ye

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020

OR

For the transition period from                      to                     

Commission File Number 001-39101

Baudax Bio, Inc.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its Charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (484) 395-2440

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  ☐    No  ☒

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    Yes  ☐    No  ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  ☒    No  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to submit such files).    Yes  ☒    No  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and "emerging growth company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the Registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 USC. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☐  

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ☐    No  ☒

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the Registrant, based on the closing price of the shares of common stock on The Nasdaq Stock Market on June 30, 2020 was $70.8 million.

The number of shares of Registrant’s Common Stock outstanding as of February 10, 2021, was 70,142,608.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Index

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K and the documents incorporated by reference herein contain forward-looking statements that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. All statements, other than statements of historical facts, included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K or the documents incorporated by reference herein regarding our strategy, future operations, future financial position, future revenues, projected costs, prospects, plans and objectives of management are forward-looking statements. The words “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “predict,” “project,” “will,” “would,” “could,” “should,” “potential,” “seek,” “evaluate,” “pursue,” “continue,” “design,” “impact,” “affect,” “forecast,” “target,” “outlook,” “initiative,” “objective,” “designed,” “priorities,” “goal,” or the negative of such terms and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain these identifying words. Such statements are based on assumptions and expectations that may not be realized and are inherently subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which cannot be predicted with accuracy and some of which might not even be anticipated.

The forward-looking statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the documents incorporated herein by reference include, among other things, statements about:

3

We may not actually achieve the plans, intentions or expectations disclosed in our forward-looking statements, and you should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements. Actual results or events could differ materially from the plans, intentions and expectations disclosed in the forward-looking statements we make. We have included important factors in the cautionary statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, particularly under “Risk Factors,” that we believe could cause actual results or events to differ materially from the forward-looking statements that we make. Our forward-looking statements do not reflect the potential impact of any future acquisitions, mergers, dispositions, joint ventures, collaborations or investments we may make.

You should read this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the documents that we incorporate by reference herein completely and with the understanding that our actual future results may be materially different from what we expect. We do not assume any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

Solely for convenience, tradenames referred to in this Annual Report on Form 10-K appear without the ® symbol, but those references are not intended to indicate, in any way, that we will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, our rights or that the applicable owner will not assert its rights, to these tradenames. All trademarks, service marks and tradenames included or incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are the property of their respective owners, including, without limitation, the NanoCrystal® mark owned by Alkermes and/or its affiliates.

4

PART I

Overview

We are a pharmaceutical company primarily focused on developing and commercializing innovative products for hospital and related acute care settings. We believe that we can bring valuable therapeutic options for patients, prescribers and payers to the hospital and related acute care markets.

Our first commercial product, ANJESO, had its New Drug Application, or NDA, approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, on February 20, 2020 for the management of moderate to severe pain, alone or in combination with other non-NSAID analgesics. Because of delayed onset of analgesia, ANJESO alone is not recommended for use when rapid onset of analgesia is required. ANJESO is a once daily intravenous, or IV, NSAID with preferential Cox-2 activity, which has successfully completed three Phase III studies, including two pivotal efficacy trials, a large double-blind Phase III safety trial and other safety studies for the management of moderate to severe pain. Overall, the total NDA program included over 1,400 patients. We have established sales management, marketing and reimbursement functions in connection with the commercialization of ANJESO in the United States.

We commenced our commercial launch of ANJESO in June of 2020. We utilize an internal sales team and collaborate with third parties who market ANJESO to health care professionals at called-on institutions for the commercialization of ANJESO in the United States. We continue to evaluate strategic partnerships to commercialize ANJESO outside of the United States. In August 2020, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, established a new permanent J-code for ANJESO, which became effective on October 1, 2020, facilitating reimbursement of ANJESO in the hospital outpatient, ambulatory surgery center and physician office settings of care. We have also entered into agreements with leading group purchasing organizations in the U.S., including Vizient Inc., and Premier Inc., as well as one of the top 3 integrated delivery networks for terms for availability of ANJESO to their member institutions. Over 65 institutions added ANJESO to their formulary. The number of vials sold to end-customers has increased 58% in the fourth quarter of 2020 versus the third quarter of 2020. The number of vials sold to hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers increased over 80% during the same time period. The average quarterly orders per account increased over 60% in the fourth quarter of 2020 versus the third quarter of 2020 and the re-order rate is approximately 55% with a deepening usage pattern.  

Our pipeline also includes other early-stage product candidates, including two novel neuromuscular blocking agents, or NMBAs, and a related proprietary chemical reversal agent and Dex-IN, a proprietary intranasal formulation of dexmedetomidine, or Dex, an alpha-2 adrenergic agonist that we are evaluating for possible partnering.

Products and Pipeline

Separation from Recro

We separated from Recro on November 21, 2019 as a result of a special dividend distribution of all the outstanding shares of our common stock to Recro shareholders, which we refer to as the Separation. On November 21, 2019, the distribution date, each Recro shareholder received one share of Baudax Bio’s common stock for every two and one-half shares of Recro common stock, or the Distribution, held of record at the close of business on November 15, 2019, the record date for the Distribution. As a result of the Distribution, we are an

5

independent public company whose shares of common stock are trading under the symbol “BXRX” on The Nasdaq Capital Market, or Nasdaq.

Our Strategy

We believe that we can bring valuable therapeutic options for patients, prescribers and payers, such as ANJESO, to the hospital and acute care markets. We believe we can create value for our shareholders through the commercialization of ANJESO and the development, registration and commercialization of our other pipeline product candidates. In addition to our pipeline, we continue to evaluate acquisition and in-licensing opportunities, especially those that can contribute revenue and cash flow.

Our near-term goals include:

Our Lead Product - ANJESO

ANJESO is a once a day, preferential COX-2 inhibitor that possesses analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and antipyretic activities. This proprietary injectable form of IV meloxicam, which utilizes NanoCrystal® technology, increases overall drug solubility that provides a faster onset of action of meloxicam and provides a rapid treatment of acute pain, which lasts for approximately 24 hours.

Post-Operative Pain Market

Based upon information from the National Center for Health Statistics, it is estimated that there are over 100 million surgeries performed in the United States each year. Of these surgeries, we believe at least 50 million procedures require post-operative pain medication. Additionally, despite efforts to improve the provision of perioperative analgesia, the proportion of patients reporting moderate to severe pain after surgery has remained constant over the past decade.

While opioids provide effective analgesia for post-operative pain, their use is increasingly limited due to the known side effects of nausea, vomiting, constipation, respiratory depression, the development of tolerance and the potential for impact on addiction, misuse and abuse. Due to the potential for abuse, opioids are regulated as controlled substances and are listed on Schedule II and III by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, or DEA. According to a January 2016 article in the New England Journal of Medicine, overdose deaths from prescription painkillers (defined to mean opioid or narcotic pain relievers) increased significantly over the past 14 years and emergency department visits involved with misusing or abusing prescription opioid painkillers increased 153% between 2004 and 2011. In the acute care setting, and according to the Joint Commission Sentinel Event Alert on the Safe Use of Opioids in Hospitals, opioid analgesics rank among the drugs most frequently associated with adverse drug events. As a result of the addictive potential and side effects, pain sufferers tend to limit their use of opioids, resulting in as many as 40% of post-operative patients reporting inadequate pain relief. This can reduce the quality of life for individuals and, according to an August 2012 article in the Journal of Pain, creates an economic burden estimated to be at least $560 to $635 billion a year in medical costs and lost productivity.

Efforts to improve pain control with multimodal analgesia are being recommended by many medical societies as a way to decrease opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Multimodal analgesia, or MMA, refers to the use of two or more drugs or nonpharmacologic interventions with differing mechanisms. Its use has been demonstrated to limit the amount of opioids consumed and provide more effective pain control than opioids alone. Effective MMA may further lessen the cost burden and personal toll of opioid-centric regimens. According to an April 2013 article in Pharmacotherapy, opioid-related adverse events negatively impact patients and the healthcare system and cause a 55% longer length of hospital stay, 47% higher cost of care, 36% higher 30-day readmission rates and a 3.4% higher risk of inpatient mortality.

We believe that ANJESO offers an attractive alternative for relief of moderate to severe pain without the risks associated with opioids. We also believe it can be an important part of an MMA approach for patients in the post-operative setting. Accordingly, we believe that physicians, hospitals and third-party payers, including Integrated Delivery Systems (IDNs), Medicare and Medicaid, are interested in new non-opioid pain therapies that provide effective post-operative pain relief without the adverse issues associated with opioids.

6

ANJESO (meloxicam) Injection Advantages

We believe ANJESO has a number of advantages over existing analgesics, including the following:

Does not cause respiratory depression. Meloxicam does not cause respiratory depression. Besides the addictive nature of opioids, we believe that medical practitioners are highly concerned with respiratory depression, which is a well-documented side effect of opioid use (all opioids, including morphine, fentanyl and oxycodone). Respiratory depression, which is defined by inadequate ventilation leading to increased carbon dioxide levels and respiratory acidosis, is an established outcome of opioid use and requires significant patient monitoring in the acute care setting. One of the more concerning adverse effects of chronic opioid use, for which tolerance does not develop, is respiratory depression during sleep, which can be life-threatening. ANJESO has demonstrated through multiple clinical trials and patient use that it does not cause respiratory depression.

Not a controlled substance. Meloxicam is not an opioid and not a controlled substance. Opioid therapeutics are currently controlled by the DEA under the Controlled Substances Act. Under this act, opioids have been scheduled based on their potential for abuse and/or addiction. For those opioids placed in Schedule II, federal law prohibits the refilling of prescriptions, thus requiring patients to request, and physicians to write, additional prescriptions for each refill. Examples of Schedule II opioids include morphine, fentanyl, sufentanil, hydrocodone and oxycodone.

Duration of pain relief. ANJESO has demonstrated the potential to be an effective analgesic for up to 24 hours after a single dose in clinical trials. Injectable forms of ketorolac, ibuprofen and acetaminophen provide effective pain relief up to four to six hours, resulting in the need for four to six doses per day.

Administration. We believe that ANJESO has an administration advantage in terms of being administered by bolus injection, whereas ibuprofen and acetaminophen can take up to 15 to 30 minutes to be infused.

GI Tolerability. Unlike opioids, the mechanism of action of meloxicam provides analgesic activity with limited impact on gastrointestinal motility thus limiting the common unwanted side effects of opioids, referred to as Opioid Induced Bowel Dysfunction, or OIBD. OIBD comprises several symptoms including constipation, anorexia, nausea and vomiting, gastroesophageal reflux, delayed digestion, abdominal pain, flatulence, bloating, hard stool, straining during bowel movement and incomplete evacuation.

Reduction of Opioid Consumption. Reducing opioid use inside and outside the hospital is becoming more of a priority for physicians and hospital administrators. ANJESO has demonstrated the potential to relieve serious pain while reducing overall opioid consumption. ANJESO also demonstrated a potential greater reduction in opioid use in patients over 65 years old with mild renal impairment in clinical trials.

Commercial Strategy

On February 20, 2020, we announced the FDA approved the NDA for ANJESO, which is indicated for the management of moderate to severe pain, alone or in combination with other non-NSAID analgesics. Limitation of Use: Because of delayed onset of analgesia, ANJESO alone is not recommended for use when rapid onset of analgesia is required.

We believe that ANJESO may have a positive value proposition based on our current clinical data. Based on our market research, a new analgesic would be perceived to have a strong value proposition if it can: (1) reduce opioid consumption, (2) allow ambulatory surgical centers to perform more complex procedures and discharge patients on the same day, and (3) allow hospitals to safely speed up patient discharge, reduce inpatient admission and/or length of stay.

Our efforts to commercialize ANJESO have been impacted and may continue to be impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Hospitals have reduced elective surgeries, and many have not yet returned to their prior number of surgeries even where the pandemic has, for a time, abated. In addition, COVID-19 has, in many cases, impacted revenue for hospitals, caused a reduction in hospital staffing, lead to a diversion in resources from other normal activities to patients suffering from COVID-19 and caused a limitation in hospital access for nonpatients, including our sales professionals, which we believe is impacting our marketing and commercialization efforts. We believe a reduction in elective surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic has caused and may continue to result in decreased demand for ANJESO.

In spite of the COVID-19 challenges on our commercialization efforts, we have generated some early commercial experience with ANJESO at settings that have lower barriers to new product adoption and/or have an appetite to use newer therapies. We initially targeted approximately 1,500 hospitals and associated hospital outpatient departments, or HOPDs, and 600 ambulatory surgical centers, or ASCs, which together represented approximately 12.6 million patients across all settings of care. We refocused our efforts in November 2020 due to the challenges further presented by the COVID-19 pandemic and our current customer facing commercial team, which includes approximately 30 individuals in roles ranging from sales, sales management, account management and reimbursement. We have deployed a contracted telesales team who expands our customer outreach to target hospitals and ASCs. We also have a medical affairs team.

We believe this focused approach will help educate health care professionals, support formulary review processes and continue to generate early adoption. We believe it is important to continue to educate surgeons (e.g., orthopedic, colorectal and general) and anesthesiologists that practice at multiple settings of care within the acute care market, including ASCs, hospital outpatient departments,

7

and hospitals (often referred to as the “hospital inpatient setting”). We have found that some ASCs and small to mid-sized hospitals have lower barriers to adoption and have incorporated ANJESO into some of their post-operative pain management protocols. We believe early success in commercializing ANJESO with ASC’s could lead to increased adoption of ANJESO in hospital outpatient settings, and ultimately hospital inpatient settings.

Clinical Development

Multiple clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics and analgesic effect of injectable meloxicam. Based on the results of these trials, we believe injectable meloxicam has the potential to be a potent analgesic used in the management of moderate to severe pain. injectable meloxicam has successfully completed two pivotal Phase III clinical trials, a large double-blind Phase III safety trial as well as four Phase II trials and additional pharmacokinetics/safety studies. Overall, we enrolled a total of approximately 1,400 patients in our Phase II/III programs. In addition, we have evaluated the results of injectable meloxicam in Phase IIIb clinical trials in colorectal surgery patients and orthopedic surgery patients that were completed in 2019. Per the Pediatric Study Plan Agreement with FDA, two clinical trials will be conducted in the pediatric population. These trials will be initiated following NDA approval of injectable meloxicam and after appropriate regulatory and institutional review board, or IRB, review.

Phase IIIb Clinical Trials

We have evaluated the results of injectable meloxicam from a Phase IIIb program that included clinical trials in colorectal surgery patients and orthopedic surgery patients to assess opioid consumption, pain intensity and length of hospital stay with associated pharmacoeconomic parameters.

Phase III Clinical Trials

Study REC-15-016

In this pivotal clinical trial, evaluating pain relief over a 48-hour period in a hard tissue, post-operative pain model (bunionectomy), injectable meloxicam achieved the primary endpoint of a statistically significant difference in Summed Pain Intensity Difference, or SPID, over the first 48 hours, or SPID48, compared to placebo. This was a Phase III, randomized, multicenter, multi-dose, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating injectable meloxicam in the management of post-operative pain following bunionectomy surgery. Two hundred and one patients who met the eligibility criteria were randomized to receive either injectable meloxicam (30 mg) or placebo once daily for up to three days. Following the beginning of treatment, patients remained under observation for 48 hours at study centers. Patients were followed for 28 days after the initial dose of study medication. There was an oral opioid rescue treatment available to all patients, if required. The primary objective of the trial was to evaluate pain relief over a 48-hour period of injectable meloxicam when administered as a bolus injection.

The primary efficacy endpoint of the trial was SPID48, utilizing a windowed 2-hour last observation carried forward, or W2LOCF, analysis method. Secondary efficacy endpoints included use of opioid rescue medication, SPIDs over various time intervals, and patient global assessment, or PGA, of pain control. The injectable meloxicam treatment arm demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in SPID48 (p=0.0034) compared to the placebo arm (Figure 1).

Figure 1: SPID48

The study also achieved the majority of secondary endpoints, including statistically significant differences in SPID6 (p=0.0153), SPID12 (p=0.0053), SPID24 (p=0.0084), SPID24-48 (p=0.0050), time to first use of rescue medication (p=0.0076), and several other rescue use and pain relief metrics during the first 48 hours, compared to placebo. Times to Perceptible and Meaningful Pain Relief, % Subjects with >50% Improvement within 6 Hours, and PGA of Pain Control at 24 hours were not significantly different between treatment groups.

The safety results demonstrated that injectable meloxicam was well tolerated with no serious adverse events, or SAEs, or bleeding events in the injectable meloxicam-treated patients. The most common adverse events, or AEs, occurring in at least 3% of injectable meloxicam-treated patients, were nausea, headache, pruritus, constipation, vomiting, dizziness, flushing and somnolence, and the incidence of these

8

AEs was generally comparable to the placebo group. The injectable meloxicam-treated patients experienced injection site pain and injection site erythema at a rate comparable to placebo. The majority of treatment emergent AEs, or TEAEs, were mild in nature and there were no discontinuations due to AEs. There were no meaningful differences between treatment groups in vital signs, electrocardiogram, or ECGs, or clinical lab assessments.

Study REC-15-015

In the second of our two Phase III pivotal clinical trials, evaluating pain relief over a 24-hour period in a soft tissue, post-operative pain model (abdominoplasty), injectable meloxicam achieved the primary endpoint of a statistically significant difference in SPID over the first 24 hours, or SPID24, compared to placebo. This was a Phase III, randomized, multicenter, multi-dose, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating injectable meloxicam in the management of post-operative pain following abdominoplasty surgery. Two hundred nineteen patients who met the eligibility criteria were randomized to receive either injectable meloxicam (30 mg) or placebo once daily for up to three days. Following the beginning of treatment, patients remained under observation for 48 hours at study centers. Patients were followed for 28 days after the initial dose of study medication. There was an oral opioid rescue treatment available to all patients, if required. The primary objective of the trial was to evaluate pain relief over a 24-hour period of injectable meloxicam when administered as a bolus injection (over 15-30 seconds).

The primary efficacy endpoint of the trial was SPID24 (0-24), utilizing a W2LOCF analysis method. Secondary efficacy endpoints included use of opioid rescue medication, SPIDs over various time intervals, time to pain relief and PGA of pain control. The injectable meloxicam treatment arm demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in SPID24 (p=0.0145) compared to the placebo arm (Figure 2).

Figure 2: SPID24

The study also achieved statistical significance for 10 of the secondary endpoints, including statistically significant differences in SPID12 (p=0.0434), time to perceptible pain relief (p=0.0050), subjects with ≥30% improvement at 24 hours (p=0.0178), number of times patients required rescue in the first 24 hours after randomization (p=0.0275), as well as number of times rescued from 24 to 48 hours (p=0.0009), and several other pain relief metrics, compared to placebo.

SPID6, Times to Meaningful Pain Relief and First Rescue, Number of Subjects rescued 0-24 and 0-48 hours, % Subjects with ≥30 and ≥50% Improvement within 6 Hours and ≥50% within 24 hours, and PGA of Pain Control at 24 hours were not significantly different between treatment groups.

The safety results demonstrated that injectable meloxicam was well tolerated with no difference in SAEs related to bleeding for injectable meloxicam treated patients versus placebo (1 each). There were two additional SAEs observed in the placebo group. The most common (at least 3% in the injectable meloxicam group) AEs were nausea, headache, vomiting, and dizziness. The incidence of these events was lower than those observed in the placebo group. The majority of AEs were mild in nature and one patient in the placebo group discontinued treatment due to an adverse event of post-procedural bleeding. There were no meaningful differences between treatment groups in vital signs, ECGs or clinical lab assessments.

Safety Study

Injectable meloxicam has also successfully completed a double-blind, randomized Phase III safety study evaluating injectable meloxicam (30mg bolus injection) or placebo following major surgery. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of injectable meloxicam 30mg vs. placebo through Day 28 following treatment. The clinical trial demonstrated that the adverse event profile of injectable meloxicam 30mg was consistent with previously completed clinical trials and was similar to placebo reported events.

9

This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III clinical trial and included patients who had undergone major elective surgical procedures which were expected to result in hospitalization for at least 24-48 hours. Major surgical procedures included total hip and knee replacements, spinal, GI, hernia repair, and gynecologic surgeries, as well as a range of other surgeries. Patient demographics were balanced across treatment groups and included 40% male patients and about 23% of patients who were over age 65. Unlike the pivotal efficacy trials, minimum pain scores were not required for treatment. Sites were permitted to use opioids and other pain management modes according to their “standard of care” and meloxicam or placebo was added to this regimen in a randomized, double-blind manner. Patients were randomized in a 3:1 ratio to receive either injectable meloxicam 30mg or injectable placebo daily for up to 7 doses. A total of 721 patients received at least one dose of study medication.

The most common (≥3%) AEs observed in the injectable meloxicam 30mg treatment group (n=538) are listed in the table below:

In patients age 65 and over, the percentage of patients reporting at least one AE was approximately 7% less in the injectable meloxicam 30mg treatment arm compared to the placebo arm. The total occurrence of patients with at least one SAE was observed to be lower in the injectable meloxicam 30mg group, 2.6%, than in the placebo group, 5.5%. In this safety study only two SAE events were listed as possibly related to study treatment. Both of these SAEs occurred in one placebo treated patient. No deaths were reported in either treatment group. Approximately 3% of patients in each study group discontinued.

There were no meaningful clinical differences between treatment groups in vital signs, ECGs, clinical lab assessments and surgeon satisfaction with wound healing. Overall, there was low incidence of clinically significant wound healing abnormalities, as scored by the primary investigator, in both treatment groups (~2%). The meloxicam group had 4/538 patients with more than one attribute scored “clinically significant”, while in placebo, 1/183 patients were scored “clinically significant” for only one attribute.

In addition, mean opioid consumption for the total population was lower in the injectable meloxicam 30mg group compared with placebo at all evaluated intervals; Hour 0-24, Hour 24-48, Hour 48-72 and Hour 0-72 intervals, or the full treatment period. There was also a significant increase in time to first use of opioids in the injectable meloxicam 30mg treatment arm, compared to placebo.  Mean opioid consumption in the injectable meloxicam group was lower than the placebo group at all evaluated intervals in the subgroups of Orthopedic Surgeries, Total Knee Replacements, and subjects >65 years with Mild Renal Impairment, as depicted in the table below.

*reaching statistical significance (p<0.05)

**reaching statistical significance (p<0.01)

Our Other Pipeline Candidates

While our current priority is the commercialization of ANJESO, our pipeline also includes other earlier stage product candidates including intermediate and short-acting NMBAs, and accompanying reversal agents, DEX-IN, along with other product candidates that we may choose to develop for use in hospital or related settings.

NMBAs

Neuromuscular blocking agents are used as muscle paralyzing agents to facilitate intubation and surgery. We are developing an intermediate-acting NMBA, BX1000, an ultrashort-acting NMBA, BX2000, and a reversal agent specific to our NMBAs.  The table

10

below summarizes the predicted onset and duration of activity for each NMBA based on currently available data, as well as the development status of each NMBA:

In animal models, the proprietary reversal agent acts quickly by chemical reaction to reverse the neuromuscular blockade. We believe that the NMBAs can reduce the time required for induction of anesthesia and the reversal agent can reduce the time needed to recover from NMBA dosing post-procedure, while potentially enhancing patient safety and resulting in cost savings for the hospital or other provider. BX1000, the intermediate-acting NMBA, and the reversal agent were subject to a clinical hold imposed by the FDA due to need for additional toxicity data at higher dose exposures. We have met with the FDA and the clinical hold has been lifted with respect to BX1000. We continue to work with the FDA regarding a path forward for the reversal agent. We submitted a new IND for BX1000 in 2019.  

We have a worldwide, exclusive license to the NMBAs and the related reversal agent from Cornell University.  

We are conducting a Phase I study with BX1000 which began in 2020 to evaluate the safety profile when administered with Total Intravenous Anesthesia, as well as to evaluate the dose response of neuromuscular blockade. We filed an IND, or equivalent application, for BX2000 in order to conduct a First-in-Human study and are working on responding to the FDA review.

Dex-IN

Dex (dexmedetomidine) is a selective alpha-2 adrenergic agonist that has demonstrated sedative, analgesic and anxiolytic properties. Dex has an extensive commercial history of safe injectable use. We have formulated Dex-IN, a proprietary intranasal formulation of Dex, at a significantly lower dose (approximately as low as 1/10^th) than the currently recommended injectable dosage levels used for clinical sedation. Based upon our lower dose, we have seen minimal sedation to date in our clinical trials while still demonstrating an analgesic effect.

We continue to explore possible uses of Dex-IN in other indications in the acute care space as well as pursue possible partnering opportunities. Once an indication is identified, clinical studies will be required to evaluate the safety of Dex-IN as well as the doses required to establish efficacy with respect to such indication.

Intellectual Property

We own patents and patent applications for injectable meloxicam, that cover pharmaceutical compositions, including compositions produced using NanoCrystal^® technology, method of making injectable meloxicam and method of treating pain with injectable meloxicam. These issued patents expire between 2022 and 2030 in the United States, and the pending applications, if issued, would expire between 2024 and 2039. We also exclusively license from Alkermes, on a perpetual, royalty-free basis, composition and methods of making patents, and patent applications directed to the prevention of flake like aggregates to manufacture and commercialize IV, intramuscular or parenteral meloxicam, which begin to expire in 2030.

We license the patents and other intellectual property covering the NMBAs and the related reversal agent under a worldwide, exclusive, sublicensable, royalty-bearing license from Cornell. The issued patents and pending patent applications, if issued, expire between 2027 and 2033, subject to any applicable disclaimers or extension. Under the license agreement, we are obligated to pay Cornell (i) an annual license maintenance fee payment which ranges from $15,000 to $125,000 until the first commercial sale of a licensed compound; (ii) milestone payments upon the achievement of certain milestones, up to a maximum, for each NMBA, of $5 million for U.S. regulatory approval and commercialization milestones and $3 million for European regulatory approval and commercialization milestones; and (iii) royalties on net sales of the NMBAs and the related reversal agent at rates ranging from low to mid-single digits, depending on the applicable licensed compound and whether there is a valid patent claim in the applicable country, subject to an annual minimum royalty amount of $150,000 to $250,000 that increases to between $150,000 to $500,000 after the fourth year of sales. In addition, we will reimburse Cornell for past and ongoing patent costs related to prosecution and maintenance of the patents related to the licensed compounds. The license agreement is terminable by us at any time upon 90 days’ written notice and by Cornell upon our material breach, subject to a cure period, and upon our filing any claim asserting the invalidity of any of Cornell’s licensed patent rights. The royalty term for each licensed compound expires, on a country-by-country basis, on the later of (i) the expiration date of the longest-lived licensed patent, (ii) the expiration of any granted statutory period of marketing exclusivity, or (iii) the first commercial sale of a generic equivalent of the applicable licensed compound. On the last to expire royalty term the license agreement will automatically convert to a royalty-free nonexclusive license.

11

We own patents and patent applications directed to the analgesia indication, formulations and intranasal and transmucosal methods of use of Dex, in the United States and certain major foreign markets. Several patents have issued outside the United States for transmucosal methods, and the resulting patent protection will last into 2030, subject to any disclaimers or extensions. In addition, patents related to intranasal methods has issued in the United States and certain major foreign markets, and the resulting patent protection will last into 2032, subject to any disclaimers or extensions.

We are party to an exclusive license with Orion for the development and commercialization of Dex for use in the treatment of pain in humans in any dosage form for transdermal, transmucosal (including sublingual and intranasal), topical, enteral or pulmonary (inhalational) delivery, but specifically excluding delivery vehicles for administration by injection or infusion, worldwide, except for Europe, Turkey, and the CIS (currently includes Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan), referred to herein as the Territory. We have the right to sublicense the rights under such license at any time. We are required to pay Orion lump sum payments in an aggregate amount of €20.5 million on the achievement of certain developmental milestones and upon the achievement of certain commercial milestones, as well as a royalty on net sales during the term, which varies from 10% to 20% depending on annual sales levels.

We intend to rely on a combination of patents and trade secrets, as well as confidentiality agreements and license agreements, to protect our product candidates. Our patent strategy is designed to facilitate commercialization of our current product candidates and future product candidates, as well as create barriers to entry for third parties. One focus of our claim strategy is on formulation claims and other related claims.

We are seeking patent protection in the United States and internationally for our product candidates. Our policy is to pursue, maintain and defend patent rights and to protect the technology, inventions and improvements that are commercially important to the development of our business. We cannot be sure that patents will be granted with respect to any of our pending patent applications or with respect to any patent applications filed by us in the future, nor can we be sure that any of our existing patents or any patents granted to us in the future will be commercially useful in protecting our technology. We also intend to rely on trade secrets to protect our product candidates. Our commercial success also depends in part on our non-infringement of the patents or proprietary rights of third parties.

Our success will depend significantly on our ability to:

We have taken steps to build and will continue to build proprietary positions for our product candidates and related technology in the United States and abroad. We note that the patent laws of foreign countries differ from those in the United States, and the degree of protection afforded by foreign patents may be different from the protection offered by United States patents.

Sales and Marketing

We believe the initial target audience for ANJESO and our product candidates will be specialty physicians, including surgeons, anesthesiologists and pain specialists. Our management team has experience building and launching therapeutics to specialty physicians, including hospital and related settings. As this target audience is only a portion of all physicians, we believe we have the capabilities to maintain and develop the sales and marketing infrastructure established and effectively market ANJESO and our product candidates. We are also seeking in-license or acquisition opportunities to add commercial or near-commercial products to our portfolio. We have established sales management, marketing and reimbursement functions for the commercialization of ANJESO in the United States and we believe we can utilize this infrastructure for the successful commercialization of an acquired or licensed product.

Competition

The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are intensely competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change. Our current and future competitors include pharmaceutical, biotechnology and specialty pharmaceutical companies. Many of our competitors have greater financial and other resources than we have, such as more commercial resources, larger research and development staffs and more extensive marketing and manufacturing organizations. As a result, these companies may obtain marketing approval more rapidly than we are able to obtain and may be more effective in selling and marketing their products. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies.

Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing technologies and drug products that are more effective or less costly than our product candidates or any other products that we may develop which could render our products obsolete and noncompetitive.

12

We expect any products that we develop and commercialize, either alone or through a strategic partnership, to compete on the basis of, among other things, efficacy, safety, convenience of administration and delivery, price and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payers. We also expect to face competition in our efforts to identify appropriate collaborators or partners to help commercialize our product candidates in our target commercial markets.

In the post-operative pain relief setting, we believe patients are prescribed injectable acetaminophen, NSAIDs, sodium channel blockers and opioids, depending on the severity of pain. Specifically, acetaminophen, NSAIDs and sodium channel blockers, we believe, are prescribed for mild to moderate pain relief, whereas we believe opioids are prescribed for moderate to severe pain relief. While we compete with all of these compounds in the post-operative pain setting, ANJESO is prescribed for moderate to severe pain, also competing with opioids and other non-opioid pain treatments. There are a number of pharmaceutical companies that currently market and or manufacture therapeutics in the pain relief area, including Johnson & Johnson, Mallinckrodt plc, Pacira Pharmaceuticals, Inc., AcelRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Trevena, Inc., and Innocoll Holdings plc. Mallinckrodt commercializes an injectable formulation of acetaminophen which is now available generically by many manufacturers, including Sandoz. Pacira commercializes an intraoperative formulation of bupivacaine, a sodium channel blocker, that is injected or instilled at the surgical site. Additionally, companies such as Adynxx, Inc., Durect Corporation, Heron Therapeutics, Inc., Sandoz AG, Avenue Therapeutics, Inc., Neumentum Inc. and Cara Therapeutics, Inc. are currently developing post-operative pain therapeutics that could compete with ANJESO in the future.

Manufacturing

We currently rely on contract manufacturers to produce commercial supplies of ANJESO drug product as well as for our clinical studies with respect to our product candidates under current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, with oversight by our internal managers. We currently rely on a single manufacturer for commercial supply of ANJESO and for the clinical supplies of our drug product for each of our product candidates and do not currently have agreements in place for redundant supply or a second source for any of our product candidates. We have identified other potential drug product manufacturers that could satisfy our clinical and commercial requirements, but this would require significant expense and could produce a significant delay in setting up the facility and moving equipment. Additionally, should a supplier or a manufacturer on whom we rely on to produce ANJESO or a product candidate provide us with a faulty product or a product that is later recalled, we would likely experience significant delays and additional costs.

ANJESO

Alkermes is currently our exclusive supplier of bulk injectable meloxicam. Pursuant to a Development, Manufacturing and Supply Agreement, or Supply Agreement with our subsidiary, Baudax Bio Limited, Alkermes (through a subsidiary), provides clinical and commercial bulk supplies of injectable meloxicam formulation. During the term of the Supply Agreement, we will purchase our clinical and commercial supplies of bulk injectable meloxicam formulation exclusively from Alkermes. The Supply Agreement has an initial term expiring on March 31, 2030. The Supply Agreement will then automatically renew for successive one-year terms unless terminated by either party upon written notice at least 180 days prior to the expiration of the applicable term.

Patheon provides sterile fill-finish of injectable meloxicam drug product pursuant to a Master Manufacturing Services Agreement and Product Agreement, collectively the Patheon Agreements, at its Monza, Italy manufacturing site. We have agreed to purchase a certain percentage of our annual requirements of finished injectable meloxicam from Patheon during the term of the Patheon Agreements. The Patheon Agreements expire on December 31, 2020 and will automatically renew thereafter for successive two-year periods unless terminated by either party upon prior written notice. The Patheon Agreement was renewed for a two-year term beginning on January 1, 2021.

NMBAs

We have successfully sourced the manufacturing of the NMBAs and reversing agent at contract manufacturers for use in pre-clinical studies and early clinical trials for these product candidates.

Dex-IN

We are party to an API supply agreement with Orion, whereby Orion provides us with API for the development and, if approved, commercialization of Dex-IN. Prior to obtaining regulatory approval, subject to advance notice to Orion, Orion will provide API without charge for agreed upon amounts. Any amounts ordered by us that are greater than the planned supply will be charged at 50% of the supply price for commercial product. The single unit dose intranasal sprayer for Dex-IN is manufactured by a supplier of proprietary components and devices. Suppliers of components, subassemblies and other materials are located in Europe, Asia and the United States.

Government Regulation

Governmental authorities in the United States at the federal, state and local level, and the equivalent regulatory authorities in other countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, marketing, export and import of products such as those we are developing. Our product candidates must be approved by the FDA before they may legally be marketed in the United States. In addition,

13

to the extent we choose to clinically evaluate or market any products in other countries or develop these products for future licensing to third parties, we are subject to a variety of regulatory requirements and to the authority of the competent regulatory authorities of those other countries.

U.S. Drug Development Process

In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the FDCA, and implementing regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and ensuring compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process, or after approval, may subject an applicant to administrative enforcement or judicial sanctions. This enforcement could include, without limitation, the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, a clinical hold, untitled or warning letters, corrective actions, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement, or civil or criminal penalties.

The process required by the FDA before a drug may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

The testing and approval process requires substantial time, effort and financial resources, and we cannot be certain that any approvals for our product candidates will be granted on a timely basis, if at all.

Once a pharmaceutical product candidate is identified for development, it enters the preclinical testing stage. Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, toxicity, formulation and stability, as well as animal studies. An IND sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information, analytical data and any available clinical data or literature, to the FDA as part of the IND. The sponsor must also include a protocol detailing, among other things, the objectives of the initial clinical trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety, and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated if the initial clinical trial 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 places the clinical trial on a clinical hold within that 30-day time period. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. Clinical holds also may be imposed by the FDA at any time before or during trials due to safety concerns regarding the product candidate or non-compliance with applicable requirements.

All clinical trials of a product candidate must be conducted under the supervision of one or more qualified investigators, in accordance with cGCP regulations. These regulations include the requirement that all research subjects provide informed consent. Further, an IRB must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial before it commences at any institution. The IRB’s role is to protect the rights and welfare of human subjects involved in clinical studies by evaluating, among other things, the potential risks and benefits to subjects, processes for obtaining informed consent, monitoring of data to ensure subject safety, and provisions to protect the subjects’ privacy. The IRB approves the information regarding the clinical trial and the consent form that must be provided to each clinical trial subject or his or her legal representative and must monitor the clinical trial until completed.

Once an IND is in effect, each new clinical protocol, and any amendments to the protocol, must be submitted to the IND for FDA review and to the IRBs for approval. Protocols detail, among other things, the objectives of the clinical trial, dosing procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria and the parameters to be used to monitor subject safety.

14

Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap or be combined:

Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted at least annually to the FDA, and safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and the investigators for serious and unexpected side effects. Phase I, Phase II and Phase III testing may not be completed successfully within any specified period, if at all. Results from earlier trials are not necessarily predictive of results from later trials. 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.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the product 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 product. 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.

U.S. 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 drug, proposed labeling and other relevant information, are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA for a new drug, requesting approval to market the product.

The submission of an NDA generally is subject to the payment of a substantial user fee for a human drug application. A waiver of such fee may be obtained under certain limited circumstances. For example, an applicant is eligible for waiver of the application fee if the applicant is a small business submitting its first human drug application and does not have another product approved under a human drug application and introduced and delivered for introduction into interstate commerce. However, we did not qualify due to prior NDA approvals received by Recro’s contract development and manufacturing, or CDMO, business.

In addition, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act of 2003, an NDA or supplement to an NDA for a new indication, dosage form, dosing regimen, route of administration, or active ingredient, must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. The FDA may waive or defer pediatric studies under certain circumstances.

Section 505(b)(2) New Drug Applications. As an alternate path to FDA approval, particularly for modifications to drug products previously approved by the FDA, an applicant may submit an NDA under Section 505(b)(2) of the FDCA, or a Section 505(b)(2) NDA. Section 505(b)(2) was enacted as part of the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, commonly referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments, and it permits approval of applications other than those for duplicate products and permits reliance for such approvals on literature or on the FDA’s findings of safety and effectiveness of an approved drug product. A Section 505(b)(2) NDA is an application where at least some of the information required for approval comes from clinical trials not conducted by or for the applicant and for which the applicant has not obtained a right of reference. The FDA requires submission of information needed to support any changes relative to a previously approved drug, known as the reference product, such as published data or new studies conducted by the applicant, including bioavailability or bioequivalence studies, or clinical trials demonstrating safety and effectiveness. The FDA may then approve the Section 505(b)(2) NDA for all or some of the labeled indications for which the reference product has been approved, as well as for any new indication sought by the applicant, unless such indications or uses are protected by patent or exclusivity provisions covering the reference product. To the extent that a Section 505(b)(2) NDA relies on clinical trials conducted for a previously approved drug product or the FDA’s prior findings of safety and effectiveness for a previously approved drug product, the Section 505(b)(2) applicant must submit patent certifications in its application with respect to any patents for the reference product that are listed in the FDA’s publication, Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, commonly referred to as the Orange Book. Specifically, the applicant must certify for each listed patent that, in relevant part, (1) the required patent information has not been filed; (2) the listed patent has expired; (3) the listed patent has not expired but will expire on a particular date and approval is

15

not sought until after patent expiration; or (4) the listed patent is invalid, unenforceable or will not be infringed by the proposed new product. A certification that the new product will not infringe the previously approved product’s listed patent or that such patent is invalid or unenforceable is known as a Paragraph IV certification. If the applicant does not challenge one or more listed patents through a Paragraph IV certification, the FDA will not approve the Section 505(b)(2) NDA until all the listed patents claiming the referenced product have expired.

Further, the FDA will also not approve a Section 505(b)(2) NDA until any non-patent exclusivity, such as, for example, five-year exclusivity for obtaining approval of a new chemical entity, three-year exclusivity for an approval based on new clinical trials, or pediatric exclusivity, listed in the Orange Book for the reference product, has expired.

If the Section 505(b)(2) NDA applicant has provided a Paragraph IV certification to the FDA, the applicant must also send notice of the Paragraph IV certification to the owner of the reference product and relevant patent holders within 20 days after the Section 505(b)(2) NDA has been accepted for filing by the FDA. The NDA and patent holders may then initiate a patent infringement suit against the Section 505(b)(2) applicant. Under the FDCA, the filing of a patent infringement lawsuit within 45 days of receipt of the notification regarding a Paragraph IV certification automatically prevents the FDA from approving the Section 505(b)(2) NDA for 30 months, beginning on the date the patent holder receives notice, or until the patent expires or a court deems the patent unenforceable, invalid or not infringed, whichever is earlier. Even if a patent infringement claim is not brought within the 45-day period, a patent infringement claim may be brought under traditional patent law, but it does not invoke the 30-month stay. Moreover, in cases where a Section 505(b)(2) application containing a Paragraph IV certification is submitted after the fourth year of a previously approved drug’s five-year exclusivity period, and the patent holder brings suit within 45 days of notice of certification, the 30-month period is automatically extended to prevent approval of the Section 505(b)(2) application until the date that is seven and one-half years after approval of the previously approved reference product. The court also has the ability to shorten or lengthen either the 30-month or the seven and one-half year period if either party is found not to be reasonably cooperating in expediting the litigation. Thus, the Section 505(b)(2) applicant may invest a significant amount of time and expense in the development of its product only to be subject to significant delay and patent litigation before its product may be commercialized. Alternatively, if the NDA applicant or relevant patent holder does not file a patent infringement lawsuit within the specified 45-day period, the FDA may approve the Section 505(b)(2) application at any time, assuming the application is otherwise approvable.

Notwithstanding the approval of many products by the FDA pursuant to Section 505(b)(2), over the last few years, some pharmaceutical companies and other stakeholders have objected to the FDA’s interpretation of Section 505(b)(2). If the FDA changes its interpretation of Section 505(b)(2), or if the FDA’s interpretation is successfully challenged in court, this could delay or even prevent the FDA from approving any Section 505(b)(2) NDA that we submit.

FDA Review of New Drug Applications. The FDA reviews all NDAs submitted to ensure that they are sufficiently complete for substantive review before it accepts them for filing. If the FDA does not find an NDA to be sufficiently complete for filing, it may request additional information rather than accepting the NDA for filing. In this event, the sponsor must resubmit the NDA with the additional information. The re-submitted 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 reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether clinical data demonstrates that a product is safe and effective for its intended use and whether its manufacturing process can assure 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. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. 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. An advisory committee is a panel of independent experts who provide advice and recommendations when requested by the FDA. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee.

 The approval process is lengthy and difficult, and the FDA may refuse to approve an NDA if the applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied or may require additional clinical data 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 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 will issue a CRL if the agency decides not to approve the NDA in its present form. The CRL usually describes all the specific deficiencies that the FDA identified in the NDA. The deficiencies identified may be minor, for example, requiring labeling changes, or major, for example, requiring additional clinical trials. Additionally, the CRL may include recommended actions that the applicant might take to place the application in a condition for approval. If a CRL is issued, the applicant may either resubmit the NDA, addressing all the deficiencies identified in the letter, withdraw the application or request an opportunity for a hearing.

If a product receives regulatory approval, the approval may be significantly limited to specific diseases and dosages, or the indications for use may otherwise be limited, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. Further, the FDA may require that certain contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling, and the agency also may require a REMS if it determines that a REMS is necessary to assure that the benefits of a drug outweigh its risks. In addition, the FDA may require Phase IV 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 that have been commercialized.

16

Patent Term Restoration and Marketing Exclusivity

Depending upon the timing, duration and specific circumstances of FDA marketing approval of our product candidates, some of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent restoration term of up to five years for patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. However, patent term restoration cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date. Subject to certain limitations, the patent term restoration period is generally equal to one-half of 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. However, each phase of the regulatory review period may be reduced by any time that the FDA finds the applicant did act not act with due diligence. Only one patent applicable to an approved drug is eligible for the extension, it must be the first approval of the active ingredient of the product, and the application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent and within sixty days of approval of the drug. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, in consultation with the FDA, reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration. In the future, we intend to apply for restorations of patent term for patents that issue from some of our currently owned or licensed patents or patent applications to add patent life beyond their current expiration dates, depending on the expected length of the clinical trials, the eligibility of the product and other factors involved in the filing of the relevant NDA.

Market exclusivity provisions under the FDCA can also delay the submission or the approval of certain applications. The FDCA provides a five-year period of non-patent marketing exclusivity within the United States to NDAs for products containing chemical entities never previously approved by the FDA alone or in combination. A new chemical entity means a drug that contains no active moiety that has been approved by the FDA in any application submitted under Section 505(b) of the FDCA. An active moiety is the molecule or ion responsible for the action of the drug substance. During the exclusivity period, the FDA may not accept for review an ANDA, or a Section 505(b)(2) NDA submitted by another company for another version of such drug where the applicant does not own or have a legal right of reference to all the data required for approval. This exclusivity provision does not prevent the submission or approval of another full Section 505(b)(1) NDA, but such an NDA applicant would be required to conduct its own preclinical and adequate, well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate safety and effectiveness. The FDCA also provides three years of marketing exclusivity for an NDA, Section 505(b)(2) NDA or supplement to an existing NDA if new clinical investigations, other than bioavailability studies, that were conducted or sponsored by the applicant are deemed by the FDA to be essential to the approval of the application. Such clinical trials may, for example, support new indications, dosages, routes of administration or strengths of an existing drug, or for a new use. This exclusivity, which is sometimes referred to as clinical investigation exclusivity, prevents the FDA from approving an application under a Section 505(b)(2) NDA or an ANDA for the same conditions of use associated with the new clinical investigations before the expiration of three years from the date of approval. Such three-year exclusivity, however, would not prevent the approval of another application if the applicant submits a Section 505(b)(1) NDA and has conducted its own adequate, well-controlled clinical trials demonstrating safety and efficacy, nor would it prevent approval of an ANDA or a Section 505(b)(2) NDA product that did not incorporate the exclusivity-protected aspects of the approved drug product.

Pediatric exclusivity is another type of exclusivity in the United States. Pediatric exclusivity, if granted, provides an additional six months of exclusivity to any existing exclusivity (e.g., three- or five-year exclusivity) or patent protection for a drug. This six-month exclusivity, which runs from the end of other exclusivity or patent protection, may be granted based on the voluntary completion of a pediatric trial in accordance with an FDA-issued “Written Request” for such a trial.

Orange Book Listing

In seeking approval for a drug through an NDA, applicants are required to list with the FDA each patent whose claims cover the applicant’s product or a method of using the product. Upon approval of a drug, each of the patents listed in the application for the drug is then published in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, commonly known as the Orange Book. Drugs listed in the Orange Book can, in turn, be cited by potential competitors in support of approval of an ANDA or an application covered by Section 505(b)(2) of the FDCA. An ANDA provides for marketing of a drug product that has the same active ingredients, generally in the same strengths and dosage form, as the listed drug and has been shown through pharmacokinetic, or PK, testing to be bioequivalent to the listed drug. Drugs approved in this way are commonly referred to as “generic equivalents” to the listed drug, and can often be substituted by pharmacists under prescriptions written for the original listed drug. Other than the requirement for bioequivalence testing, ANDA applicants are generally not required to conduct, or submit results of, preclinical studies or clinical tests to prove the safety or effectiveness of their drug product. Section 505(b)(2) applications provide for marketing of a drug product that may have the same active ingredients as the listed drug and contains full safety and effectiveness data as an NDA, but at least some of this information comes from studies not conducted by or for the applicant. This alternate regulatory pathway enables the applicant to rely, in part, on the FDA’s findings of safety and efficacy for an existing product, or published literature, in support of its application. The FDA may then approve the new drug candidate for all or some of the labeled indications for which the referenced product has been approved, as well as for any new indication sought by the 505(b)(2) applicant.

The ANDA or Section 505(b)(2) applicant is required to certify to the FDA concerning any patents listed for the approved product in the FDA’s Orange Book. Specifically, the applicant must certify that: (i) the required patent information has not been filed; (ii) the listed patent has expired; (iii) the listed patent has not expired but will expire on a particular date and approval is sought after patent expiration;

17

or (iv) the listed patent is invalid or will not be infringed by the new product. The ANDA or Section 505(b)(2) applicant may also elect to submit a statement certifying that its proposed ANDA label does not contain, or carves out, any language regarding a patented method of use rather than certify to such listed method of use patent. If the applicant does not challenge the listed patents by filing a certification that the listed patent is invalid or will not be infringed by the new product, the ANDA or Section 505(b)(2) application will not be approved until all the listed patents claiming the referenced product have expired.

A certification that the new product will not infringe the already approved product’s listed patents, or that such patents are invalid, is called a Paragraph IV certification. If the ANDA or Section 505(b)(2) applicant has provided a Paragraph IV certification to the FDA, the applicant must also send notice of the Paragraph IV certification to the NDA and patent holders once the ANDA or Section 505(b)(2) application has been accepted for filing by the FDA. The NDA and patent holders may then initiate a patent infringement lawsuit in response to the notice of the Paragraph IV certification. The filing of a patent infringement lawsuit within 45 days of the receipt of a Paragraph IV certification automatically prevents the FDA from approving the ANDA or Section 505(b)(2) application until the earliest of 30 months, expiration of the patent, settlement of the lawsuit, and a decision in the infringement case that is favorable to the ANDA or Section 505(b)(2) applicant. This prohibition is generally referred to as the 30-month stay. Thus, approval of an ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA could be delayed for a significant period of time depending on the patent certification the applicant makes and the reference drug sponsor’s decision to initiate patent litigation.

The ANDA or Section 505(b)(2) application also will not be approved until any applicable non-patent exclusivity listed in the Orange Book for the referenced product has expired.

Post-Approval Requirements

Any drugs for which we receive FDA approval will be subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, record-keeping requirements, reporting of adverse experiences with the product, providing the FDA with updated safety and efficacy information, product sampling and distribution requirements, and complying with FDA promotion and advertising requirements.

The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising, and promotion of 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. The FDA and other government agencies enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the false or misleading promotion of drugs. The FDA also limits the promotion of product candidates prior to their approval. With limited exceptions, pre-approval promotion is prohibited under the FDA’s regulations.

Further, manufacturers of drugs must continue to comply with cGMP requirements, which are extensive and require considerable time, resources and ongoing investment to ensure compliance. In addition, changes to the manufacturing process may require prior FDA approval before being implemented, and other types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications and additional labeling claims, are subject to further FDA review and approval. Drug manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacturing and distribution of approved drugs are required to list their products and 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. The cGMP requirements apply to all stages of the manufacturing process, including the production, processing, sterilization, packaging, labeling, storage and shipment of the drug. Manufacturers must establish validated systems to ensure that products meet specifications and regulatory standards and test each product batch or lot prior to its release. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the production of clinical and commercial quantities of our product candidates. FDA and state inspections may identify compliance issues at the facilities of our contract manufacturers that may disrupt production or distribution or may require substantial resources to correct.

The FDA may withdraw a product approval if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or if 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. Further, the failure to maintain compliance with regulatory requirements may result in administrative or judicial actions, such as fines, untitled and warning letters, holds on clinical trials, product recalls or seizures, product detention or refusal to permit the import or export of products, refusal to approve pending applications or supplements, restrictions on marketing or manufacturing, consent decrees, injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

From time to time, legislation is drafted, introduced and passed in the U.S. 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, the FDA regulations and policies are often revised or reinterpreted by the agency in ways that may significantly affect our business and our product candidates. It is impossible to predict whether further legislative or FDA regulation or policy changes will be enacted or implemented and what the impact of such changes, if any, may be. For example, in December 2016, the 21^st Century Cures Act, or the Cures Act, became law. The Cures Act contains numerous provisions, including provisions designed to speed development of innovative therapies and encourage greater use of real-world evidence to support regulatory decision making for drugs.

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 our product candidates to the extent we choose to clinically evaluate or sell any products outside of the United States. Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we must obtain approval of a product by the comparable

18

regulatory authorities of foreign countries before we can commence marketing of the product in those countries. The approval process varies from country to country, 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. As in the United States, post-approval regulatory requirements, such as those regarding product manufacture, marketing or distribution, would apply to any product that is approved outside the United States.

For example, in the European Union, we may submit applications for marketing authorizations either under a centralized, decentralized, or mutual recognition marketing authorization procedure. The centralized procedure provides for the grant of a single marketing authorization for a medicinal product by the European Commission on the basis of a positive opinion by the European Medicines Agency, or the EMA. A centralized marketing authorization is valid for all European Union member states and three of the four European Free Trade Association (EFTA) States (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway). The decentralized procedure and the mutual recognition procedure apply between European Union member states. The decentralized marketing authorization procedure involves the submission of an application for marketing authorization to the competent authority of all European Union member states in which the product is to be marketed. One national competent authority, selected by the applicant, assesses the application for marketing authorization. The competent authorities of the other European Union member states are subsequently required to grant marketing authorization for their territory on the basis of this assessment, except where grounds of potential serious risk to public health require this authorization to be refused. The mutual recognition procedure provides for mutual recognition of marketing authorizations delivered by the national competent authorities of European Union member states by the competent authorities of other European Union member states. The holder of a national marketing authorization may submit an application to the competent authority of a European Union member state requesting that this authority recognize the marketing authorization delivered by the competent authority of another European Union member state for the same medicinal product.

We are also subject to the U.K. Bribery Act, and other third country anti-corruption laws and regulations pertaining to our financial relationships with foreign government officials. The U.K. Bribery Act, which applies to any company incorporated or doing business in the UK, prohibits giving, offering, or promising bribes in the public and private sectors, bribing a foreign public official or private person, and failing to have adequate procedures to prevent bribery amongst employees and other agents. Penalties under the Bribery Act include potentially unlimited fines for companies and criminal sanctions for corporate officers under certain circumstances. Liability in relation to breaches of the U.K. Bribery Act is strict. This means that it is not necessary to demonstrate elements of a corrupt state of mind. However, a defense of having in place adequate procedures designed to prevent bribery is available.

Formulary Approvals and Third-Party Payer Coverage and Reimbursement

In both the United States and foreign markets, our ability to commercialize our product candidates successfully, and to attract commercialization partners for our product candidates, depends in significant part on the availability of institutional formulary approvals and on adequate financial coverage and reimbursement from third-party payers, including, in the United States. These payers include CMS, the federal program that runs the Medicare program, and monitors the Medicaid programs offered by each state, as well as national and regional commercial plans. Medicare is a federally funded program managed by CMS through local Medicare Administrative Contractors that administer coverage and reimbursement for certain healthcare items and services furnished to the elderly, disabled and other individuals with certain conditions. Medicaid is an insurance program for certain categories of patients whose income and assets fall below state defined levels that is both federally and state funded and managed by each state. The federal government sets general guidelines for Medicaid and each state creates specific regulations that govern its individual program. Each government or commercial plan has its own process and standards for determining whether it will cover and reimburse a procedure or particular product and how much it will pay for that procedure or product. Commercial plans often rely on the lead of the governmental payers in rendering coverage and reimbursement determinations. Therefore, achieving favorable Medicare coverage and reimbursement is usually an essential component of successfully launching a new product. The competitive position of some of our products will depend, in part, upon the extent of coverage and adequate reimbursement for such products and for the procedures in which such products are used. Reimbursement for our product candidates can be subject to challenge, reduction or denial by government and other commercial plans.

A primary trend in the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere is cost containment. Government healthcare programs and other third-party payers are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical products and services and examining the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of medical products and services, in addition to their safety and efficacy, and have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. Increasingly, third-party payers are challenging the prices charged for medical products and requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices.

Payers also are increasingly changing the metrics for reimbursement rates, such as basing payment on average sales price, or ASP, AMP, and wholesale acquisition cost. The existing data for reimbursement based on these metrics is relatively limited, although certain states have begun to survey acquisition cost data for the purpose of setting Medicaid reimbursement rates. CMS surveys and publishes retail community pharmacy acquisition cost information in the form of National Average Drug Acquisition Cost files to provide state Medicaid agencies with a basis of comparison for their own reimbursement and pricing methodologies and rates. It may be difficult to project the impact of these evolving reimbursement mechanics on the willingness of payers to cover any products for which we receive regulatory approval.

19

If we successfully commercialize any of our products, we may participate in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. Participation is required for federal funds to be available for our products under Medicaid and Medicare Part B. Under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, we would be required to pay a quarterly rebate to each state Medicaid program for our covered outpatient drugs that are dispensed to Medicaid beneficiaries and paid for by a state Medicaid program as a condition of having federal funds being made available to the states for our drugs under Medicaid and Part B of the Medicare program.

Federal law requires that any company that participates in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program also participate in the Public Health Service’s 340B drug pricing program in order for federal funds to be available for the manufacturer’s drugs under Medicaid and Medicare Part B. The 340B drug pricing program requires participating manufacturers to agree to charge statutorily-defined covered entities no more than the 340B “ceiling price” for the manufacturer’s covered outpatient drugs. These 340B covered entities include a variety of community health clinics and other entities that receive health services grants from the Public Health Service, as well as hospitals that serve a disproportionate share of low-income patients.

Additionally, in order to be eligible to have its products paid for with federal funds under the Medicaid and Medicare Part B programs and purchased by certain federal agencies and grantees, a manufacturer also must participate in the Department of Veterans Affairs, or VA, Federal Supply Schedule, or FSS, pricing program, established by Section 603 of the Veterans Health Care Act of 1992, or VHCA. Under this program, the manufacturer is obligated to make its innovator and single source products available for procurement on an FSS contract and charge a price to four federal agencies, Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Defense, or DoD, Public Health Service, and Coast Guard, that is no higher than the statutory Federal Ceiling Price. Moreover, pursuant to regulations issued by the DoD’s TRICARE Management Activity, now the Defense Health Agency, to implement Section 703 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, manufacturers are required to provide rebates on utilization of their innovator and single source products that are dispensed to TRICARE beneficiaries by TRICARE network retail pharmacies. The formula for determining the rebate is established in the regulations and is based on the difference between the annual non-federal average manufacturer price and the Federal Ceiling Price (these price points are required to be calculated by us under the VHCA). The requirements under the 340B, FSS, and TRICARE programs could reduce the revenue we may generate from any products that are commercialized in the future.

There may be significant delays in obtaining coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs, and coverage may be more limited than the purposes for which the drug is approved by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Moreover, eligibility for coverage and reimbursement does not imply that a drug will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers costs, including research, development, manufacturing, sale and distribution. Interim reimbursement levels for new drugs, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover costs and may only be temporary. Reimbursement rates vary according to the use of the drug and the clinical setting in which it is used. Product reimbursement may also be incorporated into existing bundled payments for other services. Net prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or commercial payers and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. Limited coverage may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product candidate for which marketing approval is obtained. Third-party payers also may seek additional clinical evidence, including expensive pharmacoeconomic studies, beyond the data required to obtain marketing approval, demonstrating clinical benefits and value in specific patient populations, before covering our products for those patients. If reimbursement is available only for limited indications, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval. Our inability to promptly obtain coverage and profitable reimbursement rates from both government-funded and commercial payers for any approved products that we develop could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, our ability to raise capital needed to commercialize products and our overall financial condition.

In addition, in some foreign countries, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. Moreover, the requirements governing drug pricing and reimbursement vary widely from country to country. For example, in the European Union the sole legal instrument at the European Union level governing the pricing and reimbursement of medicinal products is Council Directive 89/105/EEC, or the Price Transparency Directive. The aim of the Price Transparency Directive is to ensure that pricing and reimbursement mechanisms established in European Union member states are transparent and objective, do not hinder the free movement and trade of medicinal products in the European Union and do not hinder, prevent or distort competition on the market. The Price Transparency Directive does not, however, provide any guidance concerning the specific criteria on the basis of which pricing and reimbursement decisions are to be made in individual European Union member states. Neither does it have any direct consequence for pricing or levels of reimbursement in individual European Union member states. The national authorities of the individual European Union member states are free to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices and/or reimbursement of medicinal products for human use. Some individual European Union member states adopt policies according to which a specific price or level of reimbursement is approved for the medicinal product. Other European Union member states adopt a system of reference pricing, basing the price or reimbursement level in their territory either, on the pricing and reimbursement levels in other countries, or on the pricing and reimbursement levels of medicinal products intended for the same therapeutic indication. Furthermore, some European Union member states impose direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market.

Health Technology Assessment, or HTA, of medicinal products is becoming an increasingly common part of the pricing and reimbursement procedures in some European Union member states. These countries include the United Kingdom, France, Germany and

20

Sweden. The HTA process in the European Union member states is governed by the national laws of these countries. HTA is the procedure according to which the assessment of the public health impact, therapeutic impact and the economic and societal impact of the use of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country is conducted. HTA generally focuses on the clinical efficacy and effectiveness, safety, cost, and cost-effectiveness of individual medicinal products as well as their potential implications for the national healthcare system. Those elements of medicinal products are compared with other treatment options available on the market.

The outcome of HTA may influence the pricing and reimbursement status for specific medicinal products within individual European Union member states. The extent to which pricing and reimbursement decisions are influenced by the HTA of a specific medicinal product vary between the European Union member states.

In 2011, Directive 2011/24/EU was adopted at European Union level. This Directive concerns the application of patients’ rights in cross-border healthcare. The Directive is intended to establish rules for facilitating access to safe and high-quality cross-border healthcare in the European Union. Pursuant to Directive 2011/24/EU, a voluntary network of national authorities or bodies responsible for HTA in the individual European Union member states was established. The purpose of the network is to facilitate and support the exchange of scientific information concerning HTAs. This could lead to harmonization between European Union member states of the criteria taken into account in the conduct of HTA in pricing and reimbursement decisions and negatively impact price in at least some European Union member states.

United States Healthcare Reform

The United States and many foreign jurisdictions have enacted or proposed legislative and regulatory changes affecting the healthcare system. The United States government, state legislatures and foreign governments also have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs.

In recent years, Congress has considered reductions in Medicare reimbursement levels for drugs administered by physicians. CMS, the agency that administers the Medicare and Medicaid programs, also has authority to revise reimbursement rates and to implement coverage restrictions for some drugs. Cost reduction initiatives and changes in coverage implemented through legislation or regulation could decrease utilization of and reimbursement for any approved products. While Medicare regulations apply only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payers often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates. Therefore, any reduction in reimbursement that results from federal legislation or regulation may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payers.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act, or collectively the Affordable Care Act, substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly impacts the pharmaceutical industry. The Affordable Care Act is intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against healthcare fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers, and impose additional health policy reforms. Among other things, the Affordable Care Act expanded manufacturers’ rebate liability under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program by increasing the minimum Medicaid rebate for both branded and generic drugs, expanded the 340B program, and revised the definition of AMP, which could increase the amount of Medicaid drug rebates manufacturers are required to pay to states. The legislation also extended Medicaid drug rebates, previously due only on fee-for-service Medicaid utilization, to include the utilization of Medicaid managed care organizations as well and created an alternative rebate formula for certain new formulations of certain existing products that is intended to increase the amount of rebates due on those drugs. On February 1, 2016, CMS issued final regulations to implement the changes to the Medicaid Drug Rebate program under the Affordable Care Act. These regulations became effective on April 1, 2016. Since that time, there have been significant ongoing efforts to modify or eliminate the Affordable Care Act.

On January 20, 2017, President Trump signed an executive order directing federal agencies to exercise existing authorities to reduce burdens associated with the Affordable Care Act pending further action by Congress. In October 2017, he signed an Executive Order which directed federal agencies to modify how the Affordable Care Act is implemented. The Tax Act, enacted on December 22, 2017, repealed the shared responsibility payment for individuals who fail to maintain minimum essential coverage under section 5000A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, commonly referred to as the individual mandate.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since passage of the Affordable Care Act. The Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to recommend proposals in spending reductions to Congress. The Joint Select Committee did not achieve its targeted deficit reduction of an amount greater than $1.2 trillion for the fiscal years 2012 through 2021, triggering the legislation’s automatic reductions to several government programs. These reductions included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to healthcare providers of up to 2.0% per fiscal year, which went into effect in April 2013. Subsequent litigation extended the 2% reduction, on average, to 2030 unless additional Congressional action is taken. However, pursuant to the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act, or CARES Act, the 2% Medicare sequester reductions have been suspended from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. On January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act

21

was signed into law, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years.

Further legislative changes to and regulatory changes under the Affordable Care Act remain possible, although the new Administration under President-elect Joseph Biden has signaled that it plans to build on the Affordable Care Act and expand the number of people who are eligible for subsidies under it.   President-elect Biden indicated that he may use executive orders to undo changes to the Affordable Care Act made by the Trump administration and would advocate for legislation to build on the Affordable Care Act.  It is unknown what form any such changes or any law proposed to replace the Affordable Care Act would take, and how or whether it may affect our business in the future. We expect that changes to the Affordable Care Act, the Medicare and Medicaid programs, changes allowing the federal government to directly negotiate drug prices and changes stemming from other healthcare reform measures, especially with regard to healthcare access, financing or other legislation in individual states, could have a material adverse effect on the healthcare industry.

The Affordable Care Act has also been subject to challenges in the courts.  On December 14, 2018, a Texas U.S. District Court Judge ruled that the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress.  On December 18, 2019, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held that the individual mandate is unconstitutional and remanded the case to the Texas District Court to reconsider its earlier invalidation of the entire Affordable Care Act. An appeal was taken to the U.S. Supreme Court which heard oral arguments in the case on November 10, 2020.  A ruling is expected in 2021.

The Affordable Care Act requires pharmaceutical manufacturers of branded prescription drugs to pay a branded prescription drug fee to the federal government. Each individual pharmaceutical manufacturer pays a prorated share of the branded prescription drug fee, based on the dollar value of its branded prescription drug sales to certain federal programs identified in the law. Furthermore, the law requires manufacturers to provide a 50% discount off the negotiated price of prescriptions filled by beneficiaries in the Medicare Part D coverage gap, referred to as the “donut hole.” The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, or the BBA, among other things, amended the Affordable Care Act, effective January 1, 2019, to close the coverage gap in most Medicare drug plans, commonly referred to as the “donut hole,” by increasing from 50 percent to 70 percent the point-of-sale discount that is owed by pharmaceutical manufacturers who participate in Medicare Part D.

The Affordable Care Act also expanded the Public Health Service’s 340B drug pricing program. As noted above, the 340B drug pricing program requires participating manufacturers to agree to charge statutorily-defined covered entities no more than the 340B “ceiling price” for the manufacturer’s covered outpatient drugs. The Affordable Care Act expanded the 340B program to include additional types of covered entities: certain free-standing cancer hospitals, critical access hospitals, rural referral centers and sole community hospitals, each as defined by the Affordable Care Act. Because the 340B ceiling price is determined based on AMP and Medicaid drug rebate data, revisions to the Medicaid rebate formula and AMP definition could cause the required 340B discounts to increase.

Payment methodologies may be subject to changes in healthcare legislation and regulatory initiatives as well. For example, CMS may develop new payment and delivery models, such as bundled payment models. Recently, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products. Such scrutiny has resulted in several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed, and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, reduce the cost of drugs under Medicare, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for pharmaceutical products.

At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

We expect that additional foreign, federal and state healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in limited coverage and reimbursement and reduced demand for our products, once approved, or additional pricing pressures.

Other Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements

For ANJESO and if we obtain FDA approval for any of our product candidates and begin commercializing those products in the United States, our activities are subject to various federal and state fraud and abuse laws, including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal civil False Claims Act, and laws and regulations pertaining to limitations on and reporting of healthcare provider payments (physician sunshine laws). These laws and regulations are interpreted and enforced by various federal, state and local authorities including CMS, the Office of Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Department of Justice, individual U.S. Attorney offices within the Department of Justice, and state and local governments. These laws include:

22

Violations of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, may subject us to significant civil, criminal and administrative sanctions including penalties, damages, fines, imprisonment, and exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and/or adverse publicity.

Moreover, government entities and private litigants have asserted claims under state consumer protection statutes against pharmaceutical and medical device companies for alleged false or misleading statements in connection with the marketing, promotion and/or sale of pharmaceutical and medical device products, including state investigations and litigation by certain government entities regarding the marketing of opioid products.

Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or the FCPA, generally prohibits offering, promising, giving, or authorizing others to give anything of value, either directly or indirectly, to a non-U.S. government official in order to influence official action, or otherwise obtain or retain business. The FCPA also requires public companies to make and keep books and records that accurately and fairly reflect the transactions of the corporation and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls. Our industry is heavily regulated and therefore involves significant interaction with public officials, including officials of non-U.S. governments. Additionally, in many other countries, the health care providers who prescribe pharmaceuticals are employed by their government, and the purchasers of pharmaceuticals are government entities; therefore, our dealings with these prescribers and purchasers are subject to regulation under the FCPA. Recently, the SEC and Department of Justice have increased their FCPA enforcement activities with respect to pharmaceutical companies. Violations could result in fines, criminal sanctions against us, our officers, or our employees, the closing

23

down of our facilities, requirements to obtain export licenses, cessation of business activities in sanctioned countries, implementation of compliance programs, and prohibitions on the conduct of our business.

Facilities

Our principal executive offices are located at 490 Lapp Road, Malvern, PA 19355, where we occupy approximately 22,313 square feet of leased laboratory and office space pursuant to a six-year lease, which expires on December 31, 2022. We also lease a 4,145 square foot office space in Dublin, Ireland pursuant to a short-term lease.

Corporate Information

We were incorporated under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in September 2019. Our principal executive offices are located at 490 Lapp Road, Malvern, PA 19355, and our telephone number is (484) 395-2440.

Human Capital Resources

In order to achieve the goals and expectations of our Company, it is crucial that we continue to attract and retain top talent. To facilitate talent attraction and retention, we strive to make Baudax Bio a safe and rewarding workplace, with opportunities for our employees to grow and develop in their careers, supported by strong compensation, benefits and health and wellness programs, and by programs that build connections between our employees. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we implemented significant changes that we determined were in the best interest of our employees, and which comply with local and federal government regulations. This includes having some of our employees work from home, while implementing additional safety measures for employees continuing critical on-site work.

As of December 31, 2020, we had 57 full-time employees. None of our employees are represented by a collective bargaining agreement. We believe that we have a good relationship with our employees.

Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing and integrating our existing and new employees, advisors and consultants. The principal purposes of our equity and cash incentive plans are to attract, retain and reward personnel through the granting of stock-based and cash-based compensation awards, in order to increase shareholder value and the success of our company by motivating such individuals to perform to the best of their abilities and achieve our objectives.

Available Information

Our website address is www.baudaxbio.com. Our Annual Report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, any amendments to those reports, proxy and registration statements filed or furnished with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, are available free of charge through our website. We make these materials available through our website as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such materials with, or furnish such materials to, the SEC. The reports filed with the SEC by our executive officers and directors pursuant to Section 16 under the Exchange Act are also made available, free of charge on our website, as soon as reasonably practicable after copies of those filings are provided to us by those persons. These materials can be accessed through the “Investor Relations” section of our website. The information contained in, or that can be accessed through, our website is not part of this Report.

Risk Factor Summary

We are providing the following summary of the risk factors contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to enhance the readability and accessibility of our risk factor disclosures. We encourage you to carefully review the full risk factors contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K in their entirety for additional information regarding the material factors that make an investment in our securities speculative or risky. These risks and uncertainties include, among others, the following:

24

Risk Factors

The following risk factors and other information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K should be carefully considered.  The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face.  Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we presently deem less significant may also impair our business operations.  Please see pages 3 and 4 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a discussion of some of the forward-looking statements that are qualified by these risk factors.  If any of the following

25

risks occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth prospects could be materially and adversely affected. All references and risks related to the launch, commercialization or sale of ANJESO or any of our product candidates are predicated on such product candidates receiving the requisite marketing and regulatory approval in the United States and applicable foreign jurisdictions.

Risks Related to Our Finances and Capital Requirements

Our business has incurred significant losses and we may continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future. We may never achieve profitability.

Our business has incurred operating losses due to costs incurred in connection with our research and development activities, general and administrative expenses, and commercialization expenses associated with our operations. Our net losses for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 were $76.1 million and $32.6 million, respectively.

We expect to continue to incur substantial and increased expenses as we continue to pursue full commercialization of ANJESO, expand our research and development activities and advance our clinical programs for our product candidates. The size of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of future expenditures and our ability to generate revenues. Our ability to generate future revenues depends heavily on our success in:

 Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with pharmaceutical product development and commercialization, we are unable to predict the timing or amount of increased expenses, and when, or if, we will be able to achieve or maintain profitability.

If ANJESO is not successfully commercialized, if any of our product candidates are not successfully developed or commercialized, or if revenues are insufficient following commercialization of ANJESO or any of our product candidates, we will not achieve profitability and our business may fail. Our revenues from ANJESO are also dependent upon the size of the markets outside of the United States, as well as our ability to obtain market approval for ANJESO and achieve commercial success outside of the United States on our own or with a collaboration partner. As a result of the foregoing, we expect to continue to incur significant and increasing losses from operations for the foreseeable future. Even though we have generated revenues from sales of ANJESO, we may not become profitable and may need to obtain additional funding to continue operations.

Our losses, negative cash flows from operations and accumulated deficit raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern absent obtaining adequate new debt or equity financings.

Management has concluded that substantial doubt exists about our ability to continue as a going concern for the next 12 months from the date of the financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. As of December 31, 2020, we had an accumulated deficit of $112.3 million, cash and cash equivalents of $30.3 million and current liabilities of $18.1 million. Based on available resources, we believe that our cash and cash equivalents on hand, consisting of funds raised by financing activities in the year ended December 31, 2020 are sufficient to fund our currently anticipated operating and capital requirements through the first half of 2021, however, our current capital resources are not sufficient to support our planned operations for the next 12 months from the date of the financial statements included in this report.

We did not become a revenue-generating company until the second quarter of 2020, following the commercial launch of ANJESO. We expect our expenses relating to the commercialization of ANJESO, including those related to personnel, marketing and selling, to increase. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future as we continue our efforts to commercialize ANJESO and develop our other current and future product candidates. We have also incurred significant indebtedness. As of December 31, 2020, we had an outstanding balance under our PPP Loan of approximately $1.5 million, of which we cannot assure forgiveness in whole or in part, and an outstanding balance of $10 million under our credit facility with MAM Eagle Lender. These factors, individually and collectively, raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern, and therefore, could materially limit our ability to raise additional funds through an issuance of debt or equity securities or otherwise.

26

There can be no assurance that we will be able to raise sufficient additional capital on acceptable terms or at all. If such additional financing is not available on satisfactory terms, or is not available in sufficient amounts, or we do not have sufficient authorized shares, we may be required to delay, limit or eliminate the development of business opportunities and our ability to achieve our business objectives, our competitiveness, and our business, financial condition and results of operations will be materially adversely affected. In addition, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global financial markets may reduce our ability to access capital, which could negatively affect our liquidity and ability to continue as a going concern. In addition, the perception that we may not be able to continue as a going concern may cause others to choose not to deal with us due to concerns about our ability to meet our contractual obligations.

The report of our independent registered accounting firm on our audited financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020 contain an explanatory paragraph relating to our ability to continue as a going concern.

 The auditor’s opinion on our audited financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2020 includes an explanatory paragraph stating that we have incurred recurring losses and negative cash flows and have an accumulated deficit of $112.3 million as of December 31, 2020 that raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. While we believe that we will be able to raise the capital we need to continue our operations, there can be no assurances that we will be successful in these efforts or will be able to resolve our liquidity issues or eliminate our operating losses. If we are unable to obtain sufficient funding, we would need to significantly reduce our operating plans and curtail some or all our commercialization efforts for ANJESO. Accordingly, our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations will be materially and adversely affected, and we may be unable to continue as a going concern. If we seek additional financing to fund our business activities in the future and there remains substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern, investors or other financing sources may be unwilling to provide additional funding on commercially reasonable terms or at all.

We have used almost all of our unreserved, authorized shares of common stock.

We have used almost all of our unreserved authorized shares of common stock and will need shareholder approval to implement an increase in our authorized shares of common stock or a reverse stock split if we intend to issue unreserved shares of common stock in the future. Our amended and restated articles of incorporation and the Pennsylvania Business Corporation Law currently require the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority in voting power of the outstanding shares of capital stock to approve an increase in our authorized shares of common stock or a reverse stock split. There are no assurances that shareholder approval will be obtained, in which event we will be unable to raise additional capital through the issuance of shares of common stock to fund our future operations.

We will need to raise additional funding to advance our product candidates, which may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Failure to obtain capital when needed may force us to delay, limit or terminate our product development efforts or other operations.

As of December 31, 2020, our cash and cash equivalents were approximately $30.3 million.

Developing and commercializing pharmaceutical products, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials and ramping up commercialization and manufacturing activities, is expensive.  We anticipate incurring significant costs of sales and general and commercialization expenses in connection with the continued commercialization of ANJESO. In addition, we will need to raise additional funds to support our future product development operations.  Such financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all.

We will need to raise additional funding to continue our commercialization of ANJESO and to satisfy the milestone payments due to Alkermes related to the FDA approval and commercialization of ANJESO.  We may also require additional funding to finance the acquisition or in-license of new product candidates.  In addition, changing circumstances beyond our control may cause us to consume capital more rapidly than we currently anticipate.  For example, our commercialization activities for ANJESO may lead to additional, unexpected costs related to the commercial manufacture of ANJESO or the build-out of our commercial sales organization.  We may also encounter technical, enrollment or other difficulties that could increase our development costs more than we expect for our product candidates.  Additional funding will also be needed to develop our product candidates.

Raising funds in the current economic environment may present substantial challenges, and future financing may not be available in sufficient amounts or on acceptable terms, if at all. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on reasonable terms, we may curtail, delay or discontinue our research or development programs, scale back or cease any commercialization efforts or wind down our business. In addition, such additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may impede our ability to commercialize ANJESO or our product candidates and could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and prospects.

27

We have incurred significant indebtedness, which could adversely affect our business.

As of December 31, 2020, we had an outstanding balance under our PPP Loan of approximately $1.5 million and an outstanding balance of $10 million under our credit agreement with MAM Eagle Lender. Our indebtedness could have important consequences to our shareholders. For example, it:

Any of the above-listed factors could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Our credit agreement with MAM Eagle Lender also contains certain financial and other covenants, including a minimum liquidity requirement of $5 million at all times, and includes limitations on, among other things, additional indebtedness, paying dividends in certain circumstances, and making certain acquisitions and investments. The credit agreement provides for certain mandatory prepayment events, including with respect to the net proceeds of asset sales, extraordinary receipts, casualty payments and other specified events, based on the terms of the credit agreement with MAM Eagle Lender. Any failure to comply with the terms, covenants and conditions of the credit agreement may limit our ability to draw upon additional tranches of term loans and may result in an event of default under such agreement, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operation.

We may not be entitled to forgiveness of our recently received Paycheck Protection Program Loan, and our application for the Paycheck Protection Program Loan could in the future be determined to have been impermissible or could result in damage to our reputation.

On May 8, 2020, we received loan proceeds of approximately $1.5 million pursuant to the PPP under the CARES Act, administered by the Small Business Administration, or SBA. We used the PPP money on permitted purposes under the CARES Act and related regulations, including but not limited to retaining current employees, maintaining payroll and making lease and utility payments. The PPP Loan is evidenced by a promissory note, dated as of May 8, 2020, issued by PNC Bank, National Association, which contains customary events of default relating to, among other things, payment defaults and breaches of representations and warranties. The PPP Loan is scheduled to mature on May 8, 2022, or the Maturity Date, bears interest at a rate of 1.00% per annum, and is subject to the standard terms and conditions applicable to loans administered by the SBA under the CARES Act.

Commencing December 15, 2020, we were required to pay regular monthly payments in an amount equal to one month’s accrued interest under the PPP Loan. All interest which accrues during the initial six months of the loan period will be deferred and payable on the Maturity Date. The amounts outstanding under the PPP Loan may be prepaid by us at any time prior to maturity without penalty. Under the CARES Act, as amended in June 2020, loan forgiveness is generally available for the sum of documented payroll costs, covered rent payments, covered mortgage interest and covered utilities during the 8-week period beginning on the date of the first disbursement of the PPP Loan. The amount of the PPP Loan eligible to be forgiven may be reduced in certain circumstances, including as a result of certain headcount or salary reductions. We will be required to repay any portion of the outstanding principal that is not forgiven, along with accrued interest, and we cannot provide any assurance that we will be eligible for loan forgiveness, that we will apply for forgiveness, or that any amount of the PPP Loan will ultimately be forgiven by the SBA.

In order to apply for the PPP Loan, we were required to certify, among other things, that the current economic uncertainty made the PPP Loan request necessary to support our ongoing operations. We made this certification in good faith after analyzing, among other things, the maintenance of our workforce, our need for additional funding to continue operations, and our ability to access alternative forms of capital in the current market environment in light of the uncertainty resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. Following this analysis, we believe that we satisfied all eligibility criteria for the PPP Loan, and that our receipt of the PPP Loan is consistent with the broad objectives of the CARES Act. The certification described above did not contain any objective criteria and is subject to interpretation.

On April 23, 2020, the SBA issued new guidance that raised the possibility that certain public companies with substantial market value and access to capital markets would not be able to make this certification in good faith. That SBA guidance further indicated that borrowers “must make this certification in good faith, taking into account their current business activity and their ability to access other sources of liquidity sufficient to support their ongoing operations in a manner that is not significantly detrimental to the business.” After being made aware of this new guidance, we conducted additional analysis and determined that we still satisfied the eligibility criteria and had made the certification in good faith. Once again, though, this guidance did not contain any objective criteria and is subject to interpretation.

28

Under PPP, all or a portion of the PPP Loan is eligible for forgiveness if we were eligible for the PPP Loan, use the loan proceeds for eligible expenses and otherwise satisfy PPP requirements. While we believe we are eligible for the PPP Loan, in the event it was determined that we were not eligible for the PPP Loan, it is possible we would be required to repay the PPP Loan on an accelerated basis, rather than over two years provided under the PPP Loan, and at a higher interest rate than 1.000% per annum. If we were to be audited and receive an adverse finding in such audit, some or all of the PPP Loan might not be forgiven and we could be required to return or repay some or all of the PPP Loan, together with interest on the loan, which could reduce our liquidity, and potentially subject us to fines and penalties.

The COVID-19 pandemic has and may continue to materially and adversely affect our financial results.

Our business, results of operations, financial condition, cash flows and stock price have and may continue to be adversely affected by pandemics, epidemics or other public health emergencies, such as the international outbreak of COVID-19. In December 2019, COVID-19, was identified in China and has since spread to multiple countries, including the United States. In March 2020, the World Health Organization characterized COVID-19 as a pandemic. COVID-19 has had a broad adverse impact on the global economy across many industries and has resulted in significant governmental measures being implemented to control the spread of the virus, including quarantines, travel restrictions and business shutdowns, as well as significant volatility in global financial markets. Our business performance was significantly impacted by COVID-19 during the second, third and fourth quarters of 2020, and we continue to expect to see challenges while the pandemic persists and potentially thereafter. The economic impact of the COVID-19 virus, which has caused a broad impact globally, has materially and adversely impacted our business and may continue to adversely affect us. In particular, hospitals in certain geographical regions have reduced and diverted staffing, diverted resources to patients suffering from the infectious disease and limited hospital access for non-patients, including our sales professionals. In addition, travel restrictions due to COVID-19 have impacted our sales professionals’ ability to travel to hospitals. These circumstances have negatively impacted the ability of our sales professionals to effectively market to hospital pharmacists and formulary committees, which has impacted our commercial launch of ANJESO. In addition, the spread of COVID-19 has had, and may continue to have, an impact on the number or patients suffering from post-surgical pain, as hospitals cancel elective surgeries and patients postpone these procedures due to COVID-19 concerns, which may reduce demand for ANJESO and negatively impact our ability to successfully commercialize ANJESO. As a result of the negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on our commercialization efforts, in November 2020 we implemented a restructuring initiative, which included a reduction of workforce of approximately 40 positions.

COVID-19 has and will continue to have an impact on ports and trade globally. We currently rely on Alkermes and Patheon UK Limited, or Patheon, for supply of ANJESO from locations in Ireland and Italy. There is a risk that supplies of ANJESO may be significantly delayed or may become unavailable as a result of COVID-19 and the resulting impact on Alkermes’ and Patheon’s labor force and operations, including as a result of governmental restrictions on business operations and the movement of people and goods in an effort to curtail the spread of the virus. There can be no assurance that we would be able to timely implement any mitigation plans. Disruptions in our supply chain, whether as a result of restricted travel, quarantine requirements or otherwise, could negatively impact our ability to supply and sell ANJESO.

While the potential long-term economic impact of the COVID-19 virus may be difficult to assess or predict, COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant disruption of global financial markets, which could reduce our ability to access capital, thereby negatively affecting our liquidity. The extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic impacts our results will depend on future developments that are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted. Given the rapid and evolving nature of the COVID-19 virus, the full extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic will directly or indirectly impact our business, results of operations and financial condition will depend on future developments that are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted.

Raising additional capital may dilute our existing shareholders, restrict our operations or cause us to relinquish valuable rights.

We may seek to raise such capital through public or private equity or debt financings. The terms of any financing may harm existing shareholders, and the issuance of additional securities, whether equity or debt, or the possibility of such issuance, may cause the market price of our shares to decline. The sale of additional equity or convertible securities may dilute the ownership of existing shareholders. The incurrence of indebtedness would result in increased fixed payment obligations, and we may agree to restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt or limitations on our ability to acquire, sell or license intellectual property rights that could impede our ability to conduct our business.

We may also seek funds through collaborations, strategic alliances, or licensing arrangements with third parties, and such agreements may involve relinquishing rights to our product candidates or technologies, future revenue streams, research programs or products candidates or to grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. Such arrangements will limit our participation in the success of any of our product candidates that receive regulatory approval.

29

Risks Related to Commercialization of ANJESO

Our success depends heavily on the successful commercialization of ANJESO. To the extent ANJESO is not commercially successful, our business, financial condition and results of operations will be materially harmed, and the price of our common stock may decline.

We have invested and continue to invest a significant portion of our efforts and financial resources in the development, approval and now commercialization of ANJESO. Our ability to successfully commercialize ANJESO will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:

Many of these matters are beyond our control and are subject to other risks described elsewhere in this “Risk Factors” section. Accordingly, we cannot assure that we will be able to successfully commercialize ANJESO. If we cannot do so or are significantly delayed in doing so, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected, and the price of our common stock may decline.

The commercial success of ANJESO will depend upon the acceptance of ANJESO by the medical community, including physicians, patients, pharmacy and therapeutics committees, health care payers and hospital formularies.

Physicians may not prescribe a sufficient amount of ANJESO, in which case we would not generate the revenues we anticipate. The degree of market acceptance of ANJESO will depend on a number of factors, including:

If ANJESO does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, patients, pharmacy and therapeutics committees, health care payers and hospital formularies, we may not generate sufficient revenue and we may not become profitable.

30

ANJESO may cause adverse events or other safety concerns or have other properties that could limit the scope of market acceptance.

AEs caused by ANJESO could cause us, other reviewing entities, clinical study sites or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical studies. Clinical studies conducted with ANJESO have generated some AEs, and in some cases SAEs, as those terms are defined by the FDA in its regulations. During the Study REC-15-015 trial for ANJESO, four treatment-related SAEs were observed in one ANJESO-treated patient and three placebo-treated patients. During the Safety Study, two SAEs occurred in a single placebo-treated patient. It was subsequently determined that none of the SAEs from the Study REC-15-015 trial or the Safety Study were attributable to ANJESO. Additional AEs or SAEs could be generated during future clinical trials.  Our commercialization of ANJESO could be adversely impacted by these AEs, SAEs or other safety concerns.

Further, even though ANJESO has already received regulatory approval in the United States, if it is shown to cause serious or unexpected side effects after receiving market approval, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of ANJESO and could substantially increase the costs of commercializing ANJESO, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Even with regulatory approval for ANJESO, we will still face extensive regulatory requirements and ANJESO may face future regulatory difficulties.

Even with regulatory approval in the United States or if approved in other countries, the FDA and the equivalent regulatory authorities in other countries may still impose significant restrictions on the indicated uses or marketing of ANJESO or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies or post-marketing surveillance. ANJESO is subject to ongoing FDA requirements governing the labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, safety surveillance, advertising, promotion, record-keeping and reporting of safety and other post-marketing information. The holder of an approved NDA is obligated to monitor and report AEs and any failure of a product to meet the specifications in the NDA. The holder of an approved NDA must also submit new or supplemental applications and obtain FDA approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling or manufacturing process. Advertising and promotional materials must comply with FDA rules and are subject to FDA review, in addition to other potentially applicable federal and state laws.

The applicable regulations in countries outside the United States grant similar powers to the competent authorities and impose similar obligations on companies. In addition, manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are subject to payment of substantial user fees and continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities, including equivalent regulatory authorities in other countries, for compliance with cGMP regulations and adherence to commitments made in the NDA or the application for marketing authorization. If we, or a regulatory authority, discover previously unknown problems with ANJESO, such as AEs of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with a facility where the product is manufactured, a regulatory authority may impose restrictions relative to ANJESO or the manufacturing facility, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market, suspension of manufacturing, or other FDA action or other action by the equivalent regulatory authorities in other countries. If we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements following approval of ANJESO, a regulatory authority may:

If any of the above were to occur, our ability to successfully commercialize ANJESO and achieve profitability could be negatively impacted, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

31

Manufacturing issues may arise that could increase product costs or delay commercialization of ANJESO.

As ANJESO is manufactured and we conduct required stability testing, issues may arise involving product-packaging and third-party equipment malfunctions. These issues may require refinement or resolution in order to proceed with commercial scale manufacturing of ANJESO.  In addition, quality issues may arise during scale-up and validation of commercial manufacturing processes.  Any issues in ANJESO manufacturing could result in increased scrutiny by regulatory authorities, increases in our operating expenses, or failure to maintain approval for ANJESO.

If we fail to supply ANJESO in sufficient quantities and at acceptable quality and pricing levels, we may face delays in the continued commercialization of ANJESO, or be unable to meet market demand, and may lose potential revenues.

Our ability to supply sufficient quantities of ANJESO is substantially dependent on the performance of third-party manufacturers. We do not own facilities with capabilities for clinical-scale or commercial manufacturing of injectable meloxicam and we rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third-party suppliers and contract manufacturers to manufacture injectable meloxicam.  Alkermes is currently our sole supplier of bulk injectable meloxicam formulation and is the only established supplier of bulk injectable meloxicam formulation. We have committed to purchase our current requirements of injectable meloxicam formulation from Alkermes, and we have commissioned dedicated space in Alkermes’ manufacturing facility for the production of bulk injectable meloxicam. Patheon provides sterile fill and finish services, and we have committed to purchase a certain percentage of our annual requirements of sterile fill and finish services from Patheon. Our agreement with Patheon also obligates us to a minimum annual order quantity, which, if higher than the commercial demand for ANJESO, could expose us to increased costs.

Although our supply agreement and manufacturing agreements for ANJESO allow us to qualify and purchase from an alternative supplier or manufacturer in certain circumstances, it would be time-consuming and expensive for us to do so, and there can be no assurance that an alternative supplier could be found on terms that are acceptable to us or at all.  The number of potential manufacturers that have the necessary equipment, expertise and governmental licenses to produce ANJESO is limited.  If we encounter any issues with our contract manufacturers or choose to engage a new supplier or contract manufacturer for ANJESO, we would need to qualify and obtain FDA approval for another contract manufacturer or supplier as an alternative source, which could be costly and cause significant delays. Such delay could in turn delay the marketing and continued commercialization of ANJESO, which would materially and adversely affect our business.

Our reliance on a limited number of vendors to manufacture ANJESO exposes us to risks, any of which could delay commercialization of our products, result in higher costs, or deprive us of potential revenues. Our contract manufacturers may encounter difficulties in achieving the volume of production needed to satisfy our demand for ongoing commercial demand (even after accounting for the increased capacity to be provided by the dedicated space at the Alkermes facility), may experience technical issues that impact quality or compliance with applicable and strictly enforced regulations governing the manufacture of pharmaceutical products, may be affected by natural disasters that interrupt or prevent manufacturing of our products, may experience shortages of qualified personnel to adequately staff production operations, may experience shortages of raw materials and may have difficulties finding replacement parts or equipment. In addition, our contract manufacturers could default on their agreement with us to meet our requirements for commercial supplies of ANJESO and/or Alkermes could fail to deliver the dedicated space according to the currently agreed timeline.

We and our contract manufacturers must comply with federal, state and foreign regulations, including FDA’s regulations governing cGMP, enforced by the FDA through its facilities inspection program and by similar regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions where we do business. These requirements include, among other things, quality control, quality assurance and the maintenance of records and documentation. The FDA or similar foreign regulatory authorities at any time may implement new standards or change their interpretation and enforcement of existing standards for manufacture, packaging or testing of our products. Our contract manufacturers are subject to ongoing periodic unannounced inspection by the FDA, the DEA, and corresponding state agencies to ensure strict compliance with these regulations. We do not have control over third-party manufacturers’ compliance with these regulations and standards and our manufacturers may be found to be in noncompliance with certain regulations, which may impact our ability to manufacture our drug product candidates and may impact the regulatory status of our product candidate.  Any failure to comply with applicable regulations may result in fines and civil penalties, suspension of production, product seizure or recall, imposition of a consent decree, or withdrawal of product approval, and would limit the availability of ANJESO. Any manufacturing defect or error discovered after ANJESO has been produced and distributed also could result in significant consequences, including costly recall procedures, re-stocking costs, damage to our reputation and potential for product liability claims. In addition, our contract manufacturers could default on their agreement with us to meet our requirements for commercial supplies of ANJESO and/or Alkermes could fail to deliver the dedicated space according to the currently agreed timeline.

While we have scaled up our manufacturing of ANJESO for commercialization, due to the delay in our commercial launch of ANJESO as a result of the two Complete Response Letters, or CRLs, we have launch stock of ANJESO that could be unable to be sold or could be sold but returned by our wholesalers if expired prior to final sale. A significant amount of expired product or returned product could impact the success of our commercialization of ANJESO, and result in additional costs to manufacture additional product.

32

If, as a result of any of these issues, we are unable to supply the required commercial quantities of ANJESO to meet market demand for ANJESO, on a timely basis or at all, we may suffer damage to our reputation and commercial prospects and we will lose potential revenues.

If third-party service providers, including carriers, logistics providers and distributors, fail to devote sufficient time and resources to ANJESO or their performance is substandard, our successful commercialization may be delayed, and our costs may be higher than expected.

Our reliance on third-party service providers, including carriers, logistics providers and distributors, exposes us to risks that could delay or impair the successful commercialization of ANJESO, result in higher costs, or deprive us of potential product revenues. Our carriers may experience technical issues relating to the timing and shipment of ANJESO, may encounter issues in connection with transporting our products internationally, or may become subject to other transit difficulties that could cause loss or damage to ANJESO, some of which may not be adequately covered under our insurance policies. Our third-party logistic providers may experience difficulty in providing key services relating to customer service, warehousing, inventory management, distribution services, contract management, chargeback processing, accounts receivable management, cash application and financial management. Our distributors could become unable to sell and deliver ANJESO for regulatory, compliance and other reasons. Our carriers, logistics providers, distributors and other third-party service providers may not perform as agreed or may not remain in business for the time required to successfully ship, store, deliver, sell and distribute ANJESO and we may incur additional cost. Any of our vendors could also default on or terminate their agreements with us, which could delay or impair the successful commercialization of ANJESO, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. All of these risks are further exacerbated by COVID-19 and its potential impact on the third-parties on which we rely.

Even with FDA approval for ANJESO in the United States, we may never obtain approval for or commercialize ANJESO outside of the United States, which would limit our ability to realize its full market potential.

In order to market ANJESO outside of the United States, we must establish and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries regarding quality, safety and efficacy. Clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and regulatory approval in one country does not mean that regulatory approval will be obtained in any other country. Approval processes vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and validation and additional administrative review periods. Seeking foreign regulatory approval could result in difficulties and costs for us and require additional non- clinical studies or clinical trials, which could be costly and time-consuming. Regulatory requirements can vary widely from country to country and could delay or prevent the introduction of ANJESO in those countries. While our management has experience in obtaining foreign regulatory approvals, we do not have any product candidates approved for sale in any jurisdiction, including international markets, and we, as a company, do not have experience in obtaining regulatory approval in international markets. If we fail to comply with regulatory requirements in international markets or to obtain and maintain required approvals, or if regulatory approval in international markets is delayed, our target market will be reduced, and our ability to realize the full market potential of ANJESO will be adversely affected.

For example, in the European Union, similar to the United States regulation scheme, both marketing authorization holders and manufacturers of medicinal products are subject to comprehensive regulatory oversight by the EMA and the competent authorities of the individual European Union member states both before and after grant of the manufacturing and Marketing Authorizations. This includes control of compliance with cGMP rules, which govern quality control of the manufacturing process and require documentation policies and procedures. We and our third-party manufacturers are required to ensure that all of our processes, methods, and equipment are compliant with cGMP. Failure by us or by any of our third-party partners, including suppliers, manufacturers, and distributors to comply with European Union laws and the related national laws of individual European Union member states governing the conduct of clinical trials, manufacturing approval, marketing authorization of medicinal products, both before and after grant of marketing authorization, and marketing of such products following grant of authorization may result in administrative, civil, or criminal penalties. These penalties could include delays in or refusal to authorize the conduct of clinical trials or to grant Marketing Authorization, product withdrawals and recalls, product seizures, suspension, or variation of the marketing authorization, total or partial suspension of production, distribution, manufacturing, or clinical trials, operating restrictions, injunctions, suspension of licenses, fines, and criminal penalties, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.  

We have no history of commercializing drugs prior to ANJESO, which may make it difficult to predict our ability to successfully commercialize ANJESO and our future performance or evaluate our business and prospects.

Our operations have been primarily limited to developing our technology and undertaking non-clinical studies and clinical trials for our product candidates and we have only obtained regulatory approval for one product, ANJESO. To date, we have a limited time period in demonstrating our ability to successfully manufacture at commercial scale or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales, marketing and distribution activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Because our success is dependent on our ability to successfully commercialize ANJESO, any predictions about our ability to do so and our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer history of successfully developing and commercializing drugs.

33

If we are unable to identify a strategic partner with appropriate sales and marketing capabilities to sell ANJESO in markets outside of the United States and enter into a strategic partnership on commercially acceptable terms with such partner, we may be unable to generate sufficient revenue from ANJESO to achieve profitability.

To date, we have not entered into any strategic partnerships for ANJESO; however, we may enter into a strategic partnership to commercialize ANJESO outside of the United States.  We face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic partners, and these strategic partnerships can be intricate and time-consuming to negotiate and document. We may not be able to negotiate strategic partnerships on acceptable terms, or at all. We are unable to predict when, if ever, we will enter into any strategic partnerships because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with establishing strategic partnerships.  In addition, our future collaboration partners, if any, may not dedicate sufficient resources to the commercialization of ANJESO or may otherwise fail in their commercialization due to factors beyond our control. If we are unable to establish effective collaborations to enable the sale of ANJESO to healthcare professionals in geographic regions that are not be covered by our own marketing and sales force, or if our potential future collaboration partners do not successfully commercialize ANJESO, our ability to generate revenues from ANJESO will be adversely affected.

We are subject to intense competition and, if we are unable to compete effectively, ANJESO may not reach its commercial potential.

The market for ANJESO is characterized by intense competition and rapid technological advances. ANJESO competes with a number of existing and future pharmaceuticals and drug delivery devices developed, manufactured and marketed by others. We compete against fully integrated pharmaceutical companies and smaller companies that are collaborating with larger pharmaceutical companies, academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations.

In the post-operative pain relief setting, we believe patients are prescribed injectable acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or NSAIDs, sodium channel blockers and opioids, depending on the severity of pain. Specifically, acetaminophen, NSAIDs and sodium channel blockers, we believe, are prescribed for mild to moderate pain relief, whereas we believe opioids are prescribed for moderate to severe pain relief. While we compete with all of these compounds in the post-operative pain setting, ANJESO is prescribed for moderate to severe pain, also competing with opioids and other non-opioid pain treatments. There are a number of pharmaceutical companies that currently market and/or manufacture therapeutics in the pain relief area, including Johnson & Johnson, Mallinckrodt plc, Pacira Pharmaceuticals, Inc. AcelRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Trevena, Inc. and Innocoll Holdings plc. Mallinckrodt commercializes an injectable formulation of acetaminophen. Pacira commercializes an intraoperative formulation of bupivacaine, a sodium channel blocker. Trevena commercializes an intravenous opioid analgesic. Additionally, companies such as Adynxx, Inc., Durect Corporation, Heron Therapeutics, Inc., Sandoz AG, Avenue Therapeutics, Inc., Neumentum Inc. and Cara Therapeutics, Inc. are currently developing post-operative pain therapeutics that could compete with ANJESO in the future.

More established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their greater size, cash flows and institutional experience. Compared to us, many of our competitors may have significantly greater financial, technical and human resources. As a result of these factors, our competitors may have an advantage in marketing their approved products, which may limit our ability to successfully commercialize ANJESO. Our competitors may also develop drugs that are safer, more effective, more widely used and less expensive than ours, and our competitors may also be more successful than we are in manufacturing and marketing their products. These advantages could materially impact our ability to develop and commercialize ANJESO successfully.

Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller and early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These third parties compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific, management and commercial personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and subject registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

We anticipate that we will face intense and increasing competition as new drugs enter the market and additional technologies become available in the pain management and relief space. Finally, the development of different methods for the treatment of acute pain following surgery could render ANJESO non-competitive or obsolete or decrease its market share for the treatment of acute pain following surgery. These and other risks may materially adversely affect our ability to attain or sustain profitable operations.

If we are unable to establish additional relationships with group purchasing organizations any future revenues or future profitability could be materially affected.

Many end-users of pharmaceutical products have relationships with group purchasing organizations, or GPOs, whereby such GPOs provide such end-users access to a broad range of pharmaceutical products from multiple suppliers at competitive prices and, in certain cases, exercise considerable influence over the drug purchasing decisions of such end-users. Hospitals and other end-users contract with the GPO of their choice for their purchasing needs. We have contracted with GPOs such as Vizient, Inc. and Premier Inc. We expect to derive revenue for sales of ANJESO from end-user customers that are members of GPOs, for ANJESO. Establishing and maintaining strong relationships with these GPOs will require us to be a reliable supplier, remain price competitive and comply with FDA regulations. The GPOs with whom we have relationships may have relationships with manufacturers that sell competing products, and such GPOs may earn higher margins from these products or combinations of competing products or may prefer products other than

34

ours for other reasons. If we are unable to establish or maintain our GPO relationships, or establish additional GPO relationships, sales of ANJESO related revenues could be negatively impacted.

If we are unable to achieve and maintain adequate levels of coverage or reimbursement for ANJESO or pricing pressures cause the sales price to be set too low for us to sell ANJESO at a profit, our ability to successfully commercialize ANJESO and our results of operations will be harmed.

Our ability to commercialize ANJESO successfully will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement for ANJESO will be available in a timely manner from third-party payers, including governmental healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, commercial health insurers and managed care organizations and other pricing limitations such as mandatory rebates or discounts. Reimbursement and pricing limitations may hinder our ability to recoup our investment in ANJESO. Although the CMS established a permanent J-code reimbursement code for ANJESO, which provides hospital outpatient departments, ambulatory surgery centers and physician offices in the United States one consistent Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System code to standardize the submission and payment of ANJESO insurance claims, this does not guarantee reimbursement across such plans.

Government authorities and other third-party payers, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, determine which medications they will cover and establish reimbursement levels. Reimbursement decisions by particular third-party payers depend upon a number of factors, including each third-party payer’s determination that use of a product is:

Obtaining and maintaining coverage and reimbursement approval for ANJESO from government authorities or other third-party payers is a time consuming and costly process that could require us to provide supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data, including expensive pharmacoeconomic studies beyond the data required to obtain marketing approval, for the use of ANJESO to each government authority or other third-party payer. We may not be able to provide data sufficient to gain acceptance with respect to coverage and reimbursement. In addition, acceptance by third-party payers could be negatively impacted by any negative perception third-party payers may have of ANJESO as a result of our receipt of two CRLs received from the FDA for ANJESO, and the resulting labeling, despite subsequent FDA approval.

Third-party payers may deny reimbursement for covered products if they determine that a medical product was used for an unapproved indication. Third-party payers may also limit coverage to specific products on an approved list, or formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved products for a particular indication. Failure to obtain timely hospital formulary approval will limit our commercial success, and obtaining and maintaining such approval can be an expensive and time-consuming process. We cannot be certain if and when we will obtain the formulary approvals to allow us to sell ANJESO into our target markets, nor, if formulary approval is obtained, at what price ANJESO will be accepted for sale and reimbursement.

Increasingly, third-party payers are also requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for medical products. These third-party payers could also impose price controls restricting the prices at which the products will be reimbursed and other conditions that must be met by patients prior to providing coverage for the use of ANJESO.

Third-party payers are increasingly attempting to contain healthcare costs by limiting both coverage and the level of reimbursement for medical products and services, which can impact the demand for, or the price of, such products and services. The process for determining whether a payer will provide coverage for a product may be separate from the process for setting the price or reimbursement rate that the payer will pay for the product once coverage is approved. Levels of reimbursement may also decrease in the future, due to the availability of numerous generic pain medications available at lower costs or future legislation, regulation or reimbursement policies of third-party payers which may adversely affect the demand for and reimbursement available for ANJESO, which in turn, could negatively impact pricing. If patients are not adequately reimbursed for ANJESO, they may reduce or discontinue purchases of it, which could result in a significant shortfall in achieving revenue expectations, prevent us from achieving profitability and negatively impact our business, prospects and financial condition.

Moreover, eligibility for coverage and reimbursement does not imply that any drug will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including research, development, manufacture, sale and distribution. Interim reimbursement levels for new drugs, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover our costs and may only be temporary. Reimbursement rates may vary according to the use of the drug and the clinical setting in which it is used, may be based on reimbursement levels already set for lower cost drugs and may be incorporated into existing payments for other services. Net prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payers and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement policies. Our inability to obtain and maintain coverage and profitable reimbursement rates from both government-funded and private payers for ANJESO could result in a significant shortfall

35

in achieving revenue expectations, prevent us from achieving profitability and negatively impact our business, prospects and financial condition.

If we obtain approval to commercialize ANJESO outside of the United States, a variety of risks associated with international operations could materially adversely affect our business.

We may enter into agreements with third parties to seek approval for and market ANJESO outside the United States. We expect that we will be subject to additional risks related to entering into international business relationships, including:

The realization of any of these risks would negatively affect our ability to attain or sustain profitability.

Our relationships with physicians, patients and payers in the U.S. are subject to applicable anti-kickback, fraud and abuse laws and regulations. Our failure to comply with these laws could expose us to criminal, civil and administrative sanctions, reputational harm, and could harm our results of operations and financial conditions.

Our current and future operations with respect to the commercialization of ANJESO are subject to various U.S. federal and state healthcare laws and regulations. These laws impact, among other things, our proposed sales, marketing, support and education programs and constrain our business and financial arrangements and relationships with third-party payers, healthcare professionals and others who may prescribe, recommend, purchase or provide ANJESO, and other parties through which we will market, sell and distribute ANJESO. Finally, our current and future operations are subject to additional healthcare-related statutory and regulatory requirements and enforcement by foreign regulatory authorities in jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. The laws are described in greater detail in the section below under “Business Government Regulation — Other Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements,” and include, but are not limited to:

36

The shifting commercial compliance environment and the need to build and maintain robust and expandable systems to comply with different compliance or reporting requirements in multiple jurisdictions increases the possibility that a healthcare or pharmaceutical company may fail to comply fully with one or more of these requirements. Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations may involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices do not comply with applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations or guidance. In addition, the complex framework of laws and regulations at the federal and state law are subject to change, which could lead to non-compliance or additional costs in updating our compliance mechanism to reflect these changes. For example, several states have enacted laws or regulations affecting or restricting payments that pharmaceutical manufacturers or distributors can make to physicians and other drug prescribers. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, imprisonment, exclusion from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, additional oversight and reporting requirements if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. If any of the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business are found not to be in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to the same criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs. Even if we are not determined to have violated these laws, government investigations into these issues typically require the expenditure of significant resources and generate negative publicity, which could harm our financial condition and divert resources and the attention of our management from operating our business.

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity in addition to the aforementioned potential regulatory actions. The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize ANJESO and generate revenues which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we are able to successfully commercialize ANJESO and if we participate in but fail to comply with our reporting and payment obligations under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, or other governmental pricing programs, we could be subject to additional pricing pressures and controls, reimbursement requirements, penalties, sanctions and fines, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

If we participate in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, and other governmental pricing programs, we will be obligated to pay certain specified rebates and report pricing information with respect to ANJESO. Pricing and rebate calculations are complex and are often subject to interpretation by us, governmental or regulatory agencies and the courts. We cannot assure you that our submissions will not be found by the CMS to be incomplete or incorrect. Governmental agencies may also make changes in program interpretations, requirements or conditions of participation, some of which may have implications for amounts previously estimated or paid. The Medicaid rebate amount is computed each quarter based on our submission to CMS of our current average manufacturer price, or AMP, and best price for the quarter. If we become aware that our reporting for a prior quarter was incorrect or has changed as a result of recalculation of the pricing data, we are obligated to resubmit the corrected data for a period not to exceed twelve quarters from the quarter in which the data originally were due, and CMS may request or require restatements for earlier periods as well. Such restatements and recalculations increase our costs for complying with the laws and regulations governing the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. Any corrections to our rebate calculations could result in an overage or underage in our rebate liability for past quarters, depending on the nature of the correction. Price recalculations also may affect the ceiling price at which we are required to offer our products to certain covered entities, such as safety-net providers, under the 340B program, and other similar government pricing programs. These programs are described in greater detail in the section titled “Business — Government Regulation — Formulary Approvals and Third-Party Payer Coverage and Reimbursement.”

We will also be liable for errors associated with our submission of pricing data. In addition to retroactive rebates and the potential for 340B program refunds, if we are found to have knowingly submitted false AMP, or best price information to the government, we may be liable for civil monetary penalties in the amount of $181,071 per item of false information. If we are found to have made a misrepresentation in the reporting of our average sales price, we may be liable for civil monetary penalties of up to $13,066

37

for each misrepresentation for each day in which the misrepresentation was applied. Our failure to submit monthly/quarterly AMP and best price data on a timely basis could result in a civil monetary penalty of $18,107 per day for each day the information is late beyond the due date. Such failure also could be grounds for CMS to terminate our Medicaid drug rebate agreement, pursuant to which we participate in the Medicaid program. In the event that CMS terminates our rebate agreement, federal payments may not be available under Medicaid for ANJESO. A final regulation imposes a civil monetary penalty of up to $5,000 for each instance of knowingly and intentionally charging a 340B covered entity more than the 340B ceiling price.

Federal law requires that a company must participate in the FSS pricing program to be eligible to have its products paid for with federal funds. As part of this program, we would be obligated to make ANJESO available for procurement on an FSS contract, under which we must comply with standard government terms and conditions and charge a price that is no higher than the statutory Federal Ceiling Price to four federal agencies (VA, DoD, Public Health Service, and U.S. Coast Guard). The Federal Ceiling Price is based on the Non-Federal Average Manufacturer Price, which we calculate and report to the VA on a quarterly and annual basis. If we overcharge the government in connection with our FSS contract or Section 703 Agreement, whether due to a misstated Federal Ceiling Price or otherwise, we are required to refund the difference to the government. Failure to make necessary disclosures and/or to identify contract overcharges can result in allegations against us under the U.S. civil False Claims Act and other laws and regulations. Unexpected refunds to the government, and responding to a government investigation or enforcement action, would be expensive and time-consuming and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

The Affordable Care Act and any changes in healthcare law may increase the difficulty and cost for us to commercialize ANJESO and affect the prices we may obtain.

The United States and many foreign jurisdictions have enacted or proposed legislative and regulatory changes affecting the healthcare system that could restrict or regulate post-approval activities relating to ANJESO and affect our ability to profitably sell ANJESO. The United States government, state legislatures and foreign governments also have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs.

The Affordable Care Act was intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms. These intended reforms are described in greater detail in the section below under “Business — Government Regulation — United States Healthcare Reform.”

Among the provisions of the Affordable Care Act that have been implemented since enactment and are of importance to the commercialization of ANJESO are the following:

There have been significant ongoing judicial, administrative, executive and legislative efforts to modify or eliminate the Affordable Care Act. For example, the Tax Act enacted on December 22, 2017, repealed the shared responsibility payment for individuals who fail to maintain minimum essential coverage under section 5000A of the Internal Revenue Code, commonly referred to as the individual mandate. During his Administration, President Trump issued executive orders which sought to reduce burdens associated with the Affordable Care Act and modified how it was implemented.  Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since passage of the Affordable Care Act. The Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created the Joint Select

38

Committee on Deficit Reduction to recommend proposals in spending reductions to Congress. The Joint Select Committee did not achieve its targeted deficit reduction of an amount greater than $1.2 trillion for the fiscal years 2012 through 2021, triggering the legislation’s automatic reductions to several government programs. These reductions included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to healthcare providers of up to 2.0% per fiscal year, which went into effect in April 2013. Subsequent litigation extended the 2% reduction, on average, to 2030 unless additional Congressional action is taken. However, pursuant to the CARES Act, the 2% Medicare sequester reductions have been suspended from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. On January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act was signed into law, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years.

The Affordable Care Act has also been subject to challenges in the courts.  On December 14, 2018, a Texas U.S. District Court Judge ruled that the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress.  On December 18, 2019, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held that the individual mandate is unconstitutional and remanded the case to the Texas District Court to reconsider its earlier invalidation of the entire Affordable Care Act.  An appeal was taken to the U.S. Supreme Court which heard oral arguments in the case on November 10, 2020.  A ruling is expected in 2021.  

Further changes to and under the Affordable Care Act remain possible, although the new Administration under President Biden has signaled that it plans to build on the Affordable Care Act and expand the number of people who are eligible for subsidies under it.   President Biden indicated that he may use executive orders to undo changes to the Affordable Care Act made by the Trump administration and would advocate for legislation to build on the Affordable Care Act.  It is unknown what form any such changes or any law proposed to replace the Affordable Care Act would take, and how or whether it may affect our business in the future. We expect that changes to the Affordable Care Act, the Medicare and Medicaid programs, changes allowing the federal government to directly negotiate drug prices and changes stemming from other healthcare reform measures, especially with regard to healthcare access, financing or other legislation in individual states, could have a material adverse effect on the healthcare industry.

We expect that the Affordable Care Act, as well as other healthcare reform measures that have and may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for ANJESO and could seriously harm our future revenues. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare, Medicaid, or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payers. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or successfully commercialize ANJESO.

Legislative or regulatory programs that may influence prices of prescription drugs could have a material adverse effect on our ability to successfully commercialize ANJESO.

Current or future federal or state laws and regulations may influence the prices of drugs and, therefore, could adversely affect the prices that we receive for ANJESO. Programs in existence in certain states seek to set prices of all drugs sold within those states through the regulation and administration of the sale of prescription drugs. Expansion of these programs, in particular, state Medicaid programs, or changes required in the way in which Medicaid rebates are calculated under such programs, could adversely affect the price we receive for ANJESO and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Further, the pharmaceutical industry has in recent years been the subject of significant publicity regarding the pricing of pharmaceutical products, including publicity and pressure resulting from prices charged by pharmaceutical companies for new products as well as price increases by pharmaceutical companies on older products that the public has deemed excessive. Any downward pricing pressure on the price of ANJESO arising from social or political pressure to lower the cost of pharmaceutical products could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations and financial condition. As a result, pharmaceutical product prices have been the focus of increased scrutiny by the government, including certain state attorneys general, members of Congress and the United States Department of Justice. Decreases in health care reimbursements or prices of ANJESO could limit our ability to sell ANJESO or decrease our revenues, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Our business, financial condition, and results of operations are subject to risks arising from the international scope of our manufacturing and supply relationships.

Some of the contract manufacturers of ANJESO manufacture and source raw materials outside the United States and we may, in the future, use manufacturers outside the United States for our product candidates, including ANJESO. As such, we are subject to risks associated with such international manufacturing relationships, including:

39

Additionally, we are subject to periodic reviews and audits by governmental authorities responsible for administering import/export regulations. To the extent that we are unable to successfully defend against an audit or review, we may be required to pay assessments, penalties, and increased duties on products imported into the United States.

Risks Related to Clinical Development and Regulatory Approval of our Product Candidates

The regulatory approval processes of the FDA are lengthy, time-consuming and inherently unpredictable, and if we are ultimately unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, our business will be substantially harmed.

The time required to obtain approval by the FDA is unpredictable but typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. In addition, approval policies, regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. It is possible that none of our existing product candidates or any product candidates we may seek to develop in the future will ever obtain regulatory approval. Our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including the following:

We cannot be certain that our product candidates other than ANJESO will receive regulatory approval. Our revenue is dependent, to a significant extent, upon the size of the markets in the territories for which we have gained regulatory approval of ANJESO and will be dependent on the size of the market in the territories for which we require regulatory approval of our product candidates. If the markets for patients or indications that we are targeting are not as significant as we estimate, we may not generate significant revenue from sales of such products, if approved, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our product candidates may cause adverse events or other safety concerns or have other properties that could delay or prevent their regulatory approval or limit the scope of any approved label or market acceptance.

AEs caused by our product candidates could cause us, reviewing entities, clinical study sites or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical studies and could result in the denial of regulatory approval.  Clinical studies conducted with our product candidates have generated some AEs, and in some cases SAEs, as those terms are defined by the FDA in its regulations, and AEs or SAEs could be generated during our on-going and future clinical trials.  Our ability to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates may be adversely impacted by these AEs, SAEs or other safety concerns.  

40

Clinical development is a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future trial results. Clinical failure can occur at any stage of clinical development.

Clinical trials are expensive, can take many years to complete and have highly uncertain outcomes. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process as a result of inadequate study design, inadequate performance of a drug, inadequate adherence by patients or investigators to clinical trial protocols, or other factors. New drugs in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through earlier clinical trials. Some of our pipeline product candidates are in early stages of development, and positive preclinical and Phase I clinical trials for those product candidates may not necessarily be predictive of the results of later stage clinical trials. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials as a result of a lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, despite promising results in earlier trials. Our clinical trials may not be successful or may be more expensive or time-consuming than we currently expect. If clinical trials for any of our product candidates fail to demonstrate safety or efficacy to the satisfaction of the FDA or the equivalent regulatory authorities in other countries, the FDA or the equivalent regulatory authorities in other countries will not approve that drug and we would not be able to commercialize it, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Delays in clinical trials are common and have many causes, and any delay could result in increased costs to us and jeopardize or delay our ability to obtain regulatory approval and commence product sales.

We may experience delays in clinical trials of our product candidates, or the time required to complete clinical trials for our product candidates may be longer than anticipated. Our planned clinical trials may not begin on time, have an effective design, enroll a sufficient number of patients, or be completed on schedule, if at all. Our clinical trials can be delayed for a variety of reasons, including, but not limited to:

If clinical trials for any of our product candidates are delayed for any of the above reasons or other reasons, our development costs may increase, our approval process could be delayed and our ability to commercialize our product candidates could be materially harmed, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

We rely on third‑party manufacturers and suppliers to produce preclinical and clinical supplies, and, if approved, intend to rely on third-party manufacturers for commercial supplies, of our product candidates.

We do not own facilities for clinical-scale or commercial manufacturing of our product candidates. We rely on third parties to supply the materials for, and manufacture, our research and development, and preclinical and clinical trial APIs. There can be no assurance that our supply of research and development, preclinical and clinical development drugs and other materials will not be limited, interrupted, restricted in certain geographic regions or of satisfactory quality or continue to be available at acceptable prices. In particular, any replacement of our active pharmaceutical ingredient, or API, manufacturer could require significant effort and expertise because there may be a limited number of qualified manufacturers.

We expect to continue to rely on third‑party manufacturers if we receive regulatory approval for any product candidate. To the extent that we have existing, or enter into future, manufacturing arrangements with third parties, we will depend on these third parties to perform their obligations in a timely manner consistent with contractual and regulatory requirements, including those related to quality control and assurance. If we are unable to obtain or maintain third‑party manufacturing for product candidates, or to do so on commercially reasonable terms, we may not be able to develop and commercialize our product candidates successfully. Our or a third party’s failure to execute on our manufacturing requirements could adversely affect our business in a number of ways, including:

41

In addition, our ability to obtain materials from these suppliers could be disrupted if the operations of these manufacturers are affected by earthquakes, power shortages, telecommunications failures, water shortages, floods, hurricanes, typhoons, fires, extreme weather conditions, medical epidemics, including the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, and other natural or man‑made disasters or business interruptions. If their facilities are unable to operate because of an accident or incident, even for a short period of time, some or all of our research and development programs may be harmed or delayed, and our operations and financial condition could suffer. Our third‑party manufacturers also may use hazardous materials, including chemicals and compounds that could be dangerous to human health and safety or the environment, and their operations may also produce hazardous waste products. In the event of contamination or injury, our third‑party manufacturers could be held liable for damages or be penalized with fines in an amount exceeding their resources, which could result in our clinical trials or regulatory approvals being delayed or suspended. If we encounter any issues with our contract manufacturers or choose to engage a new supplier or contract manufacturer for any of our product candidates for which we seek regulatory approval, we would need to qualify and obtain FDA approval for another contract manufacturer or supplier as an alternative source for these products and services, which could be costly and cause significant delays.

We use third parties to assist with conducting, supervising and monitoring portions of our nonclinical and clinical studies, and if those third parties perform in an unsatisfactory manner, it may harm our business.

We use third parties to provide certain manufacturing and operational support and for assistance with clinical trials, data management and statistical support. While we have agreements governing their activities, we have limited influence over certain of these third parties’ actual performance. We have previously relied upon such third parties and plan to continue to use third parties to assist with monitoring and managing data for our ongoing clinical programs for ANJESO and our product candidates, as well as the execution of nonclinical studies. We control only certain aspects of our third parties’ activities.

We and our contractors are required to comply with Good Laboratory Practices, or GLPs, and Good Clinical Practices, or cGCPs, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA and equivalent regulatory authorities in other countries for all of our product candidates in development. The FDA and the equivalent regulatory authorities in other countries enforce these GLPs and cGCPs through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and clinical trial sites. If we or our contractors fail to comply with applicable GLPs and cGCPs, the data generated in our nonclinical studies and clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA may require us to perform additional studies or clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. In addition, our clinical trials for our product candidates will require a sufficiently large number of test subjects to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of each product candidate. Accordingly, if our contractors fail to comply with these regulations or fail to recruit a sufficient number of patients, we may be required to repeat the clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.

These contractors may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical studies or other drug development activities that could harm our competitive position. While we take steps to protect our intellectual property, we face the risk of potential unauthorized disclosure or misappropriation of our intellectual property by our contractors, which may allow our potential competitors to access our proprietary technology. If our contractors do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or fail to meet expected deadlines for items within their purview, or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they oversee is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements or for any other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, or successfully commercialize ANJESO or our product candidates. As a result, our financial results and the commercial prospects for ANJESO and any future product candidates that we develop would be harmed, our costs could increase, and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed.

Risks Related to Our Business Operations and Industry

We may be subject to litigation or government investigations for a variety of claims, which could adversely affect our operating results, harm our reputation or otherwise negatively impact our business.

We may be subject to litigation or government investigations. These may include claims, lawsuits, and proceedings involving securities laws, fraud and abuse, healthcare compliance, product liability, labor and employment, wage and hour, commercial and other matters. For example, on May 31, 2018, the Securities Litigation was filed against Recro and certain of its officers and directors in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Case No. 2:18-cv-02279-MMB) and purported to state a claim for alleged violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, based on statements made by Recro concerning the NDA for ANJESO. The second amended complaint seeks unspecified damages, interest, attorneys’ fees, and other costs. Recro filed a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint on June 18, 2020. The plaintiff filed an opposition to Recro’s motion to

42

dismiss on August 17, 2020. On September 16, 2020, Recro filed a reply in support of the motion to dismiss. See “Legal Proceedings” included in Part I, Item 3 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

In connection with our November 2019 separation from Recro, we accepted assignment by Recro of all of Recro’s obligations in connection with the Securities Litigation and agreed to indemnify Recro for all liabilities related to the Securities Litigation. Recro and we believe that the lawsuit is without merit and intend to vigorously defend against it. At this time, no assessment can be made as to its likely outcome or whether the outcome will be material to us. This litigation could result in substantial costs and a diversion of management’s resources and attention. In addition, any adverse determination could expose us to significant liabilities, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Issues with product quality could have a material adverse effect upon our business, subject us to regulatory actions and cause a loss of customer confidence in us or our products.

Our success depends upon the quality of our products. Quality management plays an essential role in meeting customer requirements, preventing defects, improving our product candidates and services and assuring the safety and efficacy of our product candidates. Our future success depends on our ability to maintain and continuously improve our quality management program. A quality or safety issue may result in adverse inspection reports, warning letters, product recalls or seizures, monetary sanctions, injunctions to halt manufacture and distribution of products, civil or criminal sanctions, costly litigation, refusal of a government to grant approvals and licenses, restrictions on operations or withdrawal of existing approvals and licenses. An inability to address a quality or safety issue in an effective and timely manner may also cause negative publicity, a loss of customer confidence in us or our future products, which may result in difficulty in successfully launching product candidates and the loss of sales, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Our future success depends on our ability to retain and have the full attention of our key executives as well as to attract, retain and motivate other qualified personnel.

We are highly dependent on the principal members of our executive team and, in particular, the services of Gerri A. Henwood, our President and Chief Executive Officer, the loss of whose services would adversely impact the achievement of our objectives. Recruiting and retaining qualified employees for our business, including scientific and technical personnel, will also be critical to our success. There is currently a shortage of skilled executives in our industry, which is likely to continue. As a result, competition for skilled personnel is intense and the turnover rate can be high. We may not be able to attract and retain personnel on acceptable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical companies for individuals with similar skill sets. In addition, failure to succeed in clinical studies may make it more challenging to recruit and retain qualified personnel. The inability to recruit or loss of the services of any executive or key employee could impede the progress of our research, development and commercialization objectives.

We will need to continue to grow the size of our organization. We may experience difficulties in managing this growth and factors outside our control, including the COVID-19 pandemic, may make it more difficult to operate and maintain a larger organization.

Once we received FDA approval of ANJESO, we increased the size of our managerial, operational, sales, marketing, financial and other resources as we prepared for the commercialization of ANJESO and development of our other product candidates. Our efforts to commercialize ANJESO were severely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Hospitals reduced elective surgeries, and many have still not yet returned to their prior number of surgeries before the COVID-19 outbreak, which has caused, and likely will continue to result in a decreased demand for ANJESO. COVID-19 also impacted revenue for hospitals, reduced staffing, diverted resources from other normal activities to patients suffering from COVID-19 and limited hospital access for nonpatients, including our sales professionals, which we believe has impacting our marketing and commercialization efforts. As a result of the negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on our commercialization efforts, in November 2020 we implemented a restructuring initiative, which included a reduction of workforce of approximately 40 positions.

If ANJESO is successfully commercialized, we intend to expand our employee base to fully support our evolution as a commercial stage pharmaceutical company. We will need to increase and maintain a specialty sales force to promote ANJESO to healthcare professionals and third-party payers. As we continue to expand, we may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations, which may result in weaknesses in our infrastructure, give rise to operational mistakes, loss of business opportunities, loss of employees and reduced productivity among remaining employees. Additional future growth could require significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the development of our existing or future product candidates.  Future growth would impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including:

43

As our operations expand, we will need to manage additional relationships with various collaboration partners, suppliers and other third parties.  Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize our product candidates and to compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to manage any future growth effectively.  To that end, we must be able to manage our development efforts and clinical trials effectively and hire, train and integrate additional management, administrative and sales and marketing personnel.  At this time, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to manage such growth amid the ongoing effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. We may not be able to accomplish these tasks, and our failure to accomplish any of them could prevent us from successfully growing our company.

We may acquire other assets or businesses, or form collaborations or make investments in other companies or technologies, that could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, dilute our shareholders’ ownership, increase our debt or cause us to incur significant expense.

A key aspect of our business strategy is seeking in-license or acquisition opportunities to add commercial or near-commercial products to our portfolio. We may not identify or complete these transactions in a timely manner, on a cost-effective basis, or at all, and we may not realize the anticipated benefits of any such transaction, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. We may not be able to find suitable acquisition candidates, and if we make any acquisitions, we may not be able to integrate these acquisitions successfully into our existing business and we may incur additional debt or assume unknown or contingent liabilities in connection therewith. Integration of an acquired company or assets may also disrupt ongoing operations, require the hiring of additional personnel and the implementation of additional internal systems and infrastructure, especially the acquisition of commercial assets, and require management resources that would otherwise focus on developing our existing business.

To finance any acquisitions or collaborations, we may choose to issue debt or shares of our common or preferred stock as consideration. Any such issuance of shares would dilute the ownership of our shareholders. If the price of our common stock is low or volatile, we may not be able to acquire other assets or companies or fund a transaction using our stock as consideration. Alternatively, it may be necessary for us to raise additional funds for acquisitions through public or private financings. Additional funds may not be available on terms that are favorable to us, or at all.

Our employees, partners, independent contractors, principal investigators, consultants, vendors and contract research organizations may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements.

We are exposed to the risk that our employees, partners, independent contractors, principal investigators, consultants, vendors and CROs may engage in fraudulent or other illegal activity with respect to our business. Misconduct by these employees could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct or unauthorized activity that violates: (1) FDA or DEA regulations, including those laws requiring the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to the FDA; (2) manufacturing standards; (3) federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations; or (4) laws that require the true, complete and accurate reporting of financial information or data. Activities subject to these laws also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, or illegal misappropriation of drug product, which could result in regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation. Any incidents or any other conduct that leads to an employee receiving an FDA debarment could result in a loss of business from our partners and severe reputational harm. We have adopted adopt a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, but it is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, monetary fines, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and curtailment of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business, operating results and financial condition.

We face potential product liability claims, and, if successful claims are brought against us, we may incur substantial liability.

Commercial sales of ANJESO expose us to the risk of product liability claims. Additionally, the use of any of our product candidates in clinical studies and the sale of any future products for which we obtain marketing approval exposes us to the risk of these claims. Product liability claims might be brought against us by consumers, health care providers, pharmaceutical companies or others selling or otherwise coming into contact with our products. If we cannot successfully defend against product liability claims, we could incur substantial liability and costs. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

44

Our current product liability insurance coverage may not be sufficient to reimburse us for any expenses or losses we may suffer. Moreover, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive and, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. On occasion, large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs that had unanticipated adverse effects. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our stock price to decline and, if judgments are excluded from our insurance coverage or exceed our insurance coverage, could adversely affect our results of operations and business. Moreover, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive and, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability.

We incur increased costs and demands upon our management as a result of complying with the laws and regulations affecting public companies. Failure to comply with such laws and regulations could result in sanctions or other penalties that would harm our business.

We are a public company and, as such, we incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses, including costs associated with public company reporting requirements.  We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act and we incur costs associated with current corporate governance requirements, including certain of the requirements under Section 404 and other provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as amended, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as other rules implemented by the SEC and the Nasdaq, the stock exchange on which our common stock is listed.  If we fail to comply with current corporate governance requirements, our business may be negatively affected, including by having our common stock delisted from Nasdaq.

The expenses incurred by public companies for reporting and corporate governance purposes have increased dramatically in recent years.  We expect these rules and regulations to continue to substantially increase our legal and financial compliance costs and to make some activities more time-consuming and costly.  We are unable to currently estimate these costs with any degree of certainty.  We also expect that these rules and regulations may make it difficult and expensive for us to continue to maintain director and officer liability insurance, and if we are able to maintain such insurance, we may be required to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage available to privately-held companies.  As a result, it may be more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified individuals to serve on our board of directors, or the board, or as our executive officers.

The JOBS Act allows us to postpone the date by which we must comply with certain laws and regulations and reduce the amount of information provided in reports filed with the SEC. We cannot be certain if the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies will make our common stock less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act, or JOBS Act. In addition, we qualify as a “smaller reporting company.” For so long as we remain an emerging growth company, we will be exempt from Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which requires auditor attestation to the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. We will cease to be an emerging growth company on the date that is the earliest of (i) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have total gross annual revenues of $1.07 billion or more; (ii) December 31, 2024; (iii) the date on which we have issued more than $1 billion in nonconvertible debt during the previous three years; or (iv) the date on which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer under the rules of the SEC. Even after we no longer qualify as an emerging growth company, we may still qualify as a smaller reporting company, which would allow us to take advantage of many of the same exemptions from disclosure requirements, including reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our periodic reports and proxy statements. We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we may rely on the exemptions available to us as an emerging growth company and/or smaller reporting company. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be more volatile.

As of the expiration of our emerging growth company status, we will be broadly subject to enhanced reporting and other requirements under the Exchange Act and Sarbanes-Oxley Act. This will require, among other things, annual management assessments of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and a report by our independent registered public accounting firm

45

addressing these assessments. These and other obligations could place significant demands on our management, administrative and operational resources, including accounting and information technology resources and our management and other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, these rules and regulations will increase our legal and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time-consuming and costly.

We may discover weaknesses in our system of internal financial and accounting controls and procedures that could result in a material misstatement of our financial statements. Under the Exchange Act, a material weakness is defined as a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of a company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis by the company’s internal controls. If material weaknesses or deficiencies in our internal controls exist and go undetected or unremediated, our financial statements could contain material misstatements that, when discovered in the future, could cause us to fail to meet our future reporting obligations and cause the price of our common stock to decline. Our internal control over financial reporting will not prevent or detect all errors and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the control system’s objectives will be met. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances of fraud will be detected.

If we are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, or if we are unable to maintain proper and effective internal controls over financial reporting, we may not be able to produce timely and accurate financial statements. If that were to happen, our investors could lose confidence in our reported financial information, the market price of our stock could decline, and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the SEC or other regulatory authorities.

Our disclosure controls and procedures may not prevent or detect all errors or acts of fraud.

Our disclosure controls and procedures are designed to reasonably assure that information required to be disclosed by us in reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to management, recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. We believe that any disclosure controls and procedures or internal controls and procedures, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.

These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people or by an unauthorized override of the controls. Accordingly, because of the inherent limitations in our control system, misstatements or insufficient disclosures due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.

If we fail to comply with data protection laws and regulations, we could be subject to government enforcement actions (which could include civil or criminal penalties), private litigation and/or adverse publicity, which could negatively affect our operating results and business.

We are subject to laws and regulations that address privacy and data security of patients who use our product candidates in the United States and in other jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. Numerous federal, state and international laws and regulations, including state data breach notification laws, state health information privacy laws, and federal and state consumer protection laws (e.g., Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act) govern the collection, use, disclosure, and protection of health-related and other personal information in the United States. These laws impose certain obligations, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of personal information, including individually identifiable health information, and impose notification obligations in the event of a breach of the privacy or security of personal information. Failure to comply with applicable data protection laws and regulations could result in government enforcement actions and create liability for us, which could include civil and/or criminal penalties, as well as private litigation and/or adverse publicity that could negatively affect our operating results and business.

In addition to regulations in the United States, to the extent we choose to clinically evaluate or sell any products outside of the United States, we will be subject to a variety of foreign data protection laws and compliance requirements. For example, in the European Union, the EU General Data Protection Regulation imposes strict obligations and restrictions on the ability to collect, analyze and transfer personal data, including health data from clinical trials and adverse event reporting. Switzerland and the United Kingdom have adopted similar restrictions. Data protection authorities from different European countries may interpret the applicable laws differently, and guidance on implementation and compliance practices are often updated or otherwise revised, which adds to the complexity of processing personal data in Europe. Any failure, or perceived failure, by us to comply with privacy and data protection laws, rules and regulations could result in proceedings or actions against us by governmental entities or others. These proceedings or actions may subject us to significant penalties and negative publicity, require us to change our business practices, increase our costs and severely disrupt our business.

46

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

We own or license numerous pending patent applications and issued patents in the United States. If our pending patent applications fail to issue or if our issued patents are not sufficiently broad, expire or are successfully opposed, invalidated, or rendered unenforceable, our business will be adversely affected.

Our commercial success will depend in part on obtaining and maintaining patent protection for our product candidates, as well as successfully defending our current and future patents against third-party challenges. To protect our proprietary technology, we intend to rely on patents, and we may also rely on other intellectual property protections, including trade secrets, nondisclosure agreements and confidentiality provisions.

There can be no assurance that our pending patent applications will result in issued patents. We own patents and patent applications for injectable meloxicam that cover pharmaceutical compositions, including compositions produced using NanoCrystal^® technology, methods of making ANJESO and methods of treating pain with ANJESO. These issued patents expire between 2022 and 2030 in the United States. We also exclusively in-license from Alkermes to manufacture and commercialize IV, intramuscular and parenteral meloxicam, on a perpetual royalty-free basis, patents and applications that are directed to methods of reducing flake-like aggregates in injectable nanoparticulate active agent compositions, and directed to injectable nanoparticulate active agent compositions produced by methods for reducing flake-like aggregates, which begin to expire in 2030, and an application directed to injectable, nanoparticulate meloxicam compositions containing flake-like aggregation reducing agents, which, if issued, would expire in 2030 in the field of manufacturing and commercializing IV, intramuscular and parenteral meloxicam. As of February 1, 2021, we own nine issued U.S. patents and four U.S. pending patent applications, and 58 issued foreign patents (including European validation countries) and fifteen pending PCT or foreign applications related to meloxicam, ANJESO, formulations of meloxicam, and methods of using meloxicam, which expire or would expire (if issued) between 2022 and 2039. As of February 1, 2021, we exclusively license eight issued U.S. patents and one U.S. pending patent application, and 40 issued foreign patents (including European validation countries) and two pending foreign applications relating to ANJESO, formulations of meloxicam and methods of manufacturing meloxicam to manufacture and commercialize ANJESO, intramuscular meloxicam and parenteral meloxicam. February 1, 2021, we own four issued U.S. patents, 20 issued foreign patents, including European validation countries, and one pending foreign application to Dex. In addition, we have licensed four patent families containing several U.S. and foreign issued patents and one pending application related to neuromuscular blocking agents from Cornell University. The patent applications that we have filed and have not yet been granted may fail to result in issued patents in the United States or foreign countries. Even if the patents do successfully issue, third parties may challenge the patents or the inventorship thereof, which can lead to an issued patent being found invalid, unenforceable or can otherwise alter the ownership of the patents.

The issuance of any patent is not a certainty. Unless and until our pending applications issue, their protective scope is impossible to determine. It is impossible to predict whether or how many of these applications will result in issued patents and patents that issue may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. Such challenges may result in loss of patent exclusivity or freedom to operate or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which may limit our ability to prevent others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology and products. In addition, upon expiration of a patent, we may be limited in our ability to prevent others from using or commercializing subject matter covered by the expired patents. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours. The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, including us, generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and has in recent years been the subject of much litigation. In addition, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. For example, European patent law restricts the patentability of methods of treatment of the human body more than United States law does. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after the first filing, or in some cases at all. Therefore, we cannot know with certainty whether we or our licensors were the first to make the inventions claimed in our owned or licensed patents or pending patent applications, or that we or our licensors were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. In addition, we may not be aware of particular prior art publications that may have an impact on patentability or enforceability. Further, the examination process may require us or our licensors to narrow the claims for our pending patent applications due to, for example, such prior art publications, which may limit the scope of patent protection that may be obtained if these applications issue. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued which protect our technology or products, in whole or in part, or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and products. Furthermore, our pending applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issues from such applications. Because the issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, issued patents that we own or have licensed from third parties may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the U.S. and abroad. Such challenges may result in the loss of patent protection, the narrowing of claims in such patents, and/or the invalidity or unenforceability of such patents, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products or limit the duration of the patent protection for our technology and products. Changes in either the patent laws

47

or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of patents or narrow the scope of patent protection.

Patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. The Leahy Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy Smith Act, enacted in September 2011, brought significant changes to the U.S. patent system. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The United States Patent Office continues to develop and implement new regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy Smith Act became effective on March 16, 2013. The Leahy Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patent, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Generic competitors can challenge the U.S. patents protecting our product candidates by filing an ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA for a generic or a modified version of our product candidates and negatively affect our competitive position.

Separate and apart from the protection provided under the U.S. patent laws, drug candidates may be subject to the provisions of the Hatch-Waxman Act, which may provide drug candidates with either a three- or five-year period of marketing exclusivity following receipt of FDA approval. The Hatch-Waxman Act prohibits the FDA from accepting the filing of an abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA, (for a generic product) or a 505(b)(2) NDA (for a modified version of the product) for three years for active drug ingredients previously approved by the FDA or for five years for active drug ingredients not previously approved by the FDA.

There is an exception, however, for newly approved molecules that allows competitors to challenge a patent beginning four years into the five-year exclusivity period by alleging that one or more of the patents listed in the FDA’s list of approved drug products are invalid, unenforceable and/or not infringed and submitting an ANDA for a generic version of a drug candidate. This patent challenge is commonly known as a Paragraph IV certification.  If we have an Orange Book listed patent and a third party submits a Paragraph IV certification to the FDA, a notice of the Paragraph IV certification must also be sent to us once the third party’s ANDA is accepted for filing by the FDA. We may then initiate a patent infringement lawsuit within 45 days of receipt of the notice and we will be entitled to a 30 month stay running from the end of the 5-year new chemical entity, or NCE, exclusivity period.  If we do not file a patent infringement lawsuit within the required 45-day period, the third party’s ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA will not be subject to the 30-month stay and the FDA could approve the ANDA or 505(b)(2) application after expiration of any applicable marketing exclusivity, such as the 5-year NCE exclusivity period or 3-year clinical investigation exclusivity. Within the past several years, the generic industry has aggressively pursued approvals of generic versions of innovator drugs at the earliest possible point in time.

If a generic company is able to successfully challenge the patents covering drug candidates or design around our patents and obtain FDA approval for an ANDA or 505(b)(2) application, the generic company may choose to launch a generic or modified version of our drug candidate. Any launch of a generic or modified version of our drug candidates prior to the expiration of patent protection will have a material adverse effect on our revenues and our results of operations.

Risks Related to Our Securities

The market price for our common stock has been volatile and may continue to fluctuate or may decline significantly in the future.

An active, liquid and orderly market for our common stock may not be sustained, which could depress the trading price of our common stock or cause it to continue to be highly volatile or subject to wide fluctuations. Some of the factors that could negatively affect our share price or result in fluctuations in the price or trading volume of our common stock include, among other things:

48

These broad market and industry factors may decrease the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. The stock market in general has from time-to-time experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations, including recently. In addition, in the past, following periods of volatility in the overall market and decreases in the market price of a company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against these companies. This litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources.

We do not expect to pay any cash dividends for the foreseeable future.

We do not anticipate that we will pay any cash dividends to holders of our common stock in the foreseeable future. Instead, we plan to retain any earnings to maintain and expand our operations. Our ability to pay cash dividends is currently restricted by the terms of our credit facility with MAM Eagle Lender. Accordingly, investors must rely on sales of their common stock after price appreciation, which may never occur, as the only way to realize any return on their investment. As a result, investors seeking cash dividends should not purchase our common stock.

Some provisions of our charter documents and Pennsylvania law may have anti-takeover effects that could discourage an acquisition of us by others, even if an acquisition would be beneficial to our shareholders and may prevent attempts by our shareholders to replace or remove our current management.

Provisions in our amended and restated articles of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws could make it more difficult for a third-party to acquire us or increase the cost of acquiring us, even if doing so would benefit our shareholders, or remove our current management. These include provisions that:

These provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our shareholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult for shareholders to replace members of our board of directors, who are responsible for appointing the members of our management. Because we are incorporated in Pennsylvania, we are governed by the provisions of the Pennsylvania Business Corporation Law of 1988, or PBCL, which may discourage, delay or prevent someone from acquiring us or merging with us whether or not it is desired by or beneficial to our shareholders. Under Pennsylvania law, a corporation may not, in general, engage in a business combination with any holder of 20% or more of its capital stock unless the holder has held the stock for five years or, among other things, the board of directors has approved the transaction. Any provision of our amended and restated articles of incorporation or amended and restated bylaws or Pennsylvania law that has the effect of delaying or deterring a change in control could limit the opportunity for our shareholders to receive a premium for their shares of our common stock and could also affect the price that some investors are willing to pay for our common stock.

49

Our amended and restated articles of incorporation will designate the state and federal courts located within the County of Philadelphia in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as the sole and exclusive forum for certain types of actions and proceedings that may be initiated by our shareholders, which could discourage lawsuits against us and our directors and officers.

Our amended and restated articles of incorporation provide that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, a state or federal court located within the County of Philadelphia in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania will be the sole and exclusive forum for (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on behalf of our company, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any of our directors, officers or other employees or our shareholders, (iii) any action asserting a claim arising pursuant to any provision of PBCL, or (iv) any action asserting a claim peculiar to the relationships among or between our company and our officers, directors and shareholders. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in shares of our capital stock shall be deemed to have notice of and to have consented to the provisions of our amended and restated articles of incorporation described above. This choice of forum provision may limit a shareholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for the types of claims listed above, which may discourage lawsuits with respect to such claims. Alternatively, if a court were to find the choice of forum provision contained in our amended and restated bylaws to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could harm our business, operating results and financial condition.

General Risk Factors

The security of our information technology systems may be compromised in the event of system failures, unauthorized access, cyberattacks or a deficiency in our cybersecurity, and confidential information, including non-public personal information that we maintain, could be improperly disclosed.

We rely extensively on information technology and systems including internet sites, data hosting, physical security, and software applications and platforms. Despite our security measures, our information technology systems, some of which are managed by third parties, may be susceptible to damage, disruptions or shutdowns due to computer viruses, attacks by computer hackers, failures during the process of upgrading or replacing software, power outages, user errors or catastrophic events. A significant breakdown, invasion, corruption, destruction or interruption of critical information technology systems, by our employees, others with authorized access to our systems or unauthorized persons could negatively impact or interrupt operations. For example, the loss of data from completed or ongoing clinical trials for our product candidates could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. The use of technology, including cloud-based computing, creates opportunities for the unintentional dissemination or intentional destruction of confidential information stored in our systems or our third-party systems. We could also experience a business interruption, theft of confidential information or reputational damage from malware or other cyberattacks, which may compromise our systems or lead to data leakage, either internally or at our third-party providers.

As part of our business, we maintain large amounts of confidential information, including non-public personal information on patients and our employees. Breaches in security, either internally or at our third-party providers, could result in the loss or misuse of this information, which could, in turn, result in potential regulatory actions or litigation, including material claims for damages, interruption to our operations, damage to our reputation or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results. Although we maintain information security policies and systems designed to prevent unauthorized use or disclosure of confidential information, including non-public personal information, there can be no assurance that such use or disclosure will not occur.

Any such business interruption, theft of confidential information or reputational damage from malware or other cyberattacks, or violation of personal information laws, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Litigation involving patents, patent applications and other proprietary rights is expensive and time-consuming. If we are involved in such litigation, it could cause delays in bringing our product candidates to market and interfere with our business.

Our commercial success depends in part on not infringing patents and proprietary rights of third parties. Although we are not currently aware of litigation or other proceedings or third-party claims of intellectual property infringement related to our product candidates, the pharmaceutical industry is characterized by extensive litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights.

In a patent infringement claim against us, we may assert, as a defense, that we do not infringe the relevant patent claims, that the patent is invalid or both. The strength of our defenses will depend on the patents asserted, the interpretation of these patents and/or our ability to invalidate the asserted patents. However, we could be unsuccessful in advancing non-infringement and/or invalidity arguments in our defense. In the United States, issued patents enjoy a presumption of validity, and the party challenging the validity of a patent claim must present clear and convincing evidence of invalidity, which is a high burden of proof. Conversely, the patent owner need only prove infringement by a preponderance of the evidence, which is a low burden of proof.

50

If we were found by a court to have infringed a valid third-party patent claim, we could be prevented from using the patented technology or be required to pay the owner of the patent for the right to license the patented technology or other compensatory damages. If we decide to pursue a license to one or more of these patents, we may not be able to obtain a license on commercially reasonable terms, if at all, or the license we obtain may require us to pay substantial royalties or grant cross licenses to our patent rights. For example, if the relevant patent is owned by a competitor, that competitor may choose not to license patent rights to us. If we decide to develop alternative technology, we may not be able to do so in a timely or cost-effective manner, if at all.

In addition, because patent applications can take years to issue and are often afforded confidentiality for some period of time, there may currently be pending applications, unknown to us, that later result in issued patents that could cover one or more of our products.

It is possible that we may in the future receive, particularly as a public company, communications from competitors and other companies alleging that we may be infringing their patents, trade secrets or other intellectual property rights, offering licenses to such intellectual property or threatening litigation. In addition to patent infringement claims, third parties may assert copyright, trademark or other proprietary rights against us. We may need to expend considerable resources to counter such claims and may not be able to be successful in our defense. Our business may suffer if a finding of infringement is established.

It is difficult and costly to protect our proprietary rights, and we may not be able to ensure their protection.

The patent positions of pharmaceutical companies can be highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions for which important legal principles remain unresolved. No consistent policy regarding the breadth of claims allowed in pharmaceutical patents has emerged in the United States to date. The pharmaceutical patent situation outside of the United States is even more uncertain. Changes in either the patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our intellectual property. Accordingly, we cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be allowed or enforced in the patents that may be issued from the applications we currently or may in the future own or license from third parties. Further, if any patent license we obtain is deemed invalid and/or unenforceable, it could impact our ability to commercialize or partner our technology.

The degree of future protection for our proprietary rights is uncertain, and we cannot ensure that: