Item 1. Business
Item 1. Business.
Overview
Fortress Biotech, Inc. (“Fortress” or the “Company”) is a biopharmaceutical company focused on acquiring and advancing assets to enhance long-term value for shareholders through product revenue, equity holding and dividend and royalty revenue streams. Fortress works in concert with our extensive network of key opinion leaders to identify and evaluate promising products and product candidates for potential acquisition. We have executed arrangements in partnership with some of the world’s foremost universities, research institutes and pharmaceutical companies, including City of Hope National Medical Center (“COH” or “City of Hope”), Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Nationwide Children’s Hospital, Columbia University, the University of Pennsylvania, AstraZeneca plc, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Ltd. (“DRL”), and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited (“Sun Pharma”).
Following the exclusive license or other acquisition of the intellectual property underpinning a product or product candidate, Fortress leverages its business, scientific, regulatory, legal and financial expertise to help its subsidiaries and partner companies achieve their goals. Partner and subsidiary companies then assess a broad range of strategic arrangements to accelerate and provide additional funding to support research and development, including joint ventures, partnerships, out-licensings, sales transactions, and public and private financings. To date, three partner companies are publicly-traded, and four subsidiaries have consummated strategic partnerships with industry leaders, including AstraZeneca plc as successor-in-interest to Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“AstraZeneca”), Sentynl Therapeutics, Inc. (“Sentynl”), Axsome Therapeutics, Inc. (“Axsome”), and Sun Pharma.
Our subsidiary and partner companies that are pursuing development and/or commercialization of biopharmaceutical products and product candidates are: Journey Medical Corporation (Nasdaq: DERM, “Journey” or “JMC”), Mustang Bio, Inc. (Nasdaq: MBIO, “Mustang”), Avenue Therapeutics, Inc. (OTC: ATXI, “Avenue”), Cellvation, Inc. (“Cellvation”), Cyprium Therapeutics, Inc. (“Cyprium”), Helocyte, Inc. (“Helocyte”), Oncogenuity, Inc. (“Oncogenuity”) and Urica Therapeutics, Inc. (“Urica”). Checkpoint Therapeutics, Inc. “Checkpoint”), previously a partner company, was acquired by Sun Pharma in May 2025 (the “Checkpoint Acquisition”). Baergic Bio, Inc. (“Baergic”), previously a subsidiary of Avenue, was acquired by Axsome in November 2025.
As used throughout this filing, the words “we”, “us” and “our” may refer to Fortress individually, to one or more of its subsidiaries and/or partner companies, or to all such entities as a group, as dictated by context. Generally, “subsidiary” refers to a private Fortress subsidiary, “partner company” refers to a public Fortress subsidiary, and “partner” refers to an entity with whom one of the foregoing parties has a significant business relationship, such as an exclusive license or an ongoing product-related payment obligation. The context in which any such term is used throughout this document, however, may dictate a different construal from the foregoing. Additionally, this Annual Report on Form 10-K contains references to ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers. However, information on ClinicalTrials.gov does not constitute part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Recent Developments
Checkpoint and UNLOXCYT
In May 2025, our former subsidiary, Checkpoint, was acquired by Sun Pharma for $4.10 per share in cash plus a contingent value right of up to $0.70 per share upon the achievement of EU approval of Checkpoint’s principal drug product candidate (the “Checkpoint Acquisition”). Pursuant to the Checkpoint Acquisition, Fortress received $28.0 million and is eligible to receive a 2.5% royalty on net sales of UNLOXCYT (cosibelimab-ipdl) as well as up to $4.8 million upon achievement of the contingent value right.
7
Table of Contents
Journey and EMROSI (Minocycline Hydrochloride Extended-Release Capsules, 40mg)
In November 2024, we announced that partner company Journey received approval of Emrosi (also referred to as DFD-29), a 40mg minocycline hydrochloride extended release capsule for oral use indicated to treat inflammatory lesions (papules and pustules) of rosacea in adults. Subsequently, Journey announced the commercial launch of Emrosi in March 2025.
Cyprium and ZYCUBO (copper histidinate, also known as CUTX-101)
In January 2025, we announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) had accepted the New Drug Application (“NDA”) for CUTX-101, a copper histidinate injection, for priority review for the treatment of Menkes disease and had set a Prescription Drug User Fee Act (“PDUFA”) target action date of September 30, 2025. In October 2025, we announced that the FDA had issued a Complete Response Letter (“CRL”) to our partner Sentynl for CUTX-101. The CRL noted cGMP deficiencies had been observed at the facility where CUTX-101 is manufactured and did not cite any other approvability concerns, nor did it identify any deficiencies in CUTX-101’s efficacy and safety data.
In December 2025, we announced the FDA accepted the resubmission of the NDA for CUTX-101 as a Class 1 resubmission with a new PDUFA target action date of January 14, 2026.
On January 13, 2026, we announced the FDA approved ZYCUBO (copper histidinate, also referred to as CUTX-101) for the treatment of pediatric patients with Menkes disease. A Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher (“PRV”) was issued in connection with FDA approval and, pursuant to Cyprium’s previous transaction with Sentynl, was transferred to Cyprium.
Cyprium is eligible to receive up to $128 million in aggregate sales milestones from Sentynl, as well as royalties on net sales of ZYCUBO as follows: (i) 3% of annual net sales up to $75 million; (ii) 8.75% of annual net sales between $75 million and $100 million; and (iii) 12.5% of annual net sales in excess of $100 million. On February 22, 2026, Cyprium entered into a definitive asset purchase agreement pursuant to which Cyprium agreed to sell the PRV for $205 million, which was paid upon the closing of the sale as announced on March 30, 2026.
Avenue and ATX-04 (clenbuterol)
On February 18, 2026, Avenue entered into a license agreement with Duke University (“Duke”), pursuant to which Avenue obtained from Duke an exclusive, worldwide license to certain patents and know-how for the development and commercialization of products, including ATX-04 (clenbuterol), for the treatment of lysosomal storage diseases, subject to customary retained rights for Duke and other non-profit or governmental institutions to use the licensed technology for non-commercial research and educational purposes.
Portfolio Highlights
Commercial and Approved Products
Through our partner company Journey we market the following branded dermatology products approved by the FDA for sale in the United States:
● Emrosi (Minocycline Hydrochloride Extended-Release Capsules, 40mg for the treatment of inflammatory lesions of rosacea in adults): approved by the FDA in November 2024, which launched in March 2025;
● Qbrexza: a medicated cloth towelette for the treatment of primary axillary hyperhidrosis;
● Accutane: an oral isotretinoin drug for the treatment of severe recalcitrant nodular acne;
● Amzeeq (minocycline topical foam, 4%): a topical formulation of minocycline for the treatment of inflammatory lesions of non-nodular moderate to severe acne vulgaris in adults and children nine years and older;
8
Table of Contents
● Zilxi (minocycline topical foam, 1.5%): a topical minocycline treatment for inflammatory lesions of rosacea in adults;
● Exelderm Cream and Solution: a broad-spectrum antifungal intended for topical use;
● Targadox: an oral doxycycline drug for adjunctive therapy for severe acne; and
● Luxamend: a water-based emulsion formulated to provide an optimally moist healing environment for superficial wounds; minor cuts or scrapes; dermal ulcers; donor sites; first- and second-degree burns, including sunburns; and radiation dermatitis.
EMROSI (Minocycline Hydrochloride Extended-Release Capsules, 40mg)
Journey received approval in November 2024 for Emrosi (also referred to as DFD-29), a 40mg minocycline hydrochloride extended release capsule for oral use indicated to treat inflammatory lesions (papules and pustules) of rosacea in adults. Emrosi is now the lowest approved oral minocycline hydrochloride dose. It was developed using Multiple Unit Pellet System technology, which combines Immediate Release (25%) and Extended Release (75%) Minocycline pellets for uniform drug release. Emrosi has shown superiority to Oracea and placebo on the co-primary endpoints and all secondary endpoints in two Phase 3 studies, including reduction of total lesion count, as well as reduction in erythema compared to placebo in both studies and was well-tolerated.
The NDA was filed under Section 505(b)(2) of the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”) in January 2024 and was approved in November 2024 by the FDA (NDA 219015). Emrosi has Orange Book-listed patents that extend through January of 2039.
UNLOXCYT (cosibelimab-ipdl)
Our former subsidiary Checkpoint received approval in December 2024 for UNLOXCYT, which is the first and only programmed death-ligand 1 blocking antibody to receive FDA marketing approval for the treatment of adults with metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (“mcSCC”) or locally advanced CSCC (“lacSCC”) who are not candidates for curative surgery or curative radiation.
In May 2025, the Checkpoint Acquisition was closed and in January 2026, Sun Pharma announced the availability in the U.S. of UNLOXCYT for the treatment of adults with mcSCC or lacSCC who are not candidates for curative surgery or curative radiation.
ZYCUBO (copper histidinate injection for Menkes disease, also referred to as CUTX-101)
Our subsidiary Cyprium was previously developing CUTX-101, a copper histidinate injection for the treatment of Menkes disease in pediatric patients. Menkes disease is a rare X-linked pediatric disease caused by gene mutations of copper transporter ATP7A, which affects approximately 1 in 34,810 live male births, and potentially as high as 1 in 8,664 live male births, based on a recent genome-based ascertainment study. Menkes disease is characterized by distinctive clinical features, including sparse and depigmented hair, failure to thrive, connective tissue disorders and severe neurological symptoms such as seizures and hypotonia.
In February 2021, Cyprium entered into a development and asset purchase agreement (the “Sentynl APA”) with Sentynl, a U.S.-based specialty pharmaceutical company owned by the Zydus Group. Under the Sentynl APA, Sentynl provided certain development funding for the CUTX-101 program, with Cyprium initially remaining in control of development of such program. Pursuant to a contractual right exercised by Sentynl in October 2023, Cyprium assigned the NDA and certain other assets pertaining to the CUTX-101 program to Sentynl and received $4.5 million in connection with the closing of such transaction. Sentynl is obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize CUTX-101, including the funding of the same.
9
Table of Contents
Cyprium is eligible to receive up to $128 million in aggregate sales milestones from Sentynl, as well as royalties on net sales of ZYCUBO as follows: (i) 3% of annual net sales up to $75 million; (ii) 8.75% of annual net sales between $75 million and $100 million; and (iii) 12.5% of annual net sales in excess of $100 million. On February 22, 2026, Cyprium entered into a definitive asset purchase agreement pursuant to which Cyprium agreed to sell the PRV for $205 million, which was paid upon the closing of the sale as announced on March 30, 2026.
ZYCUBO has received Breakthrough Therapy, Fast Track, Rare Pediatric Disease, and Orphan Drug Designation from the FDA. Copper histidinate has also been granted Orphan Designation by the European Medicines Agency.
Late Stage Product Candidates
Triplex (cytomegalovirus vaccine and immunotherapy)
Through our subsidiary Helocyte, we are developing Triplex, a universal recombinant Modified Vaccinia Ankara viral vector vaccine engineered to induce a rapid, robust and durable virus-specific T cell response to three immuno-dominant proteins (UL83 (pp65), UL123 (IE1), and UL122 (IE2)) linked to cytomegalovirus (“CMV”). In a Phase 1 study, Triplex was observed to be well-tolerated and highly immunogenic when administered to healthy volunteers at multiple dose levels ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01941056). In a Phase 2 trial, Triplex was observed to be safe, well-tolerated, highly immunogenic and a reduction in CMV events in allogeneic stem cell transplant recipients was observed ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02506933).
As of March 2026, Triplex is currently the subject of multiple, ongoing trials in various clinical settings including: patients undergoing stem cell transplant; adults co-infected with CMV and Anti-Human Immunodeficiency Virus (“HIV”); and in combination with a CAR T cell therapy for adults with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (“NHL”) or acute lymphoblastic leukemia (“ALL”). Helocyte has an exclusive, worldwide license to Triplex from COH.
Solid organ transplant
In May 2024, Helocyte announced that the first patient was dosed in a multi-center, placebo-controlled, randomized Phase 2 study of Triplex for control of CMV in patients undergoing liver transplantation. The trial is funded by a grant from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health that could provide over $20 million in aggregate, non-dilutive funding ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06075745 ).
Stem cell transplant
In January 2025, Helocyte announced that the first patient was dosed in a Phase 2 multi-center, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial to evaluate Triplex’s effectiveness when administered to human leukocyte antigen (“HLA”) matched related stem cell donors to reduce CMV events in adults undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (“HSCT”). The trial is funded by a grant from the National Cancer Institute (“NCI”) (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06059391).
Helocyte anticipates that its Phase 2 multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study measuring the safety and effectiveness of Triplex in reducing CMV complications in patients previously infected with CMV and undergoing donor hematopoietic cell transplant to be completed in the first half of 2026 ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02506933).
Additionally, Helocyte is recruiting for a Phase 1/2 trial to study safety outcomes and dosage for Triplex in treating pediatric patients with positive cytomegalovirus who are undergoing donor stem cell transplant ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03354728).
10
Table of Contents
HIV
In December 2021, Helocyte announced that a Phase 2 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial was initiated to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Triplex, a CMV vaccine, in eliciting a CMV-specific immune response and reducing CMV replication in people living with HIV. The Phase 2 trial is fully enrolled with topline data anticipated in the first half of 2026. The trial is being conducted by the AIDS Clinical Trials Group and is funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, part of the National Institutes of Health ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05099965).
Additionally, a trial has been initiated for a Phase 1 trial to evaluate the feasibility and safety of Triplex in combination with a bispecific CMV-HIV CAR for adults living with HIV-1 on stable ART who have maintained viral suppression. The study is funded by a $11.3 million grant from the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine in addition to other non-dilutive sources ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06252402 ).
Oncology
Helocyte is currently recruiting for two Phase 1 trials in combination with autologous CMV-specific CD19 CAR T cell therapy for adults with intermediate or high grade B-lineage NHL, and in settings following stem cell transplant in patients with high grade B-cell NHL ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT05801913 and NCT05432635).
Additionally, a trial has been initiated for a Phase 1 trial in combination with an allogeneic anti-CD19-CAR CMV-specific T cell therapy for patients with high-risk ALL after matched related donor hematopoietic stem cell transplant ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06735690).
CAEL-101 (light chain fibril-reactive monoclonal antibody for AL amyloidosis)
Our former subsidiary Caelum, in collaboration with AstraZeneca, is developing a novel, potentially first-in-class monoclonal antibody called CAEL-101 (also known as anselamimab) for the treatment of amyloid light chain (“AL”) amyloidosis. CAEL-101 is designed to improve organ function by reducing or eliminating amyloid deposits in the tissues and organs of patients with AL amyloidosis. CAEL-101 is currently in two Phase 3 trials for Mayo Stage IIIa and May Stage IIIb AL amyloidosis and additional information on those trials can be found at ClinicalTrials.gov using identifiers: NCT04512235 and NCT04504825.
In July 2025, AstraZeneca announced an update from its Cardiac Amyloid Reaching for the CARES Phase 3 clinical program showing that anselamimab did not achieve statistical significance for the primary endpoint compared to placebo in patients with Mayo stages IIIa and IIIb AL amyloidosis. The primary endpoint was defined as a hierarchical combination of time to all-cause mortality (“ACM”) and frequency of cardiovascular hospitalizations (“CVH”). All patients in the clinical program received background standard of care for plasma cell dyscrasia. AstraZeneca stated that anselamimab showed highly clinically meaningful improvement in time to ACM and frequency of CVH in a prespecified subgroup of patients, compared to placebo (although AstraZeneca did not further characterize this subgroup). AstraZeneca also reported that anselamimab was well tolerated, with the majority of events balanced between the anselamimab treatment arm and the placebo arm. AstraZeneca indicated that the company plans to submit the pre-specified subgroup analysis from the CARES trials with regulatory authorities. In January 2026, the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”) disclosed that an approval application for anselamimab for the treatment of adult patients with kappa light chain amyloidosis was being reviewed.
In October 2021, AstraZeneca acquired Caelum for an upfront payment of $135 million paid to Caelum shareholders, of which approximately $56.9 million was paid to Fortress. The agreement also provides for additional potential payments to Caelum shareholders totaling up to $295 million, payable upon the achievement of regulatory and commercial milestones. Fortress is eligible to receive 42.4% of all possible potential milestone payments, which together with the upfront payment, would total up to approximately $182 million.
11
Table of Contents
Dotinurad (urate transporter (URAT1) inhibitor for gout)
Through our subsidiary Urica, we acquired an exclusive license from Fuji Yakuhin Co. Ltd. to develop a URAT1 inhibitor product candidate in development for the treatment of gout, dotinurad, in North America, Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. In July 2024, Urica entered into an asset purchase agreement, royalty agreement, and related agreements (collectively, the “Transaction Documents”) with Crystalys Therapeutics, Inc. (“Crystalys”). Crystalys is a Delaware corporation founded in 2023 and seeded by leading life sciences institutional investors. Under the Transaction Documents, Urica transferred rights to dotinurad and related intellectual property, licenses and agreements to Crystalys. In return, Crystalys issued to Urica shares of its common stock including certain anti-dilution provisions through the raise of $150 million in equity securities. The Transaction Documents also granted Urica a secured 3% royalty on future net sales of dotinurad to be paid by Crystalys.
In October 2025, we announced that Crystalys announced a $205 million Series A financing to support the advancement of global Phase 3 clinical studies evaluating dotinurad for the treatment of gout and also announced the first patients were dosed in two randomized, double-blind, multicenter global Phase 3 trials. Urica maintains an equity position in Crystalys and has appointed a director to Crystalys’ Board of Directors pursuant to its rights to nominate a director under the Transaction Documents.
Dotinurad has obtained regulatory approval in Japan, China, Philippines and Thailand.
Early and Mid-Stage Product Candidates
MB-101 (IL13R α 2 CAR T Cell Program for Glioblastoma)
Mustang is currently developing MB-101 for malignant brain tumors, including glioblastoma (“GBM”). MB-101 is an optimized CAR T product targeting IL13Rα2 on the surface of the malignant cells and incorporates enhancements in CAR T design and T cell engineering to improve antitumor potency and T cell persistence.
GBM is the most common brain and central nervous system (“CNS”) cancer, accounting for approximately 52% of malignant primary brain and CNS tumors and approximately 14% of all primary brain and CNS tumors. On average during the years 2017 through 2021, more than 13,000 new cases of GBM were diagnosed per year in the U.S. While GBM is a rare disease, with only 3.3 cases per 100,000 persons per year in the U.S., it is quite lethal, with a median survival of only 12-15 months. Standard of care therapy for patients less than 70 years of age consists of maximal surgical resection, radiation, chemotherapy with temozolomide, and alternating electric field therapy (“tumor treating fields”). Since the approval of temozolomide for frontline GBM treatment in 2005, tumor treating fields is the only novel therapy that has improved survival in this indication, and there is no standard of care whatsoever for recurrent GBM.
Immunotherapy approaches targeting brain tumors offer promise over conventional treatments. IL13Rα2 is an attractive target for CAR T therapy, as it has limited expression in normal tissue but is over-expressed on the surface of greater than 50% of GBM tumors. CAR T cells are designed to express membrane-tethered IL-13 receptor ligand mutated at a single site (glutamic acid at position 13 to a tyrosine; E13Y) with high affinity for IL13Rα2 and reduced binding to IL13Rα1 in order to reduce healthy tissue targeting (Kahlon KS et al. Cancer Research. 2004;64:9160-9166).
Having optimized MB-101 dose, schedule, route of administration and T cell selection in a completed Phase 1 trial, ongoing COH sponsored studies include:
● MB-101 with or without nivolumab and ipilimumab in treating patients with recurrent or refractory GBM (currently enrolling patients; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04003649);
● MB-101 in treating patients with recurrent or refractory GBM with a substantial component of leptomeningeal disease (active, not recruiting; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04661384); and
● MB-101 in treating children with recurrent or refractory IL13Rα2 positive brain tumors (currently enrolling patients; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04510051) sponsored by COH.
12
Table of Contents
The final planned MB-101 trial will be in combination with the herpes simplex virus type 1 (“HSV-1”) oncolytic virus (MB-108) in treating patients with recurrent or refractory GBM and anaplastic astrocytoma. The objective of this trial is to turn immunologically “cold” tumors “hot” with MB-108 in order to potentially enhance the efficacy of MB-101, then infuse MB-101 loco-regionally as was done in the Phase 1 single-agent MB-101 trial. The combination of MB-101 and MB-108 is referred to as MB-109.
MB-108 (HSV-1 Oncolytic Virus C134 for recurrent GBM)
MB-108 is a next-generation oncolytic herpes simplex virus (“oHSV”) treatment in development at Mustang that is conditionally replication competent; that is, it is designed to replicate in tumor cells, but not in normal cells, thus killing the tumor cells directly through this process. It was in-licensed from Nationwide Children’s Hospital, and the University of Alabama at Birmingham is evaluating the safety of this oncolytic virus in patients with recurrent GBM in an ongoing Phase 1 trial ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03657576).
The rationale for in-licensing MB-108 was to potentially enhance the efficacy of MB-101 by first turning immunologically “cold” malignant glioma tumors “hot” with MB-108, then infusing MB-101 loco-regionally, as was done in the Phase 1 single-agent MB-101 trial. This combination is to be referred to as MB-109.
MB-109 (MB-101 (IL13Rα2-targeted CAR T Cell Therapy) + MB-108 (HSV-1 oncolytic virus))
Mustang is developing MB-109, a combination approach of MB-101 and MB-108, as a potential treatment for IL13Rα2+ relapsed or refractory GBM and anaplastic astrocytoma (“AA”). An attractive novel approach to control GBM is adoptive cellular immunotherapy utilizing CAR T cells. CAR T cells can be engineered to recognize very specific antigenically distinct tumor populations and to migrate through the brain parenchyma to kill malignant cells. In addition, oncolytic viruses (“OVs”) have been developed to effectively infect and kill cancer cells in the tumor, as well as modify the microenvironment to increase tumor immunogenicity and immune cell trafficking within the tumor. Due to these properties, OVs have been studied in combination with other treatments to enhance the effectiveness of immunotherapies.
Preliminary anti-tumor activity has been observed in clinical studies administering the OV (MB-108) and CAR T cell therapy (MB-101) as single agents; however, the combination has not yet been explored. To determine if the combination of both therapies will result in a synergistic effect, investigators from COH developed preclinical studies in orthotopic GBM models in nude mice. Dr. Christine Brown from City of Hope presented these preclinical studies at the American Association for Cancer Research 2022 Annual Meeting. It was observed that co-treatment with MB-108 OV and IL13Rα2-directed CAR-T cells gave no adverse events and, more notably, that pre-treatment with MB-108 re-shaped the tumor microenvironment by increasing immune cell infiltrates and enhanced the efficacy of sub-therapeutic doses of CAR-T cell therapy delivered either intraventricularly or intratumorally. These preclinical studies aimed to provide a deeper understanding of this combination approach to support the potential benefit of a combination study that will evaluate an oHSV (MB-108) and IL13Rα2-directed CAR-T cells (MB-101).
In October 2023, Mustang announced that the FDA had accepted its Investigational New Drug (“IND”) application of MB-109 for the treatment of recurrent GBM and high-grade astrocytoma. The Phase 1 clinical study under that IND would investigate increasing doses of intratumorally administered MB-108 followed by dual intratumoral and intraventricular administration of MB-101 to treat recurrent GBM and high-grade astrocytomas that express IL13Rα2 on the surface of tumor cells.
In November 2024, Mustang announced that the FDA granted Orphan Drug Designation to Mustang for MB-108 for the treatment of malignant glioma. In July 2025, Mustang announced that the FDA granted Orphan Drug Designation to Mustang for MB-101 for the treatment of recurrent diffuse and anaplastic astrocytoma (astrocytomas) and GBM.
Mustang is currently exploring with COH to conduct an investigator-sponsored single-institution trial under the COH IND to treat patients with IL13Rα2+ recurrent GBM and high-grade astrocytoma with MB-109 that could potentially be initiated in the second quarter of 2026.
13
Table of Contents
IV Tramadol
Our partner company Avenue is developing an intravenous formulation of tramadol (“IV tramadol”), a schedule IV opioid for the treatment of post-operative acute pain. Avenue completed two Phase 3 efficacy studies in 2018 and 2019 and announced that both had met their primary endpoints and all key secondary endpoints. In December 2019, Avenue submitted an NDA for IV tramadol to treat moderate to moderately severe postoperative pain pursuant to Section 505(b)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), and following a CRL received in October 2020, resubmitted the NDA in February 2021. The FDA assigned a PDUFA goal date of April 12, 2021 for the resubmitted NDA for IV tramadol. On June 14, 2021, Avenue announced the receipt of a second CRL. Avenue submitted a formal dispute resolution request (“FDRR”) with the Office of Neuroscience of the FDA on July 27, 2021. On August 26, 2021, Avenue received an Appeal Denied Letter from the Office of Neuroscience of the FDA in response to the FDRR submitted on July 27, 2021. On August 31, 2021, Avenue submitted a FDRR with the Office of New Drugs (“OND”) of the FDA. On October 21, 2021, Avenue received a written response from the OND of the FDA stating that the OND needs additional input from an Advisory Committee in order to reach a decision on the FDRR.
In February 2022, Avenue held an Advisory Committee meeting with the FDA regarding IV tramadol. In the final part of the public meeting, the Advisory Committee voted yes or no on the following question: “Has the Applicant submitted adequate information to support the position that the benefits of their product outweigh the risks for the management of acute pain severe enough to require an opioid analgesic in an inpatient setting?” The results were 8 yes votes and 14 no votes. In March 2022, Avenue received an Appeal Denied Letter from the Office of New Drugs in response to the formal dispute resolution request. In August 2022, Avenue participated in a Type A Meeting with the FDA Division of Anesthesia, Analgesia, and Addiction Products (“DAAAP”) regarding a briefing document submitted that presented a study design Avenue believed would have the potential to address the comments and deficiencies noted in the Letter.
In January 2024, Avenue announced that they reached final agreement with the FDA on the Phase 3 safety study protocol and statistical analysis approach, including the primary endpoint. The final non-inferiority study is designed to assess the risk of opioid-induced respiratory depression related to opioid stacking on IV tramadol compared to IV morphine. The study will randomize approximately 300 post bunionectomy patients to IV tramadol or IV morphine for pain relief administered during a 48-hour post-operative period. Of note, the same surgical model was used in a pivotal Phase 3 Trial. In the Phase 3 safety study to be conducted, patients will have access to IV hydromorphone, a Schedule II opioid, for rescue of breakthrough pain. The primary endpoint is a composite of elements indicative of respiratory depression. Avenue plans to initiate the study in the future, subject to having the necessary financing.
ATX-04 (clenbuterol)
On February 18, 2026, our partner company Avenue entered into a license agreement with Duke University (“Duke”), pursuant to which Avenue obtained an exclusive worldwide license (the "ATX-04 License") from Duke to certain patents and know-how pertaining to clenbuterol for the treatment of lysosomal storage diseases. Under the ATX-04 License, Avenue made an upfront payment and reimbursed certain patent expenses to Duke and has an obligation to make development, regulatory, and commercial milestone payments upon the achievement of certain milestones. In addition, Avenue is obligated to pay a tiered low single-digit royalty on future net sales of ATX-04. Avenue intends to advance ATX-04 through a late-stage clinical development program leveraging existing human safety and efficacy data, with an initial focus on treating Pompe disease as an adjunct to enzyme replacement therapy (“ERT”).
Preclinical Product Candidates
AAV-ATP7A Gene Therapy
Through our subsidiary Cyprium, we are developing adeno-associated virus (“AAV”)-based gene therapy (“AAV-ATP7A”) for the treatment of Menkes disease. Cyprium entered into a license agreement with Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development to acquire the global rights to develop and commercialize AAV-ATP7A gene therapy. AAV-ATP7A gene therapy has demonstrated the ability to rescue neurological phenotypes and improve survival when coadministered with copper histidinate injections in a mouse model of Menkes disease and has been granted Orphan Drug Designation by the FDA.
14
Table of Contents
In March 2024, Cyprium announced a $4.1 million grant from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke of the NIH was awarded to the Research Institute at Nationwide Children’s Hospital and Principal Investigator, Stephen G. Kaler, M.D., M.P.H., to fund the completion of preclinical studies, manufacturing, and preparation of an IND application for a first-in-human clinical trial.
AVTS-001 Gene Therapy
In April 2023, we announced the execution of an asset purchase agreement, pursuant to which 4D Molecular Therapeutics (“4DMT”) acquired Aevitas’ proprietary rights to its short-form human complement factor H (“sCFH”) asset for the treatment of complement-mediated diseases. Under the terms of the agreement, Aevitas is eligible to receive cash payments from 4DMT totaling up to $140 million in potential late-stage development, regulatory and sales milestones. A range of single-digit royalties on net sales are also payable.
Prior to the agreement with 4DMT, Aevitas licensed the sCFH asset from the University of Pennsylvania and also collaborated with University of Massachusetts Medical to optimize AAV constructs.
CEVA-D and CEVA-102
Through our subsidiary Cellvation, we are developing CEVA-D, a novel bioreactor device that is designed to enhance the anti-inflammatory potency of bone marrow-derived cells without genetic manipulation, using wall shear stress to suppress tumor necrosis factor-a production by activated immune cells. CEVA-102 is the first cell product produced by CEVA-D, and may be applicable for various indications, including the treatment of severe traumatic brain injury.
Other Product Candidates
MB-106 (CD20-targeted CAR T cell therapy)
Mustang was previously developing MB-106 in a collaboration with Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center (“Fred Hutch”), a CD20-targeted, 3rd generation autologous CAR T-cell therapy, for patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell NHL, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and autoimmune diseases. In September 2025, Mustang received notice from Fred Hutch of its intent to terminate the MB-106 license for cause in connection with unpaid patent expenses and maintenance fees. In December 2025, Mustang agreed to terminate the MB-106 License with Fred Hutch in exchange for a mutual release of liability and forgiveness of approximately 50% of amounts previously owed to them. Additionally, Mustang is eligible to receive sublicense revenue on any subsequent licensing consideration Fred Hutch may receive as a result of the license of MB-106 to a third party under a license agreement entered into during the three-year period following the termination.
AJ201 (Nrf1 and Nrf2 activator, androgen receptor degradation enhancer)
AJ201 is currently being studied in a Phase 1b/2a multicenter, randomized, double-blind clinical trial at six clinical sites across the U.S. for the treatment of spinal and bulbar muscular atrophy (“SBMA”), also known as Kennedy’s Disease ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05517603). Enrollment was completed in January 2024.
SBMA is a rare, inherited, X-linked genetic neuromuscular disease primarily affecting men and AJ201 was designed to modify SBMA through multiple mechanisms including degradation of the abnormal AR protein and by stimulating Nrf1 and Nrf2, which are involved in protecting cells from oxidative stress which can lead to cell death.
AJ201 has been granted Orphan Drug Designation by the FDA for the indications of SBMA, Huntington’s Disease, and Spinocerebellar Ataxia.
15
Table of Contents
AJ201 is owned by AnnJi Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. (“AnnJi”). Under a previous licensing arrangement between AnnJi and Avenue, and a related termination agreement, Avenue will be eligible to receive from AnnJi: payments totaling up to $5 million in the aggregate upon the occurrence of certain development and regulatory milestone events pertaining to AJ201; payments totaling up to $17 million in the aggregate upon AJ201 experiencing certain commercial sales milestone events; a 1.75% royalty on net sales of AJ201, which royalty percentage is subject to potential diminution in certain circumstances; and in the event that AnnJi enters into one or more subsequent licenses of rights to AJ201 with third party licensee(s), 15% of payments received by AnnJi from such licensee(s), up to a cap of $7.5 million, and with a minimum of $4 million owing under certain mechanism in the event of an approval of a NDA in the U.S. with respect to AJ201.
BAER-101 (GABA A α2/3 positive allosteric modulator)
Through Avenue’s former subsidiary Baergic, we were previously developing BAER-101, a high affinity, selective modulator of the gamma-aminobutyric acid (“GABA”) A, which is a receptor system with differential binding and modulatory properties dependent on the particular GABA A subtype.
In November 2025, Avenue announced it had entered into an agreement for Baergic to be acquired by Axsome (the “Baergic Agreement”), including the global rights to BAER-101 (also known as AZD7325), a novel oral GABAA α2,3 subtype-selective receptor positive allosteric modulator (PAM). BAER-101 was originally licensed by Baergic from AstraZeneca AB and will be referred to as AXS-17 by Axsome going forward. Axsome intends to evaluate AXS-17 as a potential treatment for epilepsy.
Under the Baergic Agreement, Axsome (i) purchased 100% of the equity interests in Baergic from Avenue and the other stockholders of Baergic for an upfront payment of $0.3 million (less transaction fees) and additional contingent consideration and (ii) received worldwide commercial, development, and manufacturing rights to BAER-101 (now referred to as AXS-17), including all available nonclinical and clinical data.
Avenue and the other former stockholders of Baergic are eligible to receive from Axsome: payments totaling up to $2.5 million in the aggregate upon the occurrence of certain development and regulatory milestone events for the first indication pertaining to AXS-17 and $1.5 million for each indication thereafter; payments totaling up to $79 million in aggregate upon AXS-17 achieving certain commercial sales milestone events; and a tiered mid-to-high single digit royalty on potential global net sales of AXS-17. Avenue expects to receive approximately 74% of all future payments and royalties payable under the Baergic Agreement.
Intellectual Property Generally
Our goal is to obtain, maintain and enforce patent protection for our product candidates, formulations, processes, methods and any other proprietary technologies, preserve our trade secrets, and operate without infringing on the proprietary rights of other parties, both in the United States and in other countries. Our policy is to actively seek to obtain, where appropriate, the broadest intellectual property protection possible for our product candidates, proprietary information and proprietary technology through a combination of contractual arrangements and patents, both in the United States and abroad. However, patent protection may not afford us with complete protection against competitors who seek to circumvent our patents.
We also depend upon the skills, knowledge, experience and know-how of our management and research and development personnel, as well as that of our advisers, consultants and other contractors. To help protect our proprietary know-how, which is not patentable, and for inventions for which patents may be difficult to enforce, we currently, and will in the future, rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect our interests. To this end, we require all of our employees, consultants, advisers and other contractors to enter into confidentiality agreements that prohibit the disclosure of confidential information and, where applicable, require disclosure and assignment to us of the ideas, developments, discoveries and inventions important to our business.
16
Table of Contents
Competition
We operate in highly competitive segments of the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical markets. We face competition from many different sources, including commercial pharmaceutical and biotechnology enterprises, academic institutions, government agencies, and private and public research institutions. Many of our competitors have significantly greater financial, product development, manufacturing and marketing resources than we do. Large pharmaceutical companies have extensive experience in clinical testing and obtaining regulatory approval for drugs. In addition, many universities and private and public research institutes are active in research in direct competition with us. We also may compete with these organizations to recruit scientists and clinical development personnel. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.
Our competitors are pursuing the development and/or acquisition of pharmaceuticals, medical devices and over-the-counter (“OTC”) products that target the same diseases and conditions that we are targeting in biotechnology, biopharmaceutical, dermatological and other therapeutic areas. If competitors introduce new products, delivery systems or processes with therapeutic or cost advantages, our products can be subject to progressive price reductions or decreased volume of sales, or both. Most new products that we introduce must compete with other products already on the market or products that are later developed by competitors. The principal methods of competition for our products include quality, efficacy, market acceptance, price, and marketing and promotional efforts, patient access programs and product insurance coverage reimbursement.
The only pharmaceutical area in which we sell marketed products is dermatology, and t he dermatology competitive landscape is highly fragmented, with a large number of mid-size and smaller companies competing in both the prescription sector and the OTC sector. Our competitors are pursuing the development and/or acquisition of pharmaceuticals, medical devices and OTC products that target the same diseases and conditions that we are targeting in dermatology. Competitive factors vary by product line and geographic area in which our products are sold. The principal methods of competition for our products include quality, efficacy, market acceptance, price, and marketing and promotional efforts.
Branded products often must compete with therapeutically similar branded or generic products or with generic equivalents. Such competition frequently increases over time. For example, if competitors introduce new products, delivery systems or processes with therapeutic or cost advantages, our products could be subject to progressive price reductions and/or decreased volume of sales. To successfully compete for business, we must often demonstrate that our products offer not only medical benefits, but also cost advantages as compared with other forms of care. Accordingly, we face pressure to continually seek out technological innovations and to market our products effectively.
Our major competitors in dermatology, including Galderma Laboratories, Almirall, Leo Pharma, Mayne Pharma, Botanix Pharmaceuticals, and Ortho Dermatologics, among others, vary depending on therapeutic and product category, dosage strength and drug-delivery systems, among other factors.
Generic Competition
Our partner company Journey faces increased competition from manufacturers of generic pharmaceutical products, who may submit applications to FDA seeking to market generic versions of Journey’s products. In connection with these applications, the generic drug companies may seek to challenge the validity and enforceability of our patents through litigation. When patents covering certain of our products (if applicable) expire or are successfully challenged through litigation or in U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) proceedings, if a generic company launches a competing product “at risk,” or when the regulatory or licensed exclusivity for our products (if applicable) expires or is otherwise lost, we may face generic competition as a result. Generic versions are generally significantly less expensive than branded versions, and, where available, may be required to be utilized before or in preference to the branded version under third-party reimbursement programs, or substituted by pharmacies. Accordingly, when a branded product loses its market exclusivity, it normally faces intense price competition from generic forms of the product. To successfully compete for business with managed care and pharmacy benefits management organizations, we must often demonstrate that our products offer not only medical benefits, but also cost advantages as compared with other forms of care. Generic products generally face intense competition from other generic equivalents (including authorized generics) and therapeutically similar branded or generic products.
17
Table of Contents
Government Regulation and Product Approval
Government authorities in the United States, at the federal, state and local level, and other countries extensively 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 products such as those we are developing.
United States Pharmaceutical Product Development Process
In the United States, the FDA regulates pharmaceutical (drug and biological) products under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, and implementing regulations. Pharmaceutical products are also 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 require 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 after approval, may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial sanctions. FDA compliance and enforcement actions could include refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, a clinical hold, warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement or civil or criminal penalties. Any agency or judicial compliance or enforcement action could have a material adverse effect on us. The process required by the FDA before a pharmaceutical product may be marketed in the United States generally includes the following:
● completion of preclinical laboratory tests, animal studies and formulation studies according to good laboratory practices (“GLPs”) or other applicable regulations;
● submission to the FDA of an IND, which must be in effect before human clinical trials may begin in the United States;
● performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials according to the FDA’s current good clinical practices (“GCPs”), to establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed pharmaceutical product for its intended use;
● submission to the FDA of an NDA or Biologics License Application (“BLA”) for a new pharmaceutical product;
● satisfactory completion of an FDA pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities where the pharmaceutical product is produced to assess compliance with the FDA’s current Good Manufacturing Practices (“cGMPs”), to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve the pharmaceutical product’s identity, strength, quality and purity;
● potential FDA audit of the preclinical and clinical trial sites that generated the data in support of the NDA or BLA; and
● FDA review and approval of the NDA or BLA.
The regulatory review and approval process is lengthy, expensive and uncertain. The process of seeking required approvals before we can market or sell a product, and the continuing need for compliance with applicable statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial resources and we cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain the appropriate marketing authorization for any product candidate.
Before testing any compounds with potential therapeutic value in humans, the pharmaceutical product candidate enters the preclinical testing stage. Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, toxicity and formulation, as well as animal studies to assess the potential safety and activity of the pharmaceutical product candidate. The conduct of the preclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements including GLPs. The sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical tests, 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. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA unless the FDA places the IND on a clinical hold within that 30-day time period. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. The FDA may also impose clinical holds on a pharmaceutical product candidate at any time before or during clinical trials due to safety concerns or non-compliance. Accordingly, we cannot be certain that submission of an IND will automatically result in the FDA allowing clinical trials to begin, or that, once begun, issues will not arise that causes such clinical trial to be suspended or terminated.
18
Table of Contents
Clinical trials involve the administration of the pharmaceutical product candidate to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of qualified investigators, generally physicians not employed by the sponsor. 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. Each protocol must be submitted to the FDA if conducted under a U.S. IND. Clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with GCP requirements. Further, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an Institutional Review Board (“IRB”) or ethics committee if conducted outside of the United States, at or servicing each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted. An IRB or ethics committee is charged with protecting the welfare and rights of trial participants and considers such items as whether the risks to individuals participating in the clinical trials are minimized and are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits. The IRB or ethics committee also approves 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. We intend to use third-party clinical research organizations (“CROs”) to administer and conduct our planned clinical trials and will rely upon such CROs, as well as medical institutions, clinical investigators and consultants, to conduct our trials in accordance with our clinical protocols and to play a significant role in the subsequent collection and analysis of data from these trials. The failure by any of such third parties to meet expected timelines, adhere to our protocols or meet regulatory standards could adversely impact the subject product development program. Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap or be combined:
● Phase 1. The pharmaceutical product is usually introduced into a small group of healthy human subjects and tested for safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism, distribution and excretion. In the case of some products for severe or life-threatening diseases, such as cancer treatments, especially when the product may be too inherently toxic to ethically administer to healthy volunteers, the initial human testing is often conducted in patients.
● Phase 2. The pharmaceutical product is evaluated in a larger, but still limited patient population to identify possible adverse effects and safety risks, to preliminarily evaluate the efficacy of the product for specific targeted diseases and to determine dosage tolerance, optimal dosage and dosing schedule.
● Phase 3. Clinical trials are undertaken to further evaluate dosage, clinical efficacy and safety in an expanded patient population at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites. These clinical trials are intended to establish safety and efficacy, the overall risk/benefit ratio of the product and provide an adequate basis for product labeling. Generally, it has been the FDA’s position that Congress intended at least two adequate and well-controlled Phase 3 clinical trials for approval of an NDA or BLA or foreign authorities for approval of marketing applications.
Post-approval studies, or Phase 4 clinical trials, may be required after initial receipt of marketing approval. These studies are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication and may be required by the FDA after it has been approved, and is on the market, as an ongoing condition of approval.
Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted at least annually to the FDA and written IND safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and the investigators for serious and unexpected adverse events or any finding from tests in laboratory animals that suggests a significant risk for human subjects. Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials may not be completed successfully within any specified period, if at all. The FDA or the sponsor or, if used, its data safety monitoring board may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB or ethics committee can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s or ethics committee’s requirements or if the pharmaceutical product has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients.
Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the pharmaceutical product as well as finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the pharmaceutical product candidate and, among other things, must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final pharmaceutical product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected, tested and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the pharmaceutical product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.
19
Table of Contents
United States Review and Approval Process
The data and results generated from product development, preclinical studies and clinical trials, along with descriptions of the manufacturing process, analytical tests conducted on the chemistry of the pharmaceutical product, proposed labeling and other required information are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA or BLA submission before the product can be marketed and sold.
The review and approval process for an NDA or BLA is lengthy and difficult and the FDA may not approve an NDA or BLA if the applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied or if the data and results in the submission are insufficient to support a finding of safety and efficacy, FDA may also require additional clinical data or other data and information to address deficiencies in an application. Even if such data and information is submitted, the FDA may ultimately decide that the NDA or BLA does not satisfy the criteria for approval. Even if a product receives regulatory approval, the approval may be significantly limited with respect to dosages, indications for use, or other label claims related to those disease states, conditions and patient populations for which the product is safe and effective and, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. Further, the FDA may require that certain contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling. Drug manufacturers and their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA for compliance with cGMPs, which impose additional regulatory requirements upon us and our third-party manufacturers. We cannot be certain that we or our suppliers will be able to fully comply with the cGMPs or other FDA regulatory requirements.
Post-Approval Requirements
Any pharmaceutical products for which we receive FDA approvals are subject to continuing post market regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, record-keeping requirements, reporting of adverse experiences with the product, providing the FDA with updated safety and efficacy information, product sampling and distribution requirements, complying with certain electronic records and signature requirements and complying with FDA promotion and advertising requirements, which include, among others, standards for direct-to-consumer advertising, promoting pharmaceutical products for uses or in patient populations that are not described in the pharmaceutical product’s approved labeling (known as “off-label use”), industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, and promotional activities involving the internet. Failure to comply with FDA requirements can have negative consequences, including adverse publicity, compliance and enforcement actions initiated by the FDA, mandated corrective advertising or communications with doctors, and civil or criminal penalties. The FDA also may require Phase 4 testing, risk minimization action plans and surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved product or place conditions on an approval that could restrict the distribution or use of the product.
Special FDA Expedited Review and Approval Programs
The FDA has various programs, including fast track designation, accelerated approval, priority review and breakthrough therapy designation, that are intended to expedite or simplify the process for the development and FDA review of drugs that are intended for the treatment of serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs. The purpose of these programs is to provide important new drugs to patients earlier than under standard FDA review procedures. To be eligible for fast track designation, the FDA must determine, based on the request of a sponsor, that a drug is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and based on preclinical or preliminary clinical data demonstrates the potential to address an unmet medical need. The FDA will determine that a product will fill an unmet medical need if it will provide a therapy where none exists or provide a therapy that may be potentially superior to existing therapy based on efficacy or safety factors.
The FDA may give a priority review designation to drugs that offer major advances in treatment or provide a treatment where no adequate therapy exists. A priority review means that the goal for the FDA to review an application is six months, rather than the standard review of ten months under current PDUFA guidelines. These six- and ten-month review periods are measured from the “filing” date rather than the receipt date for NDAs for new molecular entities, which typically adds approximately two months to the timeline for review and decision from the date of submission. Products that are eligible for fast track designation are also likely to be considered appropriate to receive a priority review.
20
Table of Contents
In addition, drugs studied for their safety and effectiveness in treating serious or life-threatening illnesses and that provide meaningful therapeutic benefit over existing treatments may receive accelerated approval and may be approved on the basis of adequate and well-controlled clinical trials establishing that the drug has 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, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require a sponsor of a drug receiving accelerated approval to perform post-marketing studies to verify and describe the predicted effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical endpoint and under the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act of 2022 (“FDORA”), the FDA is now permitted to require, as appropriate, that such trials be underway prior to approval or within a specific time period after the date of approval for a product granted accelerated approval. Under FDORA, the FDA has increased authority for expedited procedures to withdraw approval of a drug or indication approved under accelerated approval if, for example, the confirmatory trial fails to verify the predicted clinical benefit of the product. In addition, the FDA generally requires, unless otherwise informed by the agency, pre-approval of promotional materials, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product.
Moreover, a sponsor can request designation of a drug candidate as a “breakthrough therapy.” A breakthrough therapy is defined as a drug that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. Drugs designated as breakthrough therapies are also eligible for accelerated approval and priority review. The FDA must take certain actions, such as holding timely meetings and providing advice, intended to expedite the development and review of an application for approval of a breakthrough therapy.
Additionally, under FDORA, a platform technology incorporated within or utilized by a drug or biological product is eligible for designation as a designated platform technology if (1) the platform technology is incorporated in, or utilized by, a drug approved under an NDA; (2) preliminary evidence submitted by the sponsor of the approved or licensed drug, or a sponsor that has been granted a right of reference to data submitted in the application for such drug, demonstrates that the platform technology has the potential to be incorporated in, or utilized by, more than one drug without an adverse effect on quality, manufacturing, or safety; and (3) data or information submitted by the applicable person indicates that incorporation or utilization of the platform technology has a reasonable likelihood to bring significant efficiencies to the drug development or manufacturing process and to the review process. A sponsor may request the FDA to designate a platform technology as a designated platform technology concurrently with, or at any time after, submission of an IND application for a drug that incorporates or utilizes the platform technology that is the subject of the request. If so designated, the FDA may expedite the development and review of any subsequent original NDA for a drug that uses or incorporates the platform technology. Designated platform technology status does not ensure that a drug will be developed more quickly or receive FDA approval.
Even if a product candidate or our platform qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the product candidate no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened. Furthermore, fast track designation, priority review, accelerated approval and breakthrough therapy designation, do not change the standards for approval and may not ultimately expedite the development or approval process.
Section 505(b)(2) Regulatory Approval Pathway
Section 505(b)(2) was added to the Act by the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (the “Hatch-Waxman Amendments”). Section 505(b)(2) of the FDCA provides an alternate regulatory pathway for approval of a new drug by allowing the FDA to rely on data not developed by the applicant. Specifically, Section 505(b)(2) permits the submission of an NDA where one or more of the investigations relied upon by the applicant for approval was not conducted by or for the applicant and for which the applicant has not obtained a right of reference. The applicant may rely upon published literature and/or the FDA’s findings of safety and effectiveness for an approved drug already on the market. Approval or submission of a 505(b)(2) application, like those for abbreviated new drugs, or ANDAs, may be delayed because of patent and/or exclusivity rights that apply to the previously approved drug.
21
Table of Contents
Under the 505(b)(2) regulatory approval pathway, the applicant may reduce some of the burdens of developing a full clinical program by relying on investigations not conducted by the applicant and for which the applicant has not obtained a right of reference, such as prior investigations involving the listed drug. In such cases, some clinical trials may not be required or may be otherwise limited.
A 505(b)(2) application may be submitted for a new chemical entity (“NCE”), when some part of the data necessary for approval is derived from studies not conducted by or for the applicant and when the applicant has not obtained a right of reference. Such data are typically derived from published studies, rather than FDA’s previous findings of safety and effectiveness of a previously approved drug. For changes to a previously approved drug however, an applicant may rely on the FDA’s finding of safety and effectiveness of the approved drug, coupled with information needed to support the change from the approved drug, such as new studies conducted by the applicant or published data. When based on an approved drug, the 505(b)(2) drug may be approved for all of the indications permitted for the approved drug, as well as any other indication supported by additional data.
Section 505(b)(2) applications also may be entitled to marketing exclusivity if supported by appropriate data and information. As discussed in more detail below, three-year new data exclusivity may be granted to the 505(b)(2) application if one or more clinical investigations conducted in support of the application, other than bioavailability/bioequivalence studies, were essential to the approval and conducted or sponsored by the applicant. Five years of marketing exclusivity may be granted if the application is for an NCE, and pediatric exclusivity is likewise available.
Orange Book Listing and Paragraph IV Certification
For NDA submissions, including 505(b)(2) applications, applicants are required to list with the FDA certain patents with claims that cover the applicant’s product. Upon approval, each of the patents listed in the application is published in Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, commonly referred to as the Orange Book. Any applicant who subsequently files an ANDA or a 505(b)(2) application that references a drug listed in the Orange Book must certify to the FDA that (1) no patent information on the drug product that is the subject of the application has been submitted to the FDA; (2) such patent has expired; (3) the date on which such patent expires; or (4) such patent is invalid or will not be infringed upon by the manufacture, use or sale of the drug product for which the application is submitted. This last certification is known as a Paragraph IV certification.
If an applicant has provided a Paragraph IV certification to the FDA, the applicant must also send notice of the Paragraph IV certification to the holder of the NDA for the approved drug and the patent owner once the application has been accepted for filing by the FDA. The NDA holder or patent owner may then initiate a patent infringement lawsuit in response to notice of the Paragraph IV certification. The filing of a patent infringement lawsuit within 45 days of the receipt of a Paragraph IV certification prevents the FDA from approving the ANDA or 505(b)(2) application until the earlier of 30 months from the date of the lawsuit, the applicant’s successful defense of the suit, or expiration of the patent.
Orphan Drugs
Under the Orphan Drug Act, special incentives exist for sponsors to develop products for rare diseases or conditions, which are defined to include those diseases or conditions that affect fewer than 200,000 people in the United States. Requests for orphan drug designation must be submitted before the submission of an NDA or BLA.
22
Table of Contents
If a product that has an orphan drug designation is the first such product to receive FDA approval for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity for that use. This means that, subsequent to approval, the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same drug that designated orphan use, except in limited circumstances, for seven years. The FDA may approve a subsequent application from another person if the FDA determines that the application is for a different drug or different use, or if the FDA determines that the subsequent product is clinically superior, or that the holder of the initial orphan drug approval cannot assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the drug to meet the public’s need. If the FDA approves someone else’s application for the same drug that has orphan exclusivity, but for a different use, the competing drug could be prescribed by physicians outside its FDA approval for the orphan use, notwithstanding the existence of orphan exclusivity. A grant of an orphan designation is not a guarantee that a product will be approved. If a sponsor receives orphan drug exclusivity upon approval, there can be no assurance that the exclusivity will prevent another person from receiving approval for the same or a similar drug for the same or other uses.
U.S. Marketing Exclusivity and Patent Term Extensions
Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of the FDA approval of our drug candidates, some of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension (“PTE”) under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a PTE of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. However, PTE cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date. The PTE period is generally one-half the time between the effective date of an IND and the submission date of an NDA plus the time between the submission date of an NDA and the approval of that application. 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. In the future, we intend to apply for PTE for one of 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.
Marketing exclusivity provisions under the FDCA can also delay the submission or the approval of certain marketing applications. The FDCA provides a five-year period of non-patent marketing exclusivity within the U.S. to the first applicant to obtain approval 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, or ANDA, or a 505(b)(2) NDA submitted by another company for another drug based on the same active moiety, regardless of whether the drug is intended for the same indication as the original innovator drug or for another indication, 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 to one of the patents listed with the FDA by the innovator NDA holder. The FDCA also provides three years of marketing exclusivity for an 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 modification for which the drug received approval on the basis of the new clinical investigations and does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs for drugs containing the active agent for the original indication or condition of use. 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. Orphan drug exclusivity, as described below, may offer a seven-year period of marketing exclusivity, except in certain circumstances. Pediatric exclusivity is another type of regulatory market exclusivity in the U.S. which, if granted, adds six months to existing exclusivity periods for all formulations, dosage forms, and indications of the active moiety and patent terms. This six month exclusivity, which runs from the end of other exclusivity protection or patent term, may be granted based on the voluntary completion of a pediatric trial in accordance with an FDA issued “Written Request” for such a trial, provided that at the time pediatric exclusivity is granted there is not less than nine months of term remaining.
23
Table of Contents
Pediatric Information
Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act (“PREA”), NDAs and BLAs or supplements to NDAs and BLAs must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the treatment for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the treatment is safe and effective. The FDA may grant full or partial waivers, or deferrals, for submission of data. Unless otherwise required by regulation, PREA does not apply to any product for an indication for which orphan designation has been granted.
The Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act provides BLA holders a six-month extension of any exclusivity-patent or non-patent-for a product if certain conditions are met. Conditions for exclusivity include the FDA’s determination that information relating to the use of a new drug in the pediatric population may produce health benefits in that population, FDA making a written request for pediatric studies, and the applicant agreeing to perform, and reporting on, the requested studies within a specific time frame.
Drug Enforcement Agency (“DEA”) Regulation
The Federal Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (“CSA”) imposes various registration, record-keeping and reporting requirements, procurement and manufacturing quotas, labeling and packaging requirements, security controls, prescription and order form requirements and restrictions on prescription refills for certain kinds of pharmaceutical products. A principal factor for determining the particular requirements of the CSA applicable to a product, if any, is its actual or potential abuse profile, which is classified into a DEA schedule. A product may be listed as a Schedule I, II, III, IV or V controlled substance, with Schedule I presenting the highest perceived risk of abuse and Schedule V presenting the least.
Annual registration is required for any facility that manufactures, distributes, dispenses, imports or exports any controlled substance and registration is specific to the particular location, activity and controlled substance schedule.
The DEA typically inspects a facility to review its security measures prior to issuing a registration and on a periodic basis. Security requirements vary by controlled substance schedule, with the most stringent requirements applying to Schedule I and Schedule II controlled substances and less stringent requirements for Schedules III, IV, and V. Required security measures include background checks on employees and physical control of inventory through measures such as vaults and inventory reconciliations. Records must be maintained for the handling of all controlled substances, and periodic reports made to the DEA. Reports must also be made for thefts or losses of any controlled substance, and to obtain authorization to destroy any controlled substance. In addition, a DEA quota system controls and limits the availability and production of controlled substances in Schedule I or II. Distributions of any Schedule I or II controlled substance must also be accompanied by special order forms, with copies provided to the DEA.
To enforce these requirements, the DEA conducts periodic inspections of registered establishments that handle controlled substances. Failure to maintain compliance with applicable requirements, particularly as manifested in loss or diversion, can result in administrative, civil or criminal enforcement action. The DEA may seek civil penalties, refuse to renew necessary registrations or initiate administrative proceedings to revoke those registrations. In some circumstances, violations could result in criminal proceedings.
In addition to federal scheduling, some drugs may be subject to state-controlled substance regulation and thus more extensive requirements than those determined by the DEA and FDA.
Other Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements
In the United States, our activities are potentially subject to regulation by various federal, state and local authorities in addition to the FDA, including the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (formerly the Health Care Financing Administration), other divisions of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (e.g., the Office of Inspector General), the United States Department of Justice, the DEA and individual United States Attorney offices within the Department of Justice, and state and local governments.
24
Table of Contents
We will also be subject to various federal and state laws targeting fraud and abuse in the healthcare industry. These laws may impact, among other things, our proposed sales, marketing and educational programs. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include:
● The federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering or paying remuneration, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward, or in return for, either (1) the referral of an individual to a person for furnishing any item or service for which payment is available under a federal health care program, or (2) the purchase, lease, order or recommendation thereof of any good, facility, service or item for which payment is available under a federal health care program;
● The False Claims Act and civil monetary penalty laws, which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, false or fraudulent claims for payment from the federal government or making or using, or causing to be made or used, a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim;
● The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, which created new federal criminal statutes that prohibit executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, obtaining money or property of the health care benefit program through false representations or knowingly and willingly falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact, making false statements or using or making any false or fraudulent document in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, health care benefits or services;
● HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and its implementing regulations, which imposes certain requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information;
● The provision under the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) commonly referred to as the Sunshine Act, which requires applicable manufacturers of covered drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies to track and annually report to CMS payments and other transfers of value provided to physicians and teaching hospitals and certain ownership and investment interests held by physicians or their immediate family members in applicable manufacturers and group purchasing organizations; applicable manufacturers are also required to report such information regarding payments and transfers of value provided, as well as ownership and investment interests held, to physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, certified nurse anesthetists, and certified nurse-midwives; and
● State law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as the Anti-Kickback Statute and False Claims Act, and state laws concerning security and privacy of health care information, which may differ in substance and application from state-to-state thereby complicating compliance efforts.
The ACA broadened the reach of the fraud and abuse laws by, among other things, amending the intent requirement of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and the applicable criminal healthcare fraud statutes contained within 42 U.S.C. Section 1320a-7b. Pursuant to the statutory amendment, a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of this statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, the ACA provides that the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the civil False Claims Act or the civil monetary penalties statute. Many states have adopted laws similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, some of which apply to the referral of patients for healthcare items or services reimbursed by any source, not only the Medicare and Medicaid programs.
25
Table of Contents
Pharmaceutical Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement
In the United States and markets in other countries, sales of any products for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale will depend in part on the availability of reimbursement from third-party payors, including government health administrative authorities, managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations. Third-party payors are increasingly examining the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of medical products and services, in addition to their safety and efficacy, and, accordingly, significant uncertainty exists as to the reimbursement status of newly approved therapeutics. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available for any products for which we obtain regulatory approval to enable us to realize an appropriate return on our investment in research and product development. We are unable to predict the future course of federal or state healthcare legislation and regulations, including the ACA. The ACA, as well as other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and additional downward pressure on the payments received for any approved drug. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government healthcare programs result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. We are unable to predict what these changes may look like in the future.
The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (the “IRA”) contains substantial drug pricing reforms, including the establishment of a drug price negotiation program within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that would require manufacturers to charge a negotiated “maximum fair price” for certain selected drugs or pay an excise tax for noncompliance, the establishment of rebate payment requirements on manufacturers of certain drugs payable under Medicare Parts B and D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation, and requires manufacturers to provide discounts on Part D drugs. Orphan drugs that treat only one rare disease are exempt from the IRA’s drug negotiation program. Substantial penalties can be assessed for noncompliance with the drug pricing provisions in the IRA.
In May 2025, President Trump issued an executive order implementing the concept of most-favored nation pricing. Under this order, the Department of Health and Human Services, in coordination with other federal agencies, is directed to take actions to ensure that the price of prescription drugs paid by federal health insurers, including Medicare and Medicaid, is in line with the prices paid in comparably developed nations
As an alternative to the Affordable Care Act, President Trump recently announced the Great Healthcare Plan. As presented, the plan is intended to lower drug prices by increasing competition and benchmarking U.S. drug prices to other countries, reduce insurance premiums by redirecting subsidies from insurers to individuals, increase accountability and transparency from insurers, and promote consumer choice by giving individuals more direct control over how healthcare dollars are spent. Legislative and regulatory action will be required to fully implement the plan. It is unclear how these proposed changes will impact our business and the pharmaceutical industry in general.
At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical 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. Additional federal, state and foreign healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in limited coverage and reimbursement and reduced demand or additional pricing pressures.
International Regulation
In addition to regulations in the United States, there are a variety of foreign regulations governing clinical trials, pricing and reimbursement, and commercial sales and distribution of any product candidates. Importantly, the level of evidence of efficacy and safety necessary to apply for marketing authorization for a drug candidate differs from country to country, the approval process also varies from country to country, and the time may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval. Typically, if a foreign regulatory authority is satisfied that a company has presented adequate evidence of safety, quality and efficacy, then the regulatory authority will grant a marketing authorization. This foreign regulatory approval process, however, involves risks similar or identical to the risks associated with FDA approval discussed above, and therefore there are no guarantees that any company will be able to obtain the appropriate marketing authorization for any product in any particular country.
26
Table of Contents
Employees and Human Capital Management
As of December 31, 2025, we had 78 full-time employees at Fortress and our subsidiaries and partner companies. None of our employees is represented by a labor union. We have retained a number of expert advisors and consultants who help navigate us through different aspects of our business. We consider our relations with our employees to be good and have not experienced any work stoppages, slowdowns or other serious labor problems that have materially impeded our business operations.
Our human capital management objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing, and integrating our new and existing employees. The principal purpose of our equity incentive plan is to attract, retain, and motivate selected employees, consultants, and directors through the granting of share-based compensation awards and cash-based bonus awards.
Available Information
We and certain of our affiliates file annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, proxy and information statements and amendments to reports filed or furnished pursuant to Sections 13(a), 14 and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (the “Exchange Act”). The SEC also maintains a website at http://www.sec.gov that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding our Company and other companies that file materials with the SEC electronically. Copies of our and certain of our affiliates’ reports on Form 10-K, Forms 10-Q and Forms 8-K may also be obtained, free of charge, electronically through our website at www.fortressbiotech.com. Our website also includes announcements of investor conferences and events, information on our business strategies and results, corporate governance information, and other news and announcements that investors might find useful or interesting. The information contained on our website is not included in, or incorporated by reference into, this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
27
Table of Contents