ORIC 10-K
Oric Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (ORIC)
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM
(Mark One)
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended
OR
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to |
Commission File Number:
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its Charter)
|
|
|
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
|
||
(Address of principal executive offices) |
|
(Zip Code) |
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of each class |
|
Trading Symbol(s) |
|
Name of each exchange on which registered |
|
|
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files).
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer |
|
☐ |
|
Accelerated filer |
|
☐ |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
☒ |
|
Smaller reporting company |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Emerging growth company |
|
|
|
|
|
|
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report.
If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements.
Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes
The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant, based on the closing price of the shares of common stock on the Nasdaq Global Select Market on June 30, 2025 (the last day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter) was $
The number of shares of registrant’s Common Stock outstanding as of February 12, 2026 was
Portions of the Registrant’s Definitive Proxy Statement relating to the Registrant’s Annual Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K where indicated. Such Definitive Proxy Statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the registrant’s 2025 fiscal year ended December 31, 2025.
Table of Contents
|
|
|
Page |
PART I |
|
|
|
Item 1. |
|
1 |
|
Item 1A. |
|
40 |
|
Item 1B. |
|
94 |
|
Item 1C. |
|
95 |
|
Item 2. |
|
96 |
|
Item 3. |
|
96 |
|
Item 4. |
|
96 |
|
|
|
|
|
PART II |
|
|
|
Item 5. |
|
97 |
|
Item 6. |
|
97 |
|
Item 7. |
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
|
98 |
Item 7A. |
|
105 |
|
Item 8. |
|
107 |
|
Item 9. |
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure |
|
127 |
Item 9A. |
|
127 |
|
Item 9B. |
|
127 |
|
Item 9C. |
Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions That Prevent Inspections |
|
127 |
|
|
|
|
PART III |
|
|
|
Item 10. |
|
128 |
|
Item 11. |
|
128 |
|
Item 12. |
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters |
|
128 |
Item 13. |
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence |
|
128 |
Item 14. |
|
128 |
|
|
|
|
|
PART IV |
|
|
|
Item 15. |
|
129 |
|
Item 16 |
|
129 |
|
|
132 |
||
i
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements. All statements other than statements of historical facts contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including statements regarding our future results of operations and financial position, business strategy, development plans, planned preclinical studies and clinical trials, future results of clinical trials, expected research and development costs, regulatory strategy, timing and likelihood of success, as well as plans and objectives of management for future operations, are forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terms such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “would,” “expect,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “could,” “intend,” “target,” “project,” “contemplate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other similar expressions. Forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K include, but are not limited to, statements about:
ii
We have based these forward-looking statements largely on our current expectations and projections about our business, the industry in which we operate and financial trends that we believe may affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects, and these forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance or development. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions described in the section titled “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Because forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties, some of which cannot be predicted or quantified, you should not rely on these forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. The events and circumstances reflected in our forward-looking statements may not be achieved or occur and actual results could differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements. Except as required by applicable law, we do not plan to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements contained herein, whether as a result of any new information, future events or otherwise.
In addition, statements that “we believe” and similar statements reflect our beliefs and opinions on the relevant subject. These statements are based upon information available to us as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and while we believe such information forms a reasonable basis for such statements, such information may be limited or incomplete, and our statements should not be read to indicate that we have conducted an exhaustive inquiry into, or review of, all potentially available relevant information. These statements are inherently uncertain and you are cautioned not to unduly rely upon these statements.
iii
PART I
Item 1. Business.
Overview
ORIC Pharmaceuticals is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to improving patients’ lives by Overcoming Resistance In Cancer.
Profound advancements in oncology drug development have expanded the treatment options available to patients, yet therapeutic resistance and relapse continue to limit the efficacy and duration of clinical benefit of such treatments. Collectively, our founders and management team have a decades-long heritage of identifying and characterizing resistance mechanisms in oncology, having discovered, developed and commercialized groundbreaking medicines at companies such as Ignyta, Medivation, Aragon, Pharmacyclics, Deciphera and Genentech.
Our fully integrated research and development team is advancing a diverse pipeline of innovative clinical therapies designed to counter resistance mechanisms in cancer by leveraging our expertise within three specific areas: hormone-dependent cancers, precision oncology and key tumor dependencies.
Our clinical stage product candidates include:
1
Beyond these clinical stage product candidates, we have historically engaged in the research and development of multiple discovery stage precision medicines targeting other hallmark cancer resistance mechanisms. On August 12, 2025, we announced a strategic pipeline prioritization to focus operational and financial resources on the continued advancement of our two lead clinical programs, rinzimetostat and enozertinib. This initiative has resulted in a substantial decrease in preclinical research, primarily from the elimination of our discovery research group.
Cancer resistance continues to be one of the most daunting challenges facing patients, clinicians and researchers in oncology today. A multitude of biological factors and pathways have been linked to resistance, which enables tumors to restore cell growth and survival by circumventing a treatment’s intended mechanism of action. Our resistance platform is focused on three areas: (1) innate resistance, which derives from an unaddressed oncogenic driver that promotes tumorigenesis; (2) acquired resistance, the result of an induced or enriched oncogenic driver that arises in response to treatment; and (3) bypass resistance, the activation of a compensatory signaling pathway in response to treatment.
We are building a portfolio of novel agents targeting multiple resistance mechanisms by leveraging our specialized expertise in hormone-dependent cancers, precision oncology and key tumor dependencies:
2
We are applying our internal capabilities to these three areas of expertise to identify and develop innovative therapies targeting the critical cancer resistance mechanisms that we believe will bring the largest benefit to patients, including by making existing therapies more effective for a longer period of time.
Our portfolio currently consists of programs targeting key resistance mechanisms in cancer. Our product candidates are shown in the figure below:
(1) Clinical collaboration with Johnson & Johnson to evaluate enozertinib in combination with SC amivantamab in patients with first-line NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 mutations.
PRC2 inhibitor program: Rinzimetostat
The dysregulation of PRC2 methyltransferase activity can lead to tumorigenesis in a wide range of cancers including prostate cancer, breast cancer, and hematological malignancies. PRC2 is composed of two druggable subunits: EED and EZH2. Several companies are developing EZH2 inhibitors; however, the pharmacologic properties of these compounds result in high doses that achieve only partial target inhibition in the clinic. Additionally, preclinical studies suggest drug resistance to EZH2 inhibitors may develop via EZH1 bypass compensation or acquired mutations in EZH2. Allosteric inhibition of EED impacts the assembly, stabilization, and activation of PRC2, and may have benefits over EZH2-mediated inhibition of PRC2.
Rinzimetostat is a potent and selective allosteric inhibitor of PRC2 with mechanism of action via binding the EED subunit that was designed to have superior drug properties compared to EZH2 inhibitors and is efficacious in androgen-insensitive and enzalutamide-resistant prostate cancer models in preclinical studies. We filed and cleared an IND with the FDA for rinzimetostat in the fourth quarter of 2021. We completed a Phase 1b trial of rinzimetostat as a single-agent, in patients with advanced prostate cancer and reported initial Phase 1b data from this trial in January 2024, demonstrating potential best-in-class drug properties, including an approximate 20-hour clinical half-life, robust target engagement and a favorable safety profile. In July 2024, we announced that in the first half of 2024 we initiated dosing of rinzimetostat in combination with apalutamide as well as in combination with darolutamide, as part of the ongoing Phase 1b trial in patients with mCRPC. We also announced that we entered into clinical trial collaboration and supply agreements with Johnson & Johnson and Bayer, to evaluate rinzimetostat in combination with Erleada® (apalutamide),
3
Johnson & Johnson’s AR inhibitor, and Nubeqa® (darolutamide), Bayer’s AR inhibitor. In November 2025, we announced the completion of the dose exploration portion of the Phase 1b trial and the selection of provisional RP2Ds of rinzimetostat to be tested in combination with the approved doses of darolutamide and apalutamide in the dose optimization portion of the Phase 1b trial: 400 mg and 600 mg QD of rinzimetostat in combination with 600 mg BID of darolutamide; and 600 mg, 800 mg and 1,200 mg QD of rinzimetostat in combination with 240 mg QD of apalutamide. Also, in November 2025, we reported Phase 1b dose exploration data in 20 patients with mCRPC, who were treated with rinzimetostat in combination with 240 mg QD of apalutamide or with 600 mg BID of darolutamide. The November 2025 data set (cutoff date of September 22, 2025) demonstrated PSA responses and ctDNA reductions across all rinzimetostat dose levels and at comparable rates in combination with apalutamide or with darolutamide. Broad and deep PSA responses were demonstrated, with 55% of patients achieving a PSA50 response rate (confirmed in 40%), and 20% of patients achieving a PSA90 response rate (all confirmed). Rapid and deep ctDNA responses were observed in patients across a breadth of AR mutations and other gene alterations, with 76% of patients achieving greater than 50% ctDNA reduction, and 59% of patients achieving ctDNA clearance. Both combination regimens demonstrated a safety profile compatible with long-term dosing, with the vast majority of TRAEs Grade 1 or 2 in severity and consistent with PRC2 and AR inhibition. As of the September 22, 2025 cutoff date, only one patient experienced a Grade 3 TRAE, and there were no Grade 4 or Grade 5 AEs attributed to rinzimetostat, apalutamide or darolutamide. We expect to report dose optimization data in the first quarter of 2026, and we expect to initiate our first global Phase 3 registrational trial for rinzimetostat in mCRPC in the first half of 2026.
Brain-penetrant EGFR program: Enozertinib
The ErbB receptor tyrosine kinase family is involved in key cellular functions, including cell growth and survival. EGFR exon 20 mutations are observed in approximately 2.1% of all patients with NSCLC and these patients have a worse prognosis than patients with NSCLC driven by other EGFR mutations. EGFR PACC mutations are observed in approximately 2.5% of all patients with NSCLC. Approximately 30% of patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC present with de novo CNS disease and approximately 50% will develop brain metastases over the course of their disease, which contributes to poor prognosis.
Enozertinib is a brain-penetrant, orally bioavailable, irreversible inhibitor targeting EGFR exon 20 and EGFR atypical mutations. Enozertinib has demonstrated greater brain exposure in preclinical studies compared to certain other compounds being developed against exon 20 mutations and has shown strong anti-tumor activity in an EGFR-driven intracranial lung cancer model. In the fourth quarter of 2021, we filed a CTA in South Korea for enozertinib, which was cleared in the first quarter of 2022. We also filed and cleared an IND with the FDA for enozertinib in the third quarter of 2022. Enozertinib is being evaluated in Phase 1b trials in EGFR exon 20 and PACC mutated NSCLC, which allow enrollment of patients with CNS metastases that are either treated or untreated but asymptomatic. We reported initial Phase 1b data with enozertinib as a monotherapy in patients with EGFR exon 20 mutations at the ESMO Congress in October 2023, which demonstrated both systemic and intracranial activity across multiple dose levels in a heavily pre-treated patient population. In April 2024, we announced the selection of two provisional RP2Ds of enozertinib at 80 mg and 120 mg QD. In December 2025, we reported additional Phase 1b data at the 2025 ESMO Asia Congress in treatment-naïve and in previously treated NSCLC patients with EGFR exon 20 and EGFR atypical mutations. Enozertinib achieved highly competitive systemic response rates as well as profound antitumor activity in the CNS in EGFR exon 20 and EGFR PACC patients. Enozertinib also demonstrated a well-tolerated safety profile in EGFR exon 20 and EGFR atypical patients, with no significant off-target toxicity and manageable on-target toxicity, resulting in low rate of discontinuations. Based on these data, 80 mg QD oral enozertinib has been selected as the monotherapy dose for potential Phase 3 development. In January 2025, we announced that we entered into a clinical trial and supply agreement with Johnson & Johnson to evaluate enozertinib in combination with SC amivantamab for the first line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 mutations, and we initiated a Phase 1b trial in the first quarter of 2025. Dosing and follow-up continues in NSCLC patients with exon 20 mutations, including as a monotherapy, in combination with SC amivantamab and in combination with chemotherapy, as well as in NSCLC patients with EGFR PACC mutations as a monotherapy. We expect to report data in the second half of 2026 in 1L NSCLC patients with EGFR exon 20 mutations as a monotherapy and in combination with SC amivantamab, as well as in 1L NSCLC patients with EGFR PACC mutations as a monotherapy.
Our strategy
Our goal is to develop and commercialize innovative therapies that overcome resistance in cancer. The key elements of our business strategy to achieve this goal include:
4
5
Background on cancer resistance
Cancer resistance continues to be one of the most daunting challenges facing patients, clinicians and researchers in oncology today. A multitude of biological factors and pathways have been linked to resistance, which enables tumors to restore cell growth and survival by circumventing a treatment’s intended mechanism of action. Furthermore, treatment resistance in cancer emerges irrespective of therapeutic class, including targeted therapy, hormone therapy, immunotherapy and chemotherapy.
Our resistance platform is focused on three areas: (1) innate resistance, which derives from an unaddressed oncogenic driver that promotes tumorigenesis; (2) acquired resistance, the result of an induced or enriched oncogenic driver that arises in response to treatment; and (3) bypass resistance, the activation of a compensatory signaling pathway in response to treatment.
Overview of key resistance mechanisms and ORIC team’s prior relevant experience
6
Collectively, our team has spent decades identifying and characterizing resistance mechanisms and has a strong heritage of bringing forth new and improved therapies designed to exploit resistance biology from the research lab to the clinic and, ultimately, to patients in need.
Our areas of focus within cancer resistance
Our vision for patients with cancer is that therapeutics specifically addressing resistance will provide durable treatment responses, such that solid tumors can become a chronic disease with patient survival measured in years rather than months. Within the broader resistance landscape, we have specialized expertise in hormone-dependent cancers, precision oncology and key tumor dependencies, areas in which we have focused our product and business development efforts.
Hormone-dependent cancers
Two of our founders, Drs. Sawyers and Heyman, are leading experts in hormone-dependent cancers. They previously co-founded two oncology companies, Aragon and Seragon, that developed therapeutics targeting two nuclear hormone receptors, AR and ER, respectively. Following the acquisitions of Aragon, whose lead product, Erleada, was ultimately approved for prostate cancer, and Seragon, whose lead product candidates were being developed for breast cancer, Drs. Sawyers and Heyman founded ORIC.
Given the breadth of resistance in hormone driven cancers, we believe our differentiated insight into this biology is a crucial component of our future success. Our programs include the product candidate rinzimetostat being developed for advanced prostate cancer.
Precision oncology (biomarker-driven, patient-selected trials)
Our clinical development team—including our Chief Medical Officer, head of clinical development and heads of core functions—previously worked together with our Chief Executive Officer at Ignyta, an oncology company that developed a pipeline of precision therapies, including Rozlytrek, which is now approved by the FDA in two different indications for genetically defined tumors, ROS1-positive metastatic NSCLC and NTRK-positive solid tumors. The clinical development of Rozlytrek, which was largely driven by this team, relied upon biomarker-driven patient selection via a companion diagnostic, leading to the approval of the compound approximately five years after it first entered the clinic.
The Rozlytrek and Ignyta experience can be seen as a paradigm for precision oncology, in which the identification of biomarkers forms the basis of the entire drug research and development process, from early understandings of PK and PD modulation of target biology through to appropriate patient selection during clinical development. As part of our strategy, our in-house team of experienced translational scientists and computational biologists utilize existing technologies as well as develop proprietary assays to enable the selection and assessment of biomarkers for each of our programs. We seek to design rigorous and cost-efficient clinical programs that increase the probability of success by exploring connections between cellular-level biology and patient-level clinical outcomes. The use of biomarker-based patient selection is designed to enable demonstration of clinical proof-of-concept earlier and with fewer patients, leading ultimately to smaller pivotal trials.
Our emphasis on a precision oncology approach to the mechanisms that underlie cancer resistance enables us to develop biological methods and assays that can be employed in the selection of appropriate patients for our development candidates rather than relying solely on limited clinical diagnosis information. For example, like many cancers, prostate cancer is a heterogeneous disease with different pathways contributing to potential resistance mechanisms to anti-androgen therapy that may vary from patient to patient or evolve over the course of a patient’s treatment history. We intend to apply a precision oncology approach to the advancement of our entire pipeline.
7
Key tumor dependencies
Our scientific team—led by our Chief Scientific Officer, head of biology and head of translational medicine—has amassed deep knowledge of key oncogenic drivers and pathways in order to identify and validate oncology targets. They most recently worked together at Genentech, where they progressed more than 20 oncology discovery programs into clinical development, with four approvals to date, including Cotellic, Zelboraf, Polivy and Itovebi. The team’s approach to uncovering tumor dependencies that are key drivers of cancer resistance is biology-focused and mechanistically driven.
Tumors are dependent on distinct biological drivers, or key tumor dependencies, which can be exploited to develop therapeutics. Examples of key tumor dependencies include oncogenic drivers, metabolic dependencies and lineage-specific markers. The earliest known tumor dependency occurs after normal cells acquire mutations that initiate tumor development. These early lesions continuously evolve within a given tissue in the presence of other cell types, such as endothelial and immune cells, ultimately generating a heterogeneous tumor ecosystem. The interplay between tumor cells and other heterologous cell types within a tissue impart physiological restrictions, such as limited oxygen or increased acidity, that tumor cells are forced to withstand to enable growth. This concept of evolution under selective pressure also applies in the context of an advanced tumor being subjected to therapeutic interventions—the relapsing tumors are forced to adapt in order to grow in the presence of treatment. Through these evolutionary processes, tumor cells can become exclusively dependent on distinct pathways, and these are the key dependencies that can be exploited for therapeutic gain.
PRC2 inhibitor program: Rinzimetostat
Background
PRC2 is a histone methyltransferase complex consisting of three core subunits: EED, EZH2 or EZH1, and SUZ12 and plays a key role in gene regulation and transcriptional repression, in particular during embryonic development. The dysregulation of PRC2 can lead to tumorigenesis in a wide range of cancers including prostate cancer, breast cancer, and hematological malignancies. EED is responsible for histone binding and activation of PRC2. Allosteric inhibition of EED impacts the assembly, stabilization, and activation of PRC2.
Rationale for targeting allosteric inhibition of PRC2 through EED
PRC2 has two druggable subunits, EZH2, whose enzymatic function is the target of first-generation therapeutics, and EED, which next-generation therapeutics like rinzimetostat inhibit. Several companies are developing EZH2 inhibitors; however, the pharmacologic properties of these compounds result in high doses given more than once a day, that achieve only partial target inhibition in the clinic. Allosteric inhibition of PRC2 through EED is differentiated from targeting EZH2 and may be beneficial for a number of reasons. First, preclinical studies show that EED inhibition is active against mutants in EZH2 that confer innate resistance to EZH2 inhibitors. Second, in a similar fashion, acquired mutations in EZH2 are sensitive to EED inhibition. Third, cells treated with EZH2 inhibitors are also able to activate EHZ1 in a compensatory bypass mechanism of resistance, yet those cells are sensitive to EED inhibition.
Note: EZH2, enhancer of zeste homolog 2. EED, embryonic ectoderm development. H3K27, histone H3 at lysine 27.
(1) Schade et al. Nature (2024), Loi et al. Cancer Discovery (2024), Daemen et al. AACR (2024 and 2025), and Friedman AACR Presentation (2024).
(2) Yu et al Cancer Res. (2007).
(3) Schweizer et al. ASCO GU (2025).
8
Preclinical Data
Rinzimetostat is a potent and selective allosteric inhibitor of PRC2 with a mechanism of action via binding the EED subunit that was designed to have superior drug properties compared to EZH2 inhibitors. Rinzimetostat when dosed orally once a day as a single-agent significantly inhibited prostate tumor growth in androgen-insensitive and enzalutamide-resistant prostate cancer models as seen in the figures below. While cross-study comparisons of preclinical data have limitations and caveats, the rinzimetostat efficacy appears to be superior to EZH2 inhibitors in the same models.
Note: Rinzimetostat dose used was 200 mg/kg QD. Enzalutamide dose used was 30 mg/kg QD. ****p < 0.0001. Left graph: C4-2 xenograft model. Right graph: 22Rv1 xenograft model.
Additional preclinical studies with rinzimetostat as a monotherapy and in combination regimens are being explored.
Initial Phase 1 dose escalation data of rinzimetostat
We filed and cleared an IND with the FDA for rinzimetostat in the fourth quarter of 2021. We completed a Phase 1b trial of rinzimetostat as a single-agent, in patients with advanced prostate cancer and reported initial Phase 1b data from this trial in January 2024.
As of December 10, 2023, these data demonstrated potential best-in-class drug properties, including an approximate 20-hour clinical half-life and no signs of cytochrome P450 autoinduction that is seen with first-generation PRC2 inhibitors.
Preliminary Phase 1b Pharmacokinetics Data:
9
There was robust target engagement, with maximal decrease (≥75%) in H3K27me3 in monocytes from peripheral blood samples at doses as low as 200 mg QD with low inter-patient variability.
Preliminary Phase 1b Pharmacodynamic Data:
Rinzimetostat was well tolerated up to 900 mg QD, with only Grade 1 and Grade 2 TRAEs at dose levels corresponding with strong target engagement. The most common TRAEs observed are summarized below.
Treatment related adverse events occurring in ≥ 10% of patients:
Note: All data as of the data cutoff on December 10, 2024. No Grade 4 or Grade 5 events reported.
Based on rinzimetostat's emerging profile with superior drug properties, we advanced rinzimetostat into combination development in prostate cancer with AR inhibitor(s).
In mid-2024, we initiated dosing of rinzimetostat in combination with 240 mg QD apalutamide as well as in combination with 600 mg BID darolutamide, as part of the ongoing Phase 1b trial in patients with mCRPC. We also announced that we entered into clinical trial collaboration and supply agreements with Johnson & Johnson and Bayer, to evaluate rinzimetostat in combination with Erleada® (apalutamide), Johnson & Johnson’s AR inhibitor, and Nubeqa® (darolutamide), Bayer’s AR inhibitor.
Completion of dose exploration and preliminary efficacy and safety data
In November 2025, we announced the completion of the dose exploration portion of the Phase 1b trial and the selection of
10
provisional RP2Ds of rinzimetostat to be tested in combination with the approved doses of darolutamide and apalutamide in the dose optimization portion of the Phase 1b trial: 400 mg and 600 mg once daily of rinzimetostat in combination with 600 mg twice daily of darolutamide; and 600 mg, 800 mg and 1,200 mg once daily of rinzimetostat in combination with 240 mg once daily of apalutamide.
We also reported preliminary efficacy and safety data from the Phase 1b dose exploration trial of rinzimetostat in combination with AR inhibitors in 20 patients with mCRPC.
As of the September 22, 2025 cutoff date, rinzimetostat in combination with apalutamide or with darolutamide continues to be well tolerated, and both combination regimens demonstrated a safety profile compatible with long-term dosing, with the vast majority of TRAEs Grade 1 or 2 in severity and consistent with PRC2 and AR inhibition. As of the September 22, 2025 cutoff date, only one patient experienced a Grade 3 TRAE, and there were no Grade 4 or Grade 5 AEs attributed to rinzimetostat, apalutamide or darolutamide. The most common TRAEs observed are summarized below.
Treatment related adverse events occurring in ≥ 15% of patients:
(1) The occurrence of hypothyroidism is consistent with the known safety profile of apalutamide.
As of the September 22, 2025 cutoff date, PSA responses were observed across all rinzimetostat dose levels and were also observed at comparable rates in combination with apalutamide or with darolutamide, with 55% of patients (11/20) achieving a PSA50 response (confirmed in 40%), and 20% of patients (4/20) achieving a PSA90 response (all confirmed).
PSA Response Data of Rinzimetostat Plus Apalutamide or Darolutamide:
11
ctDNA was assessed for 17 patients with mCRPC who had available ctDNA samples and evidence of ctDNA at baseline prior to study entry. The ctDNA data reported as of September 22, 2025 demonstrated rapid and deep responses across a breadth of AR mutations and other gene alterations, with 76% (13/17) achieving greater than 50% ctDNA reduction, and 59% (10/17) achieving ctDNA clearance, which is greater than clearance rates observed in precedent trials with standard of care agents in comparable mCRPC patient populations.
Next steps in rinzimetostat development
We expect to report data from the dose optimization portion of the Phase 1b trial of rinzimetostat in the first quarter of 2026, and we expect to initiate our first global Phase 3 registrational trial for rinzimetostat in mCRPC in the first half of 2026.
Brain-penetrant EGFR program: Enozertinib
Background
The ErbB receptor tyrosine kinase family is involved in key cellular functions, including cell growth and survival. EGFR exon 20 mutations are observed in approximately 2.1% of all patients with NSCLC and these patients have a worse prognosis than patients with NSCLC driven by other EGFR mutations. EGFR atypical mutations are a heterogeneous group of non-classical mutations, with PACC mutations comprising the largest subset. EGFR PACC mutations are observed in approximately 2.5% of all patients with NSCLC.
Rationale for brain-penetrant inhibitor of EGFR with high potency towards exon 20 mutations
Currently, the medicines approved by the FDA specifically to treat NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 mutations provide limited benefit for patients with active brain metastases. Approximately 30% of patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC present with de novo CNS disease and approximately 50% will develop brain metastases over the course of their disease, which contributes to poor prognosis. Several companies are developing EGFR exon 20 inhibitors; however, to our knowledge none have demonstrated significant CNS activity in patients suitable for addressing brain metastases, an area of significant unmet medical need.
(1) Robichaux et al Nat Med (2018). EGFR exon 20 insertion (n=9) and classical EGFR mutation (n=129)
EGFR exon 20 insertions are associated with lower PFS with first and second generation EGFR TKIs, such as erlotinib, gefitinib and afatinib, compared to other EGFR mutations.
12
Preclinical data
Enozertinib was designed as a brain-penetrant, orally bioavailable, irreversible inhibitor targeting EGFR with nanomolar potency towards exon 20 and EGFR atypical mutations. As shown in the figure below, in a kinase selectivity panel, the ErbB receptor tyrosine kinases were strong hits and there were no off-targets identified for enozertinib, unlike the comparator clinical compounds.
Kinome selectivity screens were conducted on a 468 kinase panel with 1 uM of either enozertinib, zipalertinib, firmonertinib or silevertinib in a head-to-head assessment. The number of off-target kinase hits with inhibition of 80-100% are shown in the table. Notably, enozertinib did not hit any of the 3F family of kinases with the potential for covalent Cysteine interaction in the active site.
Enozertinib demonstrated potent anti-tumor activity in various NSCLC EGFR exon 20 mutation models. In the examples below, in models carrying the variants NPH, ASV and insG, enozertinib demonstrated potent anti-tumor activity when dosed orally once daily at 4 mg/kg.
Enozertinib was designed for brain penetrance and demonstrated potent anti-tumor activity in an intracranial NSCLC EGFR exon 19 deletion mutation in vivo model, when dosed orally at 2.5 mg/kg QD, superior to TAK-788 which was dosed orally at 30
13
mg/kg QD and osimertinib at 10 mg/kg QD. Efficacy was measured by quantification of the bioluminescence photon flux in mice carrying intracranial PC9-Luc tumors.
A key feature of enozertinib differentiation is that it was designed to optimize brain exposure across multiple parameters, including pump engagement, physicochemical properties, and free unbound fraction in the brain. Together, these compound characteristics translate in vivo into a high brain to plasma ratio in mice of nearly 1, as shown in the graph below, which depicts the free unbound fraction. Importantly, enozertinib's high brain to plasma ratio was maintained at both 1 and 4 hours. In comparison with other clinical compounds, enozertinib's free brain to plasma ratios are on par with osimertinib, which is deemed a CNS clinically active compound. In contrast, the free brain to plasma ratio of enozertinib is superior to other exon 20 directed agents such as TAK-788 and CLN-081. In summary, the limitations of current therapies to address brain metastases in the exon 20 mutant population present an opportunity for enozertinib.
In October 2023 we also presented a poster highlighting preclinical activity of enozertinib against atypical mutations in EGFR at the ESMO Congress. We assessed a variety of atypical driver mutations in EGFR and found that enozertinib showed strong cellular potency against both classes of atypical mutations – primary and acquired resistance mutations and a superior profile compared to competitors. On the right side of the figure below, enozertinib produced strong in vivo efficacy in a model bearing the EGFR G719S mutation, which is the most commonly mutated site amongst atypical mutations of EGFR.
14
In the fourth quarter of 2021, we filed a CTA in South Korea for enozertinib, which was cleared in the first quarter of 2022. We also filed and cleared an IND with the FDA for enozertinib in the third quarter of 2022. Enozertinib is being evaluated in Phase 1b trials in EGFR exon 20 and PACC mutated NSCLC, which allow enrollment of patients with CNS metastases that are either treated or untreated but asymptomatic.
Initial Phase 1 dose escalation data of enozertinib
We reported initial Phase 1b data for enozertinib at the ESMO Congress in October 2023, which demonstrated both systemic and intracranial activity across multiple doses in a heavily pre-treated patient population. As summarized in the table below, a total of 50 patients were treated with increasing doses of enozertinib. Of the 21 patients with EGFR exon 20 mutated lung cancer, 81% had received one or more EGFR exon 20 targeted agent and 86% of the patients had CNS involvement at baseline. This is a marked contrast to the patient populations that have been enrolled by the current approved and late-stage investigational programs, which are largely exon 20 inhibitor naïve and typically have approximately 35% of patients with CNS involvement at baseline.
Patient disposition and baseline characteristics.
Note: All data as of the data cutoff on September 26, 2023
15
Enozertinib was well tolerated with minimal EGFR wild type related adverse events and little evidence of off-target toxicities. The vast majority of TRAEs were Grade 1 or 2 in severity, with a low 6% rate of Grade 3 diarrhea and no events of Grade 3 or higher rash. There was a low rate of dose reductions and only 4% dose discontinuations due to safety. The most common TRAEs observed are summarized below.
Treatment related adverse events occurring in ≥ 10% of patients:
Note: All data as of the data cutoff on September 26, 2023
The waterfall plot below depicts efficacy-evaluable patients with EGFR exon 20 mutated lung cancer who received a total daily dose of 45 mg or higher and had at least one post-baseline tumor assessment performed. Across the four different total daily doses, 11 of the 15 patients received prior amivantamab and the majority experienced tumor shrinkage, with RECIST responses consisting of multiple partial responses, including one patient treated at 45 mg once daily who had two of three CNS lesions resolve on therapy, and most notably, one confirmed complete response with a complete response in the brain, in a post-amivantamab patient treated at 75 mg once daily.
16
Preliminary activity (NSCLC patients with EGFR exon 20 and treated at ≥ 45 mg QD)
Note: All data as of the data cutoff on September 26, 2023
In April 2024, we announced the selection of two provisional RP2Ds of enozertinib at 80 mg and 120 mg QD. In January 2025, we announced that we entered into a clinical trial and supply agreement with Johnson & Johnson to evaluate enozertinib in combination with SC amivantamab for the first line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 mutations, and we initiated a Phase 1b trial in the first quarter of 2025.
Additional Phase 1b data of enozertinib
In December 2025, we reported additional Phase 1b data at the 2025 ESMO Asia Congress in treatment-naïve and in previously treated NSCLC patients with EGFR exon 20 and EGFR atypical mutations.
First-line treatment-naïve NSCLC patients with EGFR exon 20 mutations
In treatment-naïve NSCLC patients with EGFR exon 20 mutations, as of the August 29, 2025 cutoff date, enozertinib was well tolerated with no significant off-target toxicities and a low 6% rate of discontinuations. Dose reductions occurred in 80% of the 120 mg cohort and 17% of the 80 mg cohort, with 58% of the reductions at the 120 mg dose occurring by approximately 8 weeks. The most common TRAEs observed are summarized below.
17
Treatment related adverse events occurring in ≥ 20% of patients
Note: All data as of the data cutoff on August 29, 2025
The waterfall plot below depicts efficacy-evaluable treatment-naïve NSCLC patients with EGFR exon 20 mutations who received a total daily dose of 120 mg and who received at least three post-baseline tumor assessments, as of the August 29, 2025 cutoff date. Of these patients, 80% underwent a dose reduction whereby most patients effectively received 80 mg daily. The best observed ORR was 67%, with a confirmed ORR of 60%. The disease control rate (DCR) was 93%. Multiple responses were observed in patients with brain metastases at baseline.
Best percentage change in lesions in patients receiving 120 mg dose
Note: All data as of the data cutoff on August 29, 2025
18
The waterfall plot below illustrates the CNS-specific intracranial responses by BICR-RANO, including 100% confirmed intracranial ORR in patients with measurable CNS disease, as of the August 29, 2025 cutoff date.
Best percentage change in CNS lesions in patients receiving 120mg dose
Note: All data as of the data cutoff on August 29, 2025. CR – complete response Measurable disease includes patients with target lesions ≥1 cm in diameter.
First-line treatment-naïve advanced NSCLC patients with EGFR PACC mutations
EGFR atypical mutations are a heterogeneous group of non-classical mutations, with PACC mutations comprising the largest subset. The waterfall below depicts treatment-naïve NSCLC patients with EGFR PACC mutations who received a total daily dose of 80 mg and who received at least one post-baseline tumor assessment, as of the November 18, 2025 cutoff date. The best observed ORR was 80%, with 3 patient responses confirmed and 5 patient responses remaining unconfirmed as of the data cutoff date.
Best percentage change in lesions in patients receiving 80 mg dose
Note: All data as of the data cutoff on November 18, 2025
19
The waterfall plot below depicts the best percentage change in CNS lesions from baseline based upon investigator assessment using RECIST criteria, as of the November 18, 2025 cutoff date. The best observed ORR was 80%, with 100% ORR in measurable CNS disease.
Best percentage change in CNS lesions in patients receiving 80 mg dose
Note: All data as of the data cutoff on November 18, 2025
Second-line NSCLC patients with EGFR exon 20 mutations and previously treated patients with EGFR atypical mutations
As of the August 29, 2025 cutoff date, 45 second-line NSCLC patients with EGFR exon 20 mutations were dosed — 24 patients received 80 mg QD oral enozertinib and 21 patients received 120 mg QD. In previously treated patients with EGFR atypical mutations, as of the August 29, 2025 cutoff date, 47 patients were dosed — 25 patients received 80 mg QD oral enozertinib and 22 patients received 120 mg QD. Enozertinib was well tolerated with mostly Grade 1 or 2 TRAEs and no significant off-target toxicities. Most frequent TRAEs included diarrhea, paronychia, and stomatitis. Preliminary activity in second-line NSCLC patients with EGFR exon 20 mutations as of the cutoff date demonstrated a 45% confirmed ORR and 100% DCR, with comparable rates in patients with brain metastases at baseline. Preliminary activity in previously treated NSCLC patients with EGFR PACC mutations as of the cutoff date demonstrated a 36% confirmed ORR and 91% DCR, with comparable rates in patients with brain metastases at baseline. Responses were observed across a wide range of EGFR PACC mutations including in the most prevalent mutations, and in a broad spectrum of PACC complex mutations.
Next steps in enozertinib development
Based on these data, 80 mg QD oral enozertinib has been selected as the monotherapy dose for potential Phase 3 development. Dosing and follow-up continues in NSCLC patients with exon 20 mutations, including as a monotherapy, in combination with SC amivantamab and in combination with chemotherapy, as well as in NSCLC patients with EGFR PACC mutations as a monotherapy. In December 2025, we announced that enrollment in our HER2 exon 20 cohort was completed with no further development planned in this patient population. Initial data from the SC amivantamab combination trial, in addition to enozertinib data as a monotherapy in first-line EGFR exon 20 mutations and first-line EGFR PACC mutations, are expected in the second half of 2026.
Out-licensing candidates
We are also looking for strategic partnerships to help us develop our out-licensing candidates.
20
Our license agreements
Voronoi license agreement
On October 19, 2020, we entered into the Voronoi License Agreement, a license and collaboration agreement, with Voronoi. The Voronoi License Agreement gives us access to Voronoi’s preclinical stage EGFR exon 20 mutation program, including a lead product candidate now designated as enozertinib. Under the Voronoi License Agreement, Voronoi granted us an exclusive, sublicensable license under Voronoi’s rights to certain patent applications directed to certain small molecule compounds that bind to EGFR with one or more exon 20 mutations and certain related know-how, in each case, to develop and commercialize certain licensed compounds and licensed products incorporating any such compound in the ORIC Territory, defined as worldwide other than in the People’s Republic of China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan. Pursuant to an amendment to the Voronoi License Agreement that we entered into with Voronoi on March 20, 2024, we also obtained the right to conduct and control certain clinical trials for the licensed products at specified clinical sites within Voronoi’s territory to support the development and commercialization of licensed products in the ORIC Territory. Under the Voronoi License Agreement, Voronoi had the right to perform certain mutually agreed upon development activities. Except for Voronoi’s right to participate in such development activities, we are wholly responsible for development and commercialization of licensed products in the ORIC Territory. In addition, we are obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize at least one licensed product in certain major markets in the ORIC Territory.
Our financial obligations under the Voronoi License Agreement included an upfront payment of $5.0 million in cash and the issuance to Voronoi of 283,259 shares of our common stock issued pursuant to a stock issuance agreement entered into between the parties on October 19, 2020. The number of shares issued pursuant to the stock issuance agreement was based on a price of $28.24 per share, representing a premium of 25% to the 30-day trailing volume weighted average trading price of our common stock. The shares were issued in a private placement in reliance on Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (Securities Act), for transactions by an issuer not involving any public offering.
Under the Voronoi License Agreement, Voronoi was responsible for certain research and development costs up to a predetermined threshold. Upon achievement of the predetermined threshold in the second quarter of 2022, Voronoi chose to opt out of participation in and funding of future development activities. We are also obligated to make milestone payments to Voronoi upon the achievement of certain events. Upon the achievement of certain development and regulatory milestones with respect to the first licensed product, we are obligated to pay Voronoi up to a maximum of $111.0 million. Upon the achievement of certain commercial milestones with respect to the first licensed product, we are obligated to pay Voronoi up to a maximum of $225.0 million. If we pursue a second licensed product, we could pay Voronoi up to an additional $272.0 million in success-based milestones. In addition, we are obligated to pay royalties on net sales of licensed products in the ORIC Territory. In the third quarter of 2022, we made a development milestone payment to Voronoi in the amount of $5.0 million, which was recorded in acquired in-process research and development expense.
Unless earlier terminated, the Voronoi License Agreement will continue in effect until the expiration of all royalty payment obligations. Following the expiration of the Voronoi License Agreement, we will retain our licenses under the intellectual property Voronoi licensed to us on a royalty-free basis. We and Voronoi may each terminate the Voronoi License Agreement if the other party materially breaches the terms of such agreement, subject to specified notice and cure provisions, or enters into bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings. Voronoi may also terminate the agreement if we discontinue development of licensed products for a specified
21
period of time. We also have the right to terminate the Voronoi License Agreement without cause by providing prior notice to Voronoi.
If Voronoi terminates the Voronoi License Agreement for cause, or we terminate the Voronoi License Agreement without cause, then we are obligated to grant a nonexclusive license to Voronoi under certain of our patents and know-how and to assign to Voronoi certain of our regulatory filings for licensed compounds and licensed products.
Mirati license agreement
On August 3, 2020, we entered into the Mirati License Agreement. Under the Mirati License Agreement, Mirati granted us a worldwide, exclusive, sublicensable, royalty-free license under Mirati’s rights to certain patents and patent applications directed to certain small molecule compounds that bind to and inhibit PRC2 and certain related know-how, in each case, to develop and commercialize certain licensed compounds and licensed products incorporating any such compound. Under the Mirati License Agreement, we are wholly responsible for development and commercialization of licensed products. In addition, we are obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize at least one licensed product in certain major markets.
Our financial obligation under the Mirati License Agreement was an upfront payment of 588,235 shares of our common stock, issued pursuant to a stock issuance agreement entered into between the parties on August 3, 2020. The number of shares issued was based on a price of $34.00 per share, representing a premium of 10% to the 60-day trailing volume weighted average trading price of our common stock. The shares were issued in a private placement in reliance on Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act for transactions by an issuer not involving any public offering. During the eighteen-month period following the date of the agreement, Mirati was subject to certain transfer restrictions, and the parties agreed to negotiate and enter into a registration rights agreement, with respect to the shares. We are not obligated to pay Mirati milestones or royalties.
Unless earlier terminated, the Mirati License Agreement will continue in effect on a country-by-country and licensed product-by-licensed product basis until the later of (a) the expiration of the last valid claim of a licensed patent covering such licensed product in such country or (b) ten years after the first commercial sale of such licensed product in such country. Following the expiration of the Mirati License Agreement, we will retain our licenses under the intellectual property Mirati licensed to us on a royalty-free basis. We and Mirati may each terminate the Mirati License Agreement if the other party materially breaches the terms of such agreement, subject to specified notice and cure provisions, or enters into bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings. Mirati may terminate the agreement if we challenge any of the patent rights licensed to us by Mirati or we discontinue development of licensed products for a specified period of time. We also have the right to terminate the Mirati License Agreement without cause by providing prior notice to Mirati.
On October 8, 2023, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) and Mirati announced that they entered into a definitive merger agreement under which BMS through a subsidiary will acquire all of the outstanding shares of Mirati common stock. The Mirati License Agreement continued in effect upon consummation of the transaction, which closed on January 23, 2024.
If BMS terminates the Mirati License Agreement, or we terminate the Mirati License Agreement without cause, then we are obligated to assign to BMS, or grant an exclusive license to BMS with respect to, certain of our patents, know-how and regulatory filings directed to licensed compounds and licensed products.
Clinical Development Collaborations
Bayer collaboration
On May 14, 2024, we entered into a clinical trial collaboration and supply agreement with Bayer, as amended effective October 23, 2024, to evaluate rinzimetostat in combination with Nubeqa® (darolutamide), Bayer’s AR inhibitor. We will continue to conduct and sponsor the ongoing Phase 1b clinical trial, and Bayer will provide darolutamide for the trial. We maintain full economic ownership and control of rinzimetostat.
Johnson & Johnson collaborations
On July 10, 2024, we entered into a clinical trial collaboration and supply agreement with Johnson & Johnson, to evaluate rinzimetostat in combination with Erleada® (apalutamide), Johnson & Johnson’s AR inhibitor. We will continue to conduct and sponsor the ongoing Phase 1b clinical trial, and Johnson & Johnson will provide apalutamide for the trial. We maintain full economic ownership and control of rinzimetostat.
22
On August 29, 2024, we entered into a clinical supply agreement with Johnson & Johnson, to evaluate enozertinib in combination with SC amivantamab, Johnson & Johnson’s fully-human EGFR-MET bispecific antibody. We will continue to conduct and sponsor the ongoing Phase 1b clinical trial, and Johnson & Johnson will provide SC amivantamab for the trial. We maintain full economic ownership and control of enozertinib.
Sales and marketing
We intend to retain significant development and commercial rights to our product candidates and, if marketing approval is obtained, to commercialize our product candidates on our own, or potentially with a partner, in the United States and other regions. We currently have initial commercial and medical affairs leadership on staff but do not have product sales, marketing or distribution capabilities. We intend to build the necessary infrastructure and capabilities over time for the United States, and potentially other regions, following further advancement of our product candidates. Clinical data, the size of the addressable patient population, the size of the required commercial infrastructure and manufacturing needs may all influence or alter our commercialization plans.
Manufacturing
We do not own or operate, and currently have no plans to establish, any manufacturing facilities. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates for preclinical and clinical testing, as well as for commercial manufacture if any of our product candidates obtain marketing approval. We also rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties to package, label, store and distribute our investigational product candidates, as well as for our commercial products if marketing approval is obtained. We believe that this strategy allows us to maintain a more efficient infrastructure by eliminating the need for us to invest in our own manufacturing facilities, equipment and personnel while also enabling us to focus our expertise and resources on the development of our product candidates.
To date, we have obtained active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) and drug product for our product candidates from single-source third party contract manufacturers. We are in the process of developing our supply chain for each of our product candidates and intend to put in place framework agreements under which third-party contract manufacturers will generally provide us with necessary quantities of API and drug product on a project-by-project basis based on our development needs.
As we advance our product candidates through development, we will consider whether to change our lack of redundant supply for the API and drug product for each of our product candidates to protect against any potential supply disruptions.
We generally expect to rely on third parties for the manufacture of any companion diagnostics we may develop.
Intellectual property
We strive to protect and enhance the proprietary technology, inventions and improvements that are commercially important to our business, including obtaining, maintaining and defending our patent rights. Our policy is to seek to protect our proprietary position by, among other methods, filing patent applications and obtaining issued patents, or in-licensing issued patents and patent applications, in the United States and in markets outside of the United States directed to our proprietary technology, inventions, improvements and product candidates that are important to the development and implementation of our business. We also rely on trade secrets and know-how relating to our proprietary technology and product candidates and continuing innovation to develop, strengthen and maintain our proprietary position in the field of oncology. We also plan to rely on data exclusivity, market exclusivity and patent term extensions when available. Our commercial success will depend in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other proprietary protection for our technology, inventions, improvements and product candidates; to preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets; to defend and enforce our proprietary rights, including any patents that we may own or license in the future; and to operate without infringing on the valid and enforceable patents and other proprietary rights of third parties.
Our patent portfolio consists of issued patents and pending patent applications that we own or in-licensed related to rinzimetostat, enozertinib, ORIC-533 and various other compounds and programs described above. As of December 31, 2025, the portfolio includes 22 issued United States patents, 38 pending United States patent applications, 7 pending international patent applications filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT application), more than 210 issued patents in various markets outside of the United States, and more than 90 pending patent applications in various markets outside of the United States.
As of December 31, 2025, our patent portfolio covering rinzimetostat that we have exclusively in-licensed from Mirati includes patents issued in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Europe, Eurasia, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Japan, Korea, Macao, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa and the United States, along with a patent application pending in the United States. We also own pending PCT applications and pending patent applications in the United States, Europe and other markets outside of the United States covering
23
certain forms and uses of rinzimetostat. The issued United States patents covering rinzimetostat as composition of matter, pharmaceutical compositions and related methods of use are expected to expire in 2039, absent any patent term extensions for regulatory delay. Any patents that may issue from the pending patent applications related to rinzimetostat are expected to expire between 2039 and 2044, absent any patent term adjustments or extensions.
As of December 31, 2025, our patent portfolio covering enozertinib that we have exclusively in-licensed from Voronoi in the ORIC Territory includes issued patents in Australia, Brazil, Europe, Eurasia, India, Israel, Japan, Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore, the United States and South Africa, along with patent applications pending in the United States, Europe and other markets outside of the United States. We also own a pending PCT application covering methods of using enozertinib, and pending patent applications in the United States, Europe and other markets outside of the United States covering certain forms of enozertinib and methods of using enozertinib. The issued United States patents covering enozertinib as compositions of matter and pharmaceutical compositions are expected to expire in 2040, absent any patent term adjustments or extensions. Any patents that may issue from the pending patent applications related to enozertinib are expected to expire between 2040 and 2046, absent any patent term adjustments or extensions.
As of December 31, 2025, our patent portfolio covering ORIC-533 includes patents issued in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Hong Kong, Europe, Eurasia, Israel, India, Japan, Korea, Macao, Mexico, New Zealand, Taiwan, the United States and South Africa, along with pending PCT applications, and other patent applications pending in the United States, Europe, Japan and other markets outside of the United States. The issued United States patents covering ORIC-533 as composition of matter, pharmaceutical compositions and related methods of use and methods of manufacture are expected to expire in 2040, absent any patent term extensions for regulatory delay. Any patents that may issue from our pending patent applications related to ORIC-533 are expected to expire between 2040 and 2044, absent any patent term adjustments or extensions.
We also possess substantial know-how and trade secrets relating to the development and commercialization of our product candidates, including related manufacturing processes and technology.
With respect to our product candidates and processes we intend to develop and commercialize in the normal course of business, we intend to pursue patent protection covering, when possible, compositions, methods of use, dosing and formulations. We may also pursue patent protection with respect to manufacturing and drug development processes and technologies.
Issued patents can provide protection for varying periods of time, depending upon the date of filing of the patent application, the date of patent issuance and the legal term of patents in the countries in which they are obtained. In general, patents issued for applications filed in the United States can provide exclusionary rights for 20 years from the earliest effective filing date. In addition, in certain instances, the term of an issued U.S. patent that covers or claims an FDA approved product can be extended to recapture a portion of the term effectively lost as a result of the FDA regulatory review period, which is called patent term extension. The restoration period cannot be longer than five years and the total patent term, including the restoration period, must not exceed 14 years following FDA approval. The term of patents outside of the United States varies in accordance with the laws of the foreign jurisdiction, but typically is also 20 years from the earliest effective filing date. However, the actual protection afforded by a patent varies on a product-by-product basis, from country-to-country and depends upon many factors, including the type of patent, the scope of its coverage, the availability of regulatory-related extensions, the availability of legal remedies in a particular country and the validity and enforceability of the patent.
The patent positions of companies like ours are generally uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions. No consistent policy regarding the scope of claims allowable in patents in the field of oncology has emerged in the United States. The relevant patent laws and their interpretation outside of the United States is also uncertain. Changes in either the patent laws or their interpretation in the United States and other countries may diminish our ability to protect our technology or product candidates and could affect the value of such intellectual property. In particular, our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing products that infringe our intellectual property will depend in part on our success in obtaining and enforcing patent claims that cover our technology, inventions and improvements. We cannot guarantee that patents will be granted with respect to any of our pending patent applications or with respect to any patent applications we may file in the future, nor can we be sure that any patents that may be granted to us in the future will be commercially useful in protecting our products, the methods of use or manufacture of those products.
Moreover, even our issued patents may not guarantee us the right to practice our technology in relation to the commercialization of our products. Patent and other intellectual property rights in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology space are evolving and involve many risks and uncertainties. For example, third parties may have blocking patents that could be used to prevent us from commercializing our product candidates and practicing our proprietary technology, and our issued patents may be challenged, invalidated or circumvented, which could limit our ability to stop competitors from marketing related products or could limit the term of patent protection that otherwise may exist for our product candidates. In addition, the scope of the rights granted under any issued
24
patents may not provide us with protection or competitive advantages against competitors with similar technology. Furthermore, our competitors may independently develop similar technologies that are outside the scope of the rights granted under any issued patents. For these reasons, we may face competition with respect to our product candidates. Moreover, because of the extensive time required for development, testing and regulatory review of a potential product, it is possible that, before any particular product candidate can be commercialized, any patent protection for such product may expire or remain in force for only a short period following commercialization, thereby reducing the commercial advantage the patent provides.
Competition
The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary products. While we believe that our technology, the expertise of our executive and scientific team, clinical capabilities, development experience and scientific knowledge provide us with competitive advantages, we face increasing competition from many different sources, including pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies and public and private research institutions. Product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize may compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future.
Many of our competitors, either alone or with their collaborators, have significantly greater financial resources, established presence in the market, expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical and clinical testing, obtaining regulatory approvals and reimbursement and marketing approved products than we do. These competitors also 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. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. Additional mergers and acquisitions may result in even more resources being concentrated in our competitors.
Our commercial potential could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market or that may make our development more complicated. The key competitive factors affecting the success of all of our programs are likely to be efficacy, safety and convenience.
For rinzimetostat, we are aware of several companies developing inhibitors against PRC2 via EZH2 inhibition that are currently in clinical trials, including Ipsen, Novartis, Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer, Shanghai HaiHe Pharmaceutical, Treeline Biosciences in collaboration with Jiangsu HengRui Medicine Co., Evopoint Biosciences and Hanmi Pharmaceutical. To our knowledge, Ascentage Pharma has an allosteric PRC2 inhibitor in clinical trials for patients with cancer.
For enozertinib, we are aware that Johnson & Johnson and Dizal Pharmaceuticals have FDA-approved products for patients with EGFR exon 20 mutations. We are also aware of several companies developing small molecule inhibitors against EGFR exon 20 mutations and EGFR atypical mutations that are currently in clinical trials, including Cullinan Therapeutics in collaboration with Taiho Pharmaceutical, ArriVent BioPharma in collaboration with Allist Pharmaceuticals, Black Diamond Therapeutics, Scorpion Therapeutics in collaboration with Pierre Fabre, BlossomHill Therapeutics, Avistone Biotechnology, BeBetter Med, Suzhou Puhe Pharmaceutical Technology Co. and Yuhan Corporation.
Government regulation
Government authorities in the United States at the federal, state and local level and in other countries regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, marketing and export and import of drug and biological products. Generally, before a new drug can be marketed, considerable data demonstrating its quality, safety and efficacy must be obtained, organized into a format specific for each regulatory authority, submitted for review and approved by the regulatory authority.
25
U.S. drug development
In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 (FDCA). Drugs also are subject to other federal, state and local statutes and regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or post-market may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial sanctions. These sanctions could include, among other actions, the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, a clinical hold, untitled or warning letters, product recalls or market withdrawals, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement and civil or criminal penalties. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect on us.
Our product candidates are considered small molecule drugs and must be approved by the FDA through the new drug application (NDA) process before they may be legally marketed in the United States. The process generally involves the following:
Preclinical studies and IND/CTA
The preclinical developmental stage generally involves laboratory evaluations of drug chemistry, formulation and stability, as well as studies to evaluate toxicity in animals, which support subsequent clinical testing. The sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical studies, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature and a proposed clinical protocol, to the FDA as part of the IND. An IND submission is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational product to humans, and must become effective before human clinical trials may begin.
Preclinical studies include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry and formulation, as well as in vitro and animal studies to assess the potential for adverse events and in some cases to establish a rationale for therapeutic use. The conduct of preclinical studies is subject to federal regulations and requirements, including GLP regulations for safety/toxicology studies. An IND sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature and plans for clinical studies, among other things, to the FDA as part of an IND submission. Some long-term preclinical testing, such as animal tests of reproductive adverse events and carcinogenicity, may continue after the IND submission is complete. An IND submission automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless before that time the FDA raises concerns or questions related to one or more proposed clinical trials and places the trial on clinical hold. In such a case, the IND
26
sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. As a result, submission of an IND may not result in the FDA allowing clinical trials to commence.
IND sponsors follow a process similar to an IND submission, review and approval when filing a CTA with regulatory agencies in other countries.
Clinical trials
The clinical stage of development involves the administration of the investigational product to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of qualified investigators, generally physicians not employed by or under the trial sponsor’s control, in accordance with GCP requirements, which include the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent for their participation in any clinical trial. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the clinical trial, dosing procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria and the parameters to be used to monitor subject safety and assess efficacy. Each protocol, and any subsequent amendments to the protocol, must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND submission. Furthermore, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an IRB for each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted to ensure that the risks to individuals participating in the clinical trials are minimized and are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits. The IRB must also approve the informed consent form that must be provided to each clinical trial subject or his or her legal representative, and must monitor the clinical trial until completed. There also are requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical trials and completed clinical trial results to public registries.
A sponsor who wishes to conduct a clinical trial outside of the United States may, but need not, obtain FDA authorization to conduct the clinical trial under an IND submission. If a foreign clinical trial is not conducted under an IND submission, the sponsor may submit data from the clinical trial to the FDA in support of an NDA. The FDA will generally accept a well-designed and well-conducted foreign clinical trial not conducted under an IND submission if the trial was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles contained in the Declaration of Helsinki pursuant to 21 CFR 312.120(c)(4), incorporating the 1989 version of such declaration, or with the laws and regulations of the foreign regulatory authority where the trial was conducted, such as the European Medicines Agency (EMA), whichever provides greater protection of the human subjects, and with GCP and GMP requirements, and the FDA is able to validate the data through an onsite inspection, if deemed necessary, and the practice of medicine in the foreign country is consistent with the United States.
Clinical trials in the United States generally are conducted in three sequential phases, known as Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3, and may overlap.
27
NDA review process
Following completion of the clinical trials, data is analyzed to assess whether the investigational product is safe and effective for the proposed indicated use or uses. The results of preclinical studies and clinical trials are then submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA, along with proposed labeling, chemistry and manufacturing information to ensure product quality and other relevant data. In short, the NDA is a request for approval to market the drug in the United States for one or more specified indications and must contain proof of safety and efficacy for a drug.
The application must include both negative and ambiguous results of preclinical studies and clinical trials, as well as positive findings. Data may come from company-sponsored clinical trials intended to test the safety and efficacy of a product’s use or from a number of alternative sources, including studies initiated by investigators. To support marketing approval, the data submitted must be sufficient in quality and quantity to establish the safety and efficacy of the investigational product to the satisfaction of the FDA. FDA approval of an NDA must be obtained before a drug may be legally marketed in the United States.
Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act of 1992, as amended (PDUFA), each NDA must be accompanied by a user fee. FDA adjusts the PDUFA user fees on an annual basis. PDUFA also imposes an annual program fee for each marketed human drug. Fee waivers or reductions are available in certain circumstances, including a waiver of the application fee for the first application filed by a small business. Additionally, no user fees are assessed on NDAs for products designated as orphan drugs, unless the product also includes a non-orphan indication. In November 2023, the FDA issued a guidance on Real-Time Oncology Review, which allows applicants to provide the FDA with earlier access to critical efficacy and safety data, which can help streamline the review process and to potentially enable earlier FDA feedback to the applicant, including earlier feedback on data quality and potential review issues.
The FDA reviews all submitted NDAs before it accepts them for filing, and may request additional information rather than accepting the NDA for filing. The FDA must make a decision on accepting an NDA for filing within 60 days of receipt. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review of the NDA. Under the goals and policies agreed to by the FDA under PDUFA, the FDA has 10 months from the filing date of a new molecular-entity NDA, and six months from the filing date of a new molecular-entity NDA designated for priority review, to complete its initial review and respond to the applicant. The FDA does not always meet its PDUFA goal dates for standard and priority NDAs, and the review process is often extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification.
Before approving an NDA, the FDA will conduct a pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facilities for the new product to determine whether they comply with cGMP requirements. The FDA will not approve the product unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. The FDA also may audit data from clinical trials to ensure compliance with GCP requirements. Additionally, the FDA may refer applications for novel drug products or drug products which present difficult questions of safety or efficacy to an advisory committee, typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts, for review, evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions, if any. The FDA is not bound by recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations when making decisions on approval. The FDA likely will reanalyze the clinical trial data, which could result in extensive discussions between the FDA and the applicant during the review process. After the FDA evaluates an NDA, it will issue an approval letter or a complete response letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A complete response letter indicates that the review cycle of the application is complete, and the application will not be approved in its present form. A complete
28
response letter usually describes all of the specific deficiencies in the NDA identified by the FDA. The complete response letter may require additional clinical data, additional pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial(s) and/or other significant and time-consuming requirements related to clinical trials, preclinical studies and/or manufacturing. If a complete response letter is issued, the applicant may either resubmit the NDA, addressing all of the deficiencies identified in the letter, or withdraw the application. Even if such data and information are submitted, the FDA may decide that the NDA does not satisfy the criteria for approval. Data obtained from clinical trials are not always conclusive and the FDA may interpret data differently than we interpret the same data.
Orphan drugs
Under the Orphan Drug Act of 1983, as amended (ODA), the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug or biological product intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or more than 200,000 individuals in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making the product available in the United States for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product.
Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, it discloses the identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process.
If a product that has orphan designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same drug for the same indication for seven years from the date of such approval, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan exclusivity by means of greater effectiveness, greater safety or providing a major contribution to patient care or in instances of drug supply issues. However, competitors may receive approval of either a different product for the same indication or the same product for a different indication, the latter of which could be used off-label in the orphan indication. Orphan drug exclusivity also could block the approval of one of our products for seven years if a competitor obtains approval before we do for the same product, as defined by the FDA, for the same indication we are seeking approval, or if a product candidate is determined to be contained within the scope of the competitor’s product for the same indication. In response to the court decision in Catalyst Pharms., Inc. v. Becerra, 14 F.4th 1299 (11th Cir. 2021), in January 2023, the FDA published a notice in the Federal Register to clarify that while the agency complies with the court’s order in Catalyst, the FDA intends to continue to apply its longstanding interpretation of the regulations to matters outside of the scope of the Catalyst order – that is, the agency will continue tying the scope of orphan-drug exclusivity to the uses or indications for which a drug is approved, which permits other sponsors to obtain approval of a drug for new uses or indications within the same orphan designated disease or condition that have not yet been approved. It is unclear how future litigation, legislation, agency decisions, and administrative actions will impact the scope of the orphan drug exclusivity. If one of our products designated as an orphan drug receives marketing approval for an indication broader than that which is designated, it may not be entitled to orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan drug status in the European Union (EU) has similar, but not identical, requirements and benefits.
In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Chevron doctrine, which gives deference to regulatory agencies’ statutory interpretations in litigation against federal government agencies, such as the FDA, where the law is ambiguous. This landmark Supreme Court decision may invite various stakeholders to bring lawsuits against the FDA to challenge longstanding decisions and policies of the FDA, including the FDA’s statutory interpretations of market exclusivities and the “substantial evidence” requirements for drug approvals, which could undermine the FDA’s authority, lead to uncertainty in the industry, and disrupt the FDA’s normal operations. Changes in the leadership of the FDA and other federal agencies under the new Trump administration can result in changes in the funding, operations, and policies of the FDA and other federal agencies, which may impact our clinical development plans and timelines.
Expedited development and review programs
The FDA has a fast-track program that is intended to expedite or facilitate the process of reviewing new drugs that meet certain criteria. Specifically, new drugs are eligible for fast-track designation if they are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and preclinical or clinical data demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the condition. Fast-track designation applies to both the product and the specific indication for which it is being studied. The sponsor can request the FDA to designate the product for fast-track status any time before receiving NDA approval, but ideally no later than the pre-NDA meeting with the FDA.
Any product submitted to the FDA for marketing, including under a fast-track program, may be eligible for other types of FDA programs intended to expedite development and review, such as priority review and accelerated approval. Any product is eligible
29
for priority review if it treats a serious or life-threatening condition and, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety and effectiveness compared to available therapies.
A product may also be eligible for accelerated approval if it treats a serious or life-threatening condition and generally provides a meaningful advantage over available therapies. In addition, such product must demonstrate an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality (IMM), which endpoint is reasonably likely to predict an effect on IMM or other clinical benefit. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require that a sponsor of a drug receiving accelerated approval perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing clinical trials. FDA may withdraw drug approval or require changes to the labeled indication of the drug if confirmatory post-market trials fail to verify clinical benefit or do not demonstrate sufficient clinical benefit to justify the risks associated with the drug. If the FDA concludes that a drug shown to be effective can be safely used only if distribution or use is restricted, it may require such post-marketing restrictions as it deems necessary to assure safe use of the product. The Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act made several changes to the FDA’s authorities and its regulatory framework, including, among other changes, reforms to the accelerated approval pathway, such as requiring the FDA to specify conditions for post-approval study requirements and setting forth procedures for the FDA to withdraw a product on an expedited basis for non-compliance with post-approval requirements.
Additionally, a drug may be eligible for designation as a breakthrough therapy if (a) the product is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs or biologics, to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and (b) preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product may demonstrate substantial improvement over currently approved therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints. The benefits of breakthrough therapy designation include the same benefits as fast-track designation, plus intensive guidance from the FDA to ensure an efficient drug development program. Fast-track designation, priority review, accelerated approval and breakthrough therapy designation do not change the standards for approval, but may expedite the development or approval process.
Post-approval requirements
Following approval of a new product, the manufacturer and the approved product are subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, monitoring and record-keeping requirements, requirements to report adverse events and comply with promotion and advertising requirements, which include restrictions on promoting drugs for unapproved uses or patient populations, known as “off-label promotion,” and limitations on industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities. Although physicians may prescribe legally available drugs for off-label uses, manufacturers may not market or promote such uses. Prescription drug promotional materials must be submitted to the FDA in conjunction with their first use. Further, if there are any modifications to the drug, including changes in indications, labeling or manufacturing processes or facilities, the applicant may be required to submit and obtain FDA approval of a new NDA or NDA supplement, which may require the development of additional data or preclinical studies and clinical trials.
The FDA may also place other conditions on approvals, including the requirement for a REMS, to assure the safe use of the product. A REMS 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. Any of these limitations on approval or marketing could restrict the commercial promotion, distribution, prescription or dispensing of products. Product approvals may be withdrawn for non-compliance with regulatory standards or if problems occur following initial marketing. Further, according to draft guidance issued by the FDA in August 2023, if the FDA finds that the clinical data used to support approval do not sufficiently represent the diversity of the real-world patient population, the FDA may require additional data on underrepresented populations post-approval, including as a post-marketing requirement, or the FDA may enter into a written agreement with the applicant to collect additional data as a post-marketing commitment.
The FDA may withdraw approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information, imposition of post-market studies or clinical studies to assess new safety risks or imposition of distribution restrictions or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences include, among other things:
30
The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of products that are placed on the market. Drugs may be promoted only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability.
FDA regulation of companion diagnostics
A therapeutic product may rely upon an in vitro companion diagnostic for use in selecting the patients that will be more likely to respond to that therapy. If an in vitro diagnostic is essential to the safe and effective use of the therapeutic product and if the manufacturer wishes to market or distribute such diagnostic for use as a companion diagnostic, then the FDA will require separate approval or clearance of the diagnostic as a companion diagnostic to the therapeutic product. According to FDA guidance, an unapproved or uncleared companion diagnostic device used to make treatment decisions in clinical trials of a drug generally will be considered an investigational medical device unless it is employed for an intended use for which the device is already approved or cleared. If used to make critical treatment decisions, such as patient selection, the diagnostic device generally will be considered a significant risk device under the FDA’s Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) regulations. The sponsor of the diagnostic device will be required to comply with the IDE regulations for clinical studies involving the investigational diagnostic device. According to the guidance, if a diagnostic device and a drug are to be studied together to support their respective approvals, both products can be studied in the same clinical trial, if the trial meets both the requirements of the IDE regulations and the IND regulations. The guidance provides that depending on the details of the clinical trial protocol, the investigational product(s), and subjects involved, a sponsor may seek to submit an IDE alone (e.g., if the drug has already been approved by FDA and is used consistent with its approved labeling), or both an IND and an IDE.
Pursuing FDA approval/clearance of an in vitro companion diagnostic would require either a pre-market notification, also called 510(k) clearance, or a pre-market approval (PMA) or a de novo classification for that diagnostic. The review of companion diagnostics involves coordination of review with the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health. In May 2024, the FDA issued guidance on a voluntary pilot program on oncology drug products used with certain in vitro diagnostic tests, which is intended to provide greater transparency regarding the minimum performance characteristics necessary for certain oncology diagnostic tests. In October 2023, the FDA issued a final rule that phases out its enforcement discretion for most laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) and to amend the FDA’s regulations to make explicit that in vitro diagnostics are medical devices under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, including when the manufacturer of the diagnostic product is a laboratory. On March 31, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas vacated and set aside the FDA LDT Final Rule in its entirety.
510(k) clearance process
To obtain 510(k) clearance, a pre-market notification is submitted to the FDA demonstrating that the proposed device is substantially equivalent to a previously cleared 510(k) device or a device that was in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976 for which the FDA has not yet required the submission of a PMA application. The FDA’s 510(k) clearance process may take three to 12 months from the date the application is submitted and filed with the FDA, but may take longer if FDA requests additional information, among other reasons. In some cases, the FDA may require clinical data to support substantial equivalence. In reviewing a pre-market notification submission, the FDA may request additional information, which may significantly prolong the review process. Notwithstanding compliance with all these requirements, clearance is never assured.
After a device receives 510(k) clearance, any subsequent modification of the device that could significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a major change in its intended use, will require a new 510(k) clearance or require a PMA. In addition, the FDA may make substantial changes to industry requirements, including which devices are eligible for 510(k) clearance, which may significantly affect the process.
De novo classification process
If a new medical device does not qualify for the 510(k) pre-market notification process because no predicate device to which it is substantially equivalent can be identified, the device is automatically classified into Class III. The Food and Drug Administration
31
Modernization Act of 1997 established a different route to market for low to moderate risk medical devices that are automatically placed into Class III due to the absence of a predicate device, called the “Request for Evaluation of Automatic Class III Designation,” or the de novo classification process. This process allows a manufacturer whose novel device is automatically classified into Class III to request down-classification of its medical device into Class I or Class II on the basis that the device presents low or moderate risk, rather than requiring the submission and approval of a PMA. If the manufacturer seeks reclassification into Class II, the manufacturer must include a draft proposal for special controls that are necessary to provide a reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the medical device. The FDA may reject the reclassification petition if it identifies a legally marketed predicate device that would be appropriate for a 510(k) or determines that the device is not low to moderate risk and requires PMA or that general controls would be inadequate to control the risks and special controls cannot be developed.
Obtaining FDA marketing authorization, de novo down-classification, or approval for medical devices is expensive and uncertain, and may take several years, and generally requires significant scientific and clinical data.
PMA process
The PMA process, including the gathering of clinical and nonclinical data and the submission to and review by the FDA, can take several years or longer. The applicant must prepare and provide the FDA with reasonable assurance of the device’s safety and effectiveness, including information about the device and its components regarding, among other things, device design, manufacturing, and labeling. PMA applications are subject to an application fee. In addition, PMAs for medical devices must generally include the results from extensive preclinical and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety and effectiveness of the device for each indication for which FDA approval is sought. In particular, for a diagnostic, the applicant must demonstrate that the diagnostic produces reproducible results. As part of the PMA review, the FDA will typically inspect the manufacturer’s facilities for compliance with the Quality System Regulation (QSR) which imposes extensive testing, control, documentation, and other quality assurance and GMP requirements. The FDA issued a final rule in February 2024 replacing the QSR with Quality Management System Regulation (QMSR), which incorporates by reference the quality management system requirements of ISO 13485:2016. The FDA has stated that the standards contained in ISO 13485:2016 are substantially similar to those set forth in the existing QSR. The FDA will begin to enforce the QMSR requirements upon the effective date, February 2, 2026.
Other U.S. regulatory matters
Our current and future arrangements with healthcare providers, third-party payors, customers, and others may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, which may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we research, as well as, sell, market, and distribute any products for which we obtain marketing approval. The applicable federal, state and foreign healthcare and healthcare-related laws and regulations, including information-sharing rules that may affect our ability to operate include, but are not limited to:
32
Pricing and rebate programs must also comply with the Medicaid rebate requirements of the U.S. Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 and more recent requirements in the ACA. If products are made available to authorized users of the Federal Supply Schedule of the General Services Administration, additional laws and requirements apply. Manufacturing, sales, promotion and other activities also are potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws. In addition, the distribution of pharmaceutical and/or medical device products is subject to additional requirements and regulations, including extensive record-keeping, licensing, storage and security requirements intended to prevent the unauthorized sale of pharmaceutical and/or medical device products. Products must meet applicable child-resistant packaging requirements under the U.S. Poison Prevention Packaging Act of 1970 as well as other applicable consumer safety requirements.
The failure to comply with any of these laws or regulatory requirements subjects firms to possible legal or regulatory action. Depending on the circumstances, failure to meet applicable regulatory requirements can result in significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, including damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, injunctions, requests for recall, seizure of products, total or partial suspension of production, denial or withdrawal of product approvals or refusal to allow a firm to enter into supply contracts, including government contracts.
U.S. patent-term restoration and marketing exclusivity
Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of FDA approval of any future product candidates, some of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Hatch-Waxman Act. The Hatch-Waxman Act permits restoration of the patent term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during product development and FDA regulatory review process. Patent-term restoration, however, cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date. The patent-term restoration period is generally one-half the time between the effective date of an IND or the issue date of the patent, whichever is later, and the submission date of an NDA plus the time between the submission date of an NDA or the issue date of the patent, whichever is later, and the approval of that application, except that the review period is reduced by any time during which the applicant failed to exercise due diligence. Only one patent applicable to an approved drug is eligible for the extension and the application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent. The USPTO, in consultation with the FDA, reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration. In the future, we may apply for restoration of patent term for our currently owned or licensed patents to add patent life beyond its current expiration date, depending on the expected length of the clinical trials and other factors involved in the filing of the relevant NDA.
Market exclusivity provisions under the FDCA also can delay the submission or the approval of certain applications. The FDCA provides a five-year period of non-patent marketing exclusivity within the United States to the first applicant to gain approval
33
of an NDA for a new chemical entity. A drug is a new chemical entity if the FDA has not previously approved any other new drug containing the same active moiety, which is the molecule or ion responsible for the action of the drug substance. During the exclusivity period, the FDA may not accept for review an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA), or a 505(b)(2) NDA submitted by another company for a generic version of such drug where the applicant does not own or have a legal right of reference to all the data required for approval. However, an application may be submitted after four years if it contains a certification of patent invalidity or non-infringement with respect to one or more patents listed for the drug in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations publication. The FDCA also provides three years of marketing exclusivity for a NDA, 505(b)(2) NDA or supplement to an existing NDA if new clinical investigations, other than bioavailability studies, that were conducted or sponsored by the applicant are deemed by the FDA to be essential to the approval of the application, for example, new indications, dosages or strengths of an existing drug. This three-year exclusivity covers only the conditions of use associated with the new clinical investigations and does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs for drugs containing the original active agent. Five-year and three-year exclusivity will not delay the submission or approval of a full NDA. However, an applicant submitting a full NDA would be required to conduct or obtain a right of reference to all of the preclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials necessary to demonstrate safety and effectiveness or generate such data themselves.
European Union and UK drug development
In addition to regulations in the United States, we must obtain the requisite approvals from regulatory authorities in foreign countries prior to the commencement of clinical studies or marketing of the product in those countries. Certain countries outside the U.S. have a similar process that requires the submission of a clinical study application much like the IND prior to the commencement of human clinical studies. The approval process varies from country to country and the time may be longer or shorter than that required to obtain FDA approval. The requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary greatly from country to country and may require us to perform additional pre-clinical or clinical testing.
European Union drug review and approval
Pharmaceutical products in the EU are subject to regulation under comprehensive legislation enacted by the European Commission in the European Medicinal Products Directive (Directive 2001/83/EC), as amended. Centrally authorized products are also regulated by Regulation (EC) No. 726/2004. This legislation is binding on all Member States together with ancillary legislation governing research. In the UK, the main legislative texts relating to human medicines is the Medicines Act 1968 and the Human Medicines Regulation 2012.
The EU system for authorization of medicinal products for human use offers several routes: the centralized procedure, the decentralized procedure, and the mutual recognition procedure, as well as domestic national routes. The centralized procedure provides for the grant of a single marketing authorization that is valid for all 27 EU Member States as well as the European Economic Area (EEA) countries of Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. The centralized procedure is mandatory for certain categories of investigational products, including human products containing a new active substance indicated for the treatment of certain diseases, including cancer, AIDS, diabetes and neurodegenerative illness; orphan medicinal products; and medicinal products manufactured using biotechnological processes. Applications for marketing authorization for such medicines must be submitted to the EMA, in which the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) is generally responsible for conducting the initial assessment of a product.
The decentralized and mutual recognition procedures are applicable to the majority of conventional medicinal products and are both based on the principle of recognition of a marketing authorization by one or more Member States. The decentralized procedure is available for applicants who wish to market a product in various EU Member States where such product has not received marketing approval in any EU Member State before. In this procedure, an application for marketing authorization is submitted simultaneously in several Member States, one of them being chosen as the “Reference Member State.” At the end of the procedure, national marketing authorizations are granted in the Reference and in the concerned Member States. The mutual recognition procedure is compulsory when a medicinal product has already received a marketing authorization in one Member State and is to be marketed in a Member State other than that in which it was first authorized. Any national marketing authorization granted by an EU Member State's national authority can be used to support an application for its mutual recognition by other Member States. Marketing authorization applications can also be submitted directly to the Member State's national competent authority under the national route (if the centralized route is not compulsory).
The UK is no longer a member of the EU, but EU law remains applicable in Northern Ireland. There are a number of new marketing authorization routes available in the UK, Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales) or Northern Ireland, in addition to the national procedure, which are broadly categorized as either (1) national routes (i.e. the innovative licensing and access procedure (ILAP), the national procedure, rolling review, EC Decision Procedure (ECDP), the MR/DC reliance procedure and unfettered access from Northern Ireland); or (2) international routes (i.e. Access Consortium to market a medicine in the UK, Australia, Canada,
34
Singapore and/or Switzerland; or the Project Orbis program for cancer treatments). The application procedure will depend on the relevant procedure chosen.
All granted centrally authorized marketing authorizations automatically became Great Britain (GB) marketing authorizations on January 1, 2021. Though there are several ways to obtain a marketing authorization for GB (and Northern Ireland) discussed above, the EDRCP is available for marketing authorizations approved under the centralized procedure. Under this procedure the UK’s regulator, the MHRA, can rely on the decision of the European Commission on the approval of a new marketing authorization under centralized procedure for a period of two years from January 1, 2021, when determining an application for a GB marketing authorization. Applicants submit a letter of intent to submit an EDRCP to the MHRA at least 4 weeks before the submission of the application for the EDRCP marketing authorization application. The marketing authorization application is submitted after receipt of the positive opinion from the CHMP.
The objective of the EMA is the comprehensive evaluation of benefit/risk profile of a new medicinal product going through the centralized procedure. This evaluation involves showing that the product has significant efficacy and safety, together with a satisfactory plan for risk management post-marketing. The CHMP is the EMA’s expert committee responsible for human medicinal products. The CHMP is responsible for conducting the initial review of centrally authorized marketing authorization applications and for assessing modifications or extensions (variations) to an existing marketing authorization. It also considers the recommendations of the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee on the safety of medicines on the market and when necessary, recommends to the European Commission changes to a medicine’s marketing authorization, or its suspension or withdrawal from the market. The marketing authorization application is similar to the NDA in the United States. All application procedures require an application in the common technical document (CTD), which includes the submission of detailed information about the manufacturing and quality of the product, and non-clinical and clinical trial information. The main scientific principle used by the CHMP in the evaluation of medicinal products is the benefit/risk ratio based on quality, efficacy, safety, and risk management considerations. The CHMP assesses whether the data it reviews comply with the ICH-harmonized Good Practices published for GCP, GMP and good laboratory practice (GLP). The CHMP also considers whether studies concluding efficacy and safety of products have sufficient statistical power.
Marketing authorizations for the UK are submitted to the Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). As the Medicinal Products Directive is transposed into domestic law, the standards of clinical efficacy, safety, chemical control and manufacture as at December 31, 2020 (the end of the transition period for the UK’s exit from the EU) are retained. As Northern Ireland continues to apply EU law, medicines regulation for Great Britain is likely to be closely aligned with the EU for some time.
Two recent developments have been introduced which further expand the European regulatory framework: the Falsified Medicines Directive and the Pharmacovigilance Directive. The Falsified Medicines Directive obliges manufacturers of medicinal products to audit their suppliers of active substances to ensure compliance with GMP. It also introduces a new obligation on product manufacturers to inform the competent authority (e.g., ANSM) and the marketing authorization holder if they become aware that these products may be falsified, whether they are being distributed through the legitimate supply chain or by illegal means. The Pharmacovigilance Directive obliges marketing authorization holders to monitor the safety of authorized products and detect any change in their risk-benefit profile. A new pan-European clinical trial data information database has been created that will be complementary to the database established for pharmacovigilance (Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 with respect to centrally authorized medicinal products). In addition, Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 520/2012 outlines the practical implications for marketing authorization holders, national competent authorities, and the EMA. Also, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 357/2014 on post-authorization efficacy studies specifies the situations in which such studies may be required. Post-authorization efficacy studies may be required where concerns relating to some aspects of efficacy of the medicinal product are identified and can be resolved only after the medicinal product has been marketed, or where the understanding of the disease, the clinical methodology or the use of the medicinal product under real-life conditions indicate that previous efficacy evaluations might have to be revised significantly. Brexit will disrupt the operation of pre- and post-authorization clinical trial infrastructure. The rules around GMP and pharmacovigilance in the UK currently remain similar to the EU requirements. However, the Falsified Medicines Directive will not apply in Great Britain though it is likely that the UK will implement a procedure to minimize the risk of falsified medicines.
Clinical trials in the EU are regulated under European Council Directive 2001/20/EC (Clinical Trials Directive) on the implementation of GCP in the conduct of clinical trials of medicinal products for human use. The Clinical Trials Directive requires the sponsor of an investigational medicinal product to obtain a CTA, much like an IND in the United States, from the national competent authority of an EU Member State in which the clinical trial is to be conducted. The application for CTA must satisfy detailed requirements for the protection of trial subjects including requirements relating to consent and specific rules for minors and adults unable to consent by reason of incapacity. The CTA application must be accompanied by an investigational medicinal product dossier with supporting information prescribed by the Council Directive and corresponding national laws of the Member States and further detailed in applicable guidance, including the European Commission Communication 2010/C 82/01. A clinical trial may only be commenced after an Ethics Committee has given its approval.
35
A sponsor of a clinical trial must also follow certain procedures, including obtaining a unique EudraCT number by entering specified relevant information in the EudraCT Community Clinical Trial System. In addition, Member States require that the manufacture and/or importation of investigational medicinal products be authorized. Sponsors of investigational medicinal products must ensure compliance with, among other things, GCP and good manufacturing practice (GMP) as well as requirements pertaining to safety reporting.
In April 2014, Regulation EU No 536/2014 (Clinical Trials Regulation) was adopted, which came into application on January 31, 2022 and repeals the existing EU Clinical Trials Directive. The Clinical Trials Regulation is intended to simplify the current rules for clinical trial authorization and standards of performance and provides for a more streamlined application procedure via a single-entry point, a European Union portal and database. The Clinical Trials Information System (CTIS) is maintained by the EMA in collaboration with the European Commission and the European Union Member States. The objectives of the new Regulation include consistent rules for conducting trials throughout the European Union, consistent data standards and adverse events listing, and consistent information on the authorization status. Additionally, information on the conduct and results of each clinical trial carried out in the European Union will be made publicly available.
The main legislation that applies to clinical trials in the UK is the UK Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations 2004, which transposes the Clinical Trials Directive into domestic law. Consequently, the requirements and obligations that relate to the conduct of clinical trials in the UK currently remain largely aligned with the EU position. A CTA will be required to conduct a clinical trial in the UK, together with Ethics Committee approval. However, the sponsor of a clinical trial in the UK must be established in the UK or a country on an approved list currently limited to the EU Member States plus Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway) or appoint a legal representative who is established on one of the aforementioned countries. Clinical trials should also be registered on an established international register such as ISRCTN registry or ClinicalTrials.gov. The UK also requires the manufacture and/or importation of investigational medicinal products to be authorized. There is no mutual recognition agreement between the UK and EU on GMP, so medicines manufactured in the UK would be subject to GMP release in the EU.
Similar to the U.S. patent term-restoration, Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs) serve as an extension to a patent right in Europe for up to five years. SPCs apply to specific pharmaceutical products to offset the loss of patent protection due to the lengthy testing and clinical trials these products require prior to obtaining regulatory marketing approval.
Coverage and reimbursement
Sales of our products will depend, in part, on the extent to which our products will be covered by third-party payors, such as government health programs, commercial insurance and managed healthcare organizations. There is significant uncertainty related to third-party payor coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the United States, for example, principal decisions about reimbursement for new products are typically made by CMS. CMS decides whether and to what extent a new product will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare, and private third-party payors often follow CMS’s decisions regarding coverage and reimbursement to a substantial degree. However, no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for drug products exists. Accordingly, decisions regarding the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided for any of our products will be made on a payor-by-payor basis.
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. Further, such payors are increasingly challenging the price, examining the medical necessity and reviewing the cost effectiveness of medical product candidates. There may be especially significant delays in obtaining coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific product candidates on an approved list, known as a formulary, which might not include all FDA-approved drugs for a particular indication. We may need to conduct expensive pharmaco-economic studies to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost effectiveness of our products. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained.
In addition, companion diagnostic tests require coverage and reimbursement separate and apart from the coverage and reimbursement for their companion pharmaceutical or biological products. Similar challenges to obtaining coverage and reimbursement, applicable to pharmaceutical or biological products, will apply to companion diagnostics.
In addition, in most foreign countries, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug pricing and reimbursement vary widely from country to country. For example, the EU provides options for its Member States to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. A Member State may approve a specific price for the medicinal product or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for
36
pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our products. Historically, products launched in the EU do not follow price structures of the United States and generally prices tend to be significantly lower.
Healthcare reform
The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA), established the Medicare Part D program to provide a voluntary prescription drug benefit to Medicare beneficiaries. Under Part D, Medicare beneficiaries may enroll in prescription drug plans offered by private entities that provide coverage of outpatient prescription drugs. Unlike Medicare Part A and B, Part D coverage is not standardized. While all Medicare drug plans must give at least a standard level of coverage set by Medicare, 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 likely will be lower than the prices we might otherwise obtain. Moreover, while the MMA applies only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private third-party payors often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own payment rates.
The United States government, state legislatures and foreign governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price-controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs. For example, the ACA substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both the government and private insurers, and continues to significantly impact the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. The ACA contains provisions that may reduce the profitability of drug products through increased rebates for drugs reimbursed by Medicaid programs, extension of Medicaid rebates to Medicaid managed care plans, mandatory discounts for certain Medicare Part D beneficiaries and annual fees based on pharmaceutical companies’ share of sales to federal health care programs. The Medicaid Drug Rebate Program requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to enter into and have in effect a national rebate agreement with the HHS Secretary as a condition for states to receive federal matching funds for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs furnished to Medicaid patients. The ACA made several changes to the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, including increasing pharmaceutical manufacturers’ rebate liability by raising the minimum basic Medicaid rebate on most branded prescription drugs from 15.1% of average manufacturer price (AMP), to 23.1% of AMP and adding a new rebate calculation for “line extensions.” The ACA also expanded the universe of Medicaid utilization subject to drug rebates by requiring pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay rebates on Medicaid managed care utilization and by enlarging the population potentially eligible for Medicaid drug benefits. Additionally, for a drug product to receive federal reimbursement under the Medicaid or Medicare Part B programs or to be sold directly to U.S. government agencies, the manufacturer must extend discounts to entities eligible to participate in the 340B drug pricing program. The required 340B discount on a given product is calculated based on the AMP and Medicaid rebate amounts reported by the manufacturer.
Since its enactment, there have been legislative and judicial efforts to repeal, replace, or change some or all of the ACA. In June 2021, the United States Supreme Court held that Texas and other challengers had no legal standing to challenge the ACA, dismissing the case without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Accordingly, the ACA remains in effect in its current form. It is unclear how this Supreme Court decision, future litigation, and healthcare measures promulgated by the new Trump administration will impact the implementation of the ACA, our business, financial condition and results of operations. Complying with any new legislation or reversing changes implemented under the ACA could be time-intensive and expensive, resulting in a material adverse effect on our business.
Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. In January 2013, President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. Other changes included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, effective April 1, 2013, which will stay in effect through 2032, unless additional congressional action is taken. These laws and future legislation may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which could have a material adverse effect on our customers for our drugs, if approved, and accordingly, our financial operations.
Additionally, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over the manner in which drug manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, eliminated the statutory cap on Medicaid Drug Rebate Programs rebates that manufacturers pay to state
37
Medicaid programs. Elimination of this cap may require pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay more in rebates than it receives on the sale of products, which could have material impact on our business. In August 2022, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which includes prescription drug provisions that have significant implications for the pharmaceutical industry and Medicare beneficiaries, including allowing the federal government to negotiate a maximum fair price for certain high-priced single source Medicare drugs, imposing penalties and excise tax for manufacturers that fail to comply with the drug price negotiation requirements, requiring inflation rebates for all Medicare Part B and Part D drugs, with limited exceptions, if their drug prices increase faster than inflation, and redesigning Medicare Part D to reduce out-of-pocket prescription drug costs for beneficiaries, among other changes. Further, the Biden administration released an additional executive order in October 2022, directing the 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. In March 2023, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) published its first guidance on how negotiations will be conducted, starting in 2026 for high expenditure drugs as determined and selected by HHS. In June 2023, CMS issued a revised guidance for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program under the Inflation Reduction Act. Only high-expenditure single-source drugs that have been approved for at least 7 years (11 years for single-source biologics) can qualify for negotiation, with the negotiated price taking effect two years after the selection year. For 2026, the first year in which negotiated prices become effective, CMS selected 10 high-cost Medicare Part D drugs in 2023, negotiations began in 2024, and the negotiated maximum fair price for each drug has been announced. CMS has selected 15 additional Medicare Part D drugs for negotiated maximum fair pricing in 2027. For 2028, up to an additional 15 drugs, which may be covered under either Medicare Part B or Part D, will be selected, and for 2029 and subsequent years, up to 20 additional Part B or Part D drugs will be selected. Various industry stakeholders, including pharmaceutical companies and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, have initiated lawsuits against the federal government, asserting that the price negotiation provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act are unconstitutional. Further, the current administration has issued executive orders focused on decreasing prescription drug prices, including directing the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a mechanism through which American patients can buy drugs directly from manufacturers who sell at a most-favored-nation (MFN) price and directing the U.S. Trade Representative and Secretary of Commerce to take action to ensure foreign countries are not engaged in practices that purposefully and unfairly undercut market prices and drive price hikes in the United States. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), which was signed into law in July 2025, includes provisions that will impact the U.S. healthcare system in various ways, including by cuts to Medicaid and introducing new participant work and eligibility requirements for Medicaid coverage, which are expected to significantly change the administration and applicability of Medicaid coverage. In November 2025, CMS announced a voluntary initiative called the GENEROUS Model (GENErating cost Reductions fOr U.S. Medicaid Model) to introduce the option of most-favored-nation pricing to the Medicaid program, whereby a drug manufacturer may voluntarily offer supplemental rebates to participating state Medicaid programs for a manufacturer’s covered outpatient drugs. The impact of these judicial challenges, legislative, executive, and administrative actions and any future healthcare measures and agency rules implemented by the government on us and the pharmaceutical industry as a whole is unclear. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize our product candidates if approved.
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. For example, a number of states are considering or have recently enacted state drug price transparency and reporting laws that could substantially increase our compliance burdens and expose us to greater liability under such state laws once we begin commercialization. These and other health reform measures that are implemented may have a material adverse effect on our operations.
We are unable to predict the future course of federal or state healthcare legislation in the United States directed at broadening the availability of healthcare and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. These and any further changes in the law or regulatory framework that reduce our revenue or increase our costs could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations, and other payors of healthcare services and medical products to contain or reduce costs of healthcare and/or impose price controls may adversely affect the demand for our product candidates, if approved, and our ability to achieve or maintain profitability.
Environmental, Social and Governance
We believe that sustainable operations are both financially and operationally beneficial to our business, and critical to the health of the communities in which we operate. Our operations are subject to federal, state, local and foreign laws, rules and regulations relating to environmental concerns, including air emissions, wastewater discharges, solid and hazardous waste management activities, and the safety of our employees. We endeavor to take the actions necessary to comply with such regulations. We seek to minimize our resource footprint at our locations with a focus on managing waste, water and energy consumption.
38
Employees and Human Capital
As of December 31, 2025, we had 104 full-time employees, of which 76 were engaged in research and development activities. Substantially all of our employees are located in South San Francisco, California and San Diego, California. None of our employees are represented by labor unions or covered by collective bargaining agreements. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.
Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing and integrating our existing and new employees, advisors and consultants. The principal purposes of our equity and cash incentive plans are to attract, retain and reward personnel through the granting of stock-based and cash-based compensation awards, to increase stockholder value and the success of our company by motivating such individuals to perform to the best of their abilities and achieve our objectives. In addition, we are committed to offering a comprehensive suite of benefits ranging from medical, dental, and vision coverage, disability, remote work flexibility, employee stock purchase, and life insurance programs. All employees are also eligible to participate in a Company sponsored defined contribution plan created under Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code that provides for the Company to match a portion of contributions by participating employees.
Corporate Information
We were incorporated in Delaware in August 2014. Our principal executive offices are located at 240 E. Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, South San Francisco, California 94080. Our telephone number is (650) 388-5600. Our website address is www.oricpharma.com. Information contained on the website is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K or any other filings we make with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
We may use our website (www.oricpharma.com), press releases, public conference calls, public webcasts, X and LinkedIn as means of disclosing material non-public information and for complying with our disclosure obligations under Regulation FD. We also make available on or through our website certain reports and amendments to those reports that we file with or furnish to the SEC in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (Exchange Act). These include our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, and our 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. We make this information available on or through our website free of charge as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file the information with, or furnish it to, the SEC. The SEC also maintains a website that contains our SEC filings. The address for the SEC website is https://www.sec.gov.
We use the ORIC Pharmaceuticals logo and other marks as trademarks in the United States and other countries. This periodic report contains references to our trademarks and service marks and to those belonging to other entities. Solely for convenience, trademarks and trade names referred to in this periodic report, including logos, artwork and other visual displays, may appear without the ® or TM symbol, but such references are not intended to indicate in any way that we will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, our rights or the rights of the applicable licensor to these trademarks and trade names. We do not intend our use or display of other entities’ trade names, trademarks or service marks to imply a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, any other entity.
39
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
Risk factors
You should carefully consider the risks described below, as well as the other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including our financial statements and related notes and the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and in our other public filings in evaluating our business. The occurrence of any of the events or developments described below could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. In such an event, the market price of our common stock could decline. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial also may impair our business operations and the market price of our common stock.
Risk factor summary
The following summarizes the most material risks that make an investment in our securities risky or speculative. If any of the following risks occur or persist, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially harmed and the market price of our common stock could significantly decline:
Risks related to our financial position and need for additional capital
Risks related to development and commercialization of our product candidates
Risks related to regulatory, legal and other compliance matters
40
Risks related to employee matters and management of our growth
Risks related to intellectual property
Risks related to dependence on third parties
Risks related to the securities markets and ownership of our common stock
41
Risks related to our financial position and need for additional capital
We have a limited operating history, have not initiated or completed any large-scale or pivotal clinical trials, and have no products approved for commercial sale, which may make it difficult for you to evaluate our current business and likelihood of success and viability.
We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history upon which you can evaluate our business and prospects. We commenced operations in 2014, have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue. Drug development is a highly uncertain undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. We have initiated clinical trials for a limited number of our product candidates. To date, we have devoted substantially all of our resources to research and development activities, including with respect to the preclinical and clinical development of rinzimetostat (formerly ORIC-944), enozertinib (formerly ORIC-114) and our other product candidates, in-licensing of external programs, business planning, establishing and maintaining our intellectual property portfolio, hiring personnel, raising capital and providing general and administrative support for these operations.
We have not yet demonstrated our ability to successfully initiate and complete any large-scale or pivotal clinical trials, obtain marketing approvals, manufacture a commercial-scale product or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. As a result, it may be more difficult for you to accurately predict our likelihood of success and viability than it could be if we had a longer operating history.
In addition, we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other known and unknown factors and risks frequently experienced by clinical-stage biopharmaceutical companies in rapidly evolving fields. We also may need to transition from a company with a research and development focus to a company capable of supporting commercial activities. We have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully overcome such risks and difficulties, or to make such a transition. If we do not adequately address these risks and difficulties or successfully make such a transition, our business will suffer.
We have incurred significant net losses since our inception, and we expect to continue to incur significant net losses for the foreseeable future.
We have incurred significant net losses since our inception, have not generated any revenue from product sales to date and have financed our operations principally through public offerings and private placements of our common stock, convertible preferred stock and other derivative securities. Our net loss was $129.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2025, and as of December 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $692.2 million. We expect that it will be several years, if ever, before we have a commercialized product and generate revenue from product sales. Even if we succeed in receiving marketing approval for and commercializing one or more of our product candidates, we expect that we will continue to incur substantial research and development and other expenses in order to develop and market additional potential products.
We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for the foreseeable future. The net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter such that a period-to-period comparison of our results of operations may not be a good indication of our future performance. The size of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of future growth of our expenses and our ability to generate revenue. Our prior losses and expected future losses have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our working capital, our ability to fund the development of our product candidates and our ability to achieve and maintain profitability and the performance of our stock.
Our ability to generate revenue and achieve profitability depends significantly on our ability to achieve several objectives relating to the development and commercialization of our product candidates.
Our business depends entirely on the successful development and commercialization of product candidates. We have no products approved for commercial sale and do not anticipate generating any revenue from product sales for the next several years, if
42
ever. Our ability to generate revenue and achieve profitability depends significantly on our ability, or any current or future collaborator’s ability, to achieve several objectives, including:
We may never be successful in achieving our objectives and, even if we do, may never generate revenue that is significant or large enough to achieve profitability. 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 our company and could impair our ability to maintain or further our research and development efforts, raise additional necessary capital, grow our business and continue our operations.
We will require substantial additional capital to finance our operations. If we are unable to raise such capital when needed, or on acceptable terms, we may be forced to delay, reduce and/or eliminate one or more of our research and drug development programs or future commercialization efforts.
Developing pharmaceutical products, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, is a very time-consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete. Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception, and we expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we conduct clinical trials of, and seek marketing approval for our product candidates and advance our other programs. Even if one or more of the product candidates that we develop is approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with sales, marketing, manufacturing and distribution activities. Our expenses could increase beyond expectations if we are required by the FDA, the EMA or other regulatory agencies to perform clinical trials or preclinical studies in addition to those that we currently anticipate. Other unanticipated costs may also arise. Because the design and outcome of our planned and anticipated clinical trials are highly uncertain, we cannot reasonably estimate the actual amount of resources and funding that will be necessary to successfully complete the development and commercialization of any product candidate we develop. We are not permitted to market or promote our product candidates before we receive marketing approval from the FDA. Accordingly, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in order to continue our operations.
43
As of December 31, 2025, we had $392.3 million in cash, cash equivalents and investments. Based on our current operating plan, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and investments will be sufficient to fund our operations into the second half of 2028. Our estimate as to how long we expect our existing cash, cash equivalents, and investments, to be able to continue to fund our operations is based on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Changing circumstances, some of which may be beyond our control, could cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned.
We will be required to obtain further funding through public or private equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations and licensing arrangements or other sources, which may dilute our stockholders or restrict our operating activities. We do not have any committed external source of funds. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. 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 may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a stockholder. Debt financing may result in the imposition of debt covenants, increased fixed payment obligations or other restrictions that may affect our business. If we raise additional funds through upfront payments or milestone payments pursuant to strategic collaborations with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our product candidates, or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us. In addition, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans.
Our failure to raise capital as and when needed or on acceptable terms would have a negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to pursue our business strategy, and we may have to delay, reduce the scope of, suspend or eliminate one or more of our research-stage programs, clinical trials or future commercialization efforts.
Market conditions and changing circumstances, some of which may be beyond our control, could impair our ability to access our existing cash, cash equivalents and investments and to timely pay key vendors and others.
Market conditions and changing circumstances, some of which may be beyond our control, could impair our ability to access our existing cash, cash equivalents and investments and to timely pay key vendors and others. For example, on March 10, 2023, Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), where we maintained certain accounts, was placed into receivership with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), which resulted in all funds held at SVB being temporarily inaccessible by SVB’s customers. If other banks and financial institutions with whom we have banking relationships enter receivership or become insolvent in the future, we may be unable to access, and we may lose, some or all of our existing cash, cash equivalents and investments to the extent those funds are not insured or otherwise protected by the FDIC. In addition, in such circumstances we might not be able to timely pay key vendors and others. We regularly maintain cash balances that are not insured or are in excess of the FDIC’s insurance limit. Any delay in our ability to access our cash, cash equivalents and investments (or the loss of some or all of such funds) or to timely pay key vendors and others could have a material adverse effect on our operations and cause us to need to seek additional capital sooner than planned.
Risks related to the development and commercialization of our product candidates
We are substantially dependent on the success of our product candidates, rinzimetostat and enozertinib. If we are unable to complete development of, obtain approval for and commercialize our product candidates for one or more indications in a timely manner, our business will be harmed.
We allocate the majority of our efforts and financial resources to the development of rinzimetostat and enozertinib. Our future success is dependent on our ability to timely and successfully complete clinical trials, obtain marketing approval for and successfully commercialize rinzimetostat and enozertinib.
These product candidates will require additional clinical development, expansion of manufacturing capabilities, marketing approval from government regulators, substantial investment and significant marketing efforts before we can generate any revenues from product sales. We are not permitted to market or promote rinzimetostat, enozertinib or any other product candidate, before we receive marketing approval from the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never receive such marketing approvals.
The success of our product candidates will depend on several factors, including the following:
44
We do not have complete control over many of these factors, including certain aspects of clinical development and the regulatory submission process, potential threats to our intellectual property rights and the manufacturing, marketing, distribution and sales efforts of any future collaborator. If we are not successful with respect to one or more of these factors in a timely manner or at all, we could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, which would materially harm our business. If we do not receive marketing approvals for our product candidates, we may not be able to continue our operations.
In addition to rinzimetostat and enozertinib, our prospects depend in part upon developing and commercializing additional product candidates, which may fail in development or suffer delays that adversely affect their commercial viability.
Our future operating results are dependent on our ability to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize product candidates. All of our current programs other than rinzimetostat and enozertinib, are in research or preclinical development. A product candidate can unexpectedly fail at any stage of preclinical and/or clinical development. The historical failure rate for product candidates is high due to risks relating to safety, efficacy, clinical execution, changing standards of medical care and other unpredictable variables. The results from preclinical testing or early clinical trials of a product candidate may not be predictive of the results that will be obtained in later stage clinical trials of the product candidate.
The success of other product candidates we may develop will depend on many factors, including the following:
Even if we successfully advance product candidates into clinical development, their success will be subject to all of the clinical, regulatory and commercial risks described elsewhere in this “Risk Factors” section. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will ever be able to develop, obtain regulatory approval of, commercialize or generate significant revenue from any product candidates.
45
The regulatory approval processes of the FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities are lengthy, time consuming and inherently unpredictable. If we are ultimately unable to obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates, we will be unable to generate product revenue and our business will be substantially harmed.
Obtaining approval by the FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities is unpredictable, typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidates involved. In addition, approval policies, regulations or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions, which may cause delays in the approval or the decision not to approve an application. For example, FDA’s Oncology Center of Excellence initiated Project Optimus to reform the dose optimization and dose selection paradigm in oncology drug development and Project FrontRunner to help develop and implement strategies to support approvals in the early clinical setting, among other goals. How the FDA plans to implement these goals and their impact on specific clinical programs and the industry are unclear. Regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process and may refuse to accept any application or may decide that our data are insufficient for approval and require additional preclinical, clinical or other data. Even if we eventually complete clinical testing and receive approval for our product candidates, the FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities may approve our product candidates for a more limited indication or a narrower patient population than we originally requested or may impose other prescribing limitations or warnings that limit the product’s commercial potential. We have not submitted for, or obtained, regulatory approval for any product candidate, and it is possible that none of our product candidates will ever obtain regulatory approval. Further, development of our product candidates and/or regulatory approval may be delayed for reasons beyond our control.
Applications for our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including the following:
This lengthy approval process, as well as the unpredictability of the results of clinical trials, may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market any of our product candidates, which would significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.
The clinical trials of our product candidates may not demonstrate safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities or otherwise produce positive results.
Before obtaining marketing approval from the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities for the sale of our product candidates, we must complete preclinical development and extensive clinical trials to demonstrate with substantial evidence the safety and efficacy of such product candidates. Clinical testing is expensive, difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete and its ultimate outcome is uncertain. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of the process. The outcome of preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later clinical trials. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of their drugs.
46
We may experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, clinical trials that could delay or prevent receipt of marketing approval or our ability to commercialize our product candidates, including:
If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our product candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate, if we are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates or other testing in a timely manner, if the results of these trials or tests are not positive or are only modestly positive or if there are safety concerns, we may incur unplanned costs, be delayed in seeking and obtaining marketing approval, if we receive such approval at all, receive more limited or restrictive marketing approval, be subject to additional post-marketing testing requirements or have the drug removed from the market after obtaining marketing approval.
Our product candidates may cause significant adverse events, toxicities or other undesirable side effects when used alone or in combination with other approved products or investigational new drugs that may result in a safety profile that could prevent regulatory approval, prevent market acceptance, limit their commercial potential or result in significant negative consequences.
If our product candidates are associated with undesirable side effects or have unexpected characteristics in preclinical studies or clinical trials when used alone or in combination with other approved products or investigational new drugs we may need to interrupt, delay or abandon their development or limit development to more narrow uses or subpopulations in which the undesirable side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a risk-benefit perspective. Treatment-related side effects could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled subjects to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the affected product candidate and may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.
Patients in our ongoing and planned clinical trials may in the future suffer other significant adverse events or other side effects not observed in our preclinical studies or previous clinical trials. Our product candidates may be used in populations for which safety concerns may be particularly scrutinized by regulatory agencies. Patients treated with our product candidates may also be undergoing surgical, radiation and chemotherapy treatments, which can cause side effects or adverse events that are unrelated to our product candidate but may still impact the success of our clinical trials. The inclusion of critically ill patients in our clinical trials may result in deaths or other adverse medical events due to other therapies or medications that such patients may be using or due to the gravity of such patients’ illnesses. For example, it is expected that some of the patients enrolled in our clinical trials will die or experience major clinical events either during the course of our clinical trials or after participating in such trials, which has occurred in the past.
If further significant adverse events or other side effects are observed in any of our current or future clinical trials, we may have difficulty recruiting patients to the clinical trials, patients may drop out of our trials, or we may be required to abandon the trials or our development efforts of that product candidate altogether. We, the FDA, EMA, other comparable regulatory authorities or an IRB may suspend clinical trials of a product candidate at any time for various reasons, including a belief that subjects in such trials are being exposed to unacceptable health risks or adverse side effects. Some potential therapeutics developed in the biotechnology industry that initially showed therapeutic promise in early-stage trials have later been found to cause side effects that prevented their further development. Even if the side effects do not preclude the product candidate from obtaining or maintaining marketing approval, undesirable side effects may inhibit market acceptance due to its tolerability versus other therapies. Any of these developments could materially harm our business, financial condition and prospects. Further, if any of our product candidates obtains marketing approval, toxicities associated with such product candidates previously not seen during clinical testing may also develop after such approval and lead to a requirement to conduct additional clinical safety trials, additional contraindications, warnings and precautions being added to the drug label, significant restrictions on the use of the product or the withdrawal of the product from the market. We cannot predict
47
whether our product candidates will cause toxicities in humans that would preclude or lead to the revocation of regulatory approval based on preclinical studies or early-stage clinical trials.
The outcome of preclinical testing and early clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later clinical trials, and the results of our clinical trials may not satisfy the requirements of the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities.
We will be required to demonstrate with substantial evidence through well-controlled clinical trials that our product candidates are safe and effective for use in a diverse population before we can seek marketing approvals for their commercial sale. Success in preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials does not mean that future clinical trials will be successful. For instance, we do not know whether rinzimetostat or enozertinib will perform in current or future preclinical studies or future clinical trials as they have in prior preclinical studies or clinical trials. Product candidates in later-stage clinical trials may fail to demonstrate sufficient safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of the FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities despite having progressed through preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials. Regulatory authorities may also limit the scope of later-stage trials until we have demonstrated satisfactory safety, which could delay regulatory approval, limit the size of the patient population to which we may market our product candidates, or prevent regulatory approval.
In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety and efficacy results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial protocols, differences in size and type of the patient populations, differences in and adherence to the dose and dosing regimen and other trial protocols and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. Patients treated with our product candidates may also be undergoing surgical, radiation and chemotherapy treatments and may be using other approved products or investigational new drugs, which can cause side effects or adverse events that are unrelated to our product candidates. As a result, assessments of efficacy can vary widely for a particular patient, and from patient to patient and site to site within a clinical trial. This subjectivity can increase the uncertainty of, and adversely impact, our clinical trial outcomes.
We do not know whether any clinical trials we may conduct will demonstrate consistent or adequate efficacy and safety sufficient to obtain approval to market any of our product candidates.
Interim, topline 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 publicly disclose preliminary, interim or topline data from our clinical trials. These interim updates are based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or trial. For example, we may report tumor responses in certain patients that are unconfirmed at the time and which do not ultimately result in confirmed responses to treatment after follow-up evaluations. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, the topline results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Topline data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. In addition, we may report interim analyses of only certain endpoints rather than all endpoints. Interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Adverse changes between interim data and final data could significantly harm our business and prospects. Further, additional disclosure of interim data by us or by our competitors in the future could result in volatility in the price of our common stock.
In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is typically selected from a more extensive amount of available information. You or others may not agree with what we determine is the material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure, and any information we determine not to disclose may ultimately be deemed significant with respect to future decisions, conclusions, views, activities or otherwise regarding a particular product candidate or our business. If the preliminary or topline data that we report differ from late, final or actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, any product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Adverse results of clinical trials conducted by third parties investigating the same class of product candidates as us in the same or different territories or indications could adversely affect our development of such product candidate.
Lack of efficacy, adverse events, undesirable side effects or other adverse results may emerge in clinical trials conducted by third parties investigating the same class of product candidates as us in different territories or indications. For example, pursuant to the Voronoi License Agreement, Voronoi retains the right to develop and commercialize the same compounds licensed to us, after a certain period, as specified in the Voronoi License Agreement, including the compound we refer to as enozertinib, in the People’s Republic of China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan and, subject to certain restrictions, to collaborate with others for such
48
development and commercialization. We do not have control over Voronoi’s clinical trials or development program, and adverse findings from Voronoi’s conduct of clinical trials could adversely affect our development of enozertinib or even the viability of enozertinib as a product candidate. We may be required to report Voronoi’s adverse events or unexpected side effects to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, which could, among other things, order us to cease further development of enozertinib.
Reports of side effects or safety concerns in other companies’ clinical trials of the same or similar class of products or of products sharing the same mechanism of action as our product candidates could delay or prevent us from obtaining regulatory approval for our product candidates or negatively impact public perception and market acceptance of our product candidates.
There are a number of clinical trials being conducted by other pharmaceutical companies involving compounds similar to, or potentially competitive with, our product candidates, including compounds of the same or similar class of products or sharing the same mechanism of action as our product candidates. Adverse results reported by these other companies in their clinical trials could delay or prevent our receipt of regulatory approval or our ability to commercialize our product candidates or could negatively impact public perception and market acceptance of our product candidates, which could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.
If we experience delays or difficulties in the enrollment and/or maintenance of patients in clinical trials, our regulatory submissions or receipt of necessary marketing approvals could be delayed or prevented.
We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials for our product candidates if we are unable to locate and enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in these trials to such trial’s conclusion as required by the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Often done through biomarker testing, patient identification and enrollment are significant factors in the timing of clinical trials. Our ability to identify and enroll eligible patients may be limited or may result in slower enrollment than we anticipate. If patient identification proves unsuccessful, we may have difficulty enrolling or maintaining patients appropriate for our product candidates. Similarly, enrollment in trials for our product candidates may be limited or slower than we anticipated if any required laboratory biomarker tests are not available due to shortages of staff or reagents.
Enrollment of patients in our clinical trials and maintaining patients in our ongoing clinical trials may be delayed or limited if our clinical trial sites limit their onsite staff or temporarily close as a result of a global pandemic or other public health emergencies. For instance, certain of our clinical trial sites in 2020 temporarily stopped or delayed enrolling new patients in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, patients may not be able to visit clinical trial sites for dosing or data collection purposes due to limitations on travel and physical distancing imposed or recommended by federal or state governments or patients’ reluctance to visit the clinical trial sites during a pandemic. These factors could delay the anticipated readouts from our clinical trials and our regulatory submissions.
Patient enrollment may be affected if our competitors have ongoing clinical trials for programs that are under development for the same indications as our product candidates, and patients who would otherwise be eligible for our clinical trials instead enroll in clinical trials of our competitors’ programs. Patient enrollment for our current or any future clinical trials may be affected by other factors, including:
49
Our inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our clinical trials would result in significant delays or may require us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether. Enrollment delays in our clinical trials may result in increased development costs for our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to obtain marketing approval for the sale of our product candidates. Furthermore, even if we are able to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our clinical trials, we may have difficulty maintaining participation in our clinical trials through the treatment and any follow-up periods.
Our operations and financial results could be adversely impacted by global pandemics or other public health emergencies in the United States and the rest of the world.
We may experience disruptions that could severely impact our business and clinical trials due to global pandemics or other public health emergencies, including:
We will continue to assess the impact that any public health emergencies may have on our ability to effectively conduct our business operations as planned and there can be no assurance that we will be able to avoid a material impact on our business from such public health emergencies or their consequences, including disruption to our business and downturns in business sentiment generally or in our industry.
To the extent a global pandemic or other public health emergency adversely affects our business, financial condition and operating results, it may also have the effect of heightening many of the risks described in this “Risk Factors” section.
If we are unable to successfully develop any required companion diagnostic tests for our product candidates, experience significant delays in doing so, or rely on third parties in the development of such companion diagnostic tests, we may not realize the full commercial potential of our product candidates.
We are exploring predictive biomarkers to determine patient selection for certain of our clinical trials and to evaluate whether a companion diagnostic test will be required for any of our product candidates. In general, the FDA expects to review and approve simultaneously NDA and pre-market approval submissions for a therapeutic and its companion diagnostic, respectively, so any delay
50
in diagnostic approval could delay drug approval. On April 13, 2020, the FDA issued new guidance on developing and labeling companion diagnostics for a specific group of oncology therapeutic products, including recommendations to support a broader labeling claim rather than individual therapeutic products. In June 2023, the FDA announced a new voluntary pilot program through which drug manufacturers can provide to the FDA the diagnostic test performance information used to enroll patients into clinical trials for drug approval. Based on assessment of the performance information, the FDA will publish the minimum performance characteristics recommended for similar tests that may be used to select patients for treatment with the approved drug to help laboratories identify specific biomarkers for their development of laboratory-developed tests (LDTs), and to ensure more consistent performance of these tests for drug selection and improved cancer patient care. In May 2024, the FDA published a final rule that phases out its enforcement discretion for LDTs, unless exempt, and amends the FDA’s regulations to make explicit that in vitro diagnostics are medical devices under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, including when the manufacturer of the diagnostic product is a laboratory. The American Clinical Laboratory Association and a private laboratory have initiated litigation against the agency to challenge the implementation of this final rule. On March 31, 2025, U.S. District Court in Texas ruled that FDA exceeded its authority and vacated and set aside this LDT final rule in its entirety. We will continue to evaluate the impact of this litigation, as well as any future lawsuits brought against the FDA, and future legislative and administration actions on our companion diagnostic development and strategy. Future guidance documents from the FDA and other regulatory authorities may impact our development of a companion diagnostic for our product candidates and result in delays in regulatory approval. To the extent other approved diagnostics are able to broaden their labeling claims to include our approved drug products, we may be forced to abandon any of our companion diagnostic development plans or we may not be able to compete effectively upon approval, which could adversely impact our ability to generate revenue from the sale of our approved products and our business operations.
We may rely on third parties for the design, development and manufacture of companion diagnostic tests for our product candidates that require such tests. To be successful, we or our collaborators will need to address a number of scientific, technical, regulatory and logistical challenges. If we or such third parties are unable to successfully develop companion diagnostics, or experience delays in doing so, we may be unable to enroll enough patients for our current and planned clinical trials, the development of our product candidates may be adversely affected or we may not obtain marketing approval, and we may not realize the full commercial potential of our product candidates.
We may develop our programs in combination with other therapies, which exposes us to additional risks.
We may develop our programs in combination with one or more currently approved cancer therapies or therapies in development. Patients may not be able to tolerate our product candidates in combination with other therapies or dosing of our product candidates in combination with other therapies may have unexpected consequences. Even if any of our product candidates were to receive marketing approval or be commercialized for use in combination with other existing therapies, we would continue to be subject to the risks that the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities could revoke approval of the therapy used in combination with any of our product candidates, or safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise with these existing therapies. In addition, it is possible that existing therapies with which our product candidates are approved for use could themselves fall out of favor or be relegated to later lines of treatment. This could result in the need to identify other combination therapies for our product candidates or our own products being removed from the market or being less successful commercially.
We may also evaluate our product candidates in combination with one or more other cancer therapies that have not yet been approved for marketing by the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. We will not be able to market and sell any product candidate in combination with any such unapproved cancer therapies that do not ultimately obtain marketing approval.
If the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities do not approve or revoke their approval of these other therapies, or if safety, efficacy, commercial adoption, manufacturing or supply issues arise with the therapies we choose to evaluate in combination with our product candidates, we may be unable to obtain approval of or successfully market any one or all of the product candidates we develop.
Additionally, if the third-party providers of therapies or therapies in development used in combination with our product candidates are unable to produce sufficient quantities for clinical trials or for commercialization of our product candidates, or if the cost of combination therapies are prohibitive, our development and commercialization efforts would be impaired, which would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.
We have limited resources and are focusing our efforts on developing rinzimetostat and enozertinib. As a result, we may fail to capitalize on other indications or product candidates that may ultimately have proven to be more profitable.
We are focusing our resources and efforts on developing rinzimetostat and enozertinib. As a result, because we have limited resources, we may forgo or delay pursuit of opportunities for other indications or with other product candidates that may have greater commercial potential. For example, we completed a Phase 1b trial of ORIC-533 as a single-agent, in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, and intend to evaluate strategic partnerships to develop ORIC-533 in combination with other immune-based antimyeloma therapies. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial drugs or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development activities may not yield any commercially viable drugs. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target markets for rinzimetostat, enozertinib or any of our other
51
future programs, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate or program through collaboration, licensing or other strategic arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate or program.
We face significant competition, and if our competitors develop and market technologies or products more rapidly than we do or that are more effective, safer or less expensive than the products we develop, our commercial opportunities will be negatively impacted.
The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary and novel products and product candidates.
Our competitors have developed, are developing or may develop products, product candidates and processes competitive with our product candidates. Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future. We believe that a significant number of products are currently under development, and may become commercially available in the future, for the treatment of conditions for which we may attempt to develop product candidates. In addition, our products may need to compete with drugs physicians use off-label to treat the indications for which we seek approval. This may make it difficult for us to replace existing therapies with our products.
In particular, there is intense competition in the field of oncology. We have competitors both in the United States and internationally, including major multinational pharmaceutical companies, established biotechnology companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, emerging and start-up companies, universities and other research institutions. We also compete with these organizations to recruit management, scientists and clinical development personnel, which could negatively affect our level of expertise and our ability to execute our business plan. We will also face competition in establishing clinical trial sites, enrolling subjects for clinical trials and in identifying and in-licensing new product candidates. We expect to face competition from existing products and products in development for each of our programs.
For rinzimetostat, we are aware of several companies developing inhibitors against PRC2 via EZH2 inhibition that are currently in clinical trials, including Ipsen, Novartis, Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer, Shanghai HaiHe Pharmaceutical, Treeline Biosciences in collaboration with Jiangsu HengRui Medicine Co., Evopoint Biosciences and Hanmi Pharmaceutical. To our knowledge, Ascentage Pharma has an allosteric PRC2 inhibitor in clinical trials for patients with cancer.
For enozertinib, we are aware that Johnson & Johnson and Dizal Pharmaceuticals have FDA-approved products for patients with EGFR exon 20 mutations. We are also aware of several companies developing small molecule inhibitors against EGFR exon 20 mutations and EGFR atypical mutations that are currently in clinical trials, including Cullinan Therapeutics in collaboration with Taiho Pharmaceutical, ArriVent BioPharma in collaboration with Allist Pharmaceuticals, Black Diamond Therapeutics, Scorpion Therapeutics in collaboration with Pierre Fabre, BlossomHill Therapeutics, Avistone Biotechnology, BeBetter Med, Suzhou Puhe Pharmaceutical Technology Co. and Yuhan Corporation.
Many of these current and potential competitors have significantly greater financial, manufacturing, marketing, drug development, technical and human resources, and commercial expertise than we do. Large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, in particular, have extensive experience in clinical testing, obtaining regulatory approvals, recruiting patients and manufacturing biotechnology products. These companies also have significantly greater research and marketing capabilities than we do and may also have products that have been approved or are in late stages of development, and collaborative arrangements in our target markets with leading companies and research institutions. Established pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies may also invest heavily to accelerate discovery and development of novel compounds or to in-license novel compounds that could make the product candidates that we develop obsolete. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. As a result of all of these factors, our competitors may obtain approval from the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities or develop or commercialize products in our field before we do. In addition, we are facing increasing competition from companies utilizing artificial intelligence, or AI, in their research and development efforts or other business processes, which could create a competitive advantage that we would find difficult to match. While our current use of AI-based platforms or tools in our business is relatively minimal, many of our competitors have begun utilizing AI tools to aid in the development of pharmaceutical products. Our cautious approach to adopting AI platforms and tools may put us at a competitive disadvantage in comparison to competitors who currently use them in the development of pharmaceutical products or other business processes, which could impair our ability to compete effectively and adversely affect our results of operations. Should we proceed with further AI adoption, we may be subject to significant risks related to developing and deploying AI platforms or tools, and there can be no assurance that the use of AI will enhance the development of our product candidates or be beneficial to our business. Any use of, or reliance on, AI technologies, including generative AI, may also expose us to a range of risks, including the generation or dissemination of inaccurate, misleading, biased, or otherwise harmful content, potential discrimination, intellectual property infringement or misappropriation, defamation, violations of data privacy or cybersecurity requirements, and compliance risks under applicable sanctions and export control laws, among others.
52
In addition, the legal and regulatory framework governing AI remains evolving and uncertain, and it is unclear how existing or future laws may apply to content produced by AI systems. To the extent that we incorporate AI technologies into our business, we may be subject to new or enhanced governmental or regulatory scrutiny, litigation, or other legal liability, ethical concerns, or other complications that could adversely affect our business or reputation. Furthermore, the integration of third-party AI models with our operations relies on certain safeguards implemented by the third-party developers of the underlying AI models, including those related to security and the accuracy, bias, and other variables of the data, and these safeguards may be insufficient. The use of AI applications has resulted in, and may in the future result in, cybersecurity incidents that implicate the data analyzed within such applications and may lead to the inadvertent release of confidential information, which may impact our ability to realize the benefits of our intellectual property.
Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer side effects, are more convenient, have a broader label, are marketed more effectively, are more widely reimbursed or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain marketing approval from the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. Even if the product candidates we develop achieve marketing approval, they may be priced at a significant premium over competitive products if any have been approved by then, resulting in reduced competitiveness. Technological advances or products developed by our competitors may render our technologies or product candidates obsolete, less competitive or uneconomical. If we are unable to compete effectively, our opportunity to generate revenue from the sale of our products we may develop, if approved, could be adversely affected.
The manufacture of drugs is complex, and our third-party manufacturers may encounter difficulties in production or supply chain. If any of our third-party manufacturers encounter such difficulties, our ability to provide adequate supply of our product candidates for clinical trials or our products for patients, if approved, could be delayed or prevented.
Manufacturing drugs, especially in large quantities, is complex and may require the use of innovative technologies. Each lot of an approved drug product must undergo thorough testing for identity, strength, quality, purity and potency. Manufacturing drugs requires facilities specifically designed for and validated for this purpose, as well as sophisticated quality assurance and quality control procedures. Slight deviations anywhere in the manufacturing process, including filling, labeling, packaging, storage and shipping and quality control and testing, may result in lot failures, product recalls or spoilage. When changes are made to the manufacturing process, we may be required to provide preclinical and clinical data showing the comparable identity, strength, quality, purity or potency of the products before and after such changes. If microbial, viral or other contaminations are discovered at the facilities of our manufacturer, such facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination, which could delay clinical trials and adversely harm our business. The use of biologically derived ingredients can also lead to allegations of harm, including infections or allergic reactions, or closure of product facilities due to possible contamination. Additionally, we may experience supply chain disruptions or slowdowns, including related manufacturing, logistics, labor supply or other factors related to the supply chains of products and materials that we use. If our third-party manufacturers are unable to produce sufficient quantities for clinical trials or for commercialization as a result of these challenges, or otherwise, our development and commercialization efforts would be impaired, which would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.
Changes in methods of product candidate manufacturing or formulation may result in additional costs or delay.
As product candidates progress through preclinical and clinical trials to marketing approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods and formulation, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize yield and manufacturing batch size, minimize costs and achieve consistent quality and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives. Any of these changes could cause our product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials conducted with the altered materials. This could delay completion of clinical trials, require the conduct of bridging clinical trials or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to commercialize our product candidates, if approved, and generate revenue.
Our product candidates may not achieve adequate market acceptance among physicians, patients, healthcare payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success.
Even if our product candidates receive regulatory approval, they may not gain adequate market acceptance among physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community. The degree of market acceptance of any of our approved product candidates will depend on a number of factors, including:
53
If any of our product candidates are approved but do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, hospitals, healthcare payors and patients, we may not generate or derive sufficient revenue from that product candidate and our financial results could be negatively impacted.
The market opportunities for our product candidates we develop, if approved, may be limited to certain smaller patient subsets.
Cancer therapies are sometimes characterized as first-line, second-line or third-line, and the FDA often approves new therapies initially only for a particular line of use. When cancer is detected early enough, first-line therapy, such as chemotherapy, hormone therapy, surgery, radiation therapy or a combination of these, is sometimes adequate to cure the cancer or prolong life without a cure. Second- and third-line therapies are administered to patients when prior therapy is not effective. There is no guarantee that product candidates we develop, even if approved, would be approved for first-line therapy, and, prior to any such approvals, we may have to conduct additional clinical trials that may be costly, time-consuming and subject to risk.
The number of patients who have the cancers we are targeting may turn out to be lower than expected. Additionally, the potentially addressable patient population for the product candidates we develop may be limited or may not be amenable to treatment with our product candidates. Regulatory approval may limit the market of a product candidate to target patient populations when biomarker-driven identification and/or highly specific criteria related to the stage of disease progression, or progression on or after certain therapies, are utilized.
Even if we obtain significant market share for any approved product, if the potential target populations are small, we may never achieve profitability without obtaining marketing approval for additional indications.
We may not be successful in augmenting our product pipeline through acquisitions and in-licenses.
We believe that accessing external innovation and expertise is important to our success; and while we plan to leverage our leadership team’s prior business development experience as we evaluate potential in-licensing and acquisition opportunities to further expand our portfolio, we may not be able to identify suitable licensing or acquisition opportunities, and even if we do, we may not be able to successfully secure such licensing and acquisition opportunities. The licensing or acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and several more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment, or at all. If we are unable to successfully license or acquire additional product candidates to expand our portfolio, our pipeline, competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects may be materially harmed.
Any product candidates we develop may become subject to unfavorable third-party coverage and reimbursement practices, as well as pricing regulations.
The availability and extent of coverage and adequate reimbursement by third-party payors, including government health administration authorities, private health coverage insurers, managed care organizations and other third-party payors is essential for most patients to be able to afford expensive treatments. Sales of any of our product candidates that receive marketing approval will depend substantially, both in the United States and internationally, on the extent to which the costs of such product candidates will be covered and reimbursed by third-party payors. If reimbursement is not available, or is available only to limited levels, we may not be
54
able to successfully commercialize our product candidates. Even if coverage is provided, the approved reimbursement amount may not be high enough to allow us to establish or maintain pricing sufficient to realize an adequate return on our investment. Coverage and reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval. If coverage and reimbursement are not available or reimbursement is available only to limited levels, we may not successfully commercialize any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval.
There is significant uncertainty related to third-party payor coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the United States, for example, principal decisions about reimbursement for new products are typically made by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). CMS decides whether and to what extent a new product will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare, and private third-party payors often follow CMS’s decisions regarding coverage and reimbursement to a substantial degree. However, one third-party payor’s determination to provide coverage for a product candidate does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage for the product candidate. As a result, the coverage determination process is often time-consuming and costly. This process will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each third-party payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance.
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. Further, such payors are increasingly challenging the price, examining the medical necessity and reviewing the cost effectiveness of medical product candidates. There may be especially significant delays in obtaining coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific product candidates on an approved list, known as a formulary, which might not include all FDA-approved drugs for a particular indication. We may need to conduct expensive pharmaco-economic studies to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost effectiveness of our products. Nonetheless, our product candidates may not be considered medically necessary or cost effective. We cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement will be available for any product that we commercialize and, if reimbursement is available, what the level of reimbursement will be.
Most significantly, in August 2022, then-President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) into law. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare, with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap (with resulting prices for the initial ten drugs first effective in 2026); imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023); redesigns the Medicare Part D benefit (beginning in 2024); and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new discounting program (beginning in 2025). The IRA permits the Secretary of the HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. On August 29, 2023, HHS announced the list of the first ten drugs that will be subject to price negotiations. HHS has issued and will continue to issue and update guidance implementing the IRA, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. While the impact of the IRA on the pharmaceutical industry cannot yet be fully determined, it is likely to be significant.
Further, in June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Chevron doctrine, which gives deference to regulatory agencies’ statutory interpretations in litigation against federal government agencies, such as the FDA, where the law is ambiguous. This landmark Supreme Court decision may invite various stakeholders to bring lawsuits against the FDA and other federal agencies to challenge longstanding decisions and policies, which could lead to uncertainty in the industry and disrupt federal agencies’ normal operations. Changes to the leadership of federal agencies like HHS, CMS and FDA under the current administration can lead to new policies and regulations that can have a material impact on our industry and business operations.
In addition, companion diagnostic tests require coverage and reimbursement separate and apart from the coverage and reimbursement for their companion pharmaceutical or biological products. Similar challenges to obtaining coverage and reimbursement, applicable to pharmaceutical or biological products, will apply to companion diagnostics. Additionally, if any companion diagnostic provider is unable to obtain reimbursement or is inadequately reimbursed, that may limit the availability of such companion diagnostic, which would negatively impact prescriptions for our product candidates, if approved.
Outside the United States, the commercialization of therapeutics is generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost containment initiatives in Europe, Canada and other countries has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of therapeutics such as our product candidates. In many countries, particularly the countries of the EU, medical product prices are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after a product receives marketing approval. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product candidate to other available therapies. In general, product prices under such systems are substantially lower than in the United States. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for products but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our product candidates. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our products may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits.
55
If we are unable to establish or sustain coverage and adequate reimbursement for any product candidates from third-party payors, the adoption of those products and sales revenue will be adversely affected, which, in turn, could adversely affect the ability to market or sell those product candidates, if approved. Coverage policies and third-party payor reimbursement rates may change at any time. 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.
Our business entails a significant risk of product liability and if we are unable to obtain sufficient insurance coverage such inability could have an adverse effect on our business and financial condition.
Our business exposes us to significant product liability risks inherent in the development, testing, manufacturing and marketing of therapeutic treatments. Product liability claims could delay or prevent completion of our development programs. If we succeed in marketing products, such claims could result in an FDA, EMA or other regulatory authority investigation of the safety and effectiveness of our products, our manufacturing processes and facilities or our marketing programs. FDA, EMA or other regulatory authority investigations could potentially lead to a recall of our products or more serious enforcement action, limitations on the approved indications for which they may be used or suspension or withdrawal of approvals. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may also result in decreased demand for our products, injury to our reputation, costs to defend the related litigation, a diversion of management’s time and our resources and substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients. We currently have product liability insurance that we believe is appropriate for our stage of development and may need to obtain higher levels prior to marketing any of our product candidates, if approved. Any insurance we have or may obtain may not provide sufficient coverage against potential liabilities. Furthermore, clinical trial and product liability insurance is becoming increasingly expensive. As a result, we may be unable to obtain sufficient insurance at a reasonable cost to protect us against losses caused by product liability claims that could have an adverse effect on our business and financial condition.
Information obtained from expanded access studies may not reliably predict the efficacy of our product candidates in our clinical trials and may lead to adverse events that could materially harm our business.
Expanded access studies that we may support are likely to be uncontrolled, carried out by individual investigators and not conducted in strict compliance with GCPs, all of which can lead to a treatment effect which may differ from that in our clinical trials. These studies provide only anecdotal evidence of efficacy for regulatory review. Patient data from these studies are not designed to be aggregated or reported as study results and may be highly variable.
Expanded access studies provide supportive safety information for regulatory review. Physicians conducting these studies may use our product candidates in a manner inconsistent with the protocol, including in children and in individuals with conditions beyond those being studied in our clinical trials. In addition, patients who receive access to unapproved drugs through expanded access studies have life-threatening illnesses and generally have exhausted all other available therapies. The risk for serious adverse events in this patient population is high and may be attributed to our product candidates. This could have a negative impact on the safety profile of our product candidates, which could cause significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and could materially harm our business.
Risks related to regulatory approval and other legal compliance matters
We may be unable to obtain U.S. or foreign regulatory approval and, as a result, may be unable to commercialize our product candidates.
Our product candidates are and will continue to be subject to extensive governmental regulations relating to, among other things, research, testing, development, manufacturing, safety, efficacy, approval, recordkeeping, reporting, labeling, storage, packaging, advertising and promotion, pricing, marketing and distribution of drugs. Rigorous preclinical testing and clinical trials and an extensive regulatory approval process must be successfully completed in the United States and in many foreign jurisdictions before a new drug can be approved for marketing. Satisfaction of these and other regulatory requirements is costly, time consuming, uncertain and subject to unanticipated delays. We cannot provide any assurance that any product candidate we may develop will progress through required clinical testing and obtain the regulatory approvals necessary for us to begin selling them.
We have not conducted, managed or completed large-scale or pivotal clinical trials nor managed the regulatory approval process with the FDA or any other regulatory authority. The time required to obtain approvals from the FDA and other regulatory authorities is unpredictable and requires successful completion of extensive clinical trials which typically takes many years, depending upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidate. The standards that the FDA and its foreign counterparts use when evaluating clinical trial data can, and often does, change during drug development, which makes it difficult to predict with any certainty how they will be applied. We may also encounter unexpected delays or increased costs due to new government regulations, including future legislation or administrative action, or changes in FDA policy during the period of drug development, clinical trials and FDA regulatory review.
Any delay or failure in seeking or obtaining required approvals would have a material and adverse effect on our ability to generate revenue from any particular product candidates we are developing and for which we are seeking approval. Furthermore, any regulatory approval to market a drug may be subject to significant limitations on the approved uses or indications for which we may
56
market, promote and advertise the drug or the labeling or other restrictions. In addition, the FDA has the authority to require a REMS plan as part of approving an NDA, or after approval, which may impose further requirements or restrictions on the distribution or use of an approved drug. These requirements or restrictions might include limiting prescribing to certain physicians or medical centers that have undergone specialized training, limiting treatment to patients who meet certain safe-use criteria and requiring treated patients to enroll in a registry. These limitations and restrictions may significantly limit the size of the market for the drug and affect reimbursement by third-party payors.
We are also subject to numerous foreign regulatory requirements governing, among other things, the conduct of clinical trials, manufacturing and marketing authorization, pricing and third-party reimbursement. The foreign regulatory approval process varies among countries, and generally includes all of the risks associated with FDA approval described above as well as risks attributable to the satisfaction of local regulations in foreign jurisdictions. Moreover, the time required to obtain approval may differ from that required to obtain FDA approval.
Further, under the new leadership at the HHS under the current administration, departures and retirements of high-profile regulators at the FDA, layoffs due to the reduction in force initiative, government shutdown, and a lapse in U.S. government appropriations may impact the normal operations at the FDA as well as other federal agencies, which can materially delay our timelines. FDA may lack adequate staff and resources to meet current review, approval, and inspection schedules, which could delay our anticipated timelines. Recent developments at the FDA include implementation of Elsa, a generative AI tool, across all centers at the agency, announcement of a plan to phase out animal testing for monoclonal antibodies and certain other drugs, and the announcement of a new Commissioner’s National Priority Voucher program to companies supporting certain U.S. national health priorities and interests. FDA has also increased its scrutiny of foreign drug manufacturing facilities and other contractors based in China, especially with respect to the transfer of biological materials, genetic data, and other health data of American patients to parties located in China. Further, FDA’s “real-time” release of newly issued Complete Response Letters associated with withdrawn or abandoned applications, if applicable to any of our product candidates, can materially impact our competitive advantage and intellectual property. It is unclear how our industry and our clinical programs will be impacted by policies and regulations implemented under the current administration and the new FDA commissioner or other executive orders. There is significant uncertainty in the industry and how federal agencies like the FDA will change in the coming years under the current administration. To the extent changes lead to disruptions in FDA’s operations, including changes resulting from executive orders; freeze on hiring, federal funding for research, and external communications; layoffs; government shutdown; return-to-office policies, and changes in funding for certain programs at the FDA, correspondence and regulatory review processes with the FDA may be materially delayed.
The FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not accept data from trials conducted in locations outside of their jurisdiction.
We have conducted and still conduct clinical trials in the United States. We may choose to conduct additional clinical trials internationally, including our current Phase 1b trials in Asia, Australia and Europe. The acceptance of study data by the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authority from clinical trials conducted outside of their respective jurisdictions may be subject to certain conditions. In cases where data from United States clinical trials are intended to serve as the basis for marketing approval in the foreign countries outside the United States, the standards for clinical trials and approval may be different. There can be no assurance that any United States or foreign regulatory authority would accept data from trials conducted outside of its applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA, EMA or any applicable foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay aspects of our business plan, and which may result in our product candidates not receiving approval or clearance for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.
Brexit and uncertainty in the regulatory framework as well as future legislation in the United Kingdom (UK), EU and other jurisdictions can lead to disruption in the execution of international multi-center clinical trials, the monitoring of adverse events through pharmacovigilance programs, the evaluation of the benefit-risk profiles of new medicinal products, and determination of marketing authorization across different jurisdictions. Uncertainty in the regulatory framework could also result in disruption to the supply and distribution as well as the import/export both of active pharmaceutical ingredients and finished product. Such a disruption could create supply difficulties for ongoing clinical trials. The cumulative effects of the disruption to the regulatory framework, uncertainty in future regulation, and changes to existing regulations may increase our development lead time to marketing authorization and commercialization of products in the EU and/or the UK and increase our costs. We cannot predict the impact of such changes and future regulation on our business or the results of our operations.
Obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction does not mean that we will be successful in obtaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in other jurisdictions.
Obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction does not guarantee that we will be able to obtain or maintain regulatory approval in any other jurisdiction. For example, even if the FDA or EMA grants marketing approval of a product candidate, comparable regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions must also approve the manufacturing, marketing and promotion and reimbursement of the product candidate in those countries. However, a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one jurisdiction may have a negative effect on the regulatory approval process in others. Approval procedures
57
vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from those in the United States, including additional preclinical studies or clinical trials as clinical trials conducted in one jurisdiction may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions. In many jurisdictions outside the United States, a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that jurisdiction. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for our products is also subject to approval.
Obtaining foreign regulatory approvals and establishing and maintaining compliance with foreign regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of our products in certain countries. If we or any future collaborator fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets or fail to receive applicable marketing approvals, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our potential product candidates will be harmed.
Even if our product candidates receive regulatory approval, they will be subject to significant post-marketing regulatory requirements and oversight.
Any regulatory approvals that we may receive for our product candidates will require the submission of reports to regulatory authorities and on-going surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate, may contain significant limitations related to use restrictions for specified age groups, warnings, precautions or contraindications, and may include burdensome post-approval study or risk management requirements and regulatory inspection. For example, the FDA may require a REMS in order to approve our product candidates, which could entail requirements for a medication guide, physician training and communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. If the FDA finds that the clinical data used to support approval do not sufficiently represent the diversity of the real-world patient population, the FDA may require additional data on underrepresented populations post-approval, including as a post-marketing requirement, or the FDA may enter into a written agreement with the applicant to collect additional data as a post-marketing commitment. In addition, if the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities approve our product candidates, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion, import, export and recordkeeping for our product candidates will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as on-going compliance with cGMPs and GCPs for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. In addition, manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic, unannounced inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP regulations and standards. If we or a regulatory agency discover previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facilities where the product is manufactured, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product, the manufacturing facility or us, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing. In addition, failure to comply with FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory requirements may subject our company to administrative or judicially imposed sanctions, including:
Moreover, the FDA strictly regulates the promotional claims that may be made about drug products. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses that are not approved by the FDA as reflected in the product’s approved labeling. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties.
The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize our product candidates, if approved, and generate revenue.
58
The FDA and other regulatory agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses.
If any of our product candidates are approved and we are found to have improperly promoted off-label uses of those products, we may become subject to significant liability. The FDA and other regulatory agencies strictly regulate the promotional claims that may be made about prescription products, such as our product candidates, if approved. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses that are not approved by the FDA or such other regulatory agencies as reflected in the product’s approved labeling. If we are found to have promoted such off-label uses, we may become subject to significant liability. The U.S. federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion of off-label use and has enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion. The FDA has also requested that companies enter into consent decrees or 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.
If we are required by the FDA to obtain approval of a companion diagnostic test in connection with approval of any of our product candidates or a group of therapeutic products, and we do not obtain or we face delays in obtaining FDA approval of a diagnostic test, we will not be able to commercialize the product candidate and our ability to generate revenue will be materially impaired.
In connection with the development of our potential product candidates, we may develop or work with collaborators to develop or obtain access to companion diagnostic tests to identify patient subsets within a disease category who may derive selective and meaningful benefit from our programs. Such companion diagnostics would be used during our clinical trials as well as in connection with the commercialization of our product candidates. To be successful in developing and commercializing product candidates in combination with these companion diagnostics, we or our collaborators will need to address a number of scientific, technical, regulatory and logistical challenges. According to FDA guidance, if the FDA determines that a companion diagnostic device is essential to the safe and effective use of a novel therapeutic product or indication, the FDA generally will not approve the therapeutic product or new therapeutic product indication if the companion diagnostic is not also approved or cleared at the same time the product candidate is approved. To date, the FDA has required marketing approval of all companion diagnostic tests for cancer therapies. Various foreign regulatory authorities also regulate in vitro companion diagnostics as medical devices and, under those regulatory frameworks, will likely require the conduct of clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of our current diagnostics and any future diagnostics we may develop, which we expect will require separate regulatory clearance or approval prior to commercialization.
The approval of a companion diagnostic as part of the therapeutic product’s labeling limits the use of the therapeutic product to only those patients who express certain biomarkers or the specific genetic alteration that the companion diagnostic was developed to detect. If the FDA, EMA or a comparable regulatory authority requires approval of a companion diagnostic for any of our product candidates, whether before or concurrently with approval of the product candidate, we, and/or future collaborators, may encounter difficulties in developing and obtaining approval for these companion diagnostics. Any delay or failure by us or third-party collaborators to develop or obtain regulatory approval of a companion diagnostic could delay or prevent approval or continued marketing of our related product candidates. Further, in April 2020, the FDA issued new guidance on developing and labeling companion diagnostics for a specific group of oncology therapeutic products, including recommendations to support a broader labeling claim rather than individual therapeutic products. In May 2024, the FDA published a final rule that phases out its enforcement discretion for LDTs, unless exempt, and amends the FDA’s regulations to make explicit that in vitro diagnostics are medical devices under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, including when the manufacturer of the diagnostic product is a laboratory. On March 31, 2025, U.S. District Court in Texas ruled that FDA exceeded its authority and vacated and set aside this LDT final rule in its entirety. The full impact of this litigation as well as any future lawsuits brought against the FDA, and future legislative and administration actions on our companion diagnostic development and strategy is unclear. To the extent other approved diagnostics are able to broaden their labeling claims to include our approved drug products, we may be forced to abandon our companion diagnostic development plans or we may not be able to compete effectively upon approval, which could adversely impact our ability to generate revenue from the sale of our approved products and our business operations. Additionally, we may rely on third parties for the design, development and manufacture of companion diagnostic tests for our product candidates that may require such tests. If we enter into such collaborative agreements, we will be dependent on the sustained cooperation and effort of our future collaborators in developing and obtaining approval for these companion diagnostics. It may be necessary to resolve issues such as selectivity/specificity, analytical validation, reproducibility, or clinical validation of companion diagnostics during the development and regulatory approval processes. Moreover, even if data from preclinical studies and early clinical trials appear to support development of a companion diagnostic for a product candidate, data generated in later clinical trials may fail to support the analytical and clinical validation of the companion diagnostic. We and our future collaborators may encounter difficulties in developing, obtaining regulatory approval for, manufacturing and commercializing companion diagnostics similar to those we face with respect to our product candidates themselves, including issues with achieving regulatory clearance or approval, production of sufficient quantities at commercial scale and with appropriate quality standards, and in gaining market acceptance. If we are unable to successfully develop companion diagnostics for our product candidates, or experience delays in doing so, the development of our product candidates may be adversely affected, our product candidates may not obtain marketing approval, and we may not realize the full commercial potential of any of our product candidates that obtain marketing approval. As a result, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially harmed. In
59
addition, a diagnostic company with whom we contract may decide to discontinue selling or manufacturing the companion diagnostic test that we anticipate using in connection with development and commercialization of product candidates or our relationship with such diagnostic company may otherwise terminate. We may not be able to enter into arrangements with another diagnostic company to obtain supplies of an alternative diagnostic test for use in connection with the development and commercialization of our product candidates or do so on commercially reasonable terms, which could adversely affect and/or delay the development or commercialization of our product candidates.
We may seek Fast Track designation from the FDA for one or more of our product candidates. Even if one or more of our product candidates receive Fast Track designation, we may be unable to obtain or maintain the benefits associated with the Fast Track designation.
Fast Track designation is designed to facilitate the development and expedite the review of therapies for serious conditions and fill an unmet medical need. Programs with Fast Track designation may benefit from early and frequent communications with the FDA, potential priority review and the ability to submit a rolling application for regulatory review. Fast Track designation applies to both the product candidate and the specific indication for which it is being studied. If any of our product candidates receive Fast Track designation but do not continue to meet the criteria for Fast Track designation, or if our clinical trials are delayed, suspended or terminated, or put on clinical hold due to unexpected adverse events or issues with clinical supply, we will not receive the benefits associated with the Fast Track program. Furthermore, Fast Track designation does not change the standards for approval. Fast Track designation alone does not guarantee qualification for the FDA’s priority review procedures.
We may not be able to obtain orphan drug designation or obtain or maintain orphan drug exclusivity for our product candidates and, even if we do, that exclusivity may not prevent the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, from approving competing products.
Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States and the EU, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. Under the ODA, 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 generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals annually in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States. Our target indications may include diseases with large patient populations or may include orphan indications. However, there can be no assurances that we will be able to obtain orphan designations for our product candidates.
In the United States, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user-fee waivers. In addition, if a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan drug exclusivity in the United States provides that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a full NDA, to market the same drug for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances. The applicable exclusivity period is 10 years 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 market exclusivity is no longer justified.
Even if we obtain orphan drug designation for a product candidate, we may not be able to obtain or maintain orphan drug exclusivity for that product candidate. We may not be the first to obtain marketing approval of any product candidate for which we have obtained orphan drug designation for the orphan-designated indication due to the uncertainties associated with developing pharmaceutical products. In addition, exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be limited if we seek approval for an indication broader than the orphan-designated indication or may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if we are unable to ensure that we will be able to manufacture sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. Further, even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs with different active moieties may be approved for the same condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve the same drug with the same active moiety for the same condition if the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care or the manufacturer of the product with orphan exclusivity is unable to maintain sufficient product quantity. In response to the court decision in Catalyst Pharms., Inc. v. Becerra, 14 F.4th 1299 (11th Cir. 2021), in January 2023, the FDA published a notice in the Federal Register to clarify that while the agency complies with the court’s order in Catalyst, the FDA intends to continue to apply its longstanding interpretation of the regulations to matters outside of the scope of the Catalyst order – that is, the agency will continue tying the scope of orphan-drug exclusivity to the uses or indications for which a drug is approved, which permits other sponsors to obtain approval of a drug for new uses or indications within the same orphan designated disease or condition that have not yet been approved. It is unclear how future litigation, including the overturning of the Chevron doctrine, legislation, agency decisions, and administrative actions, including changes under the current administration, will impact the scope of the orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the product candidate any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process or entitles the product candidate to priority review.
60
Where appropriate, we plan to secure approval from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities through the use of accelerated registration pathways. If we are unable to obtain such approval, or if we fail to meet the requirements or the timeline agreed upon with the FDA for a confirmatory trial, our regulatory approval may be delayed and we may be required to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials beyond those that we contemplate, which could increase the expense of obtaining, and delay the receipt of, necessary marketing approvals. Even if we receive accelerated approval from the FDA, if our confirmatory trials do not verify clinical benefit, or if we do not comply with rigorous post-marketing requirements, the FDA may seek to withdraw accelerated approval.
Where possible, we plan to pursue accelerated development strategies in areas of high unmet need. We may seek an accelerated approval pathway for one or more of our product candidates. Under the accelerated approval provisions in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and the FDA’s implementing regulations, the FDA may grant accelerated approval to a product candidate designed to treat a serious or life-threatening condition that provides meaningful therapeutic benefit over available therapies upon a determination that the product candidate has an effect on a surrogate endpoint or intermediate clinical endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. The Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act made several changes to the FDA’s authorities and its regulatory framework, including, among other changes, reforms to the accelerated approval pathway, such as requiring the FDA to specify conditions for post-approval study requirements and setting forth procedures for the FDA to withdraw a product on an expedited basis for non-compliance with post-approval requirements. If the FDA finds that the confirmatory trial is not sufficiently underway or that the sponsor has not met all the requirements or enrollment timeline for the confirmatory trial agreed upon with the FDA before submitting an application for accelerated approval, the FDA may issue a complete response letter and refuse to grant accelerated approval. If we are not able to meet the FDA’s requirements for accelerated approval, then our regulatory approval may be delayed.
The FDA considers a clinical benefit to be a positive therapeutic effect that is clinically meaningful in the context of a given disease, such as irreversible morbidity or mortality. For the purposes of accelerated approval, a surrogate endpoint is a marker, such as a laboratory measurement, radiographic image, physical sign, or other measure that is thought to predict clinical benefit but is not itself a measure of clinical benefit. An intermediate clinical endpoint is a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. The accelerated approval pathway may be used in cases in which the advantage of a new drug over available therapy may not be a direct therapeutic advantage but is a clinically important improvement from a patient and public health perspective. If granted, accelerated approval is usually contingent on the sponsor’s agreement to conduct, in a diligent manner, additional post-approval confirmatory studies to verify and describe the drug’s clinical benefit. If such post-approval studies fail to confirm the drug’s clinical benefit, the FDA may withdraw its approval of the drug.
Prior to seeking such accelerated approval, we will seek feedback from the FDA and will otherwise evaluate our ability to seek and receive such accelerated approval, including alignment with the FDA on requirements for a confirmatory trial. There can be no assurance that after our evaluation of the feedback and other factors we will decide to pursue or submit an NDA for accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval. Similarly, there can be no assurance that after subsequent FDA feedback we will continue to pursue or apply for accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval, even if we initially decide to do so. Furthermore, if we decide to submit an application for accelerated approval or under another expedited regulatory designation (e.g., breakthrough therapy designation), there can be no assurance that such submission or application will be accepted or that any expedited development, review or approval will be granted on a timely basis, or at all. The FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities could also require us to conduct further studies prior to considering our application or granting approval of any type. A failure to obtain accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval for our product candidate would result in a longer time period to commercialization of such product candidate, could increase the cost of development of such product candidate and could harm our competitive position in the marketplace.
We may face difficulties from changes to current regulations and future legislation.
Existing regulatory policies may change, and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained, and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.
For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively, the ACA), was passed, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both the government and private insurers and continues to significantly impact the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Since its enactment, there have been legislative and judicial efforts to repeal, replace, or change some or all of the ACA. In June 2021, the United States Supreme Court held that Texas and other challengers had no legal standing to challenge the ACA, dismissing the case without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. It is unclear how future litigation and healthcare measures promulgated by the current administration will impact the implementation of the ACA, our business, financial condition and results of operations.
61
Complying with any new legislation or reversing changes implemented under the ACA could be time-intensive and expensive, resulting in a material adverse effect on our business.
In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. These changes included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, effective April 1, 2013, which will stay in effect through 2032, unless Congress takes additional action. In January 2013, President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which could have a material adverse effect on customers for our drugs, if approved, and accordingly, our financial operations.
Moreover, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over the manner in which drug manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. For example, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 eliminated the statutory cap on Medicaid Drug Rebate Program rebates that manufacturers pay to state Medicaid programs. Elimination of this cap may require pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay more in rebates than it receives on the sale of products, which could have a material impact on our business. In August 2022, Congress passed the IRA, which includes prescription drug provisions that have significant implications for the pharmaceutical industry and Medicare beneficiaries, including allowing the federal government to negotiate a maximum fair price for certain high-priced single-source Medicare drugs, imposing penalties and excise tax for manufacturers that fail to comply with the drug price negotiation requirements, requiring inflation rebates for all Medicare Part B and Part D drugs, with limited exceptions, if their drug prices increase faster than inflation, and redesigning Medicare Part D to reduce out-of-pocket prescription drug costs for beneficiaries, among other changes. Various industry stakeholders, including pharmaceutical companies and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America have initiated lawsuits against the federal government asserting that the price negotiation provisions of the IRA are unconstitutional. Further, the current administration has issued executive orders focused on decreasing prescription drug prices, including directing the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a mechanism through which American patients can buy drugs directly from manufacturers who sell at a most-favored-nation price (MFN) and directing the U.S. Trade Representative and Secretary of Commerce to take action to ensure foreign countries are not engaged in practices that purposefully and unfairly undercut market prices and drive price hikes in the United States. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), which was signed into law in July 2025, includes provisions that will impact the U.S. healthcare system in various ways, including by cuts to Medicaid and introducing new participant work and eligibility requirements for Medicaid coverage, which are expected to significantly change the administration and applicability of Medicaid coverage. In November 2025, CMS announced a voluntary initiative called the GENEROUS Model (GENErating cost Reductions fOr U.S. Medicaid Model) to introduce the option of most-favored-nation pricing to the Medicaid program, whereby a drug manufacturer may voluntarily offer supplemental rebates to participating state Medicaid programs for a manufacturer’s covered outpatient drugs. Such MFN pricing agreements and other measures that use most-favored-nation pricing targets for prescription drugs, including the use of international pricing reference to set drug prices in the United States, or increase generic and biosimilar drug entry sooner than expected, could have a material adverse effect on our industry, ability to set adequate pricing for new drugs to recover research and development costs, and ability to attract potential investors and potential buyers in the future. We cannot predict the full impact of the executive orders focused on reducing prescription drug prices or increasing domestic drug manufacturing capacity, or other measures that may be implemented by the current administration related to drug pricing, drug supply chain and manufacturing in the United States. The impact of ongoing and future judicial challenges as well as other legislative, executive, and administrative actions and agency rules implemented by the government on us and the pharmaceutical industry as a whole is unclear. Further, uncertainties created by the IRA, including its long-term impact on drug pricing, may negatively impact investments, company valuation, royalty-based earnings, mergers, and acquisitions in the industry. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize our product candidates if approved. Complying with any new legislation and regulatory changes could be time-intensive and expensive, resulting in a material adverse effect on our business, and expose us to greater liability.
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. A number of states are considering or have recently enacted state drug price transparency and reporting laws that could substantially increase our compliance burdens and expose us to greater liability under such state laws once we begin commercialization after obtaining regulatory approval for any of our products. In addition, the FDA has authorized the state of Florida to develop Section 804 Importation Programs to import certain prescription drugs from Canada for a limited time to help reduce drug costs, provided that Florida’s Agency for Health Care Administration meets the requirements set forth by the FDA. Other states may follow Florida. We are unable to predict the future course of federal or state healthcare legislation in the United States directed at broadening the availability of healthcare and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. These and any further changes in the law or regulatory framework that reduce our revenue or increase our costs could also have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
62
Further, on May 30, 2018, the Trickett Wendler, Frank Mongiello, Jordan McLinn, and Matthew Bellina Right to Try Act of 2017 (Right to Try Act), was signed into law. The law, among other things, provides a federal framework for certain patients to access certain investigational new product candidates that have completed a Phase 1 clinical trial and that are undergoing investigation for FDA approval. Under certain circumstances, eligible patients can seek treatment without enrolling in clinical trials and without obtaining FDA permission under the FDA expanded access program. There is no obligation for a drug manufacturer to make its products available to eligible patients as a result of the Right to Try Act.
We expect that the ACA, the IRA, 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 receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement 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 product candidates.
Legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for biotechnology 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 of our product candidates, if any, may be. In addition, increased scrutiny by 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 testing and other requirements. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Chevron doctrine, which gives deference to regulatory agencies’ statutory interpretations in litigation against federal government agencies, such as the FDA, where the law is ambiguous. This landmark Supreme Court decision may invite more companies and other stakeholders to bring lawsuits against the FDA and other federal agencies to challenge longstanding decisions and policies, which could undermine the FDA’s authority, lead to uncertainties in the industry, and disrupt the FDA’s normal operations, any of which could delay the FDA’s review of our regulatory submissions. We cannot predict the full impact of this decision, future judicial challenges brought against the FDA, or the nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action.
Additionally, the collection, use and other processing of health data relating to individuals in the EU is governed by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which extends the geographical scope of EU data protection law to non-EU entities under certain conditions and imposes substantial obligations upon companies and new rights for individuals. Failure to comply with the GDPR and the applicable national data protection laws of EU Member States may result in fines up to €20,000,000 or up to 4% of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher, and other administrative penalties and liabilities. The GDPR has increased our responsibility and liability in relation to personal data that we may process, and we may be required to put in place additional mechanisms in an effort to comply with the GDPR or other laws and regulations relating to privacy, data protection and cybersecurity. This may be onerous and if our efforts to comply with GDPR or other applicable laws and regulations are not successful, it could adversely affect our business. Further, the European Court of Justice in 2020 invalidated the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield and imposed additional requirements for companies making use of standard contractual clauses issued by the European Commission (SCCs), including requirements to make use of updated SCCs. The UK also has issued updated standard contractual clauses that are required to be implemented. Additionally, the U.S. Department of Justice issued in January 2025 a final rule, effective April 8, 2025, which places limitations, and in some cases prohibitions, on certain transfers of sensitive personal data to business partners located in China or with other specified links to China and other designated countries. These and other developments with respect to cross-border data transfer may impose additional obligations with respect to cross-border data transfer and may require us to modify our policies and practices and engage in additional contractual negotiations, each of which could increase our costs and obligations and impose limitations upon our ability to efficiently transfer personal data across borders.
Further, the UK has implemented legislation that substantially implements and complements the GDPR, with penalties for noncompliance of up to the greater of £17.5 million or four percent of worldwide revenues. The UK enacted the UK Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 (DUAA) on June 19, 2025, which made targeted amendments to the UK’s data protection regime that cause it to deviate further from the GDPR. This has introduced additional compliance complexity to the UK’s data protection regime. We may be required to incur significant costs and expenses in an effort to comply with distinct privacy and data protection requirements in the EU and UK. More generally, we may incur liabilities, expenses, costs, and other operational losses under the GDPR and the privacy and data protection laws of applicable EU Member States and the UK in connection with any measures we take to comply with them.
Finally, state and foreign laws may apply generally to the privacy and security of information we maintain, and may differ from each other in significant ways, thus complicating compliance efforts. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA), which took effect on January 1, 2020, gives California residents expanded rights to access and require deletion of their personal information, opt out of certain personal information sharing, and receive detailed information about how their personal information is used. In addition, the CCPA (a) allows enforcement by the California Attorney General or the California Privacy Protection Agency, with fines set at $2,500 per violation (i.e., per person) or $7,500 per intentional violation and (b) authorizes private lawsuits to recover statutory damages for certain data breaches. While it exempts some data regulated by HIPAA and certain clinical trials data, the CCPA may increase our compliance costs and potential liability with respect to other personal information we collect about California residents. Additionally, the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) became operative in most respects on January 1, 2023. The CPRA significantly modified the CCPA, which may require us to modify our practices and policies and may further increase our compliance costs and potential liability. Numerous other states’ legislatures are considering or have enacted similar laws
63
that will require ongoing compliance efforts and investment, and which may increase our potential liability and adversely affect our business. For example, Colorado, Connecticut, Utah and Virginia have enacted legislation similar to the CCPA and CPRA that took effect in 2023; Florida, Montana, Oregon and Texas have enacted similar legislation that became effective in 2024; Tennessee, Iowa, Delaware, Maryland, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire and New Jersey have enacted similar legislation that became effective in 2025; and Indiana, Rhode Island and Kentucky have enacted similar legislation that has become effective in 2026. Further, other states have enacted laws that cover certain aspects of the collection, use, disclosure, and/or other processing of health information, such as Washington’s My Health, My Data Act, which, among other things, provides for a private right of action.
The interpretation and application of laws and regulations relating to privacy, data protection, data security, and other matters in the United States, the EEA, and elsewhere are often uncertain, contradictory, and in flux. Any failure or perceived failure to comply with federal, state, or foreign laws or regulations, or contractual or other legal obligations, may result in claims, warnings, communications, requests, or investigations from individuals, supervisory authorities, or other legal or regulatory authorities, and regulatory investigations or other proceedings. It is possible that these laws, regulations, and other actual or asserted obligations may be interpreted and applied in a manner that is inconsistent with our practices. If so, this could result in claims, demands, and litigation or other proceedings initiated by regulatory authorities or others, and fines, penalties, damages, or other liabilities, as well as government-imposed orders requiring that we change our practices, which could adversely affect our business. Our efforts to comply with emerging and changing legal and regulatory requirements relating to privacy, data protection, data security and other matters may cause us to incur costs or require us to change our business practices, which could harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations and prospects.
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, 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, in recent years, including in 2018 and 2019, the U.S. government shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA and the SEC, had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities. Separately, in response to the COVID-19 public health emergency, the FDA temporarily postponed inspections of foreign manufacturing facilities and routine surveillance inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities. If a prolonged government shutdown or other disruption occurs, or if global health or other concerns continue to prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews or other regulatory activities in a timely manner, 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.
Our relationships with healthcare professionals, clinical investigators, CROs and third party payors in connection with our current and future business activities may be subject to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws, transparency laws, government price reporting, and health information privacy and security laws, which could expose us to significant losses, including, among other things, criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual damages, exclusion from governmental healthcare programs, reputational harm, administrative burdens and diminished profits and future earnings.
Healthcare providers and third-party payors 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 healthcare professionals, clinical investigators, CROs, 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 our products for which we obtain marketing approval. Restrictions under applicable federal and state healthcare laws and regulations may include the following:
64
Efforts to ensure that our current and future business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare and data privacy laws and regulations will involve on-going 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 us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Defending against any such actions can be costly, time-consuming and may require significant financial and personnel resources. Therefore, even if we are successful in defending against any such actions that may be brought against us, our business may be impaired. Further, 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 criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs.
Our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial collaborators, principal investigators, CROs, suppliers and vendors may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements.
We are exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial collaborators, principal investigators, CROs, suppliers and vendors may engage in misconduct or other improper activities. Misconduct by these parties could include failures to comply with FDA regulations, provide accurate information to the FDA, comply with federal and state health care fraud and abuse laws and regulations, accurately report financial information or data or disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, research, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the health care industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, 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. Misconduct by these parties 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. We have adopted a code of conduct, but it is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by these parties, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity 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 comply with these 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, including the imposition of significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government funded healthcare programs, such as
65
Medicare and Medicaid, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations.
If we fail to comply with other U.S. healthcare laws and compliance requirements, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could have a material adverse effect on our business.
In the United States, our current and future activities with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors, patient organizations and customers are subject to regulation by various federal, state and local authorities in addition to the FDA, which may include but are not limited to, CMS, other divisions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (e.g., the Office of Inspector General), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and individual U.S. Attorney offices within the DOJ, and state and local governments. For example, our business practices, including our clinical research, sales, marketing and scientific/educational grant programs may be required to comply with the anti-fraud and abuse provisions of the Social Security Act, the false claims laws, the patient data privacy and security provisions of HIPAA transparency requirements, and similar state laws, each as amended, as applicable.
The federal AKS prohibits, among other things, any person or entity, from knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving any remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase, lease or order of any good, item, facility or service reimbursable, in whole or part, under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare programs. The term “remuneration” has been interpreted broadly to include anything of value. The federal AKS has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, and formulary managers on the other. There are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution. The exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly and practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchasing or recommending may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. Failure to meet all of the requirements of a particular applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the conduct per se illegal under the AKS. Instead, the legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all of its facts and circumstances. Our practices may not in all cases meet all of the criteria for protection under a statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor.
Additionally, the intent standard under the federal AKS was amended by the ACA, to a stricter standard such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the federal AKS or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. Rather, if “one purpose” of the remuneration is to induce referrals, the federal AKS is implicated. In addition, the ACA codified case law that a claim that includes items or services resulting from a violation of the federal AKS constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal civil FCA (discussed below).
The civil monetary penalties statute imposes penalties against any person or entity who, among other things, is determined to have presented or caused to be presented a claim to a federal healthcare program that the person knows or should know is for a medical or other item or service that was not provided as claimed or is false or fraudulent.
The federal civil FCA prohibits, among other things, any person or entity from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false claim for payment to, or approval by, the federal government, knowingly making, using, or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim to the federal government, or knowingly making a false statement to improperly avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government. As a result of a modification made by the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, a claim includes “any request or demand” for money or property presented to the U.S. government. Pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies are being investigated or, in the past, have been prosecuted under these laws for allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. Other companies have been prosecuted for causing false claims to be submitted because of the companies’ marketing of the product for unapproved, and thus non-reimbursable, uses.
HIPAA imposes criminal and civil liability for, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud or to obtain, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises, any money or property owned by, or under the control or custody of, any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up by trick, scheme or device, a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. Like the AKS, the ACA amended the intent standard for certain healthcare fraud statutes under HIPAA such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation.
Analogous U.S. state laws and regulations, including state anti-kickback and false claims laws, may apply to claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including private insurers our business practices.
HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, and their implementing regulations, imposes requirements on certain types of individuals and entities relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s privacy and security standards directly applicable to business associates that are independent contractors or agents of covered entities that receive or obtain protected health information in connection with providing a service on behalf of a covered entity. HITECH also created four new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties
66
directly applicable to business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions.
Additionally, the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act within the ACA, and its implementing regulations, require that certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biological and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) report annually to CMS information related to certain payments or other transfers of value made or distributed to covered recipients, including physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain non-physician healthcare providers (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners) and teaching hospitals, or to entities or individuals at the request of, or designated on behalf of, such covered recipients, and to report annually certain ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members.
In order to distribute products commercially, we must comply with state laws that require the registration of manufacturers and wholesale distributors of drug and biological products in a state, including, in certain states, manufacturers and distributors who ship products into the state even if such manufacturers or distributors have no place of business within the state. Some states also impose requirements on manufacturers and distributors to establish the pedigree of product in the chain of distribution, including some states that require manufacturers and others to adopt new technology capable of tracking and tracing product as it moves through the distribution chain.
State and local laws also require pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the U.S. federal government, establish marketing compliance programs, restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers professionals and entities and other potential referral sources, file periodic reports with the state relating to pricing and marketing, make periodic public disclosures on sales, marketing, pricing, clinical trials and other activities, and/or register field representatives, as well as to prohibit pharmacies and other healthcare entities from providing certain physician prescribing data to pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for use in sales and marketing, and to prohibit certain other sales and marketing practices. All of our activities are potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws. Ensuring that our internal operations and future business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs.
Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations, agency guidance 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 the federal and state healthcare laws described above or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including without limitation, civil, criminal and/or administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, individual imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, injunctions, private “qui tam” actions brought by individual whistleblowers in the name of the government, exclusion, debarment or refusal to allow us to enter into government contracts, contractual damages, reputational harm, administrative burdens, diminished profits and future earnings, 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, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.
If we fail to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could have a material adverse effect on our business.
We are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures and the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. Our operations involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological materials. Our operations also produce hazardous waste products. We generally contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and wastes. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from our use of hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties.
Although we maintain workers’ compensation insurance to cover us for costs and expenses, we may incur due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of hazardous materials, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. We do not maintain insurance for environmental liability or toxic tort claims that may be asserted against us in connection with our storage or disposal of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological materials.
In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. These current or future laws and regulations may impair our research, development or commercialization efforts. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.
67
Our business activities may be subject to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and similar anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws of other countries in which we operate, as well as U.S. and certain foreign export controls, trade sanctions, and import laws and regulations. Compliance with these legal requirements could limit our ability to compete in foreign markets and subject us to liability if we violate them.
Our business activities may be subject to the FCPA and similar anti-bribery or anti-corruption laws, regulations or rules of other countries in which we operate. The FCPA generally prohibits companies and their employees and third-party intermediaries from offering, promising, giving or authorizing others to give anything of value, either directly or indirectly, to a non-U.S. government official in order to influence official action or otherwise obtain or retain business. The FCPA also requires public companies to make and keep books and records that accurately and fairly reflect the transactions of the corporation and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls. Our business is heavily regulated and therefore involves significant interaction with public officials, including officials of non-U.S. governments. Additionally, in many other countries, hospitals are owned and operated by the government, and doctors and other hospital employees would be considered foreign officials under the FCPA. Recently, the SEC and DOJ have increased their FCPA enforcement activities with respect to biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies. There is no certainty that all of our employees, agents or contractors, or those of our affiliates, will comply with all applicable laws and regulations, particularly given the high level of complexity of these laws. Violations of these laws and regulations could result in fines, criminal sanctions against us, our officers or our employees, disgorgement, and other sanctions and remedial measures, and prohibitions on the conduct of our business. Any such violations could include prohibitions on our ability to offer our products in one or more countries and could materially damage our reputation, our brand, our international activities, our ability to attract and retain employees and our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition.
In addition, our products may be subject to U.S. and foreign export controls, trade sanctions and import laws and regulations. Governmental regulation of the import or export of our products, or our failure to obtain any required import or export authorization for our products, when applicable, could harm our international sales and adversely affect our revenue. Compliance with applicable regulatory requirements regarding the export of our products may create delays in the introduction of our products in international markets or, in some cases, prevent the export of our products to some countries altogether. Furthermore, U.S. export control laws and economic sanctions prohibit the shipment of certain products and services to countries, governments, and persons targeted by U.S. sanctions. If we fail to comply with export and import regulations and such economic sanctions, penalties could be imposed, including fines and/or denial of certain export privileges. Moreover, any new export or import restrictions, new legislation or shifting approaches in the enforcement or scope of existing regulations, or in the countries, persons, or products targeted by such regulations, could result in decreased use of our products by, or in our decreased ability to export our products to, existing or potential customers with international operations. Any decreased use of our products or limitation on our ability to export or sell our products would likely adversely affect our business.
Enhanced trade tariffs, import restrictions, export restrictions, Chinese regulations or other trade barriers may materially harm our business.
We are continuing to expand our international operations as part of our strategy. There is currently significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the United States and various other countries, most significantly China, with respect to trade policies, treaties, government regulations and tariffs. There is a possibility that the United States could continue to impose greater restrictions on international trade and significant increases in tariffs on goods imported into the United States. In September 2018, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) enacted a tariff on the import of other Chinese products, with a combined import value of approximately $200 billion. Since that time USTR has modified these tariff rates and imposed tariffs on additional goods. In addition, since February 4, 2025, the U.S. government has imposed additional tariffs on the import of almost all Chinese origin goods which are now 30% and an additional baseline reciprocal 10% tariff on certain products of most other U.S. trading partners, with exemptions for certain pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and consumer electronics. Additional tariffs may in the future be implemented by the U.S. government (including on imports of pharmaceutical products into the United States currently under investigation by the U.S. Department of Commerce, among other potential tariffs), the implementation, scope, and duration of which remain uncertain. Tariffs on imports of Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (APIs) and starting materials used in our product candidates as well as product candidates themselves, or retaliatory trade measures taken by China or other countries, which could potentially include restricted access to APIs or starting materials used in our product candidates, could result in us needing to make changes to our product candidates, or materially harm our business, financial condition and results of operations. Further, the continued threats of tariffs, trade restrictions, and trade barriers could have a generally disruptive impact on the global economy and, therefore, negatively impact our company.
Risks related to employee matters, managing our growth and other risks related to our business
Our success is highly dependent on our ability to attract and retain highly skilled executive officers and employees.
To succeed, we must recruit, retain, manage and motivate qualified clinical, scientific, technical and management personnel, and we face significant competition for experienced personnel. We are highly dependent on the principal members of our management and scientific and medical staff. If we do not succeed in attracting and retaining qualified personnel, particularly at the management level, it could adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan and harm our operating results. In particular, the loss of one or
68
more of our executive officers could be detrimental to us if we cannot recruit suitable replacements in a timely manner. We could in the future have difficulty attracting and retaining experienced personnel and may be required to expend significant financial resources in our employee recruitment and retention efforts.
Many of the other biotechnology companies that we compete against for qualified personnel have greater financial and other resources, different risk profiles and a longer history in the industry than we do. They also may provide higher compensation, more diverse opportunities and better prospects for career advancement. Some of these characteristics may be more appealing to high-quality candidates than what we have to offer. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high-quality personnel, the rate and success at which we can develop and commercialize our product candidates will be limited and the potential for successfully growing our business will be harmed.
Additionally, we rely on our scientific founders and other scientific and clinical advisors and consultants to assist us in formulating our research, development and clinical strategies. These advisors and consultants are not our employees and may have commitments to, or consulting or advisory contracts with, other entities that may limit their availability to us. In addition, these advisors and consultants typically will not enter into non-compete agreements with us. If a conflict of interest arises between their work for us and their work for another entity, we may lose their services. Furthermore, our advisors may have arrangements with other companies to assist those companies in developing products or technologies that may compete with ours. In particular, if we are unable to maintain consulting relationships with our scientific founders or if they provide services to our competitors, our development and commercialization efforts will be impaired and our business will be significantly harmed.
Our strategic pipeline prioritization and the associated workforce reduction announced in August 2025, may not result in anticipated cost savings and could disrupt our business.
On August 12, 2025, we announced a strategic pipeline prioritization to focus operational and financial resources on the continued advancement of our two lead clinical programs, rinzimetostat and enozertinib. This initiative has resulted in a substantial decrease in preclinical research, primarily from the elimination of our discovery research group. This resulted in an approximately 20% workforce reduction. We may not realize, in full or in part, the anticipated benefits, savings and improvements in our operating structure from our new strategic efforts due to unforeseen difficulties, delays or unexpected costs. If we are unable to realize the expected operational efficiencies and cost savings from the strategic pipeline prioritization, our results of operation and financial condition would be adversely affected. We also cannot guarantee that we will not have to undertake additional workforce reductions or related activities in the future. Such cost reduction efforts may in the future adversely affect our ability to attract and retain employees, and may adversely affect our culture and impact our ability to effectively pursue our business strategy. Furthermore, our strategic pipeline prioritization may be disruptive to our operations. For example, our workforce reduction could yield unanticipated consequences, such as attrition beyond planned staff reductions, increased difficulties in our day-to-day operations and reduced employee morale. If employees who were not affected by the reduction in force seek alternate employment, this could result in us seeking contract support which may result in unplanned additional expense or harm our productivity. Our workforce reduction could also harm our ability to attract and retain qualified management, scientific, and clinical personnel who are critical to our business. Any failure to attract or retain qualified personnel could prevent us from successfully developing our product candidates in the future.
If we are unable to establish sales or marketing capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to sell or market our product candidates, we may not be able to successfully sell or market our product candidates that obtain regulatory approval.
We currently do not have and have never had a marketing or sales team. In order to commercialize any product candidates, if approved, we must build marketing, sales, distribution, managerial and other non-technical capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services for each of the territories in which we may have approval to sell or market our product candidates. We may not be successful in accomplishing these required tasks.
Establishing an internal sales or marketing team with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize our product candidates will be expensive and time-consuming and will require significant attention of our executive officers to manage. Any failure or delay in the development of our internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities could adversely impact the commercialization of any of our product candidates that we obtain approval to market, if we do not have arrangements in place with third parties to provide such services on our behalf. Alternatively, if we choose to collaborate, either globally or on a territory-by-territory basis, with third parties that have direct sales forces and established distribution systems, either to augment our own sales force and distribution systems or in lieu of our own sales force and distribution systems, we will be required to negotiate and enter into arrangements with such third parties relating to the proposed collaboration and such arrangements may prove to be less profitable than commercializing the product on our own. If we are unable to enter into such arrangements when needed, on acceptable terms, or at all, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any of our product candidates that receive regulatory approval, or any such commercialization may experience delays or limitations. If we are unable to successfully commercialize our approved product candidates, either on our own or through collaborations with one or more third parties, our future product revenue will suffer, and we may incur significant additional losses.
69
In order to successfully implement our plans and strategies, we will need to grow the size of our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth.
As of December 31, 2025, we had 104 full-time employees, including 76 employees engaged in research and development. In order to successfully implement our development and commercialization plans and strategies, we expect to need additional managerial, operational, sales, marketing, financial and other personnel. Future growth would impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including:
Our future financial performance and our ability to successfully develop and, if approved, commercialize our product candidates will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth, and our management may also have to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from day-to-day activities in order to devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities.
We currently rely, and for the foreseeable future will continue to rely, in substantial part on certain independent organizations, advisors and consultants to provide certain services, including key aspects of clinical development and manufacturing. We cannot assure you that the services of independent organizations, advisors and consultants will continue to be available to us on a timely basis when needed, or that we can find qualified replacements. Moreover, there is the potential that our independent contractors could be deemed to be misclassified under applicable worker classification laws, which could subject us to penalties or other liabilities. In addition, if we are unable to effectively manage our outsourced activities or if the quality or accuracy of the services provided by third party service providers is compromised for any reason, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain marketing approval of our product candidates or otherwise advance our business. We cannot assure you that we will be able to manage our existing third-party service providers or find other competent outside contractors and consultants on economically reasonable terms, or at all.
If we are not able to effectively expand our organization by hiring new employees and/or engaging additional third-party service providers, we may not be able to successfully implement the tasks necessary to further develop and commercialize our product candidates and, accordingly, may not achieve our research, development and commercialization goals.
Our internal computer systems, or those of any of our CROs, manufacturers, other contractors or consultants or potential future collaborators, may fail or suffer security or data privacy breaches or incidents or other unauthorized or improper access to, use of, or destruction of our proprietary or confidential data, employee data, or personal data, which could result in additional costs, loss of revenue, significant liabilities, harm to our brand and material disruption of our operations.
Despite the implementation of security measures in an effort to protect systems that store our information, given their size and complexity and the increasing amounts of information maintained and otherwise processed on our information technology systems, and those of our third-party CROs, other contractors (including sites performing our clinical trials) and consultants, these systems are potentially vulnerable to breakdown or other damage, disruption, or interruption from service interruptions, system malfunction, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures, as well as security breaches and incidents from inadvertent or intentional actions by our employees, contractors, consultants, business partners, and/or other third parties, or from cyber-attacks by malicious third parties (including the deployment of harmful malware, ransomware, denial-of-service attacks, phishing and other means of social engineering, and other means to affect service reliability and threaten the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information), which may compromise our system infrastructure or that of our third-party CROs, other contractors (including sites performing our clinical trials) and consultants or lead to the loss, destruction, alteration, disclosure, or dissemination of, or damage or unauthorized access to, our data or data that is processed or maintained on our behalf, or other assets. For example, we have received phishing attacks, and companies have experienced an increase in phishing and social engineering attacks from third parties in recent years, and the increase in remote working further increases security threats. Additionally, for example, our third-party CROs or other contractors and consultants have suffered, and in the future may suffer, instances of unauthorized access to their systems. To date, we have not identified any such instance that we have assessed as material to our business or operations. International military conflicts and geopolitical tensions may increase cybersecurity threats that we and our CROs and other contractors and consultants face. Moreover, advancements in technology, such as AI and machine learning, are changing and may continue to change the way companies are subjected to attempts to gain unauthorized access and disrupt systems, thereby increasing the risks of security threats and attacks. Any disruption or security breach or incident resulting in any loss, destruction, unavailability, or unauthorized alteration, disclosure, dissemination, or processing of, or damage or unauthorized access to, our applications, any data processed or maintained on our behalf, or other assets, or any belief or reporting that any of these has occurred, could cause us to incur liability, financial harm and reputational damage and delays in the development and commercialization of our product candidates. We
70
cannot assure you that our data protection efforts and our investment in information technology, or the efforts or investments of CROs, consultants or other third parties, have prevented or will prevent significant breakdowns, disruptions, or breaches in systems or have prevented or will prevent security breaches or incidents leading to loss, destruction, unavailability, alteration or dissemination of, or damage or unauthorized access to, our data or other data processed or maintained on our behalf or other assets that could have a material adverse effect upon our reputation, business, operations or financial condition. Any such event causing interruptions in our operations could result in a material disruption of our programs and delays in development of our product candidates. In addition, the loss, corruption, or unavailability of clinical trial data for our product candidates could result in delays in our marketing approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. Furthermore, significant disruptions of information technology systems or security breaches or incidents suffered by us or any of our third-party CROs, other contractors, or consultants, could result in the loss, misappropriation, and/or unauthorized access, use, or disclosure, dissemination, or other processing of, or the prevention of access to, data (including trade secrets or other confidential information, intellectual property, proprietary business information, and personal information), which could result in financial, legal, business, and reputational harm to us. Any such event or any other security breach or incident leading to loss, corruption, or unavailability of, damage to, unauthorized access to, or use, alteration, disclosure, dissemination, or other processing of, personal information, including personal information regarding our clinical trial subjects or employees, could harm our reputation directly, compel us to comply with federal and/or state breach notification laws and foreign law equivalents, subject us to mandatory corrective action, and otherwise subject us to liability under laws and regulations that protect the privacy and security of personal information, which could result in significant legal and financial exposure and reputational damages that could potentially have an adverse effect on our business.
Notifications and follow-up actions related to a security breach or incident could impact our reputation and cause us to incur significant costs, including legal expenses and remediation costs. We expect to incur significant costs in our efforts to detect and prevent security incidents, and we may face increased costs and requirements to expend substantial resources in the event of an actual or perceived security breach or incident. We also rely on third parties to manufacture our product candidates, and similar events relating to their systems could also have a material adverse effect on our business. Any damage, disruption, or interruption of systems, or security breach or incident resulting in any disruption of our operations or loss, destruction, unavailability, or alteration of, or damage or unauthorized access to, our data or other information that is processed or maintained on our behalf, or inappropriate disclosure or dissemination of any such information, could expose us to litigation and governmental investigations, delays in development and commercialization of our product candidates, and significant fines or penalties for any noncompliance with certain state, federal and/or international privacy and security laws.
Our insurance policies may not be adequate to compensate us for the potential losses arising from any such disruption in or, failure or security breach or incident of our systems or third-party systems where information important to our business operations or commercial development is stored or otherwise processed. In addition, such insurance may not be available to us in the future on economically reasonable terms, or at all. Further, our insurance may not cover all claims made against us and could have high deductibles in any event, and defending a suit, regardless of its merit, could be costly and divert management attention.
Our operations are vulnerable to interruption by natural disasters, extended power loss, telecommunications failure, terrorist activity, pandemics and other events beyond our control, which could harm our business.
Our facilities are located in California. We have not undertaken a systematic analysis of the potential consequences to our business and financial results from natural disasters, such as wildfires, earthquakes or tsunamis, extended power loss, terrorist activity, pandemics or other disasters or other disruptions to our business and do not have a recovery plan for such events. In addition, we do not carry sufficient insurance to compensate us for actual losses from interruption of our business that may occur, and any losses or damages incurred by us could harm our business. The occurrence of any of these business disruptions could seriously harm our operations and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses.
Our Chief Business Officer was sued by the Securities and Exchange Commission for insider trading on a matter unrelated to ORIC.
On August 17, 2021, the SEC filed a civil enforcement action against our Chief Business Officer for insider trading in violation of the securities laws. The lawsuit involved transactions that occurred in 2016 while our Chief Business Officer was employed by a different company. On April 5, 2024, a jury found our Chief Business Officer liable for insider trading. Pursuant to the final judgment entered by the Court on October 24, 2024, our Chief Business Officer is subject to a monetary penalty and is permanently enjoined from violating Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder but is not in any way prohibited or enjoined from serving as an officer or director of a public company. Our Chief Business Officer has appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Our ability to utilize our net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes to offset future taxable income may be limited.
Our net operating loss (NOL) carryforwards may be unavailable to offset future taxable income because of restrictions under U.S. tax law. Our federal NOLs generated in tax years beginning prior to January 1, 2018 are only permitted to be carried forward for 20 taxable years under applicable U.S. federal tax law, and therefore could expire unused. Our federal NOLs generated in tax years
71
beginning after December 31, 2017 may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such NOLs generally is limited to 80% of our current year taxable income for tax years beginning after December 31, 2020. As of December 31, 2025, we had available federal NOL carryforwards of $424.3 million, of which $382.7 million do not expire. We also had available California NOL carryforwards of approximately $573.9 million as of December 31, 2025, which begin to expire in 2034 and are subject to limitation on use, including that such NOLs may not be available to offset California income prior to 2027. In addition, as of December 31, 2025, we had federal and California research and development credit carryforwards totaling $21.7 million and $9.4 million, respectively. The federal credits begin to expire in 2034, while the state credits do not expire.
In addition, under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Code), if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change” (generally defined as a cumulative change in the corporation’s ownership by “5-percent shareholders” that exceeds 50 percentage points over a rolling three-year period), the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOLs and certain other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change taxable income may be limited. Limitations on the use of state NOLs also may apply under state tax laws. We may have experienced such ownership changes in the past, and we may experience ownership changes in the future as a result of shifts in our stock ownership, some of which are outside our control. We are currently in the process of conducting a Section 382 study to determine annual limitations, if any, that could result from such changes in the ownership. Our ability to utilize our NOLs and certain other tax attributes could be limited by an “ownership change” as described above and consequently, we may not be able to utilize a material portion of our NOLs and certain other tax attributes before they expire, which could have a material adverse effect on our cash flows and results of operations.
Changes in tax laws could have a material adverse effect on our business, cash flow, results of operations or financial conditions.
We are subject to tax laws, regulations, and policies of several taxing jurisdictions. Changes in tax laws, as well as other factors, could cause us to experience fluctuations in our tax obligations and effective tax rates and otherwise adversely affect our tax positions and/or our tax liabilities. Recently, legislation commonly known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) was signed into law in July 2025, which enacts significant changes to U.S tax and related laws, including but not limited to current deduction of domestic research expenses, increasing the limit of the deduction of interest expense to thirty percent of EBITDA and one hundred percent bonus depreciation on eligible property acquired after January 19, 2025. There were no changes to the Company’s tax expense or effective income tax rate given the Company’s valuation allowance position. Further, many countries, and organizations such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development have proposed implementing changes to existing tax laws, including a 15% global minimum tax (Pillar Two). Many EU member states and other countries have enacted or are considering enacting such legislation. The United States has withdrawn support for Pillar Two, and the OECD and participating jurisdictions have recently agreed to a side-by-side arrangement that would exempt U.S. parent groups from certain provisions of Pillar Two for fiscal years beginning on or after January 1, 2026. Any of these developments or changes in federal, state, or international tax laws or tax rulings could adversely affect our effective tax rate and our operating results. There can be no assurance that our effective tax rates, tax payments, or tax credits and incentives will not be adversely affected by these or other developments or changes in law.
A variety of risks associated with contracting with foreign third parties or marketing our product candidates internationally could materially adversely affect our business.
We may contract with foreign third parties or seek regulatory approval of our product candidates outside of the United States and, accordingly, we expect that we will be subject to additional risks related to operating in foreign countries if we obtain the necessary approvals, including:
72
These and other risks associated with our international operations may materially adversely affect our ability to attain or maintain profitable operations.
In particular, there is currently significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the United States and various other countries, such as China, with respect to trade policies, treaties, tariffs, taxes, and other limitations on cross-border operations, collaboration, and investment. The U.S. government has and continues to make significant additional changes in U.S. trade policy and may continue to take future actions that could negatively impact U.S. trade.
For example, the President recently signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act of 2026, which includes Section 851 regarding “[p]rohibition on contracting with certain biotechnology providers” (the BIOSECURE Act), which restricts federal government contracts, grants, and loans from being issued to companies that use biotechnology equipment or services from any designated “biotechnology company of concern,” as part of such companies’ performance of those agreements with the U.S. government. Once fully implemented through issuance of regulations, the BIOSECURE Act may ultimately limit certain U.S. biotechnology companies (such as ours) from using equipment or services produced or provided by Chinese biotechnology companies that meet the designation criteria of the new law, or certain affiliated entities. In addition, even if we do not seek any covered federal government contracts, grants, or loans, commercial partners, government agencies, or other third parties may view our business less favorably if we contract with entities that ultimately become biotechnology companies of concern.
As another example, the U.S. Department of Justice's Data Security Program places limitations on U.S. companies’ ability to enter into (and in some cases prohibits) certain contracts involving transfers of sensitive personal data to business partners located in China, or with other specified links to China and other designated countries. The rule further requires U.S. persons to obtain from certain foreign counterparties contractual commitments to refrain from engaging in subsequent transfers of sensitive personal data to entities located in China or with other specified links to China and other designated countries. This new rule will impact our ability to contract not just with Chinese companies but also with foreign entities in general, potentially requiring us to extract promises related to compliance with this new rule.
Additionally, in September 2018, the USTR enacted a tariff on the import of other Chinese products, with a combined import value of approximately $200 billion. Since that time USTR has modified these tariff rates and imposed tariffs on additional goods. In addition, since February 4, 2025, the U.S. government has imposed additional tariffs on the import of almost all Chinese origin goods which are now 30% and an additional baseline reciprocal 10% tariff on certain products of most other U.S. trading partners, with exemptions for certain pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and consumer electronics. Additional tariffs may in the future be implemented by the U.S. government (including on imports of pharmaceutical products into the United States currently under investigation by the U.S. Department of Commerce, among other potential tariffs), the implementation, scope, and duration of which remain uncertain. Tariffs on imports of APIs and starting materials used in our product candidates as well as product candidates themselves, or retaliatory trade measures taken by China or other countries, which could potentially include restricted access to APIs or starting materials used in our product candidates, could result in us needing to make changes to our suppliers or our product candidates, or materially harm our business, financial condition and results of operations. Further, the continued threats of tariffs, trade restrictions, and trade barriers could have a generally disruptive impact on the global economy and, therefore, negatively impact our company. We cannot predict what actions may ultimately be taken with respect to trade relations between the United States and China or other countries, what products and services may be subject to such actions or what actions may be taken by the other countries in retaliation. If we are unable to obtain or use services from existing service providers, are restricted from sharing relevant data with such service providers or with others, or become unable to export or sell our products to any of our customers or service providers, our business, liquidity, financial condition, and/or results of operations would be materially and adversely affected.
We are currently operating in a period of economic uncertainty and capital markets disruption, which has been significantly impacted by geopolitical instability, including the ongoing international military conflicts.
U.S. and global markets are experiencing volatility and disruption following the escalation of certain geopolitical tensions, including international military conflicts, and the related political and economic responses. Changes in countries’ economic, trade and financial policies could trigger retaliatory actions by other affected countries, resulting in a “trade war,” “cyberwar,” escalation of conventional military conflicts, and other adverse events. For example, the military conflict in Ukraine, and any resulting effects that may follow, could result in increased costs for, or unavailability of, certain materials used in the third-party manufacturing of our product candidates and potential future product candidates. These increased costs could have a negative effect on our financial condition, and any supply interruptions could hinder our product development and make it harder for us to find favorable pricing and reliable sources for the materials needed to manufacture our product candidates and potential future product candidates. It is impossible to predict the extent to which our operations will be impacted in the short and long term, or the ways in which our business
73
may be impacted. The extent and duration of international conflicts, geopolitical tensions, and resulting market disruptions are impossible to predict but could be substantial.
Inflation and market volatility may adversely affect us by increasing our costs.
Recently, inflation and market volatility have increased and caused economic uncertainty throughout the U.S. and global economy. Inflation and market volatility can adversely affect us by increasing the costs of clinical trials and research, the development of our product candidates, administration and other costs of doing business. In fact, we have experienced, and continue to experience, increases in the prices of labor and other costs of doing business. In an inflationary, volatile and economically uncertain environment, cost increases may outpace our expectations, causing us to use our cash and other liquid assets faster than forecasted. If this continues to occur or happens more frequently or at a larger scale, we may need to raise additional capital to fund our operations sooner than expected and we may not be able to secure financing on acceptable terms.
Risks related to our intellectual property
Our success depends on our ability to protect our intellectual property and our proprietary technologies.
Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection and trade secret protection for our product candidates, proprietary technologies and their uses as well as our ability to operate without infringing upon the proprietary rights of others. We generally seek to protect our proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and abroad related to our product candidates, proprietary technologies and their uses that are important to our business. We also seek to protect our proprietary position by acquiring or in-licensing relevant issued patents or pending patent applications from third parties.
Pending patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless, and until, patents issue from such applications, and then only to the extent the issued claims cover the technology. There can be no assurance that our patent applications or the patent applications of our licensors will result in additional patents being issued or that issued patents will afford sufficient protection against competitors with similar technology, nor can there be any assurance that the patents issued will not be infringed, designed around or invalidated by third parties.
Even issued patents may later be found invalid or unenforceable or may be modified or revoked in proceedings instituted by third parties before various patent offices or in courts. The degree of future protection for our and our licensors’ proprietary rights is uncertain. Only limited protection may be available and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep any competitive advantage. These uncertainties and/or limitations in our ability to properly protect the intellectual property rights relating to our product candidates could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
Although as of December 31, 2025, we owned twelve and licensed ten issued patents in the United States pertaining to our product candidates, we cannot be certain that the claims in our other U.S. pending patent applications, corresponding international patent applications and patent applications in certain foreign territories, or those of our licensors, will be considered patentable by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), courts in the United States or by the patent offices and courts in foreign countries, nor can we be certain that the claims in our issued or licensed patents will not be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged.
The patent application process is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, and there can be no assurance that we or any of our potential future collaborators will be successful in protecting our product candidates by obtaining and defending patents. These risks and uncertainties include the following:
74
The patent prosecution process is also expensive and time-consuming, and we and our licensors may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner or in all jurisdictions where protection may be commercially advantageous. Additionally, recent reforms and changes at government agencies of the United States and those of non-U.S. jurisdictions could increase the delays, uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our owned and licensed patent applications, and the maintenance, enforcement, or defense of our owned and licensed issued patents. For example, the ability of the USPTO and other applicable patent authorities to properly administer their functions is highly dependent on the levels of funding available to the agency and their ability to retain personnel and fill key leadership appointments, among various factors. Termination of employees or delays in replacing or hiring for positions could significantly impact the ability of the USPTO and other applicable patent authorities to fulfill their functions and could greatly impact our ability to timely and adequately prosecute or maintain our owned and licensed patent applications, and our ability to timely and adequately maintain, enforce, or defend our owned and licensed issued patents. It is also possible that we or our licensors will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection.
In addition, although we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, outside scientific collaborators, CROs, third-party manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach such agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection.
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 intellectual property may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.
If the scope of any patent protection we obtain is not sufficiently broad, or if we lose any of our patent protection, our ability to prevent our competitors from commercializing similar or identical product candidates would be adversely affected.
The patent position of biopharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions, and has been the subject of much litigation in recent years. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future patent applications and those of our licensors may not result in patents being issued which protect our product candidates or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive product candidates.
Moreover, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and its scope can be reinterpreted after issuance. Even if patent applications we own or in-license currently or in the future issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors or other third parties from competing with us, or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Any patents that we own or in-license may be challenged or circumvented by third parties or may be narrowed or invalidated as a result of challenges by third parties. Consequently, we do not know whether our product candidates will be protectable or remain protected by valid and enforceable patents. Our competitors or other third parties may be able to circumvent our patents or the patents of our licensors by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and our patents or the patents of our licensors may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. We may be subject to a third-party pre-issuance submission of prior art to the USPTO, or become involved in opposition, derivation, revocation, reexamination, post-grant review (PGR) and inter partes review (IPR), or other similar proceedings challenging our owned or in-licensed patent rights. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope of, or invalidate or render unenforceable, our patent rights or those of our licensors, allow third parties to commercialize our product candidates and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. Moreover, our patents or the patents of our licensors may become subject to post-grant challenge proceedings, such as oppositions in a foreign patent office, that challenge our priority of invention or other features of patentability with respect to our patents and patent applications and those of our licensors. Such challenges may result in loss of patent rights, loss of exclusivity or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, 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 of our product candidates. Such proceedings also may result in substantial cost and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications or the patents and patent applications of our licensors is threatened, regardless of the outcome, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future product candidates.
75
Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats to our competitive advantage.
The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations and may not adequately protect our business or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. For example:
Should any of these events occur, it could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.
In the United States, drug products may obtain FDA marketing approval pursuant to an NDA (described above) for innovator products, or an ANDA for generic products. Relevant to ANDAs, the Hatch-Waxman Act amended the FDCA to establish a statutory procedure for submission and FDA review and approval of ANDAs for generic versions of branded drugs previously approved by the FDA (such previously approved drugs are also referred to as reference listed drugs). Because the safety and efficacy of reference listed drugs have already been established by the brand company (sometimes referred to as the innovator), the FDA typically does not require new human clinical trials to establish safety and efficacy of generic products. Rather, a generic manufacturer is typically required to conduct bioequivalence studies of its test product against the reference listed drug. The bioequivalence studies for orally administered, systemically available drug products assess the rate and extent to which the active pharmaceutical ingredient is absorbed into the bloodstream from the drug product and becomes available at the site of action. Bioequivalence is established when there is an absence of a significant difference in the rate and extent for absorption of the generic product and the reference listed drug. In addition to the bioequivalence data, an ANDA must contain patent certifications and chemistry, manufacturing, labeling, and stability data.
Any applicant who files an ANDA seeking approval of a generic equivalent version of a drug listed in the Orange Book must make one of the following certifications to the FDA concerning patents: (1) the patent information concerning the reference listed drug product has not been submitted to the FDA; (2) any such patent that was filed has expired; (3) the date on which such patent will expire; or (4) such patent is invalid, unenforceable or will not be infringed upon by the manufacture, use or sale of the drug product for which the application is submitted. There might also be no relevant patent certification. If the ANDA applicant does not challenge the listed patents or certify that the listed patents will not be infringed by the new product, the ANDA application will not be approved by FDA until all the patents listed in the Orange Book claiming the referenced product or its use have expired.
The last patent certification described above is known as a paragraph IV certification. A notice of the paragraph IV certification must be provided to each owner of the patent that is the subject of the certification and to the holder of the approved NDA to which the ANDA refers. The applicant may also elect to submit a “section viii” statement certifying that its proposed label does not contain (or “carves out”) any language regarding the patented method-of-use rather than certify to a listed method-of-use patent. An application with a section viii statement or carve out may be approved if the removal of language from the label necessitated by the carve out does not make the generic drug less safe or effective. This section viii statement does not require notice to the patent holder or NDA owner.
If the reference NDA holder or patent owners assert a patent challenge directed to one of the Orange Book listed patents within 45 days of the receipt of the paragraph IV certification notice, the FDA is prohibited from approving the application until the earlier of 30 months from the receipt of the paragraph IV certification, expiration of the patent, settlement of the lawsuit or a decision
76
in the infringement case that is favorable to the applicant. The ANDA application also will not be approved until any applicable non-patent exclusivity has expired. Thus approval of an ANDA can be prevented until all the listed patents claiming the referenced product or use thereof have expired, until any non-patent exclusivity, such as exclusivity for obtaining approval of a new chemical entity, has expired, and, in the case of a Paragraph IV certification and subsequent patent infringement suit, until the earlier of 30 months, settlement of the lawsuit or a decision in the infringement case that is favorable to the ANDA applicant.
The FDA may issue tentative approval of an ANDA application if the application meets all conditions for approval, but the applicant cannot receive effective approval because the listed patents, the 30-month stay or another period of regulatory exclusivity, as applicable, has not expired. If tentative approval is granted, then once such listed patents, 30-month stay or other regulatory exclusivity have expired or, in the case of patents that are subject to a patent infringement suit, been found to be invalid or not infringed, the applicant may seek final approval by submitting an amendment that, among other things, includes a safety update and any other changes, if any, in the conditions under which the product was tentatively approved. Prior to granting final approval, the FDA must review and approve any changes reflected in the amendment and may consider any other new information that has come to its attention.
Our commercial success depends significantly on our ability to operate without infringing the patents and other proprietary rights of third parties. Claims by third parties that we infringe their proprietary rights may result in liability for damages or prevent or delay our developmental and commercialization efforts.
Our commercial success depends in part on avoiding infringement of the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. However, our research, development and commercialization activities may be subject to claims that we infringe or otherwise violate patents or other intellectual property rights owned or controlled by third parties. Other entities may have or obtain patents or proprietary rights that could limit our ability to make, use, sell, offer for sale or import our product candidates and products that may be approved in the future, or impair our competitive position. There is a substantial amount of litigation, both within and outside the United States, involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biopharmaceutical industry, including patent infringement lawsuits, oppositions, reexaminations, IPR proceedings and PGR proceedings before the USPTO and/or corresponding foreign patent offices. Numerous third-party U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications exist in the fields in which we are developing product candidates. There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of our product candidates.
As the biopharmaceutical industry expands and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidates may be subject to claims of infringement of the patent rights of third parties. Because patent applications are maintained as confidential for a certain period of time, until the relevant application is published, we may be unaware of third-party patents that may be infringed by commercialization of any of our product candidates, and we cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first to file a patent application related to a product candidate or technology. Moreover, because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications that may later result in issued patents that our product candidates may infringe. In addition, identification of third-party patent rights that may be relevant to our technology is difficult because patent searching is imperfect due to differences in terminology among patents, incomplete databases and the difficulty in assessing the meaning of patent claims. There is also no assurance that there is not prior art of which we are aware, but which we do not believe is relevant to our business, which may, nonetheless, ultimately be found to limit our ability to make, use, sell, offer for sale or import our products that may be approved in the future, or impair our competitive position. In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies infringes upon these patents. Any claims of patent infringement asserted by third parties would be time consuming and could:
Although no third party has asserted a claim of patent infringement against us as of the date of this periodic report, others may hold proprietary rights that could prevent our product candidates from being marketed.
77
It is possible that a third party may assert a claim of patent infringement directed at any of our product candidates. Any patent-related legal action against us claiming damages and seeking to enjoin commercial activities relating to our products, treatment indications, or processes could subject us to significant liability for damages, including treble damages if we were determined to willfully infringe, and require us to obtain a license to manufacture or market our product candidates. 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. We cannot predict whether we would prevail in any such actions or that any license required under any of these patents would be made available on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. Moreover, even if we or our future strategic partners were able to obtain a license, the rights may be nonexclusive, which could result in our competitors gaining access to the same intellectual property. In addition, we cannot be certain that we could redesign our product candidates, treatment indications, or processes to avoid infringement, if necessary. Accordingly, an adverse determination in a judicial or administrative proceeding, or the failure to obtain necessary licenses, could prevent us from developing and commercializing our product candidates, which could harm our business, financial condition and operating results. In addition, intellectual property litigation, regardless of its outcome, may cause negative publicity and could prohibit us from marketing or otherwise commercializing our product candidates and technology.
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 a 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.
We may in the future pursue invalidity proceedings with respect to third-party patents. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity is unpredictable. Additionally, we may be subject to claims of patent infringement during those proceedings, and delays caused by the federal agencies may increase the time period that we are subject to such claims. For example, administrative changes, including reduced personnel and budgets experienced by the Patent and Trial Appeal Board, could further delay our ability to timely challenge any such patents. Even if resolved in our favor, these legal proceedings may cause us to incur significant expenses and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. 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. Such 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 conduct such proceedings adequately. Some of these third parties may be able to sustain the costs of such proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent proceedings could compromise our ability to compete in the marketplace. If we do not prevail in the patent proceedings the third parties may assert a claim of patent infringement directed at our product candidates.
We may not be successful in obtaining or maintaining necessary rights to our product candidates through acquisitions and in-licenses.
Because our development programs may require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business may depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license, or use these third-party proprietary rights. We may be unable to acquire or in-license any compositions, methods of use, processes or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as necessary for our product candidates. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment or at all. If we are unable to successfully obtain or maintain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights or maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to abandon development of the relevant program or product candidate, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or our licensors’ patents, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful. Further, our issued patents or our licensors’ patents could be found invalid, unenforceable or not infringed if challenged in court.
Competitors may infringe our intellectual property rights. To prevent infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition, in a patent infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent we own or in-license is not valid, is unenforceable and/or is not infringed. If we or any of our potential future collaborators were to initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent directed at one of our product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that our patent or the patent of our licensors is invalid and/or unenforceable in whole or in part. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a
78
validity challenge include an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness, lack of sufficient written description, non-enablement, or obviousness-type double patenting. For example, the U.S. Supreme Court recently held in Amgen v. Sanofi (2023) that a functionally claimed genus was invalid for failing to comply with the enablement requirement of the Patent Act. As such, our patent rights with functional claims may be vulnerable to third party challenges seeking to invalidate these claims for lacking enablement or adequate support in the specification. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could include an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO or made a misleading statement during prosecution.
Third parties may also raise similar invalidity claims before the USPTO or patent offices abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, PGR, IPR, derivation proceedings, and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and/or unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which we, our licensors, and the patent examiners are unaware during prosecution. There is also no assurance that there is not prior art of which we are aware, but which we do not believe affects the validity or enforceability of a claim in our patents and patent applications or the patents and patent applications of our licensors, which may, nonetheless, ultimately be found to affect the validity or enforceability of a claim. If a third party were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on our technology or platform, or any product candidates that we may develop. Such a loss of patent protection would have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
As of June 1, 2023, European patent applications 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). The option of a Unitary Patent will be a significant change in European patent practice, and our European patent applications, if issued, could be challenged in the UPC. As the UPC is a new court system, there is limited precedent for the court, increasing the uncertainty of any litigation in the UPC. It is uncertain how the UPC will impact granted European patents in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries that are subject to its jurisdiction. The UPC may, as a single court system, invalidate or centrally revoke our future European patents that are subject to its jurisdiction, and such a loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business and our ability to commercialize our technology and product candidates due to increased competition and, resultantly, on our financial condition, prospects and results of operations. During the first seven years of the UPC’s existence, the UPC legislation allows a patent owner to opt its European patents out of the jurisdiction of the UPC. We may, where applicable, opt our future European patents out of the UPC, and as such each of our future European patents for which we opted out would need to be challenged in each individual country. Moreover, our future European patents could remain under the jurisdiction of the UPC if we do not meet all of the opt-out formalities and requirements under the UPC. If we decide to opt out our future European patents from the UPC, doing so may preclude us from realizing the benefits of the UPC, such as the ability to obtain a pan-European injunction against our competitors. The UPC will also provide our competitors with a new forum to potentially obtain pan-European injunctions, and the granting of such pan-European injunctions against us could have a material adverse impact on our business and our ability to commercialize our technology and product candidates and, resultantly, on our financial condition, prospects and results of operations.
In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications or the patents and patent applications of our licensors is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future product candidates.
Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to our intellectual property rights may cause us to incur significant expenses and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. 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. 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 conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. 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. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could compromise our ability to compete in the marketplace.
Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation or other legal proceedings relating to our intellectual property rights, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation or other proceedings.
In addition, the issuance of a patent does not give us the right to practice the patented invention. Third parties may have blocking patents that could prevent us from marketing our own patented product and practicing our own patented technology.
79
Intellectual property litigation may lead to unfavorable publicity that harms our reputation and causes the market price of our common shares to decline.
During the course of any intellectual property litigation, there could be public announcements of the initiation of the litigation as well as results of hearings, rulings on motions, and other interim proceedings in the litigation. If securities analysts or investors regard these announcements as negative, the perceived value of our existing products, programs or intellectual property could be diminished. Accordingly, the market price of shares of our common stock may decline. Such announcements could also harm our reputation or the market for our future products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Derivation proceedings may be necessary to determine priority of inventions, and an unfavorable outcome may require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights from the prevailing party.
Derivation proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us or declared by the USPTO may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications or those of our licensors. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms. Our defense of derivation proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. In addition, the uncertainties associated with such proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our clinical trials, continue our research programs, license necessary technology from third parties or enter into development or manufacturing partnerships that would help us bring our product candidates to market.
Recent patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications or those of our licensors and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents or those of our licensors.
On September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the Leahy-Smith Act), was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. In particular, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned in March 2013 to a “first inventor to file” system in which, assuming that other requirements of patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent regardless of whether a third party was first to invent the claimed invention. A third party that files a patent application in the USPTO after March 2013 but before us could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours even if we had made the invention before it was made by such third party. This will require us to be cognizant going forward of the time from invention to filing of a patent application. Furthermore, our ability to obtain and maintain valid and enforceable patents depends on whether the differences between our technology and the prior art allow our technology to be patentable over the prior art. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing or until issuance, we may not be certain that we or our licensors are the first to either (1) file any patent application related to our product candidates or (2) invent any of the inventions claimed in the patents or patent applications.
The Leahy-Smith Act also includes a number of significant changes that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and also may affect patent litigation. These include allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including PGR, IPR, and derivation proceedings. An adverse determination in any such submission or proceeding could reduce the scope or enforceability of, or invalidate, our patent rights, which could adversely affect our competitive position.
Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in United States federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action. Thus, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications or those of our licensors and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents or those of our licensors, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Changes in U.S. patent law, or laws in other countries, could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our product candidates.
As is the case with other pharmaceutical companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the pharmaceutical industry involve a high degree of technological and legal complexity. Therefore, obtaining and enforcing pharmaceutical patents is costly, time consuming and inherently uncertain. Changes in either the patent laws or in the interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our intellectual property and may increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. We cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be allowed or enforced in our patents, those of our licensors or in third-party patents. In addition, Congress or other foreign legislative bodies may pass patent reform legislation that is unfavorable to us.
80
For example, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on decisions by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. federal courts, the USPTO, or similar authorities in foreign jurisdictions, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and those of our licensors and the patents we might obtain or license in the future.
We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our patents and other intellectual property.
We may also be subject to claims that former employees, other affiliates, or other third parties have an ownership interest in our patents or those of our licensors or other intellectual property. For example, a current or former employee, other affiliate, or other third party may allege that certain invention assignment agreements or invention assignments are invalid, unenforceable, or otherwise incomplete. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or ownership. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as our ability to enforce or defend our patents or those of our licensors. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and distraction to management and other employees.
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. Additionally, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision involving the interaction of patent term adjustment (PTA), terminal disclaimers, and obviousness-type double patenting that creates uncertainty regarding the patent terms of certain U.S. patents that share the same priority claim where one patent expires later than another patent due to accrued PTA. Even if patents covering our product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition from competitive products. 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 patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.
If we do not obtain patent term extension for our product candidates, our business may be materially harmed.
Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of FDA marketing approval of our product candidates, one or more of our U.S. patents or those of our licensors may be eligible for limited patent term restoration under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Hatch-Waxman Amendments). The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent restoration term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. A maximum of one patent may be extended per FDA-approved product as compensation for the patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. A patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval and only those claims covering such approved drug product, a method for using it or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. Patent term extension may also be available in certain foreign countries upon regulatory approval of our product candidates. However, we may not be granted an extension because of, for example, failing to apply within applicable deadlines, failing to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise failing to satisfy applicable requirements. Additionally, administrative changes at the USPTO or other applicable patent authorities, such as reduced hiring and/or funding, may result in delays in issuance of a patent or in accrual of patent term extension, thereby reducing the amount of patent term extension that could otherwise be received. Administrative changes (e.g., at the FDA or USPTO) may also lead to delays in review and analysis of regulatory submissions or requests for patent term extension, which could result in a patent term extension not being timely granted (e.g., before the expiration of the patent) and there may be no patent eligible for extension. Moreover, the applicable time period or the scope of patent protection afforded could be less than we project or request. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or restoration or the term of any such extension is less than we project or request, our competitors may obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration, and our revenue could be reduced, possibly materially. Further, if this occurs, our competitors may take advantage of our investment in development and trials by referencing our clinical and preclinical data and launch their product earlier than might otherwise be the case.
We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.
Although as of December 31, 2025, we owned twelve and licensed ten issued patents in the United States pertaining to our product candidates and pending patent applications in the United States and other countries, filing, prosecuting and defending patents in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States or from selling or importing products
81
made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. 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 enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our product candidates, and our patents, the patents of our licensors, or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.
Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of many foreign countries do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or our licensors’ patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights and those of our licensors in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents or the patents of our licensors at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications or the patent applications of our licensors at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop, license, or obtain.
Many countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patents. If we are forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be impaired, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be adversely affected.
Geo-political actions in the United States and in foreign countries could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution or maintenance of our patent applications or those of any current or future licensors and the maintenance, enforcement or defense of our issued patents or those of any current or future licensors. For example, the United States and foreign government actions related to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine may limit or prevent filing, prosecution and maintenance of patent applications in Russia. Government actions may also prevent maintenance of issued patents in Russia. These actions could result in abandonment or lapse of our patents or patent applications, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in Russia. If such an event were to occur, it could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, a decree was adopted by the Russian government in March 2022, allowing Russian companies and individuals to exploit inventions owned by patentees that have citizenship or nationality in, are registered in, or have a predominately primary place of business or profit-making activities in the United States and other countries that Russia has deemed unfriendly without consent or compensation. Consequently, we would not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in Russia or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into Russia. Accordingly, our competitive position may be impaired, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be adversely affected.
Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, documentary, fee payment and other requirements imposed by regulations and governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.
Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other governmental fees on patents and/or patent applications will be due to the USPTO and various foreign patent offices at various points over the lifetime of our patents and/or patent applications and those of our licensors. We have systems in place to remind us to pay these fees, and we rely on our outside patent annuity service to pay these fees when due. Additionally, the USPTO and various foreign patent offices require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. We employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply and, in many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with rules applicable to the particular jurisdiction. However, 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. If such an event were to occur, it could have a material adverse effect on our business.
If our trademarks and trade names are not adequately protected, then we may not be able to build name recognition in our markets of interest and our business may be adversely affected.
We intend to use registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names to brand and market ourselves and our products. As of December 31, 2025, we had two trademarks registered with the USPTO. Trademark applications we may file in the future may not result in any trademark registrations being issued, and our trademarks or trade names may be challenged, infringed, circumvented or declared generic or determined to be infringing on other marks. We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names, which we need to build name recognition among potential partners or customers in our markets of interest. At times, competitors may adopt trade names or trademarks similar to ours, thereby impeding our ability to build brand identity and possibly leading to market confusion. In addition, there could be potential trade name or trademark infringement claims brought by owners of other registered trademarks or trademarks that incorporate variations of our registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names. Over
82
the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be able to compete effectively, and our business may be adversely affected. Our efforts to enforce or protect our proprietary rights related to trademarks, trade secrets, domain names, copyrights or other intellectual property may be ineffective and could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources and could adversely affect our financial condition or results of operations.
If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed.
In addition, we rely on the protection of our trade secrets, including unpatented know-how, technology and other proprietary information to maintain our competitive position. Although we have taken steps to protect our trade secrets and unpatented know-how, including entering into confidentiality agreements with third parties, and confidential information and inventions agreements with employees, consultants and advisors, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed, and 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. 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 are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets.
Additionally, if any of our employees, consultants, advisors, or other parties with access to our confidential information use any third-party AI-powered systems or tools in connection with our business or the services they provide to us, it may lead to the inadvertent disclosure of our confidential information, including inadvertent disclosure of our confidential information into third-party training sets, some of which may be publicly available, and which may impact our ability to realize the benefit of, or adequately maintain, protect and enforce our intellectual property or confidential information, which could harm our competitive position and business.
Moreover, third parties may still obtain our trade secrets or other confidential information or may come upon this or similar information independently, and we would have no right to prevent them from using that information to compete with us. If any of these events occurs or if we otherwise lose protection for our trade secrets, the value of this information may be greatly reduced, and our competitive position would be harmed. If we do not apply for patent protection prior to such publication or if we cannot otherwise maintain the confidentiality of our proprietary technology and other confidential information, then our ability to obtain patent protection or to protect our trade secret information may be jeopardized.
We may be subject to claims that we or our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged confidential information or trade secrets.
We have entered into and may enter in the future into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements to protect the proprietary positions of third parties, such as outside scientific collaborators, CROs, third-party manufacturers, consultants, advisors, potential partners, lessees of shared multi-company property and other third parties. We may become subject to litigation where a third party asserts that we or our employees inadvertently or otherwise breached the agreements and used or disclosed trade secrets or other information proprietary to the third parties. A third party has inquired about a potential breach of a non-disclosure and confidentiality agreement in view of our developments in the CD73 inhibitor program. The inquiry may progress to a claim that we or our employees inadvertently or otherwise breached the agreement and used trade secrets or other information proprietary to the third party. Defense of such matters, regardless of their merit, could involve substantial litigation expense and be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. We cannot predict whether we would prevail in any such actions. Moreover, intellectual property litigation, regardless of its outcome, may cause negative publicity and could prohibit us from marketing or otherwise commercializing our product candidates and technology. Failure to defend against any such claim could subject us to significant liability for monetary damages or prevent or delay our developmental and commercialization efforts, which could adversely affect our business. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our management team and other employees.
Parties making claims against us may be able to sustain the costs of complex intellectual property 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, 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 a material adverse effect on our ability to raise additional funds or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results, financial condition and prospects.
We may be subject to claims that we have wrongfully hired an employee from a competitor or that we or our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged confidential information or trade secrets of their former employers.
As is common in the pharmaceutical industry, in addition to our employees, we engage the services of consultants to assist us in the development of our product candidates. Many of these consultants, and many of our employees, were previously employed at, or may have previously provided or may be currently providing consulting services to, other pharmaceutical companies including our competitors or potential competitors. We may become subject to claims that we, our employees or a consultant inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed trade secrets or other information proprietary to their former employers or their former or current clients.
83
Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, which could adversely affect our business. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our management team and other employees.
Our rights to develop and commercialize our technology and product candidates may be subject, in part, to the terms and conditions of licenses granted to us by others.
We have entered into license agreements with third parties and we may enter into additional license agreements in the future with others to advance our research or allow commercialization of product candidates. These and other licenses may not provide exclusive rights to use such intellectual property and technology in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize our technology and products in the future.
In addition, subject to the terms of any such license agreements, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing, prosecution, maintenance, enforcement, and defense of patents and patent applications covering the technology that we license from third parties. In such an event, we cannot be certain that these patents and patent applications will be prepared, filed, prosecuted, maintained, enforced, and defended in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. If our licensors fail to prosecute, maintain, enforce, and defend such patents, or lose rights to those patents or patent applications, the rights we have licensed may be reduced or eliminated, and our right to develop and commercialize any of our products that are subject of such licensed rights could be adversely affected.
Our licensors may have relied on third party consultants or collaborators or on funds from third parties such that our licensors are not the sole and exclusive owners of the patents we in-licensed. If other affiliates or third parties have ownership rights to our in-licensed patents, they may be able to hinder our ability to enforce or defend such patents, or they may be able to license such patents to our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.
It is possible that we may be unable to obtain additional licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to redesign our technology, product candidates, or the methods for manufacturing them or to develop or license replacement technology, all of which may not be feasible on a technical or commercial basis. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected product candidates, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects significantly. We cannot provide any assurances that third party patents do not exist which might be enforced against our current technology, manufacturing methods, product candidates, or future methods or products resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our manufacture or future sales, or, with respect to our future sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation to third parties, which could be significant.
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 license rights that are important to our business.
Our existing license agreements, and we expect that our future agreements will, impose various development, diligence, commercialization, and other obligations on us. Certain of our license agreements also require us to meet development timelines, or to exercise commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize licensed products, in order to maintain the license.
Moreover, disputes may arise between us and our licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including:
In addition, the agreements under which we 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
84
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 reasonable 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.
In spite of our best 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 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 would have 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 certain of our product candidates. For example, if Mirati terminates the Mirati License Agreement, we may be required to cease our development and commercialization of licensed products directed to PRC2 and would be obligated to assign to Mirati, or grant an exclusive license to Mirati with respect to, certain of our patents, know-how and regulatory filings. Likewise, if Voronoi terminates the Voronoi License Agreement, we may be required to cease our development and commercialization of licensed products directed to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR, or ErbB1) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (ErbB2) with exon 20 mutations and we would be obligated to grant a nonexclusive license to Voronoi under certain of our patents and know-how, and to assign to Voronoi certain of our regulatory filings. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.
The patent protection and patent prosecution for some of our product candidates may be dependent on third parties.
While we normally seek to obtain the right to control the preparation, filing, prosecution, maintenance, enforcement, and defense of the patent applications and patents relating to our product candidates, there may be times when the preparation, filing, prosecution, maintenance, enforcement and defense activities for patents and patent applications relating to our product candidates are controlled by our licensors or collaboration partners. If any of our licensors or collaboration partners fail to prepare, file, prosecute, maintain, enforce, and defend such patents and patent applications in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business, including by payment of all applicable fees for patents covering our product candidates, we could lose our rights to the intellectual property or our exclusivity with respect to those rights, our ability to develop and commercialize those product candidates may be adversely affected and we may not be able to prevent competitors from making, using and selling competing products. In addition, even where we have the right to control the preparation, filing, prosecution, maintenance, enforcement, and defense of patents and patent applications we have licensed to and from third parties, we may still be adversely affected or prejudiced by actions or inactions of our licensees, our licensors and their counsel that took place prior to the date upon which we assumed control over such activities.
Intellectual property discovered through government funded programs may be subject to federal regulations such as “march-in” rights, certain reporting requirements and a preference for U.S.-based companies. Compliance with such regulations may limit our exclusive rights and limit our ability to contract with non-U.S. manufacturers.
As of December 31, 2025, we co-own a pending international patent application filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty claiming inventions that were generated, in part, through the use of U.S. government funding. In the future, we may acquire or license other intellectual property rights that have been generated through the use of U.S. government funding or grants. Pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, the U.S. government has certain rights in inventions developed with government funding. These U.S. government rights include a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable worldwide license to use inventions for any governmental purpose. In addition, the U.S. government has the right, under certain limited circumstances, to require us to grant exclusive, partially exclusive, or non-exclusive licenses to any of these inventions to a third party if it determines that: (1) adequate steps have not been taken to commercialize the invention; (2) government action is necessary to meet public health or safety needs; or (3) government action is necessary to meet requirements for public use under federal regulations (also referred to as “march-in rights”). If the U.S. government exercised its march-in rights in our future intellectual property rights that are generated through the use of U.S. government funding or grants, we could be forced to license or sublicense intellectual property developed by us or that we license on terms unfavorable to us, and there can be no assurance that we would receive compensation from the U.S. government for the exercise of such rights. The U.S. government also has the right to take title to these inventions if the grant recipient fails to disclose the invention to the government or fails to file an application to register the intellectual property within specified time limits. Intellectual property generated under a government funded program is also subject to certain reporting requirements, compliance with which may require us to expend substantial resources. In addition, the U.S. government requires that any products embodying any of these inventions or produced through the use of any of these inventions be manufactured substantially in the United States. This preference for U.S. industry may be waived by the federal agency that provided the funding if the owner or assignee of the intellectual property can show that reasonable but unsuccessful efforts have been made to grant licenses on similar terms to potential licensees that would be likely to manufacture substantially in the United States or that under the circumstances domestic manufacture is not commercially feasible. This preference for U.S. industry may limit our ability to contract with non-U.S. product manufacturers for products covered by such intellectual property.
85
Risks related to our dependence on third parties
We depend on third-party suppliers, and the loss of these third-party suppliers or their inability to supply us could harm our business.
We depend on third-party suppliers, including from certain manufacturers located in China that provide us with active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) required for the production of our product candidates, and we expect to continue to depend on third-party suppliers located in various jurisdictions around the world. Our dependence on these third-party suppliers and the challenges faced in obtaining adequate supplies involve several risks, including supply chain issues caused by the effects of worldwide economic conditions, including disruptions due to public health concerns, national security concerns, export or import restrictions, tariffs, or other geopolitical events, limited control over pricing, the availability of such materials, the quality of such materials, and delivery schedules. To the extent our business relies on suppliers, customers, or vendors in countries where the U.S. government has imposed any of these or other trade restrictions, our business may experience a material adverse effect. We may be unable to fully mitigate the effects of these disruptions or conditions. Any supply interruption could materially harm our ability to manufacture our product candidates, or to manufacture our product candidates on commercially reasonable terms, until a new source of supply, if any, can be identified and qualified. In such an event, we may be unable to find a sufficient alternative supply channel in a reasonable time or on commercially reasonable terms. Any performance failure on the part of the suppliers could delay the development and potential commercialization of our product candidates, including limiting supplies necessary for clinical trials and regulatory approvals, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.
In particular, there is currently significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the U.S. and various other countries, most significantly China, with respect to trade policies, including sanctions, treaties, tariffs, taxes, regulatory requirements, and other limitations on cross-border operations. The U.S. government has made and continues to make significant additional changes in U.S. trade policy and may continue to take future actions that could negatively impact our business. As an example, since April 2025 the U.S. has imposed a 10% tariff on imports from most U.S. trading partners. In addition, the U.S. has imposed a 20% tariff on virtually all imports of Chinese origin since March 2025, and has also imposed a reciprocal tariff of 125% on most Chinese-origin products since April 2025. While some pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical products have been exempted from the reciprocal tariff of 125%, the U.S. government is currently undertaking an investigation to determine whether additional tariffs may be necessary on pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical products in order to attain U.S. national security and foreign policy goals. We cannot predict what actions may ultimately be taken with respect to trade relations between the U.S. and China or other countries, what interactions, including products or services, may be subject to such actions, or what actions may be taken by the other countries in retaliation. We may also be subject to indirect supply chain risks caused by recent and new changes in these policies, including an increased risk of recession, inflation, or a general macroeconomic slowdown. If our interactions with third-party suppliers, including the manufacturers we work with in China that supply API required for the production of our product candidates, are affected by any such governmental actions, our business, liquidity, financial condition, or results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.
We rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials and those third parties may not perform satisfactorily, including failing to meet deadlines for the completion of such trials, research and studies.
We do not have the ability to independently conduct our clinical trials. We currently rely on third parties, such as CROs, clinical data management organizations, medical institutions and clinical investigators, to conduct our current and planned clinical trials of our product candidates. Third parties have a significant role in the conduct of our clinical trials and the subsequent collection and analysis of data. These third parties are not our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such third parties, we have limited ability to control the amount or timing of resources that any such third party will devote to our clinical trials. The third parties we rely on for these services may also have relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors. Some of these third parties may terminate their engagements with us at any time. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements with a third party, it would delay our drug development activities.
Our reliance on these third parties for such drug development activities will reduce our control over these activities but will not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. For example, we will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial. Moreover, the FDA requires us to comply with GCP standards, regulations for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are reliable and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. The EMA also requires us to comply with similar standards. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCP requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we or any of our CROs fail to comply with applicable GCP requirements, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials substantially comply with GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under current cGMPs regulations. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the marketing approval process.
If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct our clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols, we will not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining,
86
marketing approvals for our product candidates and will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize our product candidates.
We contract with third parties for the production of our product candidates for preclinical studies and, in the case of rinzimetostat and enozertinib, our ongoing clinical trials, and expect to continue to do so for additional clinical trials and ultimately for commercialization. This reliance on third parties increases the risk that we will not have sufficient quality and quantities of our product candidates or such quantities at an acceptable cost, which could delay, prevent or impair our development or commercialization efforts.
We do not currently have the infrastructure or internal capability to manufacture supplies of our product candidates for use in development and commercialization. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third-party manufacturers for the production of our product candidates for preclinical studies and clinical trials under the guidance of members of our organization. For each of our product candidates, we rely on a single third-party manufacturer and we currently have no alternative manufacturer in place. We do not have long-term supply agreements, and we purchase our required drug product on a purchase order basis, which means that aside from any binding purchase orders we have from time to time, our supplier could cease supplying to us or change the terms on which it is willing to continue supplying to us at any time. If we were to experience an unexpected loss of supply of any product candidates for any reason, whether as a result of manufacturing, supply or storage issues or otherwise, we could experience delays, disruptions, suspensions or terminations of, or be required to restart or repeat, any pending or ongoing studies or clinical trials.
We expect to continue to rely on third-party manufacturers for the commercial supply of any of our product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. We may be unable to maintain or establish required agreements with third-party manufacturers or to do so on acceptable terms. Even if we are able to establish agreements with third-party manufacturers, reliance on third-party manufacturers entails additional risks, including:
We do not have complete control over all aspects of the manufacturing process of our contract manufacturing partners and are dependent on these contract manufacturing partners for compliance with cGMPs regulations for manufacturing both API and finished drug products. To date, we have obtained API and drug product for our product candidates from single-source third party contract manufacturers. We are in the process of developing our supply chain for each of our product candidates and intend to put in place framework agreements under which third-party contract manufacturers will generally provide us with necessary quantities of API and drug product on a project-by-project basis based on our development needs. As we advance our product candidates through development, we will consider our lack of redundant supply for the API and drug product for each of our product candidates to protect against any potential supply disruptions. However, we may be unsuccessful in putting in place such framework agreements or protecting against potential supply disruptions.
Third-party manufacturers may not be able to comply with cGMPs regulations or similar regulatory requirements outside of the United States. If our contract manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA, EMA or others, they will not be able to secure and/or maintain marketing approval for their manufacturing facilities. In addition, we do not have control over the ability of our contract manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the FDA, EMA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority does not approve these facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates or if it withdraws any such approval in the future, we will need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, and those new facilities would need to be inspected and approved by FDA, EMA or comparable regulatory authority prior to commencing manufacturing, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain marketing approval for or market our product candidates, if approved. Our failure, or the failure of our third-party manufacturers, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of product candidates or drugs, operating restrictions and
87
criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our product candidates or drugs and harm our business and results of operations.
Our current and anticipated future dependence upon others for the manufacture of our product candidates may adversely affect our future profit margins and our ability to commercialize any product candidates that receive marketing approval on a timely and competitive basis.
If we engage in future acquisitions or strategic partnerships, this may increase our capital requirements, dilute our stockholders, cause us to incur debt or assume contingent liabilities, and subject us to other risks.
From time to time, we evaluate various acquisition opportunities and strategic partnerships, including licensing or acquiring complementary products, intellectual property rights, technologies or businesses. For instance, in August 2020, we entered into the Mirati License Agreement pursuant to which we licensed from Mirati exclusive worldwide development and commercialization rights to its allosteric PRC2 inhibitor program and, in October 2020, we entered into the Voronoi License Agreement pursuant to which we licensed from Voronoi exclusive development and commercialization rights to its EGFR and HER2 exon 20 mutation program worldwide (other than in the People’s Republic of China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan). Any such acquisition or strategic partnership may entail numerous risks, including:
In addition, if we undertake acquisitions or pursue partnerships in the future, we may issue dilutive securities, assume or incur debt obligations, incur large one-time expenses and acquire intangible assets that could result in significant future amortization expense. For instance, in connection with the Mirati License Agreement, we issued to Mirati 588,235 shares of our common stock and, in connection with the Voronoi License Agreement, we issued Voronoi 283,259 shares of our common stock, each of which resulted in dilution to our existing stockholders.
If we decide to establish additional collaborations, but are not able to establish those collaborations 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. We may seek to selectively form collaborations to expand our capabilities, potentially accelerate research and development activities and provide for commercialization activities by third parties. For example, we completed a Phase 1b trial of ORIC-533 as a single-agent, in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, and intend to evaluate strategic partnerships to develop ORIC-533 in combination with other immune-based antimyeloma therapies. Any of these relationships may require us to incur non-recurring and other charges, increase our near- and long-term expenditures, issue securities that dilute our existing stockholders, or disrupt our management and business.
We would face significant competition in seeking additional appropriate collaborators and the negotiation process is time-consuming and complex. 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, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, 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 drugs, the existence of uncertainty with respect to our ownership of intellectual property and industry and market conditions generally. The potential collaborator may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us for our product candidate. Further, we may not be successful in our efforts to establish a collaboration or other alternative arrangements for product candidates because they
88
may be deemed to be at too early of a stage of development for collaborative effort and third parties may not view them as having the requisite potential to demonstrate safety and efficacy.
In addition, there have been a significant number of recent business combinations among large pharmaceutical companies that have resulted in a reduced number of potential future collaborators. Even when we are successful in entering into a collaboration, the terms and conditions of that collaboration may restrict us from entering into future agreements on certain terms with potential collaborators.
If and when we seek to enter into additional collaborations, we may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to do so, we may have to curtail the development of a product candidate, reduce or delay its development program or one or more of our other development programs, delay its potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities, or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we do not have sufficient funds, we may not be able to further develop our product candidates or bring them to market and generate product revenue.
We may enter into collaborations with third parties for the development and commercialization of product candidates. If those collaborations are not successful, we may not be able to capitalize on the market potential of these product candidates.
If we enter into any collaboration 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 revenues from these arrangements will depend on our collaborators’ abilities and efforts to successfully perform the functions assigned to them in these arrangements. Collaborations involving our product candidates would pose numerous risks to us, including the following:
89
Risks related to the securities markets and ownership of our common stock
We do not know whether an active, liquid and orderly trading market will continue for our common stock or what the market price of our common stock will be and as a result it may be difficult for you to sell your shares of our common stock.
Prior to our initial public offering in April 2020, there was no public market for shares of our common stock and we can provide no assurance that we will be able to sustain an active trading market for our shares. The lack of an active market may impair your ability to sell your shares at the time you wish to sell them or at a price that you consider reasonable. The lack of an active market may also reduce the fair market value of your shares. Furthermore, an inactive market may also impair our ability to raise capital by selling shares of our common stock and may impair our ability to enter into strategic collaborations or acquire companies, technologies or other assets by using our shares of common stock as consideration.
The price of our stock is volatile.
The trading price of our common stock is highly volatile and subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which we cannot control. The stock market in general, and pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of these companies.
Broad market and industry factors may negatively affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. In addition to the factors discussed in this “Risk Factors” section and elsewhere in this periodic report, these factors include:
90
The realization of any of the above risks or any of a broad range of other risks, including those described in this “Risk Factors” section, could have a dramatic and adverse impact on the market price of our common stock.
If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports, or if they publish adverse or misleading research or reports, regarding us, our business or our market, our stock price and trading volume could decline.
The trading market for our common stock is influenced by the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us, our business or our market. We currently have research coverage from a limited number of securities or industry analysts. If any of the analysts who cover us issue adverse or misleading research or reports regarding us, our business model, our intellectual property, our stock performance or our market, or if our operating results fail to meet the expectations of analysts, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage of us or fail to publish reports on us regularly, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.
Our operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes our future operating results difficult to predict and could cause our operating results to fall below expectations or our guidance.
Our quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate significantly in the future, which makes it difficult for us to predict our future operating results. From time to time, we may enter into license or collaboration agreements or strategic partnerships with other companies that include development funding and significant upfront and milestone payments and/or royalties, which may become an important source of our revenue. These upfront and milestone payments may vary significantly from period to period and any such variance could cause a significant fluctuation in our operating results from one period to the next.
In addition, we measure compensation cost for stock-based awards made to employees at the grant date of the award, based on the fair value of the award as determined by our board of directors, and recognize the cost as an expense over the employee’s requisite service period. As the variables that we use as a basis for valuing these awards change over time, including, our underlying stock price and stock price volatility, the magnitude of the expense that we must recognize may vary significantly.
Furthermore, our operating results may fluctuate due to a variety of other factors, many of which are outside of our control and may be difficult to predict, including the following:
91
The cumulative effect of these factors could result in large fluctuations and unpredictability in our quarterly and annual operating results. As a result, comparing our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. Investors should not rely on our past results as an indication of our future performance. This variability and unpredictability could also result in our failing to meet the expectations of industry or financial analysts or investors for any period. If our revenue or operating results fall below the expectations of analysts or investors or below any forecasts we may provide to the market, or if the forecasts we provide to the market are below the expectations of analysts or investors, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Such a stock price decline could occur even when we have met any previously publicly stated guidance we may provide.
Our principal stockholders and management own a significant percentage of our stock and will be able to exert significant control over matters subject to stockholder approval.
As of December 31, 2025, our executive officers, directors, holders of 5% or more of our common stock and their respective affiliates beneficially owned a significant percentage of our outstanding common stock. These stockholders, acting together, may be able to impact matters requiring stockholder approval. For example, they may be able to impact elections of directors, amendments of our organizational documents or approval of any merger, sale of assets or other major corporate transaction. This may prevent or discourage unsolicited acquisition proposals or offers for our common stock that you may feel are in your best interest as one of our stockholders. The interests of this group of stockholders may not always coincide with your interests or the interests of other stockholders and they may act in a manner that advances their best interests and not necessarily those of other stockholders, including seeking a premium value for their common stock, and might affect the prevailing market price for our common stock.
Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could cause our stock price to fall.
Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could occur at any time. These sales, or the perception in the market that the holders of a large number of shares intend to sell shares, could reduce the market price of our common stock.
Certain holders of shares of our common stock have rights, subject to certain conditions, to require us to file registration statements covering their shares or to include their shares in registration statements that we may file for ourselves or other stockholders. Registration of these shares under the Securities Act would result in the shares becoming freely tradeable in the public market, subject to the restrictions of Rule 144 in the case of our affiliates. For example, on June 11, 2025, we filed a Form S-3 registration statement, which the SEC declared effective on June 20, 2025, registering 14,130,313 shares of our common stock and 5,100,532 shares of our common stock underlying pre-funded warrants sold in a private placement on May 29, 2025. On December 15, 2023, we filed a Form S-3 registration statement, which the SEC declared effective on December 28, 2023, registering 9,285,710 shares of our common stock and 2,857,142 shares of our common stock underlying pre-funded warrants sold in a private placement on June 27, 2023. In addition, on January 26, 2024, we filed a Form S-3 registration statement, which the SEC declared effective on February 2, 2024, registering 12,500,000 shares of our common stock sold in a private placement on January 23, 2024. Any sales of securities by these stockholders could have a material adverse effect on the market price for our common stock.
We incur increased costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management devotes substantial time to related compliance initiatives. Additionally, if we fail to maintain proper and effective internal controls, our ability to produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis could be impaired.
As a public company, we incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company, and these expenses may increase even more now that we are no longer an “emerging growth company” or a “smaller reporting company” as of December 31, 2025. We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Protection Act, as well as rules adopted, and to be adopted, by the SEC and Nasdaq. Our management and other personnel need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, we expect these rules and regulations to substantially increase our legal and financial compliance costs and to make some activities more time-consuming and costly, which will increase our operating expenses. For example, these rules and regulations make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance and we may be required to incur substantial costs to maintain sufficient coverage, particularly in light of recent cost increases related to coverage. We cannot accurately predict or estimate the amount or timing of additional costs we may incur to respond to these requirements. The impact of these requirements could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, our board committees or as executive officers.
In addition, as a public company we are required to incur additional costs and obligations in order to comply with SEC rules that implement Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Under these rules, we are required to make a formal assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, and once we cease to be a non-accelerated filer, we may be required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. To achieve compliance with Section 404 within the prescribed period, we will be engaging in a process to document and evaluate our
92
internal control over financial reporting, which is both costly and challenging. In this regard, we will need to continue to dedicate internal resources, potentially engage outside consultants and adopt a detailed work plan to assess and document the adequacy of our internal control over financial reporting, continue steps to improve control processes as appropriate, validate through testing that controls are designed and operating effectively, and implement a continuous reporting and improvement process for internal control over financial reporting.
The rules governing the standards that must be met for management to assess our internal control over financial reporting are complex and require significant documentation, testing and possible remediation to meet the detailed standards under the rules. During the course of its testing, our management may identify material weaknesses or deficiencies which may not be remedied in time to meet the deadline imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Our internal control over financial reporting will not prevent or detect all errors 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 are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, or if we are unable to maintain proper and effective internal controls, we may not be able to produce timely and accurate financial statements. If that were to happen, the market price of our stock could decline and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the stock exchange on which our common stock is listed, the SEC or other regulatory authorities.
Our disclosure controls and procedures may not prevent or detect all errors or acts of fraud.
We are subject to the periodic reporting requirements of the Exchange Act. We designed our disclosure controls and procedures to reasonably assure that information we must disclose in reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to management, and recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. We believe that any disclosure controls and procedures or internal controls and procedures, no matter how well-conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.
These inherent limitations include the facts that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people or by an unauthorized override of the controls. Accordingly, because of the inherent limitations in our control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.
We may be subject to securities litigation, which is expensive and could divert management attention.
The market price of our common stock is volatile and, in the past, companies that have experienced volatility in the market price of their stock have been subject to securities class action litigation. This risk is especially relevant for us because biotechnology companies have experienced significant stock price volatility in recent years and we may be the target of this type of litigation in the future. Securities litigation against us could result in substantial costs and divert our management’s attention from other business concerns, which could seriously harm our business.
We do not intend to pay dividends on our common stock so any returns will be limited to the value of our stock.
We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our common stock. We currently anticipate that we will retain future earnings for the development, operation and expansion of our business and do not anticipate declaring or paying any cash dividends for the foreseeable future. Any return to stockholders will therefore be limited to any appreciation in the value of their stock.
Provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws and Delaware law might discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our company or changes in our management and, therefore, depress the market price of our common stock.
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws contain provisions that could depress the market price of our common stock by acting to discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our company or changes in our management that the stockholders of our company may deem advantageous. These provisions, among other things:
93
In addition, Section 203 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (DGCL), prohibits a publicly-held Delaware corporation from engaging in a business combination with an interested stockholder, generally a person which together with its affiliates owns, or within the last three years has owned, 15% of our voting stock, for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the person became an interested stockholder, unless the business combination is approved in a prescribed manner.
Any provision of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, amended and restated bylaws or Delaware law that has the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control could limit the opportunity for our stockholders to receive a premium for their shares of our capital stock and could also affect the price that some investors are willing to pay for our common stock.
Our amended and restated bylaws provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware and the federal district courts of the United States of America will be the exclusive forums for substantially all disputes between us and our stockholders, which may limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees.
Our amended and restated bylaws provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (or, if the Court of Chancery does not have jurisdiction, another State court in Delaware or the federal district court for the District of Delaware) is the exclusive forum for the following (except for any claim as to which such court determines that there is an indispensable party not subject to the jurisdiction of such court (and the indispensable party does not consent to the personal jurisdiction of such court within 10 days following such determination), which is vested in the exclusive jurisdiction of a court or forum other than such court or for which such court does not have subject matter jurisdiction):
This provision does not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or any other claim for which the U.S. federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction.
Our amended and restated bylaws further provide that the federal district courts of the United States of America will be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act.
These exclusive-forum provisions may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees, which may discourage lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and other employees. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in any of our securities shall be deemed to have notice of and consented to these provisions. There is uncertainty as to whether a court would enforce such provisions, and the enforceability of similar choice of forum provisions in other companies’ charter documents has been challenged in legal proceedings.
It is possible that a court could find these types of provisions to be inapplicable or unenforceable, and if a court were to find either exclusive-forum provision in our amended and restated bylaws to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving the dispute in other jurisdictions, which could seriously harm our business.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.
None.
94
Item 1C. Cybersecurity.
Risk Management and Strategy
We have established policies and processes for assessing, identifying, and managing material risk from cybersecurity threats, and have
We conduct annual risk assessments and penetration tests to identify cybersecurity threats, including assessments and tests with the assistance of independent third-party cybersecurity consultants. We also conduct assessments in the event of a material change in our business practices that may affect key information systems that are vulnerable to such cybersecurity threats. These assessments and tests are designed to assist in the identification of reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks, the likelihood and potential damage that could result from such risks, and the sufficiency of existing policies, procedures, systems, and safeguards in place to manage such risks. Following risk assessments and penetration tests, we work to re-design, implement, update, and maintain reasonable safeguards to minimize identified risks; reasonably address any identified gaps in existing safeguards; and monitor the effectiveness of our safeguards.
As part of our risk management system, we also periodically provide company-wide cybersecurity training to our employees on these safeguards. Personnel at all levels and departments are made aware of our cybersecurity policies through trainings.
We
We evaluate the security practices of
For additional information regarding whether any risks from cybersecurity threats, including as a result of any previous cybersecurity incidents, have
Governance
One of the key functions of
The processes by which
95
Item 2. Properties.
Our corporate headquarters are located in South San Francisco, California, where we lease 33,663 square feet of office, research and laboratory space, under a non-cancelable lease that expires in May 2028 with an option to renew for an additional one-year term. We are also under agreement to lease 13,041 square feet of office space and research and development space in San Diego, California through February 2028 with an option to renew for one period of two years. We believe that these existing facilities will be adequate for our near-term needs. If required, we believe that suitable additional or alternative space would be available in the future on commercially reasonable terms.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
From time to time, we may become involved in litigation or other legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of our business. We are not currently a party to any material litigation or legal proceedings that, in the opinion of our management, are likely to have a material adverse effect on our business. Regardless of outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on us because of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources, negative publicity, reputational harm and other factors.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.
Not applicable.
96
PART II
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Market Information for Our Common Stock
Our common stock has been publicly traded on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “ORIC” since April 24, 2020. Prior to that date, there was no public trading market for our common stock.
Holders of Record
As of December 31, 2025, there were approximately 23 stockholders of record of our common stock. The actual number of stockholders is greater than this number of record holders and includes stockholders who are beneficial owners but whose shares are held in street name by brokers and other nominees.
Dividend Policy
We have not declared or paid any cash dividends on our capital stock since our inception. We intend to retain future earnings, if any, to finance the operation and expansion of our business and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. Payment of future cash dividends, if any, will be at the discretion of our board of directors after taking into account various factors, including our financial condition, operating results, current and anticipated cash needs, the requirements and contractual restrictions of then-existing debt instruments, and other factors that our board of directors deems relevant.
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities
None.
Use of Proceeds
None.
Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers
None.
Item 6. [Reserved]
97
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
You should read the following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations together with our financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. This discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties, including those described in the section titled “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.” Our actual results and the timing of selected events could differ materially from those discussed below. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those identified below and those set forth under the section titled “Risk Factors” included elsewhere in this report.
Overview
ORIC Pharmaceuticals is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to improving patients’ lives by Overcoming Resistance In Cancer.
Our fully integrated research and development team is advancing a diverse pipeline of innovative clinical therapies designed to counter resistance mechanisms in cancer by leveraging our expertise within three specific areas: hormone-dependent cancers, precision oncology and key tumor dependencies.
Our clinical stage product candidates include:
98
Beyond these clinical stage product candidates, we have historically engaged in the research and development of multiple discovery stage precision medicines targeting other hallmark cancer resistance mechanisms. On August 12, 2025, we announced a strategic pipeline prioritization to focus operational and financial resources on the continued advancement of our two lead clinical programs, rinzimetostat and enozertinib. This initiative has resulted in a substantial decrease in preclinical research, primarily from the elimination of our discovery research group.
We have incurred significant losses since the commencement of our operations. Our net loss for the year ended December 31, 2025, was $129.5 million and we had an accumulated deficit of $692.2 million as of December 31, 2025. Our losses and accumulated deficit have resulted primarily from costs incurred in connection with research and development activities including in-licensing and to a lesser extent from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. We expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we anticipate these losses will increase significantly as we continue our development of rinzimetostat and enozertinib and any future product candidates through preclinical development and into clinical trials as we seek regulatory approval for these product candidates. Our net losses may fluctuate significantly from period to period, depending on the timing of and expenditures on our planned research and development activities.
Components of Operating Results
Research and Development Expenses
Research and development expenses account for a significant portion of our operating expenses and consist primarily of external and internal costs incurred in connection with the discovery and development of our product candidates.
External expenses include:
We may also incur in-process research and development expense as we acquire or in-license assets from other parties. Technology acquisitions are expensed or capitalized based upon the asset achieving technological feasibility in accordance with management’s assessment regarding the ultimate recoverability of the amounts paid and the potential for alternative future use. Acquired in-process research and development costs that have no alternative future use are immediately expensed.
Internal expenses include employee-related costs such as salaries, related benefits and non-cash stock-based compensation expense for employees engaged in research and development functions.
We expense research and development costs in the periods in which they are incurred. External expenses are recognized based on an evaluation of the progress to completion of specific tasks using information provided to us by our service providers or our estimate of the level of service that has been performed at each reporting date. We track external costs by program, clinical or preclinical. We do not track internal costs by program because these costs are deployed across multiple programs and, as such, are not separately classified.
99
Product candidates in later stages of clinical development generally have higher development costs than those in earlier stages, primarily due to the increased size and duration of later-stage clinical trials. As a result, we expect that our research and development expenses will increase substantially in the foreseeable future as we continue to invest in research and development activities related to developing our product candidates, including investments in manufacturing, advance our programs into later stages of development, conduct additional clinical trials, maintain, expand, protect and enforce our intellectual property portfolio, and hire additional personnel.
The successful development of our product candidates is highly uncertain, and we do not believe it is possible at this time to accurately project the nature, timing and estimated costs of the efforts necessary to complete the development of, and obtain regulatory approval for, any of our product candidates. To the extent our product candidates continue to advance into clinical trials, as well as advance into larger and later-stage clinical trials, our expenses will increase substantially and may become more variable. We are also unable to predict when, if ever, we will generate revenue from our product candidates to offset these expenses. Our expenditures on current and future preclinical and clinical development programs are subject to numerous uncertainties in timing and cost to completion. The duration, costs and timing of preclinical studies and clinical trials and development of our product candidates will depend on a variety of factors, including:
Any changes in the outcome of any of these factors could significantly impact the costs, timing and viability associated with the development of our product candidates.
On August 12, 2025, we announced a strategic pipeline prioritization to focus operational and financial resources on the continued advancement of our two lead clinical programs, rinzimetostat and enozertinib. This initiative has resulted in a substantial decrease in preclinical research, primarily from the elimination of our discovery research group. This resulted in an approximately 20% workforce reduction and we have incurred a one-time cost of approximately $1.9 million primarily related to termination benefits, including severance and healthcare-related benefits. The workforce reduction was completed in the fourth quarter of 2025.
General and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries, related benefits and stock-based compensation expense for personnel in executive, finance and administrative functions. General and administrative expenses also include allocated facilities, depreciation and other expenses, which include direct or allocated expenses for rent and maintenance of facilities and insurance, not otherwise included in research and development expenses, as well as professional fees for legal, patent, consulting, investor and public relations, accounting and audit services. We expect that our general and administrative expenses will increase substantially in the
100
foreseeable future as we increase our headcount to support the continued research and development of our programs and the growth of our business.
Other Income, Net
Other income, net primarily consists of interest income generated from our interest-bearing money market accounts and investments.
Results of Operations
The following table supplements the discussion below and summarizes our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024 (in thousands):
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
|
Change |
|
|||
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Research and development |
|
$ |
109,818 |
|
|
$ |
114,072 |
|
|
$ |
(4,254 |
) |
General and administrative |
|
|
33,186 |
|
|
|
28,823 |
|
|
|
4,363 |
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
143,004 |
|
|
|
142,895 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(143,004 |
) |
|
|
(142,895 |
) |
|
|
(109 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Other income, net |
|
|
13,536 |
|
|
|
15,048 |
|
|
|
(1,512 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Net loss |
|
$ |
(129,468 |
) |
|
$ |
(127,847 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,621 |
) |
Research and Development Expenses
Research and development expenses were $109.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2025, compared to $114.1 million for 2024, a decrease of $4.3 million. The decrease was driven by lower rinzimetostat drug manufacturing costs and lower costs from discontinued programs, offset by higher personnel costs of $7.5 million, including additional non-cash stock-based compensation of $2.1 million, and costs related to the advancement of enozertinib.
The following table summarizes our external and internal costs for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024 (in thousands):
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
|
Change |
|
|||
External costs: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
rinzimetostat |
|
$ |
25,090 |
|
|
$ |
32,106 |
|
|
$ |
(7,016 |
) |
enozertinib |
|
|
30,780 |
|
|
|
29,313 |
|
|
|
1,467 |
|
Preclinical, other unallocated costs and discontinued costs |
|
|
15,324 |
|
|
|
21,528 |
|
|
|
(6,204 |
) |
Total external costs |
|
|
71,194 |
|
|
|
82,947 |
|
|
|
(11,753 |
) |
Internal costs |
|
|
38,624 |
|
|
|
31,125 |
|
|
|
7,499 |
|
Total research and development expenses |
|
$ |
109,818 |
|
|
$ |
114,072 |
|
|
$ |
(4,254 |
) |
We expect our research and development expenses to increase substantially for the foreseeable future as we continue to invest in research and development activities related to developing our product candidates, including investments in manufacturing, as our programs advance into later stages of development and as we conduct additional clinical trials.
General and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses were $33.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2025, compared to $28.8 million for 2024, an increase of $4.4 million. This increase was primarily due to higher personnel costs and professional services, including additional non-cash stock-based compensation of $2.7 million.
101
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Sources of Liquidity
We previously entered into an ATM sales agreement with Jefferies LLC as our sales agent, to sell shares of our common stock. On March 11, 2024, pursuant to the terms of the ATM sales agreement, we filed a Form S-3ASR and prospectus supplement, to allow us to sell from time to time up to $200.0 million of shares of our common stock in negotiated transactions or transactions deemed to be an ATM offering. During the year ended December 31, 2025, we raised net proceeds in ATM offerings, including participation form healthcare specialist funds, of approximately $117.6 million through the sale of 11,780,032 shares at a weighted average purchase price of $10.13. In January 2026, we raised net proceeds in an ATM offering with participation from a healthcare specialist fund of approximately $20.0 million. We did not raise proceeds under an ATM offering in 2024.
On May 23, 2025, we entered into a securities purchase agreement with a select group of institutional and accredited healthcare specialist investors for the private placement of 14,130,313 shares of common stock at a price of $6.50 per share and pre-funded warrants to purchase 5,100,532 shares of common stock at a purchase price of $6.4999 per pre-funded warrant, resulting in gross proceeds of $125.0 million. The private placement closed on May 29, 2025.
On January 20, 2024, we entered into a securities purchase agreement with a select group of institutional and accredited healthcare specialist investors for the private placement of 12,500,000 shares of common stock at a price of $10.00 per share, resulting in gross proceeds of $125.0 million. The private placement closed on January 23, 2024.
Future Funding Requirements
To date, we have not generated any revenue. We do not expect to generate any meaningful revenue unless and until we obtain regulatory approval of and commercialize any of our product candidates, and we do not know when, or if at all, that will occur. We will continue to require substantial additional capital to develop our product candidates and fund operations for the foreseeable future. Moreover, we expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we continue the development of and seek regulatory approvals for our product candidates. Further, we are subject to all the risks incident in the development of new pharmaceutical products, and we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may harm our business. Our expenses will increase if, and as, we:
We expect our current cash, cash equivalents and investments will be sufficient to fund our current operating plan into the second half of 2028. However, our forecast of the period of time through which our financial resources will be adequate to support our operations is a forward-looking statement that involves risks and uncertainties, and actual results could vary materially. In order to complete the development of our product candidates and to build the sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure that we believe will be necessary to commercialize our product candidates, if approved, we will require substantial additional funding. Until we can generate a sufficient amount of revenue from the commercialization of our product candidates, we may seek to raise any necessary additional capital through the sale of equity, debt financings or other capital sources, which could include income from collaborations, strategic partnerships or marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements with third parties or from grants. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, the ownership interest of our stockholders will be or could be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of our common stockholders. Debt financing and preferred equity financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, including restricting our operations and limiting our ability to incur liens, issue additional debt, pay dividends, repurchase our common stock, make certain investments or engage in merger, consolidation, licensing or asset sale transactions. If we raise funds through collaborations, strategic partnerships and other similar arrangements with third parties, we may be required to grant rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves. We may be unable to raise additional funds or to enter into such agreements or arrangements on favorable
102
terms, or at all. If we are unable to raise additional funds when needed, we may be required to delay, reduce or eliminate our product development or future commercialization efforts.
We have based our projections of operating capital requirements on our current operating plan, which is based on several assumptions that may prove to be incorrect and we may use all of our available capital resources sooner than we expect. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with research, development and commercialization of product candidates, we are unable to estimate the exact amount and timing of our working capital requirements. Our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including:
A change in the outcome of any of these or other factors with respect to the development of any of our product candidates could significantly change the costs and timing associated with the development of that product candidate. Furthermore, our operating plan may change in the future, and we may need additional funds to meet operational needs and capital requirements associated with such operating plan.
Cash Flows
The following table summarizes the sources and uses of our cash (in thousands):
|
|
December 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
||
Net cash used in operating activities |
|
$ |
(110,970 |
) |
|
$ |
(112,662 |
) |
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities |
|
|
(148,031 |
) |
|
|
22,137 |
|
Net cash provided by financing activities |
|
|
245,264 |
|
|
|
126,547 |
|
Net (decrease) increase in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash |
|
$ |
(13,737 |
) |
|
$ |
36,022 |
|
Operating Activities
Net cash used in operating activities during the year ended December 31, 2025, of $111.0 million was primarily attributable to our net loss of $129.5 million and $5.5 million in changes to working capital related to timing of payments, offset by non-cash expenses of $24.0 million, which were primarily driven by stock-based compensation offset by accretion of discount on investments.
Net cash used in operating activities during the year ended December 31, 2024, of $112.7 million was primarily attributable to our net loss of $127.8 million, offset by non-cash expenses of $13.2 million, which were primarily driven by stock-based compensation offset by accretion of discount on investments, and $2.0 million in changes to working capital related to timing of payments.
103
Investing Activities
Net cash used in investing activities during the year ended December 31, 2025, of $148.0 million was primarily attributable to purchases of investments, net of maturities.
Net cash provided by investing activities during the year ended December 31, 2024, of $22.1 million was primarily attributable to maturities of investments, net of purchases.
Financing Activities
Net cash provided by financing activities during the year ended December 31, 2025, of $245.3 million was primarily attributable to net proceeds received from our private placement in May 2025 of $124.4 million, net proceeds from our ATM offerings of $117.6 million and proceeds received from stock option exercises and common stock issued under our ESPP.
Net cash provided by financing activities during the year ended December 31, 2024, of $126.5 million was primarily attributable to net proceeds received in connection with our private placement in January 2024 of $124.8 million and proceeds received from stock option exercises and common stock issued under our ESPP.
Contractual Obligations and Commitments
Our contractual obligations and commitments as of December 31, 2025, consist of future payments under our operating leases. See Note 8 to our audited financial statements for detail regarding our operating leases.
In addition, we have entered into contracts in the normal course of business with CROs, CMOs and other third parties for preclinical research studies and testing, clinical trials and manufacturing services. These contracts do not contain any minimum purchase commitments and are cancelable by us upon prior notice. Payments due upon cancellation consist only of payments for services provided and expenses incurred, including non-cancelable obligations of our service providers, up to the date of cancellation. We have entered into agreements with certain vendors for the provision of goods and services, which includes manufacturing services with CMOs and development services with CROs. These agreements may include certain provisions for purchase obligations and termination obligations that could require payments for the cancellation of committed purchase obligations or for early termination of the agreements. The amount of the cancellation or termination payments vary and are based on the timing of the cancellation or termination and the specific terms of the agreement.
We do not currently have, nor did we have any off-balance sheet arrangements, as defined in the rules and regulations of the SEC, during the periods presented.
Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Judgments and Estimates
Our management’s discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based on our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (US GAAP). The preparation of these financial statements in conformity with US GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that impact the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, expenses, and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities in our financial statements and accompanying notes. These estimates and assumptions are based on current facts, historical experience and various other factors believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities and the recording of expenses. Actual results may differ materially from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
While our significant accounting policies are described in more detail in the notes to our audited financial statements, we believe that the following accounting policies are those most critical to the judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our financial statements.
104
Research and Development Expenses
As part of the process of preparing our financial statements, we are required to estimate research and development costs incurred during the period, which impacts the amount of accrued expenses and prepaid balances related to such costs as of each balance sheet date. This process involves reviewing open contracts and purchase orders, communicating with our personnel and service providers to identify services that have been performed on our behalf and estimating the level of service performed and the associated cost incurred for the service when we have not yet been invoiced or otherwise notified of the actual cost. The majority of our service providers invoice us monthly in arrears for services performed or when contractual milestones are met. We make estimates of our accrued expenses as of each balance sheet date based on facts and circumstances known to us at that time. We periodically confirm the accuracy of our estimates with the service providers and make adjustments if necessary. The significant estimates in our accrued research and development expenses include the costs incurred for services performed by our vendors in connection with research and development activities for which we have not yet been invoiced.
Research and development costs are expensed in the periods in which they are incurred. External costs consist primarily of payments to outside consultants, third-party CROs, CMOs, clinical trial sites and central laboratories in connection with our discovery and preclinical activities, process development, manufacturing and clinical development activities. External costs also include laboratory supplies as well as allocated facilities, depreciation and other expenses. External expenses are recognized based on an evaluation of the progress to completion of specific tasks using information provided to us by our service providers or our estimate of the level of service that has been performed at each reporting date. We allocate external costs by program, clinical or preclinical. Internal costs consist primary of employee-related costs including salaries, related benefits and stock-based compensation expense for employees engaged in research and development functions. We do not allocate internal costs by program because these costs are deployed across multiple programs and, as such, are not separately classified.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
A description of recently issued accounting pronouncements that may potentially impact our financial position and results of operations is disclosed in Note 2 to our audited financial statements.
Transition from Emerging Growth Company Status and Smaller Reporting Company Status
On December 31, 2025, we ceased to be an “emerging growth company (EGC)”, as defined in the JOBS Act, due to the occurrence of the fifth anniversary of our initial public offering in April 2025. Accordingly, we may no longer take advantage of EGC-related reduced reporting requirements that are otherwise applicable to public companies. EGC status also exempted us from having to provide an auditor attestation of internal control over financial reporting under Sarbanes-Oxley Act Section 404(b).
On December 31, 2025, we also ceased to be a “smaller reporting company” as defined in the Exchange Act because the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates exceeded $700 million as of June 30, 2025. However, we are complying with certain of the scaled disclosure requirements available to smaller reporting companies in this Annual Report (including, for example, presenting only the two most recent fiscal years of audited consolidated financial statements), which we are permitted to do under SEC rules because we were a smaller reporting company in 2025. As a result, the information that we provide to our stockholders may be different than the information you might receive from other public reporting companies in which you hold equity interests.
Due to the loss of EGC and smaller reporting company status as of December 31, 2025, we expect our public company compliance costs to increase.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.
Interest Rate Risk
The primary objective of our investment activities is to preserve principal and liquidity while at the same time maximizing the income we receive without significantly increasing risk. To achieve this objective, we may invest in money market funds, U.S. Treasury notes, and high-quality marketable debt instruments of corporations and government sponsored enterprises with contractual maturity dates of generally less than two years, in accordance with an investment policy approved by our audit committee. Some of the financial instruments that we invest in could be subject to market risk, meaning that a change in prevailing interest rates may cause the value of the instruments to fluctuate. For example, if we purchase a security that was issued with a fixed interest rate and the prevailing interest rate later rises, the value of that security will probably decline. To minimize this risk, we intend to maintain a portfolio which may include a variety of securities, including money market funds, government debt securities, certificates of deposit and commercial paper, all with various maturity dates. As of December 31, 2025, we had cash equivalents and investments of $392.3 million, consisting of interest-bearing money market funds, certificates of deposit, securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and
105
marketable debt instruments of government sponsored enterprises. Due to the nature of our cash equivalents and investments, an immediate 100 basis point change in interest rates would not have a material effect on their fair market value.
Inflation generally affects us by increasing our cost of labor, clinical trial and manufacturing costs. We do not believe that inflation, interest rate changes or exchange rate fluctuations had a significant impact on our results of operations for any periods presented herein.
106
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
Pages |
|
108 |
|
|
109 |
|
|
110 |
|
|
111 |
|
|
112 |
|
|
113 |
107
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Stockholders and Board of Directors
ORIC Pharmaceuticals, Inc.:
Opinion on the Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of ORIC Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company) as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, the related statements of operations and comprehensive loss, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for the years then ended, and the related notes (collectively, the financial statements). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2025 and 2024, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the years then ended, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
Basis for Opinion
These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.
Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
/s/
We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2018.
February 23, 2026
108
ORIC PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
BALANCE SHEETS
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
December 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
||
Assets |
|
|||||||
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
Short-term investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Total current assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Long-term investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Property and equipment, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Other assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Total assets |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity |
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
Accrued liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Total current liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Total liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Stockholders' equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Preferred stock, $ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Common stock, $ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
( |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Total stockholders' equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
109
ORIC PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
(in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
||
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Research and development |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
General and administrative |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Total operating expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Loss from operations |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Other income, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Net loss |
|
$ |
( |
) |
|
$ |
( |
) |
Other comprehensive income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Unrealized gain on investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Comprehensive loss |
|
$ |
( |
) |
|
$ |
( |
) |
Net loss per share, basic and diluted |
|
$ |
( |
) |
|
$ |
( |
) |
Weighted-average shares outstanding, basic and diluted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
110
ORIC PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
(in thousands, except share amounts)
|
|
Common Stock |
|
|
Additional |
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
Accumulated Other Comprehensive |
|
|
Total |
|
|||||||||
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Capital |
|
|
Deficit |
|
|
Income |
|
|
Equity |
|
||||||
Balance at December 31, 2023 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
( |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|||||
Issuance of common stock, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
||||
Exercise of pre-funded warrants |
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
Exercise of common stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|||
Issuance of common stock upon vesting of RSUs |
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
Issuance of common stock from ESPP |
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|||
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
||
Unrealized gain on investments |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Net loss |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
( |
) |
Balance at December 31, 2024 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
( |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|||||
Issuance of common stock and pre-funded warrants, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
||||
Exercise of pre-funded warrants |
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
Exercise of common stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
||||
Issuance of common stock upon vesting of RSUs |
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
Issuance of common stock from ESPP |
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|||
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
||
Unrealized gain on investments |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Net loss |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
( |
) |
Balance at December 31, 2025 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
( |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|||||
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
111
ORIC PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(in thousands)
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
||
Cash flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Net loss |
|
$ |
( |
) |
|
$ |
( |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Depreciation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Accretion of discount on investments, net |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
( |
) |
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Prepaid expenses and other assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Accounts payable and accrued other liabilities |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in operating activities |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Cash flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Acquisitions of property and equipment |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
( |
) |
Purchases of investments |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
( |
) |
Maturities of investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Cash flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Proceeds from issuance of common stock and pre-funded warrants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Issuance costs associated with financings |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
( |
) |
Proceeds from issuance of common stock under ESPP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Proceeds from stock option exercises |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Net cash provided by financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Net (decrease) increase in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash at beginning of period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash at end of period |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
112
ORIC PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1. Description of the Business
ORIC Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (ORIC or the Company) is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to improving patients’ lives by Overcoming Resistance In Cancer. The Company was incorporated in Delaware in August 2014 and has offices in South San Francisco and San Diego, California. The Company’s principal operations are in the United States and the Company operates in
Since inception, the Company has devoted its primary efforts to raising capital, internal research and development activities and business development efforts and has incurred significant operating losses and negative cash flows from operations. In August 2020, the Company licensed from Mirati Therapeutics, Inc. development and commercialization rights to an allosteric inhibitor program directed towards the polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2) and in October 2020, the Company licensed from Voronoi Inc. development and commercialization rights to a brain-penetrant, orally bioavailable, irreversible inhibitor designed to selectively target epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) with high potency against exon 20 mutations.
As of December 31, 2025, the Company had an accumulated deficit of $
As the Company continues its expansion, it may seek additional financing and/or strategic investments, however, there can be no assurance that any additional financing or strategic investments will be available to the Company on acceptable terms, if at all. If events or circumstances occur such that the Company does not obtain additional funding, it will most likely be required to reduce its plans and/or certain discretionary spending, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s ability to achieve its intended business objectives. The accompanying financial statements do not include any adjustments that might be necessary if it were unable to continue as a going concern. Management believes that it has sufficient working capital on hand to fund operations through at least the next twelve months from the date of the issuance of these financial statements.
Strategic Pipeline Prioritization
On August 12, 2025, the Company announced a strategic pipeline prioritization to focus operational and financial resources on the continued advancement of its two lead clinical programs, rinzimetostat (formerly ORIC-944) and enozertinib (formerly ORIC-114). This initiative has resulted in a substantial decrease in preclinical research, primarily from the elimination of the Company’s discovery research group. This resulted in an approximately
At-The-Market Sales Agreement and Offering
The Company previously entered into an “at the market” (ATM) sales agreement with Jefferies LLC as the Company’s sales agent, to sell shares of the Company’s common stock. On March 11, 2024, pursuant to the terms of the ATM sales agreement, the Company filed a Form S-3ASR and prospectus supplement, to allow the Company to sell from time to time up to $
Private Placements
On May 23, 2025, the Company entered into a securities purchase agreement with a select group of institutional and accredited healthcare specialist investors for the private placement of
113
On January 20, 2024, the Company entered into a securities purchase agreement with a select group of institutional and accredited healthcare specialist investors for the private placement of
2. Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Basis of Presentation
The accompanying financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (GAAP). The accompanying financial statements include all known adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of the results as required by GAAP. These adjustments consist primarily of normal recurring accruals and estimates that impact the carrying value of assets and liabilities. Operating results for the year ended December 31, 2025, are not necessarily indicative of future results.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of the Company’s financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that impact the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, expenses, and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities in the Company’s financial statements and accompanying notes. These estimates and assumptions are based on current facts, historical experience and various other factors believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities and the recording of expenses that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ materially from these estimates.
Segment Reporting
The Company’s chief operating decision maker (CODM) is the Company’s Chief Executive Officer. The CODM is assisted in their responsibilities of making decisions regarding resource allocation and performance assessment by the leadership team, consisting of executives, an executive vice president, a senior vice president and a vice president.
The Company views its operations and manages its business as one operating segment, focused on the discovery and development of innovative therapies designed to counter the resistance mechanisms in cancer. Segment profit or loss is measured as the Company’s net loss as reported on the Company’s Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss. The Company monitors its cash and cash equivalents, short-term investments and long-term investments as reported on the Company’s Balance Sheets to determine funding for its research and development.
As the Company does not currently generate revenue, the CODM assesses Company performance through the achievement of pre-clinical and clinical research goals. In addition to the Company’s Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss, the CODM is regularly provided with budgeted and forecasted expense information which is used to determine the Company’s liquidity needs and cash allocation.
Concentration of Credit Risk
Financial instruments, which potentially subject the Company to concentration of credit risk, consist primarily of cash, cash equivalents and investments. The Company maintains deposits in federally insured financial institutions in excess of federally insured limits. The Company is exposed to credit risk in the event of default by the financial institutions holding its cash, cash equivalents and investments that are recorded on its balance sheets. The Company mitigates its risk by investing in high-grade instruments and limiting the concentration in any one issuer, which limits its exposure.
Cash, Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash
The Company considers all highly liquid investments with maturities of
Cash that is restricted and not available for general operations is considered restricted cash. The Company's restricted cash is in connection to a property lease and restrictions will be removed at the respective lease expiration.
114
The following table provides a reconciliation of cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash reported in the balance sheet to the total of the amount presented in the statement of cash flows, in thousands:
|
|
December 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
||
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
Restricted cash included in other assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Total cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
Investments
Property and Equipment
Property and equipment, which consist of lab equipment, leasehold improvements, computer hardware and software, and furniture and fixtures, are stated at historical cost less accumulated depreciation. Depreciation is recognized on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful lives of the related assets, which are generally to
Impairment of Property and Equipment
The Company accounts for the impairment of long-lived assets by reviewing these assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. If circumstances require a long-lived asset or asset group to be tested for possible impairment, the Company first compares undiscounted cash flows expected to be generated by that asset or asset group to its carrying value. If the carrying value of the long-lived asset or asset group is not recoverable on an undiscounted-cash-flow basis, an impairment is recognized to the extent that the carrying value exceeds its fair value. The Company did
Leases
The Company determines if an arrangement is or contains a lease at inception. For leases with a term greater than one year, lease right-of-use assets and lease liabilities are recognized at the lease commencement date based on the present value of lease payments over the lease term. In determining the net present value of lease payments, the Company uses its incremental borrowing rate which represents an estimated rate of interest that the Company would have to pay to borrow equivalent funds on a collateralized basis at the lease commencement date. Leases are classified as finance or operating, with classification affecting the pattern and classification of expense recognition in the statement of operations.
Research and Development Expenses and Accrued Research and Development Expenses
The Company is required to estimate its expenses resulting from its obligations under contracts with vendors, consultants, contract research organizations (CRO), and contract manufacturing organizations (CMO) in connection with conducting research and development activities. The financial terms of these contracts vary from contract to contract and may result in payment flows that do not match the periods over which materials or services are provided under such contracts.
Research and development costs are expensed in the period in which they are incurred. External costs consist primarily of payments to outside consultants, third-party CROs, CMOs, clinical trial sites and central laboratories in connection with the Company’s discovery and preclinical activities, process development, clinical manufacturing and clinical development activities. External expenses are recognized based on an evaluation of the progress to completion of specific tasks using information provided to the Company by its service providers or its estimate of the level of service that has been performed at each reporting date. The Company tracks external costs by program, clinical or preclinical. Internal costs consist primarily of employee-related costs,
115
laboratory supplies, facilities, depreciation and costs related to compliance with regulatory requirements. The Company does not track internal costs by program because these costs are deployed across multiple programs and, as such, are not separately classified.
The Company makes estimates of accrued expenses as of each balance sheet date based on facts and circumstances known at that time. The Company periodically confirms the accuracy of its estimates with the service providers and makes adjustments if necessary. The significant estimates in its accrued research and development expenses include the costs incurred for services performed by vendors in connection with research and development activities for which the Company has not yet been invoiced.
Income Taxes
The Company accounts for income taxes under the asset and liability method, which requires the recognition of deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in the financial statements. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined on the basis of the differences between the financial statements and tax basis of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse. The effect of a change in tax rates on deferred tax assets and liabilities is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date.
The Company recognizes deferred tax assets to the extent that the Company believes these assets are more likely than not to be realized. In making such a determination, management considers all available positive and negative evidence, including future reversals of existing taxable temporary differences, projected future taxable income, tax-planning strategies and results of recent operations. If management determines that the Company would be able to realize its deferred tax assets in the future in excess of their recorded amount, management would make an adjustment to the deferred tax asset valuation allowance, which would reduce the provision for income taxes.
As of December 31, 2025 and 2024, the Company maintained valuation allowances against its deferred tax assets as the Company concluded it had not met the “more likely than not” to be realized threshold. Changes in the valuation allowance when they are recognized in the provision for income taxes would result in a change in the effective tax rate.
Stock-Based Compensation
Stock-based compensation expense represents the grant date fair value of employee, officer, director and non-employee stock option and restricted stock unit grants, estimated in accordance with the applicable accounting guidance and recognized over the vesting period, which approximates the requisite service period of the awards. The Company recognizes forfeitures as they occur.
The fair value of stock options is estimated using a Black-Scholes Merton valuation model on the date of grant. This method requires certain assumptions be used as inputs, such as a risk-free interest rate, expected volatility of the Company’s common stock and expected term of the option before exercise. The risk-free interest rate is based on U.S. Treasury instruments with maturities similar to the expected term. The expected volatility is computed using historical volatility for a period equal to the expected term. Given the limited period of time the Company's stock has been traded, expected volatility is based on the Company's historical volatility and the historical volatility of a group of similar companies that are publicly traded for any stock options with an expected term that is longer than the Company's publicly traded history. The expected term represents the length of time the stock options are expected to be outstanding. Because the Company does not have sufficient exercise behavior, it determines the expected term assumption using the simplified method, which is an average of the contractual term of the option and its vesting period. Options granted have a maximum contractual term of
The fair value of restricted stock units is equal to the closing price of the Company's stock on the date of grant. Restricted stock units generally vest over a three-year period.
License Fees
Acquisitions of technology licenses are charged to acquired in-process research and development expense or capitalized based upon the asset achieving technological feasibility in accordance with management’s assessment regarding the ultimate recoverability of the amounts paid and the potential for alternative future use.
Deferred Offering Costs
The Company capitalizes costs that are directly associated with equity financings until such financings are consummated at which time such costs are recorded against the gross proceeds of the offering. Should an in-process equity financing be abandoned, the deferred offering costs will be expensed immediately as a charge to operating expenses in the statements of operations and comprehensive loss.
116
Other Comprehensive Gain (Loss)
Net Loss Per Share
Basic net loss per common share is calculated by dividing the net loss by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding, including pre-funded warrants issued, during the period, without consideration of potentially dilutive securities. Diluted net loss per share is computed by dividing the net loss by the weighted-average number of common shares, including pre-funded warrants issued, and potentially dilutive securities outstanding for the period. As the Company has reported a net loss for all periods presented, diluted net loss per common share is the same as basic net loss per common share for those periods.
The following table sets forth the computation of the basic and diluted net loss per share (in thousands, except share and per share amounts).
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
|
||
Numerator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Net loss |
|
$ |
( |
) |
|
$ |
( |
) |
|
Denominator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Weighted average shares outstanding used in computing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Net loss per share, basic and diluted |
|
$ |
( |
) |
|
$ |
( |
) |
|
The following outstanding shares of potentially dilutive securities were excluded from the computation of diluted net loss per share attributable to common stockholders for the periods presented because including them would have been anti-dilutive:
|
|
December 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
||
Options to purchase common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Non-vested restricted stock units |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements
In December 2023, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2023-09, Improvements to Income Tax Disclosures, which does not change accounting for income taxes but requires new disclosures focusing on the effective rate reconciliation and taxes paid. The Company adopted the standard and applied the disclosure requirements on a prospective basis for the year ended December 31, 2025. Adoption of this ASU did not have a material impact on the financial statements and related disclosures.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In November 2024, the FASB issued ASU 2024-03, Income Statement - Reporting Comprehensive Income - Expense Disaggregation Disclosures (Subtopic 220 -40): Disaggregation of Income Statement Expenses, which is intended to enhance expense disclosures by requiring additional information about specific expense categories in the notes to the financial statements. The standard is effective, as clarified by ASU 2025-01, for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2026, and interim reporting periods within annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2027, with early adoption permitted. The standard may be adopted prospectively or retrospectively. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the standard on its financial statements and related disclosures.
117
3. License Agreements and Clinical Development Collaborations
Johnson & Johnson collaborations
On August 29, 2024, the Company entered into a clinical supply agreement with Janssen Research & Development, LLC, a Johnson & Johnson company (Johnson & Johnson), to evaluate enozertinib in combination with subcutaneous (SC) amivantamab, Johnson & Johnson’s fully-human EGFR-MET bispecific antibody. The Company will continue to conduct and sponsor the ongoing Phase 1b clinical trial, and Johnson & Johnson will provide SC amivantamab for the trial. The Company maintains full economic ownership and control of enozertinib.
On July 10, 2024, the Company entered into a clinical trial collaboration and supply agreement with Johnson & Johnson, to evaluate rinzimetostat in combination with Erleada® (apalutamide), Johnson & Johnson’s androgen receptor (AR) inhibitor. The Company will continue to conduct and sponsor the ongoing Phase 1b clinical trial, and Johnson & Johnson will provide apalutamide for the trial. The Company maintains full economic ownership and control of rinzimetostat.
Bayer collaboration
On May 14, 2024, the Company entered into a clinical trial collaboration and supply agreement with Bayer Consumer Care AG (Bayer), as amended effective October 23, 2024, to evaluate rinzimetostat in combination with Nubeqa® (darolutamide), Bayer’s AR inhibitor. The Company will continue to conduct and sponsor the ongoing Phase 1b clinical trial, and Bayer will provide darolutamide for the trial. The Company maintains full economic ownership and control of rinzimetostat.
Voronoi License Agreement
On October 19, 2020, the Company entered into a license and collaboration agreement (Voronoi License Agreement) with Voronoi Inc. (Voronoi). The Voronoi License Agreement gives the Company access to Voronoi’s preclinical stage EGFR exon 20 mutation program, including a lead product candidate now designated as enozertinib. Under the Voronoi License Agreement, Voronoi granted the Company an exclusive, sublicensable license under Voronoi’s rights to certain patent applications directed to certain small molecule compounds that bind to EGFR with one or more exon 20 mutations and certain related know-how, in each case, to develop and commercialize certain licensed compounds and licensed products incorporating any such compound in the ORIC Territory, defined as worldwide other than in the People’s Republic of China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan. Pursuant to an amendment to the Voronoi License Agreement that the Company entered into with Voronoi on March 20, 2024, the Company also obtained the right to conduct and control certain clinical trials for the licensed products at specified clinical sites within Voronoi’s territory to support the development and commercialization of licensed products in the ORIC Territory. Under the Voronoi License Agreement, Voronoi had the right to perform certain mutually agreed upon development activities. Except for Voronoi's right to participate in such development activities, the Company is wholly responsible for development and commercialization of licensed products in the ORIC Territory. In addition, the Company is obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize at least
The Company’s financial obligations under the Voronoi License Agreement included an upfront payment of $
Under the Voronoi License Agreement, Voronoi was responsible for certain research and development costs up to a predetermined threshold. Upon achievement of the predetermined threshold in the second quarter of 2022, Voronoi chose to opt out of participation in and funding of future development activities. The Company is also obligated to make milestone payments to Voronoi upon the achievement of certain events. Upon the achievement of certain development and regulatory milestones with respect to the first licensed product, the Company is obligated to pay Voronoi up to a maximum of $
Unless earlier terminated, the Voronoi License Agreement will continue in effect until the expiration of all royalty payment obligations. Following the expiration of the Voronoi License Agreement, the Company will retain its licenses under the intellectual property Voronoi licensed to it on a royalty-free basis. The Company and Voronoi may each terminate the Voronoi License Agreement if the other party materially breaches the terms of such agreement, subject to specified notice and cure provisions, or enters
118
into bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings. Voronoi may also terminate the agreement if the Company discontinues development of licensed products for a specified period of time. The Company also has the right to terminate the Voronoi License Agreement without cause by providing prior notice to Voronoi.
If Voronoi terminates the Voronoi License Agreement for cause, or if the Company terminates the Voronoi License Agreement without cause, then the Company is obligated to grant a nonexclusive license to Voronoi under certain of the Company’s patents and know-how and to assign to Voronoi certain of its regulatory filings for licensed compounds and licensed products.
Mirati License Agreement
On August 3, 2020, the Company entered into a license agreement (Mirati License Agreement) with Mirati Therapeutics, Inc. (Mirati). Under the Mirati License Agreement, Mirati granted the Company a worldwide, exclusive, sublicensable, royalty-free license under Mirati’s rights to certain patents and patent applications directed to certain small molecule compounds that bind to and inhibit PRC2 and certain related know-how, in each case, to develop and commercialize certain licensed compounds and licensed products incorporating any such compounds. Under the Mirati License Agreement, the Company is wholly responsible for development and commercialization of licensed products. In addition, the Company is obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize at least
The Company’s financial obligation under the Mirati License Agreement was an upfront payment of
Unless earlier terminated, the Mirati License Agreement will continue in effect on a country-by-country and licensed product-by-licensed product basis until the later of (a) the expiration of the last valid claim of a licensed patent covering such licensed product in such country or (b)
On October 8, 2023, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) and Mirati announced that they entered into a definitive merger agreement under which BMS through a subsidiary will acquire all of the outstanding shares of Mirati common stock. The Mirati License Agreement continued in effect upon consummation of the transaction, which closed on January 23, 2024.
4. Property and Equipment, net
Property and equipment, net consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
December 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
||
Lab equipment |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
Leasehold improvements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Computer hardware and software |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Furniture and fixtures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Total property and equipment, gross |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Less accumulated depreciation |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
( |
) |
Total property and equipment, net |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
Depreciation expense was $
119
5. Accrued Liabilities
Accrued liabilities consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
December 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
||
Accrued clinical and manufacturing costs |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
Accrued compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Other accruals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Total accrued liabilities |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
6. Investments
The Company's available-for-sale investments consisted of the following (in thousands):
December 31, 2025 |
|
Amortized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Estimated |
|
||||
Short-term |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
U.S. treasury securities |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||||
Short-term investments |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Long-term |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
U.S. treasury securities |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
( |
) |
|
$ |
|
|||
Long-term investments |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
( |
) |
|
$ |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
December 31, 2024 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Short-term |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
U.S. treasury securities |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||||
Short-term investments |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||||
The Company has determined that there were no material declines in fair value of its investments due to credit-related factors as of December 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024. Credit loss is limited due to the nature of the investments.
7. Fair Value Measurements
The accounting guidance defines fair value, establishes a consistent framework for measuring fair value and expands disclosure for each major asset and liability category measured at fair value on either a recurring or nonrecurring basis. Fair value is defined as an exit price, representing the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants. As such, fair value is a market-based measurement that should be determined based on assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability. As a basis for considering such assumptions, the accounting guidance establishes a three-tier fair-value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used in measuring fair value as follows:
Level 1: Observable inputs such as quoted prices in active markets;
Level 2: Inputs, other than the quoted prices in active markets, that are observable either directly or indirectly; and
Level 3: Unobservable inputs in which there is little or no market data, which require the reporting entity to develop its own assumptions.
The carrying amounts of the Company’s interest receivable, included in prepaid expenses and other current assets, accounts payable and accrued liabilities are generally considered to be representative of their fair value because of their short-term nature. The Company’s investments, which may include money market funds and available-for-sale investments consisting of U.S. treasury securities, certificates of deposit and high-quality, marketable debt instruments of corporations and government sponsored enterprises, are measured at fair value in accordance with the fair value hierarchy.
120
Following are the major categories of assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis (in thousands):
|
|
Fair Value Measurements |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Total |
|
|||||
December 31, 2025 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
Money market funds (1) |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|||||
U.S. treasury securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
Total |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|||||
December 31, 2024 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
Money market funds (1) |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|||||
U.S. treasury securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
Total |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|||||
(1) Included in cash and cash equivalents in accompanying balance sheets.
8. Leases
Operating Leases
The Company has an operating lease for office and laboratory space in South San Francisco, California that ends in
Following contains information related to the Company's leases (in thousands, except for weighted-average information):
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
||
Lease costs and cash paid: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Operating lease costs |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
Cash paid for operating leases |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
December 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
||
Lease assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Lease liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Lease liabilities included in accrued liabilities |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Total lease liabilities |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Supplemental weighted- average information: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Weighted-average discount rate |
|
|
% |
|
|
% |
||
Weighted-average remaining lease term (years) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
121
Future lease payments of operating lease liabilities as of December 31, 2025, were as follows (in thousands):
Year ending December 31, |
|
Operating Leases |
|
|
2026 |
|
$ |
|
|
2027 |
|
|
|
|
2028 |
|
|
|
|
2029 |
|
|
|
|
2030 |
|
|
|
|
Thereafter |
|
|
|
|
Total minimum lease payments |
|
|
|
|
Less: interest |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
||
9. Stockholders' Equity and Stock-Based Compensation
As of December 31, 2025, there were
The table below summarizes the total stock-based compensation expense included in the Company’s statements of operations and comprehensive loss for the periods presented (in thousands):
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
||
Research and development |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
General and administrative |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Total stock-based compensation expense |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
Stock Options
The following table summarizes the stock option activity for the year ended December 31, 2025:
|
|
Options |
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2024 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Granted |
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Exercised |
|
|
( |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Forfeited and cancelled |
|
|
( |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Outstanding at December 31, 2025 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
||||
Exercisable at December 31, 2025 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
||||
The total intrinsic value of options exercised was $
The fair value of stock option awards to employees, executives, directors, and other service providers was estimated at the date of grant using the Black-Scholes Merton option pricing model with the following assumptions.
122
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
||
|
|
2025 |
|
2024 |
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
||
Expected volatility |
|
|
||
Expected term (in years) |
|
|
||
Expected dividend yield |
|
|
||
The weighted-average grant-date fair value of options granted was $
The Company recognized stock-based compensation expense related to the vesting of stock options of $
Restricted Stock Units
The following table summarizes the restricted stock unit activity for the year ended December 31, 2025:
|
|
Number of Shares |
|
|
Weighted- |
|
||
Outstanding at December 31, 2024 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
||
Granted |
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
||
Vested |
|
|
( |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
Forfeited |
|
|
( |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2025 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
||
The Company recognized stock-based compensation expense related to the vesting of restricted stock units of $
Employee Stock Purchase Plan
As of December 31, 2025, there were
Pre-funded Warrants
In May 2025, the Company completed a private placement in which it sold
10. Income Tax
Recently, legislation commonly known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) was signed into law in July 2025, which enacts significant changes to U.S tax and related laws, including but not limited to current deduction of domestic research expenses, increasing the limit of the deduction of interest expense to thirty percent of EBITDA and one hundred percent bonus depreciation on
123
eligible property acquired after January 19, 2025. There were no changes to the Company’s tax expense or effective income tax rate given the Company’s valuation allowance position.
In accordance with the recently and prospectively adopted ASU 2023-09, Improvements to Income Tax Disclosures,
|
|
2025 |
|
|||||
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percentage |
|
||
|
$ |
( |
) |
|
|
% |
||
State taxes, net of federal benefit (1) |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
% |
|
Tax credits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Federal research and development credit |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
% |
|
Changes in valuation allowance |
|
|
|
|
|
( |
)% |
|
Nontaxable or nondeductible items |
|
|
|
|
|
( |
)% |
|
Other adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Other |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
% |
|
Change in unrecognized tax benefits |
|
|
|
|
|
( |
)% |
|
Provisions for income taxes |
|
$ |
|
|
|
% |
||
(1)
Significant components of the Company’s provision for income taxes and income taxes computed using the U.S. federal statutory corporate tax rate for the year ended December 31, 2024 were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
2024 |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Statutory rate |
|
$ |
( |
) |
State tax |
|
|
( |
) |
Other permanent items |
|
|
|
|
Research and development credit |
|
|
( |
) |
Change in valuation allowance |
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
Provisions for income taxes |
|
$ |
|
|
124
Significant components of the Company’s deferred taxes were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
As of December 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
||
Deferred tax assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Net operating loss carryforwards |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
Research and development credits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Stock-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Accruals and other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Intangible assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Capitalized research expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Lease liability |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Gross deferred tax assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Less valuation allowance |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
( |
) |
Total deferred tax assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Deferred tax liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Property and equipment |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
( |
) |
Right-of-use assets |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
( |
) |
Other |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
( |
) |
Total deferred tax liabilities |
|
|
( |
) |
|
|
( |
) |
Deferred income taxes, net |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
A valuation allowance of $
As of December 31, 2025, the Company had available net operating loss (NOL) carryforwards of $
Pursuant to Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), annual use of the Company’s NOL and credit carryforwards may be limited in the event a cumulative change in ownership of more than
Upon the occurrence of an ownership change under Section 382 as outlined above, utilization of the Company’s NOL and research and development credit carryforwards are subject to an annual limitation, which is determined by first multiplying the value of the Company’s stock at the time of the ownership change by the applicable long-term tax-exempt rate, which could be subject to additional adjustments, as required. Any limitation may result in expiration of a portion of the NOL or R&D credit carryforwards before utilization. The Company is currently in the process of conducting a Section 382 study to determine if such an ownership change has occurred.
The Company recognizes liabilities for uncertain tax positions based in a two-step process. The first step is to evaluate the tax position for recognition by determining if the weight of available evidence indicates that it is more likely than not that the position will be sustained on audit, including resolution of related appeals or litigation processes, if any. The second step is to measure the tax benefit as the largest amount that is more than 50% likely of being realized upon settlement. While the Company believes that it has appropriate support for the positions taken on its tax returns, the Company regularly assesses the potential outcome of examinations by tax authorities in determining the adequacy of its provision for income taxes.
125
The following table summarizes the activity related to the Company's gross unrecognized tax benefits (in thousands):
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, |
|
|||||
|
|
2025 |
|
|
2024 |
|
||
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
Increases related to current year tax positions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Ending balance |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
||
As of December 31, 2025, the Company had gross unrecognized tax benefits of $
The Company is subject to taxation in the United States and California. The Company is not currently under examination by any taxing authorities. Due to the carryover of tax attributes, the statute of limitations is currently open for tax years since inception.
11. Employee Benefit Plan
The Company has a defined-contribution 401(k) plan for employees. Employees are eligible to participate in the plan beginning on the first day of the month following date of hire. Under the terms of the plan, employees may make voluntary contributions as a percentage of compensation. The Company matches employee contributions as permitted by the plan and may make an additional discretionary match as determined by the Company's board of directors. The Company's cost related to the 401(k) plan was $
126
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.
None.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our reports filed or submitted under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time period specified in the SEC's rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to management including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. As of December 31, 2025, we carried out an evaluation under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures, as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act. Based upon that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective at a reasonable assurance level as of December 31, 2025.
Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act). Under the supervision of and with the participation of our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, our management assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2025, based on the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in “Internal Control-Integrated Framework” (2013). Based on this assessment, management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2025.
This Annual Report on Form 10-K does not include an attestation report of our independent registered public accounting firm on our internal control over financial reporting due to an exemption for “non-accelerated filers.”
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting identified in connection with the evaluation required by Rules 13a-15(d) and 15d-15(d) of the Exchange Act that occurred during the quarter ended December 31, 2025 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Inherent Limitations on Effectiveness of Controls
A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable and not absolute assurance of achieving the desired control objectives. In reaching a reasonable level of assurance, management necessarily was required to apply its judgment in evaluating the benefits of possible controls and procedures relative to their costs. In addition, the design of any system of controls is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions; over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or the degree of compliance with policies or procedures may deteriorate. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.
Item 9B. Other Information.
Securities Trading Arrangements of Directors and Executive Officers
No officers or directors, as defined in Rule 16a-1(f) of the Exchange Act,
Item 9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions That Prevent Inspections.
Not applicable.
127
PART III
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.
Information required by this item will be contained in our definitive proxy statement to be filed with the SEC on Schedule 14A within 120 days after December 31, 2025, and is incorporated herein by reference.
Item 11. Executive Compensation.
Information required by this item will be contained in our definitive proxy statement to be filed with the SEC on Schedule 14A within 120 days after December 31, 2025, and is incorporated herein by reference.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.
Information required by this item will be contained in our definitive proxy statement to be filed with the SEC on Schedule 14A within 120 days after December 31, 2025, and is incorporated herein by reference.
Information required by this item will be contained in our definitive proxy statement to be filed with the SEC on Schedule 14A within 120 days after December 31, 2025, and is incorporated herein by reference.
Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services.
Our independent registered public accounting firm is KPMG LLP, San Diego, CA, Auditor Firm ID:
Information required by this item will be contained in our definitive proxy statement to be filed with the SEC on Schedule 14A within 120 days after December 31, 2025, and is incorporated herein by reference.
128
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules.
(a) The following documents are filed as part of this report:
(1) Financial Statements
The financial statements of ORIC Pharmaceuticals, Inc. are filed as part of this report on Form 10-K under Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
(2) Financial Statement Schedules
All other schedules have been omitted because they are not required, not inapplicable, or the required information is included in the financial statements or notes thereto.
(3) Exhibits
The documents listed in the Exhibit Index are incorporated by reference or are filed with this report, in each case as indicated herein (numbered in accordance with Item 601 of Regulation S-K).
Item 16. Form 10-K Summary.
None.
129
Exhibit Index
|
|
|
|
Incorporated by Reference |
||||||
Exhibit Number |
|
Description |
|
Form |
|
File No. |
|
Exhibit |
|
Filing Date |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Registrant |
|
8-K |
|
001-39269 |
|
3.1 |
|
4/28/20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
8-K |
|
001-39269 |
|
3.1 |
|
3/24/23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
S-1/A |
|
333-236792 |
|
4.2 |
|
4/20/20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
10-K |
|
001-39269 |
|
4.3 |
|
3/21/22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.3 |
|
|
8-K |
|
001-39269 |
|
4.1 |
|
5/28/25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.1 |
|
|
S-1 |
|
333-236792 |
|
10.1 |
|
2/28/20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.2+ |
|
2014 Equity Incentive Plan, as amended, and forms of agreement thereunder |
|
S-1 |
|
333-236792 |
|
10.2 |
|
2/28/20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.3+ |
|
2020 Equity Incentive Plan and forms of agreements thereunder |
|
S-1/A |
|
333-236792 |
|
10.3 |
|
4/20/20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.4+ |
|
2020 Employee Stock Purchase Plan and forms of agreements thereunder |
|
10-Q |
|
001-39269 |
|
10.2 |
|
11/8/21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.5+ |
|
Employment Letter between the Registrant and Jacob M. Chacko, M.D. |
|
S-1 |
|
333-236792 |
|
10.5 |
|
2/28/20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.6+ |
|
Employment Letter between the Registrant and Pratik Multani, M.D. |
|
S-1 |
|
333-236792 |
|
10.6 |
|
2/28/20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.7+ |
|
Employment Letter between the Registrant and Dominic Piscitelli |
|
S-1 |
|
333-236792 |
|
10.7 |
|
2/28/20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.8+ |
|
|
S-1 |
|
333-236792 |
|
10.8 |
|
2/28/20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.9+ |
|
|
S-1 |
|
333-236792 |
|
10.9 |
|
2/28/20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.10+ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Filed herewith |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.11 |
|
Lease between the Registrant and Britannia Pointe Grand Limited Partnership, dated June 5, 2015 |
|
S-1 |
|
333-236792 |
|
10.11 |
|
2/28/20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.12 |
|
|
8-K |
|
001-39269 |
|
10.1 |
|
8/16/21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.13+ |
|
Amended and Restated 2022 Inducement Equity Incentive Plan, and form agreements thereunder |
|
8-K |
|
001-39269 |
|
10.1 |
|
3/14/25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.14# |
|
License Agreement between the Registrant and Mirati Therapeutics, Inc., dated as of August 3, 2020. |
|
10-Q |
|
001-39269 |
|
10.2 |
|
5/9/22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.15# |
|
|
10-Q |
|
001-39269 |
|
10.3 |
|
5/9/22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.16 |
|
|
10-Q |
|
001-39269 |
|
10.1 |
|
5/6/24 |
|
130
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.17 |
|
Open Market Sales AgreementSM by and between the Registrant and Jefferies LLC, dated May 6, 2021 |
|
8-K |
|
001-39269 |
|
1.1 |
|
5/6/21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.18 |
|
|
8-K |
|
001-39269 |
|
10.1 |
|
6/27/23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.19 |
|
|
8-K |
|
001-39269 |
|
10.1 |
|
1/22/24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.20 |
|
|
8-K |
|
001-39269 |
|
10.1 |
|
5/28/25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19.1 |
|
|
10-K |
|
001-39269 |
|
19.1 |
|
2/18/25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Filed herewith |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24.1 |
|
Power of Attorney (included on the signature page to this Annual Report on Form 10-K) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Filed herewith |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Filed herewith |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Filed herewith |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.1* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Furnished herewith |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.2* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Furnished herewith |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
97.1+ |
|
|
10-K |
|
001-39269 |
|
97.1 |
|
3/11/24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
101.INS |
|
Inline XBRL Instance Document |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Furnished herewith |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
101.SCH |
|
Inline XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema with Embedded Linkbase Document |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Furnished herewith |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
104 |
|
Cover Page Interactive Data File (embedded within the Inline XBRL document) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Furnished herewith |
+ |
Indicates management contract or compensatory plan. |
# |
Portions of this exhibit (indicated by asterisks) have been omitted as the registrant has determined that (1) the omitted information is not material and (2) the omitted information would likely cause competitive harm to the registrant if publicly disclosed. |
* |
The certifications attached as Exhibits 32.1 and 32.2 that accompany this Annual Report on Form 10-K are not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and are not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of ORIC Pharmaceuticals, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether made before or after the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing. |
131
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the Registrant has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
ORIC Pharmaceuticals, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
Date: February 23, 2026 |
|
By: |
/s/ Jacob M. Chacko |
|
|
|
Jacob M. Chacko, M.D. |
|
|
|
President and Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
POWER OF ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature appears below constitutes and appoints Jacob M. Chacko, M.D. and Dominic Piscitelli as his or her true and lawful attorneys-in-fact and agents, with full power of substitution and substitution, for him or her and in his or her name, place, and stead, in any and all capacities (including his capacity as a director and/or officer of ORIC Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) to sign any or all amendments to this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and all other documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each of them, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as they, he or she might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorney-in-fact and agents or any of them, or their, his, or her substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, this Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
Signature |
|
Title |
|
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Jacob M. Chacko |
|
President and Chief Executive Officer |
|
February 23, 2026 |
Jacob M. Chacko, M.D. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Dominic Piscitelli |
|
Chief Financial Officer |
|
February 23, 2026 |
Dominic Piscitelli |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Richard Heyman |
|
Chair of the Board of Directors |
|
February 23, 2026 |
Richard Heyman, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Mardi Dier |
|
Director |
|
February 23, 2026 |
Mardi Dier |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Steven Hoerter |
|
Director |
|
February 23, 2026 |
Steven Hoerter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Lori Kunkel |
|
Director |
|
February 23, 2026 |
Lori Kunkel, M.D. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Angie You |
|
Director |
|
February 23, 2026 |
Angie You, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
132