EX-99.1

EX-99.1 2 d424554dex991.htm EX-99.1 EX-99.1

Exhibit 99.1

Unless the content otherwise requires, the terms “Mirum,” “company,” “our,” “us,” and “we” in this Exhibit 99.1 refer to Mirum Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

SUMMARY OF RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH OUR BUSINESS

An investment in shares of our common stock involves a high degree of risk. Below is a list of the more significant risks associated with our business. This summary does not address all of the risks that we face. Additional discussion of the risks listed in this summary, as well as other risks that we face, are set forth under “Risk Factors” below.

•

The success of our business depends, in part, on our ability to market and sell our approved medicines profitably.

•

If we are unable to adequately grow, maintain and scale our marketing and sales capabilities or enter into or maintain rights pursuant to agreements with third parties to market and sell our approved medicines, we may not be able to generate sufficient revenues to be viable.

•

Our approved medicines or any one of our product candidates, if approved, may fail to achieve the market acceptance among physicians, patients and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success.

•

We rely completely on third parties to manufacture and distribute our clinical and commercial drug supplies, including certain sole-source suppliers and manufacturers. These third parties may fail to obtain and maintain regulatory approval for their facilities, fail to provide us with sufficient quantities of drug substance, drug product, or labeled finished product in a timely fashion, or fail to do so at acceptable quality levels or prices.

•

Our business depends, in part, on the success of our product candidates, each of which requires significant clinical testing before we can seek regulatory approval and potentially launch commercial sales.

•

We have encountered and may continue to encounter delays and difficulties enrolling patients in our clinical trials, and as a result, our clinical development activities could be delayed or otherwise adversely affected.

•

Our clinical trials may fail to adequately demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates, which could prevent or delay regulatory approval and commercialization.

•

Clinical drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process with uncertain outcomes, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future trial results.

•

Any delays in the commencement or completion, or termination or suspension, of our clinical trials could result in increased costs for us, delay or limit our ability to generate revenue and adversely affect our commercial prospects.

•

Our product candidates are subject to extensive regulation and compliance, which is costly, and time consuming, and such regulation may cause unanticipated delays or prevent the receipt of the required approvals to commercialize our product candidates.

•

We face significant competition from other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies with products that may directly or indirectly compete with ours, and our operating results will suffer if we fail to compete effectively.

•

We may fail to realize all of the anticipated benefits of the Asset Purchase (defined below) or those benefits may take longer to realize than expected.

•

We depend on intellectual property licensed from third parties and termination of any of these licenses could result in the loss of significant rights, which would harm our business.

•

We may need substantial additional financing to continue our commercialization efforts for our approved medicines, develop our product candidates and implement our operating plans. If we fail to obtain additional financing when needed, we may be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our product development programs or commercialization efforts.

•

We do not currently have patent protection or regulatory exclusivity for certain of our approved medicines or may rely solely upon regulatory exclusivity. If we are unable to obtain and maintain sufficient intellectual property protection for our approved medicines and our product candidates, or if the scope of the intellectual property protection is not sufficiently broad, our competitors could develop and commercialize products similar or identical to ours, and our ability to successfully commercialize our approved medicines and our other product candidates, if approved, may be adversely affected.

RISK FACTORS

An investment in shares of our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the following risk factors, as well as the other information contained in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, our most recent Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, including the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our condensed consolidated financial statements and related notes, before deciding whether to purchase, hold or sell shares of our common stock. The occurrence of any of the following risks could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or growth prospects or cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements we have made in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, our most recent Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and those we may make from time to time. You should consider all of the risk factors described when evaluating our business.

Risks Related to Commercialization of Products and Development of our Product Candidates

The success of our business depends, in part, on our ability to sell our approved medicines profitably.

Livmarli^® (maralixibat) oral solution (“Livmarli”), Chenodal^® (chenodiol) tablets (“Chenodal”), Cholbam^® (cholic acid) capsules (“Cholbam”) are our approved medicines. The success of our business depends, in part, on our ability to commercialize our approved medicines profitably. Our successful commercialization depends on a number of factors, including, among others, the following:

•

our ability to grow and maintain our sales team in the United States (“U.S.”), Canada, and certain countries in Europe, as well as scale our distribution capabilities in these locations and others where our products are available;

•

the availability of adequate reimbursement and a commercially viable sales price;

•

acceptance by physicians, payors and patients of the benefits, safety and efficacy of our approved medicines, including relative to alternative and competing treatments;

•

a continued acceptable safety profile of our approved medicines;

•

the effect of recent or forthcoming health care legislation and regulatory changes in the locations where our approved medicines are available;

•

our ability to successfully obtain the substances and materials used in manufacturing our medicines from third parties and to have finished product manufactured by third parties in accordance with regulatory requirements and in sufficient quantities for our commercial needs;

•

our ability to establish and enforce intellectual property rights in and to our approved medicines and avoid third-party patent interference or intellectual property infringement claims; and

•

sufficient patient population that would benefit from our approved medicines as they are intended for use in rare diseases for which the patient population is small.

If one or more of the above factors is not present, many of which are beyond our control, in a timely manner or at all, we could experience significant delays or an inability to market and sell our approved medicines profitably, which would harm our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects.

To successfully commercialize our approved medicines, we must grow, maintain and appropriately scale our marketing, sales, distribution, managerial and other non-technical capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services. We have established our own commercial capabilities in the U.S. to commercialize our approved medicines. We are also in the process of further establishing our capabilities related to Livmarli in certain major European markets and Canada and have entered into a limited number of partner and distributor agreements in other select geographies. We plan to continue to evaluate opportunities to partner with pharmaceutical companies that have established sales and marketing capabilities to commercialize Livmarli and our other product candidates, if approved, outside of these geographies. Our projections of the commercial and sales needs to target these markets may not be accurate. If we are materially off from our projections, our business and operating results would be harmed.

Growing and maintaining of our own sales force to market Livmarli and Cholbam is expensive and time-consuming. Moreover, we may not be able to successfully or adequately develop this capability for our product candidates in development. We compete with other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to recruit, hire, train and retain marketing and sales personnel. We also face competition in our search for third parties to assist us with the sales and marketing efforts of our approved medicines, and any agreements with such third parties may not be on terms that are favorable to us. To the extent we do rely on third parties to commercialize our approved medicines and our other product candidates, if approved, we may have little or no control over the marketing and sales efforts of such third parties and our revenues from product sales may be lower than if we had commercialized our product candidates ourselves. In addition, we have entered into a limited number of partner and distributor agreements. Any loss, commercial failure, or termination of rights pursuant to these agreements could delay or hinder our commercialization efforts.

In the event we are unable to successfully grow and maintain our marketing and sales force or collaborate with necessary third-party marketing and sales organizations, we would not be able to commercialize our approved medicines and our business, results of operations, financial condition, and prospects would be materially adversely affected.

Our commercial success may be severely hindered if we are unable to obtain and/or maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for our approved medicines and any future product candidates, if approved.

The availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from private third-party payors such as pharmacy benefit managers and commercial insurers, and governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicaid in the US and equivalent programs in foreign countries, is critical to the commercial success of our approved medicines in the U.S. and in international markets. Coverage may be adversely affected by a number of factors, including, but not limited to:

•

increasing and intense pressure from political, social, competitive and other sources to reduce drug unit costs or limit changes in list price;

•

changes in federal, state or foreign government regulations or private third-party payors’ reimbursement policies;

•

reimbursement decisions and price negotiations with foreign government payors;

•

consolidation and increasing assertiveness of commercial payors seeking net price reduction via drug rebates and other forms of discounts linked to the placement of our approved medicines on their formularies; and

•

the imposition of restrictions on access or coverage of particular drugs or pricing.

A trend in the healthcare industry is cost containment. Third-party payors are developing increasingly sophisticated methods of controlling healthcare costs by, among other methods, limiting or preventing (for example via prior authorization, prior therapy or step edit requirements) coverage for particular medications, requiring drug companies to provide them with varying levels of discounts from list prices and/or challenging the value of list prices charged for medical products. Similarly, the containment of healthcare costs has become a priority for federal and state governments around the world. Coverage decisions may depend upon the size of a patient population, perceptions of clinical efficacy and economic standards that may disfavor new drug products when more established or lower cost therapeutic alternatives are already available or subsequently become available.

Coverage and reimbursement for drug products can differ significantly across payors. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our approved medicines to each third-party payor separately, with no assurance that coverage will be obtained or maintained. Additionally, coverage policies and third-party reimbursement rates may change at any time. For example, rebate payments may increase, or prices be adjusted under value-based purchasing arrangements based on evidence-based measures or outcomes-based measures for a patient or beneficiary based on use of our drug. Thus, even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more drug products for which we receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.

In many foreign countries, including Member States of the EU, the pricing of prescription drugs is subject to governmental control and the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. In such countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after receipt of regulatory approval for a product and varies between countries. In addition, there can be considerable pressure by governments and other stakeholders on prices and reimbursement levels. For instance, governmental authorities in the EU Member States and third-party payors could base pricing and reimbursement terms on what they perceive to be comparable products, even if approved for different indications. In addition, the EU provides options for EU Member States to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. An EU Member State may approve a specific price for the medicinal product, it may refuse to reimburse a product at the price set by the manufacturer or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. These pricing and reimbursement decisions may impact the pricing and reimbursement of Livmarli in such jurisdictions. Many EU Member States also periodically review their reimbursement procedures for medicinal products, which could have an adverse impact on reimbursement status. Moreover, political, economic and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing negotiations, and pricing negotiations often continue after coverage and reimbursement have been obtained. Reference pricing or pricing comparisons to our competitors used by various countries and parallel distribution, or arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced countries, can further reduce prices. Publication of discounts by third-party payors or authorities may lead to further pressure on the prices or reimbursement levels within the country of publication and other countries.

We expect that legislators, policymakers and healthcare insurance funds in the EU Member States will continue to propose and implement cost-containing measures, such as lower maximum prices, lower or lack of reimbursement coverage and incentives to use cheaper, usually generic, products as an alternative to branded products, and/or branded products available through parallel import to keep healthcare costs down. Moreover, in December 2021, Regulation No 2021/2282 on Health Technology Assessment, or HTA, amending Directive 2011/24/EU (“HTA Regulation”), was adopted in the EU. The Regulation will apply from January 2025. It is intended to boost cooperation among EU Member States in assessing health technologies, including new medicinal products, and providing the basis for cooperation at EU level for joint clinical assessments in these areas. The Regulation foresees a three-year transitional period and will permit EU Member States to use common HTA tools, methodologies, and procedures across the EU, working together in four main areas, including joint clinical assessment of the innovative health technologies with the most potential impact for patients, joint scientific consultations whereby developers can seek advice from HTA authorities, identification of emerging health technologies to identify promising technologies early, and continuing voluntary cooperation in other areas. Individual EU Member States will continue to be responsible for assessing non-clinical (e.g., economic, social, ethical) aspects of health technologies, and making decisions on pricing and reimbursement. If we are unable to maintain favorable pricing and reimbursement status in EU Member States for product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatory approval, any anticipated revenue from and growth prospects for those products in the EU could be negatively affected.

Historically, products launched in the EU and other foreign countries do not follow price structures of the U.S. and generally prices tend to be significantly lower and the time to obtain pricing and reimbursement approvals is significantly longer. If pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels or if reimbursement of Livmarli and any future product candidates, if approved, is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, our revenues from sales by us or our partners and the potential profitability of our approved medicines or any future product candidates, if approved, in those countries would be negatively affected.

The commercial success of our approved medicines or any one of our product candidates, if approved, depends significantly on the market acceptance among physicians, patients, tertiary care centers, transplant centers and others in the medical community. The degree and rate of market acceptance depends on a number of factors, including, among other things:

•

patient demand;

•

the availability of adequate reimbursement from private third-party payors and government authorities;

•

the willingness of patients to pay out-of-pocket in the absence of coverage and adequate reimbursement by third-party payors and government authorities;

•

the cost of treatment in relation to alternative treatments and patients willingness to pay for our approved medicines, including relative to discretionary items;

•

our ability to successfully compete with available off-label therapies, future approved therapies, and therapies in development and available for use through expanded access programs;

•

acceptance by physicians, patients, tertiary care centers, transplant centers and others in the medical community that our approved medicines are safe and effective treatments;

•

physician and patient willingness to adopt a new therapy over other available therapies;

•

limitations, warnings or adverse drug reactions contained in the labeling or product inserts approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and patients’ and physicians’ assessment of these limitations and warnings;

•

overcoming any biases physicians or patients may have toward particular therapies for the treatment of the indications our approved medicines are approved for;

•

patients and caregivers properly using our approved medicines as instructed;

•

the prevalence and severity of side effects from the use or potential misuse of our approved medicines;

•

relative convenience and ease of administration, including as compared to alternative treatments and competitive therapies, and patient satisfaction with the overall treatment experience;

•

the ability of specialty pharmacies we contract with to process prescriptions and dispense our approved medicines and the processes required to place orders with those pharmacies;

•

the ability of our patient services hub to provide adequate support for patients and physicians to prescribe and access our approved medicines;

•

the timing of market introduction of any approved medicines as well as competitive products;

•

the effectiveness of our sales, marketing and distribution efforts and those of the third parties with whom we contract;

•

adverse publicity about our approved medicines or favorable publicity about competitive products;

•

potential product liability claims;

•

our ability to manage our growth and operations to effectively support our commercialization activities; and

•

patient satisfaction leading to a high percentage of patients deriving clinical benefit and staying on our approved medicines chronically.

If any of our approved medicines fail to achieve the market acceptance among physicians, patients, tertiary care centers, transplant centers or others in the medical community necessary for commercial success, our operating results and financial condition will be adversely affected, which may delay, prevent or limit our ability to generate revenue and continue our business.

Our approved medicines and our product candidates may cause undesirable side effects or have other properties that could limit their commercial profile, expose us to product liability claims, delay or prevent regulatory approval of our product candidates or additional indications, or result in significant negative consequences following any additional marketing approval, any of which may adversely impact our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects.

As is the case with biopharmaceuticals generally, it is likely that there may be side effects and adverse events (“AEs”) associated with our product candidates’ use. Results of our clinical trials and expanded access program could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects or unexpected characteristics. Undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The drug-related side effects could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

In clinical trials of Livmarli, the most commonly reported AEs were diarrhea, abdominal pain and vomiting, and were mostly mild to moderate in severity and transient in nature. Additionally, AEs reported in greater than 5% of patients included fat-soluble vitamin deficiency, nausea, liver transaminase increases, gastrointestinal bleeding and bone fracture. The frequency of observed AEs has not increased over time. In clinical trials of volixibat, the most common AEs reported were mild to moderate GI events observed in the volixibat groups. The most common adverse events for Cholbam (≥1%) are diarrhea, reflux esophagitis, malaise, jaundice, skin lesion, nausea, abdominal pain, intestinal polyp, urinary tract infection, and peripheral neuropathy. Related adverse events seen in one patient each from the RESTORE study assessing Chenodal in patients with cerebrotendinous xanthomatosis (“CTX”), included fatigue, gait disturbance, diarrhea, liver transaminase increase, bilirubin increase, ataxia, tremors, decreased appetite and psychiatric disorder.

Additionally, in respect of our approved medicines or if one or more of our product candidates receives marketing approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by our approved medicines or such product candidates or other products with the same or related active ingredients, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including, among other things:

•

regulatory authorities may withdraw approvals of such product, including the FDA or European Commission withdrawing approval for the affected medicine;

•

regulatory authorities may require additional warnings on the label;

•

regulatory authorities may require a recall or we or our potential partners may voluntarily recall such product;

•

we may be required to create a medication guide outlining the risks of such side effects for distribution to patients at significant cost or instate a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (“REMS”) or Risk Management Plan (“RMP”);

•

regulatory authorities may require the addition of warnings, such as black box or other warnings, or contraindications in the product labeling that could diminish the usage of the product or otherwise limit the commercial success of the affected product;

•

our ability to promote our approved medicines may be limited and we could be required to change administration of, or modify, such product in some other way;

•

regulatory authorities may require us to modify, suspend or terminate our clinical trials, conduct additional clinical trials or engage in costly post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of such product;

•

undesirable side effects may limit physicians’ or patients’ willingness to initiate or continue therapy with such product;

•

sales may decrease significantly;

•

we could be sued and held liable for harm caused to patients; and

•

our corporate brand and reputation or the reputation of our approved medicines may suffer.

Such events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of our approved medicines, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

If we fail to comply with our reporting and payment obligations under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program or other governmental pricing programs in the U.S., we could be subject to additional reimbursement requirements, fines, sanctions and exposure under other laws which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We participate in, or are subject to, the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, as administered by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”), and other federal and state government pricing programs in the U.S., and we may participate, or be asked to participate, in additional government pricing programs or supplemental rebates in the future. These programs generally require us to pay rebates or otherwise provide discounts to government payors in connection with drugs that are dispensed to beneficiaries/recipients of these programs. In some cases, such as with the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, the rebates are based on pricing that we report to the government agencies that administer the programs. Pricing requirements and rebate/discount calculations are complex, vary among products and programs, and are often subject to interpretation by governmental or regulatory agencies and the courts. The requirements of these programs, including, by way of example, their respective terms and scope, change frequently. For example, on March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer’s price (“AMP”), for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, beginning January 1, 2024. Responding to current and future changes may increase our costs, and the complexity of compliance will be time consuming. Invoicing for rebates is provided in arrears, and there is frequently a time lag of up to several months between the sales to which rebate notices relate and our receipt of those notices, which further complicates our ability to accurately estimate and accrue for rebates related to the Medicaid program as implemented by individual states. Thus, there can be no assurance that we will be able to identify all factors that may cause our discount and rebate payment obligations to vary from period to period, and our actual results may differ significantly from our estimated allowances for discounts and rebates. Changes in estimates and assumptions may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) Office of Inspector General and other Congressional, enforcement and administrative bodies have recently increased their focus on pricing requirements for products, including, but not limited to the methodologies used by manufacturers to calculate AMP, and best price, for compliance with reporting requirements under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. Additionally, several states have a practice of asking or are increasing activity in requesting supplemental rebates for covered products. We are liable for errors associated with our submission of pricing data and for any overcharging of government payors. For example, failure to submit monthly/quarterly AMP and best price data on a timely basis could result in significant civil monetary penalties for each day the submission is late beyond the due date. Failure to make necessary disclosures and/or to identify overpayments could result in allegations against us under the civil False Claims Act and other laws and regulations. Any required refunds to the U.S. government or responding to a government investigation or enforcement action would be expensive and time consuming and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, in the event that the CMS were to terminate our rebate agreement, no federal payments would be available under Medicaid or Medicare for our covered outpatient drugs.

We may face product liability exposure, and if claims are brought against us, we may incur substantial liability if our insurance coverage for those claims is inadequate.

We face an inherent risk of product liability suits for our approved medicines and product candidates. Our approved medicines and our product candidates are designed to affect important bodily functions and processes. Any side effects, manufacturing defects, failure to follow instructions, misuse or abuse associated with our approved medicines or our product candidates could result in injury to a patient or even death. In addition, a liability claim may be brought against us even if our approved medicines or our product candidates merely appear to have caused an injury. Product liability claims may be brought against us by, among others, consumers, their family members, healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies or others selling or otherwise coming into contact with our product or product candidates. If we are the target of product liability claims, we will incur substantial legal costs, potential liabilities and could incur reputational harm if we do not successfully defend ourselves.

In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in, among other things:

•

the inability to commercialize our approved medicines or product candidates, if approved;

•

decreased demand for our approved medicines or product candidates;

•

termination of clinical trial sites or entire trial programs;

•

product recall or withdrawal from the market or labeling, marketing or promotional restrictions;

•

impairment of our business reputation and negative media attention;

•

substantial costs of any related litigation or similar disputes;

•

distraction of management’s attention and other resources and employees from our primary business;

•

substantial monetary awards to patients or other claimants against us that may not be covered by insurance; and

•

loss of revenue.

Large judgments have been awarded in class action and individual lawsuits based on drugs that had anticipated or unanticipated side effects. Although we have obtained product liability insurance coverage, our insurance coverage may not be sufficient to cover all of our product liability related expenses or losses and may not cover 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, in sufficient amounts or upon adequate terms to protect us against losses due to product liability. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our stock price to decline and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could decrease our cash and could harm our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects.

If we are found to have improperly promoted off-label uses of our approved medicines, or unapproved uses of our product candidates, if approved, or if physicians misuse or use off-label of our approved medicines or our product candidates, if approved, we may become subject to prohibitions on the sale or marketing of such products, product liability claims and significant fines, penalties and sanctions, and our brand and reputation could be harmed.

The FDA, European Commission, competent authorities of individual EU Member States, and comparable foreign regulatory authorities strictly regulate the marketing and promotional claims that are made about drug and biologic products. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses or indications that are not approved by the FDA, European Commission, Health Canada or comparable foreign regulatory authorities as reflected in the product’s approved labeling and comparative safety or efficacy claims cannot be made without direct comparative clinical data. For example, although Livmarli may appeal to individuals who have not been diagnosed with cholestatic pruritus associated with ALGS or suffer from other forms of cholestatic pruritus, we are only able to promote Livmarli in the U.S. for cholestatic pruritus associated with ALGS in patients three months of age and older and to HCPs in the EU for the treatment of cholestatic pruritus in patients with ALGS two months of age and older. If we are found to have promoted off-label uses of our approved medicines or product candidates, we may receive warning or untitled letters and become subject to significant criminal and civil liability, which would materially harm our business. Further, both federal and state governments have levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper off-label promotion and have enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion and to undertake corrective remedies.

If we become the target of such an investigation or prosecution based on our marketing and promotional practices, we could face similar sanctions, which would materially harm our business. In addition, management’s attention could be diverted from our business operations, significant legal expenses could be incurred and our brand and reputation could be damaged. In some instances, the FDA has also requested that companies enter into consent decrees or permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed. If we are deemed by the FDA to have engaged in the promotion of off-label uses, we could be subject to FDA regulatory or enforcement actions as well as by other federal, state or foreign enforcement authorities that might take action if they consider our business activities to constitute promotion of an off-label use, which could result in significant penalties, including criminal, civil or administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. For example, if such off-label promotion results in the submission of a reimbursement claim to a governmental healthcare program, we could be found liable under the U.S. False Claims Act. In cases where off-label promotion has resulted in violations of other statutes, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) has also required companies to enter into deferred prosecution agreements or corporate integrity agreements.

Our approved medicines and our product candidates are subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense. We may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with any product.

Any regulatory approvals that we receive may be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including post-market studies or clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor safety and effectiveness. The FDA may also require a REMS in order to approve a product candidate, which could entail requirements for a medication guide, physician communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. Similarly, the European Commission may require a RMP in order to collect additional information on a medicine’s safety profile which may include plans for pharmacovigilance activities and measures to minimize risks. In addition, if the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities approve a product candidate, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse

event reporting, post-marketing obligations, storage, advertising, promotion, import, export and recordkeeping for the approved product will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. For example, we are subject to ongoing FDA and European Commission obligations and continued regulatory review with respect to, among other things, the manufacturing, processing, labeling, packaging, distribution, AE reporting, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for Livmarli, which requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports and registration, as well as continued compliance with cGMP requirements and with the FDA’s and equivalent foreign good clinical practice (“GCP”). We are also subject to post-marketing obligations for Chenodal and Cholbam.

In addition, Livmarli was the subject of a marketing authorization granted by the European Commission in accordance with Article 14.8 of the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”) Regulations under exceptional circumstances. This type of authorization is reviewed annually to reassess the risk-benefit balance of the medicinal product. The purpose of any specific procedures/obligations imposed as part of the marketing authorization granted in exceptional circumstances is to contribute to the provision of information on the safe and effective use of the product. Grant of a marketing authorization in exceptional circumstances is for a renewable period of one year and will normally not lead to the completion of a full dossier/approval. In addition, we are subject to FDA and European Commission post-marketing requirements including the conduct and submission of non-clinical, clinical and registry studies and the FDA’s and EU’s prohibition against marketing Livmarli for uses that are not approved by the FDA and EMA, respectively, as reflected in Livmarli’s approved labeling. These and similar requirements could be imposed by the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for any approved product.

In addition, manufacturers of drug and biologic products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA, the competent authorities of the individual EU Member States, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP regulations. If we or a regulatory agency discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as AEs of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where, or processes by which, the product is manufactured, such events may result in, among other things:

•

restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, withdrawal of the product from the market, or voluntary or mandatory product recalls;

•

fines, untitled letters, warning letters or holds on clinical trials;

•

refusal by the FDA or European Commission to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications filed by us or suspension or revocation of license approvals;

•

product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of a product; and

•

injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

The occurrence of any event or penalty described above or any similar event or penalty may inhibit our ability to commercialize our approved medicines or our product candidates and generate revenue and could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity.

The FDA’s, European Commission’s and comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval for our product candidates or restrict marketing of Livmarli and any then-approved product. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

We may pursue approval in the U.S. or certain countries in Europe using accelerated, exceptional circumstances or conditional approval pathways, which typically require commitments to complete additional clinical trials. The additional clinical trials may not confirm the treatment effect, which may result in the loss of marketing authorization under accelerated approval, exceptional circumstances or conditional approval.

Our business and future success depends, in part, on our ability to obtain regulatory approval for, and then successfully commercialize our product candidates. Our product candidates will require clinical development, regulatory review and approval in multiple jurisdictions, substantial investment, access to sufficient manufacturing capacity and significant marketing efforts before we can generate any revenue from product sales. Further, we are not permitted to market or promote any of our product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never receive such regulatory approvals for our product candidates.

Our clinical trials may not be successful and may not be completed on time or at all, and the FDA, EMA or comparable regulatory authorities may disagree with the design or implementation of our clinical trials. For example, in certain of our ongoing clinical trials, the primary efficacy endpoint is a patient-reported outcome or a caregiver-reported outcome measuring the decrease in severity of pruritus. The FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not accept such patient-reported outcomes or caregiver-reported outcomes as validated. If modifications are needed for our study design to support the submission of an application for marketing approval, incorporating such modifications may be costly and could lead to delays in obtaining approval from the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, which may significantly, adversely and materially affect our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates. Further, even if we make changes to the study design to address these considerations, the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not approve our product candidates.

Even if such regulatory authorities agree with the design and implementation of our clinical trials, such regulatory authorities may change their requirements in the future. In addition, even if the clinical trials are successfully completed, the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not interpret the results as we do, and more clinical trials could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval. For example, the FDA typically requires results from two well controlled Phase 3 clinical trials to support an NDA submission seeking approval to market a new drug. We believe that the positive results from our single Phase 3 MARCH clinical trial, will be sufficient to support our NDA supplement submitted February 2023 seeking approval for Livmarli for the treatment of cholestatic pruritus associated with PFIC. In addition, in April 2023, we submitted a variation application and data from our MARCH Phase 3 clinical trial for PFIC to the EMA seeking to extend the label for Livmarli to include the treatment of PFIC in patients two months of age or older. However, the FDA or the EMA may require additional Phase 3 trials in order to expand the label or may reject expansion altogether.

To the extent that the results of our clinical trials are not satisfactory to the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for support of a marketing application, approval for our product candidates may be significantly delayed or prevented, or we may be required to expend significant additional resources, which may not be available to us, to conduct additional clinical trials in support of potential approval for our product candidates.

While Chenodal is standard of care for CTX, it is not approved for that indication and we cannot promote or market it until it is approved for CTX which may be delayed or denied, which could adversely affect Chenodal revenues.

Chenodal is approved for radiolucent stones in the gallbladder yet is used primarily as standard of care for CTX. FDA has provided a letter acknowledging Chenodal as a medical necessity for CTX, but prescriptions for this indication are not on label. As such, any change in this view from FDA could result in an adverse effect to the ability to sell Chenodal in this indication. Unless and until Chenodal is approved for CTX, we cannot market or promote Chenodal for CTX which limits its growth potential.

We recently announced topline results of a Phase 3 clinical trial to evaluate the effects of Chenodal in patients with CTX, known as the RESTORE study. While RESTORE is intended to support an NDA submission for marketing authorization of Chenodal for CTX in the United States, FDA may not agree with our interpretation of the results and may ask for additional data to be submitted or may deny an approval for CTX. FDA may also not agree with the completeness of our planned NDA submission and may ask for additional non-clinical, manufacturing or supportive clinical data. We have orphan designation for Chenodal for CTX which has the potential to allow seven years of orphan exclusivity upon approval. If we do not receive approval for CTX, we will not have the benefit of this orphan exclusivity. Furthermore, even with approval, we may not receive the benefit of the orphan designation or such designation may not prevent a generic launch for the treatment of radiolucent gallstones. Any such delay or denial of approval and orphan exclusivity for the treatment of CTX could lead to an adverse impact to, our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Patient enrollment, a significant factor in the timing of clinical trials, is generally affected by many factors including, but not limited to, the size and nature of the patient population, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the eligibility criteria for the clinical trial, the design of the clinical trial, competing clinical trials and clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the product candidate being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new drugs that may be approved for the indications we are investigating.

Further, each indication for which we are evaluating Livmarli and volixibat is a rare cholestatic liver disease with limited patient populations from which to draw participants in clinical trials. We will be required to identify and enroll a sufficient number of patients with the disease under investigation for each of our ongoing and planned clinical trials of Livmarli and volixibat. Potential patients may not be adequately diagnosed or identified with the diseases which we are targeting or may not meet the entry criteria for our trials. In addition, patients may ultimately decide not to enroll in a particular clinical trial for reasons outside of our control. We are also conducting clinical trials in countries that have not yet had Livmarli or volixibat trials conducted and we have not yet worked with such foreign regulatory authorities. As a result, we could face patient recruitment issues in certain countries where such foreign regulatory authorities are not familiar with Livmarli or volixibat. Additionally, other pharmaceutical companies targeting these same cholestatic liver diseases are recruiting clinical trial patients from these patient populations, and have expanded access programs available, which may delay or make it more difficult to fully enroll our clinical trials. Our inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients for any of our current or future clinical trials would result in significant delays. As a result, we may need to delay the completion of such trials beyond our expected timelines or abandon one or more clinical trials altogether.

Our clinical trials may fail to adequately demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates, which could prevent or delay regulatory approval and commercialization.

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of a product candidate, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive preclinical testing and clinical trials that a product candidate is both safe and effective for use in each target indication. Clinical trials often fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy of the product candidate studied for the target indication. Most product candidates that commence clinical trials are never approved by regulatory authorities for commercialization. In the case of our product candidates, we are seeking to develop treatments for rare diseases for which there is limited clinical experience, and our planned clinical trials use novel end points and measurement methodologies, which add complexity to the conduct of and analysis of data from our clinical trials and may delay or prevent regulatory approval.

Clinical drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process with uncertain outcomes, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future trial results.

Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses. Further, if patients drop out of our clinical trials, miss scheduled doses or follow-up visits or otherwise fail to follow clinical trial protocols, or if our clinical trials are otherwise disrupted, the integrity of data from our clinical trials may be compromised or not accepted by the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, which would represent a significant setback for the applicable program. Additional safety data generated from our expanded access program and post-marketing studies could be different from, including less favorable than, the data generated and discussed with regulatory authorities to date. Our clinical trials may not be successful, and any safety concerns observed in any one of our clinical trials in our targeted indications could limit the prospects for regulatory approval of our product candidates in other indications.

Before we can initiate clinical trials for our product candidates, we must submit the results of preclinical studies to the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities along with other information, including information about product candidate chemistry, manufacturing and controls, and our proposed clinical trial protocol, as part of an IND application or similar regulatory filing. Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of our product candidates, we must conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product candidates in humans. Clinical testing is expensive, time consuming and uncertain as to outcome.

We do not know whether our planned clinical trials will begin on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. The commencement and completion of clinical trials can be delayed for a number of reasons, including delays related to:

•

the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities disagreeing as to the design or implementation of our clinical trials or agreement to commence our clinical trials;

•

the FDA’s, EU Member State competent authorities’, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ failure to accept our proposed manufacturing processes and suppliers and/or requirement to provide additional information regarding our manufacturing processes before providing marketing authorization;

•

any failure or delay in reaching an agreement with CROs and clinical trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and clinical trial sites;

•

obtaining approval from one or more institutional review boards (“IRBs”) or ethics committees;

•

IRBs or ethics committees refusing to approve, suspending or terminating the clinical trial at an investigational site, precluding enrollment of additional subjects, or withdrawing their approval of the clinical trial;

•

changes to clinical trial protocol;

•

selection of clinical end points that require prolonged periods of clinical observation or analysis of the resulting data;

•

sites deviating from clinical trial protocol or dropping out of a clinical trial;

•

manufacturing sufficient quantities of product candidate or obtaining sufficient quantities of combination therapies for use in clinical trials;

•

subjects failing to enroll or remain in our trial at the rate we expect, or failing to return for post-treatment follow-up;

•

subjects choosing an alternative treatment for the indication for which we are developing our product candidates, or participating in competing clinical trials;

•

lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial;

•

subjects experiencing severe or unexpected drug-related AEs;

•

occurrence of serious adverse events (“SAEs”) in clinical trials of the same class of agents conducted by other companies;

•

a facility manufacturing our product candidates or any of their components being ordered by the FDA, EU Member State competent authorities or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to temporarily or permanently shut down due to violations of cGMP, regulations or other applicable requirements, or infections or cross-contaminations of product candidates in the manufacturing process;

•

any changes to our manufacturing process, suppliers or formulation that may be necessary or desired;

•

the impact of geopolitical and macroeconomic developments on our ongoing and planned clinical trials; and

•

failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, suspension or termination.

Further, conducting clinical trials in foreign countries presents additional risks that may delay completion of our clinical trials. These risks include the failure of enrolled patients in foreign countries to adhere to clinical protocol as a result of differences in healthcare services or cultural customs, managing additional administrative burdens associated with foreign regulatory schemes, as well as political and economic risks relevant to such foreign countries.

Moreover, principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may conclude that a financial relationship between us and a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the study. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, as the case may be, and may ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of one or more of our product candidates.

If we experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates will be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenue from any of these product candidates will be delayed. Moreover, any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenue. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, termination or suspension of, or a delay in the commencement or completion of, clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of a product candidate. Any delays to our clinical trials that occur as a result could shorten any period during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates and our competitors may be able to bring products to market before we do, and the commercial viability of our product candidates could be significantly reduced. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Our product candidates are subject to extensive regulation and compliance, which is costly and time consuming, and such regulation may cause unanticipated delays or prevent the receipt of the required approvals to commercialize our product candidates.

The clinical development, manufacturing, labeling, storage, record-keeping, advertising, promotion, import, export, marketing and distribution of our product candidates are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA in the U.S., the EMA and EU Member State competent authorities in the EU and by comparable foreign regulatory authorities in other markets. In the U.S., the EU and many foreign countries, we are not permitted to market our product candidates until we receive regulatory approval from the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The process of obtaining regulatory approval is expensive, often takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and can vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidates involved, as well as the target indications and patient population. Approval policies or regulations may change, and regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the drug approval process, including the ability to delay, limit or deny approval of a product candidate for many reasons. Despite the time and expense invested in clinical development of product candidates, regulatory approval is never guaranteed.

Prior to obtaining approval to commercialize a product candidate in the U.S. or internationally, we must demonstrate with substantial evidence from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials, and to the satisfaction of the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, that such product candidates are safe and effective for their intended uses. Results from non-clinical studies and clinical trials can be interpreted in different ways. Even if we believe the non-clinical or clinical data for our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA, EMA or comparable regulatory authorities, as the case may be, may also require us to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials for our product candidates either prior to or post-approval, or may object to elements of our clinical development program. For example, we recently announced positive results from our Phase 3 MARCH clinical trial of Livmarli in PFIC, and we have submitted an sNDA for Livmarli to the FDA in February 2023 for the treatment of cholestatic pruritus associated with PFIC and a marketing authorization variation to the EMA in April 2023 for Livmarli in the treatment of PFIC. However, the FDA or the EMA may not agree with our interpretation of the results and FDA and the European Commission may not grant approval.

Our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including the following:

•

the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with the design or implementation of our clinical trials or the validation of our caregiver and patient reported outcome instruments;

•

serious and unexpected drug-related side effects may be experienced by participants in our clinical trials or by individuals using drugs similar to our product candidates;

•

the population studied in the clinical trial may not be sufficiently broad or representative to assure safety in the full population for which we seek approval;

•

the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not accept clinical data from trials which are conducted at clinical facilities or in countries where the standard of care is potentially different from that of the U.S.;

•

we may be unable to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities that a product candidate is safe and effective for any of its proposed indications;

•

the results of clinical trials may not meet the level of statistical significance required by the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for approval;

•

we may be unable to demonstrate that a product candidate’s clinical and other benefits outweigh its safety risks;

•

the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials;

•

the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates may not be sufficient to satisfy the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to support the submission of an NDA or other comparable submissions in the EU or other foreign jurisdictions or to obtain regulatory approval in the U.S. or elsewhere;

•

approval or orphan status may be blocked or rejected by the FDA or the European Commission;

•

the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may fail to approve the manufacturing processes or facilities of third-party manufacturers with which we contract for clinical and commercial supplies; and

•

the approval policies or regulations of the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may significantly change in a manner rendering our clinical data insufficient for approval.

Any of the above events could prevent us from achieving market approval of our product candidates and could substantially increase the costs of commercializing our product candidates. The demand for our product candidates could also be negatively impacted by any adverse effects of a competitor’s product or treatment.

Of the large number of drugs in development, only a small percentage successfully complete the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory approval processes and are commercialized. The lengthy approval process as well as the unpredictability of future clinical trial results may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates, which would significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Even if we eventually complete clinical trials and receive approval of an NDA or equivalent EU or foreign marketing application for our product candidates, the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly additional clinical trials, including Phase 4 clinical trials, and/or the implementation of a REMS in the US or RMP in the EU, which may be required to ensure safe use of the drug after approval. For example, for Livmarli we have submitted an sNDA to the FDA in February 2023 for the treatment of cholestatic pruritus associated with PFIC and an application for marketing authorization variation to the EMA in April 2023 for the treatment of PFIC, which may not result in approval or may result in approval contingent on additional clinical trials or implementation of a REMS or RMP. The FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities also may approve a product candidate for a more limited indication or

patient population than we originally requested, and the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not approve the labeling that we believe is necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of a product. The FDA has set the PDUFA date for the PFIC sNDA as December 13, 2023. If approval is granted by the FDA, the approval may or may not happen on the PDUFA date. Any delay in obtaining, or inability to obtain, applicable regulatory approval would delay or prevent commercialization of that product candidate and would materially adversely impact our business and prospects.

If we fail to develop and commercialize additional product candidates, we may be unable to grow our business. Further, we may expend our limited resources to pursue a particular product candidate or indication and fail to capitalize on product candidates or indications that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

We plan to acquire rights to develop and commercialize product candidates in addition to our current approved medicines and our current product candidates. If we decide to pursue the development and commercialization of any additional product candidates, we may be required to invest significant resources to acquire or in-license the rights to such product candidates or to conduct drug discovery activities. We do not currently have the necessary drug discovery personnel or expertise adequate to discover and develop an additional product candidate on our own. Any other product candidates will require additional, time-consuming development efforts, and significant financial resources, prior to commercial sale, including preclinical studies, extensive clinical trials and approval by the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. All product candidates are prone to the risks of failure that are inherent in pharmaceutical product development, including the possibility that the product candidate will not be shown to be sufficiently safe and/or effective for approval by regulatory authorities. Because we have limited financial and personnel resources, we focus on specific product candidates for specific indications. As a result, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or other indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential. We may focus our efforts and resources on product candidates that ultimately prove to be unsuccessful.

In addition, we may not be able to acquire, discover or develop any additional product candidates, and any additional product candidates we may develop may not be approved, manufactured or produced economically, successfully commercialized or widely accepted in the marketplace or be more effective than other commercially available alternatives. Research programs to identify new product candidates require substantial technical, financial and human resources whether or not we ultimately identify any candidates. If we are unable to develop or commercialize any other product candidates, our business and prospects will suffer.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

We have incurred net losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future.

Investment in biopharmaceutical product development is highly speculative because it entails substantial upfront capital expenditures and significant risk that any potential product candidate will fail to demonstrate adequate effectiveness in the targeted indication or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval and become commercially viable. While we have three medicines approved for commercial sale, we continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred net losses since our inception in May 2018. For the six months ended June 30, 2023 and 2022, we reported a net loss of $104.2 million and $63.5 million, respectively. As of June 30, 2023, we had an accumulated deficit of $497.0 million.

We expect to continue to incur net losses for the foreseeable future as we look to acquire products and product candidates, continue our clinical development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, our product candidates and as we continue commercializing our approved medicines in the U.S. and in certain countries in Europe. We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our business. The size of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of future growth of our expenses and our ability to generate revenue. For example, we have generated limited product revenues from our approved medicines and our approved medicines may not be successfully commercialized. Our prior net losses and expected future net losses have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with drug development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses, or when, if at all, we will be able to achieve profitability.

Unfavorable geopolitical and macroeconomic developments could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Our business could be adversely affected by conditions in the U.S. and global economies, the U.S. and global financial markets and adverse geopolitical and macroeconomic developments, including recent and potential future disruptions in access to bank deposits or lending commitments due to bank failures, the COVID-19 pandemic and military conflicts and related sanctions, such as the ongoing conflicts between Ukraine and Russia and Israel and Gaza. General business and economic conditions that could affect our business, financial condition or results of operations include fluctuations in economic growth, debt and equity capital markets, liquidity of the global financial markets, the availability and cost of credit, investor and consumer confidence, and the strength of the economies in which we, our manufacturers and our suppliers operate. For example, inflation rates have increased recently to levels not

seen in years in many countries, including in the U.S., and increased inflation may result in increases in our operating costs (including our labor costs), reduced liquidity and limits on our ability to access credit or otherwise raise capital on acceptable terms, if at all. In response to rising inflation, the U.S. Federal Reserve and other central banks have raised, and may again raise, interest rates, which, coupled with reduced government spending and volatility in financial markets may have the effect of further increasing economic uncertainty and heightening these risks. A weak or declining global economy could also strain our suppliers and manufacturers, possibly resulting in supply disruption. Any of the foregoing could harm our business and we cannot anticipate all of the ways in which the current economic climate and financial market conditions could adversely impact our business.

Additionally, financial markets around the world experienced volatility due to recent bank failures and ongoing military conflicts such as between Ukraine and Russia and between Israel and Gaza. For example, in connection with the military conflict between Russia and Ukraine, the U.S., United Kingdom and EU, along with others, imposed significant sanctions and export controls against Russia, Russian banks and certain Russian individuals and may implement additional sanctions or take further punitive actions in the future. The full economic and social impact of the sanctions imposed on Russia (as well as possible future punitive measures that may be implemented), as well as the counter measures imposed by Russia, in addition to the ongoing military conflict between Ukraine and Russia and related sanctions, which could conceivably expand into the surrounding region, remains uncertain; however, both the conflict and related sanctions have resulted and could continue to result in disruptions to trade, commerce, pricing stability, credit availability, supply chain continuity and reduced access to liquidity in both Europe and globally, and has introduced significant uncertainty into global markets. In particular, the Russia-Ukraine conflict and related sanctions has contributed to rapidly rising costs of living (driven largely by higher energy prices) in Europe and other advanced economies. Further, a weak or declining economy could strain our suppliers and manufacturers, possibly resulting in additional supply disruption for the production of any of our approved medicines. As a result, our business and results of operations may be adversely affected by ongoing and future conflicts and any related sanctions. We have operations, as well as current and potential new suppliers and manufacturers, throughout Europe. If economic conditions in Europe and other key markets for our business remain uncertain or deteriorate further, we could experience adverse effects on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

If the market opportunities for our product candidates are smaller than we believe they are, our future revenue may be adversely affected, and our business may suffer.

If the size of the market opportunities in each of our target indications or for any assets or product candidates that we may acquire, is smaller than we anticipate, we may not be able to achieve profitability and growth. We focus the clinical development and commercialization of our approved medicines on rare diseases with relatively small patient populations. Given the small number of patients who have the diseases that we are targeting, it is critical to our ability to grow and become profitable that we continue to successfully identify patients with these rare diseases. In addition, our estimates of the patient populations for our target indications have been derived from a variety of sources, including the scientific literature, surveys of clinics, patient foundations, and market research, and may prove to be incorrect. Further, new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The number of patients may turn out to be lower than expected. The effort to identify patients with diseases we seek to treat is in early stages, and we cannot accurately predict the number of patients for whom treatment might be possible. Additionally, the potentially addressable patient population for each of our product candidates may be limited or may not be amenable to treatment with our product candidates, and new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, which would adversely affect our results of operations and our business. Lastly, the potentially addressable patient population for any of our potential indications may even be further reduced if gene therapy products become more widely accepted and approved.

Obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval for a product candidate in one jurisdiction does not mean that we will be successful in obtaining regulatory approval for that product candidate in other jurisdictions.

Obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval for a product candidate in one jurisdiction does not guarantee that we will be able to obtain or maintain regulatory approval in any other jurisdiction, while a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one jurisdiction may have a negative effect on the regulatory approval process in others. For example, even if the FDA grants marketing approval for a product candidate, comparable foreign regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions must also approve the manufacturing, marketing and promotion of the product candidate in those countries. Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from, and greater than, those in the U.S., including additional preclinical studies or clinical trials as clinical trials conducted in one jurisdiction may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions. In many jurisdictions outside the U.S., a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that jurisdiction. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for our product candidates is also subject to approval.

Regulatory authorities in jurisdictions outside of the U.S. and the EU have requirements for approval for product candidates with which we must comply prior to marketing in those jurisdictions, and the regulatory approval process outside the U.S. and EU generally includes all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA and European Commission approval. Consequently, approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by the European Commission, approval by the European Commission does not assure approval by the FDA, and approval of either or both of the FDA and European Commission does not assure approval by regulatory authorities in other

countries or jurisdictions. Further, marketing approvals in countries outside the U.S., including in the EU, do not ensure pricing approvals in those countries or in any other countries, and marketing approvals and pricing approvals do not ensure that reimbursement will be obtained. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets and/or receive applicable marketing approvals, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of any of our product candidates will be harmed, which would adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Disruptions at the FDA, EMA and other government agencies caused by funding shortages or global health concerns could negatively impact our business.

The ability of the FDA, the competent authorities of EU Member States and other government agencies to review and approve proposed clinical trials or new product candidates can be affected by a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, government budget and funding levels, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, and other events that may otherwise affect these regulatory agencies’ ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Disruptions at the FDA, European Commission, EMA and other government agencies may also slow the time necessary for new product candidates to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical FDA employees and stop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, including as a result of the U.S. Congress failing to timely raise the U.S. debt ceiling, or if global health concerns continue to prevent the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA, European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Recently enacted legislation, future legislation and healthcare reform measures may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval for and commercialize our product candidates and may affect the prices we may set.

In the U.S., Europe, and some other foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system, including cost-containment measures that may reduce or limit coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs and affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. For example, Germany introduced changes to its laws governing reimbursement of medicinal products that impact, among others, orphan designation medicinal products. Previously, orphan designation drugs were presumed to provide an additional benefit upon obtaining a marketing authorization and, therefore, subject to a “limited assessment” by the German authority competent for reimbursement (G-BA) as long as the sales of the orphan designation medicinal product remained under the threshold of € 50 million in 12 months. Above this threshold, an orphan designation medicinal product would be subject to a full assessment by the G-BA regarding its benefits compared to an appropriate comparator therapy, just like any other medicinal product. This threshold will be lowered to € 30 million in the future, and if we exceed this threshold, we will need to undergo a full assessment in accordance with the German laws governing reimbursement, which may impact the reimbursement of our approved medicines. Other countries may adopt similar or new approaches that may impact the reimbursement of our product(s), increase our operating costs and impact profitability. Additionally, if adopted in the form proposed, the recent European Commission proposals to revise the existing EU laws governing authorization of medicinal products may result in a decrease in data and market exclusivity for our product candidates in the EU.

There have also been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the U.S. federal and state levels that seek to reduce healthcare costs and improve the quality of healthcare. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“Affordable Care Act”) was enacted in the U.S. Among the provisions of the Affordable Care Act of importance to our potential product candidates, the Affordable Care Act: established an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports specified branded prescription drugs and biologic agents; expanded eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs; increased the statutory minimum rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program; creates a Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program; established a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research; and established a Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation at CMS to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending.

There have been executive, judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. For example, U.S. federal tax legislation enacted in 2017, informally titled The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“Tax Act”), included a provision which repealed, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the Affordable Care Act on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate.” On June 17, 2021 the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds that argued the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress. However, it is possible that the Affordable Care Act will be subject to additional judicial or Congressional challenges in the future.

In addition, the Affordable Care Act has been subject to various health reform measures. For example, prior to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, on January 28, 2021, the Biden administration issued an executive order that initiated a special enrollment period for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplace. The executive order also instructed certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the Affordable Care Act. On August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”) into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in Affordable Care Act marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the “donut hole” under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and through a newly established manufacturer discount program. It is unclear how any additional health care reform measures of the current administration will impact the Affordable Care Act and our business.

Further, the IRA will, among other things, (i) allow HHS to negotiate the price of certain drugs and biologics covered under Medicare, and subject drug manufacturers to civil monetary penalties and a potential excise tax by offering a price that is not equal to or less than the negotiated “maximum fair price” under the law and (ii) impose rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation. The IRA permits HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. HHS has and will continue to issue and update guidance as these programs are implemented. These provisions will take effect progressively starting in fiscal year 2023. On August 29, 2023, HHS announced the list of the first ten drugs that will be subject to price negotiations, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. It is currently unclear how the IRA will be effectuated but is likely to have a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. On August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011 was signed into law, which, among other things, included reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, including the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 and the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023, will remain in effect until 2032 unless additional Congressional action is taken. On January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. Additionally, on March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, beginning January 1, 2024.

Further, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny in the U.S. of pharmaceutical pricing practices in light of the rising cost of prescription drugs. Such scrutiny has resulted in several recent Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for products.

In July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, “Promoting Competition in the American Economy,” with multiple provisions aimed at prescription drugs. In response to Biden’s executive order, on September 9, 2021, HHS released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug pricing reform. The plan sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue as well as potential administrative actions HHS can take to advance these principles. In addition, in response to the Biden administration’s October 2022 executive order, on February 14, 2023, HHS released a report outlining three new models for testing by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation which will be evaluated on their ability to lower the cost of drugs, promote accessibility, and improve quality of care. It is unclear whether the models will be utilized in any health reform measures in the future.

At the state level, individual states in the U.S. have also increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Legally mandated price controls on payment amounts by third-party payors or other restrictions could harm our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. This could reduce the ultimate demand for our approved medicines and our other product candidates, if approved, or put pressure on our product pricing, which could negatively affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

We expect that the Affordable Care Act, the IRA and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, more rigorous coverage criteria, new payment methodologies and additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from third-party payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our approved medicines and our product candidates, if approved.

A variety of risks associated with marketing our product candidates internationally could materially adversely affect our business.

We already have and plan to seek further regulatory approval for our product candidates internationally and, accordingly, we are subject to additional risks related to operating in foreign countries if and when we obtain the necessary approvals, including:

•

differing regulatory requirements in foreign countries, including differing reimbursement, pricing and insurance regimes;

•

the potential for regulatory approvals in other countries to result in re-examination of previously approved regulatory submissions in other countries;

•

the potential for so-called parallel importing, which is what happens when a local seller, either with government approval or faced with high or higher local prices, opts to import goods from a foreign market (with low or lower prices) rather than buying them locally;

•

unexpected changes in tariffs, trade barriers, price and exchange controls and other regulatory requirements;

•

economic weakness, including inflation, or political instability in particular foreign economies and markets, including as a result of the Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Gaza conflicts and rising interest rates;

•

compliance with tax, employment, immigration and labor laws for employees living or traveling internationally;

•

foreign taxes, including withholding of payroll taxes;

•

foreign currency fluctuations, which could result in increased operating expenses and reduced revenue, and other obligations incident to doing business in another country;

•

difficulties staffing and managing foreign operations;

•

workforce uncertainty in countries where labor unrest is more common than in the U.S.;

•

potential liability under the FCPA or comparable foreign regulations;

•

challenges enforcing our contractual and intellectual property rights, especially in those foreign countries that do not respect and protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the U.S.;

•

production shortages resulting from any events affecting raw material supply or manufacturing capabilities internationally; and

•

business interruptions resulting from geo-political actions, including war and terrorism.

In addition, some countries, such as Brazil, Israel and Chile, require that clinical trial participants receive the product at no cost even after the clinical trial has ended. We would not be able to recover any profit for these patients and depending on the number of patients, duration of the treatment and numerous other factors, such regulations could harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations significantly. These and other risks associated with our international operations may materially adversely affect our ability to attain or maintain profitable operations.

The biopharmaceutical industry is characterized by intense competition and rapid innovation. Our potential competitors include major multinational pharmaceutical companies, established biotechnology companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, generic pharmaceutical companies and universities and other research institutions who are active in rare disease. Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial, technical and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations and well-established sales forces. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies. Competition may increase further as a result of advances in the commercial applicability of technologies and greater availability of capital for investment in these industries. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing, on an exclusive basis, drug products that are more effective or less costly than our product candidates, which may negatively affect our commercial opportunities. We believe the key competitive factors that will affect the development and commercial success of our product candidates are efficacy, safety and tolerability profile, reliability, convenience of dosing, price and reimbursement.

We are aware of two other companies pursuing clinical development of therapies that reduce sBA levels via the IBAT pathway. GlaxoSmithKline plc and Ipsen have IBATis in clinical development for cholestatic liver diseases. We are aware that Ipsen has received approval for odevixibat for the treatment of pruritus in patients with PFIC, and pruritus in patients with ALGS 12 months and older, in the U.S. and for the treatment of PFIC in Europe. Ipsen has been granted orphan designation for PFIC in Europe and if Livmarli is deemed similar, it could prevent the approval of Livmarli in PFIC or result in a refusal by the European Commission to maintain orphan designation for Livmarli for PFIC in Europe. We are aware that Ipsen has submitted a variation application to the

EMA seeking approval for odevixibat for use in patients with ALGS. In July 2023, the EMA Committee on Human Medicinal Products (“CHMP”) adopted a positive opinion concerning the application. The EMA Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products (“COMP”) recommended, however, that orphan designation not be retained in relation to odevixibat for treatment of ALGS. Ipsen is also conducting a study of odevixibat in BA and plans to pursue other cholestatic liver diseases. Other off-label medications are also used in ALGS and PFIC for cholestatic pruritus such as Ursodeoxycholic acid (“UDCA”), cholestyramine and other bile salt resins, rifampin, naltrexone and other agents, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Despite the lack of FDA approval, these older, generic agents are perceived as part of the standard of care for treating ALGS and PFIC patients suffering from cholestatic pruritus.

We are aware that GlaxoSmithKline plc has completed a Phase 2 trial of its IBATi in PBC patients and is conducting a Phase 3 trial in PBC. We are also aware that Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is exploring BA as an indication for obeticholic acid. Further, we may compete with companies that are developing gene therapy for the treatment of PFIC. In adult settings of cholestasis, similar to pediatric settings, cholestyramine, UDCA, rifampin and naltrexone are commonly used agents. We are not aware of FDA or European Commission approved therapeutics for the treatment of PSC. We are aware of several agents in clinical development for the treatment of PSC, including Cymabay’s seladelpar, DURECT Corporation’s DUR928, HighTide Biopharmaceutical Inc.’s HTD1801, Immunic Therapeutics’ IMU-838, Intercept’s Ocaliva, or obeticholic acid, Ipsen’s elafibranor and IPN60250, NGM Biopharmaceuticals Inc.’s NGM282, Escient Pharmaceuticals’s EP547, Chemomab Therapeutics Ltd.’s CM-101, and Pliant Therapeutics’ bexotegrast. Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Inc.’s Ocaliva is approved as a second-line treatment for PBC. We are aware of several agents in clinical development for the treatment of PBC including Intercept’s Ocaliva and bezafibrate, Cymabay’s seladelpar, Ipsen’s elafibranor, Zydus Therapeutics Inc.’s saroglitazar magnesium, Escient Pharmaceuticals Inc.’s EP547, NGM Biopharmaceuticals, Inc.’s NGM282, Calliditas Therapeutics AB’s setanaxib, COUR Pharmaceuticals’ CNP-104, Ascletis Pharma’s ASC42, and Umecrine Cognition’s golexanolone.

Under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, a pharmaceutical manufacturer may file an ANDA seeking approval of a generic copy of an approved innovator product or an NDA under Section 505(b)(2) that relies on the FDA’s prior findings of safety and effectiveness in approving the innovator product. A Section 505(b)(2) NDA may be for a new or improved version of the original innovator product. Certain of our approved medicines, including Chenodal and Cholbam, are subject to immediate competition from compounded and generic entrants, as the ANDA and NDA for these drug products have no remaining or current patent or non-patent exclusivity.

There are other approved chenodeoxycholic acid products available outside of the United States. Both Dr. Falk Pharma GmbH and Leadiant Biosciences, Inc. have FDA Orphan Drug Designations granted for the treatment of CTX (granted in 2004 and 2007, respectively); however neither company, based on publicly available information, has initiated any prospective clinical studies in CTX.

There are currently no FDA-approved treatments in the United States that compete with Cholbam. There are other approved cholic acid products available outside of the United States. Laboratoires CTRS has received approval from the EMA for a version of cholic acid.

In December 2019, the CREATES Act was enacted, which provides a legislatively defined private right of action under which generic companies can bring suit against companies who refuse access to product for the bioequivalence testing needed to support approval of a generic product. It is our policy, which is in compliance with the CREATES Act, to evaluate requests for samples of our branded products, and to provide samples in response to bona fide requests from qualified third parties, including generic manufacturers, subject to specified conditions. We are in the process of providing samples to certain generic manufacturers.

Even though we have obtained orphan drug designation for Livmarli in PFIC, ALGS and BA, and Chenodal in CTX, we may not be able to obtain or maintain the benefits associated with orphan drug status, including market exclusivity.

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the U.S. and the EU, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a drug as an orphan drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the U.S., or a patient population of greater than 200,000 individuals in the U.S., but for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the U.S. In the EU, the European Commission, on the basis of the opinion of the EMA Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products, grants orphan drug designation for medicines to be developed for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of diseases that are life-threatening or chronically debilitating, for which either no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment exists, or if such method exists, the medicine is of significant benefit to those affected by such condition. To benefit from such designation, either the prevalence of such condition must not be more than five in 10,000 people across the EU or, if more prevalent, it must be unlikely that the marketing of the medicine would generate sufficient returns to justify the investment needed for its development. In September 2013, the FDA granted orphan drug status to Livmarli for the treatment of patients with PFIC, ALGS and BA in the U.S. We also received orphan drug designation for Livmarli for PFIC, ALGS and BA in the EU. Generally, if a drug with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the drug may be entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA or the European Commission from approving another marketing application for the same drug (or, in the case of the European Commission, a similar

drug) for the same indication for that time period. The applicable period is seven years in the U.S. and ten years in the EU, which may be extended by six months and two years, respectively, in the case of product candidates that have complied with the respective regulatory agency’s agreed upon pediatric investigation plan. The exclusivity period in the EU can be reduced to six years if at the end of the fifth year a drug no longer meets the criteria for orphan drug designation or if the drug is sufficiently profitable so that market exclusivity is no longer justified. Orphan drug exclusivity may be lost if the FDA or European Commission determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. In addition, even after a drug is granted orphan exclusivity and approved, the FDA can subsequently approve another drug for the same condition before the expiration of the seven-year exclusivity period including the same active ingredient if the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. In the EU, the European Commission may approve another drug for the same indication as Livmarli despite its orphan exclusivity on the basis that it is not a similar medicinal product or if it is considered safer, more effective, or otherwise clinically superior. Conversely, the European Commission may deny marketing approval for a product candidate if it determines such product candidate is structurally similar to an approved product for the same indication. Specifically, Ipsen has been granted orphan designation for PFIC in the EU and if Livmarli is deemed similar, it could prevent the approval of, or result in the loss of orphan designation for, Livmarli for PFIC in the EU. In addition, if an orphan designated product receives marketing approval for an indication broader than or different from what is designated, such product may not be entitled to orphan exclusivity. Even though the FDA has granted orphan drug designation to Livmarli for the treatment of PFIC, ALGS and BA, if we receive approval for Livmarli for a modified or different indication, our current orphan designations may not provide us with exclusivity.

Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review or approval process in the U.S. or the EU. Also, regulatory approval for any product candidate may be withdrawn, and other product candidates may obtain approval before us and receive orphan drug exclusivity, which could block us from entering the market.

Even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product candidate, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the candidate from competition because different drugs can be approved for the same condition before the expiration of the orphan drug exclusivity period.

Although we have received a breakthrough therapy designation for Livmarli, this may not lead to a faster development, regulatory review or approval process, and it does not increase the likelihood that Livmarli will receive marketing approval in the U.S. for other indications.

We have received a breakthrough therapy designation for Livmarli for the treatment of PFIC2. A breakthrough therapy is defined as a therapy that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other therapies, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the therapy may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For therapies that have been designated as breakthrough therapies, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens. Therapies designated as breakthrough therapies by the FDA may also be eligible for priority review and accelerated approval. The breakthrough therapy designation for Livmarli may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to therapies considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, the FDA may later decide that Livmarli no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened.

We have formed and may continue to form or seek strategic alliances or enter into additional licensing arrangements in the future, and we may not realize the benefits of such alliances or licensing arrangements.

We have formed and may continue to form or seek strategic alliances, create joint ventures or collaborations or enter into additional licensing arrangements with third parties that we believe will complement or augment our development and commercialization efforts with respect to our approved medicines, our product candidates and any future product candidates that we may develop. We also intend to establish commercial partnerships outside of North America and in major European markets.

Any of our existing relationships or any future relationships we enter into may require us to incur non-recurring and other charges, increase our near- and long-term expenditures, issue securities that dilute our existing stockholders or disrupt our management and business. In addition, we face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic partners and the negotiation process is time-consuming and complex. Moreover, we may not be successful in our efforts to establish a strategic partnership or other alternative arrangements for volixibat because it may be deemed to be at too early of a stage of development for collaborative effort, and third parties may not view volixibat as having the requisite potential to demonstrate safety and efficacy. If we license products or businesses, we may not be able to realize the benefit of such transactions if we are unable to successfully integrate them with our existing operations and company culture. Following a strategic transaction or license, we may not achieve the revenues or specific net income that justifies such transaction. Any delays in entering into new strategic partnership agreements related to our product candidates could delay the development and commercialization of our product candidates in certain geographies for certain indications, which would harm our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Our failure to successfully in-license, acquire, develop and market additional product candidates or approved medicines would impair our ability to grow our business.

Although a substantial amount of our efforts are focused on the clinical development, potential regulatory approval and commercialization of our product candidates, a key element of our long-term strategy is to in-license, acquire, develop, market and commercialize a portfolio of products to treat patients with liver disease. Because we do not have the necessary internal research and development capabilities, unless we build such capabilities internally, we will be dependent upon pharmaceutical companies, academic scientists and other researchers to sell or license products or technology to us. The success of this strategy depends partly upon our ability to identify and select promising biopharmaceutical product candidates and products, negotiate licensing or acquisition agreements with their current owners and finance these arrangements. The process of proposing, negotiating and implementing a license or acquisition of a product candidate or approved product is lengthy and complex. Other companies, including some with substantially greater financial, marketing, sales and other resources, may compete with us for the license or acquisition of product candidates and approved medicines. We have limited resources to identify and execute the acquisition or in-licensing of third-party products, businesses and technologies and integrate them into our current infrastructure. Moreover, we may devote resources to potential acquisitions or licensing opportunities that are never completed, or we may fail to realize the anticipated benefits of such efforts. We may not be able to acquire the rights to additional product candidates on terms that we find acceptable, or at all. Further, any product candidate that we acquire may require additional development efforts prior to commercial sale, including preclinical or clinical testing and approval by the FDA, the European Commission and other similar regulatory authorities. All product candidates are prone to risks of failure during biopharmaceutical product development, including the possibility that a product candidate will not be shown to be sufficiently safe and effective for approval by regulatory authorities. In addition, any approved medicines that we acquire may not have the market potential we believe, be manufactured or sold profitably, or achieve market acceptance.

We may fail to realize all of the anticipated benefits of the Asset Purchase or those benefits may take longer to realize than expected.

In July 2023, we entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) with Travere Therapeutics, Inc. (“Travere”), pursuant to which we acquired Travere’s bile acid product portfolio, including Cholbam and Chenodal (the “Asset Purchase”). We believe that there are significant benefits that may be realized from the products acquired from Travere. The full benefits of the transactions contemplated by the Purchase Agreement, including the anticipated financial contribution of newly acquired assets, may not be realized as expected, may be diminished due to competition or may not be achieved within the anticipated time frame, or at all. For example, the Phase 3 RESTORE study may not support an approval. Failure to achieve the anticipated benefits of the Asset Purchase could adversely affect our results of operations or cash flows, divert needed resources away from our current products, decrease or delay any accretive effect of the Asset Purchase and negatively impact the price of our common stock.

In addition, we will be required to devote significant attention to complete the post-closing integration of the acquired assets and rely on Travere for certain transition services. We may not be able to integrate the acquired assets successfully. We have hired additional employees as part of the transaction and may not successfully integrate or deploy them for commercialization of the acquired products. We plan to transfer and enter new contracts for a number of vendors that support the manufacture and distribution of the acquired assets. If we fail to successfully integrate the acquired assets, our results of operations could be adversely affected. The integration process will continue to require significant time and resources, require significant attention from management and may disrupt the ordinary functioning of our business, and we may not be able to manage the process successfully, which could harm our business.

We are highly dependent on our key personnel, and if we are not successful in attracting and retaining highly qualified personnel, we may not be able to successfully implement our business strategy.

Our ability to compete in the highly competitive biotechnology and pharmaceuticals industries depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified managerial scientific and medical personnel. The loss of the services of any of our executive officers or other key employees and our inability to find suitable replacements could potentially harm our business, prospects, financial condition or results of operations.

We conduct many of our operations at our facility in Foster City, California. This region serves as the headquarters to many other biopharmaceutical companies and many academic and research institutions. Competition for skilled personnel in our market is intense and may limit our ability to hire and retain highly qualified personnel on acceptable terms or at all. To induce valuable employees to remain at our company, in addition to salary and cash incentives, we have provided stock awards that vest over time. The value to employees of stock awards that vest over time may be significantly affected by movements in our stock price that are beyond our control and may at any time be insufficient to counteract more lucrative offers from other companies. In addition, in response to competition, rising inflation rates and labor shortages, we may need to adjust employee cash compensation, which would

affect our operating costs and our margins, or equity compensation, which would affect our outstanding share count and cause dilution to existing stockholders. Despite our efforts to retain valuable employees, members of our management, scientific and development teams may terminate their employment with us on short notice. Although we have offer letters with our key employees, these offer letters provide for at-will employment, which means that any of our employees could leave our employment at any time, with or without notice. We do not maintain “key man” insurance policies on the lives of these individuals or the lives of any of our other employees. Our success also depends on our ability to continue to attract, retain and motivate highly skilled junior, mid-level, and senior managers as well as junior, mid-level, and senior scientific and medical personnel.

Many of the other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies that we compete against for qualified personnel have greater financial and other resources, different risk profiles and a longer history in the industry than we do. They may also provide more diverse opportunities and better chances for career advancement. Some of these characteristics are more appealing to high quality candidates than what we can offer. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high quality personnel, the rate and success at which we can discover, develop and commercialize product candidates will be limited.

We will need to grow the size of our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth.

As of June 30, 2023, we had 213 full time employees. As our development and commercialization plans and strategies develop, we expect to need additional development, managerial, operational, financial, sales, marketing and other personnel. Future growth would impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including:

•

identifying, recruiting, integrating, maintaining and motivating additional employees;

•

managing our commercialization efforts while focusing on other areas of our business;

•

managing our internal development efforts effectively, including the clinical and regulatory review process for Livmarli, Cholbam, Chenodal and volixibat, while complying with our contractual obligations to contractors and other third parties; and

•

improving our operational, financial and management controls, reporting systems and procedures.

Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize our approved medicines, any then-approved product and product candidates depends, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth, and our management may also have to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from day-to-day activities in order to devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities. To date, we have used the services of outside vendors to perform tasks including clinical trial management, statistics and analysis, regulatory affairs, formulation development and other drug development functions. Our growth strategy may also entail expanding our group of contractors or consultants to implement these tasks going forward. Because we rely on numerous consultants, effectively outsourcing many key functions of our business, we will need to be able to effectively manage these consultants to ensure that they successfully carry out their contractual obligations and meet expected deadlines. However, if we are unable to effectively manage our outsourced activities or if the quality or accuracy of the services provided by consultants is compromised for any reason, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates or otherwise advance our business. We may not be able to manage our existing consultants or find other competent outside contractors and consultants on economically reasonable terms, or at all. If we are not able to effectively expand our organization by hiring new employees and expanding our groups of consultants and contractors, we may not be able to successfully implement the tasks necessary to further develop and commercialize our approved medicines, any then-approved product and product candidates and, accordingly, may not achieve our research, development and commercialization goals.

Business disruptions could seriously harm our future revenue and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses.

Our operations, and those of our CROs and other contractors and consultants, could be subject to earthquakes, power shortages, telecommunications failures, water shortages, floods, hurricanes, typhoons, fires, extreme weather conditions, medical epidemics and other natural or manmade disasters or business interruptions, for which we are predominantly self-insured. The occurrence of any of these business disruptions could seriously harm our operations and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses. We rely on third-party manufacturers to produce our approved medicines and product candidates. Our ability to obtain clinical supplies of these products could be disrupted if the operations of these suppliers are affected by a man-made or natural disaster or other business interruption. Our corporate headquarters is located in California near major earthquake faults and fire zones. The ultimate impact on us, our significant suppliers and our general infrastructure of being located near major earthquake faults and fire zones and being consolidated in certain geographical areas is unknown, but our operations and financial condition could suffer in the event of a major earthquake, fire or other natural disaster.

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

We are exposed to the risk that employees, independent contractors, principal investigators, CROs, consultants and vendors may engage in fraudulent or other illegal activity. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct or disclosure of unauthorized activities to us that violates: (1) the laws of the FDA, EU, individual EU Member States or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, including those laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to the FDA, EMA, the competent authorities of individual EU Member States or comparable foreign regulatory authorities; (2) manufacturing standards; (3) healthcare fraud and abuse laws in the U.S. and similar foreign fraudulent misconduct laws; or (4) laws that require the true, complete and accurate reporting of our financial information or data. These laws may impact, among other things, our current activities with principal investigators and research subjects, as well as proposed and future sales, marketing and education programs. In particular, the promotion, sales and marketing of healthcare items and services, as well as certain business arrangements in the healthcare industry, are subject to extensive laws designed to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, structuring and commission(s), certain customer incentive programs and other business arrangements generally. Activities subject to these laws also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of patient recruitment for clinical trials. If we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates and begin commercializing those products in the U.S. and in certain countries in Europe, our potential exposure under such laws will increase significantly, and our costs associated with compliance with such laws are also likely to increase. 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 significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, disgorgement, monetary fines, imprisonment, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, additional reporting requirements and/or oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and curtailment of our operations.

Our relationships with customers, physicians and third-party payors may be subject, directly or indirectly, to federal, state and equivalent foreign healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws, transparency laws, health information privacy and security laws and other healthcare laws and regulations. If we or our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial partners or vendors violate these laws, we could face substantial penalties.

These laws may impact, among other things, our clinical research program, as well as sales, marketing and education programs. In particular, the promotion, sales and marketing of healthcare items and services is subject to extensive laws and regulations designed to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive and other business arrangements. We may also be subject to federal, state and foreign laws governing the privacy and security of identifiable patient information. The U.S. healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate include, but are not limited to:

•

the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, any person or entity from knowingly and willfully, offering, paying, soliciting or receiving any remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce, or in return for, the purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase, lease, or order of any item or service reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare programs. The term “remuneration” has been broadly interpreted to include anything of value. Although there are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution, the exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly. Practices that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchases or recommendations, include any payments of more than fair market value, and may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. In addition, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of this statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal civil False Claims Act and the civil monetary penalties statute;

•

federal civil and criminal false claims laws, including the federal civil False Claims Act, and civil monetary penalty laws, which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment or approval from Medicare, Medicaid, or other federal government programs that are false or fraudulent or knowingly making a false statement to improperly avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government, including federal healthcare programs;

•

the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”), which created new federal civil and criminal statutes that prohibit knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or obtain, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, any of the money or property owned by, or under the custody or control of, any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up by any trick, scheme or device, a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statements in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items or services. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;

•

HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH”), and their respective implementing regulations, which impose requirements on certain healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses, known as covered entities and their respective business associates that perform services for them as well as their covered subcontractors that involve the use, or disclosure of, individually identifiable health information, relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information; and

•

the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, which requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologicals and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) to report annually to CMS information related to payments or other transfers of value made to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners) and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members.

We may also be subject to state and foreign equivalents of each of the healthcare laws described above, among others, some of which may be broader in scope. For example, we may be subject to the following: state anti-kickback and false claims laws that may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third party payors, including private insurers, or that apply regardless of payor; state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government; state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers, marketing expenditures, or drug pricing; state and local laws requiring the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives; and state and foreign laws, such as the EU’s and the United Kingdom’s General Data Protection Regulations (respectively, the “EU GDPR” and “UK GDPR”, together, the “GDPR”) governing the privacy and security of health information in some circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.

Additionally, we may be subject to federal consumer protection and unfair competition laws, which broadly regulate marketplace activities and activities that potentially harm consumers.

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities, or our arrangements with physicians, could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. If we or our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial partners and vendors violate these laws, we may be subject to investigations, enforcement actions and/or significant penalties. We have adopted a code of conduct and healthcare compliance policies, but it is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct or business noncompliance, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent inappropriate conduct 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. Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements will comply with applicable healthcare laws may involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental and enforcement authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law interpreting applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, disgorgement, monetary fines, imprisonment, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, additional reporting requirements and/or oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, and curtailment of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations. In addition, the approval and commercialization of any of our product candidates outside the U.S. will also likely subject us to foreign equivalents of the healthcare laws mentioned above, among other foreign laws.

Our business is subject to complex and evolving U.S. and foreign laws, regulations, rules, contractual obligations, policies and other obligations relating to privacy and data protection. Our actual or perceived failure to comply with such obligations could result in regulatory investigations or actions, litigations (including class claims) and mass arbitration demands, fines and penalties, disruptions of and changes to our business practices, monetary penalties, reputational harm, loss of revenue or profits, and other adverse business consequences.

In the ordinary course of business, we collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share (collectively, “process”) personal data and other sensitive information, including proprietary and confidential business data, trade secrets, intellectual property, data we collect about trial participants in connection with clinical trials, and sensitive third-party data.

Our data processing activities subject us to numerous data privacy and security obligations, such as various laws, regulations, guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contracts, and other obligations that govern the processing of personal data by us and on our behalf. In the U.S., federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal data privacy laws, consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), and other similar laws (e.g. wiretapping laws). For example, HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, imposes specific requirements relating to the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Additionally, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) imposes specific requirements relating to marketing to individuals using technology such as telephones, mobile devices, and text messages. TCPA violations can result in significant financial penalties, including penalties or criminal fines imposed by the Federal Communications Commission or fines of up to $1,500 per violation imposed through private litigation or by state authorities. Class action suits are the most common method for private enforcement.

At the state level, the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”), which took effect on January 1, 2020, imposes obligations on covered businesses. These obligations include, but are not limited to, providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording California residents, including consumers, business representatives and employees, certain rights related to their personal data. The CCPA provides for administrative fines for violations (up to $7,500 per violation) and a private right of action for certain data breaches. Although the CCPA exempts some data processed in the context of clinical trials, the CCPA may increase compliance costs and potential liability with respect to other personal data we maintain about California residents. The CCPA has expanded substantially as a result of the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (“CPRA”), which took effect January 1, 2023. The CPRA expanded the CCPA’s requirements, including by adding a new right for individuals to correct their personal information and established a new California Privacy Protection Agency to implement and enforce the CPRA, which could increase the risk of enforcement. Other states have also enacted data privacy laws, several of which take effect in 2023 including Virginia, Utah, Colorado, and Connecticut. These state laws and the CCPA create certain rights for individuals, including the right to access, correct, delete, and opt-out of certain processing activities, such as targeted advertising, profiling, and automated decision-making. The exercise of these rights may impact our business and ability to provide our approved medicines and services. While these states, like the CCPA, also exempt some data in the context of clinical trials, these developments further complicate compliance efforts and increase legal risks and compliance costs for us and our third party partners. In addition, data privacy and security laws have been proposed at the federal, state, and local levels in recent years, which could further complicate compliance efforts. Privacy advocates and industry groups have also proposed, and may propose, standards with which we are legally or contractually bound to comply.

Outside the U.S., an increasing number of laws, regulations, and industry standards apply to data privacy and security. For example, the EU GDPR and the UK GDPR (together “GDPR”), Brazil’s General Data Protection Law (Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados Pessoais, or “LGPD”) (Law No. 13,709/2018), Canada’s Personal Information Protection and Electronic Document Act (“PIPEDA”) and China’s Personal Information Protection Law (“PIPL”) impose strict requirements for processing personal data, and violators of these laws face significant penalties.

For example, the GDPR imposes stringent requirements for controllers and processors of personal data, including, for example, more robust disclosures to individuals and a strengthened individual data rights regime, mandatory data breach notifications in certain circumstances, limitations on retention of information, increased requirements pertaining to special categories of data, such as health data, and additional obligations when we contract with third-party processors in connection with the processing of personal data. In addition, the definition of “personal data” under the GDPR is broad and captures “pseudonymized” or key-coded data that is commonly processed in a clinical trial-related context.

We are subject to the GDPR because of our data processing activities that involve the personal data of individuals residing in the European Economic Area (“EEA”) and UK, such as in connection with our clinical trials in Europe, and early access program in multiple EU countries, and because of any potential processing of personal data carried out in the context of the activities of our relevant European subsidiaries. In addition, we maintain an office in Switzerland, which subjects us to privacy and data protection laws and regulations similar to the GDPR under the Swiss Federal Act on Data Protection, or the FADP. The FADP applies to the collection and processing of personal data, including health-related information, by companies located in Switzerland, or in certain circumstances, by companies located outside of Switzerland. The FADP has been revised and adopted by the Swiss Parliament. Companies have been required to comply with the revised version of the FADP and its revised ordinances since September 1, 2023, which may result in an increase of costs of compliance, risks of noncompliance and penalties for noncompliance.

Furthermore, the EU GDPR provides that EEA Member States may introduce specific requirements related to the processing of “special categories of personal data”, including the personal data related to health and genetic information, which we may process in connection with clinical trials or otherwise; as well as personal data related to criminal offences or convictions where allowed under local law and confirmed by potential employee in employment situations. Under the GDPR, companies that do not comply may face temporary or definitive bans on data processing and other corrective actions; fines of up to 20 million Euros under the EU GDPR or 17.5 million pounds sterling under the UK GDPR, or in each case, 4% of annual global revenue, whichever is greater; or private litigation related to processing of personal data brought by classes of data subjects or consumer protection organizations authorized at law to represent their interests.

Additionally, in Canada, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (“PIPEDA”) and various related provincial laws, as well as Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (“CASL”), may apply to our operations.

In the ordinary course of business, we may transfer personal data from Europe (including from our European subsidiaries) and other jurisdictions to the U.S. or other countries. Europe and other jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring data to be localized or limiting the transfer of personal data to other countries. In particular, the EEA and the UK have significantly restricted the transfer of personal data to the U.S. and other countries whose privacy laws it generally believes are inadequate. Other jurisdictions may adopt similarly stringent interpretations of their data localization and/or cross-border data transfer laws. Although there are currently various mechanisms that may be used to transfer personal data from the EEA and UK to the U.S. in compliance with law, such as the EEA and UK’s standard data protection clauses, the UK’s International Data Transfer Agreement / Addendum, and the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework and the UK extension thereto (which allows for transfers for relevant U.S.-based organizations who self-certify compliance and participate in the Framework), these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures to lawfully transfer personal data to the U.S. If there is no lawful manner for us to transfer personal data from the EEA, the UK, or other jurisdictions, to the U.S., or if the requirements for a legally-compliant transfer are too onerous, we could face significant adverse consequences, including limitations of our ability to conduct clinical trial activities in Europe and/or elsewhere, the interruption or degradation of our operations, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions (such as Europe) at significant expense, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and penalties, the inability to transfer personal data and work with partners, vendors and other third parties, and/or injunctions against our processing or transferring of personal data necessary to operate our business. Some European regulators have ordered certain companies to suspend or permanently cease certain transfers of personal data to recipients outside Europe for allegedly violating the EU GDPR’s cross-border data transfer limitations. For example, in May 2023, the Irish Data Protection Commission determined that a major social media company’s use of the standard contractual clauses to transfer personal data from Europe to the United States was insufficient and levied a 1.2 billion Euro fine against the company and prohibited the company from transferring personal data to the United States. Additionally, companies that transfer personal data to recipients outside of the EEA and/or UK to other jurisdictions, particularly to the U.S., are subject to increased scrutiny from regulators, individual litigants and activist groups.

In addition, we may also be bound by contractual obligations related to data privacy and security, and our efforts to comply with such obligations may not be successful. Additionally, some of our customer contracts require us to host personal data locally. We may also publish privacy policies, marketing materials and other statements, such as compliance with certain certifications or self-regulatory principles, regarding data privacy and security. If these policies, materials or statements are found to be deficient, lacking in transparency, deceptive, unfair or misrepresentative of our practices, we may be subject to adverse consequences.

Obligations related to data privacy and security are quickly changing, becoming increasingly stringent, and creating regulatory uncertainty. Additionally, these obligations may be subject to differing applications and interpretations, which may be inconsistent or conflict among jurisdictions. Preparing for and complying with these obligations requires significant resources and may necessitate changes to our information technologies, systems, and practices and to those of any third parties that process personal data on our behalf.

Although we endeavor to comply with all applicable data privacy and security obligations, we may at times fail (or be perceived to have failed) to do so. Moreover, despite our efforts, our personnel or third parties upon whom we rely may fail to comply with such obligations, which could negatively impact our business operations and compliance posture.

Our, or the third parties’ upon which we rely, actual or perceived failure to adequately comply with applicable laws and regulations relating to privacy and data protection, or to protect personal data and other data we process or maintain, could result in adverse consequences, including regulatory fines and bans on processing personal information, government enforcement actions (e.g. investigations, fines, penalties, audits, inspections, and similar), litigation (including class action claims), mass arbitration demands, and other liabilities, claims for damages by affected individuals, orders to destroy or not use personal information, imprisonment of company officials, additional reporting requirements and/or oversight, interruptions or stoppages in our business operations (including, as relevant, clinical trials), and damage to our reputation. Any of these consequences could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects, including but not limited to: loss of customers; interruptions or stoppages in our business operations (including, clinical trials); inability to process personal data or to operate in certain jurisdictions; limited ability to develop or commercialize our approved medicines; expenditure of time and resources to defend any claim or inquiry; adverse publicity; or substantial changes to our business model or operations. In particular, plaintiffs have become increasingly more active in bringing privacy-related claims against companies, including class claims and mass arbitration demands. Some of these claims allow for the recovery of statutory damages on a per violation basis, and, if viable, carry the potential for monumental statutory damages, depending on the volume of data and the number of violations.

Any collaboration arrangements that we have or may enter into in the future may not be successful or may result in product diversion, which could adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our approved medicines and any then-approved product.

Any existing or future collaborations that we enter into may not be successful. The success of our collaboration arrangements depends and will depend heavily on the efforts and activities of our collaborators. Collaborations are subject to numerous risks, which may include that:

•

collaborators have significant discretion in determining the efforts and resources that they will apply to collaborations;

•

collaborators may conduct their own clinical trials which may not be compliant, may not be successful or may generate contradictory results;

•

collaborators may not pursue development and commercialization of our approved medicines and any then-approved product or may elect not to continue or renew development or commercialization programs based on trial or test results, changes in their strategic focus due to the acquisition of competitive products, availability of funding or other external factors, such as a business combination that diverts resources or creates competing priorities;

•

collaborators could independently develop, or develop with third parties, products that compete directly or indirectly with our product or product candidates;

•

a collaborator with marketing, manufacturing and distribution rights to one or more products may not commit sufficient resources to or otherwise not perform satisfactorily in carrying out these activities;

•

we could grant exclusive rights to our collaborators that would prevent us from collaborating with others;

•

collaborators may not properly maintain or defend our intellectual property rights or may use our intellectual property or proprietary information in a way that gives rise to actual or threatened litigation that could jeopardize or invalidate our intellectual property or proprietary information or expose us to potential liability;

•

a collaborator or series of collaborators may improperly or unknowingly sell product directly (or indirectly to a potential customer) into the “gray market” whereby our branded products are diverted from authorized sales channels into the hands of dealers, brokers or the open market, and may result in unauthorized sale of our product in a specific country or region;

•

disputes may arise between us and a collaborator that causes the delay or termination of the research, development or commercialization of our current or future products or that results in costly litigation or arbitration that diverts management attention and resources;

•

collaborations may be terminated, and, if terminated, may result in a need for additional capital to pursue further development or commercialization of the applicable current or future products;

•

collaborators may own or co-own intellectual property covering our approved medicines and any then-approved product that results from our collaborating with them, and in such cases, we would not have the exclusive right to develop or commercialize such intellectual property; and

•

a collaborator’s sales and marketing activities or other operations may not be in compliance with applicable laws resulting in civil or criminal proceedings.

Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties

We depend on intellectual property licensed from third parties and termination of any of these licenses could result in the loss of significant rights, which would harm our business.

We are dependent on patents, know-how and proprietary technology, both our own and licensed from others. For example, we entered into an assignment and license agreement with Shire pursuant to which we were assigned exclusive global rights to license intellectual property and know-how related to Livmarli and volixibat, rights to license know-how related to Livmarli from Pfizer, certain patents and know-how related to volixibat from Sanofi and certain patents and know-how related to Livmarli and volixibat from Satiogen, which we subsequently acquired in May 2022. We also acquired licensed rights to commercialize Cholbam and Chenodal from certain parties via the Asset Purchase. We are required to use commercially reasonable efforts or diligent efforts to commercialize products based on the licensed rights and to pay certain royalties based off our net sales. We may not meet these requirements, which could result in a loss or termination of any rights under such agreements. Any termination of these licenses will result in the loss of significant rights and will restrict our ability to commercialize our product candidates.

We are generally also subject to all of the same risks with respect to protection of intellectual property that we license, as we are for intellectual property that we own, which are described below under “Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property.” If we or our licensors fail to adequately protect this intellectual property, our ability to commercialize products could suffer.

We rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates.

We currently rely on, and intend to continue relying on, third-party CROs in connection with our clinical trials. We control or will control only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on our CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our CROs are required to comply with GCPs, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA, the competent authorities of the individual EU Member States, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for product candidates in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCPs through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we or any of these CROs fail to comply with applicable GCP regulations, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, EMA, the competent authorities of the individual EU Member States, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. Upon inspection, such regulatory authorities may not determine that any of our clinical trials comply with the GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with drug product produced under cGMP regulations and will require a large number of test subjects. Our failure or any failure by our CROs to comply with these regulations or to recruit a sufficient number of patients may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. Moreover, our business may be implicated if any of our CROs violates federal or state fraud and abuse or false claims laws and regulations or healthcare privacy and security laws.

Our CROs are not our employees and, except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such CROs, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our ongoing preclinical, clinical and non-clinical programs. These CROs may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials or other drug development activities, which could affect their performance on our behalf. If our CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to complete development of, obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. As a result, our financial results and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenue could be delayed.

Switching or adding CROs involves substantial cost and requires extensive management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can materially impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. Although we carefully manage our relationships with our CROs, we may encounter challenges or delays in the future and these delays or challenges may have a material adverse impact on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

We rely completely on third parties to manufacture and distribute our clinical and commercial drug supplies, including certain sole-source suppliers and manufacturers. These third parties may fail to obtain and maintain regulatory approval for their facilities, fail to provide us with sufficient quantities of drug substance, drug product, labeled finished product in a timely fashion, or fail to do so at acceptable quality levels or prices.

We do not currently have nor do we plan to acquire the infrastructure or capability internally to manufacture or distribute our clinical and commercial drug supplies. Instead, we rely on contracted third parties.

We do not currently have any long-term agreements or commitment with a manufacturer to produce raw materials, active pharmaceutical ingredients (“APIs”) and the finished products of our product candidates or the associated packaging. We will need to continue to identify and qualify a third-party manufacturer prior to commercialization of our product candidates, and we intend to enter into agreements for commercial production with third-party suppliers. For our approved medicines, we are reliant on third parties to successfully manufacture drug substance components and the finished drug product in accordance with regulatory requirements and in sufficient quantities for commercialization. We are also reliant on third parties for the manufacture of packaging, labeling and oral dosing dispensers for our approved medicines. As our approved medicines are intended to treat rare diseases, we will only require a low-volume of raw materials and APIs, and in some cases with single-source suppliers and manufacturers. Our reliance on third-party suppliers and manufacturers, including single-source suppliers, could harm our ability to develop our product candidates or to commercialize our currently approved medicines and any product candidates that are approved in the future.

Any of our existing or future suppliers or manufacturers may, among other things:

•

fail to supply us with our product and product candidates on a timely basis or in the requested amount due to unexpected damage to or destruction of facilities, equipment or deliveries, labor disputes or otherwise, including “acts of God”;

•

fail to increase manufacturing capacity and produce drug product and components in larger quantities and at higher yields in a timely or cost-effective manner, or at all, to sufficiently meet our clinical and commercial needs;

•

be unable to meet our production demands, including due to issues related to their reliance on sole-source suppliers and manufacturers;

•

become unavailable through business interruption or financial insolvency; or

•

be unable or unwilling to supply or manufacture for us, or to renew current supply or manufacturing agreements when such agreements expire on a timely basis, on acceptable terms or at all.

In the event of any of the foregoing or in the event such third parties fail to meet our needs, if we do not have an alternative supplier or manufacturer in place, we would be required to expend substantial management time and expense to identify, qualify and transfer processes to alternative suppliers or manufacturers. Transferring technology to other sites may require additional processes, technologies and validation studies, which are costly, may take considerable amounts of time, may not be successful and, in most cases, require review and approval by the FDA, the competent authorities of the individual EU Member States or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Any need to find and qualify new suppliers or manufacturers could adversely impact our ability to commercialize our approved medicines or our product candidates, if approved. Additionally, we and our manufacturers do not currently maintain significant inventory of drug substances and other materials. Any delay or interruption in the supply of clinical trial supplies could delay the completion of our clinical trials, increase the costs associated with maintaining clinical trial programs and, depending upon the period of delay, require us to commence new clinical trials at additional expense or terminate clinical trials completely.

Although we are ultimately responsible for ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements such as current good manufacturing practices (“cGMPs”), we are dependent on our contract suppliers and manufacturers for day-to-day compliance with cGMP for production of both drug substances and finished products. Facilities used by our contract suppliers and manufacturers to produce the drug substances and materials or finished products for commercial sale must pass inspection and be approved by the FDA and other relevant regulatory authorities including the competent authorities of the individual EU Member States. A number of our contract suppliers and manufacturers must comply with cGMP requirements enforced by the FDA, the competent authorities of the individual EU Member States, and other equivalent foreign authorities, through their facilities inspection program and review of submitted technical information. If our contract manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the FDA’s, the competent authorities of the individual EU Member States, and other equivalent foreign authorities’ strict regulatory requirements, they will not be able to secure or maintain FDA approval for the manufacturing facilities and our ability to secure supplies of our approved medicines or our product candidates will be negatively affected.

In addition, we have no control over the ability of our contract manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the safety of our approved medicines is compromised due to a failure to adhere to applicable laws or for other reasons, the manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time and we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, in which case we might not be able to identify manufacturers for clinical or commercial supply on acceptable terms, or at all, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our approved medicines.

We and our third-party suppliers and manufacturers are vulnerable to geopolitical and macroeconomic developments, such as recent and potential future bank failures, the ongoing conflicts between Ukraine and Russia and Israel and Gaza, any related sanctions, future pandemics, increasing inflation rates and the responses by central banking authorities to control such inflation, which could negatively impact the availability or cost of materials and the third parties on which we rely. Similarly, the manufacturing facilities of a majority of our suppliers are located outside of the U.S. This may give rise to difficulties in importing our product into the U.S. or other countries as a result of, among other things, regulatory agency approval requirements, taxes, tariffs, local import requirements such as import duties or inspections, incomplete or inaccurate import documentation or defective packaging. If such events result in any interruption in the supply of a drug substance or other material or in the manufacture of our approved medicines, such interruption could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects.

We rely on a single specialty pharmacy and a single distributor for all of our sales of our approved medicines in the U.S. and use a single distributor in certain countries in Europe. If either the specialty pharmacy or the distributor becomes subject to bankruptcy or is acquired by a company that wants to terminate the relationship with us, and we are required to transition to a new specialty pharmacy or distributor, such transition may result in an inability for us to collect outstanding receivables, a decline in our revenue, results of operations and cash flows. Further, we are in the process of switching or adding contract manufacturing organizations for both Livmarli and volixibat, which is cost-intensive and time-consuming. We are also in the process of transferring contractual and technical responsibilities for manufacturing activities related to Cholbam and Chenodal. The success of these transfers is necessary for continuous supply to clinical trials and potential future commercial demand.

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Capital Requirements

We may need substantial additional financing to continue our commercialization efforts for our approved medicines, develop our product candidates and implement our operating plans. If we fail to obtain additional financing, we may be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our product development programs or commercialization efforts.

Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception. We expect to continue to spend substantial amounts to continue the clinical development and seek regulatory approval of our product candidates. We will require significant additional amounts in order to continue our marketing and sales efforts for our approved medicines, prepare for commercialization for our product candidates, and, if approved, to launch and commercialize our product candidates.

Based on our current and anticipated level of operations, we believe our existing cash, cash equivalents and investments, will be sufficient to fund current operations through at least the next 12 months. However, changing circumstances may cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, and we may need to spend more money than currently expected because of circumstances beyond our control. We may require additional capital for the further development and commercialization of our product candidates and may need to raise additional funds sooner if we choose to expand more rapidly than we presently anticipate.

Additional funding may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. As a result of adverse geopolitical and macroeconomic developments, such as recent and potential future disruptions in access to bank deposits or lending commitments due to bank failures, the ongoing conflicts between Ukraine and Russia and Israel and Gaza, the COVID-19 pandemic, actions taken to slow its spread, actual and anticipated changes in interest rates, economic inflation and the responses by central banking authorities to control such inflation, the global credit and financial markets have experienced extreme volatility and disruptions, including severely diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, increases in unemployment rates and uncertainty about economic stability. If the equity and credit markets deteriorate, it may make any necessary debt or equity financing more difficult, more costly and more dilutive. If we are unable to raise additional capital in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, we may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development or commercialization of our approved medicines and product candidates or other research and development initiatives. We also could be required to seek collaborators for our product candidates at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable or on terms that are less favorable than might otherwise be available or relinquish or license on unfavorable terms our rights to our product candidates in markets where we otherwise would seek to pursue development or commercialization ourselves.

Any of the above events could significantly harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations and cause the price of our common stock to decline.

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our existing stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to our technologies or product candidates.

We may seek additional capital through a combination of public and private equity offerings, debt financings, strategic partnerships and alliances and licensing arrangements. For example, in April 2023, we issued and sold $316.3 million aggregate principal amount of indebtedness under the Notes. Further, in July 2023, in connection with the Asset Purchase, we entered into the Subscription Agreements, pursuant to which we issued 8 million shares of our common stock. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a stockholder. For example, if we elect to settle our conversion obligation under the Notes in shares of our common stock or a combination of cash and shares of our common stock, the issuance of such common stock may dilute the ownership interests of our stockholders and sales in the public market could adversely affect prevailing market prices. The incurrence of indebtedness would result in increased fixed payment obligations and could involve certain restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt, limitations on our ability to acquire or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. If we raise additional funds through strategic partnerships and alliances and licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies or product candidates, or grant licenses on terms unfavorable to us.

If we raise additional funds through collaboration, strategic partnerships and licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our approved medicines and product candidates, our intellectual property, future revenue streams or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us. If our cash flows and capital resources are insufficient to allow us to make required payments, we may have to reduce or delay capital expenditures, sell assets or seek additional capital.

We may be unable to raise the funds necessary to repurchase the Notes for cash following a fundamental change, or to pay any cash amounts due upon conversion, and any future indebtedness may limit our ability to repurchase the Notes or pay cash upon their conversion.

Holders of the Notes may, subject to a limited exception described in certain provisions in the Notes and the related Indenture, require us to repurchase the Notes following a fundamental change at a cash repurchase price generally equal to the principal amount of the Notes to be repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any. In addition, upon conversion, we will satisfy part or all of our conversion obligation in cash unless we elect to settle conversions solely in shares of our common stock. We may not have enough available cash or be able to obtain financing at the time we are required to repurchase the Notes or pay any cash amounts due upon conversion. In addition, applicable law, regulatory authorities and agreements governing any future indebtedness may restrict our ability to repurchase the Notes or pay any cash amounts due upon conversion. Our failure to repurchase Notes or to pay any cash amounts due upon conversion when required will constitute a default under the indenture. A default under the indenture or the fundamental change itself could also lead to a default under agreements governing any future indebtedness, which may result in that any future indebtedness becoming immediately payable in full. We may not have sufficient funds to satisfy all amounts due under any future indebtedness and the Notes.

Our ability to utilize our net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes may be limited.

We have incurred substantial losses during our history and do not expect to become profitable in the near future, and we may never achieve profitability. As of December 31, 2022, we had federal and California and other state net operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards of approximately $153.1 million, $19.1 million and 17.7 million, respectively. The federal NOL carryforwards do not expire, and the California and other state NOL carryforwards will begin to expire in 2038 and 2032, respectively, unless previously utilized. Our ability to utilize our NOL carryforwards and certain other tax attributes may be limited. As of December 31, 2022, we also had federal and state research and development credit carryforwards totaling $32.5 million and $4.2 million, respectively. The federal research and development credit carryforwards will begin to expire in 2039, unless previously utilized. The state research and development credits do not expire.

Under the Tax Act, as modified by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”), federal NOLs generated in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such federal NOLs in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2020 is limited to 80% of taxable income. It is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to the Tax Act or the CARES Act. Our NOL carryforwards and other applicable tax attributes are subject to review and possible adjustment by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service and state tax authorities and may become subject to an annual limitation in the event of certain cumulative changes in the ownership interest of significant stockholders over a three-year period in excess of 50 percentage points (by value), as defined under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. It is possible that we have experienced one or more such ownership changes in the past, and we may experience ownership changes in the future as a result of subsequent shifts in our stock ownership. We may therefore be limited in the portion of NOL carryforwards and other applicable tax attributes that we can use in the future to offset future taxable income. In addition, at the state level, there may be periods during which the use of net operating losses is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed. We have recorded a full valuation allowance related to our NOLs and other deferred tax assets due to the uncertainty of the ultimate realization of the future benefits of those assets.

Our indebtedness and liabilities could limit the cash flow available for our operations, expose us to risks that could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and impair our ability to satisfy our obligations under our indebtedness.

As of June 30, 2023, we had $316.3 million aggregate principal amount of indebtedness under the Notes.

We may also incur additional indebtedness to meet future financing needs. Our indebtedness could have significant negative consequences for our security holders and our business, results of operations and financial condition by, among other things:

•

increasing our vulnerability to adverse economic and industry conditions;

•

limiting our ability to obtain additional financing;

•

requiring the dedication of a substantial portion of our cash flow from operations to service our indebtedness, which will reduce the amount of cash available for other purposes;

•

limiting our flexibility to plan for, or react to, changes in our business;

•

diluting the interests of our existing stockholders as a result of issuing shares of our common stock upon conversion of the Notes; and

•

placing us at a possible competitive disadvantage with competitors that are less leveraged than us or have better access to capital.

Our ability to make scheduled payments of the principal of, to pay interest on or to refinance our indebtedness, including the Notes, depends on our future performance, which is subject to economic, financial, competitive and other factors beyond our control. Our business may not generate sufficient funds, and we may otherwise be unable to maintain sufficient cash reserves, to pay amounts due under our indebtedness, including the Notes, and our cash needs may increase in the future.

The conditional conversion feature of the Notes, if triggered, may adversely affect our financial condition and operating results, and conversion of our outstanding Notes may result in the dilution of existing stockholders, create downward pressure on the price of our common stock, and restrict our ability to take advantage of future opportunities.

The conditional conversion feature of the Notes entitles holders of the Notes to convert the Notes at any time during specified periods at their option. If one or more holders elect to convert their Notes, unless we elect to satisfy our conversion obligation by delivering solely shares of our common stock (other than paying cash in lieu of delivering any fractional share), we would be required to settle a portion or all of our conversion obligation in cash, which could adversely affect our liquidity.

The Notes may be converted into cash and shares of our common stock (subject to our right or obligation to pay cash in lieu of all or a portion of such shares). If shares of our common stock are issued to the holders of the Notes upon conversion, there will be dilution to our stockholders’ equity and the market price of our shares may decrease due to the additional selling pressure in the market. Any downward pressure on the price of our common stock caused by the sale or potential sale of shares issuable upon conversion of the Notes could also encourage short sales by third parties, creating additional selling pressure on our stock. The existence of the Notes and the obligations that we incurred by issuing them may restrict our ability to take advantage of certain future opportunities, such as engaging in future debt or equity financing activities.

The accounting method for the Notes could adversely affect our reported financial condition and results.

The accounting method for reflecting the Notes on our balance sheet, accruing interest expense for the Notes and reflecting the underlying shares of our common stock in our reported diluted earnings per share may adversely affect our reported earnings and financial condition.

In August 2020, the Financial Accounting Standards Board published an Accounting Standards Update, which we refer to as ASU 2020-06, which simplifies certain of the accounting standards that apply to convertible notes. In accordance with ASU 2020-06, we expect that the Notes we are offering will be reflected as a liability on our balance sheets, with the initial carrying amount equal to the principal amount of the Notes, net of issuance costs. The issuance costs are treated as a debt discount for accounting purposes, which will be amortized into interest expense over the term of the Notes. As a result of this amortization, the interest expense that we expect to recognize for the Notes for accounting purposes will be greater than the cash interest payments we will pay on the Notes, which will result in lower reported income.

In addition, the shares underlying the Notes are reflected in our diluted earnings per share using the “if converted” method, in accordance with ASU 2020-06. Under that method, diluted earnings per share would generally be calculated assuming that all the Notes were converted solely into shares of common stock at the beginning of the reporting period, unless the result would be anti-dilutive. The application of the if-converted method may reduce our reported diluted earnings per share, and accounting standards may change in the future in a manner that may adversely affect our diluted earnings per share.

In the future, we may, in our sole discretion, irrevocably elect to settle the conversion value of the Notes in cash up to the principal amount being converted. Following such an irrevocable election, if the conversion value of the Notes exceeds their principal amount for a reporting period, then we will calculate our diluted earnings per share by assuming that all of the Notes were converted at the beginning of the reporting period and that we issued shares of our common stock to settle the excess, unless the result would be anti-dilutive.

Furthermore, if any of the conditions to the convertibility of the Notes is satisfied, then we may be required under applicable accounting standards to reclassify the liability carrying value of the Notes as a current, rather than a long-term, liability. This reclassification could be required even if no noteholders convert their Notes and could materially reduce our reported working capital.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

We do not currently have patent protection for certain of our approved medicines or rely on regulatory exclusivity. If we are unable to obtain and maintain sufficient intellectual property protection for our approved medicines and our product candidates, or if the scope of the intellectual property protection is not sufficiently broad, our competitors could develop and commercialize products similar or identical to ours, and our ability to successfully commercialize our approved medicines and our other product candidates, if approved, may be adversely affected.

Our commercial success will depend in part on obtaining and maintaining a combination of patents, trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our technologies. We do not have, and do not expect to obtain, patent protection for Chenodal or Cholbam. Any unauthorized disclosure to or misappropriation by third parties of our confidential proprietary information could enable competitors to quickly duplicate or surpass our technological achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market.

The patent positions of biotechnology and 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 to date in the U.S. or in many jurisdictions outside of the U.S. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretations of patent laws in the U.S. and other jurisdictions may diminish the value of our intellectual property. Accordingly, we cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be 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 patents we obtain or license are deemed invalid and unenforceable, our ability to commercialize or license our technology could be adversely affected.

The patent application process is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, and there can be no assurance that we or any of our actual or potential future collaborators will be successful in protecting our approved medicines or product candidates, proprietary technologies and their uses by obtaining and defending patents. These risks and uncertainties include the following:

•

the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other provisions during the patent process, the noncompliance with which can result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application, and partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction;

•

patent applications may not result in any patents being issued;

•

patents that may be issued or in-licensed may be challenged, invalidated, modified, revoked, circumvented, found to be unenforceable or otherwise may not provide any competitive advantage;

•

our competitors, many of whom have substantially greater resources than we do and many of whom have made significant investments in competing technologies, may seek or may have already obtained patents that will limit, interfere with or eliminate our ability to make, use, import, and sell our approved medicines or our product candidates;

•

other parties may have designed around our claims or developed technologies that may be related or competitive to our platform, may have filed or may file patent applications and may have received or may receive patents that overlap or conflict with our patent applications, either by claiming the same methods or devices or by claiming subject matter that could dominate our patent position;

•

any successful opposition or other post-grant proceeding to any patents owned by or licensed to us could deprive us of rights necessary for the practice of our technologies or the successful commercialization of any products or product candidates that we may develop;

•

because patent applications in the U.S. and most other jurisdictions are confidential for a period of time after filing, we cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first to file any patent application related to our approved medicines or our product candidates, proprietary technologies and their uses;

•

an interference proceeding can be provoked by a third party or instituted by the USPTO to determine who was the first to invent any of the subject matter covered by the patent claims of our applications for any application with an effective filing date before March 16, 2013;

•

there may be significant pressure on the U.S. government and international governmental bodies to limit the scope of patent protection both inside and outside the U.S. for disease treatments that prove successful, as a matter of public policy regarding worldwide health concerns; and

•

jurisdictions other than the U.S. may have patent laws less favorable to patentees than those upheld by U.S. courts, allowing foreign competitors a better opportunity to create, develop and market competing products.

The patent prosecution process is also expensive and time-consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. Although we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, CROs, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach such agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection. We may also rely on trade secrets to protect our technology, especially where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or feasible. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. Although we use reasonable efforts to protect our trade secrets, our employees, consultants, contractors, outside scientific collaborators and other advisors may unintentionally or willfully disclose our information to competitors. Enforcing a claim that a third party illegally obtained and is using any of our trade secrets is expensive and time consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, courts outside the U.S. are sometimes less willing to protect trade secrets. Moreover, our competitors may independently develop equivalent knowledge, methods and know-how.

The degree of future protection for our proprietary rights is uncertain because legal means afford only limited protection and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep our competitive advantage. Only limited protection may be available and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep any competitive advantage. If we do not adequately protect our intellectual property and proprietary technology, competitors may be able to use our approved medicines, our product candidates and proprietary technologies and erode or negate any competitive advantage we may have, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. For example:

•

others may be able to make compounds that are similar to our approved medicines and our product candidates but that are not covered by the claims of our patents;

•

we might not have been the first to make the inventions covered by our pending patent applications;

•

we might not have been the first to file patent applications for these inventions;

•

others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of our technologies;

•

any patents that we obtain may not provide us with any competitive advantages;

•

we may not develop additional proprietary technologies that are patentable;

•

our competitors might conduct research and development activities in jurisdictions where we do not have patent rights and then use the information learned from such activities to develop competitive products for sale in our major commercial markets;

•

we cannot ensure that any of our patents, or any of our pending patent applications, if issued, or those of our licensors, will include claims having a scope sufficient to protect our approved medicines and any then-approved medicine;

•

we cannot ensure that we will be able to successfully commercialize our approved medicines and any then-approved product on a substantial scale, if approved, before the relevant patents that we own or license expire; or

•

the patents of others may have an adverse effect on our business.

Others have filed, and in the future are likely to file, patent applications covering products and technologies that are similar, identical or competitive to ours or important to our business. We cannot be certain that any patent application owned by a third party will not have priority over patent applications filed or in-licensed by us, or that we or our licensors will not be involved in interference, opposition or other patent office proceedings before the USPTO or non-U.S. patent offices.

We cannot be certain that the claims in our issued patents and pending patent applications covering our approved medicines or our product candidates will be considered patentable by the USPTO, courts in the U.S., or by patent offices and courts in foreign jurisdictions. Furthermore, the laws of some foreign jurisdictions do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the U.S. As a result, we may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our intellectual property.

The strength of patents in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical fields involves complex legal and scientific questions and can be uncertain. The patent applications that we own or in-license may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover our approved medicines or our product candidates in the U.S. or in foreign jurisdictions. Even if such patents do successfully issue, third parties may challenge the validity, enforceability or scope thereof, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable. Any successful opposition or other post-grant proceeding to our patents could deprive us of exclusive rights necessary for the successful commercialization of our approved medicines or our product candidates. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, our patents may not adequately protect our intellectual property, provide exclusivity for approved medicines or our product candidates or prevent others from designing around our claims. If the breadth or strength of protection provided by the patents we hold with respect to our approved medicines or our product candidates is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to develop, or threaten our ability to commercialize, our approved medicines or our product candidates.

Further, if we encounter delays in our development efforts, including our clinical trials, the period of time during which we could market our approved medicines or our product candidates under patent protection would be reduced. In addition, patents have a limited lifespan. In the U.S., the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years after it is filed. Various extensions may be available; however, the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. A patent term extension of up to five years based on regulatory delay may be available in the U.S. under the Hatch-Waxman Act. However, only a single patent can be extended for each marketing approval, and any patent can be extended only once, for a single product. Moreover, the scope of protection during the period of the patent term extension does not extend to the full scope of the claim, but instead only to the scope of the product as approved. Further, a patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval and only those claims covering such approved drug product, an approved method for using it or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. Laws governing analogous patent term extensions in foreign jurisdictions vary widely, as do laws governing the ability to obtain multiple patents from a single patent family. Additionally, we may not receive an extension if we fail to apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the applicable time period or the scope of patent protection afforded could be less than we request. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or restoration, or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we will have the right to exclusively market our product will be shortened and our competitors may obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration, and our revenue could be reduced.

For U.S. patent applications in which claims are entitled to a priority date before March 16, 2013, an interference proceeding can be provoked by a third party or instituted by the USPTO to determine who was the first to invent any of the subject matter covered by the patent claims of our patents or patent applications. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms. Our participation in an interference proceeding may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees.

For U.S. patent applications containing a claim not entitled to priority before March 16, 2013, there is greater level of uncertainty in the patent law. In September 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or America Invents Act, was signed into law. The America Invents Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law, including provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The USPTO has developed regulations and procedures to govern the administration of the America Invents Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the America Invents Act, and in particular, the “first to file” provisions, were enacted on March 16, 2013. The America Invents 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 patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable, or that we elect not to patent, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our approved medicines and our product candidates and drug discovery and development processes that involve proprietary know-how, information or technology that is not covered by patents. However, trade secrets can be difficult to protect. We require all of our employees, consultants, advisors and any third parties who have access to our proprietary know-how, information or technology, such as third parties involved in the manufacture of our approved medicines and our product candidates and third parties involved in our clinical trials to enter into confidentiality agreements. We cannot be certain that all such agreements have been duly executed, that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. Misappropriation or unauthorized disclosure of our trade secrets could impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business. Additionally, if the steps taken to maintain our trade secrets are deemed inadequate, we may have insufficient recourse against third parties for misappropriating the trade secret. For example, the FDA, as part of its Transparency Initiative, is currently considering whether to make additional information publicly available on a routine basis, including information that we may consider to be trade secrets or other proprietary information, and it is not clear at the present time how the FDA’s disclosure policies may change in the future, if at all. If we are unable to prevent unauthorized material disclosure of our intellectual property to third parties, we may not be able to establish or maintain a competitive advantage in our market, which could materially adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.

We currently rely on method-of-use and formulation patents to protect Livmarli and composition-of-matter and method-of-use patents to protect volixibat.

We currently have rights to patents and patent applications in the U.S., Europe and other jurisdictions covering methods of treating certain cholestatic liver diseases using certain IBATis, including maralixibat (the active pharmaceutical ingredient of Livmarli) and volixibat. Patent applications may never issue as patents. We do not have patents or patent applications covering maralixibat as a composition-of-matter. Therefore, the primary patent-based intellectual property protection for our Livmarli program are granted method-of-use patents and any patents that may grant on currently pending method-of-use and formulation patent applications.

Composition-of-matter patents on active pharmaceutical ingredients are generally considered to be the strongest form of intellectual property protection for pharmaceutical products, as such patents provide protection without regard to any method of use. Method-of-use patents protect the use of a product for the specified method. Method-of-use patents do not prevent a competitor from making and marketing a product that is identical to our product for an indication that is outside the scope of the patented method. Moreover, even if competitors do not actively promote their products for our targeted indication(s), physicians may prescribe these products “off-label.” Although off-label prescriptions may infringe or contribute to the infringement of method-of-use patents, the practice is common and such infringement is difficult to prevent or prosecute.

Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.

The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent process. Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other governmental fees on any issued patents and/or applications are due to be paid to the USPTO and foreign patent agencies in

several stages over the lifetime of the patents and/or applications. We have systems in place to remind us to pay these fees, and we employ an outside firm and rely on our outside counsel to pay these fees due to foreign patent agencies. While an inadvertent lapse may sometimes be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, our competitors might be able to enter the market earlier than should otherwise have been the case, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

Changes in U.S. patent law could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect Livmarli and our product candidates.

As is the case with other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly on obtaining and enforcing patents. Our patent rights may be affected by developments or uncertainty in U.S. or foreign patent statutes, patent case law, USPTO rules and regulations or the rules and regulations of foreign patent offices. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biotechnology industry involve both technological and legal complexity, and is therefore costly, time-consuming and inherently uncertain. In addition, the U.S. may, at any time, enact changes to U.S. patent law and regulations, including by legislation, by regulatory rule-making, or by judicial precedent, that adversely affect the scope of patent protection available and weakened the rights of patent owners to obtain patents, enforce patent infringement and obtain injunctions and/or damages. For example, the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101 has evolved significantly over the past several years as the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court issued various opinions, and the USPTO modified its guidance for practitioners on multiple occasions. Other jurisdictions may likewise enact changes to their patent laws in ways that adversely diminish the scope of patent protection and weaken the rights of patent owners to obtain patents, enforce patent infringement and obtain injunctions and/or damages. Further, the U.S. and other governments may, at any time, enact changes to laws and regulations that create new avenues for challenging the invalidity of issued patents. For example, the America Invents Act created new administrative post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings that allow third parties to challenge the validity of issued patents. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on decisions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that could weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

Patents are of national or regional effect. Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on Livmarli and our product candidates in all jurisdictions throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. In addition, the laws of some foreign jurisdictions do not protect intellectual property rights in the same manner and to the same extent as laws in the U.S. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all jurisdictions outside the U.S. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement of such patent protection is not as strong as that in the U.S. These products may compete with Livmarli and any then-approved product and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

The requirements for patentability may differ in certain jurisdictions. For example, unlike other jurisdictions, China has a heightened requirement for patentability, and specifically requires a detailed description of medical uses of a claimed drug. In India, unlike the U.S., there is no link between regulatory approval for a drug and its patent status. In addition to India, certain jurisdictions in Europe and developing jurisdictions, including China, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In those jurisdictions, we may have limited remedies if patents are infringed or if we are compelled to grant a license to a third party, which could materially diminish the value of those patents. This could limit our potential revenue opportunities. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we own or license.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology or pharmaceutical products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

In addition, geo-political actions in the U.S. and in foreign countries could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution or maintenance of our patent applications or those of any current or future licensors and the maintenance, enforcement or defense of our issued patents or those of any current or future licensors. For example, the U.S. and foreign government actions related to Russia’s conflict in Ukraine may limit or prevent filing, prosecution, and maintenance of patent applications in Russia. Government actions may also prevent maintenance of issued patents in Russia. These actions could result in abandonment or lapse of our patents or patent applications, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in Russia. If such an event were to occur, it could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, a decree was adopted by the Russian government in March 2022, allowing Russian companies and individuals to exploit inventions owned by patentees from the U.S. without consent or compensation. Consequently, we would not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in Russia or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into Russia. Accordingly, our competitive position may be impaired, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be adversely affected.

Finally, Europe’s planned Unified Patent Court may in particular present uncertainties for our ability to protect and enforce our patent rights against competitors in Europe. In 2012, the European Patent Package (“EU Patent Package”) regulations were passed with the goal of providing a single pan-European Unitary Patent and a new European Unified Patent Court (“UPC”), for litigation involving European patents. Implementation of the EU Patent Package will likely occur in the first half of 2023. Under the UPC, all European patents, including those issued prior to ratification of the European Patent Package, will by default automatically fall under the jurisdiction of the UPC. The UPC will provide our competitors with a new forum to centrally revoke our European patents, and allow for the possibility of a competitor to obtain pan-European injunctions. It will be several years before we will understand the scope of patent rights that will be recognized and the strength of patent remedies that will be provided by the UPC. Under the EU Patent Package as currently proposed, we will have the right to opt our patents out of the UPC over the first seven years of the court’s existence, but doing so may preclude us from realizing the benefits of the new unified court.

If we fail to comply with our obligations in the agreements under which we license intellectual property rights from third parties or otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our licensors, we could lose license rights that are important to our business.

We are a party to a number of license agreements under which we are granted intellectual property rights that are important to our business. For example, certain trade secrets related to maralixibat are licensed from Pfizer, and patents, patent applications and trade secrets related to volixibat are licensed from Sanofi. Our existing license agreements as related to maralixibat and volixibat impose various development, regulatory and/or commercial diligence obligations, payment of milestones and/or royalties and other obligations. If we fail to comply with our obligations under a license agreement, or we are subject to a bankruptcy, the license agreement may be terminated, in which event we would not be able to develop, commercialize or market our approved medicines or other product candidates, as the case may be.

Licensing of intellectual property rights is of critical importance to our business and involves complex legal, business and scientific issues. Disputes may arise between us and our licensors regarding intellectual property rights subject to a license agreement, including:

•

the scope of rights granted under the license agreement and other interpretation-related issues;

•

whether and the extent to which our technology and processes infringe on intellectual property rights of the licensor that are not subject to the licensing agreement;

•

our right to sublicense intellectual property rights to third parties under collaborative development relationships;

•

our diligence obligations with respect to the use of the licensed technology in relation to our development and commercialization of our approved medicines and our product candidates, and what activities satisfy those diligence obligations; and

•

the ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by our licensors and us and our partners.

If disputes over intellectual property rights that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects may be adversely affected. We may enter into additional licenses in the future and if we fail to comply with obligations under those agreements, we could suffer adverse consequences.

We may become subject to claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our patents and other intellectual property.

We may be subject to claims that former employees (including former employees of our licensors), collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our patents or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. The failure to name the proper inventors on a patent application can result in the patents issuing thereon being unenforceable. Inventorship disputes may arise from conflicting views regarding the contributions of different individuals named as inventors, the effects of foreign laws where foreign nationals are involved in the development of the subject matter of the patent, conflicting obligations of third parties involved in developing Livmarli or our product candidates or as a result of questions regarding co-ownership of potential joint inventions. Litigation may be necessary to resolve these and other claims challenging inventorship and/or ownership. Alternatively, or additionally, we may enter into agreements to clarify the scope of our rights in such intellectual property. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

We may not be successful in obtaining or maintaining necessary rights to product components and processes for our development pipeline through acquisitions and in-licenses.

Presently we have intellectual property rights, through licenses from third parties related to our approved medicines and our product candidates. For example, we have license agreements with Shire and Satiogen for both maralixibat and volixibat. We have our license agreement with Shire, Satiogen and Pfizer for our intellectual property rights covering maralixibat. Further, we have our license agreement with Sanofi for our intellectual property rights covering volixibat. Because our programs may require the use of additional proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business will likely depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license or use these proprietary rights. In addition, Livmarli or our product candidates may require specific formulations to work effectively and efficiently and these rights may be held by others. We may be unable to acquire or in-license proprietary rights related to any compositions, formulations, methods of use, processes or other intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as being necessary for Livmarli or our product candidates. Even if we are able to obtain a license to such proprietary rights, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license replacement technology.

Where we obtain licenses from or collaborate with third parties, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain the patents, covering technology that we license from third parties, or such activities, if controlled by us, may require the input of such third parties. We may also require the cooperation of our licensors and collaborators to enforce any licensed patent rights, and such cooperation may not be provided. Therefore, these patents and applications may not be prosecuted and enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business, in compliance with applicable laws and regulations, which may affect the validity and enforceability of such patents or any patents that may issue from such application. Moreover, if we do obtain necessary licenses, we will likely have obligations under those licenses, including making royalty and milestone payments, and any failure to satisfy those obligations could give our licensor the right to terminate the license. Termination of a necessary license, or expiration of licensed patents or patent applications, could have a material adverse impact on our business. Our business would suffer if any such licenses terminate, if the licensors fail to abide by the terms of the license, if the licensors fail to enforce licensed patents against infringing third parties, if the licensed patents or other rights are found to be invalid or unenforceable, or if we are unable to enter into necessary licenses on acceptable terms. Furthermore, if any licenses terminate, or if the underlying patents fail to provide the intended exclusivity, competitors or other third parties may gain the freedom to seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products identical to ours. Moreover, our licensors may own or control intellectual property that has not been licensed to us and, as a result, we may be subject to claims, regardless of their merit, that we are infringing or otherwise violating the licensor’s rights. In addition, while we cannot currently determine the amount of the royalty obligations we would be required to pay on sales of future products, if any, the amounts may be significant. The amount of our future royalty obligations will depend on the technology and intellectual property we use in products that we successfully develop and commercialize, if any. Therefore, even if we successfully develop and commercialize products, we may be unable to achieve or maintain profitability.

The licensing and acquisition of third-party proprietary rights is a competitive area, and companies, which may be more established, or have greater resources than we do, may also be pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party proprietary rights that we may consider necessary or attractive in order to commercialize our approved medicines or our product candidates. More established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, cash resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities.

For example, we collaborate with U.S. and foreign academic institutions to accelerate our preclinical research or development under written agreements with these institutions. Typically, these institutions provide us with an option to negotiate an exclusive license to any of the institution’s proprietary rights in technology resulting from the collaboration. Regardless of such option to negotiate a license, we may be unable to negotiate a license within the specified time frame or under terms that are acceptable to us. If we are unable to do so, the institution may offer, on an exclusive basis, their proprietary rights to other parties, potentially blocking our ability to pursue our program.

In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us, either on reasonable terms, or at all. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment, or at all. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights on commercially reasonable terms, our ability to commercialize our approved medicines and any then-approved product, and our business, financial condition and prospects for growth could suffer.

Third-party claims alleging intellectual property infringement may prevent or delay our drug discovery and development efforts.

Our success depends in part on our avoiding infringement of the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. There is a substantial amount of litigation, both within and outside the U.S., involving patents and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, as well as administrative proceedings for challenging patents, including inter partes review, post-grant proceedings, interference and reexamination proceedings before the USPTO or oppositions and other comparable proceedings in foreign jurisdictions. The America Invents Act introduced new procedures including inter partes review and post grant review. The implementation of these procedures brings uncertainty to the possibility of challenges to our patents in the future and the outcome of such challenges. Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we are marketing our approved medicines and developing our product candidates. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our activities related to our approved medicines and our product candidates may give rise to claims of infringement of the patent rights of others.

The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have produced a proliferation of patents, and it is not always clear to industry participants, including us, which patents cover various types of products or methods of use. The coverage of patents is subject to interpretation by the courts, and the interpretation is not always uniform. Any of our approved medicines or our current or future product candidates may infringe existing or future patents. We may not be aware of patents that have already issued that a third party might assert are infringed by our approved medicines or one of our current or future product candidates. Nevertheless, we are not aware of any issued patents that will prevent us from marketing our approved medicines or our product candidates.

Third parties may assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. There may be third-party patents of which we are currently unaware with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of our approved medicines or our product candidates. Because patent applications can take many years to issue and may be confidential for 18 months or more after filing, there may be currently pending third-party patent applications which may later result in issued patents that our approved medicines, our product candidates or our technologies may infringe, or which such third parties claim are infringed by the use of our technologies. Parties making claims against us for infringement or misappropriation of their intellectual property rights may seek and obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize our approved medicines or one or more of our product candidates. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, could involve substantial expenses and could be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business.

If we collaborate with third parties in the development of technology in the future, our collaborators may not properly maintain or defend our intellectual property rights or may use our proprietary information in such a way as to invite litigation that could jeopardize or invalidate our intellectual property or proprietary information or expose us to litigation or potential liability. Further, collaborators may infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties, which may expose us to litigation and potential liability. In the future, we may agree to indemnify our commercial collaborators against certain intellectual property infringement claims brought by third parties.

Any claims of patent infringement asserted by third parties would be time consuming and could:

•

result in costly litigation;

•

divert the time and attention of our technical personnel and management;

•

cause development delays;

•

prevent us from commercializing our approved medicines or our product candidates until the asserted patent expires or is held finally invalid or not infringed in a court of law;

•

require us to develop non-infringing technology, which may not be possible on a cost-effective basis;

•

require us to pay damages to the party whose intellectual property rights we may be found to be infringing, which may include treble damages if we are found to have been willfully infringing such intellectual property;

•

require us to pay the attorney’s fees and costs of litigation to the party whose intellectual property rights we may be found to be infringing; and/or

•

require us to enter into royalty or licensing agreements, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all.

If we are sued for patent infringement, we would need to demonstrate that our approved medicines and any then-approved product or methods either do not infringe the patent claims of the relevant patent or that the patent claims are invalid, and we may not be able to do either. Proving invalidity is difficult. For example, in the U.S., proving invalidity requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption of validity enjoyed by issued patents. Even if we are successful in these proceedings, we may incur substantial costs and divert management’s time and attention in pursuing these proceedings, which could have a material adverse effect on us. If we are unable to avoid infringing the patent rights of others, we may be required to seek a license, which may not be available, defend an infringement action or challenge the validity of the patents in court. Patent litigation is costly and time consuming. We may not have sufficient resources to bring these actions to a successful conclusion. In addition, if we do not obtain a license, develop or obtain non-infringing technology, fail to defend an infringement action successfully or have infringed patents declared invalid, we may incur substantial monetary damages, encounter significant delays in bringing our product candidates to market and be precluded from manufacturing or selling our approved medicines or our product candidates.

We do not always conduct independent reviews of pending patent applications of and patents issued to third parties. We cannot be certain that others have not filed patent applications for technology covered by our pending applications, or that we were the first to invent the technology, because:

•

some patent applications in the U.S. may be maintained in secrecy until the patents are issued;

•

patent applications in the U.S. and elsewhere can be pending for many years before issuance, or unintentionally abandoned patents or applications can be revived;

•

pending patent applications that have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover our technologies, our approved medicines, our product candidates or the use thereof;

•

identification of third-party patent rights that may be relevant to our technology is difficult because patent searching is imperfect due to differences in terminology among patents, incomplete databases and the difficulty in assessing the meaning of patent claims;

•

patent applications are typically not published until 18 months after the priority date; and

•

publications in the scientific literature often lag behind actual discoveries.

Furthermore, the scope of a patent claim is determined by an interpretation of the law, the written disclosure in a patent and the patent’s prosecution history and can involve other factors such as expert opinion. Our interpretation of the relevance or the scope of claims in a patent or a pending application may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to market our approved medicines and any then-approved product. Further, we may incorrectly determine that our technologies, our approved medicines and any then-approved product, or product candidates are not covered by a third-party patent or may incorrectly predict whether a third party’s pending patent application will issue with claims of relevant scope. Our determination of the expiration date of any patent in the U.S. or internationally that we consider relevant may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our approved medicines or our product candidates.

Our competitors may have filed, and may in the future file, patent applications covering technology similar to ours, and others may have or obtain patents or proprietary rights that could limit our ability to make, use, sell, offer for sale or import our approved medicines, our product candidates and future approved medicines or impair our competitive position. Numerous third-party U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications exist in the fields in which we are marketing our approved medicines and developing product candidates. There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of our approved medicines and our product candidates. Any such patent application may have priority over our patent applications, which could further require us to obtain rights to issued patents covering such technologies. If another party has filed a U.S. patent application on inventions similar to ours, we may have to participate in an interference proceeding declared by the USPTO to determine priority of invention in the U.S. The costs of these proceedings could be substantial, and it is possible that such efforts would be unsuccessful if, unbeknownst to us, the other party had independently arrived at the same or similar invention prior to our own invention, resulting in a loss of our U.S. patent position with respect to such inventions. Other jurisdictions have similar laws that permit secrecy of patent applications and may be entitled to priority over our applications in such jurisdictions.

Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our operations.

If a third party prevails in a patent infringement lawsuit against us, we may have to stop making and selling the infringing product, pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees if we are found to be willfully infringing a third party’s patents, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties or redesign our infringing products, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure.

We cannot predict whether any such license would be available at all or whether it would be available on commercially reasonable terms. Furthermore, even in the absence of litigation, we may need to obtain licenses from third parties to advance our research or allow commercialization of our approved medicines and our product candidates. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we would be unable to further develop and commercialize our approved medicines and our product candidates, which could harm our business significantly. Even if we were able to obtain a license, the rights may be nonexclusive, which may give our competitors access to the same intellectual property.

We may be subject to claims that we have wrongfully hired an employee from a competitor or that we or our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged confidential information or trade secrets of their former employers.

As is common in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, in addition to our employees, we engage the services of consultants to assist us in the development of our product candidates. Many of these consultants, and many of our employees, were previously employed at, or may have previously provided or may be currently providing consulting services to, other pharmaceutical companies including our competitors or potential competitors. We may become subject to claims that we, our employees or consultants inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed trade secrets or other information proprietary to their former employers or their former or current clients. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, which could adversely affect our business. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our management team and other employees.

We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or the patents of our licensors, which could be expensive, time consuming, and unsuccessful. Further, our issued patents could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court, and we may incur substantial costs as a result of litigation or other proceedings relating to patent and other intellectual property rights.

Third parties including competitors may infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate our patents, patents that may issue to us in the future, or the patents of our licensors that are licensed to us. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may need to or choose to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. We may not be able to prevent, alone or with our licensors, misappropriation of our intellectual property rights, particularly in jurisdictions where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the U.S. Further, because of the expense and uncertainty of litigation, we may conclude that even if a third party is infringing our issued patent, any patents that may be issued as a result of our pending or future patent applications or other intellectual property rights, the risk-adjusted cost of bringing and enforcing such a claim or action may be too high or not in the best interest of our company or our stockholders. In such cases, we may decide that the more prudent course of action is to simply monitor the situation or initiate or seek some other non-litigious action or solution.

If we choose to go to court to stop another party from using the inventions claimed in our patents, that individual or company has the right to ask the court to rule that such patents are invalid, unenforceable, or should not be enforced against that third party for any number of reasons. In patent litigation in the U.S., defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge include an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements for patentability, including lack of novelty, obviousness, lack of written description, indefiniteness, or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could include an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld material information from the USPTO or made a misleading statement during prosecution, i.e. committed inequitable conduct. Third parties may also raise similar claims before the USPTO, even outside the context of litigation. Similar mechanisms for challenging the validity and enforceability of a patent exist in foreign patent offices and courts and may result in the revocation, cancellation, or amendment of any foreign patents we or our licensors hold now or in the future. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable, and prior art could render our patents or those of our licensors invalid. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on such product or product candidate. Such a loss of patent protection would have a material adverse impact on our business.

Interference or derivation proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us or declared by the USPTO may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications or those of our licensors. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or if a non-exclusive license is offered and our competitors gain access to the same technology. Our defense of litigation or interference proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. In addition, the uncertainties associated with litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our clinical trials, continue our research programs, license necessary technology from third parties or enter into development or manufacturing partnerships that would help us bring our product candidates to market.

Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to our intellectual property rights may cause us to incur significant expenses and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could compromise our ability to compete in the marketplace.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of our common stock.

Our ability to enforce our patent rights depends on our ability to detect infringement. It may be difficult to detect infringers who do not advertise the components or methods that are used in connection with their products and services. Moreover, it may be difficult or impossible to obtain evidence of infringement in a competitor’s or potential competitor’s product or service. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded if we were to prevail may not be commercially meaningful.

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed. Our reliance on third parties requires us to share our trade secrets, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secrets will be misappropriated or disclosed.

We rely on trade secrets to protect our proprietary technologies, especially where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or obtainable. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. We rely in part on confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors, and inventions agreements with employees, consultants and advisors, to protect our trade secrets and other proprietary information. In addition to contractual measures, we try to protect the confidential nature of our proprietary information using commonly accepted physical and technological security measures. Despite these efforts, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed, and these agreements may not effectively prevent disclosure of confidential information and may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. In addition, others may independently discover our trade secrets and proprietary information. For example, the FDA, as part of its Transparency Initiative, is currently considering whether to make additional information publicly available on a routine basis, including information that we may consider to be trade secrets or other proprietary information, and it is not clear at the present time how the FDA’s disclosure policies may change in the future, if at all. Costly and time-consuming litigation could be necessary to enforce and determine the scope of our proprietary rights, and failure to obtain or maintain trade secret protection could adversely affect our competitive business position.

In addition, such security measures may not provide adequate protection for our proprietary information, for example, in the case of misappropriation of a trade secret by an employee, consultant, customer or third party with authorized access. Our security measures may not prevent an employee, consultant or customer from misappropriating our trade secrets and providing them to a competitor, and recourse we take against such misconduct may not provide an adequate remedy to protect our interests fully. Monitoring unauthorized uses and disclosures is difficult, and we do not know whether the steps we have taken to protect our proprietary technologies will be effective. Unauthorized parties may also attempt to copy or reverse engineer certain aspects of our approved medicines and any then-approved product that we consider proprietary. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret can be difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. Even though we use commonly accepted security measures, the criteria for protection of trade secrets can vary among different jurisdictions.

Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the U.S. are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. Moreover, third parties may still obtain this information or may come upon this or similar information independently, and we would have no right to prevent them from using that technology or information to compete with us. Trade secrets may over time be disseminated within the industry through independent development, the publication of journal articles and the movement of personnel skilled in the art from company to company or academic to industry scientific positions. Though our agreements with third parties typically restrict the ability of our advisors, employees, collaborators, licensors, suppliers, third-party contractors and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our trade secrets, our agreements may contain certain limited publication rights. If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to prevent such competitor from using that technology or information to compete with us, which could harm our competitive position. Because from time to time we expect to rely on third parties in the development, manufacture, and distribution of our approved medicines and any then-approved product and provision of our services, we must, at times, share trade secrets with them. Despite employing the contractual and other security precautions described above, the need to share trade secrets increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by our competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others, or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. If any of these events occurs or if we otherwise lose protection for our trade secrets, the value of this information may be greatly reduced and our competitive position would be harmed. If we do not apply for patent protection prior to such publication or if we cannot otherwise maintain the confidentiality of our proprietary technology and other confidential information, then our ability to obtain patent protection or to protect our trade secret information may be jeopardized.

If our trademarks and trade names are not adequately protected, then we may not be able to build name recognition in our markets of interest and our business may be adversely affected.

Our current or future trademarks or trade names may be challenged, infringed, circumvented or declared generic or determined to be infringing on other marks. We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names, which we need to build name recognition among potential partners or customers in our markets of interest. At times, competitors may adopt trade names or trademarks similar to ours, thereby impeding our ability to build brand identity and possibly leading to market confusion. In addition, there could be potential trade name or trademark infringement claims brought by owners of other trademarks or trademarks that incorporate variations of our registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names. Over the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected. We have and may continue to license our trademarks and trade names to third parties, such as distributors. Though these license agreements may provide guidelines for how our trademarks and trade names may be used, a breach of these agreements or misuse of our trademarks and tradenames by our licensees may jeopardize our rights in or diminish the goodwill associated with our trademarks and trade names. Our efforts to enforce or protect our proprietary rights related to trademarks, trade names, trade secrets, domain names, copyrights or other intellectual property may be ineffective and could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources and could adversely affect our financial condition or results of operations.

Moreover, any name we have proposed to use with our product or product candidates in the U.S. must be approved by the FDA, regardless of whether we have registered it, or applied to register it, as a trademark.

The FDA typically conducts a review of proposed product names, including an evaluation of potential for confusion with other product names. If the FDA (or an equivalent administrative body in a foreign jurisdiction) objects to any of our proposed proprietary product names, we may be required to expend significant additional resources in an effort to identify a suitable substitute name that would qualify under applicable trademark or regulatory laws, not infringe the existing rights of third parties and be acceptable to the relevant administrative body. Furthermore, in many jurisdictions, owning and maintaining a trademark registration may not provide an adequate defense against a subsequent infringement claim asserted by the owner of a senior trademark. At times, competitors or other third parties may adopt trade names or trademarks similar to ours, thereby impeding our ability to build brand identity and possibly leading to market confusion. In addition, there could be potential trade name or trademark infringement claims brought by owners of other registered trademarks or trademarks that incorporate variations of our registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names. If we assert trademark infringement claims, a court may also determine that the marks we have asserted are invalid or unenforceable, or that the party against whom we have asserted trademark infringement has superior rights denying our claim. In this case, we could ultimately be forced to cease use of such trademarks. Similar requirements exist in most jurisdictions worldwide.

Risks Related to Ownership of Our Common Stock

The trading price of our common stock may be volatile, and you could lose all or part of your investment.

The trading price of our common stock is likely to be highly volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which are beyond our control, including limited trading volume. For example, the closing price of our common stock since January 1, 2023 to October 12, 2023 has ranged from a low of $19.19 to a high of $32.85. In addition to the factors discussed in this “Risk Factors” section, these factors include, among others:

•

the degree of physician and patient adoption of our approved medicines and use of our approved medicines necessary for commercial success;

•

our failure to grow and maintain our own sales force to market our approved medicines;

•

our ability to market and sell our approved medicines, where approved;

•

any delay in our regulatory filings for Livmarli, Chenodal or volixibat and any adverse development or perceived adverse development with respect to the applicable regulatory authority’s review of such filings, including without limitation the FDA’s issuance of a “refusal to file” letter or a request for additional information;

•

our ability to scale our distribution capabilities;

•

any delay in our regulatory filings for our product candidates and any adverse development or perceived adverse development with respect to the applicable regulatory authority’s review of such filings, including without limitation the FDA’s issuance of a “refusal to file” letter or a request for additional information;

•

our failure to commercialize our product candidates;

•

the commencement, enrollment or results of our ongoing clinical trials of our product candidates or any future clinical trials we may conduct, or changes in the development status of our product candidates;

•

adverse results or delays in clinical trials;

•

our decision to initiate a clinical trial, not to initiate a clinical trial or to terminate an existing clinical trial;

•

adverse regulatory decisions, including failure to receive regulatory approval for our product candidates;

•

changes in laws or regulations applicable to our approved medicines and our product candidates, including but not limited to clinical trial requirements for approvals;

•

changes in the structure of health care payment systems;

•

the failure to obtain coverage and adequate reimbursement of our approved medicines and our product candidates, if approved;

•

adverse developments concerning our manufacturers;

•

our inability to obtain adequate product supply for any approved drug product or inability to do so at acceptable prices;

•

our inability to maintain or establish collaborations if needed;

•

our ability to in-license, acquire, develop and market additional product candidates or approved medicines;

•

management transitions and additions or departures of key scientific or management personnel;

•

unanticipated serious safety concerns related to the use of our approved medicines or our product candidates;

•

introduction of new products or services offered by us or our competitors;

•

announcements of significant acquisitions, strategic partnerships, joint ventures or capital commitments by us or our competitors;

•

our ability to effectively manage our growth;

•

the size and growth, if any, of the markets for our approved medicines with approved indications;

•

our ability to successfully enter new markets or develop additional product candidates;

•

actual or anticipated variations in quarterly operating results;

•

our cash position;

•

our failure to meet the estimates and projections of the investment community or that we may otherwise provide to the public;

•

publication of research reports about us or our industry or positive or negative recommendations or withdrawal of research coverage by securities analysts;

•

changes in the market valuations of similar companies;

•

overall performance of the equity markets;

•

issuances of debt or equity securities;

•

sales of our common stock by us or our stockholders in the future;

•

trading volume of our common stock;

•

changes in accounting practices;

•

ineffectiveness of our internal controls;

•

disputes or other developments relating to proprietary rights, including patents, litigation matters and our ability to obtain patent protection for our technologies;

•

significant lawsuits, including patent or stockholder litigation;

•

geopolitical and macroeconomic developments, including the Ukraine-Russia and Israel-Gaza conflicts, the COVID-19 pandemic, economic slowdowns, recessions, inflation, bank failures, rising interest rates and tightening of credit markets; and

•

other events or factors, many of which are beyond our control.

In addition, the stock market in general, and Nasdaq-listed and biopharmaceutical companies in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of these companies. Broad market and industry factors may negatively affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. In the past, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against companies following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities. This type of litigation, if instituted, could result in substantial costs and a diversion of management’s attention and resources, which would harm our business, operating results or financial condition.

We do not intend to pay dividends on our common stock so any returns will be limited to the value of our stock.

We have never declared or paid any cash dividend on our common stock. We currently anticipate that we will retain future earnings for the development, operation and expansion of our business and do not anticipate declaring or paying any cash dividends for the foreseeable future. Any return to stockholders will therefore be limited to the appreciation of their stock.

Our principal stockholders and management own a significant percentage of our stock and are able to exert significant control over matters subject to stockholder approval.

Our executive officers and directors, combined with our stockholders who own more than 5% of our outstanding capital stock, beneficially own shares representing a significant percentage of our common stock. Therefore, these stockholders have the ability to influence us through this ownership position. These stockholders may be able to determine all matters requiring stockholder approval. For example, these stockholders may be able to control elections of directors, amendments of our organizational documents, or approval of any merger, sale of assets, or other major corporate transaction. This may prevent or discourage unsolicited acquisition proposals or offers for our common stock that you may feel are in your best interest as one of our stockholders.

Future sales and issuances of our common stock or rights to purchase common stock, including pursuant to the Shelf Registration, Sales Agreement, Subscription Agreements and our equity incentive plans, could result in additional dilution of the percentage ownership of our stockholders and could cause our stock price to fall.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could occur at any time. These sales, or the perception in the market that the holders of a large number of shares intend to sell shares, could result in additional dilution of the percentage ownership of our stockholders and could cause our stock price to fall.

We expect that significant additional capital may be needed in the future to continue our planned operations, including conducting clinical trials, commercialization efforts, expanded research and development activities and costs associated with operating a public company. To raise capital, we may sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in one or more transactions at prices and in a manner we determine from time to time, including through the Shelf Registration. For example, in August 2020, we entered into the Sales Agreement with SVB Securities, pursuant to which we may elect to issue and sell, from time to time, shares of common stock having an aggregate offering price of up to $75.0 million under the Shelf Registration through SVB Securities acting as the sales agent and/or principal. The remaining capacity under the Sales Agreement is approximately $31.3 million as of June 30, 2023. Further, in July 2023, in connection with the Asset Purchase, we entered into the Subscription Agreements, pursuant to which we issued and sold approximately 8 million shares of our common stock, and we expect to file a registration statement registering these shares for resale. If these additional shares of common stock are resold, or if it is perceived that they will be resold, in the public market, the trading price of our common stock could decline. Subject to the limitations on our ability to sell common stock described above, if we sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities, investors may be materially diluted by subsequent sales. Such sales may also result in material dilution to our existing stockholders, including noteholders who have received shares of our common stock upon conversion of their notes, and new investors could gain rights, preferences and privileges senior to the holders of our common stock.

Pursuant to our 2019 Equity Incentive Plan (“2019 Plan”), our management is authorized to grant equity incentive awards to our employees, directors and consultants. We also maintain a 2019 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (“ESPP”) pursuant to which our management is authorized to grant options to purchase shares of our common stock to our employees. In addition, in March 2020, we adopted a 2020 Inducement Plan, pursuant to which our board of directors, or a committee thereof, is authorized to grant inducement awards to new hires as a material inducement to their employment with us.

Additionally, the number of shares of our common stock reserved for issuance under our 2019 Plan is subject to an automatic increase on January 1 of each year through and including January 1, 2029, by 5.0% of the total number of shares of our capital stock outstanding on December 31 of the preceding calendar year, or a lesser number of shares determined by our board of directors. The number of shares of our common stock reserved for issuance under our ESPP is subject to an automatic increase on January 1 of each year through and including January 1, 2029, by the lesser of (i) 1.0% of the total number of shares of our capital stock outstanding on December 31 of the preceding calendar year, and (ii) 1,500,000 shares of common stock. Unless our board of directors elects not to increase the number of shares available for future grant each year, our stockholders may experience additional dilution, which could cause our stock price to fall. Shares of common stock that are either subject to outstanding options or reserved for future issuance under our employee benefit plans will become eligible for sale in the public market to the extent permitted by the provisions of various vesting schedules, Rule 144 and Rule 701 under the Securities Act. If these additional shares of common stock are sold, or if it is perceived that they will be sold, in the public market, the trading price of our common stock could decline.

Further, certain holders of our common stock are entitled to rights with respect to the registration of their shares under the Securities Act. Registration of these shares under the Securities Act would result in the shares becoming freely tradable without restriction under the Securities Act, except for shares held by affiliates, as defined in Rule 144 under the Securities Act. Any sales of securities by these stockholders could have a material adverse effect on the trading price of our common stock.

Our business could be negatively affected as a result of actions of activist stockholders, and such activism could impact the trading value of our securities.

Stockholders may, from time to time, engage in proxy solicitations or advance stockholder proposals, or otherwise attempt to effect changes and assert influence on our board of directors and management. Activist campaigns that contest or conflict with our strategic direction or seek changes in the composition of our board of directors could have an adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition. A proxy contest would require us to incur significant legal and advisory fees, proxy solicitation expenses and administrative and associated costs and require significant time and attention by our board of directors and management, diverting their attention from the pursuit of our business strategy. Any perceived uncertainties as to our future direction and control, our ability to execute on our strategy, or changes to the composition of our board of directors or senior management team arising from a proxy contest could lead to the perception of a change in the direction of our business or instability which may result in the loss of potential business opportunities, make it more difficult to pursue our strategic initiatives, or limit our ability to attract and retain qualified personnel and business partners, any of which could adversely affect our business and operating results. If individuals are ultimately elected to our board of directors with a specific agenda, it may adversely affect our ability to effectively implement our business strategy and create additional value for our stockholders. We may choose to initiate, or may become subject to, litigation as a result of the proxy contest or matters arising from the proxy contest, which would serve as a further distraction to our board of directors and management and would require us to incur significant additional costs. In addition, actions such as those described above could cause significant fluctuations in our stock price based upon temporary or speculative market perceptions or other factors that do not necessarily reflect the underlying fundamentals and prospects of our business.

Our failure to meet Nasdaq’s continued listing requirements could result in a delisting of our common stock.

If we fail to satisfy the continued listing requirements of Nasdaq, such as the corporate governance requirements or the minimum closing bid price requirement, Nasdaq may take steps to delist our common stock. Such a delisting would likely have a negative effect on the price of our common stock and would impair your ability to sell or purchase our common stock when you wish to do so. In the event of a delisting, we can provide no assurance that any action taken by us to restore compliance with listing requirements would allow our common stock to become listed again, stabilize the market price or improve the liquidity of our common stock, prevent our common stock from dropping below the Nasdaq minimum bid price requirement or prevent future non-compliance with the listing requirements of Nasdaq.

Anti-takeover provisions under our charter documents and Delaware law could delay or prevent a change of control, which could limit the market price of our common stock and may prevent or frustrate attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws contain provisions that could delay or prevent a change of control of our company or changes in our board of directors that our stockholders might consider favorable. Some of these provisions include:

•

a board of directors divided into three classes serving staggered three-year terms, such that not all members of the board will be elected at one time;

•

a prohibition on stockholder action through written consent, which requires that all stockholder actions be taken at a meeting of our stockholders;

•

a requirement that special meetings of stockholders be called only by the chairman of the board of directors, the chief executive officer, the president or by a majority of the total number of authorized directors;

•

advance notice requirements for stockholder proposals and nominations for election to our board of directors;

•

a requirement that no member of our board of directors may be removed from office by our stockholders except for cause and, in addition to any other vote required by law, upon the approval of not less than two-thirds of all outstanding shares of our voting stock then entitled to vote in the election of directors;

•

a requirement of approval of not less than two-thirds of all outstanding shares of our voting stock to amend any bylaws by stockholder action or to amend specific provisions of our certificate of incorporation; and

•

the authority of the board of directors to issue preferred stock on terms determined by the board of directors without stockholder approval and which preferred stock may include rights superior to the rights of the holders of common stock.

In addition, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporate Law, which may prohibit certain business combinations with stockholders owning 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock. These anti-takeover provisions and other provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws could make it more difficult for stockholders or potential acquirors to obtain control of our board of directors or initiate actions that are opposed by the then-current board of directors and could also delay or impede a merger, tender offer or proxy contest involving our company. These provisions could also discourage proxy contests and make it more difficult for you and other stockholders to elect directors of your choosing or cause us to take other corporate actions you desire. Any delay or prevention of a change of control transaction or changes in our board of directors could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

In addition, certain provisions in the Notes and the related Indenture could make a third party attempt to acquire us more difficult or expensive. For example, if a takeover constitutes a fundamental change under our indenture, then noteholders will have the right to require us to repurchase their Notes for cash. In addition, if a takeover constitutes a make-whole fundamental change under our indenture, then we may be required to temporarily increase the conversion rate. In either case, and in other cases, our obligations under the Notes and the indenture could increase the cost of acquiring us or otherwise discourage a third party from acquiring us or removing incumbent management, including in a transaction that noteholders or holders of our common stock may view as favorable.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware and the federal district courts of the U.S. will be the exclusive forums for substantially all disputes between us and our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws provide that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the sole and exclusive forum for the following types of actions or proceedings under Delaware statutory or common law: (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf; (ii) any action or proceeding asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any of our current or former directors, officers or other employees to us or our stockholders; (iii) any action or proceeding asserting a claim against us or any of our current or former directors, officers or other employees, arising out of or pursuant to any provision of the Delaware General Corporation Law, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws; (iv) any action or proceeding to interpret, apply, enforce or determine the validity of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws; (v) any action or proceeding as to which the Delaware General Corporation Law confers jurisdiction to the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware; and (vi) any action asserting a claim against us or any of our directors, officers or other employees governed by the internal affairs doctrine, in all cases to the fullest extent permitted by law and subject to the court’s having personal jurisdiction over the indispensable parties named as defendants. These provisions would not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Exchange Act, or any other claim for which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction. Furthermore, Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all such Securities Act actions. Accordingly, both state and federal courts have jurisdiction to entertain such claims. To prevent having to litigate claims in multiple jurisdictions and the threat of inconsistent or contrary rulings by different courts, among other considerations, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation further provides that the federal district courts of the U.S. will be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act. While the Delaware courts have determined that such choice of forum provisions are facially valid, a stockholder may nevertheless seek to bring a claim in a venue other than those designated in the exclusive forum provisions. In such instance, we would expect to vigorously assert the validity and enforceability of the exclusive forum provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation. This may require significant additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions and there can be no assurance that the provisions will be enforced by a court in those other jurisdictions.

These exclusive-forum provisions may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees and may discourage these types of lawsuits. If a court were to find either exclusive-forum provision in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or amended and restated bylaws to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur further significant additional costs associated with resolving the dispute in other jurisdictions, all of which could seriously harm our business.

General Risk Factors

If our information technology systems, or those used by our CROs or other contractors, consultants or third parties upon which we rely, are or were compromised, we could experience adverse consequences, including but not limited to regulatory investigation, actions, litigation, fines and penalties, disruptions of our business operations, reputation harm, loss or revenue or profits, and other adverse consequences.

In the course of our business, we and the third parties upon which we rely, may process proprietary, confidential and sensitive information, including personal data (such as health-related data), intellectual property and trade secrets (collectively, sensitive information).

The sensitive information processed and stored in our technology systems, and those of our research collaborators, CROs, contractors, consultants and other third parties on which we depend to operate our business, may be vulnerable to cyberattacks, malicious internet-based activity, online and offline fraud and other similar activities. These threats are prevalent and continue to rise, are increasingly difficult to detect, and come from a variety of sources, including traditional computer “hackers,” threat actors, “hacktivists,” organized criminal threat actors, personnel (such as through theft or misuse), sophisticated nation states, and nation-state-supported actors. Some actors now engage and are expected to continue to engage in cyber-attacks, including without limitation nation-state actors for geopolitical reasons and in conjunction with military conflicts and defense activities. During times of war and other major conflicts, we and the third parties upon which we rely may be vulnerable to a heightened risk of these attacks, including cyber-attacks that could materially disrupt our systems and operations, supply chain, and ability to produce, sell and distribute our goods and services. We and the third parties upon which we rely may be subject to a variety of threats, including but not limited to errors or malfeasance by our personnel or the personnel of the third parties, malware (including as a result of advanced persistent threat intrusions), malicious code (such as viruses and worms), software vulnerabilities, hacking, denial of service attacks (such as credential stuffing), social engineering (including through deep fakes, which may be increasingly more difficult to identify as fake, and phishing), ransomware, supply-chain attacks, server malfunctions, software or hardware failure, loss of data or other information technology assets, adware, telecommunications failures and other similar threats. Threat actors may continue to develop and use more sophisticated tools and techniques (including AI) that are specifically designed to circumvent security controls, evade detection, and obfuscate forensic evidence, making it more difficult for us to identify, investigate and recover from incidents. Ransomware attacks, including by organized criminal threat actors, nation-states, and nation-state-supported actors, are becoming increasingly prevalent and severe and can lead to significant interruptions in our operations, loss of data and income, reputational harm, and diversion of funds. Extortion payments may alleviate the negative impact of a ransomware attack, but we may be unwilling or unable to make such payments due to, for example, applicable laws or regulations prohibiting such payments. Remote work remains common and has increased risks to our information technology systems and data, as more of our employees utilize network connections, computers and devices outside our premises or network, including working at home, while in transit and in public locations.

Future or past business transactions (such as acquisitions or integrations) could also expose us to additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities, as our systems could be negatively affected by vulnerabilities present in acquired or integrated entities’ systems and technologies. Furthermore, we may discover security issues that were not found during due diligence of such acquired or integrated entities, and it may be difficult to integrate companies into our information technology environment and security program.

We rely upon third-party service providers and technologies to operate critical business systems to process sensitive information in a variety of contexts, including, without limitation, third-party providers of cloud-based infrastructure, encryption and authentication technology, employee communications, and other functions. Likewise, we rely on third-party research institution collaborators, CROs, other contractors and consultants for many aspects of our business, including research and development activities and manufacturing of our approved medicines and our product candidates, and similar events relating to their computer systems or data could also have a material adverse effect on our business. Our ability to monitor these third parties’ information security practices is limited, and these third parties may not have adequate information security measures in place. If our third-party service providers experience a security incident or other interruption, we could experience adverse consequences. While we may be entitled to damages if our third-party service providers fail to satisfy their privacy or security-related obligations to us, any award may be insufficient to cover our damages, or we may be unable to recover such award. Similarly, supply-chain attacks have increased in frequency and severity, and we cannot guarantee that third parties and infrastructure in our supply chain or our third-party partners’ supply chains have not been compromised or that they do not contain exploitable defects or bugs that could result in a breach of or disruption to our information technology systems or the third-party information technology systems that support us and our services.

Any of the previously identified or similar threats could cause a security incident or other interruption that could result in unauthorized, unlawful, or accidental acquisition, modification, destruction, loss, alteration, encryption, disclosure of, or access to our sensitive information or our information technology systems, or those of the third parties upon whom we rely. A security incident or other interruption could disrupt our ability (and that of third parties upon whom we rely) to provide our approved medicines and services.

We may expend significant resources or modify our business activities (including our clinical trial activities) to try to protect against security incidents. Certain data privacy and security obligations may require us to implement and maintain specific security measures, industry-standard or reasonable security measures to protect our information technology systems and sensitive information. While we have developed systems and processes designed to protect the integrity, confidentiality and security of the sensitive information under our control, we cannot assure you that our security measures or those of the third parties we depend on will be effective in preventing security incidents. We may be unable to anticipate attempted security breaches, identify them before our

sensitive information is exploited, or react in a timely manner. For example, we take steps to detect and remediate vulnerabilities, but we may not be able to detect and remediate all vulnerabilities because the threats and techniques used to exploit the vulnerability change frequently and are often sophisticated in nature. Therefore, such vulnerabilities could be exploited but may not be detected until after a security incident has occurred. These vulnerabilities pose material risks to our business. Further, we may experience delays in developing and deploying remedial measures designed to address any such identified vulnerabilities.

Applicable data privacy and security obligations may require us to notify relevant stakeholders of security incidents. Such disclosures are costly, and the disclosure or the failure to comply with such requirements could lead to adverse consequences. Although, to our knowledge, we have not experienced a material system failure or security incident to date, if such an event were to occur, or we (or a third party upon whom we rely) are perceived to have experienced a security incident, we may experience adverse consequences. These consequences may include: government enforcement actions (for example, investigations, fines, penalties, audits, and inspections), additional reporting requirements and/or oversight, restrictions on processing sensitive information (including personal data), litigation (including class claims), indemnification obligations, negative publicity, reputational harm, monetary fund diversions, interruptions in our operations (including availability of data), financial loss, and other similar harms. Security incidents and attendant consequences may negatively impact our ability to grow and operate our business. More specifically, for example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed, ongoing or future clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. Security incidents and any unauthorized access or disclosure of our sensitive information could also compromise our intellectual property and patent portfolio, expose sensitive business information, expose the personal data of our employees, require us to incur significant remediation costs, disrupt key business operations and divert attention of management and key information technology resources.

Our insurance coverage may not be adequate for cybersecurity liabilities, may not continue to be available to us on economically reasonable terms, or at all, and any insurer may deny coverage as to any future claim. The successful assertion of one or more large claims against us that exceed available insurance coverage, or the occurrence of changes in our insurance policies, including premium increases or the imposition of large deductible or co-insurance requirements, could adversely affect our reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations. Additionally, our contracts may not contain limitations of liability, and even where they do, there can be no assurance that limitations of liability in our contracts are sufficient to protect us from liabilities, damages, or claims related to our data privacy and security obligations.

In addition to experiencing a security incident, third parties may gather, collect, or infer sensitive information about us from public sources, data brokers, or other means that reveals competitively sensitive details about our organization and could be used to undermine our competitive advantage or market position.

We are subject to U.S. and certain foreign export and import controls, sanctions, embargoes, anti-corruption laws and anti-money laundering laws and regulations. Compliance with these legal standards could impair our ability to compete in domestic and international markets. We can face criminal liability and other serious consequences for violations, which can harm our business.

We are subject to export control and import laws and regulations, including the U.S. Export Administration Regulations, U.S. Customs regulations, and various economic and trade sanctions regulations administered by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Controls, and anti-corruption and anti-money laundering laws and regulations, including the FCPA, the U.S. domestic bribery statute contained in 18 U.S.C. § 201, the U.S. Travel Act, the USA PATRIOT Act, and other state and national anti-bribery and anti-money laundering laws in the countries in which we conduct activities. Anti-corruption laws are interpreted broadly and prohibit companies and their employees, agents, clinical research organizations, contractors and other collaborators and partners from authorizing, promising, offering, providing, soliciting or receiving, directly or indirectly, improper payments or anything else of value to recipients in the public or private sector. We may engage third parties for clinical trials outside of the U.S., to sell our approved medicines and any then-approved product internationally once we enter a commercialization phase, and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, patent registrations and other regulatory approvals. We have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or government-affiliated hospitals, universities and other organizations. We can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of our employees, agents, clinical research organizations, contractors and other collaborators and partners, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have actual knowledge of such activities. Any violations of the laws and regulations described above may result in substantial civil and criminal fines and penalties, imprisonment, the loss of export or import privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm and other consequences.

If we or our third-party manufacturers use hazardous and biological materials in a manner that causes injury or violates applicable law, we may be liable for damages.

Our research and development activities involve the controlled use of potentially hazardous substances, including chemical and biological materials, by our third-party manufacturers. Our manufacturers are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations in the U.S. governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of medical, radioactive and hazardous materials. Although we believe that our manufacturers’ procedures for using, handling, storing and disposing of these materials comply with legally prescribed standards, we cannot completely eliminate the risk of contamination or injury resulting from medical, radioactive or

hazardous materials. As a result of any such contamination or injury, we may incur liability or local, city, state or federal authorities may curtail the use of these materials and interrupt our business operations. In the event of an accident, we could be held liable for damages or penalized with fines, and the liability could exceed our resources. We do not have any insurance for liabilities arising from medical radioactive or hazardous materials. Compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations is expensive, and current or future environmental regulations may impair our research, development and production efforts, which could harm our business, prospects, financial condition or results of operations.

We are an emerging growth company and a smaller reporting company, and the reduced reporting requirements applicable to emerging growth companies and smaller reporting companies may make our common stock less attractive to investors.

We are an emerging growth company, as defined in the JOBS Act. For as long as we continue to be an emerging growth company, we may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements and exemptions from the requirements of holding nonbinding advisory votes on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. We could be an emerging growth company until December 31, 2024, although circumstances could cause us to lose that status earlier, including if we become a “large accelerated filer” as defined in Rule 12b-2 under the Exchange Act or if we have total annual gross revenue of $1.235 billion or more during any fiscal year before that time, in which cases we would no longer be an emerging growth company as of the following December 31 or, if we issue more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during any three year period before that time, we would cease to be an emerging growth company immediately. 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 not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements. Investors may find our common stock less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. 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.

Under the JOBS Act, emerging growth companies can also delay adopting new or revised accounting standards until such time as those standards apply to private companies. We have irrevocably elected not to avail ourselves of this exemption from new or revised accounting standards and, therefore, will be subject to the same new or revised accounting standards as other public companies that are not emerging growth companies. As a result, changes in rules of accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. or their interpretation, the adoption of new guidance or the application of existing guidance to changes in our business could significantly affect our financial position and results of operations.

We are also a “smaller reporting company” as defined in the Exchange Act. We may continue to be a smaller reporting company even after we are no longer an emerging growth company. We may take advantage of certain of the scaled disclosures available to smaller reporting companies and will be able to take advantage of these scaled disclosures for so long as our voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates is less than $250.0 million measured on the last business day of our second fiscal quarter, or our annual revenue is less than $100.0 million during the most recently completed fiscal year and our voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates is less than $700.0 million measured on the last business day of our second fiscal quarter.

As of June 30, 2023, the market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates exceeded $700.0 million. As a result, we will be a large accelerated filer and thus will cease to be an emerging growth company effective December 31, 2023. Additionally, we will no longer qualify as a smaller reporting company beginning with our first Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending March 31, 2024.

If we fail to maintain proper and effective internal controls, our ability to produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis could be impaired.

We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the rules and regulations of Nasdaq. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls over financial reporting. Each fiscal year, we must perform system and process evaluation and testing of our internal controls over financial reporting to allow management to report on the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting in our Form 10-K filing for that year, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. This will require that we incur substantial additional professional fees and internal costs to expand our accounting and finance functions and that we expend significant management efforts. Prior to our initial public offering, we have never been required to test our internal controls within a specified period, and, as a result, we may experience difficulty in meeting these reporting requirements in a timely manner.

We may discover weaknesses in our system of internal financial and accounting controls and procedures that could result in a material misstatement of our consolidated financial statements. 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, we may not be able to produce timely and accurate financial statements. If that were to happen, the market price of our stock could decline and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by Nasdaq, the SEC or comparable foreign regulatory authorities.

We have incurred and will continue to incur significant increased costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management will be required to devote substantial time to new compliance initiatives.

As a public company, we have incurred and will continue to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, which require, among other things, that we file with the SEC annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to our business and financial condition. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as rules subsequently adopted by the SEC and Nasdaq to implement provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, impose significant requirements on public companies, including requiring establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and changes in corporate governance practices. Further, in July 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or the Dodd-Frank Act, was enacted. There are significant corporate governance and executive compensation related provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act that require the SEC to adopt additional rules and regulations in these areas such as “say on pay” and proxy access. Recent legislation permits emerging growth companies to implement many of these requirements over a longer period. We have taken advantage of this new legislation, but we may be required to implement these requirements sooner than budgeted or planned and thereby incur unexpected expenses. As of June 30, 2023, the market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates exceeded $700.0 million. Consequently, we will be a large accelerated filer and will therefore cease to be an emerging growth company effective December 31, 2023. As a result of this transition, we will be subject to certain disclosure and compliance requirements that apply to other public companies but did not previously apply to us due to our status as an emerging growth company and expect to incur additional legal and financial compliance costs as a result. Stockholder activism, the current political environment and the current high level of government intervention and regulatory reform may lead to substantial new regulations and disclosure obligations, which may lead to additional compliance costs and impact the manner in which we operate our business in ways we cannot currently anticipate.

We expect the rules and regulations applicable to public companies to continue to substantially increase our legal and financial compliance costs and to make some activities more time-consuming and costly. If these requirements divert the attention of our management and personnel from other business concerns, they could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. The increased costs will decrease our net income or increase our consolidated net loss and may require us to reduce costs in other areas of our business or increase the prices of our approved medicines and any then-approved product or services. For example, we expect these rules and regulations to make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance and we may be required to incur substantial costs to maintain the same or similar coverage. We cannot predict or estimate the amount or timing of additional costs we may incur to respond to these requirements. The impact of these requirements could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, our board committees or as executive officers.

If securities or industry analysts publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common stock depends in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. If one or more of the analysts who covers us downgrades our stock or publishes inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price may decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases coverage of our company or fails to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our stock could decrease, which might cause our stock price and trading volume to decline.