Item 1. Business
Item 1. Business.
Unless the context requires otherwise, references in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to “Aerovate”, “we”, “us” and “our” refer to Aerovate Therapeutics, Inc.
Overview
We are a biopharmaceutical company. Our initial focus was on advancing AV 101, our dry powder inhaled formulation of imatinib for the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension, or PAH, a devastating disease impacting approximately 70,000 people in the United States and Europe. On June 17, 2024, we announced topline results from the Phase 2b portion of our Phase 2b/Phase 3 Inhaled Imatinib Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Clinical Trial of AV-101, or IMPAHCT. Topline data showed that, while AV-101 was generally well tolerated across all dose groups, the study did not meet its primary endpoint for improvement in pulmonary vascular resistance compared to placebo for any of the studied doses or show meaningful improvements in the secondary endpoint of change in six minute walk distance. We also reviewed data from several additional secondary endpoints of the Phase 2b portion of IMPAHCT, which also failed to show meaningful improvements. Based upon these results and in agreement with the independent study advisory committee, we halted enrollment and shut down the Phase 3 portion of IMPAHCT as well as the long-term extension study. AV-101 for the treatment of PAH was our only product candidate in development. At this time, we do not intend to resume development of AV-101 or any other product candidates. In July 2024, we announced the decision to conduct a comprehensive review of strategic alternatives focused on maximizing shareholder value. We also engaged Wedbush Securities Inc., or Wedbush PacGrow, as our exclusive strategic financial advisor to assist in the process of exploring strategic alternatives.
In June 2024, following our decision to halt further development of AV-101, we announced our plan to terminate nearly all of our workforce in the coming months, or the Workforce Reduction Plan. As of December 31, 2024, 47 individuals, or approximately 92% of our workforce, have been terminated. The affected individuals have been and will be provided severance benefits, including cash severance payments. Each affected individual’s eligibility for severance benefits is contingent upon entering into a separation agreement, which includes a general release of claims against our company. In connection with the Workforce Reduction Plan, we incurred costs (in consideration of releases) of approximately $6.7 million, which are primarily one-time severance benefits.
On October 30, 2024, we entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger, or the Merger Agreement, by and among us, Caribbean Merger Sub I, Inc., a Delaware corporation and our wholly owned subsidiary, or Merger Sub I, Caribbean Merger Sub II, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company and our wholly owned subsidiary, or Merger Sub II and together with Merger Sub I, Merger Subs, and Jade Biosciences, Inc., a Delaware corporation, or Jade, pursuant to which, and subject to the satisfaction or waiver of the conditions set forth in the Merger Agreement, among other things, Merger Sub I will merge with and into Jade, with Jade surviving the merger as the surviving corporation, or the First Merger, and as part of the same overall transaction, Jade will merge with and into Merger Sub II, with Merger Sub II continuing as our wholly owned subsidiary and the surviving corporation of the merger, or the Second Merger and together with the First Merger, the Merger. The Merger is intended to qualify for federal income tax purposes as a tax-free reorganization under the provisions of Section 368(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code.
In addition, in connection with the closing of the Merger, or the Closing, we expect to declare a cash dividend to our pre-Merger stockholders of approximately $65.0 million in the aggregate, or the Cash Dividend, provided such amount is subject to adjustment as set forth in the Merger Agreement.
Subject to the terms and conditions of the Merger Agreement, at the effective time of the Merger, or the Effective Time, (a) each then-outstanding share of Jade’s common stock, par value $0.0001 per share, or Jade Common Stock, will be converted into the right to receive a number of shares of our common stock, par value $0.0001 per share, or Aerovate Common Stock, based on a ratio calculated in accordance with the Merger Agreement, or the Exchange Ratio, provided that any unvested restricted shares of Jade Common Stock will be subject to the same terms and conditions (including, without limitation, vesting and repurchase provisions) that are otherwise applicable to such unvested shares as of immediately prior to the Effective Time, (b) each then-outstanding share of Jade’s preferred stock, par value $0.0001 per share, or Jade Preferred Stock, will be converted into the right to receive a number of shares of our newly authorized
6
Table of Contents
convertible preferred stock, par value $0.0001 per share, equal to (x) the Exchange Ratio divided by (y) 1,000, (c) each then-outstanding option to purchase Jade Common Stock will be assumed by us, subject to adjustment as set forth in the Merger Agreement and (d) each then-outstanding warrant to purchase shares of Jade Common Stock or Jade Preferred Stock will be assumed by us, subject to adjust as set forth in the Merger Agreement.
We and Jade have each agreed to customary representations, warranties and covenants in the Merger Agreement, including, among others, covenants relating to (1) obtaining the requisite approval of our respective stockholders, (2) non-solicitation of alternative acquisition proposals and (3) the conduct of our respective businesses during the period between the date of signing the Merger Agreement and the Closing.
On October 30, 2024, Jade entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement, or the Purchase Agreement, with certain existing Jade stockholders and new investors, or the Investors. Pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, and subject to the terms and conditions thereof, Jade agreed to sell, and the Investors agreed to purchase, immediately prior to the consummation of the Merger, shares of Jade Common Stock and pre-funded warrants for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $300.0 million, or the Concurrent Investment, which reflects the conversion of the previously issued $95 million of convertible notes. The consummation of the Concurrent Investment is conditioned on the satisfaction or waiver of the conditions set forth in the Merger Agreement and in the Purchase Agreement. Shares of Jade Common Stock and pre-funded warrants issued pursuant to this financing transaction will be converted into shares of Aerovate Common Stock and pre-funded warrants to acquire shares of Aerovate Common Stock, in accordance with the Exchange Ratio and the Merger Agreement.
Consummation of the Merger is subject to certain closing conditions, including, among other things, (1) requisite approval by our stockholders, (2) approval by the requisite Jade stockholders of the adoption and approval of the Merger Agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby, (3) Nasdaq’s approval of the listing of the shares of Aerovate Common Stock to be issued in connection with the Merger, and (4) an executed Purchase Agreement for the Concurrent Investment in full force and effect evidencing cash proceeds of not less than $80.0 million to be received by the combined company immediately prior to or following the Closing.
The Merger Agreement contains certain termination rights of each of us and Jade. Upon termination of the Merger Agreement under specified circumstances, we may be required to pay Jade a termination fee of $2,340,000, and in certain other circumstances, Jade may be required to pay us a termination fee of $5,250,000.
At the Effective Time, our board of directors is expected to consist of six members, all of whom will be designated by Jade.
Concurrently and in connection with the execution of the Merger Agreement, (i) certain stockholders of Jade (solely in their respective capacities as Jade stockholders) holding approximately 99% of the outstanding shares of Jade capital stock have entered into support agreements with us and Jade to vote all of their shares of Jade capital stock in favor of the adoption and approval of the Merger Agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby and (ii) certain of our stockholders holding approximately 38.1% of the outstanding shares of Aerovate Common Stock have entered into support agreements with us and Jade to vote all of their shares of Aerovate Common Stock in favor of, among other things, the adoption and approval of the Merger Agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby.
Our Strategy to Date
PAH is an orphan disease with unmet medical need and is characterized by high pressure in the vessels transporting blood from the right side of the heart to the lungs. This high pressure is caused by abnormal cellular hyperproliferation and resistance to apoptosis, driven by improper signaling in cells of the distal pulmonary arteries, which over time results in narrowing of the pulmonary vessels and forces the heart to work harder to pump blood through the lungs. The severe blood flow restriction and strain on the heart becomes increasingly severe over time and ultimately leads to heart failure that is often fatal. We estimate there are between 30,000 to 40,000 patients treated with approved PAH therapies in the U.S. alone, many of whom are on two or more approved PAH therapies. It is estimated that the combined global sales for PAH products in 2023 was $6.2 billion. Despite the availability of multiple approved therapies, PAH has a five-year survival rate for newly diagnosed and prevalent patients between 61% and 65%. None of the approved therapies directly address
7
Table of Contents
the abnormal cellular hyperproliferation of the pulmonary vasculature that causes the increased resistance to blood flow. We believe that novel treatments that primarily address abnormal cellular hyperproliferation may provide therapeutic benefit to PAH patients and lead to improved quality of life.
Our focus on developing AV-101 had been driven by historical results from the Phase 3 IMPRES clinical trial of oral imatinib for the treatment of PAH patients. Oral imatinib is a well-characterized targeted kinase inhibitor and approved oncology treatment, but clinical trials had also supported its potential for the treatment of PAH.
On June 17, 2024, we announced topline results from the Phase 2b portion of the Phase 2b/Phase 3 IMPAHCT. Results showed that, while AV-101 was well tolerated across all dose groups, the study did not meet its primary endpoint for improvement in pulmonary vascular resistance, or PVR, compared to placebo for any of the studied doses or show meaningful improvements in the secondary endpoint of change in 6MWD.
Primary Endpoint — ITT analysis of PVR (dynes*sec/cm ˄ 5)
Dose
Least-squares mean difference as compared with placebo (95% CI)d
P value
10mg BID (N=50)
42.8 (-80.57 to 166.09)
0.4968
35mg BID (N=49)
-5.5 (-129.16 to 118.18)
0.9306
70mg BID (N=51)
-57.0 (-181.14 to 67.20)
0.3685
Secondary Endpoint — ITT analysis of 6MWD (meters)
Dose
Least-squares mean difference as compared with placebo (95% CI)d
10mg BID (N=50)
-11.7 (-34.75 to 11.26)
35mg BID (N=49)
-4.2 (-27.74 to 19.37)
70mg BID (N=51)
+1.3 (-22.09 to 24.60)
We also reviewed data from several additional secondary endpoints of the Phase 2b portion of IMPAHCT, which also failed to show meaningful improvements. Based upon these results, we, in agreement with the independent study advisory committee, halted enrollment and shut down the Phase 3 portion of IMPAHCT as well as the long-term extension study. We plan to release full data from the Phase 2b portion of IMPAHCT at a later date, the timing of which is to be determined.
Manufacturing and Supply
We use third-party contract manufacturers for the production of our combination product, AV-101. Our active pharmaceutical ingredient, or API, is generic and can be purchased from multiple commercial vendors in compliance with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s, or the FDA’s, current Good Manufacturing Practice, or current GMP, regulations and European Pharmacopoeia, or EP, standards. To be used in our inhaled product, the API requires an additional manufacturing step, which is completed at our contract manufacturing organization that complies with the FDA’s current GMP regulations. The API is converted into drug product for aerosol use by one of our two contract fill/finish providers in the United States. As AV-101 is a drug-device combination product, we have contracted with a third-party to manufacture the single-dose inhaler device that we use for delivering inhaled AV-101 to patients in our Phase 2b/Phase 3 clinical trial.
Release and stability testing to date supports stability of at least 36 months for API under ambient conditions and supports stability of at least 36 months for drug product also under ambient conditions.
Our API, finished product, and single-dose inhaler producers are accepted by the health authorities in all countries that were included in our global Phase 2b/Phase 3 clinical trial.
We have paused manufacturing of AV-101 as we engage in our process to evaluate strategic alternatives, including the Merger.
8
Table of Contents
Sales and Marketing
Our commercialization strategy was previously to develop AV-101 into a leading therapy worldwide for the treatment of PAH. Should we resume product development activities and obtain approval for any products, we would need to establish a sales and marketing organization.
We cannot guarantee that AV-101 or any future product candidate will receive coverage and reimbursement by public and commercial payors.
Intellectual Property
Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to obtain and maintain proprietary protection for our products, novel discoveries, drug development technologies and know-how; to operate without infringing on or otherwise violating the proprietary rights of others; and to prevent others from infringing or otherwise violating our proprietary rights. Our policy is to seek to protect our proprietary position by, among other methods, filing or in-licensing U.S. and foreign patents and patent applications related to our products and other proprietary technology, inventions and improvements that are important to the development and implementation of our business. We also rely on trademarks, trade secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovation and potential in-licensing opportunities to develop and maintain our proprietary position. In June 2024, we announced our decision to halt enrollment and shut down the Phase 3 portion of IMPAHCT as well as the long-term extension study of AV-101 in PAH, and we do not intend to continue to seek or maintain intellectual property protection on the technology underlying AV-101.
Our intellectual property portfolio includes issued patents in the United States, pending patent applications in the United States, under the Patent Cooperation Treaty, or the PCT international applications, and in commercially relevant foreign jurisdictions for our products. The PCT international applications preserve all of our rights to file patent applications in commercially relevant foreign jurisdictions for our products. As of December 31, 2024, we own six U.S. patents, seven U.S. patent applications, no pending PCT international applications, and 19 foreign patent applications. Our U.S. patent portfolio is expected to expire between May 14, 2040 and February 15, 2042, excluding any extension of patent term that may be available and assuming that the filed patent applications will issue as patents. Our foreign patent portfolio is expected to expire between May 14, 2040 and February 15, 2042, excluding any extension of patent terms that may be available and assuming that filed applications will issue as patents and that the foreign patent terms are calculated similarly to the calculation of U.S. patent terms for the corresponding U.S. portion of the patent portfolio. Our patent portfolio is summarized in the following table.
NO.
PRODUCT
EXPIRATION*
APPLICATION/
PATENT NO.
RELATED
PRODUCT
PROTECTION SOUGHT
PROJECTED
EXPIRATION*
JURISDICTION
62/849,054
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use
N/A
US
11,229,650
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use
5/14/2040
US
11,806,349
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use
5/14/2040
US
18/377,561
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use
5/14/2040
US
20806383.4
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
Europe
202080051359.5
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
China
2021- 568694
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
Japan
2020274521
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
Australia
3140641
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
Canada
288111
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
Israel
202117055928
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
India
11202112719X
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
Singapore
10-2021- 7041312
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
Republic of Korea
MX/A/2021/104029
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
Mexico
BR1120210230149
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
Brazil
2021/09070
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
South Africa
20210285
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
Bahrain
305/2021
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
Jordan
KW/P/2021/466
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
Kuwait
OM/P/2021/00467
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
Oman
QA/202111/000655
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
Qatar
9
Table of Contents
521430873
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
Saudi Arabia
P6002085/2021
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
5/14/2040
UAE
PCT/US20/32872
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use; Process
N/A
International PCT
62/849,056
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use
N/A
US
11,298,355
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use
5/14/2040
US
62/849,058
AV- 101
Process
N/A
US
11,413,289
AV- 101
Process
5/14/2040
US
11,813,263
AV- 101
Process
5/14/2040
US
18/378,949
AV- 101
Process
5/14/2040
US
62/849,059
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use
N/A
US
16/874,128
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use
5/14/2040
US
62/877,575
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Process
N/A
US
16/874,143
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Process
5/14/2040
US
62/942,408
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use
N/A
US
11,464,776
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use
5/14/2040
US
17/963,607
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Use
5/14/2040
US
62/984,037
AV- 101
Use; Kit
N/A
US
16/874,168
AV- 101
Use; Kit
5/14/2040
US
17/685,704
AV- 101
Use; Kit
5/14/2040
US
62/958,481
AV- 101
Use
N/A
US
16/874,190
AV- 101
Use
5/14/2040
US
PCT/US20/32874
AV- 101
Use
N/A
International PCT
20806763.7
AV- 101
Use
Europe
63/117,258
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Combination Products; Use
N/A
US
63/150,731
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Combination Products; Use
N/A
US
18/034,558
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Combination Products; Use
11/23/2041
US
2021382051
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Combination Products; Use
11/23/2041
Australia
3199091
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Combination Products; Use
11/23/2041
Canada
202180076594.2
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Combination Products; Use
11/23/2041
China
21895804.9
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Combination Products; Use
11/23/2041
Europe
202317028210
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Combination Products; Use
11/23/2041
India
2023- 530592
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Combination Products; Use
11/23/2041
Japan
PCT/US21/60526
AV- 101
Composition of Matter; Combination Products; Use
N/A
International PCT
63/149,446
AV- 101
Process; Composition of Matter
N/A
US
18/276,396
AV- 101
Process; Composition of Matter
2/15/2042
US
2022220017
AV- 101
Process; Composition of Matter
2/15/2042
Australia
3211077
AV- 101
Process; Composition of Matter
2/15/2042
Canada
202280024931.8
AV- 101
Process; Composition of Matter
2/15/2042
China
22753517.6
AV- 101
Process; Composition of Matter
2/15/2042
Europe
2023- 548863
AV- 101
Process; Composition of Matter
2/15/2042
Japan
PCT/US22/16422
AV- 101
Process; Composition of Matter
N/A
International PCT
63/619,079
AV- 101
Use
N/A
US
*
Projected patent expiration dates were calculated for pending U.S. Nonprovisional Applications and Foreign Applications based on filing date. These calculations do not take into account any terminal disclaimers or patent term adjustments that may occur during prosecution or for pharmaceutical patents in Australia. U.S. Provisional and International PCT filings will not issue as patents and therefore do not have a projected expiration date. European filings will issue only in validated European countries and the projected expiration date will apply to those individual country patents.
Our intellectual property estate strategy is designed to provide multiple layers of protection, including: (1) proprietary patent rights with claims directed to our drug product; (2) proprietary patent rights covering methods of treatment using our drug product; and (3) proprietary patent rights covering innovative manufacturing processes.
While we seek broad coverage under our pending patent applications, there is always a risk that a modification of the product or manufacturing process may allow a competitor to avoid infringement claims. In addition, patents, if granted, expire, and we cannot provide any assurance that any patents will be issued from our pending or any future applications or that any issued patents will adequately protect our products.
10
Table of Contents
We have conducted freedom to operate analyses of the current patent landscape with respect to our lead product candidates. In doing so, we have strived to ensure our ability to operate freely within the complex patent landscape of inhalable kinase inhibitors and the use of such products in the field of PAH.
New formulations of drug products and new uses for such products would require seeking patent protection on our own to expand the layers of protection provided by our intellectual property estate.
Patent Protection and Terms
Individual patents extend for varying periods depending on the date of filing of the patent application or the date of patent issuance and the legal term of patents in the countries in which they are obtained. Generally, patents issued from regularly filed applications in the United States are granted a term of 20 years from the earliest effective filing date. In addition, in certain instances, a patent term can be adjusted to recapture a portion of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or the USPTO, delay in issuing the patent, and extended to recapture a portion of the patent term effectively lost as a result of the FDA regulatory review period of the drug covered by the patent. However, as to the FDA component, the restoration period cannot be longer than five years, the total patent term including the restoration period must not exceed 14 years following FDA approval of the drug, and the extension may only apply to one patent that covers the approved drug (and to only those patent claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it, or a method for manufacturing it). There can be no assurance that any such patent term adjustment or extension will be obtained. The duration of foreign patents varies in accordance with provisions of applicable local law, but typically is also 20 years from the earliest effective filing date. However, the actual protection afforded by a patent varies on a product-by-product basis, from country to country, and depends upon many factors, including the type of patent, the scope of its coverage, the availability of regulatory-related extensions, the availability of legal remedies in a particular country and the validity and enforceability of the patent.
Furthermore, the patent positions of biotechnology and pharmaceutical products and processes are generally uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions. No consistent policy regarding the breadth of claims allowed in such patents has emerged to date in the United States. The patent situation outside the United States is even more uncertain. Changes in either the patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries can diminish the ability to protect inventions and enforce intellectual property rights, can make it easier to challenge the validity, enforceability or scope of any patents that may issue, and, more generally, could affect the value of intellectual property. Accordingly, the breadth of claims that may be allowed or enforced in our patents or in third-party patents cannot be predicted.
Third-Party Patent Filings
Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and patent applications owned by third parties exist in the fields in which we may resume developing products. In addition, because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be applications unknown to us, which may later result in issued patents that our products or proprietary technologies may infringe. Moreover, we may be aware of patent applications, but incorrectly predict the likelihood of those applications issuing with claims of relevance to us.
Under U.S. law, a person may be able to patent a discovery of a new way to use a previously known compound, even if such compound itself is patented, provided the newly discovered use is novel and non-obvious. Such a method-of-use patent, however, if valid, only protects the use of a claimed compound for the specified methods claimed in the patent. This type of patent does not prevent persons from using the compound for any previously known use of the compound. Further, this type of patent does not prevent persons from making and marketing the compound for an indication that is outside the scope of the patented method.
Trade Secrets and Other Protections
In addition to the protections afforded by patents and other regulatory protections, we may rely, in some circumstances, on trade secrets to protect our technology. Trade secrets may be useful to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable or which we elect not to patent. Trade secrets may also be useful for processes or improvements for which patents are difficult to enforce.
11
Table of Contents
We also protect our products and proprietary technology through confidentiality agreements with employees, consultants, advisors, contractors and collaborators. These agreements are designed to protect our proprietary information and, in the case of the invention assignment agreements, to grant us ownership of technologies that are developed through a relationship with a third party. These agreements may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors. To the extent that our commercial partners, collaborators, employees and consultants use intellectual property owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the rights in related or resulting know-how and inventions.
We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data and trade secrets by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems.
Infringement of Third-Party Proprietary Rights
Our commercial success will depend in part on not infringing upon or otherwise violating the intellectual property and proprietary rights of third parties. If we are found to infringe a third party’s intellectual property rights, we could be required to obtain a license from such third party to continue developing and marketing our products and technology. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. We could also be forced, including by court order, to cease commercializing the infringing product or technology. In addition, we could be found liable for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees, if we are found to have willfully infringed a patent. A finding of infringement could prevent us from commercializing our products or force us to cease some of our business operations. For more information regarding these risks, please see “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property.”
Competition
The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary products. We have faced potential competition from many different sources, including major pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions and governmental agencies and public and private research institutions. In June 2024, we announced our decision to halt enrollment and shut down the Phase 3 portion of IMPAHCT as well as the long-term extension study of AV-101 in PAH and will not advance development of AV-101 in PAH.
Some of our historical competitors have had significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than we did. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.
The key competitive factors that differentiate products, if approved, are likely to be efficacy, safety, convenience, price, and the availability of reimbursement from commercial, government and other third-party payors.
Government Regulation
United States—FDA Process
In the United States, pharmaceutical products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA. The FDCA and other federal and state statutes and regulations, govern, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, storage, recordkeeping, approval, labeling, promotion and marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, sampling, and import and export of pharmaceutical products. We, along with third-party contractors, will be required to navigate the various preclinical, clinical and commercial approval requirements of the governing regulatory authorities of the countries in which we wish to conduct studies or seek approval of our product candidates. Failure to comply with applicable United States requirements may subject a company to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions, such as FDA refusal to approve pending New Drug Applications, or NDAs, withdrawal of an approval, warning or untitled letters, clinical holds, product recalls or withdrawals from the market, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production
12
Table of Contents
or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement of profits, civil penalties, and criminal prosecution.
FDA approval is required before any new unapproved product or a product with certain changes to a previously approved product, including a new use of a previously approved drug, can be marketed in the United States. The steps required to be completed by the FDA before a drug may be marketed in the United States generally includes the following:
● completion of preclinical laboratory tests, animal studies, and formulation studies performed in accordance with the FDA’s Good Laboratory Practice, or GLP, regulations;
● submission to the FDA of an investigational new drug, or IND, application for human clinical testing, which must become effective before human clinical trials may begin and must be updated annually or when significant changes are made;
● approval by an independent institutional review board, or IRB, or ethics committee at each clinical site before the clinical trial is commenced;
● performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials in accordance with applicable IND regulations, GCP, requirements and other clinical-trial related regulations to establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed drug for each indication;
● preparation and submission to the FDA of a NDA after completion of all pivotal clinical trials, which includes not only the results of the clinical trials, but also, detailed information on the chemistry, manufacture and quality controls for the product candidate and proposed labeling;
● satisfactory completion of an FDA Advisory Committee review, if applicable;
● a determination by the FDA within 60 days of its receipt of an NDA to file the application for review;
● satisfactory completion of an FDA pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities at which the proposed drug is produced to assess compliance with current GMP regulations and of selected clinical trial sites to assess compliance with GCPs; and
● FDA review and approval of the NDA to permit commercial marketing of the product for particular indications for use in the United States.
Satisfaction of FDA pre-market approval requirements typically takes many years and the actual time required may vary substantially based upon the type, complexity, and novelty of the product or disease.
Preclinical and Clinical Development
Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry, formulation, and toxicity, as well as animal trials to assess the characteristics and potential safety and efficacy of the product candidate. The conduct of the preclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements, including GLPs. The results of preclinical testing are submitted to the FDA as part of an IND application along with other information, including information about the product candidate, chemistry, manufacturing and controls, any available human data or literature to support the use of the product candidate and a proposed clinical trial protocol. Long term preclinical tests, such as animal tests of reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity, may continue after the IND is submitted.
An IND application must become effective before human clinical trials may begin. The IND application automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA, within the 30-day period, raises safety concerns or questions relating to one or more proposed clinical trials and places the clinical trial on clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns or questions before the clinical trial can begin. The FDA
13
Table of Contents
may also impose clinical holds on a product candidate at any time before or during clinical trials due to safety concerns, non-compliance or other issues affecting the integrity of the trial. Accordingly, submission of an IND application may or may not result in the FDA allowing clinical trials to commence and, once begun, issues may arise that could cause the trial to be suspended or terminated.
Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational drug product to human subjects under the supervision of a qualified investigator. Clinical trials must be conducted: (i) in compliance with federal regulations; (ii) in compliance with GCP, an international standard meant to protect the rights and health of clinical research participants and to define the roles of clinical trial sponsors, administrators, and monitors; as well as (iii) under protocols detailing the objectives of the trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety, and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. Each protocol involving testing on United States patients and subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Furthermore, an independent IRB or ethics committee for each site proposing to conduct the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial and its informed consent form before the clinical trial begins at that site, and must monitor the study until completed. An IRB 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.
Regulatory authorities, the IRB or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or that the trial is unlikely to meet its stated objects. The FDA may order the temporary, or permanent, discontinuation of a clinical trial at any time, or impose other sanctions, if it believes that the clinical trial either is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements. Further, an IRB may also require the clinical trial at the site to be halted, either temporarily or permanently, for failure to comply with the IRB’s requirements, or may impose other conditions. Some trials also include oversight by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical trial sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board, which provides authorization for whether or not a study may move forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the study and may recommend a clinical trial to be halted if it determines that there is an unacceptable safety risk for subjects or other grounds, such as futility.
Clinical trials to support an NDA for marketing approval are typically conducted in three sequential phases, but the phases may overlap or be combined. In Phase 1 clinical trials, the investigational product is typically introduced into a limited population of healthy human subjects or patients with the target disease or condition. These trials are designed to test the safety, dosage tolerance, pharmacokinetics and pharmacological actions of the investigational product, to identify side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, to gain early evidence on effectiveness. Phase 2 clinical trials usually involve administering the investigational product to a limited patient population with the specified disease or condition to evaluate the preliminarily efficacy, dosage tolerance, and optimum dosage, and to identify possible adverse effects and safety risks. Phase 3 clinical trials are typically undertaken in a larger number of patients, typically at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites, to provide substantial evidence of clinical efficacy and to further test for safety in an expanded and diverse patient population. These clinical trials are intended to permit the FDA to evaluate the overall benefit-risk relationship of the investigational product and to provide adequate information for the labeling of the product candidate.
In reviewing an NDA, the FDA will consider all information submitted in the NDA, including the results of all clinical trials conducted. In some cases, the FDA may require, or companies may voluntarily pursue, additional clinical trials after a product is approved to gain more information about the product. These so-called Phase 4 studies may be made a condition to approval of the NDA. These trials are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication and further document clinical benefit in the case of drugs approved under accelerated approval regulations. Failure to exhibit due diligence with regard to conducting Phase 4 clinical trials could result in the withdrawal of approval for products.
Concurrent with clinical trials, companies may complete additional animal studies and develop additional information about the biological characteristics of the product candidate, and must finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with current GMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and
14
Table of Contents
tested and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.
During all phases of clinical development, regulatory agencies require extensive monitoring and auditing of all clinical activities, clinical data, and clinical study investigators. Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials, among other information, 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 suspected adverse events, findings from other studies suggesting a significant risk to humans exposed to the product candidate, findings from animal or in vitro testing that suggest a significant risk for human subjects, and any clinically important increase in the rate of a serious suspected adverse reaction over that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure.
NDA Submission and Review
Assuming successful completion of the required clinical testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, an NDA application which includes, among other information, the results of product development, preclinical studies and clinical trials are submitted to the FDA. FDA approval of the NDA is required before marketing of the product may begin in the United States. The NDA must include, among other things, the results of all trials and preclinical testing, and other testing and a compilation of data relating to the product’s pharmacology, chemistry, manufacture, controls and proposed labeling. The cost of preparing and submitting an NDA is substantial.
The FDA has 60 days from its receipt of an NDA to either issue a Refuse to File Letter or accept the NDA for filing, indicating that it is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review. The FDA has agreed to certain performance goals in the review of NDAs. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, the FDA has a goal of responding to standard review NDAs within ten months after it accepts the application for filing, or, if the application qualifies for priority review, six months after the FDA accepts the application for filing, but this timeframe can be extended such as by the submission of major amendments by applicants during the review period. The FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether the product is safe and effective and the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packed or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, purity and potency.
The FDA may refer applications for novel drug products, or drug products that present difficult questions of safety or efficacy, to an advisory committee—typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts—for review, evaluation, and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it generally follows such recommendations. Before approving an NDA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCPs. Additionally, the FDA will inspect the facility or the facilities at which the proposed product is manufactured. If the FDA determines that the application, manufacturing process or manufacturing facilities are not acceptable, it will outline the deficiencies in the submission and often will request additional testing or information. Notwithstanding the submission of any requested additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval.
After the FDA evaluates the NDA and conducts inspections of the manufacturing facilities where the investigational product and/or its drug substance will be produced, it issues either an approval letter or a Complete Response letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with approved prescribing information for specific indications. A Complete Response letter indicates that the review cycle of the application is complete and the application is not ready for approval. A Complete Response letter generally outlines the deficiencies in the submission, except that where the FDA determines that the data supporting the application are inadequate to support approval, the FDA may issue the Complete Response letter without first conducting required inspections or reviewing proposed labeling. In issuing the Complete Response letter, the FDA may require substantial additional clinical data and/or other significant, expensive, and time-consuming requirements related to clinical trials, preclinical studies and/or manufacturing. If a Complete Response letter is issued, the applicant may either resubmit the NDA, addressing all of the deficiencies identified in the letter, withdraw the application or request a hearing. The FDA has committed to reviewing resubmissions of the NDA addressing such deficiencies in two or six months depending on the type of information included. Even if such data are submitted, however, the FDA may ultimately decide that the NDA does not satisfy the criteria for approval.
15
Table of Contents
If regulatory approval of a product is granted, such approval will be granted for a particular indication(s) and may include limitations on the indicated use(s) for which such product may be marketed. Further, the FDA may require that certain contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling or may condition the approval of the NDA on other changes to the proposed labeling, development of adequate controls and specifications, or a commitment to conduct post-market testing or clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the effects of approved products. As a condition of NDA approval, the FDA may require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, to help ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh the potential risks. REMS can include medication guides, communication plans for healthcare professionals, and elements to assure safe use, or ETASU. ETASU can include, but are not limited to, special training or certification for prescribing or dispensing, dispensing only under certain circumstances, special monitoring, and the use of patient registries. The requirement for REMS can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the product. Moreover, product approval may also be conditioned on substantial post-approval testing, such as Phase 4 post-market studies, and surveillance to monitor the product’s safety or efficacy, and FDA may limit further marketing of the product based on the results of these post-approval studies. Once granted, product approvals may be withdrawn if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or problems are identified following initial marketing.
Changes to some of the conditions established in an approved application, including changes in indications, labeling, or manufacturing processes or facilities, require submission and FDA approval of a new NDA or NDA supplement before the change can be implemented. An NDA supplement for a new indication typically requires clinical data similar to that in the original application, and the FDA uses the same procedures and actions in reviewing NDA supplements as it does in reviewing NDAs. As with new NDAs, the review process is often significantly extended by the FDA requests for additional information or clarification.
505(b)(2) NDA Approval Process
Section 505(b)(2) of the FDCA provides an alternate regulatory pathway for the FDA to approve a new product and permits reliance for such approval on published literature or an FDA finding of safety and effectiveness for a previously approved drug product. Specifically, section 505(b)(2) permits the filing of an NDA where one or more of the investigations relied upon by the applicant for approval were not conducted by or for the applicant and for which the applicant has not obtained a right of reference. Typically, 505(b)(2) applicants must perform additional trials to support the change from the previously approved drug and to further demonstrate the new product’s safety and effectiveness. The FDA may then approve the new product candidate for all or some of the labeled indications for which the referenced product has been approved, as well as for any new indication sought by the section 505(b)(2) applicant.
Regulation of Combination Products in the United States
Certain products may be comprised of components, such as drug components and device components, that would normally be regulated under different types of regulatory authorities, and frequently by different centers at the FDA. These products are known as combination products. Specifically, under regulations issued by the FDA, a combination product may be:
● a product comprised of two or more regulated components that are physically, chemically, or otherwise combined or mixed and produced as a single entity;
● two or more separate products packaged together in a single package or as a unit and comprised of drug and device products, device and biological products, or biological and drug products;
● a drug, or device, or biological product packaged separately that according to its investigational plan or proposed labeling is intended for use only with an approved individually specified drug, or device, or biological product where both are required to achieve the intended use, indication, or effect and where upon approval of the proposed product the labeling of the approved product would need to be changed, e.g., to reflect a change in intended use, dosage form, strength, route of administration, or significant change in dose; or
● any investigational drug, or device, or biological product packaged separately that according to its proposed labeling is for use only with another individually specified investigational drug, device, or biological product where both are required to achieve the intended use, indication, or effect.
16
Table of Contents
Under the FDCA and its implementing regulations, the FDA is charged with assigning a center with primary jurisdiction, or a lead center, for review of a combination product. The designation of a lead center generally eliminates the need to receive approvals from more than one FDA component for combination products, although it does not preclude consultations by the lead center with other components of FDA. The determination of which center will be the lead center is based on the “primary mode of action” of the combination product. Thus, if the primary mode of action of a drug-device combination product is attributable to the drug product, the FDA center responsible for premarket review of the drug product would have primary jurisdiction for the combination product. The FDA has also established an Office of Combination Products to address issues surrounding combination products and provide more certainty to the regulatory review process. That office serves as a focal point for combination product issues for agency reviewers and industry. It is also responsible for developing guidance and regulations to clarify the regulation of combination products, and for assignment of the FDA center that has primary jurisdiction for review of combination products where the jurisdiction is unclear or in dispute.
A combination product with a drug primary mode of action generally would be reviewed and approved pursuant to the drug approval processes under the FDCA. In reviewing the NDA application for such a product, however, FDA reviewers in the drug center could consult with their counterparts in the device center to ensure that the device component of the combination product met applicable requirements regarding safety, effectiveness, durability and performance. In addition, under FDA regulations, combination products are subject to current GMP requirements applicable to both drugs and devices, including the Quality System, or QS, regulations applicable to medical devices.
Post-Approval Requirements
Once an NDA is approved, a product will be subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA including, among other things, requirements relating to current GMPs, quality controls, record-keeping, reporting of adverse experiences, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, and advertising and promotion of the product. For instance, the FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of drugs, including standards and regulations for direct-to-consumer advertising, off-label promotion, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities and promotional activities involving the internet. Drugs may be marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in adverse publicity, warning letters, corrective advertising, and potential civil and criminal penalties. Physicians may prescribe legally available products for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and that differ from those tested by us and approved by the FDA. Such off-label uses are common across medical specialties. Physicians may believe that such off-label uses are the best treatment for many patients in varied circumstances. The FDA does not regulate the practice of medicine by physicians or their choice of treatments. The FDA does, however, regulate manufacturer’s communications on the subject of off-label use of their products.
In addition, quality control, drug manufacture, packaging, and labeling procedures must continue to conform to current GMPs after approval. Drug manufacturers and certain of their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA, and certain state agencies for compliance with current GMPs, which impose certain organizational, procedural and documentation requirements with respect to manufacturing and quality assurance activities. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated, and, depending on the significance of the change, may require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from current GMPs and impose reporting requirements upon us and any third-party manufacturers that we may decide to use. NDA holders using contract manufacturers, laboratories or packagers are responsible for the selection and monitoring of qualified firms, and, in certain circumstances, qualified suppliers to these firms. Drug manufacturers and other parties involved in the drug supply chain for prescription drug products must also comply with product tracking and tracing requirements and for notifying the FDA of counterfeit, diverted, stolen and intentionally adulterated products or products that are otherwise unfit for distribution in the United States. The discovery of violative conditions, including failure to conform to current GMP, could result in enforcement actions that interrupt the operation of any such facilities or the ability to distribute products manufactured, processed or tested by them. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the areas of production and quality-control to maintain compliance with current GMPs.
17
Table of Contents
The FDA may withdraw product approvals or request product recalls if a company fails to comply with regulatory standards or is not maintained, if problems occur following initial marketing, or if previously unrecognized problems are subsequently discovered. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information; imposition of post-market studies or clinical trials to assess new safety risks; or imposition of distribution restrictions or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences include, among other things:
● restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of a product, complete withdrawal of the product from the market or product recalls;
● fines, warning letters or holds on post-approval clinical trials;
● refusal of the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications, or suspension or revocation of existing product approvals;
● product seizure or detention, or refusal of the FDA to permit the import or export of products;
● consent decrees, corporate integrity agreements, debarment or exclusion from federal healthcare programs;
● mandated modification of promotional materials and labeling and the issuance of corrective information;
● the issuance of safety alerts, Dear Healthcare Provider letters, press releases and other communications containing warnings or other safety information about the product; or
● injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.
U.S. Patent Term Restoration
Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of the potential FDA approval of AV-101 and any future product candidates, some of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent restoration term, often referred to as patent term extension, of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. However, patent term restoration cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date. The patent term restoration period is generally one-half the time between the effective date of an IND 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 or denies the application for any patent term extension or restoration.
U.S. Marketing Exclusivity
Market exclusivity provisions under the FDCA can also delay the submission or the approval of certain marketing applications, including 505(b)(2) applications. The FDA provides three years of marketing exclusivity for an NDA (including a 505(b)(2) application), 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. Three-year exclusivity is typically awarded to innovative changes to a previously-approved drug product, such as new indications, dosage forms or strengths. 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 applications for drugs that do not have the innovative change, such as generic copies of the original, unmodified drug product. Three-year exclusivity blocks approval of 505(b)(2) applications and Abbreviated NDAs, but 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 nonclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials necessary to
18
Table of Contents
demonstrate safety and effectiveness. Orphan drug exclusivity, as described above, may offer a seven-year period of marketing exclusivity, except in certain circumstances. Pediatric exclusivity is another type of regulatory market exclusivity in the United States. Pediatric exclusivity, if granted, adds six months to existing exclusivity periods, including exclusivity attaching to certain patent certifications. This six-month exclusivity, which runs from the end of other exclusivity protection and patent terms, 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.
Orphan Drug Designation
Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition—generally a disease or condition with either a patient population that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States or a patient population greater than 200,000 individuals in the United States and there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available the drug will be recovered from sales of the drug in the United States. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the product and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process.
The first NDA applicant to receive FDA approval for a particular active ingredient to treat a particular disease with FDA orphan drug designation is entitled to a seven-year exclusive marketing period in the United States for that product, for that indication. During the seven-year exclusivity period, the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same product for the same disease, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity or if the FDA finds that the holder of the orphan drug exclusivity has not shown that it can assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the orphan drug to meet the needs of the patients with the disease or condition for which the product was designated. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different product for the same disease or condition, or the same product for a different disease or condition. Among the other benefits of orphan drug designation are tax credits for certain research and a waiver of the NDA or BLA application user fee.
A designated orphan drug may not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan drug designation. In addition, orphan drug exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.
Fast Track Designation, Breakthrough Therapy Designation and Accelerated Approval
The FDA is required to facilitate the development, and expedite the review, of drugs that are intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening disease or condition which demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the condition. These programs include fast track designation, priority review and accelerated approval.
A product candidate is eligible for fast track designation if it is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for such disease or condition. Fast track designation applies to the combination of the product and the specific indication for which it is being studied. Under the fast track program, the sponsor of a drug candidate may request that the FDA designate the candidate for a specific indication as a fast track product concurrent with, or after, the filing of the IND for the candidate. The FDA must determine if the product candidate qualifies for fast track designation within 60 days of receipt of the sponsor’s request. Fast track designation provides increased opportunities for sponsor interactions with the FDA during preclinical and clinical development, in addition to the potential for rolling review of sections of a the applicant’s NDA before the application is complete. This rolling review is available if the applicant provides, and the FDA approves, a schedule for the submission of the remaining information and the applicant pays applicable user fees. However, the FDA’s time period goal for reviewing an application does not begin until the last section of the NDA is submitted. Additionally, the fast track designation may be withdrawn by the FDA if the FDA believes that the designation is no longer supported by data emerging in the clinical trial process.
19
Table of Contents
Under the FDA’s breakthrough therapy program, a sponsor may seek FDA designation of its product candidate as a breakthrough therapy if the product candidate is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs or biologics, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that it may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. Breakthrough therapy designation comes with all of the benefits of fast track designation. The FDA may take other actions appropriate to expedite the development and review of the product candidate, including intensive guidance on an efficient product development program beginning as early as Phase 1, and FDA organizational commitment to expedited development, including involvement of senior managers and experienced review staff in a cross-disciplinary review, where appropriate.
Any product submitted to the FDA for marketing, including under the fast track or breakthrough designation program, may also be eligible for other types of FDA programs intended to expedite development and review, such as accelerated approval. Products are eligible for accelerated approval if they can be shown to have 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 an effect on 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.
In clinical trials, a surrogate endpoint is a measurement of laboratory or clinical signs of a disease or condition that substitutes for a direct measurement of how a patient feels, functions, or survives. Surrogate endpoints can often be measured more easily or more rapidly than clinical endpoints. A product candidate approved on this basis is subject to rigorous post-marketing compliance requirements, including the conduct of Phase 4, or post-approval, clinical trials to confirm the effect on the clinical endpoint which must be conducted with due diligence and, under the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act of 2022, or FDORA, the FDA may require, as appropriate, that such trials be underway prior to approval or within a specific time period after the date accelerated approval is granted. Additionally, under FDORA, the FDA has increased authority for expedited procedures to withdraw a product or indication approved under accelerated approval if, for example, the confirmatory trial fails to verify the predicted clinical benefit of the product. All promotional materials for product candidates approved under accelerated regulations are subject to prior review by the FDA unless otherwise informed by the FDA.
Priority Review
A product is eligible for priority review if it has the potential to provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness in the treatment, diagnosis or prevention of a serious disease or condition. 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 Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, guidelines. Under the current PDUFA agreement, 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. Most products that are eligible for fast track designation are also likely to be considered appropriate to receive a priority review.
Pediatric Information
Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, NDAs or supplements to NDAs must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the drug is safe and effective. 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 drug for an indication for which orphan designation has been granted.
Disclosure of Clinical Trial Information
Sponsors of clinical trials of FDA-regulated products, including drugs and combination products, are required to register and disclose certain clinical trial information. Information related to the product, patient population, phase of investigation, trial sites and investigators, and other aspects of the clinical trial is then made public as part of the registration. Sponsors are also obligated to disclose the results of their clinical trials after completion. Competitors may use this publicly available
20
Table of Contents
information to gain knowledge regarding the progress of development programs. Disclosure of the results of these trials can be delayed until the new product or new indication being studied has been approved. Failure to timely register a covered clinical study or to submit study results as provided for in the law can give rise to civil monetary penalties and also prevent the non-compliant party from receiving future grant funds from the federal government. The Final Rule on ClinicalTrials.gov registration and reporting requirements became effective in 2017, and both the National Institutes of Health and the FDA have signaled the government’s willingness to begin enforcing those requirements against non-compliant clinical trial sponsors.
European Union—Process
In the European Union, or EU, our product candidate(s) may also be subject to extensive regulatory requirements governing, among other things, clinical trials and any commercial sales and distribution of our product candidate(s).
Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product candidate, we must obtain the requisite approvals from regulatory authorities located in the EU Member States prior to the commencement of clinical trials as well as EU or national regulatory approvals prior to marketing the product candidate(s).
Non-Clinical Studies and Clinical Trials
Similar to the United States, the various phases of non-clinical studies and clinical trials in the EU are subject to significant regulatory controls.
Non-clinical studies are performed to demonstrate the health or environmental safety of new chemical substances. Non-clinical studies must be conducted in compliance with the principles of GLP as set forth in EU Directive 2004/10/EC. In particular, non-clinical studies, both in vitro and in vivo, must be planned, performed, monitored, recorded, reported and archived in accordance with the GLP principles, which define a set of rules and criteria for a quality system for the organizational process and the conditions for non-clinical studies. These GLP standards reflect the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development requirements.
Clinical trials of medicinal products in the EU must be conducted in accordance with the EU Clinical Trials Regulation (EU) No 536/2014, or CTR, (which was adopted in April 2014, and repealed the EU Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC on January 31, 2022), and the International Conference on Harmonization, or ICH, guidelines on GCP, as well as the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki. If the sponsor of the clinical trial is not established within the EU, it must appoint an EU entity to act as its legal representative (unless all EU Member States in which the trial is being conducted have chosen not to apply such rule, in which case it may be that only a contact person in the EU is required), who shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with the sponsor’s obligations under the CTR and be the addressee for all communications provided for under the CTR. The sponsor must take out a clinical trial insurance policy, and in most EU Member States, the sponsor is liable to provide ‘no fault’ compensation to any study subject injured in the clinical trial.
The CTR is directly applicable in all Member States (meaning that no national implementing legislation in each EU Member State is required). Under the CTR, there is a centralized application procedure where one national authority takes the lead in reviewing the application and the other national authorities have only limited involvement (instead of submitting applications separately to each national competent authority and ethics committee in the Member States in which the trial will be conducted, as was the case under the previous EU Clinical Trials Directive). The CTR also makes it more efficient for EU Member States to evaluate and authorize applications together, via the Clinical Trials Information System. Medicines used in clinical trials must be manufactured in accordance with Good Manufacturing Practices, or GMP. Other national and EU-wide regulatory requirements may also apply.
Disclosure of Clinical Trial Information
The CTR significantly enlarges the publication and transparency obligations for clinical trial sponsors from the previous position under the Clinical Trials Directive. Additionally, the CTR requires that EU Member States adopt specific measures, including penalties, to adequately sanction infringements of the relevant transparency obligations.
21
Table of Contents
Marketing Authorisations
In the EU, medicinal products can only be placed on the market after obtaining a marketing authorisation, or MA. To obtain regulatory approval of a product in the EU, we must submit a marketing authorization application, or MAA. The process for doing this depends, among other things, on the nature of the medicinal product.
Centralized Procedure
Under the centralized procedure, the European Commission issues a single MA, based on the opinion of the European Medicines Agency’s, or EMA, Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, or CHMP, which is valid across the entire territory of the EU, as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway (i.e. the European Economic Area, or EEA). The centralized procedure is compulsory for human medicines that are: (i) derived from biotechnology processes; (ii) advanced-therapy medicinal products (i.e. gene therapy, somatic cell-therapy or tissue-engineered medicines); (iii) contain a new active substance indicated for the treatment of certain diseases, such as HIV, AIDS, cancer, diabetes, neurodegenerative diseases, viral diseases or autoimmune diseases and other immune dysfunctions; and (iv) officially designated orphan medicines. For medicines that do not fall within these categories, an applicant has the option of submitting an application for a centralized MA to the EMA if the product contains a new active substance not yet authorized in the EU, or the medicine concerned is a significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovation, or that the granting of a centralized authorization would be in the interest of public health at the EU-level.
Under the centralized procedure the maximum timeframe for the evaluation of an MAA by the EMA is 210 days, excluding clock stops, when additional written or oral information is to be provided by the applicant in response to questions asked by the CHMP. Clock stops may extend the timeframe of evaluation of an MAA considerably beyond 210 days. Where the CHMP gives a positive opinion, the EMA provides the opinion together with supporting documentation to the European Commission, who makes the final decision to grant an MA, which is issued within 67 days of receipt of the EMA’s recommendations. Accelerated assessment may be granted by the CHMP in exceptional cases, when a medicinal product is of major interest from the point of view of public health and, in particular, from the point of view of therapeutic innovation. Accelerated assessment of an MAA will be performed by the CHMP in no more than 150 days (excluding clock stops) but it is possible that the CHMP may revert to the standard time limit for the centralized procedure if it determines that the application is no longer appropriate to conduct an accelerated assessment. Innovative products that target an unmet medical need (there is no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment in the EU or, if there is, the new medicine will bring a major therapeutic advantage) may be eligible for a number of expedited development and review programs, such as the PRIME scheme, which provides incentives similar to the breakthrough therapy designation in the United States. PRIME is a voluntary scheme aimed at enhancing the EMA’s support for the development of medicines that target unmet medical needs. It is based on increased interaction and early dialogue with companies developing promising medicines, to optimize their product development plans and speed up their evaluation to help them reach patients earlier. Product developers that benefit from PRIME designation can expect to be eligible for accelerated assessment but this is not guaranteed. The benefits of a PRIME designation include the appointment of a CHMP rapporteur before submission of an MAA, early dialogue and scientific advice at key development milestones, and the potential to qualify products for accelerated review earlier in the application process.
National Authorisation Procedures
There are also two other possible routes to authorize medicinal products in several Member States. National MAs are issued by the national competent authorities of the EU Member States and only cover their respective territory. They are available for products that fall outside the scope of the centralized procedure:
● Decentralized procedure. If the product has not received a national MA in any Member State at the time of application, an applicant may apply for simultaneous MAs in more than one EU Member State. Under the decentralized procedure an identical dossier is submitted to the national competent authority of each of the Member States in which an MA is sought, one of which is selected by the applicant as the Reference Member State.
22
Table of Contents
● Mutual recognition procedure. Under the mutual recognition procedure, a medicine that has already been authorized in one EU Member State in accordance with the national procedures of that Member State, can be recognized in another Member State.
MAs have an initial duration of five years. After these five years, the authorization may be renewed for an unlimited period on the basis of a reevaluation of the risk-benefit balance.
Similar to the United States, there is a process for authorization of generic/biosimilar versions of innovator medicinal products authorized in the EU. Abridged applications for the authorization of generic/biosimilar versions of medicinal products authorized via the EU centralized procedure can be submitted to the EMA through the centralized procedure referencing the innovator’s data.
Data and Market Exclusivity
In the EU, innovative medicinal products approved on the basis of a complete and independent data package qualify for eight years of data exclusivity upon the grant of an MA and an additional two years of market exclusivity. Data exclusivity prevents generic and biosimilar applicants from referencing the innovator’s preclinical and clinical trial data contained in the dossier of the reference product when applying for an MA for a period of eight years from the date on which the reference product was first authorized in the EU. During the additional two-year period of market exclusivity, a generic or biosimilar MAA can be submitted and authorized, and the innovator’s data may be referenced, but no generic or biosimilar medicinal product can be marketed until the expiration of the market exclusivity period. The overall 10 year period will be extended to a maximum of 11 years if, during the first eight years of those 10 years, the MA holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to authorization, is held to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies. There is no guarantee that a product will be considered by the EMA to be an innovative medicinal product, and products may not qualify for data exclusivity. Even if a product is considered to be an innovative medicinal product so that the innovator gains the prescribed period of data exclusivity, another company may market another version of the product if such company obtained an MA based on an MAA with a complete and independent data package of pharmaceutical tests, preclinical tests and clinical trials.
Orphan Medicinal Products
The criteria for designating an “orphan medicinal product” in the EU are similar in principle to those in the United States. A medicinal product may be designated as orphan if (1) it is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition; (2) either (a) such condition affects no more than five in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) it is unlikely that the marketing of the product, without the benefits derived from orphan status, would generate sufficient return in the EU to justify the necessary investment in its development; and (3) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of such condition authorized for marketing in the EU or, if such a method exists, the product in question would be of significant benefit compared to products available for that condition.
In the EU, orphan designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers, regulatory assistance and the possibility to apply for a centralized MA. The application for orphan designation must be submitted before the application for an MA. Orphan designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process. The grant of an MA for an orphan medicinal product leads to ten years of market exclusivity. During the ten-year market exclusivity period, the EMA cannot accept an MAA, or grant an MA, or accept an application to extend an MA, for the same therapeutic indication, in respect of a “similar medicinal product.” A “similar medicinal product” is defined as a medicinal product containing a similar active substance or substances as contained in an authorized orphan medicinal product, and which is intended for the same therapeutic indication. An orphan medicinal product can also obtain an additional two years of market exclusivity in the EU for pediatric studies conducted in compliance with an agreed pediatric investigation plan, or PIP. No extension to any supplementary protection certificate can be granted on the basis of pediatric studies for orphan indications.
The 10-year market exclusivity may be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the orphan designation criteria are no longer met, including where it is shown that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify
23
Table of Contents
maintenance of market exclusivity. At any time, an MA may be granted to a similar medicinal product for the same therapeutic indication if: (i) a second applicant can establish that its product, although similar to the authorized product, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior; (ii) the MA holder for the authorized orphan product consents to a second orphan medicinal product application; or (iii) the MA holder for the authorized orphan product cannot supply enough orphan medicinal product.
Pediatric Development
In the EU, MAAs for new medicinal products have to include the results of trials conducted in the pediatric population, in compliance with a PIP agreed with the EMA’s Pediatric Committee, or PDCO. The PIP sets out the timing and measures proposed to generate data to support a pediatric indication of the product for which an MA is being sought. The PDCO can grant a deferral of the obligation to implement some or all of the measures of the PIP until there are sufficient data to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of the product in adults. Further, the obligation to provide pediatric clinical trial data can be waived by the PDCO when these data are not needed or appropriate because the product is likely to be ineffective or unsafe in children, the disease or condition for which the product is intended occurs only in adult populations, or when the product does not represent a significant therapeutic benefit over existing treatments for pediatric patients. Once the MA is obtained in all Member States and study results are included in the product information, even when negative, the product is eligible for a six-months supplementary protection certificate, or SPC extension (provided an application for such extension is made at the same time as filing the SPC application for the product, or at any point up to two years before the SPC expires) or, in the case of orphan medicinal products, a two-year extension of the orphan market exclusivity is granted. This pediatric reward is subject to specific conditions and is not automatically available when data in compliance with the PIP are developed and submitted.
Failure to comply with EU and Member State laws that apply to the conduct of clinical trials, manufacturing approval, marketing of such products, both before and after grant of the MA, manufacturing of pharmaceutical products, statutory health insurance, bribery and anti-corruption or with other applicable regulatory requirements may result in administrative, civil or criminal penalties. These penalties could include delays or refusal to authorize the conduct of clinical trials, or to grant an MA, product withdrawals and recalls, product seizures, suspension, withdrawal or variation of the MA, total or partial suspension of production, distribution, manufacturing or clinical trials, operating restrictions, injunctions, suspension of licenses, fines and criminal penalties.
Reform of the Regulatory Framework in the European Union
The European Commission introduced legislative proposals in April 2023 that, if implemented, will replace the current regulatory framework in the EU for all medicines (including those for rare diseases and for children). The European Commission has provided the legislative proposals to the European Parliament and the European Council for their review and approval. In October 2023, the European Parliament published draft reports proposing amendments to the legislative proposals, which will be debated by the European Parliament. Once the European Commission’s legislative proposals are approved (with or without amendment), they will be adopted into EU law.
Regulation of Combination Products
The EU regulates medical devices and medicinal products separately, through different legislative instruments, and the applicable requirements will vary depending on the type of drug-device combination product. EU guidance has been published to help manufacturers select the right regulatory framework. In the case of drug-delivery products intended to administer a medicinal product where the device and the medicinal product do not form a single integral product (i.e. where the medicinal product and the device do not form a single product which is intended exclusively for use in the given combination and which is not reusable), the medicinal product is regulated in accordance with the aforementioned rules while the device part is regulated as a medical device and will have to comply with all the requirements set forth by Regulation 2017/745, or the Medical Devices Regulation (which became applicable on May 26, 2021 and repealed the EU Council Directive 93/42/EEC, or the Medical Devices Directive). The dry powder delivery device used with AV-101 is classed as a class IIa device under the Medical Devices Regulation and this will need to be certified under the Medical Devices Regulation in due course as described below. The current CE mark for the delivery device is in accordance with the Medical Devices Directive as a class I device. Under the transitional provisions of the Medical Devices Regulation,
24
Table of Contents
medical devices for which the conformity assessment procedure pursuant to the Medical Devices Directive did not require the involvement of a notified body, for which the declaration of conformity was drawn up prior to May 26, 2021 and for which the conformity assessment procedure pursuant to the Medical Device Regulation requires the involvement of a notified body, may be placed on the market or put into service until December 31, 2028, after which they must be re-certified under the Medical Devices Regulation.
The characteristics of non-integral devices used for the administration of medicinal products may impact the quality, safety and efficacy profile of the medicinal products. To the extent that administration devices are co-packaged with the medicinal product or, in exceptional cases, where the use of a specific type of administration device is specifically provided for in the product information of the medicinal product, additional information may need to be provided in the MAA for the medicinal product on the characteristics of the medical device(s) that may impact on the quality, safety and/or efficacy of the medicinal product. The requirements regarding quality aspects for integral drug-device combination products, including devices that are co-packaged with medicinal products, are outlined in an EMA guideline which came into effect on January 1, 2022.
For a medical device to obtain a CE mark under the Medical Devices Regulation, the device must meet the relevant general safety and performance requirements laid down in Annex I of the Medical Devices Regulation. The most fundamental requirement is that a medical device must be designed and manufactured in such a way that it will not compromise the clinical condition or safety of patients, or the safety and health of users and others. In addition, the device must achieve the performances intended by the manufacturer and be designed, manufactured, and packaged in a suitable manner. To demonstrate compliance with the general safety and performance requirements laid down in Annex I to the Medical Devices Regulation, medical device manufacturers must undergo a conformity assessment procedure, which varies according to the type of medical device and its (risk) classification. Conformity assessment procedures require an assessment of available clinical evidence, literature data for the product, and post-market experience in respect of similar products already marketed. For class IIa medical devices, a conformity assessment procedure requires the intervention of a notified body. Notified bodies are independent organizations designated by EU countries to assess the conformity of devices before being placed on the market. If satisfied that the relevant product conforms to the relevant general safety and performance requirements, the notified body issues a certificate of conformity, which the manufacturer uses as a basis for its own declaration of conformity. The manufacturer may then apply the CE mark to the device, which allows the device to be placed on the market throughout the EU.
As a general rule, demonstration of conformity of medical devices and their manufacturers with the general safety and performance requirements must be based, among other things, on the evaluation of clinical data supporting the safety and performance of the products during normal conditions of use. Specifically, a manufacturer must demonstrate that the device achieves its intended performance during normal conditions of use, that the known and foreseeable risks, and any adverse events, are minimized and acceptable when weighed against the benefits of its intended performance, and that any claims made about the performance and safety of the device are supported by suitable evidence.
The aforementioned EU rules are generally applicable in the EEA.
Brexit and the Regulatory Framework in the United Kingdom
The United Kingdom, or UK formally left the EU (commonly referred to as “Brexit”) on January 31, 2020, and the EU and the UK have concluded a trade and cooperation agreement, or TCA, which was provisionally applicable since January 1, 2021 and has been formally applicable since May 1, 2021. The TCA includes specific provisions concerning pharmaceuticals, which include the mutual recognition of GMP, inspections of manufacturing facilities for medicinal products and GMP documents issued, but does not provide for wholesale mutual recognition of UK and EU pharmaceutical or medical devices regulations. At present, Great Britain has implemented EU legislation on the marketing, promotion and sale of medicinal products through the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 (as amended) (under the Northern Ireland Protocol, the EU regulatory framework currently continues to apply in Northern Ireland). The medicinal products regulatory regime in Great Britain therefore largely aligns with EU regulations, however it is possible that these regimes will diverge more significantly in future now that Great Britain’s regulatory system is independent from the EU and the TCA does not provide for mutual recognition of UK and EU pharmaceutical legislation. The new Medical Devices Regulation is not applicable in Great Britain following Brexit and the current legislation is based on the previous Medical
25
Table of Contents
Devices Directive. However, notwithstanding that there is no wholesale recognition of EU pharmaceutical legislation under the TCA, under a new framework which was put in place by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, or MHRA, the UK medicines and medical devices regulator, on January 1, 2024, the MHRA may take into account decisions on the approval of MAs from the EMA (and certain other regulators) when considering an application for a Great Britain or UK MA.
On February 27, 2023, the UK government and the European Commission announced a political agreement in principle to replace the Northern Ireland Protocol with a new set of arrangements, known as the “Windsor Framework”. This new framework fundamentally changes the existing system under the Northern Ireland Protocol, including with respect to the regulation of medicinal products in the UK. In particular, the MHRA will be responsible for approving all medicinal products destined for the UK market (i.e., Great Britain and Northern Ireland), and the EMA will no longer have any role in approving medicinal products destined for Northern Ireland. A single UK-wide MA will be granted by the MHRA for all medicinal products to be sold in the UK, enabling products to be sold in a single pack and under a single authorization throughout the UK. The Windsor Framework was approved by the EU-UK Joint Committee on March 24, 2023, so the UK government and the EU will enact legislative measures to bring it into law.
On June 9, 2023, the MHRA announced that the medicines aspects of the Windsor Framework will apply from January 1, 2025.
Other International Markets—Drug Approval Process
In some international markets ( e.g. , China or Japan), although data generated in United States or EU trials may be submitted in support of an MAA, additional clinical trials conducted in the host territory, or studying people of the ethnicity of the host territory, may be required prior to the filing or approval of MA within the country.
Pricing and Reimbursement
In the United States and internationally, sales of products that we market in the future, and our ability to generate revenues on such sales, are dependent, in significant part, on the availability and level of reimbursement from third-party payors such as state and federal governments, managed care providers and private insurance plans. Substantial uncertainty exists as to the reimbursement status of newly approved healthcare products by third-party payors.
In the United States no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for drug products exists. Accordingly, decisions regarding the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided for any products will be made on a payor by payor basis. Private third-party payors tend to follow Medicare coverage policies and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rate to a substantial degree, but also have their own methods and approval process apart from Medicare determinations. As a result, coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require providing scientific and clinical support for the use of product candidates to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained. Factors payors consider in determining reimbursement are based on whether the product is:
● a covered benefit under its health plan;
● safe, effective and medically necessary;
● appropriate for the specific patient;
● cost-effective; and
● neither experimental nor investigational.
Increasingly, third party payors are implementing cost-cutting and reimbursement initiatives and likely will continue to do so in the future. These include establishing formularies that govern the drugs and biologics that will be offered and also
26
Table of Contents
the out-of-pocket obligations of member patients for such products. In addition, net prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. It is possible that future legislation in the United States and other jurisdictions could be enacted which could potentially impact the reimbursement rates for the products in development and that may be developed in the future and also could further impact the levels of discounts and rebates paid to federal and state government entities. Any legislation that impacts these areas could impact, in a significant way, the ability to generate revenues from sales of products that, if successfully developed, are brought to market.
In addition, in some foreign countries, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug pricing vary widely from country to country. In the EU, governments influence the price of medicinal products through their pricing and reimbursement rules and control of national healthcare systems that fund a large part of the cost of those products to consumers. EU Member States are free to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. Some jurisdictions operate positive and negative list systems under which products may only be marketed once a reimbursement price has been agreed to by the government. Member States may approve a specific price for the medicinal product or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market, including volume-based arrangements, caps and reference pricing mechanisms. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval, some of the Member States may require the completion of clinical trials that compare the cost effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies that are considered the local standard of care. Other EU Member States allow companies to fix their own prices for medicines, but monitor and control company profits. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription medicines, has become very intense. It is increasingly common in many EU Member States for MA holders to be required to demonstrate the pharmaco-economic superiority of their products as compared to products already subject to pricing and reimbursement in specific countries. In order for drugs to be evaluated positively under such criteria, pharmaceutical companies may need to re-examine, and consider altering, a number of traditional functions relating to the selection, study, and management of drugs, whether currently marketed, under development, or being evaluated as candidates for research and/or development.
Sales and Marketing
Sales, promotion and other activities following product approval are subject to regulation by numerous regulatory authorities in addition to the FDA, including, in the United States, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, other divisions of the Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Department of Justice, and similar foreign, state, and local government authorities.
As described above, the FDA regulates all advertising and promotion activities for products under its jurisdiction both prior to and after approval. A company can make only those claims relating to safety and efficacy that are approved by the FDA in labeling. Physicians may prescribe legally available drugs for uses that are not described in the drug’s labeling and that differ from those tested uses and uses approved by the FDA. Such off-label uses are common across medical specialties, and often reflect a physician’s belief that the off-label use is the best treatment for the patients. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments, but FDA regulations do impose stringent restrictions on manufacturers’ communications regarding off-label uses. Failure to comply with applicable FDA requirements may subject a company to adverse publicity, enforcement action by the FDA, corrective advertising, consent decrees and the full range of civil and criminal penalties available to the FDA.
Healthcare Laws and Regulations
Pharmaceutical companies are also subject to additional healthcare regulation and enforcement by the federal government and by authorities in the states and foreign jurisdictions in which they conduct their business that may constrain the financial arrangements and relationships through which products are researched, sold, marketed and distributed, when marketing authorization is obtained. Such laws include, without limitation, state and federal anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, and transparency laws and regulations related to drug pricing and payments and other transfers of value made to physicians and other healthcare providers. If operations are found to be in violation of any of such laws or
27
Table of Contents
any other governmental regulations that apply, there may to penalties, including, without limitation, administrative, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, the curtailment or restructuring of operations, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs and responsible individuals may be subject to imprisonment. Such laws include, but are not limited to:
● the United States federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons or entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or providing any remuneration (including any kickback, bribe, or certain rebate), directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward, or in return for, either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, lease, order or recommendation of, any good, facility, item or service, for which payment may be made, in whole or in part, under any United States federal healthcare program, such as Medicare and Medicaid. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. Violations are subject to civil and criminal fines and penalties for each violation, plus up to three times the remuneration involved, imprisonment, and exclusion from government healthcare programs. In addition, 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 federal False Claims Act or federal civil money penalties;
● the United States federal civil monetary penalty and civil and criminal false claims laws, including the civil federal False Claims Act, which can be enforced through civil whistleblower or qui tam actions, which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the United States federal government, claims for payment or approval that are false or fraudulent, knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used, a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim, or from knowingly making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the United States federal government. Manufacturers can be held liable under the federal False Claims Act even when they do not submit claims directly to government payors if they are deemed to “cause” the submission of false or fraudulent claims. Pharmaceutical manufacturers can cause false claims to be presented to the United States federal government by engaging in impermissible marketing practices, such as the off-label promotion of a product for an indication for which it has not received FDA approval. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items and services resulting from a violation of the United States federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the civil False Claims Act. The federal False Claims Act also permits a private individual acting as a “whistleblower” to bring actions on behalf of the federal government alleging violations of the federal False Claims Act and to share in any monetary recovery;
● the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, which created new federal criminal statutes that prohibit a person from knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or obtain, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises, any of the money or property owned by, or under the custody or control of, any healthcare benefit program, regardless of the payor (e.g., public or private) and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up by any trick or device a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items or services relating to healthcare matters; similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;
● the FDCA, which prohibits, among other things, the adulteration or misbranding of drugs, biologics and medical devices;
● HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, or HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, including the Final Omnibus Rule published in January 2013, which impose requirements on certain covered healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses as well as their respective business associates, independent contractors or agents of covered entities, that perform services for them that involve the creation, maintenance, receipt, use, or disclosure of, individually identifiable health information relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. HITECH also created new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to
28
Table of Contents
make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, there may be additional federal, state and non-U.S. laws which govern the privacy and security of health and other personal information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts;
● the United States Physician Payments Sunshine Act and its implementing regulations, which requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies that are reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with specific exceptions, to report annually to the government information related to certain payments and other transfers of value to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain other licensed health care professionals, and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by the physicians described above and their immediate family members ;
● federal consumer protection and unfair competition laws, which broadly regulate marketplace activities and activities that potentially harm consumers;
● federal government price reporting laws, which require us to calculate and report complex pricing metrics in an accurate and timely manner to government programs;
● analogous United States state laws, including: state anti-kickback and false claims laws, which may apply to our business practices, including but not limited to, research, distribution, sales and marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, 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 United States federal government, or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; state laws that require drug manufacturers to file reports relating to pricing and marketing information, which requires tracking gifts and other remuneration and items of value provided to healthcare professionals and entities; and state and local laws requiring the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives;
● the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, which prohibits, among other things, United States companies and their employees and agents from authorizing, promising, offering, or providing, directly or indirectly, corrupt or improper payments or anything else of value to foreign government officials, employees of public international organizations and foreign government owned or affiliated entities, candidates for foreign political office, and foreign political parties or officials thereof; and
● similar healthcare laws in the European Union and other jurisdictions, including reporting requirements detailing interactions with and payments to healthcare providers and laws governing privacy and security of health information, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.
Similar rigid restrictions are imposed on the promotion and marketing of medicinal products in the EU and other countries. Laws (including those governing promotion, marketing and anti-kickback provisions), industry regulations and professional codes of conduct often are strictly enforced. Even in those countries where we are not directly responsible for the promotion and marketing of our products, inappropriate activity by our international distribution partners can have adverse implications for us.
Healthcare Reform and Legislation
Payors, whether domestic or foreign, or governmental or private, are developing increasingly sophisticated methods of controlling healthcare costs and those methods are not always specifically adapted for new technologies such as gene therapy and therapies addressing rare diseases. In both the United States and certain foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the health care system that could impact the ability to sell products
29
Table of Contents
profitably. In particular, in 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or collectively, the ACA, was enacted, which, among other things, subjected biologic products to potential competition by lower-cost biosimilars; increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by most manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program; extended the Medicaid Drug Rebate program to utilization of prescriptions of individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations; subjected manufacturers to new annual fees and taxes for certain branded prescription drugs; created a Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 70% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D; and provided incentives to programs that increase the federal government’s comparative effectiveness research.
Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. The Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, included aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers up to 2% per fiscal year. Subsequent legislation extended the 2% payment reduction which remains in effect through 2031. In addition, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 further reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. On March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, beginning January 1, 2024. Due to the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, estimated budget deficit increases resulting from the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, and subsequent legislation, Medicare payments to providers will be further reduced starting in 2025 absent further legislation. These laws and regulations may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding and otherwise affect the prices we may obtain for any of our product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval or the frequency with which any such product candidate is prescribed or used. Additionally, in May 2019, CMS issued a final rule to allow Medicare Advantage Plans the option of using step therapy for Part B drugs beginning January 1, 2020.
The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, includes several provisions that may impact the healthcare industry to varying degrees, including provisions that reduce the out-of-pocket cap for Medicare Part D beneficiaries to $2,000 starting in 2025; impose new manufacturer financial liability on certain drugs under Medicare Part D, allow the U.S. government to negotiate Medicare Part B and Part D price caps for certain high-cost drugs and biologics without generic or biosimilar competition, require companies to pay rebates to Medicare for certain drug prices that increase faster than inflation, and delay the rebate rule that would limit the fees that pharmacy benefit managers can charge. Further, under the IRA, orphan drugs are exempted from the Medicare drug price negotiation program, but only if they have one orphan designation and for which the only approved indication is for that disease or condition. If a product receives multiple orphan designations or has multiple approved indications, it may not qualify for the orphan drug exemption. The implementation of the IRA is currently subject to ongoing litigation challenging the constitutionality of the IRA’s Medicare drug price negotiation program. The effects of the IRA on the healthcare industry is not yet known.
There has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there have been several recent United States Congressional inquiries and proposed federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. President Biden has issued multiple executive orders that have sought to reduce prescription drug costs. In February 2023, HHS also issued a proposal in response to an October 2022 executive order from President Biden that includes a proposed prescription drug pricing model that will test whether targeted Medicare payment adjustments will sufficiently incentivize manufacturers to complete confirmatory trials for drugs approved through FDA’s accelerated approval pathway. 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 it will continue to seek new legislative measures to control drug costs.
Further, 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
30
Table of Contents
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.
At the state level, individual states are increasingly active in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. In addition, regional health care authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other health care programs. These measures could reduce the ultimate demand for products or put pressure on product pricing.
Data Privacy and Security Laws
Numerous state, federal and foreign laws, including consumer protection laws and regulations, govern the collection, dissemination, use, access to, confidentiality, and security of personal information, including health-related information. In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including data breach notification laws, health information privacy and security laws, including HIPAA and federal and state consumer protection laws and regulations (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act) govern the collection, use, disclosure, and protection of health-related and other personal information. In addition, certain state and non-U.S. laws, such as the CCPA, and GDPR, govern the privacy and security of personal information, including health-related information in certain circumstances, some of which are more stringent than HIPAA and many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. Failure to comply with these laws, where applicable, can result in the imposition of significant civil and/or criminal penalties and private litigation. Privacy and security laws, regulations, and other obligations are constantly evolving, may conflict with each other to make compliance efforts more challenging, and can result in investigations, proceedings, or actions that lead to significant penalties and restrictions on data processing.
Other Laws and Regulatory Processes
We are subject to a variety of financial disclosure and securities trading regulations as a public company in the United States, including laws relating to the oversight activities of the SEC and, the regulations of The Nasdaq Global Market. In addition, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, the SEC and other bodies that have jurisdiction over the form and content of our accounts, our financial statements and other public disclosure are constantly discussing and interpreting proposals and existing pronouncements designed to ensure that companies best display relevant and transparent information relating to their respective businesses.
Our international operations are subject to compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or the FCPA, which prohibits corporations and individuals from paying, offering to pay, or authorizing the payment of anything of value to any foreign government official, government staff member, political party, or political candidate in an attempt to obtain or retain business or to otherwise influence a person working in an official capacity. We also may be implicated under the FCPA for activities by our partners, collaborators, contract research organizations, or CROs, vendors or other agents.
Our present and future business has been and will continue to be subject to various other laws and regulations. The extent of government regulation, which might result from future legislation or administrative action, cannot accurately be predicted.
Human Capital Resources
As of March 24, 2025, we had four full-time employees, all in general and administrative functions. We also contract with consultants to supplement the efforts and responsibilities of our employees. None of our employees are subject to a collective bargaining agreement or represented by a labor or trade union.
31
Table of Contents
Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing and integrating our existing and new employees, advisors and consultants. The principal purposes of our equity and cash incentive plans are to attract, retain and reward personnel through the granting of stock-based and cash-based compensation awards, in order to increase stockholder value and the success of our company by motivating such individuals to perform to the best of their abilities and achieve our objectives.
We are committed to fostering a diverse workforce and a culture of inclusion. We pursue fair employment practices in every aspect of our business and are dedicated to creating a productive work environment for all our employees. Both at work and in the clinic, we are committed to recruiting individuals that exemplify diversity in culture and life experience and are always striving to grow and improve. As an emerging company operating in a competitive industry, much of our success is rooted in investing in the development of each of our employees. It is our goal to empower all employees to take full advantage of their professional growth opportunities, to lead them to long-term job satisfaction and organizational success. Our people are our greatest competitive advantage and as we grow, we plan to continue to add to our human capital initiatives.
Corporate Information
We were incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware in July 2018. Our principal corporate office is located at 930 Winter Street, Suite M-500, Waltham, MA 02451, and our telephone number is (617) 443-2400. Our website address is www.aerovatetx.com. Our website and the information contained on, or that can be accessed through, the website will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference in, and are not considered part of, this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
We own various U.S. federal trademark applications and unregistered trademarks, including our company name. All other trademarks or trade names referred to in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are the property of their respective owners.
On July 2, 2021, we closed our initial public offering, or IPO, in which we issued and sold 9,984,463 shares of common stock, including the exercise in full by the underwriters of their option to purchase up to 1,302,321 additional shares of common stock, at a public offering price of $14.00 per share. Including the option exercise, our aggregate net proceeds from the IPO were $126.9 million, net of underwriting discounts, commissions and estimated offering costs.
We are an “emerging growth company” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012. We will remain an emerging growth company until the earlier of: (i) the last day of the fiscal year (a) following the fifth anniversary of the completion of the IPO, (b) in which we have total annual gross revenue of at least $1.235 billion, or (c) in which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of our common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700.0 million as of the prior June 30th, and (ii) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period.
Solely for convenience, the trademarks and trade names in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are referred to without the symbols ® and ™, but such references should not be construed as any indicator that their respective owners will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, their rights thereto.
Available Information
Our website address is https://www.aerovatetx.com. Our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, including exhibits, proxy and information statements and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Sections 13(a), 14, and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, are available through the “Investors” portion of our website free of charge as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC. Information on our website is not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K or any of our other securities filings unless specifically incorporated herein by reference. In addition, our filings with the SEC may be accessed through the SEC’s Interactive Data Electronic Applications system at www.sec.gov. All statements made in any of our securities filings, including all forward-looking statements or information, are made as of the date of the document in which the statement is included, and we do not assume or undertake any obligation to update any of those statements or documents unless we are required to do so by law.
32
Table of Contents
From time to time, we may use our website, LinkedIn or our Twitter account (@AerovateTx) to distribute material information. Our financial and other material information is routinely posted to and accessible on the Investors section of our website, available at www.aerovatetx.com. Investors are encouraged to review the Investors section of our website because we may post material information on that site that is not otherwise disseminated by us. Information that is contained in and can be accessed through our website or our Twitter or LinkedIn posts are not incorporated into, and does not form a part of, this Annual Report.
Our code of conduct, corporate governance guidelines and the charters of our Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee are available through the “Investors” portion of our website.
Text extracted from the filing as submitted to EDGAR. Formatting, tables and exhibits are simplified for reading; the original document is authoritative for anything you rely on.