MADRIGAL PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. 10-K

Item 1. Business References in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to Madrigal, the Company, we, our and us refer to Madrigal Pharmaceuticals, Inc. “Madrigal” is a registered trademark of Madrigal Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in the U.S. and/or other countries. Other trademarks or service marks appearing in this report may be trademarks or service marks of other owners. Executive Overview Our Focus. We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on the development and commercialization of innovative therapeutic candidates for the treatment of cardiovascular, metabolic, and liver diseases. Our lead product candidate, MGL-3196 (resmetirom), is a proprietary, liver-directed, selective thyroid hormone receptor-ß, or THR-ß, agonist being developed as a once-daily oral pill that can potentially be used to treat a number of disease states with high unmet medical need, including non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, or NASH. Our Patient Market Opportunity. NASH is a serious inflammatory form of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, or NAFLD. NAFLD has become the most common liver disease in the United States and other developed countries and is characterized by an accumulation of fat in the liver with no other apparent causes. NASH can progress to cirrhosis or liver failure, require liver transplantation and can also result in liver cancer. Progression of NASH to end stage liver disease will soon surpass all other causes of liver failure requiring liver transplantation. Importantly, beyond these critical conditions, NASH and NAFLD patients additionally suffer heightened cardiovascular risk and, in fact, die more frequently from cardiovascular events than from liver disease. NASH and NAFLD have grown as a consequence of rising worldwide obesity-related disorders. In 2016, in the United States alone, NAFLD was estimated to affect approximately 26% of the population, or an estimated 85M people, and approximately 20% of this population was projected to progress from NAFLD to NASH. Current estimates place NASH prevalence at approximately 17M people in the United States, or five percent of the population. Slightly lower prevalence is seen in EU and Asia with approximately 2.5-4.5% of the population having NASH. Our Completed Studies. For NASH, we enrolled 125 patients in a Phase 2 clinical trial with resmetirom. We achieved the 12-week primary endpoint for this Phase 2 clinical trial and reported the results in December 2017, and we reported positive topline 36-week results at the conclusion of the Phase 2 clinical trial in May 2018. We have completed treatment in a 36-week, open-label extension study in 31 participating NASH patients from our Phase 2 clinical trial, which includes 14 patients who received placebo in the main study. We also completed a 116 patient Phase 2 clinical trial and announced results in February 2018 for the use of resmetirom in patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia, or HeFH. In addition to the NASH and HeFH Phase 2 clinical trials, resmetirom has also been studied in eight completed Phase 1 trials in a total of 219 subjects. Resmetirom appeared to be safe and was well-tolerated in these trials, which included a single ascending dose trial, a multiple ascending dose trial, two drug interaction trials with statins, a multiple dose mass balance study, a single dose relative bioavailability study of tablet formulation versus capsule formulation, a multiple dose drug interaction study, and a multiple dose drug interaction with food effect study. Our Ongoing and Planned Studies. On March 28, 2019, the Company announced that it had initiated MAESTRO-NASH, a Phase 3 trial in NASH with its once daily, oral thyroid hormone receptor beta selective agonist, resmetirom. This double-blind, placebo-controlled study is being conducted at more than 200 sites in the United States and the rest of the world. Patients with liver biopsy confirmed NASH with stage 2 or 3 fibrosis are being randomized 1:1:1 to receive a single oral daily dose of placebo, resmetirom 80 mg or resmetirom 100 mg. A second liver biopsy at week 52 in the first 900 patients will be the basis of filing for subpart H-accelerated approval; the primary endpoint will be the percent of patients treated with either dose of resmetirom as compared with placebo who achieve NASH resolution on the week 52 liver biopsy, defined as the absence of hepatocyte ballooning (score=0), and minimal lobular inflammation (score 0-1), associated with at least a 2-point reduction in NAS (NAFLD Activity Score), and no worsening of fibrosis stage. Two key secondary endpoints are reduction in LDL-cholesterol and a 1-point or more improvement in fibrosis stage on the week 52 biopsy with no worsening of NASH. Patients will continue in the study for a total of approximately 54 months, and will be evaluated for a composite clinical outcome including cirrhosis on liver biopsy, or a liver related event such as hepatic decompensation. The total anticipated enrollment is approximately 2,000 patients, and will include up to 15% high risk F1 fibrosis stage NASH patients whose efficacy responses will be evaluated as exploratory endpoints. On December 18, 2019 the Company announced it had opened for enrollment MAESTRO-NAFLD-1, a 52-week, double-blind, placebo controlled Phase 3 clinical study originally targeting enrollment of 700 patients with biopsy-confirmed or presumed NASH recruited from sites in the U.S. Key endpoints are safety, including safety biomarkers, LDL cholesterol, lipid biomarkers, and fibrosis biomarkers. Except for serial liver biopsies, the study protocol is similar to the MAESTRO-NASH study with resmetirom doses of 80 mg or 100 mg or placebo and includes key secondary lipid, MRI-PDFF and NASH biomarker endpoints. Enrollment objectives for this study have been exceeded, with approximately 1,200 patients enrolled overall. In October 2020 we completed enrollment of the double-blind, placebo controlled arms of the study. The MAESTRO-NAFLD-1 study will help support the adequacy of the safety database at the time of NDA submission for subpart H approval for treatment of NASH in patients with F2 or F3 fibrosis (MAESTRO-NASH, NASH resolution surrogate endpoint). 7 Table of Contents The following chart summarizes the status of our product candidate development programs for resmetirom and MGL-3745, a preclinical compound which has similar thyroid receptor selectivity to resmetirom and is thus a potential backup compound for resmetirom: Key Developments Ongoing MAESTRO-NASH Phase 3 clinical trial In March 2019 we initiated a Phase 3 trial in NASH, described in detail above under “—Our Ongoing and Planned Studies.” Ongoing MAESTRO-NAFLD-1 Phase 3 clinical trial In December 2019 we initiated a Phase 3 trial in presumed NASH, described in detail above under “—Our Ongoing and Planned Studies.” In October 2020 we completed enrollment of the double-blind, placebo controlled arms of the study. FDA grants Fast Track designation for resmetirom in NASH In October 2019, FDA granted Fast Track designation to resmetirom for NASH. COVID-19 Pandemic Effects on Madrigal In April 2020 we announced that in response to guidance from regulatory agencies, measures for COVID-19 at impacted sites have been put in place for our Phase 3 MAESTRO-NASH and MAESTRO-NAFLD-1 studies, allowing both studies to continue without changes to the protocol. At a recently conducted Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) meeting it was recommended that Phase 3 studies proceed without significant modification. The COVID-19 pandemic had no material adverse impact on our operating results, MAESTRO-NAFLD-1 study or liquidity for the period ended December 31, 2020, but it did introduce clinical trial and operational risks and uncertainties that are both general in nature and relate specifically to our MAESTRO-NASH study. These risks and uncertainties, which are beyond our control, are summarized in the section entitled “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report. 8 Table of Contents MGL-3196 (resmetirom) Phase 2 Clinical Trial in NASH The Company successfully completed a Phase 2 clinical trial in NASH in 2018. In this clinical trial, resmetirom demonstrated statistical significance in the primary endpoint (p<0.0001), the relative reduction of liver fat compared with baseline on magnetic resonance imaging-estimated proton density fat fraction, or MRI-PDFF, at 12-weeks which was reported in December 2017, and statistically significant results in multiple 36-week endpoints, including key secondary endpoints, reduction and resolution of NASH on liver biopsy as set forth in the table below, which was reported in May 2018. This clinical trial was published in the Lancet in November, 2019. MGL-3196 MGL-3196 MRI-PDFF Responders(1) Placebo Number of patients with baseline and end-of-study liver biopsies(2) 73 46 34 >2 Point Decrease in NAS 56% 70% 32% p=0.02 p=0.001 NASH Resolution 27% 39% 6% p=0.02 p=0.001 (1) resmetirom MRI-PDFF Responders = resmetirom treated patients with >=30% relative fat reduction on Week 12 MRI-PDFF (2) does not include one end-of-study liver biopsy that was inadequate Resmetirom treated patients with greater than or equal to 30% fat reduction on MRI-PDFF at 12-weeks demonstrated a higher percentage of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease activity score, or NAS, reduction and NASH resolution. In patients with NASH resolution, 35% of resmetirom treated patients and no placebo patients had a baseline NAS greater than or equal to five. In resmetirom patients with NASH resolution, fibrosis also resolved in 50% of such patients and was decreased statistically significantly relative to all placebo patients. Further, 36-week results from our Phase 2 clinical trial in NASH showed: • Sustained, highly statistically significant (p<0.0001) reduction in liver fat compared with placebo on 36-week MRI-PDFF and mean relative fat reduction of 37% with resmetirom treated patients in contrast with 8.5% with placebo patients; • Sustained, statistically significant reductions (p<0.0001) in resmetirom compared to placebo treated patients in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and apolipoprotein B (ApoB) of more than 20%, triglycerides (TG) of 36% and lipoprotein(a) of 37%; • Statistically significant reductions in liver enzymes (ALT, AST and GGT) relative to placebo (all p=0.002) and a 40% reduction in ALT in patients with elevated baseline levels (p=0.01); • Statistically significant reductions in fibrosis biomarkers in MGL-3196 treated patients as compared with placebo patients; • On liver biopsy, fibrosis was reduced by at least one point in 23% of placebo patients and 29% of resmetirom treated patients; • Very good all subject tolerability: mostly mild and a few moderate adverse events, or AEs, which were balanced between drug treated patients and placebo patients; and • An increase in incidence of a transient mild diarrhea at beginning of study, often a single episode, in resmetirom treated patients compared with placebo patients. MGL-3196 (resmetirom) Phase 2 Clinical Trial in HeFH In February 2018, we announced top-line results from our Phase 2 clinical trial in HeFH. In this trial, patients treated with resmetirom (placebo corrected) achieved highly significant (p< 0.0001) LDL-C lowering of 18.8%, and 21% LDL-C lowering in those patients receiving an optimal dose of resmetirom. LDL-C lowering was 28.5% in patients treated with resmetirom as compared to placebo in a prespecified group of patients who did not tolerate high intensity statin doses. Highly significant (p<0.0001) and numerically similar results were observed with ApoB. Highly significant (p<0.0001) TG (25-31%), apolipoprotein CIII (22.7%), and Lp(a) lowering (26-33%) were observed in all patients treated with resmetirom and certain prespecified subgroups, irrespective of statin treatment. 9 Table of Contents Resmetirom has been well-tolerated with mostly mild AEs and some moderate AEs, the numbers of which are balanced between placebo and drug-treatment groups. Fewer than seven percent of patients did not complete the study, and patients who discontinued for AEs, all mild to moderate, were balanced between drug-treated and placebo patients. There were two serious AEs in the study, both considered unrelated to treatment, one in a placebo and one in a drug-treated patient. Lead Product Candidate—MGL-3196 (resmetirom) We believe that resmetirom may be the first THR-agonist product candidate in development for NASH that selectively targets the THR-ß pathway. Active thyroid hormone, known as T3, interacts with two nuclear receptors, THR-α, which is the predominant receptor expressed in most human tissues, including heart and bone, and THR-ß, which has more restricted tissue expression, and is the predominant receptor responsible for metabolic actions in the liver, including both cholesterol- and TG-lowering. Selective activation of the THR-ß receptor in liver tissue is believed to favorably affect cholesterol and lipoprotein levels via multiple mechanisms, which may be complementary to those of other lipid-lowering therapies such as statin drugs. We believe that these characteristics of THR-ß activation by resmetirom will in turn lead to clinically meaningful reductions in LDL-C, and plasma and liver TGs. We believe that resmetirom is the first selective small molecule THR-ß agonist compound. Resmetirom, along with MGL-3745, a potential backup compound to resmetirom, was discovered at Hoffmann-La Roche, or Roche, in Nutley, New Jersey, by utilizing a novel functional assay that, unlike a simple receptor binding assay, assessed the functional activity of compounds which interacted with thyroid hormone receptors. In a published study by Madrigal and Roche in the Journal of Medicinal Chemistry using this functional assay, resmetirom was shown to be highly selective for the THR-ß receptor, with almost no effect on THR-α, unlike other compounds purported in published studies to be ß -selective based on binding affinity, but which were shown to equally activate THR-α and THR-ß in the novel functional assay. We believe that the ß-selectivity and liver-targeting properties of resmetirom are critically important for resmetirom’s beneficial metabolic actions in the liver, and enable avoidance of safety issues associated with THR-α activation by thyroid hormone and/or less selective THR agonists in tissues such as heart and bone. In a variety of preclinical animal model studies, resmetirom showed enhanced safety relative to T3 or other thyroid agonists. In animal models, resmetirom demonstrated cholesterol lowering, liver TG lowering, and reduction of markers of NASH-related liver inflammation and fibrosis at drug levels similar to those that lowered LDL-C in human clinical trials, providing data to support the advancement of resmetirom into NASH and FH clinical trials. In chronic animal toxicology studies in dogs and rats, no effects on bone or cartilage histology were seen at any resmetirom dose in either species. Resmetirom did not increase liver enzymes in Phase 1 studies and there were no bone and cartilage histologic findings in chronic animal toxicology studies. MGL-3196 (resmetirom) Clinical and Non-Clinical Development Program To date, we have completed a series of Phase 1 and 2 clinical studies, Phase 2-enabling preclinical good laboratory practice, or GLP, toxicology studies, and drug manufacturing studies to support further clinical development, including active pharmaceutical ingredient, or API, manufacturing and drug product development studies, drug metabolism studies, acute, subchronic and chronic animal toxicology studies, and other safety pharmacology and toxicology studies. We have completed Phase 1 studies with resmetirom in a total of 252 subjects to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic effects of resmetirom. Our Phase 1 studies included randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, single and 14-day multiple-dose escalation studies, drug-interaction studies with statins, with the antidiabetic agent pioglitazone, and with the antiplatelet agent clopidogrel. In addition, a study using radiolabeled resmetirom, a study of a tablet versus capsule formulation of resmetirom, and a multiple dose drug interaction and food effect study have also been completed. In Phase 1 studies, resmetirom appeared safe and was well-tolerated up to 200 mg once daily. The results of these studies suggest that resmetirom is suitable for once-daily oral dosing. Currently there is an ongoing Phase 1 hepatic impairment study to characterize the safety and pharmacokinetics of resmetirom in patients with hepatic impairment, a Phase 1 drug-interaction study with warfarin, and a drug interaction study of resmetirom and pravastatin and simvastatin. In a Phase 1 multiple ascending dose study in healthy subjects, the effects of resmetirom on lipid parameters were assessed as initial markers of pharmacodynamic activity (Atherosclerosis 230:373-380, 2013). As illustrated in the figure below, daily doses of resmetirom ranging from 50 to 200 mg showed highly statistically significant reductions relative to placebo of up to 30% for LDL-C (range, p=.05-<0.0001), 28% for non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, or non-HDL-C (range, p =0.027-p<0.0001) and 24% for ApoB (range, p =0.008-0.0004), and statistical trends of up to 60% reduction in TG (range, p =0.13-0.016). The near maximal lipid effects were observed at a resmetirom dose of 80 mg once-daily. Resmetirom was well-tolerated at all doses, with no dose-related 10 Table of Contents adverse events or liver enzyme, electrocardiography, or vital-sign changes. At the highest dose of resmetirom (200 mg), there was a reversible reduction of 20% in the level of a precursor hormone to T3, free T4, which was significantly different from placebo (p < 0.0001) that may be explained by increased liver metabolism of free T4. There was no change in thyrotropin, a pituitary hormone that regulates the level and production of thyroid hormone by the thyroid gland or T3, or other evidence of central thyroid axis dysfunction at any dose of resmetirom. Change in Lipids After 14 Days Change from Baseline (CFB) by mean % CFB calculated for each individual subject 24 h after 14th dose; baseline value obtained just prior to first dose; ApoB, apolipoprotein B; Chol, total cholesterol; LDL-C, LDL cholesterol directly measured; Non-HDL-C, non-HDL cholesterol; TG, triglycerides (median %CFB). In a Phase 2 double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center clinical trial, 116 patients with HeFH who were not at their LDL-C goal were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive either resmetirom or placebo, in addition to their current cholesterol lowering regimen, which included approximately 75% taking high intensity statins (20/40 mg rosuvastatin or 80 mg atorvastatin), and about two-thirds of patients also taking ezetimibe. Compared to placebo, resmetirom treated patients achieved highly significant (p< 0.0001) LDL-C lowering of 18.8%, and 21% LDL-C lowering in those on an optimal dose of resmetirom. LDL-C lowering was 28.5% in resmetirom treated compared to placebo in a prespecified group of patients who did not tolerate high intensity statin doses. Highly significant (p<0.0001) and numerically similar results were observed with ApoB. Highly significant reductions (p<0.0001) in TG (25-31%), ApoCIII (22.7%) and Lp(a) (26-33%) were observed in all resmetirom treated patients and prespecified subgroups, irrespective of statin treatment. In the NASH Phase 2 double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center clinical trial, 125 patients 18 years of age and older with liver biopsy-confirmed NASH were randomized at approximately 25 clinical sites in the United States. Patients were randomized to receive either placebo (N=41) or resmetirom (N=84). The starting dose in resmetirom-treated patients was 80 mg once a day. The study employed an adaptive dosing design whereby, in a blinded fashion, the dose could be adjusted by small amounts (i.e. 20 mg up or down) or remain at 80 mg in each resmetirom-treated patient based on a pharmacokinetic analysis of drug level performed in each patient at 2 weeks. The primary endpoint of the study was the reduction of liver fat at 12 weeks compared with baseline (relative change), assessed by MRI-PDFF, with efficacy confirmed at the end of the trial (36 weeks) by repeat MRI-PDFF and conventional liver biopsy to examine histological evidence for the resolution of NASH. Other secondary endpoints included changes in clinically relevant biomarkers at 12 and 36 weeks, improvement in fibrosis by at least one stage with no worsening of steatohepatitis, and safety and tolerability. Resmetirom demonstrated statistical significance (p<0.0001) in the primary endpoint, the relative reduction of liver fat on MRI-PDFF at 12 weeks. At 36 weeks, statistically significant results were demonstrated in multiple histology endpoints including key secondary endpoints related to the reduction and resolution of NASH. At 36 weeks, resmetirom treated patients demonstrated sustained, statistically significant (p<0.0001) reductions compared to placebo treated patients in LDL-C and ApoB of more than 20%, TGs of 36% and Lp(a) of 37%. In addition, resmetirom demonstrated statistically significant reductions in liver enzymes (ALT, AST and GGT) relative to placebo (all p=0.002). 11 Table of Contents Published data [Lancet] showed that patients with >=30% PDFF reduction at Week 12 had a higher rate of NASH resolution and accompanying fibrosis reduction. A secondary analysis of the Phase 2 NASH clinical trial further supported the potential of PDFF to predict NASH response. • Percentages of patients with NASH resolution at Week 36 increased with greater PDFF reduction (agreement between two independent pathologist central biopsy readers) • In resmetirom-treated patients with ³ 50% fat reduction at Week 12, 64% had NASH resolution with a component response driven primarily by ballooning and inflammation • PDFF reduction ³ 30 and ³ 50% at Week 12 was associated with improvement in all NAS components including fibrosis reduction on subsequent liver biopsy and achievement of both endpoints: NASH resolution and ³ 1 point fibrosis reduction PDFF reduction ³ 30 and ³ 50% at Week 12 was also associated with fibrosis reduction on subsequent liver biopsy These findings support the pathogenicity of liver steatosis in NASH and fibrosis progression. Our Strategy Our goal is to become a leading biopharmaceutical company developing and commercializing innovative liver-directed, ß-selective thyroid hormone receptor agonists for the treatment of cardio-metabolic and liver disease, fibrosis and inflammation. A key element is building a multi-therapy NASH focused company. To achieve our goal, we plan to: • Complete clinical development and seek regulatory approval of MGL-3196 (resmetirom) in NASH. We successfully completed a Phase 2 clinical trial in NASH in 2018. NASH is a disease driven by the growing epidemic of obesity, with a significant unmet need for approved therapies that are effective and well tolerated. We believe resmetirom is an excellent candidate for the chronic treatment of NASH due to its safety profile and first-in-class pleiotrophic actions in liver cells and potential to reduce cardiovascular risk in NASH patients. • Establish commercial capabilities to market MGL-3196 (resmetirom) as a leading treatment for NASH. If approved, we may choose either to establish a sales and marketing organization with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize resmetirom, or to collaborate with one or more third parties to accomplish these tasks. Patients with NASH are primarily managed by a concentrated group of liver specialists in the United States and Europe. We believe this will enable us to launch resmetirom in NASH in a cost-effective, targeted manner. • Grow our pipeline through additional indications for MGL-3196 (resmetirom) potentially including orphan indications. We believe that resmetirom has the potential to be an effective treatment for other disease indications that are rare diseases or may be designated rare diseases and we may pursue orphan drug designation where possible. Target Indications Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease and Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis Overview and Market Opportunity NASH is a serious inflammatory form of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, or NAFLD. NAFLD has become the most common liver disease in the United States and other developed countries and is characterized by an accumulation of fat in the liver with no other apparent causes. The rising worldwide prevalence of obesity-related disorders has contributed to a rapid increase in the global prevalence of NASH and NAFLD. In the United States, NAFLD is estimated to affect approximately 27% to 34% of the population, or an estimated 86 million to 108 million people, and approximately 10% to 20% of those will progress from NAFLD to NASH. Current estimates place NASH prevalence at approximately 9 million to 15 million people in the United States, or three percent to five percent of the population, with similar prevalence in Europe and Asia. The prevalence of NASH is also increasing in developing regions due to the adoption of a more sedentary lifestyle and a diet consisting of processed foods with high fat and fructose content. In addition to the accumulation of fat in the liver, NASH is characterized by inflammation and cellular damage with or without fibrosis, the first stage of liver scarring, which may ultimately progress to cirrhosis. NASH is a severe condition that can lead to fibrosis and eventually progress to cirrhosis, portal hypertension, esophageal varices, ascites, liver cancer and liver failure. NASH is strongly associated with cardiovascular disease, or CVD, and the most common cause of death in NASH patients is CVD. Progression to cirrhosis and other late-stage complications can occur within five to ten years after an initial NASH diagnosis. NASH patients with type-2 diabetes have a heightened risk of NASH disease progression. Once the disease advances beyond NASH to such life-threatening conditions as liver cancer and liver failure, then liver transplantation is the only treatment alternative. 12 Table of Contents The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention projects the prevalence of obesity to increase from 34% of the United States population to 42% of the United States population by 2030. Driven by this epidemic of obesity, NASH is projected to become the leading cause of liver transplants by 2020. Given the extremely limited availability of organ donors and high transplant costs, NASH patients who require transplantation will place a significant economic burden on the healthcare system. As such, there is a significant unmet medical need for well-tolerated oral treatments for NASH. Because there are currently no therapeutic products approved for the treatment of NASH, the market size is difficult to estimate. However, based on our analysis of multiple market assessments, we estimate that the addressable NASH population is several million patients worldwide, and that NASH could become a multi-billion dollar market able to support multiple approved drug products. MGL-3196 (resmetirom) in NASH We are developing resmetirom for the treatment of non-cirrhotic NASH with fibrosis. Based on the scientific literature in human and animal studies, we believe that NASH livers in humans frequently have a deficiency in THR-ß activity that leads to features of NASH, including fatty liver, inflammation and fibrosis, and that treatment with resmetirom will replace this hormone deficiency and be an effective NASH treatment. We believe that resmetirom is an excellent candidate for the chronic treatment of NASH because of its safety and tolerability profile observed to date in healthy subjects, its effects in reducing cardiovascular risk factors such as LDL-C and TGs in early-stage clinical trials, and its multiple beneficial effects in animal models of NASH. CVD is the most common cause of death in patients with NASH. We have completed multiple studies in animal models of metabolic diseases, dyslipidemia and NASH in which resmetirom demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in liver TGs, insulin resistance, liver enzymes (which may be elevated in NASH), and markers of inflammation and fibrosis. We believe that resmetirom will treat the underlying lipotoxicity that drives the inflammation and liver cell damage observed in NASH patients, and after the underlying lipotoxicity is treated, NASH-related liver fibrosis will resolve as the liver regenerates. MGL-3196 (resmetirom) NASH Phase 2 and 3 Clinical Studies In October 2016, we initiated a Phase 2 proof of concept clinical trial in patients with liver biopsy documented NASH, including those with type-2 diabetes, dyslipidemia and hypertension. In the study we randomized 125 NASH patients 2:1, resmetirom or placebo QD in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, study of once-daily resmetirom versus placebo in patients with NASH, including those with type-2 diabetes. Patients continued treatment through 36 weeks. The study was conducted in the United States. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the efficacy of resmetirom as measured by the reduction of liver fat at 12 weeks, and the secondary endpoint was to evaluate the efficacy of resmetirom as measured by a reduction of NASH, which was assessed by liver biopsy, at 36 weeks. Other secondary and exploratory endpoints included safety and tolerability, and effects on serum biomarkers at 12 and 36 weeks, lipid parameters, and biomarker measures of insulin sensitivity. We reached our top-line analysis of the primary endpoint in December 2017, and we reached our top-line analysis of the secondary endpoint (NASH assessment on liver biopsy) in May 2018. There was an extension study in a subset of the patients that completed the main 36-week study which was completed in 2019. In September 2013, the American Association for the Study of Liver Disease and the FDA conducted a joint workshop focused on trial designs and endpoints in drug and diagnostic development for liver disease secondary to NAFLD, including NASH. In December 2014, the journal Hepatology accepted for publication a manuscript summarizing the workshop output, including potentially acceptable surrogate endpoints for clinical studies supporting the approval of agents for NASH and liver fibrosis. We believe that our Phase 2 NASH study design incorporated surrogate secondary endpoints consistent with the current FDA requirements for demonstration of efficacy in registrational trials. Following completion of our Phase 2 clinical trial of resmetirom in NASH patients, we held an end of Phase 2 meeting with the FDA, received positive feedback. In March 2019 the Company announced that it had initiated a Phase 3 trial in NASH with its once daily, oral thyroid hormone receptor beta selective agonist, MGL-3196 (resmetirom). This double-blind, placebo-controlled study will be conducted at more than 150 sites in the United States and the rest of the world. Patients with liver biopsy confirmed NASH with stage 2 or 3 fibrosis will be randomized 1:1:1 to receive a single oral daily dose of placebo, resmetirom 80 mg or resmetirom 100 mg. A second liver biopsy at week 52 in the first 900 patients will be the basis of filing for subpart H-accelerated approval; the primary endpoint will be the percent of patients treated with either dose of resmetirom as compared with placebo who achieve NASH resolution on the week 52 liver biopsy, defined as the absence of hepatocyte ballooning (score=0), and minimal lobular inflammation (score 0-1), associated with at least a 2 point reduction in NAS, and no worsening of fibrosis stage. Two key secondary endpoints are reduction in LDL-cholesterol and a 1-point or more improvement in fibrosis stage on the week 52 biopsy with no worsening of NASH. Patients will continue in the study for a total of approximately 54 months and will be evaluated for a composite clinical outcome including cirrhosis on liver biopsy, or a liver related event such as hepatic decompensation. The total anticipated enrollment is approximately 2,000 patients and will include up to 15% high risk F1 fibrosis stage NASH patients whose efficacy responses will be evaluated as exploratory endpoints. 13 Table of Contents In December 2019 the Company announced it had opened for enrollment MAESTRO-NAFLD-1, a 52-week, double-blind, placebo controlled Phase 3 clinical study in 700 patients with biopsy-confirmed or presumed NASH recruited from sites in the U.S. Key endpoints are safety, including safety biomarkers, LDL cholesterol, lipid biomarkers, and fibrosis biomarkers. Except for serial liver biopsies, the study protocol is similar to the MAESTRO-NASH study with resmetirom doses of 80 mg or 100 mg or placebo and includes key secondary lipid, MRI-PDFF and NASH biomarker endpoints. In addition, MAESTRO-NAFLD-1 includes an open label arm in which up to 100 patients will be dosed with 100 mg resmetirom. Enrollment objectives for this study have been exceeded, with approximately 1,200 patients enrolled overall. In October 2020 we completed enrollment of the double-blind, placebo controlled arms of the study. The MAESTRO-NAFLD-1 study will help support the adequacy of the safety database at the time of NDA submission for subpart H approval or treatment of NASH in patients with F2 or F3 fibrosis (MAESTRO-NASH, NASH resolution surrogate endpoint). Madrigal has agreement on liver biopsy endpoints with the FDA, and long term liver related benefit endpoints for the treatment of NASH. Given that NASH is an evolving field, and FDA evaluates risk versus benefit prior to approval, Phase 3 data will be carefully reviewed by FDA. However, currently there are ongoing Phase 3 clinical trials of compounds to treat NASH by other companies in which it is contemplated that accelerated approval of the compounds under FDA subpart H, which provides for accelerated approval of certain new drug products that have been studied for their safety and effectiveness in treating serious or life-threatening illnesses and that provide meaningful therapeutic benefit to patients over existing treatments, would be based on the surrogate endpoint of histological evidence of NASH resolution without the worsening of fibrosis. It is expected that these trials would continue after approval to confirm the long term clinical benefit of NASH resolution based on a reduction in patients progressing to cirrhosis and other liver related events. Collaborations VIA Pharmaceuticals, Inc., or VIA, entered into a research, development and commercialization agreement, or the Roche Agreement, with Roche, on December 18, 2008. We subsequently assumed all of VIA’s rights in, to and under, and all of VIA’s obligations under, the Roche Agreement pursuant to an asset purchase agreement, dated September 14, 2011. Pursuant to the terms of the Roche Agreement, we, as successor-in-interest to VIA, assumed control of all development and commercialization of MGL-3196 (resmetirom) and will hold exclusive worldwide rights for all potential indications. Under the Roche Agreement, Roche exclusively licensed certain patent rights and know-how relating to resmetirom in exchange for consideration consisting of an upfront payment, milestone payments, the remainder of which total $8 million and are tied to regulatory approval in the United States and Europe of resmetirom or any derivative product, and single-digit royalty payments based on net sales of resmetirom and any derivative products, subject to certain reductions. In 2011, we commenced Phase 1 clinical trials and subsequently paid Roche a related milestone payment. In October 2016, we commenced a Phase 2 study in NASH and subsequently paid Roche a related milestone payment. In 2019, we commenced a Phase 3 study in NASH and subsequently paid Roche a $2 million related milestone payment. Except as described above, we have not achieved any additional product development or regulatory milestones under the Roche Agreement and have generated no net sales of products developed from resmetirom. Pursuant to the Roche Agreement, we must use commercially reasonable efforts to conduct clinical and commercial development programs for products containing resmetirom. If we determine that it is not reasonable to continue clinical trials or other development of resmetirom, we may elect to cease further development and Roche may terminate the license. If we determine not to pursue the development or commercialization of resmetirom in certain jurisdictions, including the United States, Roche may terminate the license for such territories. The Roche Agreement will expire, unless earlier terminated pursuant to other provisions of the agreement, on the last to occur of (i) the expiration of the last valid claim of a licensed patent covering the manufacture, use or sale of products containing resmetirom, or (ii) ten years after the first sale of a product containing resmetirom. Competition The development and commercialization of new drugs is highly competitive. We will face competition with respect to all product candidates we may develop or commercialize in the future from pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies worldwide. The key factors affecting the success of any approved product will be its efficacy, safety profile, drug interactions, method of administration, pricing, reimbursement and level of promotional activity relative to those of competing drugs. • Our potential competitors may have substantially greater financial, technical, and personnel resources than us. In addition, many of these competitors have significantly greater commercial infrastructures. Our ability to compete successfully will depend largely on our ability to leverage our collective experience in drug discovery, development and commercialization to: • discover and develop medicines that are differentiated from other products in the market, • obtain patent and/or proprietary protection for our products and technologies; 14 Table of Contents • obtain required regulatory approvals; • obtain a commercial partner; • commercialize our drugs, if approved; and • attract and retain high-quality research, development and commercial personnel. There are currently no therapeutic products approved and marketed for the treatment of NASH. There are several commercially available products that are currently used off-label for NASH, such as vitamin E, an antioxidant, insulin sensitizers, such as pioglitazone, anti-hyperlipidemic agents, such as gemfibrozil, pentoxifylline, ursodiol and others. In addition, there are numerous drugs in development for the treatment of NASH. We are aware of several companies that have product candidates in clinical development for the treatment of NASH, including Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Gilead Sciences, Inc., Galectin Therapeutics, Inc., Galmed Medical Research Ltd., Genfit Corp., Cirius Therapeutics, Novartis AG, Novo Nordisk A/S, Takeda, Inventiva, Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Inc., Merck & Co., Lilly, Genentech, Sanofi S.A., NGM Biopharmaceutical, Viking Therapeutics, Akero Therapeutics, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, 89Bio Inc., and MedImmune LLC, and there are other companies with candidates in earlier stages of development. Given resmetirom’s actions on the underlying biological pathways across the spectrum of early to late stages of NASH, its CV beneficial effects, and its complementary mechanism to other therapies, we believe that resmetirom has the potential to be used alone or in combination with some of these potential NASH products. Sales and Marketing Because we are focused on discovery and development of our product candidates, we currently have no sales, marketing or distribution capabilities in order to commercialize any approved product candidates. If our product candidates are approved, we intend either to establish a sales and marketing organization with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize our products, or to outsource this function to a third party. Manufacturing We do not own or operate, and currently have no plans to establish, any manufacturing facilities. We currently rely, and expect to rely, on third-party contract manufacturers, or CMOs, for the manufacture of any product candidates that we may develop for larger-scale preclinical and clinical testing, as well as for commercial quantities of any drug candidates that are approved. Research and Development Research and development expenses primarily consist of costs associated with our research activities, including the preclinical and clinical development of our product candidates. Our research and development expenses were $184.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, $72.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, and $25.4 million for year ended December 31, 2018. The increase in research and development expenses was primarily due to the advancement of clinical programs to Phase 3 studies, further API manufacturing studies and the continuation of preclinical studies. We expect research and development expenses to increase over time as we advance our clinical and preclinical development programs for resmetirom. Intellectual Property We will be able to protect our technology and products from unauthorized use by third parties only to the extent we are covered by valid and enforceable patents or such knowledge is effectively maintained as trade secrets. Patents and other proprietary rights are thus an essential element of our business. We also rely on trade secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovation and licensing opportunities to develop and maintain our competitive position. Our success will depend in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other proprietary protection for our current and future product candidates, technology and know-how, to operate without infringing on the proprietary rights of others, and to prevent others from infringing our proprietary rights. We seek to protect our proprietary position by, among other methods, filing United States and foreign patent applications related to our proprietary technology, and maintaining the confidentiality of inventions and improvements that are important to the development of our business. We own or co-own: four United States and 23 foreign issued patents and allowed patent applications; and six United States and 43 foreign pending patent applications, each of which relates to composition-of-matter of resmetirom, including certain dosage forms, methods of making resmetirom, and its use in the treatment of key disease indications. Our current patent portfolio covers the United States and certain other jurisdictions worldwide. In addition, pursuant to the Roche Agreement, Roche granted us an exclusive license to certain United States and foreign patents and patent applications owned by Roche and Roche know-how relating to resmetirom. The Roche Agreement imposes various diligence, milestone payment, royalty payment, insurance, indemnification, and other obligations on us. 15 Table of Contents Issued patents directed to resmetirom, including certain dosage forms, have statutory expiration dates between 2026 and 2033, excluding any patent term extensions or equivalents thereof that might be available following the grant of marketing authorizations. We have pending patent applications for resmetirom that, if issued, would be expected to expire in the United States and in countries outside of the United States between 2033 and 2042, excluding any patent term adjustment that might be available following the grant of the patent and any patent term extensions that might be available following the grant of marketing authorizations. Our trademarks are protected under the common law and/or by registration in the United States and other countries. We seek to protect our proprietary processes, in part, by confidentiality agreements and invention assignment agreements with our personnel, including consultants and commercial partners. These agreements are designed to protect our proprietary information. Orphan Drug Designation Some potential target disease indications for resmetirom are rare diseases or may be designated rare diseases and we plan to pursue orphan drug designation where possible. If granted, each such designation might provide for regulatory exclusivity for seven years in the United States and ten years in the EU from the date of product approval for individual indications. Government Regulation Government Regulation and Product Approval Government authorities in the United States, at the federal, state and local level, and other countries extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, marketing and export and import of products such as those we are developing. A new drug must be approved by the FDA through the new drug application, or NDA, process before it may be legally marketed in the United States, and must be approved by foreign regulatory authorities via various procedures before it can be marketed in the applicable country. The animal and other non-clinical data and the results of human clinical trials performed under an Investigational New Drug application, or IND, and under similar foreign applications will become part of the NDA. United States Drug Development Process In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, and implementing regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local, and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable United States requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or after approval, may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial sanctions. These sanctions could include, among other things, the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, a clinical hold, warning letters and other types of enforcement-related letters, requesting product recalls, product seizures, changes to the conditions surrounding marketing approval such as labeling changes or changes to a Risk Evaluation and Mitigations Strategies, or REMS, program, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, debarment, restitution, disgorgement of profits, or civil or criminal investigations and penalties. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect on us. The process required by the FDA before a drug or biologic may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following: • completion of preclinical laboratory tests, animal studies and formulation studies according to GLP or other applicable regulations; • submission to the FDA of an IND which must become effective before human clinical trials may begin; • performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials according to Good Clinical Practices, or GCP, to establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed drug for its intended use; • submission to the FDA of an NDA; • completion of registration batches and validation of the manufacturing process to show ability to consistently produce quality batches of product; • satisfactory completion of a FDA inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities at which the drug is produced to assess compliance with current good manufacturing practice, or cGMP, to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve the drug’s identity, strength, quality and purity; and • FDA review and approval of the NDA. 16 Table of Contents Once a pharmaceutical candidate is identified for development, it enters the preclinical testing stage. Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, toxicity and formulation, as well as animal studies, to assess the safety and quality of the product. Animal studies must be performed in compliance with FDA’s GLP regulations and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal Welfare Act. An IND sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information and analytical data, to the FDA as part of the IND. The sponsor will also include a protocol detailing, among other things, the objectives of the first phase of the clinical trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety, and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated, if the first phase lends itself to an efficacy evaluation. Some preclinical testing may continue even after the IND is submitted. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA, within the 30-day time period, places the clinical trial on a clinical hold or a partial clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. Clinical holds also may be imposed by the FDA at any time before or during studies due to safety concerns or non-compliance, or other reasons. All clinical trials must be conducted under the supervision of one or more qualified investigators in accordance with good clinical practice regulations. They must be conducted under protocols detailing the objectives of the trial, dosing procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria and the safety and effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. Each protocol must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND, and progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted at least annually. In addition, timely safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and the investigators for serious and unexpected adverse events or animal test results that suggest a significant risk to human subjects. An institutional review board, or IRB, at each institution participating in the clinical trial must review and approve each protocol before a clinical trial commences at that institution and must also approve the information regarding the trial and the consent form that must be provided to each trial subject or his or her legal representative, monitor the study until completed and otherwise comply with IRB regulations. Foreign studies conducted under an IND must meet the same requirements that apply to studies being conducted in the U.S. Data from a foreign study not conducted under an IND may be submitted in support of an NDA if the study was conducted in accordance with GCP and the FDA is able to validate the data. Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap or be combined: • Phase 1: The product candidate is initially introduced into healthy human subjects and tested for safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism, distribution and excretion. In the case of some products for severe or life-threatening diseases, such as cancer, especially when the product may be too inherently toxic to ethically administer to healthy volunteers, the initial human testing is often conducted in patients with the target diseases. • Phase 2: This phase involves studies in a limited patient population to identify possible adverse effects and safety risks, to preliminarily evaluate the efficacy of the product for specific targeted diseases and to determine dosage tolerance and optimal dosage. • Phase 3: This phase involves trials undertaken to further evaluate dosage, clinical efficacy and safety in an expanded patient population at geographically dispersed clinical study sites. These studies are intended to establish the overall risk-benefit ratio of the product candidate and provide, if appropriate, an adequate basis for product approval and product labeling. The FDA or the sponsor may suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the drug has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients. Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 3 testing may not be completed successfully within any specified period, if at all. Further, success in either preclinical studies or early-stage clinical trials does not assure success in later-stage clinical trials. Sponsors of all controlled clinical trials, except for Phase 1 trials, are required to submit certain clinical trial information for inclusion in the public clinical trial registry and results data bank maintained by the National Institutes of Health, which are publicly available at http://clinicaltrials.gov. During the development of a new drug, sponsors are given opportunities to meet with the FDA at certain points. These points may be prior to submission of an IND, at the end of Phase 2, and before an NDA is submitted. Meetings at other times may be requested. These meetings can provide an opportunity for the sponsor to share information about the data gathered to date, for the FDA to provide advice, and for the sponsor and FDA to reach agreement on the next phase of development. Sponsors typically use the end of Phase 2 meeting to discuss their Phase 2 clinical results and present their plans for the pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial that they believe will support approval of the new drug. Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the drug and finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, the manufacturer must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final drug. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life. 17 Table of Contents United States Review and Approval Processes The results of product development, preclinical studies and clinical trials, along with descriptions of the manufacturing process, analytical tests conducted on the chemistry of the drug, proposed labeling, and other relevant information are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA requesting approval to market the product. The submission of an NDA is subject to the payment of user fees; a waiver of such fees may be obtained under certain limited circumstances. The FDA conducts a preliminary review of all NDAs submitted to ensure that they are sufficiently complete for substantive review before it accepts them for filing. The FDA may request additional information rather than accept an NDA for filing. In this event, the NDA must be resubmitted with the additional information. The resubmitted application also is subject to review before the FDA accepts it for filing. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth substantive review. The FDA may refer the NDA to an advisory committee for review, evaluation and recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it generally follows such recommendations. The approval process is lengthy and often difficult, and the FDA may refuse to approve an NDA if the applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied or may require additional clinical or other data and information. Even if such data and information are submitted, the FDA may ultimately decide that the NDA does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval. Data obtained from clinical trials are not always conclusive, and the FDA may interpret data differently than we interpret the same data. The FDA may issue a complete response letter, which generally outlines the deficiencies in the submission and may require additional clinical or other data or impose other conditions that must be met in order to secure final approval of the NDA, or an approval letter following satisfactory completion of all aspects of the review process. The FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe and effective for its intended use and whether its manufacturing is cGMP-compliant to assure and preserve the product’s identity, strength, quality and purity. Before approving an NDA, the FDA will inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. In addition, the FDA often will conduct a bioresearch monitoring inspection of the clinical trial sites involved in conducting pivotal studies to ensure data integrity and compliance with applicable GCP requirements. NDAs receive either standard or priority review. A drug representing a significant improvement in treatment, prevention or diagnosis of disease may receive priority review. Priority review for an NDA for a new molecular entity will be six months from the date that the NDA is filed. The FDA has ten months in which to complete its initial review of a standard new molecular entity NDA. The FDA does not always meet its goal dates and in certain circumstances the goal date may be extended. In addition, products studied for their safety and effectiveness in treating serious or life-threatening illnesses and which provide meaningful therapeutic benefit over existing treatments, may receive accelerated approval. In that situation, the product may be approved on the basis of adequate and well-controlled clinical trials establishing that the drug product has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit or on the basis of an effect on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, or IMM, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on IMM or other clinical benefit. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require that a sponsor of a drug receiving accelerated approval perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing clinical trials. Priority review and accelerated approval do not change the standards for approval, but may expedite the approval process. If a product receives regulatory approval, the approval may be significantly limited to specific diseases, dosages or patient populations, or the indications for use may otherwise be limited, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. In addition, the FDA may require a sponsor to conduct Phase 4 testing which involves clinical trials designed to further assess a drug’s safety and effectiveness after NDA approval, and may require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the safety of approved products which have been commercialized. The Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act, or FDASIA, which was enacted in 2012, made permanent the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, which requires a sponsor to conduct pediatric studies for most drugs and biologics, for a new active ingredient, new indication, new dosage form, new dosing regimen or new route of administration. Under PREA, original NDAs and supplements thereto must contain a pediatric assessment unless the sponsor has received a deferral or waiver. The required assessment must assess the safety and effectiveness of the product for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. The sponsor or FDA may request a deferral of pediatric studies for some or all of the pediatric subpopulations. A deferral may be granted for several reasons, including a finding that the drug or biologic is ready for approval for use in adults before pediatric studies are complete or that additional safety or effectiveness data needs to be collected before the pediatric studies begin. After April 2013, the FDA must send a non-compliance letter to any sponsor that fails to submit the required assessment, keep a deferral current or fails to submit a request for approval of a pediatric formulation. Patent Term Restoration and Marketing Exclusivity Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of FDA approval of our product candidates, some of our United States patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent restoration term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. However, patent term 18 Table of Contents 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, except that the period is reduced by any time during which the applicant failed to exercise due diligence. Only one patent applicable to an approved drug is eligible for the extension, and the extension must be applied for prior to expiration of the patent and within 60 days of approval. The United States Patent and Trademark Office, in consultation with the FDA, reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration. Pediatric exclusivity is another type of marketing exclusivity available in the United States. The FDASIA made permanent the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act, or BPCA, which provides for an additional six months of marketing exclusivity if a sponsor conducts clinical trials in children in response to a written request from the FDA, or a Written Request. If the Written Request does not include studies in neonates, the FDA is required to include its rationale for not requesting those studies. The FDA may request studies on approved or unapproved indications in separate Written Requests. The issuance of a Written Request does not require the sponsor to undertake the described studies. Orphan Drug Designation Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to a drug or biological product intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or more than 200,000 individuals in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available in the United States a drug for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales in the United States for that drug. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the identity of the therapeutic agent 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. If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same drug for the same indication, except in very limited circumstances, for seven years. Orphan drug exclusivity, however, also could block the approval of one of our product candidates for seven years if a competitor obtains approval of the same drug as defined by the FDA or if our product candidate is determined to be contained within the competitor’s product for the same indication or disease. The FDA also administers a clinical research grants program, whereby researchers may compete for funding to conduct clinical trials to support the approval of drugs, biologics, medical devices, and medical foods for rare diseases and conditions. A product does not have to be designated as an orphan drug to be eligible for the grant program. An application for an orphan grant should propose one discrete clinical study to facilitate FDA approval of the product for a rare disease or condition. The study may address an unapproved new product or an unapproved new use for a product already on the market. Fast Track 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 for which there is no effective treatment and which demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for such a disease or condition. Under the fast track program, the sponsor of a new drug candidate may request that the FDA designate the drug candidate for a specific indication as a fast track drug concurrent with, or after, the filing of the IND for the drug candidate. The FDA must determine if the drug candidate qualifies for fast track designation within 60 days of receipt of the sponsor’s request. Under the fast track program, the FDA may designate a drug for fast-track status if it is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening illness and nonclinical or clinical data demonstrate the potential to address an unmet medical need. Similarly, the agency may designate a drug for accelerated approval if it treats a serious condition and generally provides meaningful therapeutic benefit to patients over existing treatments based upon a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than IMM, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on IMM 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 drug candidate approved on this basis is subject to rigorous post-marketing compliance requirements, including the completion of Phase 4 or post-approval clinical trials to confirm the effect on the clinical endpoint. Failure to conduct required post-approval studies, or confirm a clinical benefit during post-marketing studies, will allow the FDA to withdraw the drug from the market on an expedited basis. All promotional materials for drug candidates approved under accelerated regulations are subject to prior review by the FDA. 19 Table of Contents In FDASIA, Congress encouraged the FDA to utilize innovative and flexible approaches to the assessment of products under accelerated approval. The law required the FDA to issue related draft guidance within a year after the law’s enactment and also promulgate confirming regulatory changes. In May 2014, the FDA published a Guidance for Industry entitled, “Expedited Programs for Serious Conditions-Drugs and Biologics” which provides guidance on FDA programs that are intended to facilitate and expedite development and review of new drugs as well as threshold criteria generally applicable to concluding that a drug is a candidate for these expedited development and review programs. In addition to the Fast Track, accelerated approval and priority review programs discussed above, the FDA also provided guidance on a new program for Breakthrough Therapy designation. A request for Breakthrough Therapy designation should be submitted concurrently with, or as an amendment to an IND. The FDA has already granted this designation to over 30 new drugs and has approved several. Post-Approval Requirements Once an approval is granted, products are subject to continuing regulation by the FDA. The FDA may withdraw the approval if, among other things, compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or if safety or efficacy problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product may result in restrictions on the product or even complete withdrawal of the product from the market. If new safety issues are identified following approval, the FDA may require the NDA sponsor to take certain measures, such as revising the approved labeling to reflect the new safety information, conducting post-market studies or clinical trials to assess the new safety information, and/or implementing or changing a REMS Program to mitigate newly-identified risks. After approval, some types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications, manufacturing changes and additional labeling claims, are subject to further FDA review and approval. Drug manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drugs 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 cGMP and other laws and regulations. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the production of clinical and commercial quantities of our product candidates. Future inspections by the FDA and other regulatory agencies may identify compliance issues at the facilities of our contract manufacturers that may disrupt production or distribution, or require substantial resources to correct. Any drug products manufactured or distributed by us pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, record-keeping requirements, reporting of adverse experiences with the drug, providing the FDA with updated safety and efficacy information, drug sampling and distribution requirements, complying with certain electronic records and signature requirements, and complying with FDA promotion and advertising requirements. The FDA strictly regulates labeling, advertising, promotion and other types of information on products that are placed on the market. Drugs may be promoted only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. From time to time, legislation is drafted, introduced and passed in Congress that could significantly change the statutory provisions governing the approval, manufacturing and marketing of products regulated by the FDA. In addition to new legislation, FDA regulations and guidance are often revised or interpreted by the agency in ways that may significantly affect our business and our products. It is impossible to predict whether further legislative changes will be enacted, or FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations changed or what the impact of such changes, if any, may be. Foreign Regulation In addition to regulations in the United States, we will be subject to a variety of foreign regulations governing clinical trials and commercial sales and distribution of its products. Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we must obtain approval by the comparable regulatory authorities of foreign countries or economic areas, such as the 28-member European Union, before we may commence clinical trials or market products in those countries or areas. The approval process and requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary greatly from place to place, and the time may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval. Under EU regulatory systems, a company may submit marketing authorization applications either under a centralized or decentralized procedure. The centralized procedure, which is compulsory for medicinal products produced by biotechnology or those medicinal products containing new active substances for specific indications such as the treatment of AIDS, cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, diabetes, viral diseases and designated orphan medicines, and optional for other medicines which are highly innovative. Under the centralized procedure, a marketing application is submitted to the EMA where it will be evaluated by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use and a favorable opinion typically results in the grant by the European Commission of a single marketing authorization that is valid for all EU member states within 67 days of receipt of the opinion. The initial marketing authorization is valid for five years, but once renewed is usually valid for an unlimited period. The decentralized procedure provides for approval by one or more “concerned” member states based on an assessment of an application performed by one member state, known as the “reference” member state. Under the decentralized approval procedure, an applicant submits an application, or dossier, and related materials to the reference member state and concerned member states. The reference member state prepares a draft 20 Table of Contents assessment and drafts of the related materials within 120 days after receipt of a valid application. Within 90 days of receiving the reference member state’s assessment report, each concerned member state must decide whether to approve the assessment report and related materials. If a member state does not recognize the marketing authorization, the disputed points are eventually referred to the European Commission, whose decision is binding on all member states. When conducting clinical trials in the EU, we must adhere to the provisions of the EU Clinical Trials Directive and the laws and regulations of the EU Member States implementing them. These provisions require, among other things, that the prior authorization of an Ethics Committee and the submission and approval of a clinical trial authorization application be obtained in each Member State before commencing a clinical trial in that Member State. As in the United States, it may be possible in foreign countries to obtain a period of market and/or data exclusivity that would have the effect of postponing the entry into the marketplace of a competitor’s generic product. For example, in the EU, if any of our products receive marketing approval in the European Economic Area, or EEA, which is comprised of the 28 member states of the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, we expect that we will benefit from eight years of data exclusivity and an additional two years of marketing exclusivity. An additional one-year extension of marketing exclusivity is possible if during the data exclusivity period we obtain an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications that is deemed to bring a significant clinical benefit compared to existing therapies. The data exclusivity period begins on the date of the product’s first marketing authorization in the EU and prevents biosimilars from relying on the holder of the marketing authorization for the reference biological medicine’s pharmacological, toxicological and clinical data for a period of eight years. After eight years, a biosimilar product application may be submitted and the sponsoring companies may rely on the marketing authorization holder’s data. However, a biosimilar medicine cannot launch until 2 years later (or a total of ten years after the first marketing authorization in the EU of the innovator product), or 3 years later (or a total of eleven years after the first marketing authorization in the EU of the innovator product) if the marketing authorization holder obtains marketing authorization for a new indication with significant clinical benefit within the eight year data exclusivity period. As in the United States, a sponsor may apply for designation of a product as an orphan drug for the treatment of a specific indication in the EU before the application for marketing authorization is made. Orphan drugs in Europe enjoy economic and marketing benefits, including up to ten years of market exclusivity for the approved indication unless another applicant can show that its product is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior to the orphan-designated product. Reimbursement Significant uncertainty exists regarding the coverage and reimbursement status of products approved by the FDA and other government authorities. In the United States, sales of any products for which we may receive regulatory approval for commercial sale will depend in significant part on the availability and adequacy of coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors. Third-party payors include government authorities, managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations. The process for determining whether a payor will provide coverage for a product may be separate from the process for setting the reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the product. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific products on an approved list which might not include all of the FDA-approved products for a particular indication. Moreover, a payor’s decision to provide coverage for a product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged for, examining the medical necessity of, and assessing the cost-effectiveness of medical products and services, in addition to their safety and efficacy. In order to obtain coverage and reimbursement for any product that might be approved for sale, we may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of any products, in addition to the costs required to obtain regulatory approvals. Our drug candidates may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective. If third-party payors do not consider a product to be cost-effective compared to other available therapies, they may not cover the product after approval as a benefit under their plans or, if they do, the level of payment may not be sufficient to allow a company to sell its products at a profit. The U.S. government and state legislatures have shown significant interest in implementing cost containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid health care costs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs. For example, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act, or collectively, ACA, contains provisions that may reduce the profitability of drug products, including, for example, increased rebates for drugs reimbursed by Medicaid programs, extension of Medicaid rebates to Medicaid managed care plans, mandatory discounts for certain Medicare Part D beneficiaries and annual fees based on pharmaceutical companies’ share of sales to federal health care programs. Adoption of government controls and measures, and tightening of restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could limit payments for pharmaceuticals. 21 Table of Contents The marketability of any products for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale may suffer if the government and third-party payors fail to provide adequate coverage and reimbursement. In addition, an increasing emphasis on cost containment measures in the United States has increased and we expect will continue to increase the pressure on pharmaceutical pricing. Coverage policies and third-party reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products for which we receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future. In addition, in some foreign countries, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug pricing vary widely from country to country. For example, the EU provides options for its member states to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. A member state may approve a specific price for the medicinal product or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our products. Historically, products launched in the EU do not follow price structures of the United States and generally tend to be significantly lower Human Capital As of February 19, 2021, we had forty two full-time employees, including thirty two engaged in research, development, and regulatory activities, and ten in executive, commercial, general and administrative functions, and multiple part-time consultants. We believe that our future success will be shaped by our continued ability to attract and retain highly skilled employees. We provide our employees with competitive salaries and bonuses, opportunities for equity ownership in the Company, and an employment package that is designed to promote well-being across all aspects of their lives, including health care, disability, retirement investment options and paid time off. General Information We were incorporated in Delaware in September 2011. Our principal executive offices are located at 200 Barr Harbor Drive, Suite 200, West Conshohocken, PA 19428. Our Internet website address is www.madrigalpharma.com. No portion of our website is incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We advise you to read this Annual Report on Form 10-K in conjunction with other reports and documents that we file from time to time with the SEC. In particular, please read our definitive proxy statement, which will be filed with the SEC in connection with our 2021 annual meeting of stockholders, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and any current reports on Form 8-K that we may file from time to time. You may obtain copies of these reports after the date of this annual report directly from us or from the SEC at its website at www.sec.gov. We make our periodic and current reports available on our internet website, free of charge, as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. 22 Table of Contents