Item 1. Business
Item 1. Business
About Eton
Eton is an innovative pharmaceutical company focused on developing and commercializing treatments for rare diseases. The Company currently has four commercial rare disease products, ALKINDI SPRINKLE® for the treatment of adrenocortical insufficiency; Carglumic Acid for the treatment of hyperammonemia due to N-acetylglutamate synthas e (“NAGS”) deficiency ; Betaine Anhydrous for the treatment of homocystinuria; and Nitisinone for the treatment of hereditary tyrosinemia type 1 (HT-1). The Company has three additional product candidates in late-stage development: ET-400, ET-600, and ZENEO® hydrocortisone autoinjector.
ALKINDI SPRINKLE ® (hydrocortisone granules) – This product was approved by the FDA in September 2020 as a replacement therapy for Adrenocortical Insufficiency (“AI”) in children under 17 years of age. The product is the first and only FDA-approved granule hydrocortisone formulation designed to help provide accurate dosing for newborns and children with adrenal insufficiency. We acquired U.S. marketing rights to the product in March 2020 and launched ALKINDI SPRINKLE® in December 2020 with a sales force targeting pediatric endocrinologists. We believe there are approximately 10,000 children currently suffering from AI in the United States. ALKINDI SPRINKLE® is protected by three issued patents that extend to 2034.
Carglumic Acid tablets – Our Carglumic Acid product is an FDA-approved generic version of Carbaglu®. Our product is approved for the treatment of acute and chronic hyperammonemia due to NAGS deficiency. We acquired marketing rights to the product in October 2021 and launched the product in December 2021. We promote the product with our internal sales force.
Betaine Anhydrous for Oral Solution – Our Betaine Anhydrous product is an FDA-approved generic version of Cystadane® for the treatment of homocystinuria, a rare inherited condition that is estimated to impact fewer than 2,000 patients in the United States. We acquired the product in September 2022 and launched the product in May 2023.
Nitisinone – Our Nitisinone product is an FDA-approved generic version of Orfadin® for the treatment of tyrosinemia type 1, an ultra-rare inherited condition that is estimated to impact fewer than 500 patients in the United States. We acquired the product in October 2023 and launched the product in February 2024.
ET-400 – Eton expects to submit a new drug application for the product during 2024, which could allow for an approval and launch of the product in 2025.
ET-600 – Eton expects to submit a new drug application for the diabetes insipidus product during 2025, which could allow for an approval and launch of the product in early 2026.
ZENEO ® Hydrocortisone Autoinjector – Our ZENEO® hydrocortisone autoinjector product candidate is a proprietary needle-free autoinjector under development for the treatment of adrenal crisis. We expect to submit a New Drug Application (“NDA”) for the product in 2025, which could allow for FDA approval in 2026.
Eton Pharmaceuticals
Products Summary
Product
Eton Category
Indication
FDA Status
Carglumic Acid Tablets
Metabolic
NAGS deficiency
Commercial
ALKINDI SPRINKLE®
Endocrinology
Adrenal Insufficiency
Commercial
Betaine Anhydrous
Metabolic
Homocystinuria
Commercial
Nitisinone
Metabolic
Tyrosinemia Type 1
Commercial
ET-400
Pending
Pending
Submission Expected in 2024
ET-600
Endocrinology
Diabetes Insipidus
Submission Expected in 2025
ZENEO® Hydrocortisone
Endocrinology
Adrenal Crisis
Submission Expected in 2025
3
Table of Contents
Goals and Strengths
Our goal is to become a leading profitable pharmaceutical company focused on developing and commercializing treatments for rare diseases. We believe we are unique in the pharmaceutical industry in our ability to identify, acquire, and advance products through the development and regulatory process. Our biggest competitive strengths are:
●
Business development experience – our ability to identify and execute transactions on under-appreciated development assets. Our team has completed over 150 business development transactions throughout their careers and their industry connections and track record provide the company with proprietary deal flow. We typically avoid participating in broker led transactions of auction processes.
●
Regulatory expertise – our knowledge and experience in gaining FDA approval, and particularly our knowledge within the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway, provides drug sponsors with the opportunity to leverage existing data or literature to drastically expedite drug development timelines and reduce investment.
●
Established commercial operations – our sales and marketing teams have developed strong relationships with healthcare professionals and patient advocacy groups in multiple therapeutic areas. These relationships allow us to commercialize new products quickly and effectively.
Sales and Marketing
We currently commercialize four orphan products under our own label with our internal infrastructure and sales force. We market and sell our ALKINDI SPRINKLE®, Carglumic Acid, Betaine Anhydrous, and Nitisinone in the United States consistent with applicable laws. These products are distributed to patients via specialty pharmacies, which support customer service and reimbursement activities.
Research and Development
We currently have nine employees that support our product research and development (“R&D”) priorities and strategy. In addition, we utilize external sources for various product development activities, including the resources of our product development partners for certain product candidates and through the use of contract laboratory services on a fee for service model. Our R&D priorities include:
●
developing, manufacturing and delivering a pipeline of innovative products to patients living with rare diseases;
●
advancing our capabilities that can position us for long-term R&D leadership; and
●
pursuing multiple development pathways through acquisitions, joint ventures, partnerships, and product licensing with creativity, flexibility and urgency to deliver innovative products to patients as quickly as possible.
Manufacturing and Suppliers
We rely on third-party contract manufacturing organizations (“CMOs”) to manufacture our products. The majority of our finished product manufacturing partners are based in the United States or Europe. We seek to work with CMOs that have a long history of quality and FDA compliance. All products are manufactured in compliance with current Good Manufacturing Processes (“GMP”), and our internal quality system requires us to enter quality agreements with and audit all of our manufacturers prior to commercializing the product. Our choice to rely on external manufacturers significantly reduces the amount of capital invested in our business and allows us the flexibility to pursue a broad range of opportunities beyond the specific capabilities of a single facility.
Intellectual Property
Our success depends in part on our ability to obtain patents, to protect trade secrets, to operate without infringing upon the proprietary rights of others and to prevent others from infringing on our proprietary rights. Our policy is to seek to protect our proprietary position by, among other methods, filing U.S. and foreign patent applications related to our proprietary technology, inventions and improvements that are important to the development of our business. We also rely on our trade secrets, know-how and continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our proprietary position. We vigorously defend our intellectual property to preserve our rights and gain the benefit of our technological investments. Our business is not dependent, however, upon any single patent, trademark, or contract.
4
Table of Contents
ALKINDI SPRINKLE® is protected by three issued patents that extend to 2034. ET-400 is protected by an issued patent that extends to 2043, and there are additional patent applications related to this product and ET-600 under review with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”). In June 2021, we acquired U.S. marketing rights from Crossject to the ZENEO® hydrocortisone autoinjector. We intend to seek patent protection on our internally developed products as circumstances warrant.
Government Regulation
The FDA and comparable regulatory agencies in federal, state and local jurisdictions impose substantial requirements upon the development, manufacture, and marketing of pharmaceutical products. These agencies regulate the research, testing, manufacture, quality, control, storage, distribution, marketing and sale of our pharmaceutical products. Additionally, in the United States, we must follow rules and regulations established by the FDA requiring the presentation of data indicating that our products are safe and efficacious and are manufactured in accordance with GMP regulations. If we do not comply with applicable requirements, we may be fined, the government may refuse to approve our marketing applications or allow us to manufacture or market our products, and we may be criminally prosecuted. We, and our manufacturers and contract research organizations (“CROs”), may also be subject to regulations under other foreign, federal, state and local laws, including, but not limited to, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Clean Air Act and import, export and customs regulations as well as the laws and regulations of other countries. The U.S. government has increased its enforcement activity regarding marketing practices domestically and internationally. As a result, pharmaceutical companies must ensure their compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and federal healthcare fraud and abuse laws, including the False Claims Act.
FDA Market Approval Process
The steps required to be taken before a new drug may be marketed in the United States generally include:
●
completion of pre-clinical laboratory and animal testing under current good laboratory practices;
●
completion of required chemistry, manufacturing and controls testing;
●
submission to the FDA of an Investigational New Drug (“IND”) application, which must be evaluated and found acceptable by the FDA before human clinical trials may commence;
●
performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials to establish the safety, pharmacokinetics and efficacy of the proposed drug for its intended use;
●
approval by an independent institutional review board (“IRB”) or ethics committee before each human clinical trial may be initiated;
●
submission and approval of an NDA by the FDA; and
●
compliance with any post-approval requirements, including agreement with FDA of the language on the package insert.
The testing and approval process require substantial time, effort, and financial resources, and we cannot be certain that any approval will be granted on a timely basis, if at all. Preclinical development of a drug candidate can take several years to complete, with no guarantee that an IND based on those studies will become effective to even permit clinical testing to begin. Even though several of our pharmaceutical product candidates utilize active drug ingredients that are commercially marketed in the United States in other dosage forms, we need to establish safety and effectiveness of those active ingredients in the formulation and dosage forms that we are developing.
Clinical studies are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the study, what types of patients may enter the study, schedules of tests and procedures, drugs, dosages, and length of study, as well as the parameters to be used in monitoring safety, and the efficacy criteria to be evaluated. A protocol for each clinical study and any subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND process.
Clinical trials are usually conducted in three phases. Phase 1 clinical trials are conducted in small groups of healthy volunteers to assess safety of various dosing regimens and pharmacokinetics. After a safe dose has been established, in Phase 2 clinical trials the drug is administered to a limited patient population with the target disease or condition to identify possible adverse events and safety risks, to conduct a preliminary evaluation of the efficacy of the product candidate in treating the targeted disease or condition. Phase 3 clinical trials are usually multi-center, double-blind controlled trials in larger numbers of subjects to assess as fully as possible both the safety and effectiveness of the drug, establish the overall risk-benefit of the product candidate, and provide adequate information for the labeling of the product.
5
Table of Contents
Clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with the FDA’s current Good Clinical Practices (“GCP”) requirements. The FDA may order the temporary or permanent discontinuation of a clinical study at any time or impose other sanctions if it believes that the clinical study is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements or that the participants are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. An IRB generally must approve the clinical trial design and patient informed consent at study sites that the IRB oversees and may halt a study, either temporarily or permanently, for failure to comply with the IRB’s requirements, or may impose other conditions. Additionally, some clinical studies are overseen by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical study sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board or committee. This group recommends whether or not a trial may move forward at designated checkpoints based on access to certain data from the study. The clinical study sponsor may also suspend or terminate a clinical trial based on evolving business objectives and/or competitive climate.
As a product candidate moves through the clinical testing phases, manufacturing processes are further defined, refined, controlled, and validated. The level of control and validation required by the FDA increases as clinical studies progress. We and the third-party manufacturers on which we rely for the manufacture of our product candidates and their respective components (including the active pharmaceutical ingredient (“API”)) are subject to requirements that drugs be manufactured, packaged, and labeled in conformity with GMP. To comply with GMP requirements, manufacturers must continue to spend time, money, and effort to meet requirements relating to personnel, facilities, equipment, production and process, labeling and packaging, quality control, recordkeeping, and other requirements.
After completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, detailed information on the product candidate is submitted to the FDA in the form of an NDA, requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications, together with payment of a user fee, unless waived. An NDA includes all relevant data available from pertinent nonclinical and clinical studies, including negative or ambiguous results as well as positive findings, together with detailed information on the chemistry, manufacture, controls, and proposed labeling, among other things. To support marketing approval, the data submitted must be sufficient in quality and quantity to establish the safety and efficacy of the product candidate for its intended use to the satisfaction of the FDA.
If an NDA submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review of the NDA. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (“PDUFA”) the FDA’s goal is to complete its initial review and respond to the applicant within ten months of submission, unless the application relates to an unmet medical need, or is for a serious or life-threatening indication, in which case the goal may be within six months of NDA submission. However, the review process and the target response date under PDUFA may be extended if the FDA requests or the NDA sponsor otherwise provides additional information or clarification regarding information already provided in the NDA. During its review of an NDA, the FDA may refer the application to an advisory committee for review, evaluation, and recommendation as to whether the application should be approved. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of the advisory committee, but it typically follows such recommendations. Data from clinical studies are not always conclusive and the FDA and/or any advisory committee it appoints may interpret data differently than the applicant.
After the FDA evaluates the NDA and inspects manufacturing facilities where the drug product and/or its API will be produced, it will either approve commercial marketing of the drug product with prescribing information for specific indications or issue a Complete Response Letter (“CRL”) indicating that the application is not ready for approval and stating the conditions that must be met in order to secure approval of the NDA. If the CRL requires additional data and the applicant subsequently submits that data, the FDA nevertheless may ultimately decide that the NDA does not satisfy its criteria for approval. The FDA could also approve the NDA with a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (“REMS”) plan to mitigate risks, which could include medication guides, physician communication plans, or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries, and other risk minimization tools. The FDA also may condition approval on, among other things, changes to proposed labeling, development of adequate controls and specifications, or a commitment to conduct post-marketing testing. Such post-marketing testing may include Phase 4 clinical trials and surveillance to further assess and monitor the product’s safety and efficacy after approval.
6
Table of Contents
If the FDA approves one of our product candidates, we will be required to comply with post-approval regulatory requirements, including record-keeping requirements and reporting of adverse reactions and production problems, and updated safety and efficacy information. Also, quality control and manufacturing procedures must continue to conform to GMP after approval, and the FDA periodically inspects manufacturing facilities to assess compliance with GMP, which imposes extensive procedural, substantive and record-keeping requirements. If we seek to make certain changes to an approved product, such as certain manufacturing changes, we will need FDA review and approval before the change can be implemented. For example, if we change the manufacturer of a product or our API, the FDA may require stability or other data from the new manufacturer. Such data will take time and are costly to generate, and the delay associated with generating these data may cause interruptions in our ability to meet commercial demand, if any. While physicians may use products for indications that have not been approved by the FDA, we may not label or promote the product for an indication that has not been approved. Securing FDA approval for new indications is similar to the process for approval of the original indication and requires, among other things, submitting data from adequate and well-controlled studies that demonstrate the product’s safety and efficacy in the new indication. Even if such studies are conducted, the FDA may not approve any change in a timely fashion, or at all.
The FDA may also require post-marketing testing or Phase 4 testing, as well as risk minimization action plans and surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved product or place conditions on an approval that could otherwise restrict the distribution or use of the product.
Section 505(b)(2) New Drug Applications
We intend to submit applications for certain product candidates via the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway. As an alternate path for FDA approval of new indications or new formulations of previously approved products, a company may submit a Section 505(b)(2) NDA, instead of a “stand-alone” or “full” NDA. Section 505(b)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”) was enacted as part of the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, otherwise known as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. Section 505(b)(2) permits the submission of an NDA where at least some of the information required for approval comes from studies not conducted by or for the applicant and for which the applicant has not obtained a right of reference. Some examples of products that may be allowed to follow a 505(b)(2) path to approval are drugs that have a new dosage form, strength, route of administration, formulation, or indication.
The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit applicants to rely upon certain published nonclinical or clinical studies conducted for an approved product or the FDA’s conclusions from prior review of such studies. The FDA may require companies to perform additional studies or measurements to support any changes from the approved product. The FDA may then approve the new product for all or some of the labeled indications for which the reference product has been approved, as well as for any new indication supported by the Section 505(b)(2) application. While references to nonclinical and clinical data not generated by the applicant or for which the applicant does not have a right of reference are allowed, all development, process, stability, qualification, and validation data related to the manufacturing and quality of the new product must be included in an NDA submitted under Section 505(b)(2).
To the extent that the Section 505(b)(2) applicant is relying on the FDA’s conclusions regarding studies conducted for an already approved product, the applicant must provide the patent number and certify to the FDA in its opinion and to the best of its knowledge, one of the following circumstances: (i) the required patent information has not been filed; (ii) the listed patent has expired; (iii) the listed patent has not expired, but will expire on a particular date and approval is sought after patent expiration; or (iv) the listed patent is invalid or will not be infringed by the new product. The Section 505(b)(2) application also will not be approved until any non-patent exclusivity, such as exclusivity for obtaining approval of a new chemical entity, listed in the Orange Book for the reference product has expired. If the Orange Book certifications outlined above are not accomplished, the Section 505(b)(2) applicant may invest a significant amount of time and expense in the development of its products only to be subject to significant delay and patent litigation before its products may be commercialized.
7
Table of Contents
Section 505(j) Abbreviated New Drug Applications
The 505(j) pathway is used for product candidates that are therapeutically equivalent to an approved product. The underlying premise of the 505(j) pathway is that a product candidate classified as therapeutically equivalent can be substituted for the approved product with the full expectation that the substituted product will produce the same clinical effect and safety profile as the approved product when administered under the same conditions. A product candidate utilizing the 505(j) pathway requires an abbreviated new drug application, (“ANDA”), which relies on the FDA’s finding that the previously approved drug candidate is safe and effective. An ANDA generally must contain information to show that the product candidate is the same as the approved product with respect to API, conditions of use, route of administration, dosage form, strength, and labeling, with certain permissible differences, and is the bioequivalent of the approved drug. The 505(j) pathway typically requires no clinical testing other than a bioequivalence trial. While the 505(j) pathway is typically shorter and less expensive than the 505(b)(2) pathway, the 505(b)(2) pathway allows greater flexibility as to the characteristics of the product candidate.
Other U.S. Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements
Products distributed in the United States are also subject to additional healthcare regulation and enforcement by the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. Applicable federal and state healthcare laws and regulations include the following:
●
The U.S. Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving, or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order, lease, or recommendation of, any good or service, for which payment may be made under federal healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid;
●
The federal civil and criminal false claims laws, including the U.S. False Claims Act, can be enforced by individuals, on behalf of the government, through civil whistleblower or qui tam actions, and the civil monetary penalties law, prohibits individuals or entities from, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the federal government claims for payment that are false or fraudulent or making a false statement to avoid, decrease, or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government;
●
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”), which prohibits, among other things, executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors, and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up 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;
●
HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, and their implementing regulations, imposes obligations, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information; and
●
Analogous state laws and regulations, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws, may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers, state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government; state and local laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures; state laws that require the reporting of information related to drug pricing; state and local laws requiring the registration of pharmaceutical sales and medical representatives; and state and foreign laws, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679, governing the privacy and security of health information in some circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.
8
Table of Contents
Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of available statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the federal or state laws described above or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including significant criminal, civil, and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, integrity oversight and reporting obligations to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations.
Reimbursement
Sales of our products in the United States may depend, in part, on the extent to which the costs of the products will be covered and reimbursed by third-party payors, such as government health programs, commercial insurance and managed health care organizations. These third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical products and services. Additionally, the containment of health care costs has become a priority of federal and state governments, and the prices of drugs have been a focus in this effort. The United States government, state legislatures and foreign governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could further limit our net revenue and results. If these third-party payors do not consider our products to be cost-effective compared to other available therapies, they may not cover our products after approval as a benefit under their plans or, if they do, the level of payment may not be sufficient to allow us to sell our products on a profitable basis.
The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, (the “MMA”), imposed new requirements for the distribution and pricing of prescription drugs for Medicare beneficiaries and included a major expansion of the prescription drug benefit under Medicare Part D. Under Part D, Medicare beneficiaries may enroll in prescription drug plans offered by private entities which will provide coverage of outpatient prescription drugs. Part D plans include both stand-alone prescription drug benefit plans and prescription drug coverage as a supplement to Medicare Advantage plans. Unlike Medicare Parts A and B, Part D coverage is not standardized. Part D prescription drug plan sponsors are not required to pay for all covered Part D drugs, and each drug plan can develop its own drug formulary that identifies which drugs it will cover and at what tier or level. However, Part D prescription drug formularies must include drugs within each therapeutic category and class of covered Part D drugs, though not necessarily all the drugs in each category or class. Any formulary used by a Part D prescription drug plan must be developed and reviewed by a pharmacy and therapeutic committee. Government payment for some of the costs of prescription drugs may increase demand for products for which we receive marketing approval. However, any negotiated prices for our products covered by a Part D prescription drug plan will likely be lower than the prices we might otherwise obtain. Moreover, while the MMA applies only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private third-party payors often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own payment rates. Any reduction in payment that results from the MMA may result in a similar reduction in payments from non-governmental payors.
9
Table of Contents
Decreases in third-party reimbursement for our products or a decision by a third-party payor to not cover our products could reduce physician usage of the products and have a material adverse effect on our sales, results of operations and financial condition.
Healthcare Reform
In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the health-care system that could prevent or delay marketing approval pharmaceutical products, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to profitably sell our product candidates. Among policy makers and payors in the United States and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives.
In March 2010, then President Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (collectively, the “Health Care Reform Law”), which, among other things, imposed reporting requirements on manufacturers related to drug samples and financial relationships with physicians and teaching hospitals, increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, extended the rebate program to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations, established annual fees on manufacturers of certain branded prescription drugs, and established a Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program.
Some of the provisions of the Health Care Reform Law have yet to be implemented, and there have been judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the Health Care Reform Law. In addition, Congress has considered legislation that would repeal or repeal and replace all or part of the Health Care Reform Law. While Congress has not passed comprehensive repeal legislation, two bills affecting the implementation of certain taxes under the Health Care Reform Law have been signed into law and became effective in January 2019. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (the “Tax Act”) included a provision which repealed the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the Health Care Reform Law on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate.” The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, among other things, amended the Health Care Reform Law to increase from 50 percent to 70 percent the point-of-sale discount that is owed by pharmaceutical manufacturers who participate in Medicare Part D and to close the coverage gap in most Medicare drug plans, commonly referred to as the “donut hole”.
In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the Health Care Reform Law was enacted, including:
● In August 2011, President Obama signed into law the Budget Control Act of 2011, which, among other things, created the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to recommend to Congress proposals for deficit reduction of at least $1.2 trillion for the years 2013 through 2021. The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction did not achieve a targeted deficit reduction, which triggered the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This includes aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of, up to 2% per fiscal year, and, due to subsequent legislative amendments, will remain in effect through 2030 unless Congress takes additional action. These reductions went into effect in April 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2030 unless additional action is taken by Congress.
● On April 13, 2017, CMS published a final rule that gives states greater flexibility in setting benchmarks for insurers in the individual and small group marketplaces, which may have the effect of relaxing the essential health benefits required under the Health Care Reform Law for plans sold through such marketplaces.
● On May 30, 2018, the 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 drug products 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 pharmaceutical manufacturer to make its drug products available to eligible patients as a result of the Right to Try Act.
● On May 23, 2019, CMS published a final rule to allow Medicare Advantage Plans the option of using step therapy for Part B drugs beginning January 1, 2020.
10
Table of Contents
Further, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny in the United States of pharmaceutical pricing practices in light of the rising cost of prescription drugs and biologics. Such scrutiny has resulted in several recent U.S. Congressional Inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer and patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for products. In July 2021, President Biden signed an Executive Order affirming the administration’s policy to (i) support legislative reforms that would lower the prices of prescription drug and biologics, including by allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices, by imposing inflation caps, and, by supporting the development and market entry of lower-cost generic drugs and biosimilars; and (ii) support the enactment of a public health insurance option. Among other things, the Executive Order also directs the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (“HHS”) to provide a report on actions to combat excessive pricing of prescription drugs, enhance the domestic drug supply chain, reduce the price that the Federal government pays for drugs, and address price gouging in the industry; and directs the FDA to work with states and Indian Tribes that propose to develop section 804 Importation Programs in accordance with the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, and the FDA’s implementing regulations. The FDA released such implementing regulations on September 24, 2020, which went into effect on November 30, 2020, providing guidance for states to build and submit importation plans for drugs from Canada. On September 25, 2020, CMS stated drugs imported by states under this rule will not be eligible for federal rebates under Section 1927 of the Social Security Act and manufacturers would not report these drugs for “best price” or Average Manufacturer Price purposes. Since these drugs are not considered covered outpatient drugs, CMS further stated it will not publish a National Average Drug Acquisition Cost for these drugs. If implemented, importation of drugs from Canada may materially and adversely affect the price we receive for any of our product candidates. Additionally, on November 30, 2020, HHS published a regulation removing safe harbor protection for price reductions from pharmaceutical manufacturers to plan sponsors under Part D, either directly or through pharmacy benefit managers, unless the price reduction is required by law. The rule also creates a new safe harbor for price reductions reflected at the point-of-sale, as well as a safe harbor for certain fixed fee arrangements between pharmacy benefit managers and manufacturers. Pursuant to court order, the removal and addition of the aforementioned safe harbors were delayed and recent legislation imposed a moratorium on implementation of the rule until January 1, 2032. Although a number of these and other proposed measures may require authorization through additional legislation to become effective, and the Biden administration may reverse or otherwise change these measures, both the Biden administration and Congress have indicated that they will continue to seek new legislative measures to control drug costs.
In August 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act (“IRA”) which provides for (i) the government to set or negotiate prices for select high-cost Medicare Part D (beginning in 2026) and Medicare Part B drugs (beginning in 2028) that are more than nine years (for small-molecule drugs) or 13 years (for biological products) from their FDA approval, (ii) manufacturers to pay a rebate for Medicare Part B and Part D drugs when prices increase faster than inflation beginning in 2022 for Medicare Part D and 2023 for Medicare Part B drugs, and (iii) Medicare Part D redesign which replaces the current coverage gap provisions and establishes a $2,000 cap for out-of-pocket limits costs for Medicare beneficiaries beginning in 2025, with manufacturers being responsible for 10% of costs up to the $2,000 cap and 20% after that cap is reached. Implementation of the IRA is expected to be carried out through upcoming actions by regulatory authorities, the outcome of which is uncertain.
In August 2023, the Biden Administration published the first ten medicines subject to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. In addition, there will be a new Medicare manufacturer discount program agreement expected to be signed in March 2024 that will change our discounting obligations for all medicines in Medicare, with few exceptions, beginning in 2025. The Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program is currently subject to legal challenges and therefore, the outcome of the Program remains uncertain. We continue to evaluate the impact of the IRA on our business, operations and financial condition and results as the full effect of the IRA on our business and the pharmaceutical industry remains uncertain.
At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. We expect that states will continue to seek cost cutting, which may focus on managed care capitation payments, supplemental rebates, and/or formulary management.
We expect that the healthcare reform measures that have been adopted and 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 and could seriously harm our future revenues. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private third-party payors.
There have been, and likely will continue to be, legislative and regulatory proposals at the foreign, federal, and state levels directed at broadening the availability of healthcare and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize our product. Such reforms could have an adverse effect on anticipated revenue from product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatory approval and may affect our overall financial condition and ability to develop product candidates.
11
Table of Contents
Employees
We currently have 30 full-time employees, 9 of whom are engaged in research and development activities, 16 are engaged in sales and marketing operations and 5 of whom are engaged in general corporate and strategy roles. We periodically utilize outside consultants on an as-needed basis, including medical consultants.
Corporate and Other Information
We were incorporated under the laws of the state of Delaware in April 2017. Our principal executive offices are located at 21925 W. Field Parkway, Suite 235, Deer Park, Illinois, 60010, and our telephone number is (847) 787-7361. Our corporate website address is www.etonpharma.com, to which we regularly post copies of our press releases as well as links to reports we have filed with the SEC, which are available free of charge as soon as reasonably practicable after being electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. Interested persons can subscribe on our website to email alerts that are sent automatically when we issue press releases, file reports with the SEC or post certain other information to our website. Information contained on or accessible through our website is not a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K or our other filings with the SEC.
We own two U.S. federal trademark applications and unregistered trademarks, including our company name. All other trademarks or trade names referred to in this Annual Report are the property of their respective owners. Solely for convenience, the trademarks and trade names in this Annual Report are referred to without the symbols ® and ™, but such references should not be construed as any indication that their respective owners will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, their rights thereto.
Risk Factors Summary
You should carefully consider the risks set forth in the section of this Annual Report of Form 10-K entitled “Risk Factors” beginning on page 14 of this Annual Report, including, but not limited to, the following:
●
We may have significant research, regulatory and development expenses as we advance our product candidates.
●
We may need to grow the size of our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth.
●
If product liability lawsuits are brought against us, we may incur substantial liabilities and may be required to limit commercialization of our product candidates.
●
We may acquire businesses or products, or form strategic alliances, in the future, and we may not realize the benefits of such acquisitions.
●
We rely significantly on information technology and any failure, inadequacy, interruption or security lapse of that technology, including any cybersecurity incidents, could harm our ability to operate our business effectively.
●
Sales of counterfeits of any of our product candidates, as well as unauthorized sales of any of our product candidates, may have adverse effects on our revenues, business and results of operations and damage our brand and reputation.
●
We have entered into several arrangements with related parties for the development and marketing of certain product candidates and these arrangements present potential conflicts of interest.
●
We face competition from other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies and our operating results will suffer if we fail to compete effectively.
●
Our competitors may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for comparable products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, and the risk of our competitors doing so may lead us to develop drug candidates without disclosing certain information with regard to such candidates.
●
If we are not able to obtain regulatory approvals for our product candidates, we will not be able to commercialize our product candidate and our ability to generate revenue will be limited.
12
Table of Contents
●
If the FDA concludes that our product candidates do not satisfy the requirements for the 505(b)(2) regulatory approval pathway, or if the requirements for approval of any of our product candidates under Section 505(b)(2) are not as we expect, the approval pathway for our product candidates will likely take significantly longer, cost significantly more and encounter significantly greater complications and risks than anticipated, and in any case may not be successful.
●
An NDA submitted under Section 505(b)(2) subjects us to the risk that we may be subject to a patent infringement lawsuit that would delay or prevent the review or approval of our product candidate.
●
Even if we receive regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, we may not be able to successfully commercialize the product, and the revenue that we generate from its sales, if any, may be limited.
●
We are subject to ongoing obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense. Additionally, our product candidates could be subject to labeling and other restrictions and withdrawal from the market, and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or if we experience unanticipated problems with our product candidates.
●
Significant additional labeling or warning requirements or limitations on the availability of our products may inhibit sales of affected products.
●
Current and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval of and commercialize our product candidates and affect the prices we may obtain.
●
If we market any of our products or product candidates in a manner that violates health care fraud and abuse laws, or if we violate government price reporting laws, we may be subject to civil or criminal penalties.
●
We may not be able to establish agreements with third parties with whom we wish to collaborate and, if we are able to establish them, we may not be able to establish them on commercially reasonable terms, which could result in alterations or delays of our development and commercialization plans.
●
We expect to rely on third parties to conduct clinical trials for our product candidates. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize any of our product candidates and our business would be substantially harmed.
●
We enter into various contracts in the normal course of our business, some or all of which may require us to indemnify the other party to the contract. In the event we have to perform under these indemnification provisions, it could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
●
Any termination or suspension of, or delays in the commencement or completion of, any necessary studies of any of our product candidates for any indications could result in increased costs to us, delay or limit our ability to generate revenue and adversely affect our commercial prospects.
●
Clinical drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future trial results.
●
Third-party coverage and reimbursement and health care cost containment initiatives and treatment guidelines may constrain our future revenues.
●
We are subject to extensive laws and regulations related to data privacy, and our failure to comply with these laws and regulations could harm our business.
●
We will depend on rights to certain pharmaceutical compounds that have been acquired by us. We do not have complete control over these pharmaceutical compounds and any loss of our rights to them could prevent us from selling our products.
●
It is difficult and costly to protect our intellectual property rights, and we cannot ensure the protection of these rights.
●
Changes in either U.S. or foreign patent law or interpretation of such laws could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products.
●
Our product candidates may infringe the intellectual property rights of others, which could increase our costs and delay or prevent our development and commercialization efforts.
●
Others may claim an ownership interest in our intellectual property, which could expose us to litigation and have an adverse effect on our 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.
13
Table of Contents