Yarrow Bioscience, Inc. 10-K

ITEM 1 - BUSINESS Overview We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on developing differentiated therapies to treat inflammatory and immune-mediated conditions with high unmet need. We have exclusive worldwide rights to research, develop and commercialize products containing small molecule bromodomain and extra-terminal domain (“BET”) inhibitors for the treatment of any disease, disorder or condition in humans, which we licensed from Tay Therapeutics Ltd., formerly known as In4Derm Ltd ("Tay"). BET proteins are epigenetic enablers of transcription that regulate the expression of specific genes. Each BET protein consists of two bromodomains (“BD1” and “BD2”) and one end terminal (“ET”) domain. Through our transaction with Tay, we obtained access to a library of new small molecule BET inhibitor compounds including those that inhibit both BD1 and BD2 (“pan-BD” BET inhibitor) and that selectively inhibit BD2 (“BD2-selective” BET inhibitor). We initially focused our development efforts with these molecules on immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, which are not being targeted by current BET inhibitors in development. In August 2025, we initiated a strategic review to evaluate a range of options to maximize stockholder value, including the assessment of our internal pipeline, financing opportunities and strategic alternatives. As part of this process, we evaluated opportunities for repibresib and VYN202, including as part of broader strategic alternatives. In conjunction, we implemented cost reductions to extend our cash runway. Following the strategic review, we entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger and Reorganization, dated as of December 17, 2025, which was amended on January 30, 2026 (as amended, the "Merger Agreement") with Yarrow Biosciences, Inc. ("Yarrow"), pursuant to which, among other matters, Yellow Merger Sub Corp., a direct, wholly owned subsidiary of ours ("Merger Sub"), will merge with and into Yarrow, with Yarrow surviving as a wholly owned subsidiary of VYNE and the surviving corporation of the merger (the "Merger"). In connection with the Merger, VYNE will change its name to “Yarrow Bioscience, Inc.” VYNE following the Merger is referred to herein as the “Combined Company.” The Merger is intended to qualify for federal income tax purposes as (1) a tax-free reorganization under the provisions of Section 368(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code") and/or (2) an exchange of shares of Yarrow stock for VYNE common stock under Section 351(a) of the Code. Following completion of the Merger, the Combined Company plans to focus on advancing YB-101 (also known as GS-098), a clinical-stage, potentially first-in-class TSHR antibody for the treatment of Graves Disease and explore a clinical development plan for the treatment of Thyroid Eye Disease. We may continue to evaluate opportunities for repibresib and VYN202, which may include a sale, license, transfer, disposition, divestiture or other monetization transaction to a third party or to a related party so long as the transaction would not result in material post-closing obligations to us without Yarrow’s consent. If the Merger Agreement is terminated, we may pursue other strategic alternatives, including financing opportunities, or liquidation. The Proposed Merger and Special Cash Dividend At the effective time of the Merger, (i) each then-outstanding share of Yarrow common stock, par value $0.0001 per share and Yarrow Series A Preferred Stock, par value $0.0001 per share, including any shares of Yarrow common stock or Yarrow pre-funded warrants issued in the Yarrow Pre-Closing Financing described below, will be converted into the right to receive a number of shares of VYNE common stock, par value $0.0001 per share or VYNE pre-funded warrants (as described below) equal to an exchange ratio calculated in accordance with the Merger Agreement (the "Exchange Ratio"), (ii) each then outstanding Yarrow option to purchase shares of Yarrow common stock will be converted into and become an option to purchase shares of VYNE common stock on the existing terms and conditions, subject to adjustment as set forth in the Merger Agreement, and (iii) each then-outstanding and unexercised pre-funded warrant to purchase shares of Yarrow common stock will be converted into a pre-funded warrant to purchase shares of VYNE common stock on the existing terms and conditions, subject to adjustment as set forth in the Merger Agreement and the form of pre-funded warrant. In connection with the Merger, certain institutional investors led by an affiliate of RTW Investments purchased $100 million of Yarrow Series A Preferred Stock in a private placement and have agreed to purchase, prior to the closing of the Merger, an additional $100 million of Yarrow's common stock and/or pre-funded warrants, in a "Pre-Closing Financing" that will convert into VYNE common stock or VYNE pre-funded warrants at the closing of the Merger, in accordance with the Merger Agreement. 5 Table of Contents Each share of VYNE common stock that is issued and outstanding at the effective time of the Merger will remain issued and outstanding and such shares, subject to a proposed reverse stock split, will be unaffected by the Merger. Prior to the effective time, options to purchase shares of VYNE common stock and any VYNE restricted stock units will be accelerated. Any "in-the-money" options will be cancelled and cashed out; any "out-of-the-money" options will be cancelled for no consideration. Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, the pre-Merger VYNE stockholders are expected to own approximately 3% of the Combined Company, and the pre-Merger Yarrow stockholders (inclusive of those investors who participated in Yarrow's Series A Preferred Financing and who will participate in Yarrow's Pre-Closing Financing, described above) are expected to own approximately 97% of the Combined Company, which is subject to adjustment in accordance with the Merger Agreement. In addition, in connection with the closing of the Merger, we expect to declare a special cash dividend to our pre-Merger stockholders and warrant holders of approximately $14.5 million to $16.5 million in the aggregate, subject to adjustment as set forth in the Merger Agreement. Our BETi Platform and Product Candidates to Date Our former lead program is repibresib gel (also known as VYN201 ), a topically administered, small molecule pan-BD BET inhibitor designed as a “soft” drug to address diseases involving multiple, diverse inflammatory cell signaling pathways while providing low systemic exposure. We initiated a Phase 2b trial with repibresib ge l in nonsegmental vitiligo ("NSV") subjects in June 2024. The Phase 2b trial was a randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled trial evaluating the efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of once-daily repibresib gel in NSV subjects in three dose cohorts (1%, 2% or 3% concentrations) compared to vehicle over 24 weeks, followed by a 28-week active treatment extension with subjects on vehicle crossing over to active doses. In July 2025, VYNE announced that the trial did not meet its primary endpoint of the proportion of subjects achieving an improvement in Facial Vitiligo Area Scoring Index of at least 50% from baseline (“F-VASI50”) at week 24 compared to vehicle. Based on these data, VYNE discontinued the then ongoing extension phase of the trial and terminated the trial. We are currently developing VYN202, an oral, small molecule BD2-selective BET inhibitor. Prior studies have shown that while BD1 modulates cell-cycling and homeostatic functions, BD2 regulates gene expression of pro-inflammatory mediators in cells. VYN202 has been designed to achieve potential class-leading potency and selectivity for BD2 vs. BD1. By maximizing BD2 selectivity, we believe VYN202 has the potential to be a potent oral immunomodulator option for both acute control and chronic management of immune-mediated inflammatory conditions, without the hematologic and gastrointestinal adverse effects associated with earlier generation systemic pan-BD BET inhibitors that were being developed in oncologic settings. We initiated a Phase 1b trial in February 2025 in adult subjects with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. The Phase 1b trial was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of once daily treatment with VYN202 capsules dosed for 12 weeks, to primarily evaluate the safety of VYN202 across four cohorts (0.25 mg, 0.5 mg, 1 mg doses and placebo), with secondary objectives that include pharmacokinetics and preliminary evidence of efficacy via endpoints evaluating improvements from baseline in psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) scores. In April 2025, the FDA verbally placed a clinical hold on our Phase 1b trial following an observation of testicular toxicity in dogs from a non-clinical toxicology study of VYN202. In June 2025, the FDA lifted the clinical hold for two doses of VYN202 for female subjects. Further, the FDA indicated that sufficient data from a 12-week non-clinical toxicology study of VYN202 in dogs would be required in order to resume studies in male clinical subjects. The design of this toxicology study was agreed upon with the FDA. In July 2025, we made the decision to unblind the clinical data from the seven subjects who were enrolled in the trial (VYN202 treated: n=6 across 0.25 mg, 0.5 mg and 1 mg doses; placebo treated: n=1). All subjects treated with VYN202 had an improvement in signs and symptoms of disease, while the subject who received placebo did not. In addition, the subjects who received VYN202 for greater than one week showed reductions in serum cytokine levels involved in the pathogenesis of plaque psoriasis, while there was no change in this biomarker level for the subject receiving placebo. Based on this data, together with promising results for VYN202 in multiple preclinical models, we terminated the Phase 1b psoriasis trial in support of continued advancement of VYN202 into other serious, immune-mediated diseases with more limited effective treatment options. In October 2025, we initiated the repeat non-clinical toxicology study of VYN202 in male dogs to remedy the partial hold in male clinical subjects. The study is expected to be completed in the second half of 2026, with a final report expected in the fourth quarter of 2026. BET Proteins: Key Epigenetic Regulators of NF-kB, an Orchestrator of Inflammation BET proteins are epigenetic enablers of transcription that regulate the expression of specific genes. In some cases, BET proteins can activate oncogenes via BD1, thereby leading to increased cell proliferation and survival that may lead to formation of solid tumors and hematologic malignancies. BET inhibitors have the potential to downregulate the expression of such oncogenes. These observations have resulted in the generation and clinical investigation of BET inhibitors in several cancer subtypes by various pharmaceutical companies, including large pharmaceutical companies. 6 Table of Contents In addition, BET proteins can regulate the expression of a wide range of pro-inflammatory genes, primarily through the NF-kB pathway. NF-kB is a critical transcription factor in inflammation that orchestrates production of key inflammatory cytokines and activation of multiple immune cell types. The dysregulation of NF-kB pathway activation can lead to several chronic immune-mediated conditions. BET Inhibition: A Potential Novel Mechanism for the Treatment of Immune-Mediated Conditions Inhibition of BET proteins can prevent the continual dysregulated/hyperactivated signaling of the NF-kB pathway which occurs in many autoimmune diseases. A known family of drugs, corticosteroids, have demonstrated efficacy in treating inflammation predominantly by inhibiting the NF-kB pathway. These are a widely used class of anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive drugs, but their therapeutic use when given systemically is limited by many endocrine and metabolic side effects mediated by other pathways that are also impacted by these agents. By inhibiting the NF-kB pathway through the specific bromodomain BD2, BET inhibition could be a novel, non-steroidal, mechanism for the treatment of immune-mediated diseases without the non-immune side effects of corticosteroids. Because most of such diseases are heterogenous and driven by multiple immune pathways, BET inhibition has the potential to address a broad range of immune-mediated diseases due to its potential impact on many of these pathways. The diagram below depicts the role of BET proteins in gene transcription via the NF-kB pathway, and the subsequent effect of disrupting this process on expression of inflammatory cytokines. Our BET Inhibitor Platform and Product Candidates InhiBET™ BET Inhibitor Platform Through our partnership with Tay, we have exclusive worldwide rights to research, develop and commercialize products containing certain BET inhibitor compounds for the treatment of any disease, disorder or condition in humans. 7 Table of Contents Repibresib - Locally Administered Pan-BD BET Inhibitor Until July 2025, our lead product was repibresib gel (also known as VYN201), a topically administered, small molecule pan-bromodomain (“BD”) BET inhibitor designed as a “soft” drug to address diseases involving multiple, diverse inflammatory cell signaling pathways while providing low systemic exposure. We initiated a Phase 2b trial in nonsegmental vitiligo in June 2024. The trial evaluated 177 subjects (mITT population). In July 2025, we announced that the trial did not meet its primary endpoint of the proportion of subjects achieving an improvement in Facial Vitiligo Area Scoring Index of at least 50% from baseline (“F-VASI50”) at week 24 compared to vehicle. Based on these data, we discontinued the ongoing extension phase of the trial and terminated the trial. Repibresib gel is covered by patents providing composition of matter patent exclusivity into at least 2042 in the United States and into at least 2040 in Europe, Japan and other large global pharmaceutical markets. We are seeking an external partner for continued development of repibresib gel. VYN202 - Oral BD2-Selective BET Inhibitor VYN202 is an oral, small molecule BD2-selective BET inhibitor that has been designed to achieve potential class-leading potency and selectivity for BD2 vs. BD1. Systemic BET inhibitors have historically targeted both BD1 and BD2 less selectively, which we believe caused gastrointestinal toxicity and bone marrow suppressive effects like thrombocytopenia. By maximizing BD2 selectivity, we believe VYN202 may alleviate these toxicities observed by other less BD2-selective BET inhibitors in development for oncology and have the potential to be a potent, oral immunomodulator option for both acute control and chronic management of immune-mediated conditions, where the damaging effects of unrestricted inflammatory signaling activities are common. Phase 1b Trial In February 2025, we initiated a Phase 1b trial of VYN202 in adult subjects with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. In April 2025, the FDA verbally placed a clinical hold on our Phase 1b trial following an observation of testicular toxicity in dogs from a non-clinical toxicology study of VYN202. In June 2025, the FDA lifted the clinical hold for two doses of VYN202 for female subjects. Further, the FDA indicated that sufficient data from a 12-week non-clinical toxicology study of VYN202 in dogs would be required in order to resume studies in male clinical subjects. The design of this toxicology study was agreed upon with the FDA. There were no serious adverse events observed in subjects that were enrolled in the Phase 1b trial. Following the clinical hold, we made the decision to unblind the clinical data from the seven subjects who were enrolled in the trial (VYN202 treated: n=6 across 0.25 mg, 0.5 mg and 1 mg doses; placebo treated: n=1). All subjects treated with VYN202 had an improvement in signs and symptoms of disease, while the subject who received placebo did not. In addition, the subjects who received VYN202 for greater than one week showed reductions in serum cytokine levels involved in the pathogenesis of plaque psoriasis, while there was no change in this biomarker level for the subject receiving placebo. Two subjects who enrolled in the trial also co-presented with psoriatic arthritis. The subject on VYN202 reported improvements in joint pain and showed a corresponding reduction in serum c-reactive protein levels, a biomarker associated with psoriatic arthritis and other rheumatic diseases, while the subject on placebo showed no joint pain improvement or biomarker reduction. Based on this data, together with promising results for VYN202 in multiple preclinical models, we terminated the Phase 1b psoriasis trial in support of continued advancement of VYN202 into other serious, immune-mediated diseases with more limited effective treatment options. In October 2025, we initiated the repeat non-clinical toxicology study of VYN202 in male dogs to remedy the partial hold in male clinical subjects. The study is expected to be completed in the second half of 2026, with a final report expected in the fourth quarter of 2026. Manufacturing We have historically contracted with third-party manufacturers for all of our required raw materials, active ingredients and finished products for our preclinical studies and clinical trials for our product candidates. We currently have no plans to establish our own manufacturing capabilities and plan to continue to rely on third-party manufacturers for any future trials of our product candidates. Together with contract manufacturing organizations (“CMOs”), we previously developed the validation processes, methods, tests and/or controls that we believed were suitable for the manufacturing of our product candidates and for defining their properties. Development stage quantities of any products that we developed needed to be manufactured in facilities and by processes that complied with the requirements of the FDA and the regulatory agencies of other jurisdictions in which it may have sought approval. We required all of our CMOs to comply with these requirements and employed internal and external resources to manage our manufacturing contractors. In addition, the relevant manufacturers of our product candidates for our prior preclinical and clinical trials advised us that they were compliant with both the FDA’s Good Laboratory Practices (“GLP”) and the FDA's current Good Manufacturing Practice (“cGMP”) guidances. 8 Table of Contents Development and License Agreements Agreements with Tay Evaluation and Option Agreement In April 2021, we entered into an Evaluation and Option Agreement (the “Option Agreement”) with Tay. Pursuant to the Option Agreement, Tay granted us an exclusive option to obtain certain exclusive worldwide rights to research, develop and commercialize products containing Tay’s BET inhibitor compounds for the treatment of any disease, disorder or condition in humans. Pursuant to the Option Agreement, we agreed to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and manufacture a product with a pan-BD BET inhibitor as its active ingredient, and Tay agreed to provide a mutually agreed data package and select a new chemical entity development candidate from its Oral BET inhibitor ("BETi") Compounds. We paid a $1.0 million non-refundable cash payment to Tay upon execution of the Option Agreement. Under the terms of the Option Agreement, our option (the “Oral Option”) with respect to the Oral BETi Compounds was to expire on June 30, 2022, but in June 2022, we entered into a letter agreement with Tay to extend the option term to February 28, 2023. In February 2023, we entered into an additional letter agreement with Tay pursuant to which the option term was further extended to April 30, 2023. We exercised the Oral Option for VYN202 on April 28, 2023. License for Locally Administered Pan-BD BET Inhibitor Program (Repibresib) In August 2021, we exercised our option with respect to the repibresib program and entered into a license agreement (the “Repibresib License Agreement”) granting us a worldwide, exclusive license that is sublicensable through multiple tiers to exploit certain of Tay’s pan-BD BET inhibitor compounds in all fields. We have the sole responsibility for development, regulatory, marketing and commercialization activities to be conducted for the licensed products at our sole cost and discretion. We are required to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and, if approved, commercialize such products. Pursuant to the Repibresib License Agreement, a joint development committee consisting of one representative from each party reviews the progress of the development plan for the licensed products. Pursuant to the Repibresib License Agreement, we may develop a product that contains or incorporates a specific BET inhibitor, whether alone or in combination with other active ingredients, in any form, formulation, presentation, or dosage, and for any mode of administration. We made a $0.5 million cash payment to Tay in 2021 in connection with entering into the Repibresib License Agreement. Pursuant to the Repibresib License Agreement, we agreed to make cash payments to Tay upon the achievement of specified clinical development and regulatory approval milestones with respect to each licensed topical product in the United States of up to $15.75 million for all indications, of wh ich $1.8 million has been paid or accrued through December 31, 2025. Tay is entitled to additional milestone payments upon the achievement of regulatory approvals in certain non-U.S. jurisdictions. In addition, with respect to any products we commercialize under the Repibresib License Agreement, we will pay tiered royalties to Tay on net sales of such licensed products by it, our affiliates, or sublicensees, of 5%, 7.5% and 10% based on tiered annual net sales of licensed products under the Repibresib License Agreement and the VYN202 License Agreement, subject to specified reductions. We are obligated to pay royalties until the latest of (1) the tenth anniversary of the first commercial sale of the relevant licensed product, (2) the expiration of the last valid claim of the licensed patent rights covering such licensed product in such country and (3) the expiration of regulatory exclusivity for the relevant licensed product in the relevant country, on a licensed product-by-licensed product and country-by-country basis. Pursuant to the Repibresib License Agreement, we were granted a sublicense under certain intellectual property which was licensed to Tay by the University of Dundee (“Dundee”) pursuant to a certain license agreement between Tay and Dundee effective as of July 24, 2020 and amended and restated on October 8, 2021 (the “Head License”). On February 13, 2025, Tay and Dundee entered into an agreement for the termination of the Head License and assignment of such intellectual property from Dundee to Tay. Upon termination of the Head License, the Repibresib License Agreement was accordingly amended to reflect the assignment of the intellectual property to Tay upon its payment in full to Dundee. The amendment does not change any of Tay’s or our rights or obligations under the Repibresib License Agreement, except that any obligations owed by us to Dundee with respect to repibresib are now owed to Tay. License for Selective BET Inhibitor Program (VYN202) On April 28, 2023, we exercised the Oral Option and entered into a license agreement (the “VYN202 License Agreement”) with Tay granting it a worldwide, exclusive license that is sublicensable through multiple tiers to exploit certain of Tay’s Oral BETi Compounds in all fields. We have the sole responsibility for development, regulatory, marketing and commercialization activities to be conducted for the licensed products at our sole cost and discretion, and shall use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and, if approved, commercialize such products. We may sublicense our rights to a third party without Tay’s consent. Pursuant to the VYN202 License Agreement, a joint development committee consisting of one representative from each party reviews the progress of the development plan for the licensed products. 9 Table of Contents We made a cash payment of $3.75 million to Tay in connection with entering into the VYN202 License Agreement. Pursuant to the terms of the VYN202 License Agreement, we agreed to make cash payments to Tay of up to $43.75 million upon the achievement of specified clinical development and regulatory approval milestones with respect to each licensed oral product in the United States for all indications, of which $2.3 million has been paid or accrued through December 31, 2025. In August 2025, we paid Tay $1,000,000 in partial satisfaction of the "Phase 2 Milestone" under the VYN202 License Agreement for the initiation of the Phase 1b trial in psoriasis and amended the VYN202 License Agreement to provide that upon initiation of a new clinical trial in a target patient population involving VYN202 for oral administration with an efficacy endpoint, regardless of the trial's phase designation or regulatory classification, we shall pay Tay the remaining $4,000,000 amount under the "Phase 2 Milestone." All other terms of the VYN202 License Agreement were unchanged. Tay is entitled to additional milestone payments upon the achievement of regulatory approvals in certain non-U.S. jurisdictions. In addition, with respect to any products we commercialize under the VYN202 License Agreement, we will pay tiered royalties to Tay on net sales of such licensed products by it, our affiliates, or sublicensees, of 5%, 7.5% and 10% based on tiered annual net sales of licensed products under the VYN202 License Agreement and the Repibresib License Agreement, subject to specified reductions. We are obligated to pay royalties until the latest of (1) the tenth anniversary of the first commercial sale of the relevant licensed product, (2) the expiration of the last valid claim of the licensed patent rights covering such licensed product in such country and (3) the expiration of regulatory exclusivity for the relevant licensed product in the relevant country, on a licensed product-by-licensed product and country-by-country basis. Intellectual Property Our intellectual property and proprietary technology are essential to the development of our product candidates. We are committed to protecting our intellectual property rights, core technologies and other know-how through a combination of patents, trademarks, domain names, trade dress, trade secrets, copyrights, non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements, common interest agreements to protect privileged confidential information, licenses, assignments of invention and other contractual arrangements with our employees, scientific advisors, consultants, partners, suppliers, customers and others. These agreements and rights may, however, be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach. In addition, our trade secrets and other proprietary and confidential information may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors. To the extent that our employees, scientific advisors, consultants, partners, or other contractors use intellectual property owned by others in their work for it, disputes may arise as to the rights in related or resulting know-how and inventions. Our success will also depend at least in part on not infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. While we are diligent in our efforts to investigate proprietary rights of third parties, no search is completely exhaustive. For example, a relevant patent or published application could escape detection because of unusual terminology or use of terminology that is still evolving in developing technological fields. Also, databases used in the searches may not be entirely complete. It is uncertain whether the issuance of any third party patent would require us to alter our development strategies, alter our processes, obtain licenses or cease certain activities. Our breach of any license agreements or failure to obtain a license to proprietary rights that we may require to develop our current and future product candidates may have a material adverse impact on it. If third parties prepare and file patent applications in the United States that also claim technology to which we have rights, we may have to participate in derivation, interference or other proceedings in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) to determine derivation or priority of invention. We may also have to participate in court proceedings or arbitration to defend and assert our rights. Our BET inhibitor patent portfolio is licensed in and/or is being developed by us and comprises or is derived from several PCT applications, various national applications and certain provisional applications. As of December 31, 2025, our patent portfolio in relation to our repibresib program includes granted patents in the United States, Europe, Eurasia, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Israel, India, Japan, Mexico, and South Africa and pending compound and composition patent applications in the United States, China, Europe, New Zealand, Australia, Brazil, Canada, South Korea, New Zealand, and Thailand, licensed from Tay. A PCT application covering the compound, which published as WO 2020/216779, was filed nationally in more than 15 jurisdictions, including the U.S., China, Europe, Eurasia, and Japan. Subject to being granted and payments of the appropriate maintenance fees, each patent will expire in 2040, without accounting for any potential patent term adjustment in the United States. In addition, two provisional applications directed to various uses of repibresib are pending. Subject to the provisional application converting to a non-provisional application and these patent applications being granted and payments of the appropriate maintenance fee, each patent will expire in 2046, without accounting for any potential patent term adjustment in the United States. 10 Table of Contents As of December 31, 2025, VYNE’s patent portfolio in relation to VYNE’s VYN202 program includes a granted patent in the United Kingdom and pending compound and composition patent applications in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Eurasia, Europe, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Israel, India, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Thailand, United States, and South Africa, licensed from Tay. A PCT application covering the compound, which published as WO 2023/275542, was filed nationally in more than 15 jurisdictions, including the U.S., China, Europe, Eurasia and Japan. Subject to being granted and payments of the appropriate maintenance fees, each patent will expire in 2042, without accounting for any potential patent term adjustment in the United States. Two additional compound and composition PCT applications were also filed in relation to VYN202 and our oral BD2-selective BET inhibitor program exclusively licensed from Tay. A PCT application covering compounds and compositions related to VYN202, which published as WO 2024/138201, is pending nationally in the United States, Europe, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Eurasia, United Kingdom, Indonesia, Israel, India, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Thailand, and South Africa. Subject to being granted and payment of the appropriate maintenance fees, each patent will expire in 2043, without accounting for any potential patent term adjustment in the United States An additional PCT covering compounds and compositions related to VYN202, which published as WO 2024/018423, is pending nationally in the United States and Europe. Subject to being granted and payment of the appropriate maintenance fees, each patent will expire in 2043, without accounting for any potential patent term adjustment in the United States. One additional PCT application directed to various uses of VYN202 is pending in relation to VYN202. Subject to this PCT application being filed nationally, and the patent applications being granted and payments of the appropriate maintenance fees, the patents will expire in 2045, without accounting for any potential patent term adjustment in the United States In addition, six provisional applications directed to VYN202 method of use and combination therapies are pending. Subject to filing a non-provisional and the patent applications being granted and payments of the appropriate maintenance fees, this patent would expire in 2046, without accounting for any potential patent term adjustment in the United States. Patents extend for varying periods according to the date of patent filing or grant and the legal term of patents in various countries where patent protection is obtained. The actual protection afforded by a patent, which can vary from country to country, depends on the type of patent, the scope of its coverage and the availability of legal remedies in the country. In most countries in which we file, the patent term is 20 years from the earliest date of filing a non-provisional patent application. In the United States, a patent term may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over another patent or as a result of delays in patent prosecution by the patentee, and a patent’s term may be lengthened by patent term adjustment, which compensates a patentee for administrative delays by the USPTO in granting a patent or by patent term extension, which compensates a patentee for delays at the FDA. The patent term of a European patent is 20 years from its filing date; however, unlike in the United States, the European patent does not grant patent term adjustments. The European Union does have a compensation program similar to patent term extension called supplementary patent certificate that would effectively extend the duration of protection of the product for up to five years. Obtaining a patent term extension in the United States or a supplementary patent certificate in the European Union is uncertain and will depend on eligibility and satisfying rigorous criteria in each jurisdiction. Competition Our drug development activities face, and will continue to face, intense competition from organizations such as pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, as well as academic and research institutions and government agencies. Our drug development activities also face, and may continue to face, governmental actions designed to promote generic drug competition and lower prices. Any product candidate that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with existing treatments, including those that may have achieved broad market acceptance, and any new treatment that may become available in the future. Many of the companies against which we are competing, or against which we may compete in the future, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, and preclinical and clinical development than it does. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and subject registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or that may be necessary for, our development programs. 11 Table of Contents We are currently developing VYN202 for the treatment of various immune-mediated conditions, which include indications in highly competitive markets. Many companies, including large pharmaceutical companies such as AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Johnson & Johnson, UCB, LEO Pharma, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Eli Lilly, Pfizer and others, have approved drugs (and are developing) small molecule and biologics in these therapeutic classes. For example, our initial proof-of-concept indication was moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis which is a competitive market. The psoriasis market includes several approved anti-IL-17 antibody therapies, including COSENTYX, marketed by Novartis; TALTZ, marketed by Eli Lilly; SILIQ, marketed by Bausch Health; and BIMZELX, marketed by UCB SA. Other classes of injectable biologics approved for use in indications for which IL-17 therapeutics are also approved include anti-IL-12/23 and anti TNFα monoclonal antibodies marketed by AbbVie, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries and Janssen Pharmaceuticals, among others. Furthermore, the oral PDE4 inhibitor, OTEZLA, marketed by Amgen, and oral TYK2 inhibitor, SOTYKTU, marketed by Bristol Myers Squibb, are approved for the treatment of psoriasis. In addition, we are aware of other oral therapeutic candidates including other TYK2 inhibitors, oral IL-17 inhibitors, and oral IL-23 inhibitors being developed by Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, Ventyx Biosciences, Eli Lilly, LEO Pharma and Johnson & Johnson, among others. Similarly, any potential alternative indications for which we develop VYN202 may also be in highly competitive markets. The commercial opportunity for our product candidates, if approved, could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize drugs that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any drug we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their product candidates more rapidly than it, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before our product candidates are able to enter the market. Government Regulation Our business is subject to extensive government regulation. Regulation by governmental authorities in the United States and other jurisdictions is a significant factor in our research and development activities. Product approval process in the United States Review and approval of drugs In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”) and implementing regulations. In general, new drug products require the submission of a New Drug Application (“NDA”) and approval thereof by the FDA prior to being marketed in the United States. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or after approval may subject an applicant to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions and enforcement actions brought by the FDA, the Department of Justice or other governmental entities. Possible sanctions may include the FDA’s refusal to approve pending NDAs, withdrawal of an approval, imposition of a clinical hold, issuance of warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement and civil or criminal penalties. The process required by the FDA prior to marketing and distributing a new drug product in the United States generally involves the following: • completion of laboratory tests, animal studies and formulation studies in compliance with the FDA’s Good Laboratory Practice (“GLP”) or other applicable regulations; • submission to the FDA of an application for an IND which must become effective before human clinical trials may begin; • approval by an independent institutional review board (“IRB”) at each clinical site before each trial may be initiated at that site; • performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials in accordance with Good Clinical Practice (“GCP”) requirements to establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed drug for its intended use; • preparation and submission to the FDA of an NDA or supplemental NDA; • satisfactory completion of an FDA advisory committee review, if applicable; • satisfactory completion of one or more FDA inspections of the manufacturing facility or facilities at which the product or components thereof are produced, to assess compliance with cGMP and to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve the drug’s identity, strength, quality and purity; • satisfactory completion of FDA audits of clinical trial sites and the sponsor’s clinical trial records to assure compliance with GCPs and the integrity of the clinical data; • payment of user fees and FDA review and approval of an NDA; and • compliance with any post-approval requirements, including the potential requirement to implement a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (“REMS”) and the potential requirement to conduct post-approval studies. 12 Table of Contents Preclinical studies Preclinical studies include laboratory evaluation, as well as animal studies to assess the potential safety and efficacy of the product candidate. Preclinical safety tests must be conducted in compliance with the FDA’s GLP regulations. The results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information and analytical data, are submitted to the FDA as part of an IND which must become effective before clinical trials may be commenced. Clinical trials in support of an NDA Clinical trials involve the administration of an investigational product to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with GCP requirements, which include, among other things, the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent in writing before their participation in any clinical trial. Clinical trials are conducted under written trial protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety, and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. A protocol for each clinical trial and any subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. An IND becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless before that time the FDA raises concerns or questions related to a proposed clinical trial and places the trial on clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. In addition, an IRB representing each institution participating in the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial before it commences at that institution, and the IRB must conduct continuing review and reapprove the trial at least annually. The IRB must review and approve, among other things, the trial protocol and informed consent information to be provided to trial subjects. An IRB must operate in compliance with FDA regulations. Information about certain clinical trials must be submitted within specific timeframes to the National Institutes of Health for public dissemination on their ClinicalTrials.gov website. Clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases, which, in some cases, may overlap or be combined: • Phase 1: The drug is initially introduced into healthy human subjects or patients with the target disease or condition and tested for safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism, distribution, excretion and, if possible, to gain an early indication of its effectiveness and to determine optimal dosage. • Phase 2: The drug is administered to a limited patient population to identify possible short-term 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: The drug is administered to an expanded patient population, generally at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites, in well-controlled clinical trials to generate enough data to statistically evaluate the efficacy and safety of the product for approval, to establish the overall risk-benefit profile of the product, and to provide adequate information for the labeling of the product. Submission of an NDA to the FDA The results of the preclinical studies and clinical trials, together with other detailed information, including information on the manufacture, control and composition of the product, are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA requesting approval to market the product candidate for a proposed indication. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (“PDUFA”) as amended, applicants are required to pay fees to the FDA for reviewing an NDA. These user fees, as well as the annual fees required for commercial manufacturing establishments and for approved products, can be substantial. Each NDA submitted to the FDA for approval is reviewed for administrative completeness and reviewability within 60 days following submission of the application. If found complete, the FDA will “file” the NDA, thus triggering a full review of the application. The FDA may refuse to file any NDA that it deems incomplete or not properly reviewable at the time of submission. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth substantive review. The FDA has agreed to certain performance goals in the review of NDAs. Most applications for standard review drug products are reviewed within ten to twelve months; most NDAs for priority review drugs are reviewed in six to eight months. The review process for both standard and priority review may be extended by FDA for three additional months to consider certain late-submitted information, or information intended to clarify information already provided in the submission. The FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether the drug is safe and effective and whether the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packaged or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, quality and purity. 13 Table of Contents Before approving an NDA, the FDA may inspect the facilities at which the product is manufactured or facilities that are significantly involved in the product development and distribution process, and will not approve the product unless cGMP compliance is satisfactory at such facilities. The FDA may deny approval of an NDA if applicable statutory or regulatory criteria are not satisfied, or it may require additional testing or information, which can delay the approval process. FDA approval of any application may include many delays or may never be granted. If a product is approved, the approval will specify the indicated uses for which the product may be marketed in the United States pursuant to that NDA, may require that warning statements be included in the product labeling, may require that additional studies or trials be conducted following approval as a condition of the approval, may impose restrictions and conditions on product distribution, prescribing or dispensing in the form of a REMS, or may impose other limitations. After evaluating the NDA and all related information, including any advisory committee recommendation, if applicable, and inspection reports regarding the manufacturing facilities and clinical trial sites, the FDA will issue an approval letter or a complete response letter. A complete response letter generally outlines the deficiencies in the submission and contains a statement of specific conditions that must be met in order to secure final approval of the NDA and may require additional clinical or non-clinical testing in a resubmission to the NDA in order for the FDA to reconsider the application. FDA has committed to reviewing such submissions in two or six months depending on the type of information included in the resubmission. Even with submission of this additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval. If and when those conditions have been met to the FDA’s satisfaction, the FDA will typically issue an approval letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications. Even if the FDA approves a product, it may limit the approved indications for use of the product, require that contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling, require that post-approval studies, including Phase 4 clinical trials, be conducted to further assess a drug’s safety after approval, require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the product after commercialization, or impose other conditions, including distribution and use restrictions or other risk management mechanisms under a REMS, which can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the product. Once a product is approved, marketing the product for other indicated uses or making certain manufacturing or other changes requires FDA review and approval of a supplemental NDA or a new NDA, which may require additional clinical data and review fees. In addition, further post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of a product may be required. Also, product approvals may be withdrawn if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or if safety or manufacturing problems occur at any time following approval. In addition, new government requirements may be established that could delay or prevent regulatory approval of our product candidates under development. Special FDA Expedited Review and Approval Programs The FDA has various programs, including Fast Track designation, Breakthrough Therapy designation, Accelerated Approval, and Priority Review, which are intended to expedite or simplify the process for the development and FDA review of drugs that are intended for the treatment of serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs. The purpose of these programs is to provide important new drugs to patients earlier than under standard FDA review procedures. Under the fast track program, the sponsor of a new product candidate may request that FDA designate the product candidate for a specific indication as a fast track drug concurrent with, or after, the filing of the IND for the product candidate. Fast track designation provides opportunities for frequent interactions with the FDA review team to expedite development and review of the product. FDA may initiate review of sections of a fast track drug’s NDA before the application is complete. This rolling review is available if the applicant provides, and FDA approves, a schedule for the submission of the remaining information and the applicant pays applicable user fees. However, FDA’s time period goal for reviewing an application does not begin until the last section of the NDA is submitted. In addition, a sponsor can request breakthrough therapy designation for a drug if it is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. Drugs designated as breakthrough therapies are eligible for intensive guidance from FDA on an efficient drug development program, organizational commitment to the development and review of the product including involvement of senior managers, and, like fast track products, are also eligible for rolling review of the NDA. Both fast track and breakthrough therapy products are also eligible for accelerated approval and/or priority review, if relevant criteria are met. Under the FDA’s accelerated approval regulations, the FDA may approve a drug for a serious or life-threatening illness that 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 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. 14 Table of Contents 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 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 FDA to withdraw the drug from the market on an expedited basis. All promotional materials for product candidates approved under accelerated approval regulations are subject to prior review by FDA. Once an NDA is submitted for a product intended to treat a serious condition, the FDA may assign a priority review designation if FDA determines that the product, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness. A priority review means that the goal for the FDA to review an application is six months, rather than the standard review of ten months under current PDUFA guidelines. Under the current PDUFA agreement, for NDAs for new molecular entities, these six- and ten- month review periods are measured from the 60-day filing date rather than the receipt date, which typically adds approximately two months to the timeline for review from the date of submission. Most products that are eligible for fast track and/or breakthrough therapy designation are also likely to be considered appropriate to request and potentially receive a priority review. Even if a product qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened. In addition, the manufacturer of an investigational drug for a serious or life-threatening disease is required to make available, such as by posting on its website, its policy on responding to requests for expanded access. Furthermore, fast track designation, breakthrough therapy designation, accelerated approval and priority review do not change the standards for approval and may not ultimately expedite the development or approval process. Post-approval requirements Any drug products for which we receive FDA approval will be subject to continuing regulation by the FDA. Certain requirements include, inter alia, record-keeping requirements, reporting of adverse experiences with the product, providing the FDA with updated safety and efficacy information on an annual basis or more frequently for specific events, product sampling and distribution requirements, complying with certain electronic records and signature requirements and complying with FDA promotion and advertising requirements. These promotion and advertising requirements include, among others, standards for direct-to-consumer advertising, prohibitions against promoting drugs for uses or patient populations that are not described in the drug’s approved labeling, known as “off-label use,” and other promotional activities, such as those considered to be false or misleading. Failure to comply with FDA requirements can have negative consequences, including the immediate discontinuation of noncomplying materials, adverse publicity, enforcement letters from the FDA, mandated corrective advertising or communications with doctors, and civil or criminal penalties. Such enforcement may also lead to scrutiny and enforcement by other government and regulatory bodies. Although physicians may prescribe legally available drugs for off-label uses, manufacturers may not encourage, market or promote such off-label uses. As a result, “off-label promotion” has formed the basis for litigation under the Federal False Claims Act (“FCA”) violations of which are subject to significant civil fines and penalties. In addition, under the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, manufacturers of certain prescription products are required to disclose annually to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) payments or transfers of value made to “covered recipients” and teaching hospitals, and ownership or investment interests held by covered recipients and their immediate family members. Reportable payments and transfers of value may be direct or indirect, in cash or kind, for any reason, and are required to be disclosed even if the transfers are not related to an approved product. Failure to comply with the Physician Payments Sunshine Act could result in penalties up to $1.15 million per year. The manufacturing of any of our product candidates, if approved, will be required to comply with applicable FDA manufacturing requirements contained in the FDA’s cGMP regulations. The FDA’s cGMP regulations require, among other things, quality control and quality assurance, as well as the corresponding maintenance of comprehensive records and documentation. Drug manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drugs are also required to register their establishments and list any products they make with the FDA and to comply with related requirements in certain states. These entities are further subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP and other laws. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance. Discovery of problems with a product after approval may result in serious and extensive restrictions or other consequences for a product, manufacturer or holder of an approved NDA, as well as lead to potential market disruptions. These restrictions or consequences may include untitled or warning letters, recalls, suspension of a product until the FDA is assured that quality standards can be met, and continuing oversight of manufacturing by the FDA under a “consent decree,” which frequently includes the imposition of costs and continuing inspections over a period of many years, as well as possible withdrawal of the product from the market. In addition, changes to the manufacturing process generally require prior FDA approval before being implemented. Other types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications and additional labeling claims, are also subject to further FDA review and approval. 15 Table of Contents The FDA also may require post-marketing testing, or Phase IV testing, as well as REMS to monitor the effects of an approved product or place conditions on an approval that could otherwise restrict the distribution or use of approved products. Pediatric trials and exclusivity Even when not pursuing a pediatric indication, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act of 2003, an NDA or supplement thereto must contain data that are adequate to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug product for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations, and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. Sponsors must also submit pediatric trial plans prior to the assessment data. Those plans must contain an outline of the proposed pediatric trials the applicant plans to conduct, including trial objectives and design, any deferral or waiver requests, and other information required by regulation. The applicant, the FDA, and the FDA’s internal review committee must then review the information submitted, consult with each other, and agree upon a final plan. The FDA or the applicant may request an amendment to the plan at any time. The FDA may, on its own initiative or at the request of the applicant, grant deferrals for submission of some or all pediatric data until after approval of the product for use in adults, or full or partial waivers from the pediatric data requirements. Additional requirements and procedures relating to deferral requests and requests for extension of deferrals are contained in the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act. Separately, in the event the FDA makes a written request for pediatric data relating to a drug product, an NDA sponsor who submits such data may be entitled to pediatric exclusivity. Pediatric exclusivity is another type of non-patent marketing exclusivity in the United States and, if granted, provides for the attachment of an additional 6 months of marketing protection to the term of any existing regulatory exclusivity, including the non-patent and orphan exclusivity. Patent term restoration and extension A patent claiming a new drug product may be eligible for a limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, generally referred to as the “Hatch-Waxman Act,” which permits an extension of the term of a patent for up to five years to compensate patent holders for marketing time lost while developing the product and awaiting government approval during the FDA regulatory review. The basis for the patent extension is the regulatory review period, which is basically composed of two parts, a testing phase and an approval phase, less a reduction, if any, in either part for a period time where there was a finding of lack of due diligence. The restoration period granted can be up to one-half the time between the effective date of an IND and the submission date of an NDA (testing phase), plus the time between the submission date of an NDA and the ultimate approval date (approval phase). Patent term extension cannot be used to extend the remaining term of a patent past a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date. Only one patent applicable to an approved drug product may be extended, and the application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent in question and within 60 days of FDA approval. A patent that covers multiple drugs for which approval is sought can only be extended in connection with one of the approvals and the scope of the extended patent is limited to the approved drug. The USPTO reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension in consultation with the FDA. The term of a patent which claims a human drug product, a method of using the product, or a method of manufacturing the product may potentially be extended if it satisfies the various conditions including that it is the first permitted commercial marketing or use of the drug. Review and approval of drug products outside the United States In addition to regulations in the United States, we are subject to a variety of foreign regulations governing manufacturing, clinical trials, commercial sales and distribution of our future products. Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product candidate, we must obtain approval by the comparable regulatory authorities of foreign countries before commencing clinical trials or marketing in those countries. The approval process varies from country to country and can be subject to uncertainties, and the time may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval. The requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary greatly from country to country. Regulation in the European Economic Area In the European Economic Area (“EEA”) which is composed of the Member States of the European Union plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, medicinal products can only be commercialized after obtaining a Marketing Authorization (“MA”). 16 Table of Contents There are two types of MAs: • The Community MA, which is issued by the European Commission through the Centralized Procedure, based on the opinion of the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (“CHMP”) of the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”) and which is valid throughout the entire territory of the EEA. The Centralized Procedure is mandatory for certain types of products, such as biotechnology medicinal products, orphan medicinal products and medicinal products that contain a new active substance indicated for the treatment of AIDS, cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, diabetes, auto-immune and viral diseases. The Centralized Procedure is optional for products containing a new active substance not yet authorized in the EEA, or for products that constitute a significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovation or which are in the interest of public health in the EU. Under the Centralized Procedure the maximum timeframe for the evaluation of a marketing authorization application (“MAA”) 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). Accelerated evaluation might be granted by the CHMP in exceptional cases, when the authorization of a medicinal product is of major interest from the point of view of public health and in particular from the viewpoint of therapeutic innovation. Under the accelerated procedure the standard 210 days review period is reduced to 150 days. • National MAs, which are issued by the competent authorities of the Member States of the EEA and only cover their respective territory, are available for products not falling within the mandatory scope of the Centralized Procedure. Where a product has already been authorized for marketing in a Member State of the EEA, this National MA can be recognized in another Member State through the Mutual Recognition Procedure. If the product has not received a National MA in any Member State at the time of application, it can be approved simultaneously in various Member States through the Decentralized Procedure. Prior to obtaining an MA in the EEA, applicants have to demonstrate compliance with all measures included in a Pediatric Investigation Plan (“PIP”) approved by the EEA regulatory agency, covering all subsets of the pediatric population, unless the EEA regulatory agency has granted (1) a product-specific waiver, (2) a class waiver or (3) a deferral for one or more of the measures included in the PIP. In the EEA, upon receiving a MA, new chemical entities generally receive eight years of data exclusivity and an additional two years of market exclusivity. If granted, data exclusivity prevents regulatory authorities in the EEA from referencing the innovator’s data to assess a generic application. During the additional two-year period of market exclusivity, a generic marketing authorization can be submitted, and the innovator’s data may be referenced, but no generic product can be marketed until the expiration of the market exclusivity. However, there is no guarantee that a product will be considered by the EEA regulatory agencies to be a new chemical entity, and products may not qualify for data exclusivity. Pharmaceutical coverage, pricing and reimbursement Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any product and any product candidates for which we obtain regulatory approval. In the United States and other markets, sales of any product, and any product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale, will depend in part on the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from third party payors. Third party payors include government health administrative authorities, managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations. The process for determining whether a payor will provide coverage for a drug product may be separate from the process for setting the price or reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the drug product. Third party payors may limit coverage to specific drug products on an approved list, or formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved drug products for a particular indication. Third party payors are increasingly challenging the price and examining the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of medical products and services, in addition to their safety and efficacy. A payor may not consider a product to be medically necessary or cost-effective. Moreover, a payor’s decision to provide coverage for a drug product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved, or that other payors will similarly provide similar coverage for the product. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on its investment in product development. 17 Table of Contents Further, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to drug pricing practices, including several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, increase drug pricing transparency, expedite generic competition, review relationships between pricing and manufacturer patient assistance programs, and reform government program drug reimbursement methodologies. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) imposes rebates on many Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D products to penalize price increases that outpace inflation on an annual basis. In addition, HHS has been empowered to negotiate the price to negotiate the price of certain single-source drugs that have been on the market for at least 7 years covered under Medicare as part of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Each year up to twenty (20) products will be selected by HHS for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Products subject to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program are expected to experience a significant reduction in reimbursement from the Medicare program on a per unit basis. CMS administers the Medicaid drug rebate program, in which pharmaceutical manufacturers pay quarterly rebates to each state Medicaid agency. Generally, for branded prescription drugs marketed under NDAs, manufacturers are required to rebate the greater of 23.1% of the average manufacturer price or the difference between such price and the best price during a specified period (subject to inflation). An additional rebate for products marketed under NDAs is payable if the average manufacturer price increases at a rate higher than inflation, and other methodologies apply to new formulations of existing drugs. In addition, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the “ACA”) revised certain definitions used for purposes of calculating the rebates, including the definition of “average manufacturer price.” Various state Medicaid programs have implemented voluntary supplemental drug rebate programs that may provide states with additional manufacturer rebates in exchange for preferred status on a state’s formulary or for patient populations that are not included in the traditional Medicaid drug benefit coverage. In the European Union, pricing and reimbursement schemes vary widely from country to country. Some countries provide that drug products may be marketed only after a reimbursement price has been agreed. Some countries may require the completion of additional studies or trials that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies. For example, the European Union provides options for its member states to restrict the range of drug products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. European Union member states may approve a specific price for a drug product or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the drug product on the market. Other member states allow companies to fix their own prices for drug products, but monitor and control company profits. The downward pressure on health care costs in general, and particularly on prescription drugs, has become intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. In addition, in some countries, cross-border imports from low-priced markets exert competitive pressure that may reduce pricing within a country. Any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for drug products may not allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements. Healthcare Reform In March 2010, the then President of the United States signed one of the most significant healthcare reform measures in decades, the ACA. The ACA substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly impacted the pharmaceutical industry. This comprehensive legislative overhaul was expected to extend coverage to approximately 36 million previously uninsured Americans. The ACA also requires the pharmaceutical industry to share in the costs of reform by increasing Medicaid rebates and expanding Medicaid rebates to cover Medicaid managed care programs, among other things. The ACA also includes funding of pharmaceutical costs for Medicare patients in excess of the prescription drug coverage limit and below the catastrophic coverage threshold. There have been executive, judicial, Congressional, and political challenges and amendments to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, on July 4, 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act ("OBBBA"), was signed into law, which narrowed access to ACA marketplace exchange enrollment and declined to extend the ACA enhanced advanced premium tax credits that expired at the end of 2025, which, among other provisions in the law, are anticipated to reduce the number of Americans with health insurance. The OBBBA also is expected to reduce Medicaid spending and enrollment by implementing work requirements for some beneficiaries, capping state-directed payments, reducing federal funding, and limiting provider taxes used to fund the program. Congress is considering proposed legislation intended to further reduce healthcare costs with alternatives to replace the expired ACA subsidies. It is possible that there will be additional health reform measures. It is unclear how any such challenges, if any, and other efforts to modify, repeal and replace the ACA will impact the ACA. 18 Table of Contents The current administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government agencies including at HHS, the FDA, CMS and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. For example, the current administration has announced agreements with pharmaceutical companies that require the drug manufacturers to offer, through a direct to consumer platform, U.S. patients and Medicaid programs prescription drug Most-Favored Nation pricing equal to or lower than those paid in other developed nations, with additional mandates for direct-to-patient discounts and repatriation of foreign revenues. Other recent actions, for example, include (1) directing agencies to reduce agency workforce and cut programs; (2) directing HHS and other agencies to lower prescription drug costs through a variety of initiatives, including by improving upon the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program and establishing Most-Favored-Nation pricing for pharmaceutical products; (3) imposing tariffs on imported pharmaceutical products; and (4) as part of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission’s Strategy Report released in September 2025, working across government agencies to increase enforcement on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. These actions and policies may significantly reduce U.S. drug prices, potentially impacting manufacturers’ global pricing strategies and profitability, while increasing their operational costs and compliance risks. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision greatly reduced judicial deference to regulatory agencies, which could increase successful legal challenges to federal regulations affecting our operations. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program created under the IRA. At the state level, legislatures are increasingly 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. Any such approved importation plans, when implemented, may result in lower drug prices for products covered by those programs. We anticipate that these and other healthcare reform efforts will continue to result in additional downward pressure on drug pricing, particularly in light of recent U.S. Presidential and Congressional elections. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare and other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. Healthcare Laws Healthcare providers, physicians and third party payors play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of drug products that are granted marketing approval. Arrangements with healthcare providers, third party payors and other customers are subject to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations. Such restrictions under applicable federal and state healthcare laws and regulations include the following: • the federal healthcare Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, persons from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of, any good or service for which payment may be made, in whole or in part, under a federal healthcare program such as Medicare or Medicaid. The term “remuneration” has been broadly interpreted to include anything of value, including cash, improper discounts, and free or reduced price items and services. The intent standard under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute was amended by ACA to a stricter standard such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. Moreover, under the ACA, 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 civil FCA. Additionally, many states have similar laws that apply to their state health care programs as well as private payors. Violations of the federal or state anti-kickback laws can result in exclusion from federal and state health care programs and substantial civil and criminal penalties; • the federal civil and criminal false claims laws and civil monetary penalties laws, including the federal FCA, which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, false, fictitious or fraudulent claims for payment from Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare programs, and knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government. Even where pharmaceutical companies do not submit claims directly to payors, they can be held liable under these laws if they are deemed to “cause” the submission of false or fraudulent claims by, for example, providing inaccurate billing or coding information to customers, promoting a product off-label, marketing products of sub-standard quality, or paying a kickback that results in a claim for items or services. In addition, activities relating to the reporting of wholesaler or estimated retail prices for pharmaceutical products, the reporting of prices used to calculate Medicaid rebate information and other information affecting federal, state and third-party reimbursement for such products, and the sale and marketing of such products, are subject to scrutiny under this law. Private individuals or whistleblowers can bring FCA “qui tam” actions on behalf of the government and may share in amounts recovered. Proof of intent to deceive is not required to establish liability under the civil False Claims Act; 19 Table of Contents • the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) imposes criminal and civil liability for, among other things, executing or attempting to execute a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including any third party payors, knowingly and willfully embezzling or stealing from a healthcare benefit program, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense, and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations, or making false statements relating to healthcare benefits, items, or services. 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 to have committed a violation; • HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH”) and their implementing regulations, which imposes privacy, security, transmission and breach reporting obligations, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to individually identifiable health information including Protected Heath Information (“PHI”), upon “covered entities” subject to the law, such as health plans, healthcare clearinghouses and certain healthcare providers, and their respective business associates and covered subcontractors that perform services on their behalf that involve individually identifiable health information, including PHI. HITECH also created new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to 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 HIPAA laws and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. Other federal and state laws, such as the Federal Trade Commission Act, also impose requirements with respect to individuals' personal information; • the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act requires certain manufacturers of prescription drugs, devices and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program to annually report to CMS information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists, chiropractors, certain other healthcare professionals (such as nurse practitioners and physicians assistants), and teaching hospitals, and ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. In addition, Section 6004 of the ACA requires annual reporting of information about drug samples that manufacturers and authorized distributors provide to physicians; and • analogous state and foreign laws and regulations, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws, which may apply more broadly than their U.S. federal analogues, such as to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third party payors, including private insurers; state laws that require drug companies to comply with the industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the applicable compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; state and local laws that require the licensure of sales representatives; state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to drug pricing or payments and other transfers of value to healthcare providers or marketing expenditures and pricing information; data privacy and security laws and regulations in foreign jurisdictions that may be more stringent than those in the United States (such as the European Union, which adopted the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) which became effective in May 2018); state laws governing the privacy and security of health 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; and state laws related to insurance fraud in the case of claims involving private insurers. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the healthcare laws or regulations described above or any other healthcare regulations that apply to it, we may be subject to significant penalties, including administrative, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, imprisonment, additional reporting obligations and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or consent decree, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and pursue our strategy. Environmental, Health and Safety Matters We are subject to extensive environmental, health and safety laws and regulations in a number of jurisdictions governing, among other things, (i) the use, storage, registration, handling, emission and disposal of chemicals, waste materials and sewage; and (ii) chemical, air, water and ground contamination, air emissions and the cleanup of contaminated sites, including any contamination that results from spills due to our failure to properly dispose of chemicals, waste materials and sewage. 20 Table of Contents These laws, regulations and permits could potentially require the expenditure by us of significant amounts for compliance or remediation. If we fail to comply with such laws, regulations or permits, it may be subject to fines and other civil, administrative or criminal sanctions, including the revocation of permits and licenses necessary to continue our business activities. In addition, we may be required to pay damages or civil judgments in respect of third party claims, including those relating to personal injury (including exposure to hazardous substances we use, store, handle, transport, manufacture or dispose of), property damage or contribution claims. Some environmental, health and safety laws allow for strict, joint and several liability for remediation costs, regardless of comparative fault. We may be identified as a responsible party under such laws. Such developments could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, laws and regulations relating to environmental, health and safety matters are often subject to change. In the event of any changes or new laws or regulations, we could be subject to new compliance measures or to penalties for activities which were previously permitted. The operations of our subcontractors and suppliers are also subject to various laws and regulations relating to environmental, health and safety matters, and their failure to comply with such laws and regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business and reputation, result in an interruption or delay in the development or manufacture of our product candidates, or increase the costs for the development or manufacture of our product candidates. Human Capital Resources As of December 31, 2025, we had a total of 10 full-time employees. All of our employees are located in the United States. From time to time, we also retain independent contractors and consultants to support our organization. We believe that our internal R&D capabilities coupled with our third-party R&D consultants are sufficient to execute our clinical development strategy in a cost-effective manner. None of our employees are represented by a labor union, and we consider our employee relations to be good. Attracting, retaining and developing employees from a wide range of backgrounds to support our research, development and clinical activities is an integral part of our human capital strategy and we believe we offer competitive compensation (including salary, incentive bonus, and equity) and benefits packages. Corporate Information We were incorporated in October 2011 as a Delaware corporation under the name Tigercat Pharma, Inc. We changed our name to VYNE Therapeutics Inc. in September 2020, following the merger between Foamix Pharmaceuticals Ltd. ("Foamix") and Menlo Therapeutics Inc. (our predecessor company) ("Menlo") in March 2020. We are a “smaller reporting company,” as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. As such, we are eligible to take advantage of certain reduced or scaled disclosure requirements available to smaller reporting companies. See the risk factor captioned “We are eligible to report as a ‘smaller reporting company,’ and as a result of the reduced reporting requirements applicable to such companies, our securities may be less attractive to investors” for more information. Our principal executive offices were previously located in Bridgewater, NJ. Effective November 1, 2025, we have been operating on a fully remote model. Our website is www.vynetherapeutics.com. We may use our website to comply with disclosure obligations under Regulation FD. Therefore, investors should monitor our website in addition to following its press releases, filings with the SEC, public conference calls, and webcasts. The contents of our website are not intended to be incorporated by reference into this Annual Report or in any other report or document we file with the SEC, and any references to our websites are intended to be inactive textual references only.