the scientific literature often lag the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, or in some cases not at all. We cannot be certain that any existing or future application will be subject to the “first to file” or “first to invent” rule of law, that we were the first to make the inventions claimed in our existing patents or pending patent applications subject to the prior laws, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions subject to the new laws. If third parties prepare and file patent applications in the United States that also claim technology we have claimed in our patents or patent applications, we may have to participate in interference proceedings in the USPTO to determine priority of invention, which could result in substantial costs to us, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us. In addition, because of the extensive time required for clinical development and regulatory review of a product candidate we may develop, it is possible that, before any of our product candidates can be commercialized, any related patent may expire or remain in force for only a short period following commercialization, thereby reducing any advantage of any such patent.
In addition to patents, we rely upon unpatented trade secrets, know-how, and continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our competitive position. We seek to protect our proprietary information, in part, by using confidentiality agreements with our collaborators, scientific advisors, employees and consultants, and invention assignment agreements with our employees. We also have agreements requiring assignment of inventions with selected consultants, scientific advisors and collaborators. The confidentiality agreements are designed to protect our proprietary information and, in the case of agreements or clauses requiring invention assignment, to grant us ownership of technologies that are developed under those agreements.
Government Regulation and Product Approval
The FDA Approval Process
In the United States, pharmaceutical products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, (the “FDCA”), and other federal and state statutes and regulations, govern, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, storage, recordkeeping, approval, labeling, promotion and marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, sampling, and import and export of pharmaceutical products. Failure to comply with applicable U.S. requirements may subject a company to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions, such as imposition of clinical holds, refusal by the FDA to approve pending NDAs, warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement, civil penalties and criminal prosecution.
Pharmaceutical product development in the United States typically involves preclinical or other nonclinical laboratory and animal tests and the submission to the FDA of an IND, which must become effective before clinical testing may commence. For commercial approval, the sponsor must submit adequate tests by all methods reasonably applicable to show that the drug is safe for use under the conditions prescribed, recommended or suggested in the proposed labeling. The sponsor must also submit substantial evidence, generally consisting of adequate, well-controlled clinical trials to establish that the drug will have the effect it purports or is represented to have under the conditions of use prescribed, recommended or suggested in the proposed labeling. In certain cases, the FDA may determine that a drug is effective based on one clinical study plus confirmatory evidence.
Nonclinical tests include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry, formulation and toxicity, as well as animal studies to assess the characteristics and potential safety and efficacy of the product. The conduct of the nonclinical tests must comply with federal requirements, including the FDA’s good laboratory practices regulations and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (“USDA’s”), regulations implementing the Animal Welfare Act. The results of nonclinical testing are submitted to the FDA as part of an IND along with other information, including information about product chemistry, manufacturing and controls, and a proposed clinical trial protocol. Long-term nonclinical tests, such as animal studies of reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity, may continue after the IND is submitted.
A 30-day waiting period after the submission of each IND is required prior to the commencement of clinical testing in humans. If the FDA has not imposed a clinical hold on the IND or otherwise commented or questioned the IND within this 30-day period, the clinical trial proposed in the IND may begin.
Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational new drug to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of a qualified investigator. Clinical trials must be conducted: (i) in compliance with federal regulations, (ii) in compliance with GCP, an international standard meant to protect the rights and health of patients and to define the roles of clinical trial sponsors, administrators and monitors, and (iii) under protocols detailing the objectives of the trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. Each protocol involving testing on U.S. patients and subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND.
The FDA may order the temporary, or permanent, discontinuation of a clinical trial at any time or impose other sanctions if it believes that the clinical trial either is not being conducted in accordance with the FDA requirements or presents an unacceptable risk to the clinical trial patients. The trial protocol and informed consent information for patients in clinical trials must also be submitted to an institutional review board (“IRB”) at each site where a trial will be conducted for approval. An IRB may also require the clinical trial at the site to be halted, either temporarily or permanently, for failure to comply with the IRB’s requirements or may impose other conditions.
Clinical trials to support NDAs for marketing approval are typically conducted in three sequential phases, but the phases may overlap. In general, in Phase 1, the initial introduction of the drug into healthy human volunteers or, in some cases, patients, the drug is tested to assess metabolism, pharmacokinetics, pharmacological actions, side effects associated with increasing doses and, if possible, early evidence of effectiveness. Phase 2 usually involves trials in a limited patient population to determine the effectiveness of the drug for a particular indication, dosage tolerance and optimum dosage, and to identify common adverse effects and safety risks. If a compound demonstrates evidence of effectiveness and an acceptable safety profile in Phase 2 evaluations, Phase 3 trials are undertaken to obtain the additional information about clinical efficacy and safety in a larger number of patients, typically at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites, to permit the FDA to evaluate the overall benefit-risk relationship of the drug and to provide adequate information for the labeling of the drug. In most cases, the FDA requires two adequate and well-controlled Phase 3 clinical trials to demonstrate the efficacy of the drug. The FDA may, however, determine that a drug is effective based on one clinical trial plus confirmatory evidence. In some cases, the FDA may require post-market studies, known as Phase 4 studies, to be conducted as a condition of approval to gather additional information on the drug’s effect in various populations and any side effects associated with long-term use. Depending on the risks posed by the drugs, other post-market requirements may be imposed.
After completion of the required clinical testing, an NDA is prepared and submitted to the FDA. FDA approval of the NDA is required before marketing of the product may begin in the United States. The NDA must include the results of all preclinical, clinical, and other testing and a compilation of data relating to the product’s pharmacology, chemistry, manufacture, and controls. Under federal law, the submission of most NDAs is additionally subject to a substantial application user fee, subject to certain exceptions and waivers, such as for orphan-designated drugs.
The FDA has 60 days from its receipt of an NDA to determine whether the application will be accepted for filing based on the agency’s threshold determination that it is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review. Under the performance goals established pursuant to the Prescription Drug User Fee Act the FDA aims to complete review of 90% of standard (non-priority) NDAs within 10 months filing and within six months for priority NDAs.
The FDA may also refer applications for novel drug products, or drug products that present difficult questions of safety or efficacy, to an advisory committee, which is typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts, for review, evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it generally follows such recommendations. Before approving an NDA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP. Additionally, the FDA will inspect the facility or the facilities at which the drug is manufactured. The FDA will not approve the product unless compliance with current GMP is satisfactory and the NDA contains data that provide substantial evidence that the drug is safe and effective in the indication studied.
After the FDA evaluates the NDA and the manufacturing facilities, it issues either an approval letter or a complete response letter. A complete response letter generally outlines the deficiencies in the submission and may require substantial additional testing, or information, in order for the FDA to reconsider the application. If, or when, those deficiencies have been addressed to the FDA’s satisfaction in a resubmission of the NDA, the FDA will issue an approval letter.
An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications. As a condition of NDA approval, the FDA may require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (“REMS”) to help ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh the potential risks. REMS can include medication guides, communication plans for health care professionals, and elements to assure safe use (“ETASU”). ETASU can include, but are not limited to, special training or certification for prescribing or dispensing, dispensing only under certain circumstances, special monitoring, and the use of patient registries. The requirement for a REMS can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the drug. Moreover, product approval may require substantial post-approval testing and surveillance to monitor the drug’s safety or efficacy. Once granted, product approvals may be withdrawn if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or problems are identified following initial marketing.
The Hatch-Waxman Act
Orange Book Listing
In seeking approval for a drug through an NDA, applicants are required to list with the FDA each patent whose claims cover the applicant’s product. Upon approval of a drug, each of the patents listed in the application for the drug is then published in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, commonly known as the Orange Book. Drugs listed in the Orange Book can, in turn, be cited by potential generic competitors in support of approval of an abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA. An ANDA provides for marketing of a drug product that has the same active ingredients in the same strengths and dosage form as the listed drug and has been shown through bioequivalence testing to be bioequivalent to the listed drug. Other than the requirement for bioequivalence testing, ANDA applicants are not required to conduct, or submit results of, pre-clinical or clinical tests to prove the safety or effectiveness of their drug product. Drugs approved in this way are considered to be therapeutically equivalent to the listed drug, are commonly referred to as “generic equivalents” to the listed drug, and can often be substituted by pharmacists under prescriptions written for the original listed drug in accordance with state law.
The ANDA applicant is required to certify to the FDA concerning any patents listed for the approved product in the FDA’s Orange Book. Specifically, the applicant must certify that: (i) the required patent information has not been filed; (ii) the listed patent has expired; (iii) the listed patent has not expired, but will expire on a particular date and approval is sought after patent expiration; or (iv) the listed patent is invalid or will not be infringed by the new product. The ANDA applicant may also elect to submit a section viii statement, certifying that its proposed ANDA labeling does not contain (or carves out) any language regarding the patented method-of-use, rather than certify to a listed method-of-use patent.
If the applicant does not challenge the listed patents, the ANDA application will not be approved until all the listed patents claiming the referenced product have expired.
A certification that the new product will not infringe the already approved product’s listed patents, or that such patents are invalid, is called a Paragraph IV certification. If the ANDA applicant has provided a Paragraph IV certification to the FDA, the applicant must also send notice of the Paragraph IV certification to the NDA and patent holders once the ANDA has been accepted for filing by the FDA. The NDA and patent holders may then initiate a patent infringement lawsuit in response to the notice of the Paragraph IV certification. The filing of a patent infringement lawsuit within 45 days of the receipt of a Paragraph IV certification automatically prevents the FDA from approving the ANDA until the earlier of 30 months, expiration of the patent, settlement of the lawsuit, or a decision in the infringement case that is favorable to the ANDA applicant.
The ANDA application also will not be approved until any applicable non-patent exclusivity listed in the Orange Book for the referenced product has expired.
Exclusivity
Upon NDA approval of a new chemical entity, or NCE, which is a drug that contains no active moiety that has been approved by the FDA in any other NDA, that drug receives five years of marketing exclusivity during which time the FDA cannot receive any ANDA or 505(b)(2) application seeking approval of a drug that references a version of the NCE drug. Certain changes to a drug, such as the addition of a new indication to the package insert, are associated with a three-year period of exclusivity during which the FDA cannot approve an ANDA or 505(b)(2) application that includes the change.
An ANDA or 505(b)(2) application may be submitted one year before NCE exclusivity expires if a Paragraph IV certification is filed. If there is no listed patent in the Orange Book, there may not be a Paragraph IV certification and thus no ANDA or 505(b)(2) application may be filed before the expiration of the exclusivity period.
Five-year and three-year exclusivities do not preclude FDA approval of a 505(b)(1) application for a duplicate version of the drug during the period of exclusivity, provided that the 505(b)(1) applicant conducts or obtains a right of reference to all of the preclinical studies and adequate and well controlled clinical trials necessary to demonstrate safety and effectiveness.
Patent Term Extension
After NDA approval, owners of relevant drug patents may apply for up to a five-year patent extension. The allowable patent term extension is calculated as half of the drug’s testing phase—the time between IND submission and NDA submission—and all of the review phase—the time between NDA submission and approval up to a maximum of five years. The time can be shortened if the FDA determines that the applicant did not pursue approval with due diligence. The total patent term after the extension may not exceed 14 years.
For patents that might expire during the application phase, the patent owner may request an interim patent extension. An interim patent extension increases the patent term by one year and may be renewed up to four times. For each interim patent extension granted, the post-approval patent extension is reduced by one year. The director of the USPTO must determine that approval of the drug covered by the patent for which a patent extension is being sought is likely. Interim patent extensions are not available for a drug for which an NDA has not been submitted.
Advertising and Promotion
Once an NDA is approved, a product will be subject to certain post-approval requirements. For instance, the FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of drugs.
Drugs may be marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. Changes to some of the conditions established in an approved application, including changes in indications, labeling, or manufacturing processes or facilities, require submission and FDA approval of a new NDA or NDA supplement before the change can be implemented. An NDA supplement for a new indication typically requires clinical data similar to that in the original application, and the FDA uses the same procedures and actions in reviewing NDA supplements as it does in reviewing NDAs.
Adverse Event Reporting and GMP Compliance
Adverse event reporting and submission of periodic reports is required following FDA approval of an NDA. The FDA also may require post-marketing testing, known as Phase 4 testing, require a REMS special communications regarding the safety of the drug or heightened surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved product, or may place conditions on an approval that could restrict the distribution or use of the product. In addition, quality control, drug manufacture, packaging, and labeling procedures must continue to conform to GMP after approval. Drug manufacturers and certain of their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies. Registration with the FDA subjects entities to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA, during which the agency inspects manufacturing facilities to assess compliance with GMP. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the areas of production and quality control to maintain compliance with GMP. Regulatory authorities may withdraw product approvals or request product recalls if a company fails to comply with regulatory standards, if it encounters problems following initial marketing or if previously unrecognized problems are subsequently discovered.
Pediatric Exclusivity and Pediatric Use
The Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act, or BPCA, provides NDA holders a six-month period of exclusivity attached to any other exclusivity listed with FDA—patent or non-patent—for a drug if certain conditions are met. Conditions for pediatric exclusivity include a determination by the FDA that information relating to the use of a new drug in the pediatric population may produce health benefits in that population; a written request by the FDA for pediatric studies; and agreement by the applicant to perform the requested studies and the submission to the FDA, completion of the studies in accordance with the written request, and the acceptance by the FDA of the reports of the requested studies within the statutory timeframe.
In addition, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, NDAs or supplements to NDAs must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the drug is safe and effective, unless the sponsor has received a deferral or waiver from the FDA. Unless otherwise required by regulation, PREA does not apply to any drug for an indication for which orphan designation has been granted. The sponsor or the FDA may request a deferral of pediatric studies for some or all of the pediatric subpopulations. A deferral may be granted for several reasons, including a finding that the drug is ready for approval for use in adults before pediatric studies are complete or that additional safety or effectiveness data need to be collected before the pediatric studies begin.
Orphan Drugs
Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to drugs intended to treat a rare disease or condition—generally a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States (or affects more than 200,000 in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available in the United States a drug for such disease or condition will be recovered from sales of such drug in the United States). Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the drug and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process. The first NDA applicant to receive FDA approval for a particular active ingredient to treat a particular disease with FDA orphan drug designation is entitled to a seven-year exclusive marketing period in the United States for that product, for that indication. During the seven-year exclusivity period, the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same drug for the same disease, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity. If the FDA designates an orphan drug based on a finding of clinical superiority, the FDA must provide a written notification to the sponsor that states the basis for orphan designation, including “any plausible hypothesis” relied upon by the FDA. The FDA must also publish a summary of its clinical superiority findings upon granting orphan drug exclusivity based on clinical superiority.
Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different drug for the same disease or condition, or the same drug for a different disease or condition. Among the other benefits of orphan drug designation are tax credits for certain research and a waiver of the NDA application user fee.
Breakthrough Designation
A product can be designated as a breakthrough therapy by FDA if it is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that it may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints. A sponsor may request that a product candidate be designated as a breakthrough therapy concurrently with the submission of an IND or any time before an end-of-Phase-2 meeting, and the FDA must determine if the product candidate qualifies for breakthrough therapy designation within 60 days of receipt of the sponsor’s request. If so designated, the FDA shall act to expedite the development and review of the product’s marketing application, including by meeting with the sponsor throughout the product’s development, providing timely advice to the sponsor to ensure that the development program to gather pre-clinical and clinical data is as efficient as practicable, involving senior managers and experienced review staff in a cross-disciplinary review, assigning a cross-disciplinary project lead for the FDA review team to facilitate an efficient review of the development program and to serve as a scientific liaison between the review team and the sponsor, and taking steps to ensure that the design of the clinical trials is as efficient as practicable.
Rest of World Government Regulation
In addition to regulations in the United States, we are and will be subject, either directly or through our distribution partners, to a variety of regulations in other jurisdictions governing, among other things, clinical trials and any commercial sales and distribution of our products, if approved.
Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we must obtain the requisite approvals from regulatory authorities in non-U.S. countries prior to the commencement of clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries.
Pharmaceutical Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement
Sales of pharmaceutical products in the United States will depend, in part, on the extent to which the costs of the products will be covered by third-party payors, such as government health programs, and commercial insurance and managed health care organizations. These third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical products and services.
Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any drug products for which we obtain regulatory approval. In the United States, sales of any products for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale will depend in part on the availability of coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors. Third-party payors include government authorities, managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations. Coverage and reimbursement policies for drug products can differ significantly from payor to payor as there is no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for drug products among third party payors in the United States. Third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates, but also have their own methods and approval process apart from Medicare determinations. The process for determining whether a payor will provide coverage for a drug product may be separate from the process for setting the reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the drug product. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific drug products on an approved list, or formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved drugs for a particular indication. Moreover, a payor’s decision to provide coverage for a drug product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development.
Additionally, the containment of health care costs has become a priority of federal and state governments, and the prices of drugs have been a focus in this effort. The U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, utilization management and requirements for substitution of generic products. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could further limit our net revenue and results. If these third-party payors do not consider our products to be cost-effective compared to other available therapies, they may not cover our products after approval as a benefit under their plans or, if they do, the level of payment may not be sufficient to allow us to sell our products on a profitable basis.
The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, or the MMA, imposed requirements for the distribution and pricing of prescription drugs for Medicare beneficiaries and included a major expansion of the prescription drug benefit under Medicare Part D. Under Part D, Medicare beneficiaries may enroll in prescription drug plans offered by private entities that provide coverage of outpatient prescription drugs. Part D is available through both stand-alone prescription drug benefit plans and prescription drug coverage as a supplement to Medicare Advantage plans. Unlike Medicare Parts A and B, Part D coverage is not standardized. Part D prescription drug plan sponsors are not required to pay for all covered Part D drugs, and each drug plan can develop its own drug formulary that identifies which drugs it will cover and at what tier or level. However, Part D prescription drug formularies must include drugs within each therapeutic category and class of covered Part D drugs, though not necessarily all the drugs in each category or class. Any formulary used by a Part D prescription drug plan must be developed and reviewed by a pharmacy and therapeutic committee.
Government payment for some of the costs of prescription drugs may increase demand for products for which we receive marketing approval. However, any negotiated prices for our products covered by a Part D prescription drug plan will likely be lower than the prices we might otherwise obtain. Moreover, while the MMA applies only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payors often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own payment rates. Any reduction in payment that results from the MMA may result in a similar reduction in payments from non-governmental payors.
Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price and examining the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of medical products and services, in addition to their safety and efficacy. In order to obtain coverage and reimbursement for any product that might be approved for sale, we may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of our products, in addition to the costs required to obtain regulatory approvals. Our product candidates may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective. If third-party payors do not consider a product to be cost-effective compared to other available therapies, they may not cover the product after approval as a benefit under their plans or, if they do, the level of payment may not be sufficient to allow a company to sell its products at a profit.
Healthcare Reform
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, collectively, the ACA, was enacted with the goal of expanding coverage for the uninsured while at the same time containing overall health care costs. With regard to pharmaceutical products, among other things, the ACA expanded and increased industry rebates for drugs covered under Medicaid programs and made changes to the coverage requirements under the Medicare D program. There have been challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, on June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds that argued the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress. Prior to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, on January 28, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA 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 ACA. In addition, 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 ACA 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 creating a new manufacturer discount program. It is possible that the ACA will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how any such challenges and the healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the ACA.
Also, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over pharmaceutical pricing practices in light of the rising cost of prescription drugs and biologics. Such scrutiny has resulted in several Presidential executive orders, Congressional hearings and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for products. For example, 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 and 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, the IRA, among other things, (i) directs HHS to negotiate the price of certain high-expenditure, single-source 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” for such drugs and biologics under the law, and (ii) imposes rebates with respect to certain drugs and biologics covered under Medicare Part B or 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. These provisions will take effect progressively starting in fiscal year 2023, although they may be subject to legal challenges. It is currently unclear how the IRA will be implemented but is likely to have a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry. Further, the Biden administration released an additional executive order on October 14, 2022, directing HHS to submit a report on how the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation can be further leveraged to test new models for lowering drug costs for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries. It is unclear whether this executive order or similar policy initiatives will be implemented in the future. Further, Congress is considering additional health reform measures. At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented 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, in some foreign countries, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug pricing vary widely from country to country. For example, some E.U. jurisdictions operate positive and negative list systems under which products may only be marketed once a reimbursement price has been agreed. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval, some of these countries may require the completion of clinical trials that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies. Other member states allow companies to fix their own prices for medicines but monitor and control company profits. Such differences in national pricing regimes may create price differentials between E.U. member states. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our products. Historically, products launched in the European Union do not follow price structures of the United States. In the European Union, the downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription medicines, has become intense. As a result, barriers to entry of new products are becoming increasingly high and patients are unlikely to use a drug product that is not reimbursed by their government.
Other Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements
Our current and future operations may subject us to various federal and state laws targeting fraud and abuse in the healthcare industry. These laws may impact, among other things, our research and proposed sales, marketing and education programs. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy regulation by both the federal government and the states and foreign jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include:
•the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering or paying remuneration, directly or indirectly, to induce, or in return for, the purchase or recommendation of an item or service reimbursable under a federal healthcare program, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs;
•federal civil and criminal false claims laws and civil monetary penalty laws, which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment from Medicare, Medicaid, or other third-party payors that are false or fraudulent;
•the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, which created additional federal criminal statutes that prohibit, among other things, executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program and making false statements relating to healthcare matters;
•the federal transparency laws, including the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, that require drug manufacturers to disclose payments and other transfers of value provided to physicians, (currently defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners) and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members;
•HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and its implementing regulations, which imposes certain requirements on “covered entities,” including certain healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses, as well as their respective “business associates” that create, receive, maintain or transmit individually identifiable health information for or on behalf of a covered entity, and their covered subcontractors, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information; and
•Foreign and state law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers, state and local laws governing the disclosure of payments to health care professionals, state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government, state laws that require the reporting of information related to drug pricing, state and local laws requiring the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts.
If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to it, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, imprisonment, exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations.
Human Capital Policies and Procedures
As of December 31, 2022, we had 70 full-time employees. Of these employees, 47 were engaged in research and development and 23 were engaged in selling, general and administrative functions. All of our employees are located in the United States or Vienna, Austria. We have no collective bargaining agreements with our employees and have not experienced any work stoppages. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.
Human capital is critical to our success. Our overarching human capital resource strategy is to recruit, hire, incentivize and retain employees consistent with our stage of operations and strategic objectives. We believe we offer our employees compensation that is competitive and consistent with the markets in which we operate, namely the Greater Boston and the Vienna, Austria metropolitan areas. We supplement base cash employee compensation with awards of stock options and/or restricted stock units under our equity incentive plans. We review employee performance annually and our Compensation Committee approves associated merit increases and annual incentive bonus payments during the first quarter of the year annually. When needed, we augment our employee base with outside consultants who specialize in various fields.
Corporate Information
We were incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware in 2010 under the name Arsanis Inc. Following the Merger with X4 Therapeutics Inc. (formerly X4 Pharmaceuticals Inc.) on March 13, 2019, we changed our name to X4 Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Our principal executive offices are located at 61 North Beacon Street, 4th Floor, Boston, Massachusetts 02134 and our telephone number is (857) 529-8300.
Available Information
We maintain a website at http://www.x4pharma.com. Our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, proxy statements, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act are available free of charge on our website as soon as reasonably practicable after electronically filing such reports with the SEC. Such reports and other information may be accessed through the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Information contained in our website is not part of this or any other report that we file with or furnish to the SEC.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
An investment in our securities involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the following information about these risks, together with the other information appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report, including our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes hereto, before deciding to invest in our common stock. The occurrence of any of the following risks could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth prospects, or cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements we have made in this report and those we may make from time to time. In these circumstances, the market price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment. We cannot assure you that any of the events discussed below will not occur.
Summary of Selected Risks Associated with Our Business
Our business faces significant risks and uncertainties. If any of the following risks are realized, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. You should carefully review and consider the full discussion of our risk factors in the section titled “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report. Some of the more significant risks include the following:
•We have incurred significant losses and have not generated revenue from product sales since our inception. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, and we may never achieve or maintain profitability.
•Our liquidity position raises substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern and we will require substantial additional funding. If we are unable to raise capital when needed, we could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate any product development programs or commercialization efforts.
•Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our investors, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to our technologies or product candidates. Future debt obligations may expose us to risks that could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition and may result in further dilution to our stockholders.
•We depend almost entirely on the success of our lead product candidate, mavorixafor, which we are developing for the potential treatment of chronic neutropenic disorders, including WHIM (Warts, Hypogammaglobulinemia, Infections, and Myelokathexis) syndrome and, contingent on a potential strategic partnerships, for the treatment of Waldenström’s. We cannot be certain that we will be able to obtain regulatory approval for, or successfully commercialize, mavorixafor or any other product candidate.
•The regulatory review and approval processes of the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities are lengthy, time-consuming and inherently unpredictable, and if we are ultimately unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, including mavorixafor, our business will be substantially harmed.
•We depend on license agreements with Genzyme, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Georgetown University and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute to permit us to use patents and patent applications. Termination of these rights or the failure to comply with obligations under these agreements could materially harm our business and prevent us from developing or commercializing our product candidates.
•The results of clinical trials may not support our product candidate claims.
•We may fail to enroll a sufficient number of patients in our clinical trials in a timely manner, which could delay or prevent clinical trials of our product candidates.
•If the commercial opportunity for mavorixafor in chronic neutropenic disorders, including WHIM syndrome, is smaller than we anticipate, our potential future revenue from mavorixafor for the treatment of any of the diseases may be adversely affected and our business may suffer.
•Interim top-line and preliminary data from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data.
•A breakthrough therapy designation or Fast Track designation by the FDA for our product candidates may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process, and neither of these designations increases the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval.
•Product candidates may cause undesirable side effects that could delay or prevent their marketing approval, limit the commercial profile of an approved label, or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval, if any, including marketing withdrawal.
•If, in the future, we are unable to establish sales and marketing capabilities or to selectively enter into agreements with third parties to sell and market our product candidates, we may not be successful in commercializing our product candidates if and when they are approved.
•We face substantial competition that may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing products before or more successfully than we do.
•Even if we obtain and maintain approval for our product candidates from the FDA, we may never obtain approval for our product candidates outside of the United States, which would limit our market opportunities and could harm our business.
•Even if we are able to commercialize mavorixafor or any other product candidate that we develop, the product may become subject to unfavorable pricing regulations, third-party reimbursement practices or healthcare reform initiatives, which would harm our business.
•We have no experience manufacturing our product candidates on a large clinical or commercial scale and have no manufacturing facility. We are currently dependent on a single third party manufacturer for the manufacture of mavorixafor, the active pharmaceutical ingredient (“API”) and a single manufacturer of mavorixafor finished drug product capsules. If we experience problems with these third parties, the manufacturing of mavorixafor could be delayed, which could harm our results of operations.
•We rely on third-party CROs to conduct our preclinical studies and clinical trials. If these CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates and our business could be substantially harmed.
•Disruptions in our supply chain could delay the commercial launch of our product candidates.
•Our employees, principal investigators, CROs and consultants may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
•We may depend on such collaborations for the development and commercialization of our product candidates. If those collaborations are not successful, we may not be able to capitalize on the market potential of our product candidates.
•If we are unable to protect our intellectual property rights, our competitive position could be harmed.
•Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing their intellectual property rights, the outcome of which would be uncertain and could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business.
•Our future success depends on our ability to retain executives and to attract, retain and motivate key personnel in a competitive environment for skilled biotechnology personnel.
•We will need to grow the size of our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth.
•Our term load contains restrictions that limit our flexibility in operating our business.
•Our business could be adversely affected by economic downturns, inflation, increases in interest rates, natural disasters, public health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic, political crises, geopolitical events, such a the war in Ukraine, or other macroeconomic conditions, which have in the past and may in the future negatively impact our business and financial performance.
•Our stock price has been and is likely to continue to be volatile and fluctuate substantially.
Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital
We have incurred significant losses and have not generated revenue from product sales since our inception. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future and we may never achieve or maintain profitability.
We are a late clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company. 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 effect or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval or become commercially viable. Since inception, we have incurred significant operating losses. Our net losses were $93.9 million, $88.7 million and $62.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020 respectively, and we had an accumulated deficit of $376.7 million as of December 31, 2022. We have funded our operations to date primarily with proceeds from sales of common stock, warrants and prefunded warrants for the purchase of our preferred stock and our common stock, sales of preferred stock, proceeds from the issuance of convertible debt and borrowings under loan and security agreements. We have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales to date, and we may never generate product revenue or achieve profitability.
We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for at least the next several years as we conduct additional clinical trials for our product candidates; continue to discover and develop additional product candidates; acquire or in-license other product candidates and technologies; maintain, expand and protect our intellectual property portfolio; hire additional clinical, scientific and commercial personnel; establish a commercial manufacturing source and secure supply chain capacity sufficient to provide commercial quantities of any product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval; seek regulatory approvals for any product candidates that successfully complete clinical trials; establish a sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure to commercialize any products for which we may obtain regulatory approval; and add operational, financial and management information systems and personnel, including personnel to support our product development and planned future commercialization efforts. 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 revenues.
Our ability to generate profits from operations and thereafter to remain profitable depends heavily on:
•the scope, number, progress, duration, endpoints, cost, results and timing of clinical trials and nonclinical studies of our current or potential future product candidates, including in particular the scope, progress, duration, endpoints, cost, results and timing for completion of our Phase 2 clinical trial of mavorixafor for the treatment of chronic neutropenic disorders;
•our ability to raise sufficient funds to support the development and potential commercialization of our product candidates;
•the outcomes and timing of regulatory reviews, approvals or other actions;
•our ability to obtain marketing approval for our product candidates;
•our ability to establish and maintain licensing, collaboration or similar arrangements on favorable terms and whether and to what extent we retain development or commercialization responsibilities under any new licensing, collaboration or similar arrangement;
•the success of any other business, product or technology that we acquire or in which we invest;
•our ability to maintain, expand and defend the scope of our intellectual property portfolio;
•our ability to manufacture any approved products on commercially reasonable terms;
•our ability to establish a sales and marketing organization or suitable third-party alternatives for any approved product;
•the number and characteristics of product candidates and programs that we pursue;
•hire additional clinical, regulatory and scientific personnel; and
•incur additional legal, accounting and other expenses associated with operating as a public company.
Based on our current plans, we do not expect to generate significant revenue from product sales unless and until we (or a potential future licensee or collaborator) obtain marketing approval for, and commercialize, one or more of our current or potential future product candidates. Neither we nor a licensee may ever succeed in obtaining marketing approval for, or commercializing, our product candidates and, even if we do, we may never generate revenues that are significant enough to generate profits from operations. Even if we do generate profits from operations, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to generate profits from operations and remain profitable would decrease our value and could impair our ability to raise capital, expand our business, maintain our research and development efforts, diversify our product offerings or continue our operations. A decline in our value could also cause you to lose all or part of your investment.
We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other known and unknown factors that may alter or delay our plans. For example, we experienced delays in clinical trial site activation and slower patient enrollment in some of our clinical trials as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, which delayed our expectations regarding our ability to report data from those trials, and we may encounter additional delays, disruptions and other direct and indirect negative effects of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on our clinical trials. Assuming that we complete the development of and obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates, we will need to transition from a company with a research and development focus to a company capable of supporting commercial activities. We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications and delays, and may not be successful in such a transition.
Our liquidity position raises substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern and we will require substantial additional funding. If we are unable to raise capital when needed, we could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate any product development programs or commercialization efforts.
We may be forced to delay or reduce the scope of our development programs and/or limit or cease our operations if we are unable to obtain additional funding to support our current operating plan. We have identified conditions and events that raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.
Our operations have consumed a large amount of cash since inception. To date, we have funded our operations primarily with proceeds from sales of common stock, warrants and prefunded warrants for the purchase of our preferred stock and our common stock, sales of preferred stock, proceeds from the issuance of convertible debt and borrowings under loan and security agreements. We expect our research and development expenses to increase in future periods as we continue to advance the clinical development of our product candidates and prepare for the launch and commercialization of any product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval, including potentially building our own commercial organization to address the U.S. and certain other markets. In addition, if we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates that are not then subject to licensing, collaboration or similar arrangements with third parties, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product sales, marketing, distribution and manufacturing. Furthermore, we expect to incur additional costs associated with operating as a public company.
As of December 31, 2022, we have cash and cash equivalents of $121.7 million. We will require additional capital to sustain our operations, and to carry out our business plans, which may include raising funds through public or private equity or debt financings, third-party funding, marketing and distribution arrangements, as well as other collaborations, strategic alliances and licensing arrangements, or any combination of these approaches. While we have successfully raised capital in the past, our ability to raise capital in future periods is not assured. We will also require additional capital to satisfy the covenant under our existing debt facility with Hercules Capital, Inc. and certain affiliated entities (“Hercules”) that requires that we maintain a minimum level of cash of $20.0 million, subject to reduction to $10.0 million upon the achievement of certain conditions. Based on our current cash flow projections and assuming no additional funding, we will fail to maintain the minimum cash required to satisfy this covenant as soon as the first quarter of 2024. In such event, Hercules could require the repayment of all outstanding debt. Based on the foregoing, we have concluded that substantial doubt exists about our ability to continue as a going concern for a period of at least 12 months from the date of issuance of the financial statements appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report. Our financial statements have been prepared assuming that we will continue as a going concern, which contemplates the realization of assets and the settlement of liabilities and commitments in the normal course of business. The financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts or the amounts and classification of liabilities that might result from the outcome of the uncertainty described above. See also the risk factor titled “Our term loan contains restrictions that limit our flexibility in operating our business” below.
We cannot be certain that additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to raise additional capital when needed or in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, we could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development programs or any future commercialization efforts of one or more of our product candidates or one or more of our other research and development initiatives. In addition, when we need to secure additional financing, such additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from our day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates. Any of these events could significantly harm our business, financial condition and prospects, and our stockholders could lose all or part of their investment in our company.
We also could be required to:
•seek new or additional collaborators for one or more of our current or future product candidates at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable or on terms that are less favorable than might otherwise be available; or
•relinquish or license on unfavorable terms our rights to technologies or product candidates that we otherwise would seek to develop or commercialize ourselves.
Our future funding requirements, both near and long-term, will depend on many factors, including, but not limited to:
•the scope, number, initiation, progress, timing, costs, design, duration, any potential delays, and results of clinical trials and nonclinical studies for our current or future product candidates;
•the clinical development plans that we establish for these product candidates;
•the number and characteristics of product candidates and programs that we develop or may in-license;
•the outcome, timing and cost of regulatory reviews, approvals or other actions to meet regulatory requirements established by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, including the potential for the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to require that we perform more studies for our product candidates than those that we currently expect;
•our ability to obtain marketing approval for our product candidates;
•the cost of filing, prosecuting, defending and enforcing our patent claims and other intellectual property rights covering our product candidates, including any such patent claims and intellectual property rights that we have licensed from Genzyme pursuant to the terms of our license agreement with Genzyme or from other third parties;
•our ability to maintain, expand and defend the scope of our intellectual property portfolio, including the cost of defending intellectual property disputes, including patent infringement actions brought by third parties against us or our product candidates;
•the cost and timing of completion of commercial-scale manufacturing activities with respect to our product candidates;
•our ability to establish and maintain licensing, collaboration or similar arrangements on favorable terms and whether and to what extent we retain development or commercialization responsibilities under any new licensing, collaboration or similar arrangement;
•the cost of establishing sales, marketing and distribution capabilities for any product candidates for which we may receive regulatory approval in regions where we choose to commercialize our products on our own;
•the success of any other business, product or technology that we acquire or in which we invest;
•the costs of acquiring, licensing or investing in businesses, product candidates and technologies;
•our need and ability to hire additional management and scientific and medical personnel;
•market acceptance of our product candidates, to the extent any are approved for commercial sale;
•the effect of competing technological and market developments;
•the costs to operate as a public company; and
•business interruptions resulting from pandemics and public health emergencies, including those related to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, geopolitical actions, including war and terrorism or natural disasters including earthquakes, typhoons, floods and fires.
Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our investors, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to our technologies or product candidates. Future debt obligations may expose us to risks that could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition and may result in further dilution to our stockholders.
Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenues, we expect to finance our cash needs through public or private equity or debt financings, third-party funding, marketing and distribution arrangements, as well as other collaborations, strategic alliances and licensing arrangements, or any combination of these approaches. Other than our common stock purchase agreement with Lincoln Park Capital Fund LLC (“Lincoln Park”), pursuant to which Lincoln Park is obligated, subject to certain limitations and conditions, to purchase up to $50.0 million in the aggregate of shares of our common stock, we do not have any committed external sources of funds and may seek to raise additional capital at any time. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a holder of our common stock. Debt financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, declaring dividends or other distributions, acquiring or licensing intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business and may result in liens being placed on additional assets such as intellectual property. For example, our debt facility with Hercules contains a minimum cash financial covenant that we project we would be in violation of in the first quarter of 2024 based on our current cash flow projections, assuming we do not raise additional funding. If we default on such indebtedness, with Hercules or a future lender, we could be required to pledge additional assets, or the lenders could enforce remedies on the current collateral.
If we raise additional funds through licensing, collaboration or similar arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams, research and development programs or product candidates or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us. If we are unable to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings or through licensing, collaboration or similar arrangements when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves.
We have not generated revenues from any product sales since inception and may never become profitable.
To date, we have not generated revenues from any product sales. Our ability to generate revenue and become profitable depends upon our ability to successfully obtain marketing approval and commercialize our product candidates, including mavorixafor, or other product candidates that we may develop, in-license or acquire in the future. Even if we are able to successfully achieve regulatory approval for these product candidates, we are unable to predict the extent of any future losses and do not know when any of these product candidates will generate revenue for us, if at all. Our ability to generate revenue from mavorixafor or any of our current or future product candidates also depends on a number of additional factors, including our ability to:
•successfully complete development activities, including all necessary nonclinical studies and clinical trials;
•complete and submit New Drug Applications to the FDA and obtain regulatory approval for indications for which there is a commercial market;
•complete and submit marketing applications to, and obtain regulatory approval from, foreign regulatory authorities;
•set and obtain a commercially viable price for our products;
•obtain commercial quantities of our products at acceptable cost levels;
•develop a commercial organization capable of sales, marketing and distribution for the products we intend to sell ourselves in the markets in which we have retained commercialization rights;
•find suitable collaborators to help us market, sell and distribute our approved products in other markets; and
•obtain coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party, including government, payors.
In addition, because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with product development, including the possibility that our product candidates may not advance through development or demonstrate safety and efficacy for their intended uses, the FDA or any other regulatory agency may require additional clinical trials or nonclinical studies. We are unable to predict the timing or amount of increased expenses, or when or if we will be able to achieve or maintain profitability, and such expense could increase beyond our expectations if the FDA or any other regulatory agency requires such additional clinical trials or nonclinical studies as part of the application and approval process or post-approval process if we are successful at achieving regulatory approval. Even if we are able to successfully complete the development and regulatory reviews described above, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing these products, if they are approved.
Even if we are able to generate revenues from the sale of our product candidates, we may not become profitable and may need to obtain additional funding to continue operations. If we fail to become profitable or are unable to sustain profitability on a continuing basis, then we may be unable to continue our operations at planned levels and be forced to reduce our operations. If we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to become and remain profitable would decrease the value of the company and could impair our ability to raise capital, maintain our discovery and preclinical development efforts, expand our business or continue our operations and may require us to raise additional capital that may dilute your ownership interest. A decline in our value could also cause you to lose all or part of your investment.
Changes in estimates regarding fair value of intangible assets may result in an adverse impact on our results of operations.
We test goodwill for impairment annually or more frequently if changes in circumstances or the occurrence of events suggest impairment exists. Any significant change in market conditions, including a sustained decline in our stock price, that indicate a reduction in carrying value may give rise to impairment in the period that the change becomes known. For example, as of December 31, 2021, our market capitalization, measured as the price of our common stock multiplied by shares of common stock outstanding, declined to below the value of our net assets, including goodwill. As a result of the sustained decline in the market price of our common stock, the fair value of our single reporting unit, measured based on our market capitalization as of December 31, 2021, was lower than its carrying value and we concluded that goodwill was impaired. Accordingly, we recorded an impairment charge of $9.8 million to reduce the carrying amount of goodwill to $17.4 million as of December 31, 2021. While we determined that goodwill was not impaired based on its quantitative test as of December 31, 2022, future declines in the market value of our common stock may result in additional impairment charges being recorded.
Risks Related to Development of Our Product Candidates
We depend almost entirely on the success of our lead product candidate, mavorixafor, which we are developing for the potential treatment of chronic neutropenic disorders, including WHIM syndrome, and, contingent on a potential strategic partnership, for the treatment of Waldenström’s. We cannot be certain that we will be able to obtain regulatory approval for, or successfully commercialize, mavorixafor or any other product candidate.
Our business depends almost entirely on the successful clinical development, regulatory approval and commercialization of mavorixafor. We currently have no products for sale and may never be able to develop marketable drug products. The clinical trials of our product candidates are, and the manufacturing and marketing of our product candidates will be, subject to extensive and rigorous review and regulation by government authorities in the United States and in other countries where we intend to test and, if approved, market any product candidate. Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of any product candidate, we must successfully meet a number of critical developmental milestones, including:
•developing dosages that will be well-tolerated, safe and effective;
•completing the development and scale-up to permit manufacture of our product candidates in commercial quantities and at acceptable costs;
•demonstrating through pivotal clinical trials that each product candidate is safe and effective in patients for the intended indication;
•establishing commercial manufacturing capabilities or making arrangements with third-party manufacturers; and
•obtaining and maintaining patent and trade secret protection and non-patent exclusivity for our product candidates.
The time necessary to achieve these developmental milestones for any individual product candidate is long and uncertain, and we may not successfully complete these milestones for mavorixafor or any other product candidates that we may develop. We have not yet completed development of any product candidate. We also may not be able to finalize the design or formulation for our other programs. We may not be able to complete development of any product candidates that demonstrate safety and efficacy and that will have a commercially reasonable treatment and storage period. If we are unable to complete development of mavorixafor or any other product candidates that we may develop, we will not be able to commercialize and earn revenue from them.
We may develop mavorixafor, and potentially future product candidates, in combination with other therapies, which could expose us to additional risks.
We may develop mavorixafor, and may develop future product candidates, in combination with one or more currently approved therapies. Even if any product candidate we develop were to receive marketing approval or be commercialized for use in combination with other existing therapies, we would continue to be subject to the risks that the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside of the United States could revoke approval of the therapy used in combination with our product candidate or that safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise with these existing therapies. Combination therapies are commonly used for the treatment of diseases, and we would be subject to similar risks if we develop any of our product candidates for use in combination with other drugs. This could result in our own products being removed from the market or being less successful commercially.
We may also evaluate mavorixafor or any other future product candidates in combination with one or more other cancer therapies that have not yet been approved for marketing by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside of the United States. We will not be able to market and sell mavorixafor or any product candidate we develop in combination with any such unapproved therapies that do not ultimately obtain marketing approval.
If the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside of the United States do not approve these other drugs or revoke their approval of, or if safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues arise with, the drugs that we choose to evaluate in combination with mavorixafor or any product candidate we develop, we may be unable to obtain approval of or market mavorixafor or any product candidate we develop.
The regulatory review and approval processes of the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities are lengthy, time-consuming and inherently unpredictable, and if we are ultimately unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, including mavorixafor, our business will be substantially harmed.
We are not permitted to market mavorixafor or any other product candidate in the United States until we receive approval of an New Drug Application (“NDA”) from the FDA, or in any foreign countries until we receive the requisite approval from such countries or jurisdictions, such as the marketing authorization application (“MAA”) in the European Union from the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”). Prior to submitting an NDA to the FDA for approval of mavorixafor for the treatment of WHIM syndrome, we will need to complete the analysis of the data collected in our Phase 3 pivotal clinical trial of mavorixafor in patients with WHIM syndrome. Our NDA submission may receive a refusal to file response from the FDA, and even if filed by the FDA, we may receive a Complete Response Letter rather than approval for commercial marketing. In addition, we may be required by the FDA to conduct additional clinical trials and/or nonclinical studies to support potential approval. Successfully completing clinical trials and obtaining approval of an NDA is a complex, lengthy, expensive and uncertain process, and the FDA, or a comparable foreign regulatory authority, may delay, limit or deny approval of mavorixafor for the treatment of WHIM syndrome or other indications for many reasons, including, among others:
•disagreement with the design or implementation of our clinical trials;
•disagreement with the sufficiency of our clinical trials;
•failure to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of mavorixafor or any other product candidate for its proposed indications;
•failure to demonstrate that any clinical and other benefits of mavorixafor or any other product candidate outweigh its safety risks;
•a negative interpretation of the data from our nonclinical studies or clinical trials;
•deficiencies in the manufacturing or control processes or failure of third-party manufacturing facilities with which we contract for clinical and commercial supplies to comply with current Good Manufacturing Practice requirements, or cGMPs;
•insufficient data collected from clinical trials of mavorixafor or changes in the approval requirements that render its nonclinical and clinical data insufficient to support the filing of an NDA or to obtain regulatory approval; or
•changes in clinical practice in or approved products available for the treatment of the target patient population that could have an impact on the indications that we are pursuing for mavorixafor or our other product candidates.
The FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority may also require more information, including additional nonclinical or clinical data to support approval, which may delay or prevent approval of our commercialization plans, or cause us to abandon the development program. Even if we obtain regulatory approval, our product candidates may be approved for fewer or more limited indications than we request, such approval may be contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials, or we may not be allowed to include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of such product candidate. For instance, it is possible that mavorixafor could be approved for an indication but fail to be used for treating patients in that indication due to the availability of other available treatments or then-accepted clinical practice.
We depend on license agreements with Genzyme, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Georgetown University and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute to permit us to use patents and patent applications. Termination of these rights or the failure to comply with obligations under these agreements could materially harm our business and prevent us from developing or commercializing our product candidates.
We are party to license agreements with Genzyme, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Georgetown University and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute under which we were granted rights to patents and patent applications that are important to our business. We rely on these license agreements in order to be able to use various proprietary technologies that are material to our business, including certain patents and patent applications that cover our product candidates, including mavorixafor. Our rights to use these patents and patent applications and employ the inventions claimed in these licensed patents are subject to the continuation of and our compliance with the terms of our license agreements.
Our license agreement with Genzyme imposes upon us various diligence, payment and other obligations, including the following:
•our obligation to pay Genzyme milestone payments in the aggregate amount of up to $25.0 million, contingent upon our achievement of certain late-stage regulatory and sales milestones with respect to licensed products.
•our obligation to pay Genzyme tiered royalties based on net sales of licensed products that we commercialize under the agreement.
•our obligation to pay Genzyme a certain percentage of cash payments received by us or our affiliates in consideration for the grant of a sublicense under the license granted to us by Genzyme.
If we fail to comply with any of our obligations under the Genzyme license agreement, or we are subject to a bankruptcy, Genzyme may have the right to terminate the license agreement, in which event we would not be able to market any product candidates covered by the license.
Prior to July 2014, we did not control the prosecution, maintenance, or filing of the patents and patent applications that are licensed to us under the Genzyme license agreement, or the enforcement of these patents and patent applications against infringement by third parties. Thus, these patents and patent applications were not drafted by us or our attorneys, and we did not control or have any input into the prosecution of these patents and patent applications prior to our execution of the Genzyme license agreement in July 2014. Under the terms of the license agreement with Genzyme, since July 2014, we have controlled the right to control the prosecution, maintenance, and filing of the patents and patent applications that are licensed to us, and the enforcement of these patents and patent applications against infringement by third parties. However, we cannot be certain that the same level of attention was given to the drafting and prosecution of these patents and patent applications as we may have used if we had control over the drafting and prosecution of such patents and patent applications. We also cannot be certain that drafting or prosecution of the patents and patent applications licensed to us has been conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents.
Pursuant to our license agreement with Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, we paid an upfront, one-time fee for the rights granted by the license agreement. This license agreement imposes upon us various obligations, including the requirement to provide Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center with progress reports at regular intervals and to maintain specified levels of insurance. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center may terminate the agreement for our non-payment, insolvency or default of material obligations. We have the right to terminate the agreement for any reason upon 90 days’ advance written notice.
Our license agreement with Georgetown imposes upon us various diligence, payment and other obligations, including our obligations to pay Georgetown milestone payments in the aggregate amount of up to $0.8 million, contingent upon our achievement of certain sales milestones with respect to licensed products, to deliver reports upon certain events and at regular intervals and to maintain customary levels of insurance. Georgetown may terminate the agreement for our non-payment, insolvency, failure to maintain insurance or default of material obligations. We have the right to terminate the agreement for any reason upon 60 days advance written notice.
Our license agreement with the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (“DFCI”) imposes upon us various diligence, payment and other obligations, including our obligations to pay DFCI milestone payments in the aggregate amount of up to approximately $32 million, contingent upon our achievement of certain regulatory and sales milestones with respect to licensed products, to deliver reports at regular intervals and to maintain certain minimum levels of insurance. DFCI may terminate the agreement if (i) we cease to carry on our business with respect to the licensed products, (ii) we default on diligence, insurance, payment or any other material obligations, (iii) one of our officers or that of a sublicensee is convicted of a felony relating to the manufacture, use, sale or importation of one or more licensed product, (iv) we become insolvent, (v) we grant a sublicense without notifying DFCI or on terms inconsistent with the terms required of sublicenses under the agreement or (vi) we bring a patent challenge against the licensed products. We have the right to terminate the agreement for any reason upon 90 days advance written notice.
Disputes may arise under any of our license agreements with Genzyme, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Georgetown University and/or Dana-Farber Cancer Institute regarding the intellectual property that is subject to such license agreement, including:
•the scope of rights granted under the applicable license agreement and other interpretation-related issues;
•whether and the extent to which our technology and processes infringe on intellectual property that is not subject to the applicable license agreement;
•our diligence obligations with respect to the use of the licensed technology under the applicable license agreement to develop and commercialize products and technologies, including the level of effort and specific activities that will satisfy those diligence obligations; and
•the ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by us and our collaborators.
If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain any of our license agreements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates and technologies.
The results of clinical trials may not support our product candidate claims.
Even if our clinical trials are completed as planned, we cannot be certain that their results will support the proposed product candidates, that the FDA or foreign government authorities will agree with our conclusions regarding such results, or that the FDA or foreign governmental authorities will not require additional clinical trials. Success in preclinical testing and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful and the results of later clinical trials often do not replicate the results of prior clinical trials and preclinical testing. The clinical trial results may fail to demonstrate that our product candidates are safe for humans and effective for the intended indications. This failure could cause us to abandon a product candidate and may delay development of other product candidates. Any delay in, or termination of, our clinical trials will delay or prevent the submission of our marketing applications (NDA and/or MAA) and, ultimately, our ability to obtain approval and commercialize our product candidates and generate product revenues. Information about certain clinical trials, including results (positive or negative) will be made public according to each country’s clinical trial register policies. Competitors may use this publicly available information to gain knowledge regarding the progress of development programs.
Delays in our clinical trials may lead to a delay in the submission of our marketing approval application and jeopardize our ability to potentially receive approvals and generate revenues from the sale of our products.
We may experience delays in our current or future clinical trials, including our Phase 2 clinical trial of mavorixafor for the treatment of chronic neutropenic disorders. As a result of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, we experienced delays in clinical trial site activation and slower patient enrollment in our clinical trials of mavorixafor for the treatment of WHIM syndrome, Waldenström’s and chronic neutropenia disorders. Clinical trials may be delayed, suspended or terminated for a variety of reasons, including the following:
•delay or failure in reaching agreement with the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority on a trial design that we are able to execute;
•delay or failure in obtaining authorization to commence a trial or inability to comply with conditions imposed by a regulatory authority regarding the scope or design of a clinical trial;
•inability, delay or failure in identifying and maintaining a sufficient number of trial sites, many of which may already be engaged in competing clinical trial programs;
•delay or failure in recruiting and enrolling suitable subjects to participate in a trial;
•delay or failure in having subjects complete a trial or return for post-treatment follow-up;
•clinical sites and investigators deviating from trial protocol, failing to conduct the trial in accordance with regulatory requirements, or dropping out of a trial;
•delay or failure in reaching agreement on acceptable terms with prospective clinical 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 trial sites;
•delay or failure in obtaining institutional review board (“IRB”) approval to conduct a clinical trial at each site;
•delays resulting from negative or equivocal findings of the Data Safety Monitoring Board (“DSMB”) if any;
•ambiguous or negative results;
•decision by the FDA, a comparable foreign regulatory authority, or recommendation by a DSMB to suspend or terminate clinical trials at any time for safety issues or for any other reason;
•inadequate drug product for use in nonclinical studies or clinical trials;
•lack of adequate funding to continue the product development program;
•external business disruptions affecting the initiation, patient enrollment, development and operation of our clinical trials, including a public health emergency, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, and unforeseen events such as the war in Ukraine; or
•changes in governmental regulations or requirements.
Any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may significantly harm our business, financial condition and prospects. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.
We may fail to enroll a sufficient number of patients in our clinical trials in a timely manner, which could delay or prevent clinical trials of our product candidates.
Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in clinical trials of our product candidates is critical to our success. The timing of our clinical trials depends on the rate at which we can recruit, enroll and retain patients in testing our product candidates, and we have made certain assumptions about the rate at which we can enroll patients in our clinical trials. The timing of our clinical trials depends in part on the speed at which we can recruit patients to participate in testing mavorixafor and any other current or future product candidates that we may develop as well as completion of required follow-up periods. For example, as a result of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, we have experienced, and expect to continue to experience, a slower enrollment pace.
If we cannot identify patients to participate in our clinical trials or if patients are unwilling to participate in our clinical trials for any reason, including if patients choose to enroll in competitive clinical trials for similar patient populations, the timeline for recruiting patients, conducting studies and obtaining regulatory approval of mavorixafor and any other current or future product candidates that we may develop may be delayed. These delays could result in increased costs, delays in advancing our current or future product candidates, delays in testing the effectiveness of our product candidates or termination of the clinical trials altogether.
We may not be able to identify, recruit and enroll a sufficient number of patients, or those with required or desired characteristics to achieve diversity in a trial, to complete our current and future clinical trials in a timely manner. In particular, we are currently evaluating mavorixafor for the treatment of WHIM syndrome and chronic neutropenic disorders, rare diseases with limited patient pools from which to draw for clinical trials. The eligibility criteria of our clinical trials will further limit the pool of available trial participants. If we experience difficulty enrolling a sufficient number of patients to conduct our clinical trials as planned, we may be forced to delay, limit or terminate ongoing or planned clinical trials of our product candidates, which would delay our ability to obtain approvals and generate product revenues from any of these product candidates.
If the commercial opportunity for mavorixafor in chronic neutropenic disorders, including WHIM syndrome, is smaller than we anticipate, our potential future revenue from mavorixafor for the treatment of any of the diseases may be adversely affected and our business may suffer.
If the size of the commercial opportunities in any of our target indications is smaller than we anticipate, we may not be able to achieve profitability and growth. Our lead clinical candidate, mavorixafor, is being developed as an oral, once-daily therapy for the potential treatment of a variety of chronic neutropenic disorders, including WHIM syndrome. We have advanced mavorixafor through a pivotal, Phase 3 clinical trial (the “4WHIM trial”) in people with WHIM syndrome, and are currently advancing mavorixafor in a Phase 2 clinical trial in people with certain chronic neutropenic disorders. We are currently aware of only a few small available patient registries for WHIM syndrome, and we rely on various estimates and assumptions to estimate the addressable WHIM syndrome population. Based on a broad online survey of physicians to validate current prevalence estimates and additional research using artificial intelligence, which interrogated a database of more than 300 million anonymized patient records that spanned 10 years of insurance claims, we estimate there are up to 3,700 diagnosed and undiagnosed WHIM patients in the United States, many of whom were previously undiagnosed. If the commercial opportunity in any of our target indications, including WHIM syndrome is smaller than we anticipate, whether because our estimates of the addressable patient population prove to be incorrect or for other reasons, our potential future revenue from mavorixafor may be adversely affected and our business may suffer.
It is critical to our ability to grow and become profitable that we successfully identify patients with WHIM syndrome and other chronic neutropenic disorders. Our projections of the number of people who have WHIM syndrome (or its other potential primary immunodeficiencies) and chronic neutropenic disorders are based on a variety of sources, including third-party estimates and analyses in the scientific literature, and may prove to be incorrect. Further, new information may emerge that changes our estimate of the prevalence of these diseases or the number of patient candidates for each disease. The effort to identify patients for treatment is at an early stage, and we cannot accurately predict the number of patients for whom treatment might be possible. Additionally, the addressable patient population for our indications may be limited or may not be amenable to treatment with mavorixafor, and new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, which would adversely affect our results of operations and our business.
Results of earlier clinical trials may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials.
The results of pre-clinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Interpretation of results from early, usually smaller, trials that suggest positive trends in some subjects, require caution. Results from later stages of clinical trials enrolling more subjects may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy results or otherwise fail to be consistent with the results of earlier trials of the same product candidate. Inconsistencies may occur for a variety of reasons, including differences in trial design, trial endpoints (or lack of trial endpoints in exploratory studies), subject population, number of subjects, subject selection criteria, trial duration, drug dosage and formulation or due to the lack of statistical power in the earlier trials.
Data obtained from preclinical and clinical activities are subject to varying interpretations, which may delay, limit, or prevent regulatory approval. In addition, we may experience regulatory delays or rejections as a result of many factors, including due to changes in regulatory policy during the period of our product candidate development. Any such delays could negatively impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Interim top-line and preliminary data from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data.
From time to time, we may publish interim top-line or preliminary data from our clinical trials. Interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Preliminary or top-line data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. Preliminary or top-line data may include, for example, data regarding a small percentage of the patients enrolled in a clinical trial, and such preliminary data should not be viewed as an indication, belief or guarantee that other patients enrolled in such clinical trial will achieve similar results or that the preliminary results from such patients will be maintained. As a result, interim and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects and may cause the trading price of our common stock to fluctuate significantly.
Risks Related to the Marketing and Commercialization of Our Product Candidates
Even if our product candidates receive regulatory approval, they may still face future development and regulatory difficulties and any approved products will be subject to extensive post-approval regulatory requirements.
If we obtain regulatory approval for a product candidate, it would be subject to extensive ongoing requirements by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities governing the manufacture, quality control, further development, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, safety surveillance, import, export, advertising, promotion, recordkeeping and reporting of safety and other post-market information. The safety profile and efficacy of any product will continue to be closely monitored by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities after approval. If the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities become aware of new safety information after approval of any of our product candidates, these regulatory authorities may require labeling changes or the FDA may require establishment of a Risk Evaluation Mitigation Strategy (“REMS”), or similar strategy, impose significant restrictions on a product’s indicated uses or marketing, impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies or post-market surveillance. Progress reports are required at quarterly intervals, every six months and at annual intervals depending upon the country, and more frequently if serious adverse events occur.
In addition, manufacturers of drugs and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP regulations. If a regulatory agency discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product, the manufacturing facility or us, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing. If we, our product candidates or the manufacturing facilities for our product candidates fail to comply with cGMPs and other applicable regulatory requirements, the FDA may, among other things:
•issue warning letters;
•request modifications to promotional materials or require us to provide corrective information to healthcare practitioners;
•require us to enter into a consent decree, which can include imposition of various fines, reimbursements for inspection costs, required due dates for specific actions and penalties for noncompliance;
•seek an injunction or impose civil or criminal penalties or monetary fines;
•suspend or withdraw regulatory approval;
•suspend any ongoing clinical trials;
•refuse to approve pending applications or supplements to applications filed by us;
•suspend or impose restrictions on operations, including costly new manufacturing requirements; or
•seize or detain products, refuse to permit the import or export of products, or require us to initiate a product recall.
The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize our products and generate revenue.
The FDA and other regulatory agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses. If we are found or alleged to have improperly promoted off-label uses, we may become subject to significant liability.
The FDA and other regulatory agencies strictly regulate the promotional claims that may be made about drug products. These regulations include standards and restrictions for direct-to-consumer advertising, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, promotional activities involving the internet and off-label promotion. For example, any regulatory approval that the FDA grants is limited to those indications and patient populations for which a drug is deemed to be safe and effective by the FDA.
While physicians in the United States may choose, and are generally permitted, to prescribe products for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and for uses that differ from those tested in clinical trials and approved by the regulatory authorities, our ability to promote any of our products candidates, if approved, will be narrowly limited to those indications and populations that are specifically approved by the FDA or such other regulatory agencies, and if we are found to have promoted such off-label uses, we may become subject to significant liability. For example, the federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion and has enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion. The government has also required companies to enter into consent decrees or imposed permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed. If we cannot successfully manage the promotion of our product candidates, if approved, we could become subject to significant liability, which would materially adversely affect our business and financial condition.
A breakthrough therapy designation or Fast Track designation by the FDA for our product candidates may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process, and neither of these designations increases the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval.
We have obtained both breakthrough therapy and Fast Track designations for mavorixafor for the treatment of adult patients with WHIM and we may pursue those designations for other product candidates as well. A breakthrough therapy is defined as a product that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints. For product candidates that have been designated as breakthrough therapies, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the trial can help identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens. A breakthrough therapy designation affords the possibility of rolling review, enabling the FDA to review portions of our marketing application before submission of a complete application, and possibly, priority review.
If a drug or biologic candidate is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition or disease and the drug demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for the condition, the sponsor may apply for Fast Track designation.
Designation as a breakthrough therapy and Fast Track designation are within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe that our product candidates meet the criteria for designation as a breakthrough therapy or Fast Track designation, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. In any event, the receipt of either or both of a breakthrough therapy designation or Fast Track designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to products considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one or more of our product candidates qualify as breakthrough therapies or for Fast Track designation, the FDA may later decide that the products no longer meet the conditions for qualification.
It is possible that we may not be able to obtain or maintain orphan drug designation or exclusivity for our drug candidates, which could limit the potential profitability of our product candidates.
Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States and Europe, may designate drugs for the treatment or prevention of rare diseases or conditions with relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. Under the Orphan Drug Act of 1983, the (“Orphan Drug Act”), the FDA may designate a product as an orphan drug if it is a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States. We received orphan drug designation from the FDA for mavorixafor for the treatment of WHIM syndrome in October 2018, and from the EMA in July 2019. We also received orphan drug designation in the U.S. for mavorixafor for the treatment of Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia in June 2022. If a product with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to a seven-year period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA from approving another marketing application for the same drug for the same indication during that time period with some exceptions. A similar provision in the European Union allows 10 years of exclusivity in Europe. The European exclusivity period can be reduced to six years if a drug no longer meets the criteria for orphan drug designation or if the drug is sufficiently profitable so that marketing exclusivity is no longer justified. Orphan drug exclusivity may be lost in both the United States and Europe under certain situations, such as the inability of the holder of the orphan drug designation to produce sufficient quantities of the drug to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition or for certain other reasons.
The FDA has granted rare pediatric disease designation for mavorixafor for the treatment of WHIM syndrome, however, there is no guarantee that FDA approval of mavorixafor for WHIM will result in a priority review voucher.
In 2012, Congress authorized the FDA to award priority review vouchers to sponsors of certain rare pediatric disease product applications. This program is designed to encourage development of new drug and biological products for prevention and treatment of certain rare pediatric diseases. Specifically, under this program, a sponsor who receives an approval for a drug or biologic for a “rare pediatric disease” that meets certain criteria may qualify for a voucher that can be redeemed to receive a priority review of a subsequent marketing application for a different product. The sponsor of a rare pediatric disease drug product receiving a priority review voucher may transfer (including by sale) the voucher to another sponsor. The voucher may be further transferred any number of times before the voucher is used, as long as the sponsor making the transfer has not yet submitted the application. The FDA may also revoke any priority review voucher if the rare pediatric disease drug for which the voucher was awarded is not marketed in the U.S. within one year following the date of approval.
The FDA has granted rare pediatric disease designation for mavorixafor for the treatment of WHIM syndrome, however, there is no guarantee that we will be able to obtain a priority review voucher, even if mavorixafor is approved by the FDA. Specifically, FDA may not award the voucher to sponsors of marketing applications unless either (i) the drug has received rare pediatric disease designation as of September 30, 2024 and is then approved by the FDA no later than September 30, 2026; or (ii) Congress reauthorizes the program. Even though we received rare pediatric disease designation by the current statutory deadline of September 30, 2024 we may not receive the voucher if we do not obtain approval by September 2026. Even if legislation is enacted that extends the date by which approval of the rare pediatric disease-designated drug must obtain approval to receive a priority review voucher, we may not obtain approval by that date, and even if we do, we may not obtain a priority review voucher.
If we are unable to establish sales and marketing capabilities to market and sell our product candidates, we may be unable to generate any revenue.
Even if we are ultimately successful in obtaining regulatory approval of mavorixafor for the treatment of WHIM syndrome or another indication, in order to market and sell mavorixafor and our other product candidates in development, we currently intend to build and develop our own sales, marketing and distribution operations. Although our management team has previous experience with such efforts, there can be no assurance that we will be successful in building these operations. If we are unable to establish adequate sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, we may not be able to generate product revenue and may not become profitable. We will also be competing with many companies that currently have extensive and well-funded sales and marketing operations. If any of our product candidates are approved, we may be unable to compete successfully against these more established companies.
Our commercial success depends upon attaining significant market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved, among hospitals, physicians, patients and healthcare payors.
Even if we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates that we may develop or acquire in the future, the product may not gain market acceptance among hospitals, physicians, health care payors, patients and the medical community. Market acceptance of any of our product candidates for which we receive approval depends on a number of factors, including:
•the efficacy and safety of such product candidates as demonstrated in clinical trials;
•the clinical indications for which the product candidate is approved;
•acceptance by major operators of hospitals, physicians and patients of the product candidate as a safe and effective treatment, particularly the ability of mavorixafor and our other product candidates to establish themselves as a new standard of care in the treatment paradigm for the indications that we are pursuing;
•the potential and perceived advantages of our product candidates over alternative treatments as compared to the relative costs of the product candidates and alternative treatments;
•the prevalence and severity of any side effects with respect to our product candidates, including mavorixafor;
•our ability to offer any approved products for sale at competitive prices;
•the timing of market introduction of our products as well as competitive products;
•our pricing, and the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement by third party payors and government authorities;
•relative convenience and ease of administration; and
•the effectiveness of our sales and marketing efforts and those of our potential future collaborators.
There may be delays in getting our product candidates, if approved, on hospital or insurance formularies or limitations on coverages that may be available in the early stages of commercialization for newly approved drugs. If any of our product candidates are approved but fail to achieve market acceptance among hospitals, physicians, patients or health care payors, we will not be able to generate significant revenues, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.
Product candidates may cause undesirable side effects that could delay or prevent their marketing approval, limit the commercial profile of an approved label, or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval, if any, including marketing withdrawal.
Undesirable side effects caused by any of our product candidates that we may develop or acquire could cause us or the FDA or other regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt our clinical trials and could result in more restrictive labels or the delay or denial of marketing approval by the FDA or other regulatory authorities of such product candidates. Results of our clinical trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of these or other side effects. In such an event, our trials could be suspended or terminated and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease further development of or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. In addition, any 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.
Further, clinical trials by their nature utilize a sample of the potential patient population. With a limited number of patients, rare and severe side effects of our product candidates may only be uncovered with a significantly larger number of patients exposed to the product candidate. If our product candidates receive marketing approval and we or others identify undesirable side effects caused by such product candidates (or any other similar drugs) after such approval, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:
•regulatory authorities may withdraw or limit their approval of such product candidates;
•regulatory authorities may require the addition of labeling statements, such as a “boxed” warning or a contraindication;
•we may be required to create a medication guide outlining the risks of such side effects for distribution to patients;
•we may be required to change the way such product candidates are distributed or administered, conduct additional clinical trials or change the labeling of the product candidates;
•regulatory authorities may require a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy plan to mitigate risks, which could include medication guides, physician communication plans, or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools;
•we may be subject to regulatory investigations and government enforcement actions;
•we may decide to remove such product candidates from the marketplace after they are approved;
•we could be sued and held liable for injury caused to individuals exposed to or taking our product candidates; and
•our reputation may suffer.
We believe that any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the affected product candidates and could substantially increase the costs of commercializing our product candidates, if approved, and significantly impact our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and generate revenues.
Any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval could be subject to marketing restrictions or withdrawal from the market, and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or if we experience unanticipated problems with our products.
Any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval will be subject to continual requirements of and review by the FDA and other regulatory authorities. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration and listing requirements, cGMP requirements, quality assurance and corresponding maintenance of records and documents and requirements regarding the distribution of samples to physicians and recordkeeping. Even if marketing approval of a product candidate is granted, the approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for costly post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of the medicine. The FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of drugs to ensure that they are marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling.
In addition, later discovery of previously unknown problems with our products, manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in, among other things:
•restrictions on such products, manufacturers or manufacturing processes;
•restrictions on the labeling, marketing, distribution or use of a product;
•requirements to conduct post-approval clinical trials;
•warning or untitled letters;
•withdrawal of the products from the market;
•refusal to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications that we submit;
•recall of products;
•fines, restitution or disgorgement of profits or revenue;
•suspension or withdrawal of marketing approvals;
•refusal to permit the import or export of our products;
•product seizure; and
•injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.
If, in the future, we are unable to establish sales and marketing capabilities or to selectively enter into agreements with third parties to sell and market our product candidates, we may not be successful in commercializing our product candidates if and when they are approved.
We do not have a sales or marketing infrastructure and have no experience in the sale, marketing or distribution of pharmaceutical products. To achieve commercial success for any approved product for which we retain sales and marketing responsibilities, we must either develop a sales and marketing organization or outsource these functions to other third parties. In the future, we may choose to build a focused sales and marketing infrastructure to sell some of our product candidates if and when they are approved.
There are risks involved both with establishing our own sales and marketing capabilities and with entering into arrangements with third parties to perform these services. For example, recruiting and training a sales force is expensive and time consuming and could delay any product launch. If the commercial launch of a product candidate for which we recruit a sales force and establish marketing capabilities is delayed or does not occur for any reason, we would have prematurely or unnecessarily incurred these commercialization expenses. This may be costly, and our investment would be lost if we cannot retain or reposition our sales and marketing personnel.
Factors that may inhibit our efforts to commercialize our product candidates on our own include:
•our inability to recruit and retain adequate numbers of effective sales and marketing personnel;
•the inability of sales personnel to obtain access to physicians or educate adequate numbers of physicians on the benefits of prescribing any future products; and
•unforeseen costs and expenses associated with creating an independent sales and marketing organization.
If we enter into arrangements with third parties to perform sales, marketing and distribution services, our product revenue or the profitability of these product revenue to us may be lower than if we were to market and sell any products that we develop ourselves. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into arrangements with third parties to sell and market our product candidates or may be unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us. We may have little control over such third parties, and any of them may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our products effectively. If we do not establish sales and marketing capabilities successfully, either on our own or in collaboration with third parties, we will not be successful in commercializing our product candidates.
We face substantial competition that may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing products before or more successfully than we do.
The development and commercialization of new drug products is highly competitive. We face competition with respect to our current product candidates, and will face competition with respect to any product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future, from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies worldwide. Some of these competitive products and therapies are based on scientific approaches that are the same as or similar to our approach and others are based on entirely different approaches. Potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, seek patent protection
and establish collaborative arrangements for research, development, manufacturing and commercialization.
We are developing our lead product candidate, mavorixafor, for the treatment of chronic neutropenic disorders, including WHIM syndrome. We are aware of other companies that are developing CXCR4 inhibitors that are in a similar stage of development as mavorixafor, including BioLineRx, Noxxon, Upsher-Smith, Polyphor and Glycomimetics. To our knowledge, there do not appear to be any competitors with programs in development for WHIM syndrome or chronic neutropenia disorders. With respect to chronic neutropenia, filgrastim injections (human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF)) and two biosimilars (Zarxio and Nivestym) are FDA-approved to reduce the incidence and duration of after affects of severe neutropenia (e.g.‚ fever‚ infections‚ oropharyngeal ulcers) in symptomatic patients with congenital neutropenia‚ cyclic neutropenia‚ or idiopathic neutropenia.
In many diseases, these drugs are administered in combination to enhance efficacy. Some of the currently approved drug therapies are branded and subject to patent protection, and others are available on a generic basis. Many of these approved drugs are well-established therapies and are widely accepted by physicians, patients and third-party payors. Insurers and other third-party payors may also encourage the use of generic products. We expect that if any of our product candidates are approved, they will be priced at a significant premium over competitive generic products. This may make it difficult for us to achieve our business strategy of using our product candidates in combination with existing therapies or replacing existing therapies with our product candidates.
Our competitors may develop products that are more effective, have a better safety profile, are more convenient or less costly than any that we are developing or that would render our product candidates obsolete or non-competitive. Our competitors may also obtain marketing approval from the FDA or other regulatory authorities for their products sooner than we may obtain approval for our product candidates, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market.
Many of our competitors 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. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller and other early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These third parties may compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.
Even if we obtain and maintain approval for our product candidates from the FDA, we may never obtain approval for our product candidates outside of the United States, which would limit our market opportunities and could harm our business.
Approval of a product candidate in the United States by the FDA does not ensure approval of such product candidate by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions, and approval by one foreign regulatory authority does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or by the FDA. If regulatory approval is obtained, sales of any future product candidates outside of the United States will be subject to foreign regulatory requirements governing clinical trials and marketing approval. Even if the FDA grants marketing approval for a product candidate, comparable foreign regulatory authorities also must approve the manufacturing and marketing of the product candidate in those countries. Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from, and more onerous than, those in the United States, including additional preclinical studies or clinical trials. In many countries outside the United States, a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that country. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for any product candidates, if approved, is also subject to approval. Obtaining approval for any future product candidates in the European Union from the European Commission following the opinion of the European Medicines Agency, if we choose to submit a marketing authorization application there, would be a lengthy and expensive process. Even if a product candidate is approved, the FDA or the European Commission, as the case may be, may limit the indications for which the drug may be marketed, require extensive warnings on the drug labeling or require expensive and time-consuming additional clinical trials or reporting as conditions of approval. Obtaining foreign regulatory approvals and compliance with foreign regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of any future product candidates in certain countries.
Further, clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries. Also, regulatory approval for our product candidates may be withdrawn. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our product candidates will be harmed and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be harmed.
If we seek approval to commercialize our product candidates outside of the United States, a variety of risks associated with international operations could harm our business.
If we seek approval of our product candidates outside of the United States, we expect that we will be subject to additional risks in commercialization including:
•different regulatory requirements for approval of therapies in foreign countries;
•reduced protection for intellectual property rights;
•unexpected changes in tariffs, trade barriers and regulatory requirements;
•economic weakness, including inflation, or political instability in particular foreign economies and markets;
•compliance with tax, employment, immigration and labor laws for employees living or traveling abroad;
•foreign currency fluctuations, which could result in increased operating expenses and reduced revenues, and other obligations incident to doing business in another country;
•foreign reimbursement, pricing and insurance regimes;
•workforce uncertainty in countries where labor unrest is more common than in the United States;
•production shortages resulting from any events affecting raw material supply or manufacturing capabilities abroad; and
•business interruptions resulting from geopolitical actions, including war and terrorism, or natural disasters and public health epidemics, such as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
We have no prior experience in these areas. In addition, there are complex regulatory, tax, labor and other legal requirements imposed by many of the individual countries in and outside of Europe with which we will need to comply. Many biopharmaceutical companies have found the process of marketing their own products in foreign countries to be very challenging.
Even if we are able to commercialize mavorixafor or any other product candidate that we develop, the product may become subject to unfavorable pricing regulations, third-party reimbursement practices or healthcare reform initiatives, which would harm our business.
The laws and regulations that govern marketing approvals, pricing, coverage and reimbursement for new drug products vary widely from country to country. Current and future legislation may significantly change the approval requirements in ways that could involve additional costs and cause delays in obtaining approvals. Some countries require approval of the sale price of a drug before it can be marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or product licensing approval is granted and, in some markets, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. As a result, we might obtain marketing approval for a product in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations that delay our commercial launch of the product, possibly for lengthy time periods, and negatively impact the revenues we are able to generate from the sale of the product in that country. Adverse pricing limitations may hinder our ability to recoup our investment in one or more product candidates, even if our product candidates obtain marketing approval.
Our ability to commercialize mavorixafor or any other product candidate successfully also will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers and other organizations. Government authorities and other third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which medications they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. A primary trend in the U.S. and E.U. healthcare industries and elsewhere is cost containment.
Government authorities and other third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for medical products. We cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement will be available for mavorixafor or any other product that we commercialize and, if coverage and reimbursement is available, the level of reimbursement. Reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval. Obtaining and maintaining adequate reimbursement for mavorixafor may be particularly difficult because of the higher prices typically associated with drugs directed at smaller populations of patients. In addition, third-party payors are likely to impose strict requirements for reimbursement of a higher priced drug, and any launch of a competitive product is likely to create downward pressure on the price initially charged. If reimbursement is not available or is available only to a limited degree, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products for which we receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.
There may be significant delays in obtaining coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs, and coverage may be more limited than the purposes for which the drug is approved by the applicable regulatory authority. Moreover, eligibility for coverage and reimbursement does not imply that any drug will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including research, development, intellectual property, manufacturing, sale and distribution expenses. Interim reimbursement levels for new drugs, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover our costs and may not be made permanent.
Reimbursement rates may vary according to the use of the drug and the clinical setting in which it is used, may be based on reimbursement levels already set for lower cost drugs, and may be incorporated into existing payments for other services. Net prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. In the United States, third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement policies. In the European Union, reference pricing systems and other measures may lead to cost containment and reduced prices. Our inability to promptly obtain coverage and adequate reimbursement rates from both government-funded and private payors for any approved products that we develop could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, our ability to raise capital needed to develop product candidates and commercialize products and our overall financial condition.
Governments outside the United States tend to impose strict price controls, which may adversely affect our revenues, if any.
In some countries, particularly the countries of the European Union, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing approval for a product. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product candidate to other available therapies. If reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business could be harmed, possibly materially.
Product liability lawsuits against us could cause us to incur substantial liabilities and could limit the commercialization of any product candidates we may develop.
We face an inherent risk of product liability exposure related to the testing of our product candidates in human clinical trials and will face an even greater risk with respect to commercial sales of any products that we may develop. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against claims that our product candidates or products caused injuries, we could incur substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:
•reduced resources of our management to pursue our business strategy;
•decreased demand for any products that we may develop;
•injury to our reputation and significant negative media attention;
•withdrawal of clinical trial participants;
•significant costs to defend any related litigation;
•substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients;
•loss of revenue;
•increased insurance costs; and
•the inability to commercialize any products that we may develop.
Although we maintain clinical trial insurance coverage, it may not be adequate to cover all liabilities that we may incur. We anticipate that we will need to increase our insurance coverage as we continue clinical trials or begin commercialization of any products. Insurance coverage is increasingly expensive. We may not be able to obtain or maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in an amount adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise.
Risks Related to Government Regulation
Our relationships with customers and third-party payors will be subject to applicable anti-kickback, fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, which could expose us to significant penalties, including administrative, civil and criminal penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm and diminished profits and future earnings.
Although we do not currently have any drugs on the market, we are, and once we begin commercializing our product candidates, we will be subject to additional healthcare statutory and regulatory requirements and enforcement by the federal government and the states and foreign governments in the jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. Healthcare providers and third-party payors will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any product candidates for which we obtain marketing
approval. Our current and future arrangements with third-party payors and customers may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we research, as well as market, sell and distribute any products for which we obtain marketing approval. Restrictions under applicable federal and state healthcare laws and regulations include the following:
•the federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, persons and entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or paying remuneration, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward, or in return for, either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of, any good or service, for which payment may be made under a federal healthcare program such as Medicare and Medicaid; a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;
•the federal false claims laws impose criminal and civil penalties, including civil whistleblower or qui tam actions, against individuals or entities for, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the federal government, claims for payment that are false or fraudulent or making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government; in addition, the government may assert that a claim including items and services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act;
•the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) imposes criminal and civil liability for, among other things, executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, or knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services; similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;
•the federal physician payment transparency requirements, sometimes referred to as the “Sunshine Act” under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively the “ACA”), require certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies that are reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program to report to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”), information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians, (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners), and teaching hospitals and the ownership and investment interests of physicians and their immediate family members in such manufacturers;
•HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act and its implementing regulations, which also imposes obligations on certain covered entity healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses as well as their business associates that perform certain services involving the use or disclosure of individually identifiable health information, and their subcontractors that use, disclose, or otherwise process individually identifiable health information, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information;
•analogous state and foreign laws and regulations, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws, may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers;
•some state laws require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government and may require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers, drug pricing or marketing expenditures;
•state and local laws that require the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives; and
•state and foreign laws also govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.
Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to it, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, imprisonment, exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, additional reporting requirements and/or oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. If any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to significant criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs.
Current and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval of and commercialize our product candidates and affect the prices we may obtain.
In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict post-approval activities and affect our ability to sell profitably any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval.
In the United States, Medicare covers certain drug purchases by the elderly and eligible disabled people and introduced a reimbursement methodology based on average sales prices for physician-administered drugs. In addition, Medicare may limit the number of drugs that will be covered in any therapeutic class. Ongoing cost reduction initiatives and future laws could decrease the coverage and price that we will receive for any approved products. While Medicare beneficiaries are limited to most elderly and certain disabled individual, private payors often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own payment rates.
In March 2010, the ACA became law. The ACA is a sweeping law intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms. Among the provisions of the ACA of importance to our product candidates are the following:
•an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports specified branded prescription drugs and biologic products;
•an increase in the statutory minimum rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program;
•expansion of healthcare fraud and abuse laws, including the False Claims Act and the Anti-Kickback Statute, new government investigative powers, and enhanced penalties for noncompliance;
•a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 70% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices;
•extension of manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability;
•expansion of eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs;
•expansion of the entities eligible for discounts under the Public Health Service Act’s pharmaceutical pricing program;
•new requirements to report to CMS financial arrangements with physicians, as defined by such law, and teaching hospitals;
•a new requirement to annually report to FDA drug samples that manufacturers and distributors provide to physicians; and
•a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research.
There have been challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. For example, on June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds that argued the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress. Prior to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, on January 28, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace. The executive order also 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 ACA. In addition, on August
16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in ACA 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 creating a new manufacturer discount program.It is possible that the ACA will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how any such challenges and the healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the ACA and our business.
There has also been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several Presidential executive orders, Congressional inquiries and proposed bills designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. For example, 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 and 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, the IRA, among other things, (i) directs HHS to negotiate the price of certain high-expenditure, single-source 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” for such drugs and biologics under the law, and (ii) imposes rebates with respect to certain drugs and biologics covered under Medicare Part B or 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. These provisions will take effect progressively starting in fiscal year 2023, although they may be subject to legal challenges. It is currently unclear how the IRA will be implemented but is likely to have a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry. Further, the Biden administration released an additional executive order on October 14, 2022, directing HHS to submit a report on how the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation can be further leveraged to test new models for lowering drug costs for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries. It is unclear whether this executive order or similar policy initiatives will be implemented in the future. Further, Congress is considering additional health reform measures. At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented 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.
We cannot predict what healthcare reform initiatives may be adopted in the future. However, we expect that the ACA, as well as other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we will receive for any approved product. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding. Any reduction in payments from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private 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 products.
Legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for pharmaceutical products. We cannot be sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals, if any, of our product candidates may be. In addition, increased scrutiny by the U.S. Congress of the FDA’s approval process may significantly delay or prevent marketing approval, as well as subject us to more stringent product labeling and post-marketing conditions and other requirements.
We are subject to anti-corruption laws, as well as export control laws, customs laws, sanctions laws and other laws governing our operations. If we fail to comply with these laws, we could be subject to civil or criminal penalties, other remedial measures and legal expenses, which could adversely affect its business, results of operations and financial condition.
Our operations are subject to anti-corruption laws, including the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) and other anti-corruption laws that apply in countries where we do business and may do business in the future. The FCPA and these other laws generally prohibit us, our officers and employees and intermediaries from bribing, being bribed or making other prohibited payments to government officials or other persons to obtain or retain business or gain some other business advantage. We may in the future operate in jurisdictions that pose a high risk of potential FCPA violations, and may participate in collaborations and relationships with third parties whose actions could potentially subject us to liability under the FCPA or local anti-corruption laws. In addition, we cannot predict the nature, scope or effect of future regulatory requirements to which its international operations might be subject or the manner in which existing laws might be administered or interpreted.
We are also subject to other laws and regulations governing our international operations, including regulations administered by the U.S. government and authorities in the European Union or the United Kingdom, including applicable export control regulations, economic sanctions on countries and persons, customs requirements and currency exchange regulations, which we collectively refer to as Trade Control Laws.
There is no assurance that we will be completely effective in ensuring our compliance with all applicable anti-corruption laws, including the FCPA or other legal requirements, including Trade Control Laws. If we are not in compliance with the FCPA and other anti-corruption laws or Trade Control Laws, we may be subject to criminal and civil penalties, disgorgement and other sanctions and remedial measures, and legal expenses, which could have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity. Likewise, any investigation of any potential violations of the FCPA, other anti-corruption laws or Trade Control Laws by U.S. or other authorities could also have an adverse impact on our reputation, business, results of operations and financial condition.
Inadequate funding for the FDA, the SEC and other government agencies could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, prevent new products and services from being developed or commercialized in a timely manner or otherwise prevent those agencies from performing normal business functions on which the operation of our business may rely, which could negatively impact our business.
The ability of the FDA to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, the ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and statutory, regulatory and policy changes. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of the SEC and other government agencies on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.
Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, 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 and the SEC, have had to furlough critical FDA, SEC and other government employees and stop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, in our operations as a public company, future government shutdowns could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue our operations.
Risks Related to Our Dependence on Third Parties
We have no experience manufacturing our product candidates on a large clinical or commercial scale and have no manufacturing facility. We are currently dependent on a single third party manufacturer for the manufacture of mavorixafor, the active pharmaceutical ingredient (“API”), and a single manufacturer of mavorixafor finished drug product capsules. If we experience problems with these third parties, the manufacturing of mavorixafor could be delayed, which could harm our results of operations.
To meet our projected needs for clinical supplies to support our activities through regulatory approval and commercial manufacturing, the manufacturer with whom we currently work will need to increase its frequency and/or scale of production or we will need to find additional or alternative manufacturers. We have not yet secured alternate suppliers in the event the current manufacturer we utilize is unable to meet demand, or if otherwise we experience any problems with them. If such problems arise and we are unable to arrange for alternative third-party manufacturing sources, we are unable to find an alternative third party capable of reproducing the existing manufacturing method or we are unable to do so on commercially reasonable terms or in a timely manner, we may not be able to complete development of our product candidates, or market or distribute them.
Reliance on third-party manufacturers entails risks to which we would not be subject if we manufactured our product candidates ourselves, including reliance on the third party for regulatory compliance and quality assurance, the possibility of breach of the manufacturing agreement by the third party because of factors beyond our control (including a failure to synthesize and manufacture our product candidates or any products that we may eventually commercialize in accordance with our specifications), and the possibility of termination or nonrenewal of the agreement by the third party, based on its own business priorities, at a time that is costly or damaging to us. In addition, the FDA and other regulatory authorities require that our product candidates and any products that we may eventually commercialize be manufactured according to cGMP and similar foreign standards. Drug manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drugs are required to register their establishments with the FDA and some state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections for compliance with cGMP requirements. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated and often require prior FDA or other regulatory authority approval before being implemented. FDA requirements also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose reporting and documentation requirements upon us and any third-party manufacturers that we may decide to use. Accordingly, the manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the areas of production and quality
control to maintain cGMP compliance. Any failure by our third-party manufacturers to comply with cGMP or failure to scale up manufacturing processes, including any failure to deliver sufficient quantities of product candidates or products if they are approved in a timely manner, could lead to a delay in, or failure to obtain, regulatory approval of any of our product candidates. In addition, such failure could be the basis for the FDA to issue a warning letter, withdraw approvals for product candidates previously granted to us, or take other regulatory or legal action, including recall or seizure, total or partial suspension of production, suspension of ongoing clinical trials, refusal to approve pending applications or supplemental applications, detention of product, refusal to permit the import or export of products, injunction, or imposing civil and criminal penalties.
Our current manufacturer and any future manufacturers may not be able to manufacture our product candidates at a cost or in quantities or in a timely manner necessary to make commercially successful products. If we successfully commercialize any of our product candidates, we may be required to establish large-scale commercial manufacturing capabilities. In addition, as our drug development pipeline increases and matures, we will have a greater need for clinical study and commercial manufacturing capacity. We have no experience manufacturing pharmaceutical products on a commercial scale and some of these manufacturers will need to increase their scale of production to meet our projected needs for commercial manufacturing, the satisfaction of which may not be met on a timely basis.
We rely on third-party CROs to conduct our preclinical studies and clinical trials. If these CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates and our business could be substantially harmed.
We have relied upon and plan to continue to rely upon third-party contract research organizations, or CROs, and clinical data management organizations to monitor and manage data for our ongoing preclinical and clinical programs. Although we control only certain aspects of their activities, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol and legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We also rely on third parties to conduct our preclinical studies in accordance with Good Laboratory Practice, or GLP, requirements and the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act of 1966 requirements. We, our CROs and our clinical trial sites are required to comply with regulations and current Good Clinical Practices, or GCP, and comparable foreign requirements to ensure that the health, safety and rights of patients are protected in clinical trials, and that data integrity is assured. Regulatory authorities ensure compliance with GCP requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors and trial sites. If we, any of our CROs or our clinical trial sites fail to comply with applicable GCP requirements, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials or a specific site may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications.
Our CROs are not our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such CROs, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our ongoing clinical and preclinical programs. If CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual obligations or meet expected timelines or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols, regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. As a result, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed.
Disruptions in our supply chain could delay the commercial launch of our product candidates.
Any significant disruption in our supplier relationships could harm our business. We currently rely on a single source supplier of mavorixafor, as well a single supplier for the finished product capsules for mavorixafor. If either of these single source suppliers suffers a major natural or man-made disaster at its manufacturing facility, we would not be able to manufacture mavorixafor on a commercial scale until a qualified alternative supplier is identified. Although alternative sources of supply exist, the number of third party suppliers with the necessary manufacturing and regulatory expertise and facilities is limited, and it could be expensive and take a significant amount of time to arrange for alternative suppliers. Any significant delay in the supply of a product candidate or its key materials for an ongoing clinical study could considerably delay completion of our clinical studies, product testing and potential regulatory approval of our product candidates. If we or our manufacturers are unable to purchase these key materials after regulatory approval has been obtained for our product candidates, the commercial launch of our product candidates would be delayed, which would impair our ability to generate revenues from the sale of our product candidates.
Our employees, principal investigators, CROs and consultants may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
We are exposed to the risk that our employees, principal investigators, CROs and consultants may engage in fraudulent conduct or other illegal activity. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional failures to comply with FDA regulations or similar regulations of comparable foreign regulatory authorities, to provide accurate information to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, to comply with manufacturing standards we have established, to comply with federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations and similar laws and regulations established and enforced by comparable foreign regulatory
authorities, to report financial information or data accurately or to disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Employee or third party misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation. It is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity, such as employee training, may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business and results of operations, including the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions.
We have established, and may seek to selectively establish in the future, collaborations, and, if we are unable to establish them on commercially reasonable terms, we may have to alter our development and commercialization plans.
Our drug development programs and the potential commercialization of our product candidates will require substantial additional cash to fund expenses. For some of our product candidates, we may decide to collaborate with pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for the development and potential commercialization of those product candidates.
We face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators. Whether we reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. Those factors may include the design or results of clinical trials, the likelihood of approval by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside the United States, the potential market for the subject product candidate, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering such product candidate to patients, the potential of competing products, the existence of uncertainty with respect to our ownership of technology, which can exist if there is a challenge to such ownership without regard to the merits of the challenge and industry and market conditions generally. The collaborator may also consider alternative product candidates for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us for our product candidates.
We may depend on such collaborations for the development and commercialization of our product candidates. If those collaborations are not successful, we may not be able to capitalize on the market potential of our product candidates.
We have, and may selectively seek in the future, third-party collaborators for the development and commercialization of our product candidates. Our likely collaborators for any collaboration arrangements include large and mid-size pharmaceutical companies, regional and national pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies. If we enter into any such arrangements with any third parties, we will likely have limited control over the amount and timing of resources that our collaborators dedicate to the development or commercialization of our product candidates. Our ability to generate revenue from these arrangements will depend on our collaborators’ abilities to successfully perform the functions assigned to them in these arrangements.
Collaborations involving our product candidates pose many risks to us, including that:
•collaborators have significant discretion in determining the efforts and resources that they will apply to these collaborations;
•collaborators may not pursue development and commercialization of our product candidates or may elect not to continue or renew development or commercialization programs based on clinical trial results, changes in the collaborator’s strategic focus or available funding or external factors such as an acquisition that diverts resources or creates competing priorities;
•collaborators may delay clinical trials, provide insufficient funding for a clinical trial program, stop a clinical trial or abandon a product candidate, repeat or conduct new clinical trials or require a new formulation of a product candidate for clinical testing;
•collaborators could independently develop, or develop with third parties, products that compete directly or indirectly with our product candidates or products if the collaborators believe that competitive products are more likely to be successfully developed or can be commercialized under terms that are more economically attractive than ours;
•collaborators with marketing and distribution rights to one or more product candidates or products may not commit sufficient resources to the marketing and distribution of such drugs;
•collaborators may not properly maintain or defend our intellectual property rights or may use our proprietary information in such a way as to invite litigation that could jeopardize or invalidate our proprietary information or expose us to potential litigation;
•disputes may arise between the collaborators and us that result in the delay or termination of the research, development or commercialization of our product candidates or products or that result in costly litigation or arbitration that diverts management attention and resources;
•we may lose certain valuable rights under circumstances identified in our collaborations if we undergo a change of control;
•collaborations may be terminated and, if terminated, may result in a need for additional capital to pursue further development or commercialization of the applicable product candidates; and
•collaboration agreements may not lead to development or commercialization of product candidates in the most efficient manner or at all. In addition, if a future collaborator of ours were to be involved in a business combination, the continued pursuit and emphasis on our product development or commercialization program under such collaboration could be delayed, diminished or terminated.
Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property
Recent laws and rulings by U.S. courts make it difficult to predict how patents will be issued or enforced in our industry.
Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other countries may have a significant impact on our ability to protect our technology and enforce our intellectual property rights.
There have been numerous changes over the past ten years to the patent laws and to the rules of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), which may have a significant impact on our ability to protect our technology and enforce our intellectual property rights. For example, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”), which was signed into law in 2011, includes a transition from a “first-to-invent” system to a “first-to-file” system, and changes the way issued patents are challenged. Certain changes, such as the institution of inter partes review proceedings, that allow third parties to challenge newly issued patents, came into effect on September 16, 2012. The burden of proof required for challenging a patent in these proceedings is lower than in district court litigation, and patents in the biologics and pharmaceuticals industry have been successfully challenged using these new post-grant challenges. In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in specified circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in specified situations. Depending on decisions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, these substantive changes to patent law associated with the AIA may further weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future, all of which could harm our business.
Furthermore, the patent positions of companies engaged in the development and commercialization of biologics and pharmaceuticals are particularly uncertain. We cannot assure you that our efforts to seek patent protection for our technology and products will not be negatively impacted by the changes described above, future rulings in district court cases or changes in guidance or procedures issued by the USPTO. We cannot fully predict what impact the Supreme Court’s decisions may have on the ability of life science companies to obtain or enforce patents relating to their products and technologies in the future.
Moreover, although the Supreme Court has held in Myriad that isolated segments of naturally occurring DNA are not patent-eligible subject matter, certain third parties could allege that activities that we may undertake infringe other gene-related patent claims, and we may deem it necessary to defend ourselves against these claims by asserting non-infringement and/or invalidity positions, or pay to obtain a license to these claims. In any of the foregoing or in other situations involving third-party intellectual property rights, if we are unsuccessful in defending against claims of patent infringement, we could be forced to pay damages or be subjected to an injunction that would prevent us from utilizing the patented subject matter. Such outcomes could harm our business.
If we are unable to protect our intellectual property rights, our competitive position could be harmed.
We depend on our ability to protect our proprietary technology. We rely on trade secret, patent, copyright and trademark laws, and confidentiality, licensing and other agreements with employees and third parties, all of which offer only limited protection. Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection in the United States and other countries with respect to our proprietary technology and products. Where we have the right to do so under our license agreements, we seek to protect our proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and abroad related to our novel technologies and products that are important to our business.
The patent positions of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally are highly uncertain, involve complex legal and factual questions and have in recent years been the subject of much litigation. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patents, including those patent rights licensed to us by third parties, are highly uncertain.
The steps we have taken to police and protect our proprietary rights may not be adequate to preclude misappropriation of our proprietary information or infringement of our intellectual property rights, both inside and outside the United States. The rights already granted under any of our currently issued patents and those that may be granted under future issued patents may not provide us with the proprietary protection or competitive advantages that we are seeking. If we are unable to obtain and maintain patent protection for our technology and products, or if the scope of the patent protection obtained is not sufficient, our competitors could develop and commercialize technology and products similar or superior to ours, and our ability to successfully commercialize our technology and products may be adversely affected.
With respect to patent rights, we do not know whether any of the pending patent applications for any of our product candidates will result in the issuance of patents that protect our technology or products, or which will effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and products. Our pending applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issues from such applications. Further, the examination process may require us or our licensors to narrow the claims, which may limit the scope of patent protection that may be obtained. Although our license agreement with Genzyme includes a number of issued patents that are exclusively licensed to us, the issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, issued patents that we own or have licensed from third parties may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. Such challenges may result in the loss of patent protection, the narrowing of claims in such patents, or the invalidity or unenforceability of such patents, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection for our technology and products. Protecting against the unauthorized use of our patented technology, trademarks and other intellectual property rights is expensive, difficult and may, in some cases, not be possible. In some cases, it may be difficult or impossible to detect third party infringement or misappropriation of our intellectual property rights, even in relation to issued patent claims, and proving any such infringement may be even more difficult.
We could be required to incur significant expenses to obtain our intellectual property rights, and we cannot ensure that we will obtain meaningful patent protection for our product candidates.
The patent prosecution process is expensive and time-consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. In addition, it is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of further inventions made in the course of our development and commercialization activities before they are publicly disclosed, making it too late to obtain patent protection on them. Further, given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. We expect to seek extensions of patent terms where these are available in any countries where we are prosecuting patents. This includes in the United States under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, which permits a patent term extension of up to five years beyond the expiration of a patent that covers an approved product where the permission for the commercial marketing or use of the product is the first permitted commercial marketing or use, and as long as the remaining term of the patent does not exceed 14 years. However, the applicable authorities, including the FDA in the United States, and any equivalent regulatory authority in other countries, may not agree with our assessment of whether such extensions are available, and may refuse to grant extensions to our patents, or may grant more limited extensions than we request. If this occurs, our competitors may be able to take advantage of our investment in development and clinical trials by referencing our clinical and preclinical data and launch their product earlier than might otherwise be the case. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our patents or narrow the scope of our patent protection. The laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States, and these foreign laws may also be subject to change. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing or in some cases not at all. Therefore, we cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first to make the inventions claimed in our owned or licensed patents or pending patent applications, or that we or our licensors were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions.
Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, documentary, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.
Periodic maintenance fees on any issued patent are due to be paid to the USPTO, and foreign patent agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patent. The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other requirements during the patent application process. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Non-compliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or
patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. If we or our licensors fail to maintain the patents and patent applications covering our product candidates, our competitors might be able to enter the market, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.
Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on our product candidates for an adequate amount of time.
Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date. Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering our product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition from competitive products, including generics or biosimilars. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.
We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our intellectual property, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.
In addition to the possibility of litigation relating to infringement claims asserted against it, we may become a party to other patent litigation and other proceedings, including inter partes review proceedings, post-grant review proceedings, derivation proceedings declared by the USPTO and similar proceedings in foreign countries, regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our current or future technologies or product candidates or products. The cost to us of any patent litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their substantially greater financial resources. Patent litigation and other proceedings may also absorb significant management time. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could impair our ability to compete in the marketplace.
Competitors may infringe or otherwise violate our intellectual property, including patents that may issue to or be licensed by us. As a result, we may be required to file claims in an effort to stop third-party infringement or unauthorized use. Any such claims could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us, including claims alleging that we infringe their patents or other intellectual property rights. This can be prohibitively expensive, particularly for a company of our size, and time-consuming, and even if we are successful, any award of monetary damages or other remedy we may receive may not be commercially valuable. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that our asserted intellectual property is not valid or is unenforceable, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our intellectual property does not cover its technology. An adverse determination in any litigation or defense proceedings could put our intellectual property at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing.
If the breadth or strength of our patent or other intellectual property rights is compromised or threatened, it could allow third parties to commercialize our technology or products or result in our inability to commercialize our technology and products without infringing third-party intellectual property rights. Further, third parties may be dissuaded from collaborating with us.
Interference or derivation proceedings brought by the USPTO or its foreign counterparts may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patent applications, and we may also become involved in other proceedings, such as re-examination proceedings, before the USPTO or its foreign counterparts. Due to the substantial competition in the pharmaceutical space, the number of such proceedings may increase. This could delay the prosecution of our pending patent applications or impact the validity and enforceability of any future patents that we may obtain. In addition, any such litigation, submission or proceeding may be resolved adversely to us and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distraction to our management.
Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. Moreover, intellectual property law relating to the fields in which we operate is still evolving and, consequently, patent and other intellectual property positions in our industry are subject to change and are often uncertain. We may not prevail in any of these suits or other efforts to protect our technology, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially valuable. During the course of this type of litigation, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, the market price for our common stock could be significantly harmed.
If we fail to comply with our obligations in the agreements under which we license intellectual property rights from third parties or otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our licensors, we could lose intellectual property rights that are important to our business.
We are a party to several license agreements and may need to obtain additional licenses from others to advance our research and
development activities or allow the commercialization of our current product candidates and any that we may identify and pursue in the future. Our currently license agreements impose, and we expect that future license agreements will impose, various development, diligence, commercialization, and other obligations on us. In spite of our efforts, our licensors might conclude that we have materially breached our obligations under such license agreements and might therefore terminate the license agreements, thereby removing or limiting our ability to develop and commercialize products and technology covered by these license agreements. If these in-licenses are terminated, or if the underlying patents fail to provide the intended exclusivity, competitors or other third parties may gain the freedom to seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products identical to ours and we may be required to cease our development and commercialization of our product candidates. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.
Moreover, disputes may arise regarding intellectual property subject to a licensing agreement, including:
•the scope of rights granted under the license agreement and other interpretation-related issues;
•the extent to which our product candidates, technology and processes infringe on intellectual property of the licensor that is not subject to the licensing agreement;
•the sublicensing of patent and other rights under our collaborative development relationships;
•our diligence obligations under the license agreement and what activities satisfy those diligence obligations;
•the inventorship and ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by our licensors and us and our partners; and
•the priority of invention of patented technology.
In addition, the agreements under which we currently license intellectual property or technology from third parties are complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.
From time to time, we may need to rely on licenses to proprietary technologies, which may be difficult or expensive to obtain or we may lose certain licenses which may be difficult to replace.
We may need to obtain licenses to patents and other proprietary rights held by third parties to develop, manufacture and market our product candidates. If we are unable to timely obtain these licenses on commercially reasonable terms and maintain these licenses, our ability to commercially market our product candidates may be inhibited or prevented, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing their intellectual property rights, the outcome of which would be uncertain and could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business.
Our commercial success depends upon our ability to develop, manufacture, market and sell our product candidates, and to use our proprietary technologies without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. We may become party to, or threatened with, future adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our products and technology, including interference and various post grant proceedings before the USPTO, non-U.S. opposition proceedings, and German nullity proceedings. Third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on existing patents or patents that may be granted in the future.
As a result of any such infringement claims, or to avoid potential claims, we may choose or be compelled to seek intellectual property licenses from third parties. These licenses may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license, the license would likely obligate us to pay license fees or royalties or both, and the rights granted to us likely would be nonexclusive, which would mean that our competitors also could obtain licenses to the same intellectual property. Ultimately, we could be prevented from commercializing a product candidate or technology or be forced to cease some aspect of our business operations if, as a result of actual or threatened infringement claims, we are unable to enter into licenses of the relevant intellectual property on acceptable terms. Further, if we attempt to modify a product candidate or technology or to develop alternative methods or products in response to infringement claims or to avoid potential claims, we could incur substantial costs, encounter delays in product introductions or interruptions in sales. Ultimately, such efforts could be unsuccessful.
Parties making claims against us may obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize our product candidates that we may identify. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, pay royalties, redesign our infringing products or obtain one or more licenses from third parties, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure.
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 our ability to raise additional funds or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.
Intellectual property litigation could cause us to spend substantial resources and distract our personnel from their normal responsibilities.
Litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims, with or without merit, is unpredictable and generally expensive and time consuming and is likely to divert significant resources from our core business, including distracting our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock and negatively impact our ability to raise additional funds. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities.
We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to adequately conduct such litigation or proceedings. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources and more mature and developed intellectual property portfolios. Accordingly, despite our efforts, we may not be able to prevent third parties from infringing upon or misappropriating or from successfully challenging our intellectual property rights. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace.
Our trade secrets are difficult to protect and if we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed.
In addition to seeking patents for some of our technologies and product candidates, we also rely on trade secrets, including unpatented know-how, technology and other proprietary information, to maintain our competitive position. We seek to protect these trade secrets, in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to them, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties. We also enter into confidentiality, non-competition, non-solicitation, and invention assignment agreements with our employees and consultants that obligate them to assign to us any inventions developed in the course of their work for us. However, we cannot guarantee that we have executed these agreements with each party that may have or have had access to our trade secrets or that the agreements we have executed will provide adequate protection. Despite these efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. As a result, we may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims that they bring against us, to determine ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property. Monitoring unauthorized disclosure is difficult and we do not know whether the procedures that we have followed to prevent such disclosure are or will be adequate. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States may be less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. If any of the technology or information that we protect as trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to prevent them from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to, or independently developed by, a competitor, our competitive position would be harmed.
We may be subject to claims that our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of their former employers.
Our employees, including members of our senior management, were previously employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. All such individuals, including each member of our senior management, executed proprietary rights, non-disclosure and non-competition agreements in connection with such previous employment. Although we try to ensure that our employees do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or these employees have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such employee’s former employer. We are not aware of any threatened or pending claims related to these matters or concerning the agreements with our senior management, but in the future litigation may be necessary to defend against such claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management.
We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.
Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on all of our product candidates throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. In general, we have sought patent protection of our intellectual property in the following jurisdictions: US, Canada, China, Japan and in countries within Europe via the European Patent Office. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but where enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products in jurisdictions where we do not have any issued patents and our patent claims or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from so competing.
Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biopharmaceuticals, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial cost and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business.
As another example, the complexity and uncertainty of European patent laws have increased in recent years. In Europe, a new unitary patent system will likely be introduced by the end of 2023, which would significantly impact European patents, including those granted before the introduction of such a system. Under the unitary patent system, European applications will soon have the option, upon grant of a patent, of becoming a Unitary Patent which will be subject to the jurisdiction of the Unitary Patent Court (“UPC”). As the UPC is a new court system, there is no precedent for the court, increasing the uncertainty of any litigation. Patents granted before the implementation of the UPC will have the option of opting out of the jurisdiction of the UPC and remaining as national patents in the UPC countries. Patents that remain under the jurisdiction of the UPC will be potentially vulnerable to a single UPC-based revocation challenge that, if successful, could invalidate the patent in all countries who are signatories to the UPC. We cannot predict with certainty the long-term effects of any potential changes.
Risks Related to Our Business Operations, Employee Matters and Managing Growth
Our future success depends on our ability to retain executives and to attract, retain and motivate key personnel in a competitive environment for skilled biotechnology personnel.
Because of the specialized scientific and managerial nature of our business, we rely heavily on our ability to attract and retain qualified scientific, technical and managerial personnel. We are also highly dependent upon members of our current management team, including Paula Ragan, Ph.D., our Chief Executive Officer. The loss of the services provided by these individuals will adversely impact the achievement of our objectives. These individuals could leave our employment at any time, as they are “at will” employees. Effective succession planning is also important to our long-term success. Failure to ensure effective transfer of knowledge and smooth transitions involving key employees could hinder our strategic planning and execution. For example, our former Chief Medical Officer resigned in November 2022 and we have engaged an interim Chief Medical Officer while we complete a search for a permanent Chief Medical Officer. While we expect to engage in an orderly transition process if and when we integrate newly appointed officers and managers, we face a variety of risks and uncertainties relating to management transition, including diversion of management attention from business concerns, failure to retain other key personnel, or loss of institutional knowledge. In addition, the loss of the services of any of our executive officers, other key employees, and other scientific and medical advisors, and an inability to find suitable replacements could result in delays in product development, and harm our business.
Our success will depend on our ability to retain our management team and other key employees, and to attract and retain qualified personnel in the future. The loss of the services of certain members of our senior management or key employees could prevent or delay the implementation and completion of our strategic objectives, or divert management’s attention to seeking qualified replacements. The competition for qualified personnel in the pharmaceutical field is intense and we cannot guarantee that we will be able to retain our current personnel or attract and retain new qualified personnel necessary for the development of our business or to recruit suitable replacement personnel.
We will need to grow the size of our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth.
As of December 31, 2022, we had 70 full-time employees. Although we announced a reduction in workforce of approximately 20% in July 2022 as part of our streamlining of resources to focus on advancing our lead clinical candidate, mavorixafor, as our development and commercialization plans and strategies develop, or as a result of any future acquisitions, we will need additional managerial, operational, development, sales, marketing, financial and other resources. Our management, personnel and systems currently in place will not be adequate to support this future growth. Future growth would impose significant added responsibilities on our employees, including:
•managing our clinical trials effectively;
•identifying, recruiting, maintaining, motivating and integrating additional employees;
•managing our internal development efforts effectively while complying with our contractual obligations to licensors, contractors and other third parties;
•improving our managerial, development, operational and finance systems; and
•expanding our facilities.
As our operations expand, we will need to manage additional relationships with various strategic collaborators, suppliers and other third parties. Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize our product candidates and to compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to manage any future growth effectively. To that end, we must be able to manage our development efforts and clinical trials effectively and hire, train and integrate additional management, administrative, research and development, and sales and marketing personnel. We may not be able to accomplish these tasks, and our failure to accomplish any of them could prevent us from successfully growing the company.
The pharmaceutical industry is highly competitive and is subject to rapid and significant technological change, which could render our technologies and products obsolete or uncompetitive.
The pharmaceutical industry is highly competitive and is subject to rapid and significant technological change, which could render certain of our products obsolete or uncompetitive. This is particularly true in the development of therapeutics for oncology indications where new products and combinations of products are rapidly being developed that change the treatment paradigm for patients. There is no assurance that our product candidates will be the best, have the best safety profile, be the first to market, or be the most economical to make or use. The introduction of competitive therapies as alternatives to our product candidates could dramatically reduce the value of those development projects or chances of successfully commercializing those product candidates, which could have a material adverse effect on our long-term financial success.
We will compete with companies in the United States and internationally, including major pharmaceutical and chemical companies, specialized CROs, research and development firms, universities and other research institutions. Many of our competitors have greater financial resources and selling and marketing capabilities, greater experience in clinical testing and human clinical trials of pharmaceutical products and greater experience in obtaining FDA and other regulatory approvals than we do. In addition, some of our competitors may have lower development and manufacturing costs.
We rely significantly on information technology and any failure, inadequacy, interruption or security lapse of that technology or loss of data, including any cyber security incidents, could compromise sensitive information related to our business, prevent us from accessing critical information or expose us to liability which could harm our ability to operate our business effectively and adversely affect our business and reputation.
In the ordinary course of our business, we, our contract research organizations and other third parties on which we rely collect and store sensitive data, including legally protected patient health information, personally identifiable information about our employees, intellectual property, and proprietary business information. We manage and maintain our applications and data utilizing on-site systems. These applications and data encompass a wide variety of business-critical information including research and development information and business and financial information.
The secure processing, storage, maintenance and transmission of this critical information is vital to our operations and business strategy. Additionally, despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems and those of third parties with which we contract are vulnerable to damage from cyber-attacks, computer viruses, breaches, unauthorized access, interruptions due to employee error or malfeasance or other disruptions, or damage from natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures.
In addition, we have implemented a work model that has enabled substantially all of our employees to periodically work remotely, which may make us more vulnerable to cyberattacks. Any such event could compromise our networks and the information stored there could be accessed by unauthorized parties, publicly disclosed, lost or stolen. We have measures in place that are designed to detect and respond to such security incidents and breaches of privacy and security mandates. Any such access, disclosure or other loss of information could result in legal claims or proceedings, liability under laws that protect the privacy of personal information, government enforcement actions and regulatory penalties. Unauthorized access, loss or dissemination could also disrupt our operations, including our ability to conduct research, development and commercialization activities, process and prepare company financial information, manage various selling, general and administrative aspects of our business and damage our reputation, in addition to possibly requiring substantial expenditures of resources to remedy, any of which could adversely affect our business. The loss of clinical trial data could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. In addition, there can be no assurance that we will promptly detect any such disruption or security breach, if at all. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and our research, development and commercialization efforts could be delayed.
Our ability to use our net operating losses to offset future taxable income may be subject to certain limitations.
Our net operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards could expire unused and be unavailable to offset future tax liabilities because of their limited duration or because of restrictions under U.S. tax law. As of December 31, 2022, we had U.S. federal and state NOLs of $342.9 million and $336.5 million, respectively. Our NOLs generated in tax years ending on or prior to December 31, 2017 are only permitted to be carried forward for 20 years under applicable U.S. tax law. Under the Tax Act, as modified by the CARES Act, our federal NOLs generated in tax years ending after December 31, 2017 may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of federal NOLs, particularly for tax years beginning after December 31, 2020, may be limited. It is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to the Tax Act and the CARES Act.
Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or Section 382, contains rules that limit the ability of a company that undergoes an ownership change to utilize its net operating losses, or NOLs, and tax credits existing as of the date of such ownership change. Under the rules, such an ownership change is generally any change in ownership of more than 50% of a company’s stock within a rolling three-year period. The rules generally operate by focusing on changes in ownership among stockholders considered by the rules as owning, directly or indirectly, 5% or more of the stock of a company and any change in ownership arising from new issuances of stock by the company. We have experienced multiple ownership changes since our inception and are conducting a study to assess whether an ownership change has occurred and whether these ownership changes will limit the future use of our NOL carryforwards. Future ownership changes as defined by Section 382 may further limit the amount of NOL carryforwards that could be utilized annually to offset future taxable income.
Our term loan contains restrictions that limit our flexibility in operating our business.
In October 2018, we entered into a loan and security agreement, as most recently amended and restated in January 2023, with Hercules, secured by a lien on substantially all of our assets, excluding intellectual property. This loan contains various covenants that limit our ability to engage in specified types of transactions. These covenants limit our ability to, among other things:
•sell, transfer, lease or dispose of certain assets;
•incur indebtedness;
•encumber or permit liens on certain assets;
•make certain investments;
•make certain restricted payments, including paying dividends on, or repurchasing or making distributions with respect to, our common stock; and
•enter into certain transactions with affiliates.
The covenants also include a requirement that we maintain cash in an aggregate amount greater than or equal to $20 million; provided, however, that following the FDA approval of the sale and marketing of mavorixafor for the treatment to patients with WHIM syndrome, the required level shall be reduced to $10 million. Based on our current cash and cash equivalents and our current operating plan, we believe that if we fail to raise additional capital, we would be in violation of the minimum cash described above in the first quarter of 2024. A breach of any of the covenants under the loan and security agreement could result in a default under the loan. Upon the occurrence of an event of default under the loan, the lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding, if any, to be immediately due and payable and terminate all commitments to extend further credit. If there are any amounts outstanding that we are unable to repay, the lenders could proceed against the collateral granted to them to secure such indebtedness.
Our business could be adversely affected by economic downturns, inflation, increases in interest rates, natural disasters, public health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic, political crises, geopolitical events, such as the war in Ukraine, or other macroeconomic conditions, which have in the past and may in the future negatively impact our business and financial performance.
The global economy, including credit and financial markets, has experienced extreme volatility and disruptions, including, among other things, severely diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, supply chain shortages, increases in inflation rates, higher interest rates and uncertainty about economic stability. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in widespread unemployment, economic slowdown and extreme volatility in the capital markets. The U.S. Federal Reserve recently raised interest rates multiple times in response to concerns about inflation and it may raise them again. Higher interest rates, coupled with reduced government spending and volatility in financial markets may increase economic uncertainty. If the equity and credit markets deteriorate, including as a result of political unrest or war, such as the war in Ukraine, it may make any necessary debt or equity financing more difficult to obtain in a timely manner or on favorable terms, more costly or more dilutive. Increased inflation rates can adversely affect us by increasing our costs, including labor and employee benefit costs.
Risks Related to Ownership of Our Common Stock
Our stock price has been and is likely to continue to be volatile and fluctuate substantially.
The market price of our common stock has been and could continue to be subject to significant fluctuations. Market prices for securities of pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other life sciences companies have historically been particularly volatile. Some of the factors that may cause the market price of our common stock to fluctuate include:
•our ability or the ability of our collaborators to develop product candidates and conduct clinical trials that demonstrate such product candidates are safe and effective;
•our ability or the ability of our collaborators to obtain regulatory approvals for product candidates, and delays or failures to obtain such approvals;
•failure of any our product candidates to demonstrate safety and efficacy, receive regulatory approval and achieve commercial success;
•failure to maintain our existing third-party license, manufacturing and supply agreements;
•failure by us or our licensors to prosecute, maintain or enforce our intellectual property rights;
•changes in laws or regulations applicable to our current or future product candidates;
•any inability to obtain adequate supply of product candidates or the inability to do so at acceptable prices;
•adverse decisions by regulatory authorities;
•introduction of new or competing products by our competitors;
•failure to meet or exceed financial and development projections that we may provide to the public;
•the perception of the pharmaceutical industry by the public, legislatures, regulators and the investment community;
•announcements of significant acquisitions, strategic collaborations, joint ventures or capital commitments by us or our competitors;
•disputes or other developments relating to proprietary rights, including patents, litigation matters and our ability to obtain intellectual property protection for our technologies;
•additions or departures of key personnel;
•significant lawsuits, including intellectual property or stockholder litigation;
•announcements by us of material developments in our business, financial condition and/or operations;
•if securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports about us, or if they issue an adverse or misleading opinions regarding our business and stock;
•changes in the market valuations of similar companies;
•general macroeconomic, political and market conditions and overall fluctuations in the financial markets in the United States and abroad;
•sales of our common stock or our stockholders in the future;
•trading volume of our common stock;
•adverse publicity relating to our markets generally, including with respect to other products and potential products in such markets;
•changes in the structure of health care payment systems;
•period-to-period fluctuations in our financial results; and
•the other factors described in this “Risk Factors” section and elsewhere in this Annual Report
In addition, companies trading in the stock market in general have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of these companies, including in connection with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, which has resulted in decreased stock prices for many companies notwithstanding the lack of a fundamental change in their underlying business models or prospects. Broad market and industry factors, including potentially worsening economic conditions and other adverse effects or developments relating to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, may negatively affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities, stockholders have often instituted class action securities litigation against those companies. Such litigation, if instituted, could result in substantial costs and diversion of management attention and resources, which could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and reputation.
“Penny stock” rules may make buying or selling our securities difficult which may make our stock less liquid and make it harder for investors to buy and sell our securities.
Trading in our securities is subject to the SEC’s “penny stock” rules and it is anticipated that trading in our securities will continue to be subject to the penny stock rules for the foreseeable future. The SEC has adopted regulations that generally define a penny stock to be any equity security that has a market price of less than $5.00 per share, subject to certain exceptions. These rules require that any broker-dealer who recommends our securities to persons other than prior customers and accredited investors must, prior to the sale, make a special written suitability determination for the purchaser and receive the purchaser’s written agreement to execute the transaction. Unless an exception is available, the regulations require the delivery, prior to any transaction involving a penny stock, of a disclosure schedule explaining the penny stock market and the risks associated with trading in the penny stock market. In addition, broker-dealers must disclose commissions payable to both the broker-dealer and the registered representative and current quotations for the securities they offer. The additional burdens imposed upon broker-dealers by these requirements may discourage broker-dealers from recommending transactions in our securities, which could severely limit the liquidity of our securities and consequently adversely affect the market price for our securities.
If securities analysts do not publish research or reports about our business or if they publish negative evaluations of our stock, the price of our stock could decline.
The trading market for our common stock will be influenced, in part, on the research and reports that industry or financial analysts publish about us or our business. Equity research analysts may elect not to provide research coverage of our common stock, and such lack of research coverage may adversely affect the market price of our common stock. In the event we do have equity research analyst coverage, we will not have any control over the analysts or the content and opinions included in their reports. The price of our common stock could decline if one or more equity research analysts downgrade our stock or issue other unfavorable commentary or research. If one or more equity research analysts ceases coverage of us or fails to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our common stock could decrease, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.
We do not anticipate that we will pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.
The current expectation is that we will retain our future earnings to fund the development and growth of our business. In addition, the terms of our debt agreements may preclude us from paying dividends. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our common stock will be your sole source of gain, if any, for the foreseeable future. We are prohibited from declaring or paying any cash dividends under our existing loan and security agreement with Hercules.
Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could cause our stock price to decline.
Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market, or the perception that these sales might occur, could depress the market price of our common stock and could impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities. We are unable to predict the effect that sales, particularly sales by our directors, executive officers, and significant stockholders, may have on the prevailing market price of our common stock.
In addition, we have filed registration statements on Form S-8 registering the issuance of shares of common stock subject to options or other equity awards issued or reserved for future issuance under our equity incentive plans. Shares registered under these registration statements are available for sale in the public market subject to vesting arrangements and exercise of options, as well as Rule 144 in the case of our affiliates.
If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, stockholders could lose confidence in our financial and other public reporting, which would harm our business and the trading price of our common stock.
We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the rules and regulations of The Nasdaq Stock Market (“Nasdaq”). Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Section 404”), we are required to perform system and process evaluation and testing of our internal control over financial reporting to allow our management to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting in this Annual Report.
Effective internal control over financial reporting is necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and, together with adequate disclosure controls and procedures, is designed to prevent fraud. Any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation, could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. In addition, any testing by us, as and when required, conducted in connection with Section 404, or any subsequent testing by our independent registered public accounting firm, as and when required, may reveal deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting that are deemed to be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses or that may require prospective or retroactive changes to our consolidated financial statements or identify other areas for further attention or improvement. Inferior internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the trading price of our common stock.
Pursuant to Section 404, we are required to furnish a report by our management on our internal control over financial reporting beginning with this Annual Report. However, while we remain a non-accelerated filer, we will not be required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. When we cease to be a smaller reporting company and no longer qualify as a non-accelerated filer, we will be required to incur substantial additional professional fees and internal costs to expand our accounting and finance functions in order to include such attestation report.
We may in the future discover weaknesses in our system of internal financial and accounting controls and procedures that could result in a material misstatement of our consolidated financial statements. Our internal control over financial reporting will not prevent or detect all error and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the control system’s objectives will be met. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances of fraud will be detected. If we identify one or more material weaknesses in our internal controls, investors could lose confidence in the reliability of our consolidated financial statements, the market price of our stock could decline and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by Nasdaq, the SEC or other regulatory authorities.
We are a “smaller reporting company” and cannot predict if the reduced reporting requirements applicable to smaller reporting companies will make our securities less attractive to investors.
We are a “smaller reporting company” under the Exchange Act as of June 30, 2022. We may continue to be a smaller reporting company if either (i) the market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates is less than $250 million or (ii) our annual revenue was less than $100.0 million during the most recently completed fiscal year and the market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates is less than $700.0 million. As a smaller reporting company, we may rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are available to smaller reporting companies, including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements. For so long as we remain a smaller reporting company, we are permitted and intend to rely on such exemptions from certain disclosure and other requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not smaller reporting companies.
We cannot predict if investors will find our securities less attractive because we may rely on the exemptions and reduced disclosure obligations applicable to smaller reporting companies. If some investors find our securities less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be more volatile.
We may become involved in securities class action litigation or shareholder derivative litigation that could divert management’s attention and harm our business and insurance coverage may not be sufficient to cover all costs and damages.
In the past, securities class action or shareholder derivative litigation has often followed certain significant business transactions, such as the sale of a business division or announcement of a merger. This risk is especially relevant for us because biopharmaceutical companies have experienced significant stock price volatility in recent years. We may become involved in this type of litigation in the future.The outcome of litigation is necessarily uncertain, and we could be forced to expend significant resources in the defense of such suits, and we may not prevail. Monitoring and defending against legal actions is time-consuming for our management and detracts from management’s ability to fully focus our internal resources on our business activities. In addition, we may incur substantial legal fees and costs in connection with any such litigation. We have not established any reserves for any potential liability relating to any such potential lawsuits. It is possible that we could, in the future, incur judgments or enter into settlements of claims for monetary damages. We currently maintain insurance coverage for some of these potential liabilities. Other potential liabilities may not be covered by insurance, insurers may dispute coverage or the amount of insurance may not be enough to cover damages awarded. In addition, certain types of damages may not be covered by insurance, and insurance coverage for all or certain forms of liability may become unavailable or prohibitively expensive in the future. A decision adverse to our interests on one or more legal matters or litigation could result in the payment of substantial damages, or possibly fines, and could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, financial condition and results of operations.
Provisions in our corporate charter documents and under Delaware law could make an acquisition of our company, which may be beneficial to our stockholders, more difficult and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management.
Provisions in our corporate charter and by-laws may discourage, delay or prevent a merger, acquisition or other change in control of our Company that stockholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which you might otherwise receive a premium for your shares. These provisions also could limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock, thereby depressing the market price of our common stock. In addition, because our board of directors is responsible for appointing the members of our management team, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of our board of directors. Among other things, these provisions:
•establish a classified board of directors such that not all members of the board are elected at one time;
•allow the authorized number of our directors to be changed only by resolution of the board of directors;
•limit the manner in which stockholders can remove directors from the board;
•establish advance notice requirements for stockholder proposals that can be acted on at stockholder meetings and nominations to the board of directors;
•require that stockholder actions must be effected at a duly called stockholder meeting and prohibit actions by our stockholders by written consent;
•limit who may call stockholder meetings;
•authorize the board of directors to issue preferred stock without stockholder approval, which could be used to institute a shareholder rights plan, or so-called “poison pill,” that would work to dilute the stock ownership of a potential hostile acquirer, effectively preventing acquisitions that have not been approved by the board of directors; and
•require the approval of the holders of at least 75% of the votes that all our stockholders would be entitled to cast to amend or repeal certain provisions of our charter or by-laws.
Moreover, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which prohibits a person who owns in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock from merging or combining with the Company for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the person acquired in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock, unless the merger or combination is approved in a prescribed manner.
Our certificate of incorporation provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the exclusive forum for substantially all disputes between the Company and our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with the Company or our directors, officers, employees or stockholders.
Our certificate of incorporation provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for any derivative action or proceeding brought on the Company’s behalf, any action asserting a breach of fiduciary duty owed by our directors, officers, other employees or stockholders to the Company or our stockholders, any action asserting a claim against the Company arising pursuant to the Delaware General Corporation Law or as to which the Delaware General Corporation Law confers jurisdiction on the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, or any action asserting a claim arising pursuant to our certificate of incorporation or by-laws or governed by the internal affairs doctrine. This provision may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with the Company or our directors, officers, employees or stockholders, which may discourage such lawsuits against the Company and our directors, officers, employees or stockholders.
Alternatively, if a court were to find this provision in our certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect our business and financial condition.