Item 1A. Risk Factors.

You should consider carefully the following information about the risks described below, together with the other information contained in this Annual Report and in our other public filings, in evaluating our business. If any of the following risks actually occurs, our business, financial condition, results of operations, and future growth prospects would likely be materially and adversely affected. In these circumstances, the market price of our common stock would likely decline.

Summary Risk Factors

We face risks and uncertainties related to our business, many of which are beyond our control.In particular, risks associated with our business include:

•

Our prospects are highly dependent on the successful commercialization of NUPLAZID. To the extent NUPLAZID is not commercially successful, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected and the price of our common stock may decline.

•

If we do not obtain regulatory approval of pimavanserin for other indications in addition to treatment of PDP in the U.S., or for any indication in foreign jurisdictions, or regulatory approval of trofinetide for Rett syndrome, we will not be able to market pimavanserin for other indications in the U.S. or in other jurisdictions or market trofinetide at all, which will limit our commercial revenues.

•

Even though the FDA has granted approval of NUPLAZID for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP, the terms of the approval may limit its commercial potential. Additionally, NUPLAZID is still subject to substantial, ongoing regulatory requirements.

•

We currently market and sell NUPLAZID, our only commercial product, and rely on a limited network of third-party distributors and pharmacies. If we are unable to continue to effectively commercialize NUPLAZID, we may not be able to generate adequate product revenues.

•

If we are unable to effectively train and equip our sales force, our ability to successfully commercialize NUPLAZID will be harmed.

•

NUPLAZID may not gain maximal acceptance among physicians, patients, and the medical community, thereby limiting our potential to generate revenues.

•

Our ability to generate product revenues will be diminished if NUPLAZID does not receive coverage from payors or sells for inadequate prices, or if patients have unacceptably high co-pay amounts.

•

Delays, suspensions and terminations in our clinical trials could result in increased costs to us and delay our ability to generate product revenues.

•

Healthcare reform measures may negatively impact our ability to sell NUPLAZID or our product candidates, if approved, profitably.

•

If we are unable to attract, retain, and motivate key management, research and development, and sales and marketing personnel, our drug development programs, our research and discovery efforts, and our commercialization plans may be delayed and we may be unable to successfully commercialize our products, including NUPLAZID, or develop our product candidates, including pimavanserin for indications beyond PDP.

•

We expect our net losses to continue for the next few years and are unable to predict the extent of future losses or when we will become profitable, if ever.

•

If we fail to obtain the capital necessary to fund our operations, we will be unable to successfully continue the development and commercialization of NUPLAZID or successfully develop and commercialize our other product candidate opportunities.

•

We expect that our results of operations will fluctuate, which may make it difficult to predict our future performance from period to period.

•

Public health threats, including the continuing COVID-19 pandemic, have impacted our clinical trials and could have an adverse effect on our operations and financial results, or may cause us to modify or suspend our financial guidance.

•

We previously have depended, and in the future may depend, on collaborations with third parties to develop and commercialize selected product candidates other than pimavanserin, and we have limited control over how those third parties conduct development and commercialization activities for such product candidates.

•

We currently depend, and in the future will continue to depend, on third parties to manufacture NUPLAZID, trofinetide and our other product candidates. If these manufacturers fail to provide us or our collaborators with adequate supplies of clinical trial materials and commercial product or fail to comply with the requirements of regulatory authorities, we may be unable to develop or commercialize NUPLAZID, trofinetide or any other product candidates.

•

If we fail to comply with the obligations in agreements under which we license intellectual property rights from third parties, we could lose the right to develop certain of our product candidates.

•

Our ability to compete may decline if we do not adequately protect our proprietary rights.

•

If our competitors develop and market products that are more effective than NUPLAZID or our product candidates, they may reduce or eliminate our commercial opportunity.

•

Our stock price historically has been, and is likely to remain, highly volatile.

Risks Related to Our Business

NUPLAZID is our only drug that has been approved for sale and it has only been approved for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP, in the U.S. since April 2016. We are currently focusing most of our activities and resources on NUPLAZID, because we believe that our prospects are highly dependent on, and the vast majority of the value of our company relates to, our ability to successfully commercialize NUPLAZID in the U.S.

Successful commercialization of NUPLAZID is subject to many risks, and there is no guarantee that we will be able to successfully commercialize NUPLAZID for additional approved indications beyond PDP. There are numerous examples of failures to meet high expectations of market potential, including by pharmaceutical companies with more experience and resources than us. While we have established our commercial team and have hired our U.S. sales force, we will need to further expand and develop the team in order to successfully commercialize NUPLAZID for additional indications. Even if

we are successful in developing our commercial team, there are many factors that could cause the commercialization of NUPLAZID to be unsuccessful, including a number of factors that are outside our control. Because no drug has previously been approved by the FDA for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP, it is especially difficult to estimate NUPLAZID’s market potential for its approved indication and potential additional indications. The commercial success of NUPLAZID currently depends on the extent to which patients and physicians recognize and diagnose PDP and accept and adopt NUPLAZID as a treatment for hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP, and we do not know whether our or others’ estimates in this regard will be accurate. For example, if the patient population suffering from hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP is smaller than we estimate or if physicians are unwilling to prescribe or patients are unwilling to take NUPLAZID, perceived safety issues, or for other reasons, the commercial potential of NUPLAZID will be limited. We have limited information about how physicians, patients and payors have responded and will respond to the pricing of NUPLAZID. We have changed, and may continue to change, the price of NUPLAZID from time to time. Physicians may not prescribe NUPLAZID and patients may be unwilling to use NUPLAZID if coverage is not provided or reimbursement is inadequate to cover a significant portion of the cost. Additionally, any negative publicity related to NUPLAZID, or negative development for NUPLAZID in our post-marketing commitments, in clinical development in additional indications, or in regulatory processes in other jurisdictions, may adversely impact the commercial results and potential of NUPLAZID. Thus, significant uncertainty remains regarding the commercial potential of NUPLAZID.

In addition, our business could be adversely affected by the effects of public health threats, including the COVID-19 pandemic. During 2021, sales of NUPLAZID were negatively impacted by ongoing conditions related to the pandemic, including a reduction in patient office visits and a continuing reduced occupancy rates at long-term care facilities. While we observed incremental improvements in some of these factors during the latter part of the year, their levels are still meaningfully below where they were pre-pandemic. It remains difficult to predict the duration of the pandemic’s impact and the pace of recovery, and no assurances can be given that the pandemic will not continue to have additional negative impacts on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. If the commercialization of NUPLAZID is less successful than expected or perceived as disappointing, our stock price could decline significantly and the long-term success of the product and our company could be harmed.

While pimavanserin has been approved in the U.S. by the FDA for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP, it has not been approved by the FDA for any other indications, and it has not been approved in any other jurisdiction for this indication or for any other indication. In order to market pimavanserin for other indications or in other jurisdictions, we must obtain regulatory approval for each of those indications and in each of the applicable jurisdictions, and we may never be able to obtain such approval. Approval of NUPLAZID by the FDA for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP does not ensure that foreign jurisdictions will also approve NUPLAZID for that indication, nor does it ensure that NUPLAZID will be approved by the FDA for any other indication. For example, following the successful completion of our Phase 3 HARMONY study, we submitted an sNDA to the FDA for the treatment of DRP on June 3, 2020. In July 2020 the FDA notified us of its filing of our sNDA with a filing date of August 2, 2020 and a PDUFA target action date of April 3, 2021. As part of its filing communication, the FDA advised us that it had not identified any potential review issues at that point in its evaluation and at that time was not planning to hold an Advisory Committee meeting. On March 3, 2021, we received a notification from the FDA stating that it had identified deficiencies that preclude discussion of labeling and post-marketing requirements/commitments. The notification did not specify the deficiencies identified by the FDA. On April 2, 2021, we received a CRL from the FDA, indicating that the FDA had completed its review of the application and determined that it could not be approved in its present form. In the CRL, the FDA cited a lack of statistical significance in some of the subgroups of dementia in the HARMONY study, as well as insufficient numbers of patients with certain less common dementia subgroups as lack of substantial evidence of effectiveness to support approval. The FDA also stated in the CRL that it considers Alzheimer’s disease psychosis study -019 to not be adequate and well controlled, citing that it was a single center study with no type I error control of secondary endpoints in which certain protocol deviations occurred. We conducted an end of review (Type A) meeting at which the FDA reiterated, as stated in the CRL, that pimavanserin should be studied by individual subgroups of DRP, and advised us that the best path forward is to conduct an additional clinical study in each of the subgroups for which we seek approval. However, the FDA was also open to reviewing additional analyses from the HARMONY and -019 studies in support of a potential resubmission for individual subgroups without additional clinical studies. We subsequently held additional meetings (Type B) with the FDA and further discussed the potential for a resubmission based on additional analyses supporting a potential indication for treatment of ADP

specifically. In February 2022, we made a resubmission to the FDA for NUPLAZID for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with ADP and to make a complete response to the issues raised in the FDA’s CRL.

We initiated a Phase 3 program for pimavanserin as an adjunctive treatment for MDD in April 2019. In July 2020, we announced that our Phase 3 CLARITY study, which combined two identical, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies, did not achieve statistical significance on the primary endpoint. As a result, at this time we do not plan on initiating any additional Phase 3 studies to evaluate pimavanserin for adjunctive use with SSRI/SNRI drugs for the treatment of MDD.

We initiated the Phase 3 ADVANCE-2 study of pimavanserin for the treatment of the negative symptoms of schizophrenia in August 2020. There is no guarantee that our ongoing study will be successful, or that the FDA or any regulatory authority in foreign jurisdictions will approve pimavanserin for that indication.

In December 2021, we announced positive results from our pivotal Phase 3 LAVENDER study. The study demonstrated a statistically significant improvement over placebo for both co-primary endpoints as well as key secondary endpoint. We plan to submit to the FDA an NDA for trofinetide for the treatment of Rett syndrome around mid-year 2022, but there is no guarantee that FDA will approve trofinetide for the treatment of Rett syndrome.

The research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, approval, sale, import, export, marketing, and distribution of pharmaceutical product candidates are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory authorities in the U.S. and other countries, whose regulations differ from country to country. We will be required to comply with different regulations and policies of the jurisdictions where we seek approval for our product candidates, and we have not yet identified all of the requirements that we will need to satisfy to submit NUPLAZID for approval for other indications or in other jurisdictions or to submit trofinetide for approval for Rett syndrome. This will require additional time, expertise and expense, including the potential need to conduct additional studies or development work for other jurisdictions beyond the work that we have conducted to support our NDA submission in PDP. In addition, strategic considerations need to be taken into account when determining whether and when to submit NUPLAZID for approval in other jurisdictions. For example, in the fourth quarter of 2016, the European Medicines Agency (EMA), approved our proposed pediatric investigation plan related to our planned submission of a marketing authorization application (MAA), for NUPLAZID for the treatment of PDP in Europe. However, in light of our continuing clinical development of pimavanserin in indications other than in PDP, and the time-limited data exclusivity currently granted by the EMA that commences on first approval of a product in Europe, we deferred submission of the MAA and we do not yet have a revised estimate of when we will make that filing. If we do not receive marketing approval for NUPLAZID for any other indication or from any regulatory agency outside of the U.S. or any marketing approval for trofinetide, we will never be able to commercialize NUPLAZID for any other indication in the U.S. or for any indication in any other jurisdiction or be able to commercialize trofinetide at all. Even if we do receive additional regulatory approvals, we may not be successful in commercializing those opportunities.

If the results or timing of regulatory filings, the regulatory process, regulatory developments, clinical trials or preclinical studies, or other activities, actions or decisions related to NUPLAZID do not meet our or others’ expectations, the market price of our common stock could decline significantly.

Even though the FDA has granted approval of NUPLAZID, the scope and terms of the approval may limit our ability to commercialize NUPLAZID and, therefore, our ability to generate substantial sales revenues. The FDA has approved NUPLAZID only for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP. The label for NUPLAZID also contains a “boxed” warning that elderly patients with DRP treated with antipsychotic drugs are at an increased risk of death, and that NUPLAZID is not approved for the treatment of patients with DRP unrelated to the hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP. This “boxed” warning may discourage physicians from prescribing NUPLAZID to patients diagnosed with PDP, including those with dementia.

In connection with the FDA approval, we committed to conduct the following post-marketing studies: (i) a randomized, placebo-controlled withdrawal study in patients treated with NUPLAZID, (ii) studies to collect additional data to add to the NUPLAZID safety database from an aggregate of at least 500 predominantly frail and elderly subjects on NUPLAZID in one or more randomized, placebo-controlled studies of eight or more weeks duration, (iii) a drug-drug interaction study with NUPLAZID and a strong CYP3A4 inducer, and (iv) re-analysis of tissue samples from certain previously conducted preclinical studies. We have completed the (i) a randomized, placebo-controlled withdrawal study in patients treated with NUPLAZID, (iii) drug-drug interaction study with NUPLAZID and a strong CYP3A4 inducer and (iv) the re-analysis of tissue samples. We have received FDA approval of an sNDA for labeling revisions related to the completed CYP3A4 study. If we fail to comply with our remaining post-marketing commitment, or if the results of the post-marketing studies, or any other ongoing or planned clinical studies of NUPLAZID, are negative, the FDA could decide to withdraw approval, add warnings or narrow the approved indication in the product label.

The manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for NUPLAZID will also continue to be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as continued compliance with current good manufacturing processes, good clinical practices, international council for harmonization guidelines and good laboratory practices, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA for all of our nonclinical and clinical development and for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval.

Discovery of any issues post-approval, including any safety concerns, such as unexpected side effects or drug-drug interaction problems, adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or concerns over misuse or abuse of the product, problems with the facilities where the product is manufactured, packaged or distributed, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in, among other things, restrictions on NUPLAZID or on us, including:

•

withdrawal of approval, addition of warnings or narrowing of the approved indication in the product label;

•

requirement of a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy to mitigate the risk of off-label use in populations where the FDA may believe that the potential risks of use may outweigh its benefits;

•

voluntary or mandatory recalls;

•

warning letters;

•

suspension of any ongoing clinical studies;

•

refusal by the FDA or other regulatory authorities to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications filed by us, or suspension or revocation of product approvals;

•

restrictions on operations, including restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product or the imposition of costly new manufacturing requirements; or

•

seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products.

If any of these actions were to occur, we may have to discontinue the commercialization of NUPLAZID, limit our sales and marketing efforts, conduct further post-approval studies, and/or discontinue or change any other ongoing or planned clinical studies, which in turn could result in significant expense and delay or limit our ability to generate sales revenues.

NUPLAZID has only been studied in a limited number of patients and in limited populations. As we continue to commercialize NUPLAZID, it is becoming available to a much larger number of patients and in broader populations, and we do not know whether the results of NUPLAZID use in such larger number of patients and broader populations will be consistent with the results from our clinical studies.

Prior to commencing our commercial launch of NUPLAZID in May 2016, NUPLAZID was administered only to a limited number of patients and in limited populations in clinical studies, including our successful pivotal -020 Phase 3 trial with NUPLAZID for the treatment of PDP. We do not know whether the results, when broader populations are exposed to NUPLAZID, including results related to safety and efficacy, will be consistent with the results from the clinical studies of NUPLAZID that served as the basis for its approval. New data relating to NUPLAZID, including from adverse event reports and post-marketing studies in the U.S., and from other ongoing clinical studies, may result in changes to the product label and may adversely affect sales, or result in withdrawal of NUPLAZID from the market. The FDA and regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions may also consider the new data in reviewing NUPLAZID marketing applications for indications other than

in PDP and/or in other jurisdictions, or impose additional post‐approval requirements. If any of these actions were to occur, it could result in significant expense and delay or limit our ability to generate sales revenues.

NUPLAZID is our only drug that has been approved for sale by any regulatory body, and it became available for prescription in the U.S. in May 2016. In order to successfully market NUPLAZID, we must continue to develop our sales, marketing, managerial, compliance, and related capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services. If we are unable to maintain and develop adequate sales, marketing, and distribution capabilities, whether independently or with third parties, we may not be able to appropriately commercialize NUPLAZID and may not become profitable.

We employ our own internal specialty sales force to commercialize NUPLAZID for the treatment of PDP as part of our commercialization strategy in the U.S. We will need to refine and further develop our sales force as we continue our commercialization efforts, and we will be competing with other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to recruit, hire, train and retain marketing and sales personnel. These efforts will continue to be expensive and time-consuming, and we cannot be certain that we will be able to successfully refine and further develop our sales force. If we receive marketing approval for pimavanserin in ADP, we will need to increase our U.S. sales force significantly, and expand our commercial, medical affairs and general and administrative support functions to support commercialization for that indication.

Additionally, our strategy in the U.S. includes distributing NUPLAZID solely through a limited network of third-party specialty distributors and specialty pharmacies. While we have entered into agreements with each of these distributors and pharmacies to distribute NUPLAZID in the U.S., they may not perform as agreed or they may terminate their agreements with us. Also, we may need to enter into agreements with additional distributors or pharmacies, and there is no guarantee that we will be able to do so on commercially reasonable terms or at all. If we are unable to maintain and, if needed, expand, our network of specialty distributors and specialty pharmacies, we would be exposed to substantial distribution risk.

In the event we are unable to maintain, or expand, if needed, our commercial team, including our U.S. sales force, or maintain and, if needed, expand, our network of specialty distributors and specialty pharmacies, our ability to effectively commercialize NUPLAZID and generate product revenues would be limited.

If we are unable to effectively train and equip our sales force, our ability to successfully commercialize NUPLAZID will be harmed.

NUPLAZID is the first drug approved by the FDA for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP. As a result, we are and will continue to be required to expend significant time and resources to train our sales force to be credible, persuasive, and compliant with applicable laws in marketing NUPLAZID for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP to neurologists, psychiatrists, and pharmacists and physicians in long-term care facilities. In addition, we must ensure that consistent and appropriate messages about NUPLAZID are being delivered to our potential customers by our sales force. If we are unable to effectively train our sales force and equip them with effective materials, including medical and sales literature to help them inform and educate potential customers about the benefits of NUPLAZID and its proper administration, our efforts to successfully commercialize NUPLAZID could be put in jeopardy, which would negatively impact our ability to generate product revenues.

NUPLAZID may not gain maximal acceptance among physicians, patients, and the medical community, thereby limiting our potential to generate revenues.

The degree of market acceptance by physicians, healthcare professionals and third-party payors of NUPLAZID, and any other product for which we obtain regulatory approval, and our profitability and growth, will depend on a number of factors, including:

•

the ability to provide acceptable evidence of safety and efficacy;

•

the scope of the approved indication(s) for the product;

•

the inclusion of any warnings or contraindications in the product label;

•

the relative convenience and ease of administration;

•

the prevalence and severity of any adverse side effects;

•

the availability of alternative treatments;

•

pricing and cost effectiveness, which may be subject to regulatory control;

•

effectiveness of our or our collaborators’ sales and marketing strategy; and

•

our ability to obtain sufficient third-party insurance coverage or adequate reimbursement levels.

If a product does not provide a treatment regimen that is at least as beneficial as the current standard of care or otherwise does not provide patient benefit, that product will not achieve market acceptance and will not generate sufficient revenues to achieve or maintain profitability.

With respect to NUPLAZID specifically, successful commercialization will depend on whether and to what extent physicians, long-term care facilities and pharmacies, over whom we have no control, determine to utilize NUPLAZID. NUPLAZID is available to treat hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP, an indication for which no other FDA-approved pharmaceutical treatment currently exists. Because of this, it is particularly difficult to estimate NUPLAZID’s market potential and how physicians, payors and patients will respond to changes in the price of NUPLAZID. Additionally, NUPLAZID net sales for the year ended December 31, 2021 were negatively impacted due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the continuing effects of COVID-19 on NUPLAZID net sales are difficult to assess or predict at this time. Industry sources and analysts have a divergence of estimates for the near- and long-term market potential of NUPLAZID, and a variety of assumptions directly impact the estimates for NUPLAZID’s market potential, including assumptions regarding the prevalence of PDP, the rate of diagnosis of PDP, the prevalence and rate of hallucinations and delusions in patients diagnosed with PDP, the rate of physician adoption of NUPLAZID, the potential impact of payor restrictions regarding NUPLAZID, and patient adherence and compliance rates. Small differences in these assumptions can lead to widely divergent estimates of the market potential of NUPLAZID. For example, certain research suggests that patients with Parkinson’s disease may be hesitant to report symptoms of PDP to their treating physicians for a variety of reasons, including apprehension about societal stigmas relating to mental illness. Research also suggests that physicians who typically treat patients with Parkinson’s disease may not ask about or identify symptoms of PDP. For these reasons, even if PDP occurs in high rates among patients with Parkinson’s disease, it may be underdiagnosed. Even if PDP is diagnosed, physicians may not prescribe treatment for hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP, and if they do prescribe treatment, they may prescribe other drugs, even though they are not approved in PDP, instead of NUPLAZID. In addition, even if NUPLAZID is prescribed for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP, issues may arise with respect to patient adherence and compliance rates. If patients do not adhere to the recommended dosing of NUPLAZID, patients and physicians may believe that NUPLAZID is less effective, and as a result they may stop taking it and prescribing it.

The label for NUPLAZID also contains a “boxed” warning that elderly patients with DRP treated with antipsychotic drugs are at an increased risk of death, and that NUPLAZID is not approved for the treatment of patients with DRP unrelated to the hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP. There has also been recent attention to publicly reported deaths of patients that were prescribed NUPLAZID, and the FDA conducted an evaluation of available information about NUPLAZID. On September 20, 2018 the U.S. FDA issued a statement concluding: “The U.S. FDA has completed a review of all post marketing reports of deaths and serious adverse events (SAEs) reported with the use of NUPLAZID. Based on an analysis of all available data, FDA did not identify any new or unexpected safety findings with NUPLAZID, or findings that are inconsistent with the established safety profile currently described in the drug label. After a thorough review, FDA’s conclusion remains unchanged that the drug’s benefits outweigh its risks for patients with hallucinations and delusions of Parkinson’s disease psychosis.” Although the FDA did not identify any new or unexpected safety risks, the FDA indicated that some potentially concerning prescribing patterns were observed, such as the concomitant use of other antipsychotic drugs or drugs that can cause QT prolongation, a potential cause of heart rhythm disorder. The FDA reminded health care providers to be aware of the risks described in the NUPLAZID prescribing information and that none of the other antipsychotic medications are approved for the treatment of PD psychosis. Regardless, perceptions that NUPLAZID is unsafe, even if unfounded, may discourage physicians from prescribing or patients from taking NUPLAZID.

The commercial success of NUPLAZID depends on acceptance by patients and physicians, and there are a number of factors that could skew our or others’ estimates about prescribing behaviors and market adoption.

Our ability to generate product revenues will be diminished if NUPLAZID does not receive coverage from payors or sells for inadequate prices, or if patients have unacceptably high co-pay amounts.

Patients who are prescribed medicine for the treatment of their conditions generally rely on third-party payors, including governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, managed care organizations and commercial payors, among others, to reimburse all or part of the costs associated with their prescription drugs. Coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party commercial payors is critical to product acceptance. Coverage decisions may depend upon clinical and economic standards that disfavor drug products when lower cost therapeutic alternatives are already available or subsequently become available. Even with coverage for NUPLAZID, or other products we may market, the resulting reimbursement payment rates might not be adequate or may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. Patients may not use NUPLAZID if coverage is not provided or reimbursement is inadequate to cover a significant portion of its cost.

In addition, the market for NUPLAZID depends significantly on access to third-party payors’ drug formularies, or lists of medications for which third-party payors provide coverage and reimbursement. The industry competition to be included in such formularies often leads to downward pricing pressures on pharmaceutical companies. Also, third-party payors may refuse to include a particular branded drug in their formularies or otherwise restrict patient access to a branded drug when a less costly alternative is available, even if not approved for the indication for which NUPLAZID is approved.

In many foreign countries, particularly the countries of the European Union, the pricing of prescription drugs is subject to government control. In some non-U.S. jurisdictions, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug pricing vary widely from country to country. For example, the European Union provides options for its member states to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. A member state may approve a specific price for the medicinal product or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. We may face competition from lower-priced products in foreign countries that have placed price controls on pharmaceutical products. In addition, there may be importation of foreign products that compete with NUPLAZID, and any other products we may market, which could negatively impact our profitability.

Third-party payors, whether foreign or domestic, or governmental or commercial, are developing increasingly sophisticated methods of controlling healthcare costs. The current environment is putting pressure on companies to price products below what they may feel is appropriate. Selling NUPLAZID at less than an optimized price could impact our revenues and overall success as a company. We have changed, and may continue to change, the price of NUPLAZID from time to time, however, we do not know if the price we have selected, or may select in the future, for NUPLAZID is or will be the optimized price. Additionally, we do not know whether and to what extent third-party payors will react to any possible future changes in the price of NUPLAZID. In the U.S., no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for drug products exists among third-party payors. Further, one payor’s determination to provide coverage and reimbursement for a product does not assure that other payors also will provide coverage and reimbursement for the product. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for NUPLAZID may differ significantly from payor to payor. 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 NUPLAZID to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage will be obtained. Coverage policies and third-party payor reimbursement rates may change at any time. Therefore, even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future. If we are unable to obtain coverage of, and adequate payment levels for, NUPLAZID or any other products we may market to third-party payors, physicians may limit how much or under what circumstances they will prescribe or administer them and patients may decline to purchase them. This in turn could affect our ability to successfully commercialize NUPLAZID, or any other products we may market, and thereby adversely impact our profitability, results of operations, financial condition, and future success.

There is no guarantee that future studies with pimavanserin will be successful.

The historical rate of failures for product candidates in clinical development is extremely high. In November 2012, we announced successful results from the Phase 3 -020 Study of pimavanserin for PDP. Additionally, in December 2016, we announced positive top-line results from our Phase 2 exploratory study of pimavanserin in patients with AD Psychosis, those results may not be predictive of the results of any additional studies that we are currently undertaking or may undertake in the future with pimavanserin, including the post-marketing studies we committed to conduct in connection with FDA approval of NUPLAZID and the ongoing studies of pimavanserin in various indications. We believe that pimavanserin also may have utility in indications other than in PDP, such as in ADP and schizophrenia. However, prior to the Phase 3 HARMONY study that we initiated in the fourth quarter of 2017, which was stopped early for efficacy in September 2019, we had never tested pimavanserin in clinical studies where the primary outcome was for the indication of DRP, and prior to the studies in schizophrenia that we initiated in the fourth quarter of 2016, we had only conducted a Phase 2 trial for pimavanserin as a co-therapy treatment in schizophrenia. There is no guarantee that we will have the same level of success with pimavanserin in other studies that we had with the -020 Study, the HARMONY study and the ADVANCE study. For example, in July 2020 we announced top-line results from the Phase 3 CLARITY study evaluating pimavanserin as an adjunctive treatment with SSRI/SNRI drugs in MDD. In this study pimavanserin did not achieve statistical significance on the primary endpoint. Further, there is no guarantee that we will be successful at all in ongoing or future studies for additional indications or in our post-marketing studies, or that future results of studies of NUPLAZID for treatment in PDP or for other indications will be positive. Moreover, there can be no assurance that a positive study outcome will ultimately result in approval by the FDA.

If we do not successfully complete additional development of NUPLAZID, we will be unable to market and sell NUPLAZID or products derived from it for indications other than the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP, or to generate related product revenues.

We are solely responsible for the development and commercialization of pimavanserin.

We have full responsibility for the pimavanserin program throughout the world. We expect our research and development costs for continued development of pimavanserin to be substantial. We are currently undertaking ongoing development work for pimavanserin, including clinical trials of pimavanserin for indications other than in PDP. In the event of approval for additional indications, we would need to add significant resources, and possibly raise additional capital, in order to further commercialize pimavanserin, and to conduct the necessary sales and marketing activities, and to conduct further development activities. Our current strategy is to continue to commercialize NUPLAZID for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP in the U.S. using our specialty sales force focused primarily on neurologists, a small group of psychiatrists, and pharmacists and physicians in long-term care facilities who treat PDP patients. If we receive marketing approval for pimavanserin in ADP, we will need to increase our U.S. sales force significantly, and expand our commercial, medical affairs and general and administrative support functions in connection with commercializing pimavanserin in ADP. In addition, if we are approved to commercialize NUPLAZID in markets outside of the U.S., we may need to establish one or more strategic alliances in the future for that purpose. Without future additional resources or collaboration partners in the U.S. and abroad, we might not be able to realize the full value of NUPLAZID.

Furthermore, even though NUPLAZID is approved for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP, a failure in a subsequent pimavanserin study for another indication, including our ongoing studies in schizophrenia and our previous studies in depression, or any additional studies that may be required in ADP, or a failure in our post-marketing studies could harm our ability to successfully market NUPLAZID for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP or could lead to it being withdrawn from the market. If we are unable to develop pimavanserin for other indications, we may not be able to maximize the potential of the compound and that could have a material adverse effect on our future revenues and our success as a company.

Pimavanserin is currently in late-stage development for additional indications other than in PDP, and we have completed Phase 3 development of trofinetide for Rett syndrome. Drug development is a long, expensive and unpredictable process with a high risk of failure.

Preclinical testing and clinical trials are long, expensive and unpredictable processes that can be subject to delays. It may take several years to complete the preclinical testing and clinical development necessary to commercialize a drug, and delays or failure can occur at any stage. Preliminary, initial, top-line or interim results of clinical trials do not necessarily predict final results and such results may change as more patient data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final results. In addition, success in preclinical testing and

early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials even after promising results in earlier trials.

Our drug development programs are at various stages of development and the historical rate of failures for product candidates is extremely high. In fact, we had an unsuccessful Phase 3 trial with NUPLAZID in 2009. An unfavorable outcome in any of our ongoing or future development efforts or in the post-marketing studies for NUPLAZID could be a major set-back for the program and for us, generally. In particular, an unfavorable outcome in our NUPLAZID program or in the post-marketing studies may require us to delay, devote additional substantial resources to, reduce the scope of, or eliminate this program and could have a material adverse effect on us and the value of our common stock.

In addition, based on positive top-line results from CLARITY, a Phase 2 study evaluating pimavanserin as an adjunctive treatment for MDD, we initiated our Phase 3 CLARITY program, consisting of two Phase 3 studies, CLARITY-2 and CLARITY-3, evaluating pimavanserin as an adjunctive treatment with SSRI/SNRI drugs for MDD. Despite the positive results observed in the Phase 2 CLARITY study, our Phase 3 CLARITY study, did not achieve statistical significance on the primary endpoint. In July 2019, we announced top-line results from the Phase 3 ENHANCE study evaluating pimavanserin as a treatment in inadequate response schizophrenia. In this study pimavanserin did not achieve statistical significance on either the primary endpoint or the key secondary endpoint.

Following the successful completion of our Phase 3 HARMONY study, we submitted an sNDA to the FDA for the treatment of DRP on June 3, 2020. In July 2020 the FDA advised us that it had not identified any potential review issues at that point in its evaluation. On April 2, 2021, we received a CRL indicating that the FDA had completed its review of the application and determined that it could not be approved in its present form. In the CRL, the FDA cited a lack of statistical significance in some of the subgroups of dementia in the HARMONY study, as well as insufficient numbers of patients with certain less common dementia subgroups as lack of substantial evidence of effectiveness to support approval. The FDA also stated in the CRL that it considers Alzheimer’s disease psychosis study -019 to not be adequate and well controlled, citing that it was a single center study with no type I error control of secondary endpoints in which certain protocol deviations occurred. We conducted an end of review (Type A) meeting at which the FDA reiterated, as stated in the CRL, that pimavanserin should be studied by individual subgroups of DRP, and advised us that the best path forward is to conduct an additional clinical study in each of the subgroups for which we seek approval. However, the FDA was also open to reviewing additional analyses from the HARMONY and -019 studies in support of a potential resubmission for individual subgroups without additional clinical studies. We subsequently held additional meetings (Type B) with the FDA and further discussed the potential for a resubmission based on additional analyses supporting a potential label for ADP specifically. In February 2022, we submitted to the FDA an sNDA for NUPLAZID for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with ADP.

We are currently conducting several studies and may conduct additional studies in the future.

In connection with clinical trials, we face risks that:

•

a product candidate may not prove to be efficacious or safe;

•

patients may die or suffer other adverse effects for reasons that may or may not be related to the product candidate being tested;

•

the results may not be consistent with positive results of earlier trials; and

•

the results may not meet the level of statistical significance required by the FDA or other regulatory agencies.

If we do not successfully complete preclinical and clinical development, we will be unable to market and sell products derived from our product candidates and to generate product revenues. Even if we do successfully complete clinical trials, those results are not necessarily predictive of results of additional trials that may be needed before an NDA may be submitted to the FDA. Of the large number of drugs in development, only a small percentage result in the submission of an NDA to the FDA and even fewer are approved for commercialization.

Delays, suspensions and terminations in our clinical trials could result in increased costs to us and delay our ability to generate product revenues.

The commencement of clinical trials can be delayed for a variety of reasons, including delays in:

•

demonstrating sufficient safety and efficacy to obtain regulatory approval to commence a clinical trial;

•

reaching agreement on acceptable terms with prospective contract research organizations and clinical trial sites;

•

manufacturing sufficient quantities of a product candidate;

•

obtaining clearance from the FDA to commence clinical trials pursuant to an Investigational New Drug application;

•

obtaining institutional review board approval to conduct a clinical trial at a prospective clinical trial site; and

•

patient recruitment, which is a function of many factors, including the size of the patient population, the nature of the protocol, the proximity of patients to clinical trial sites, the availability of effective treatments for the relevant disease and the eligibility criteria for the clinical trial.

Once a clinical trial has begun, it may be delayed, suspended or terminated due to a number of factors, including:

•

competition for internal and external resources, including clinical sites and study patients, that we may choose to allocate to other programs;

•

ongoing discussions with regulatory authorities regarding the scope or design of our clinical trials or requests by them for supplemental information with respect to our clinical trial results;

•

imposition of clinical holds by regulatory authorities or institutional review boards;

•

failure to conduct clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements;

•

patient enrollment, which is a function of many factors, including the size of the patient population, the nature of the protocol, the proximity of patients to clinical trial sites, the availability of effective treatments for the relevant disease and the eligibility criteria for the clinical trial;

•

lower than anticipated screening or retention rates of patients in clinical trials;

•

serious adverse events or side effects experienced by participants; and

•

insufficient supply or deficient quality of product candidates or other materials necessary for the conduct of our clinical trials.

In addition, enrollment and retention of patients in clinical trials could be disrupted by man-made or natural disasters or public health emergencies. For example, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, we temporarily paused enrollment of new patients in our ongoing clinical trials, as well as commencement of new trials. However, we have re-initiated enrollment in clinical trials on a study-by-study and site-by-site basis. It is possible that future enrollment in these studies, or enrollment in future studies, could be impacted due to COVID-19. If patients withdraw from our trials, miss scheduled doses or follow-up visits or otherwise fail to follow trial protocols, or if our trial results are otherwise disputed due to COVID-19 or actions taken to slow its spread, the integrity of data from our trials may be compromised or not accepted by the FDA or other regulatory authorities, which would represent a significant setback for the applicable program.

Many of these factors may also ultimately lead to denial of regulatory approval of a current or potential product candidate. If we experience delays, suspensions or terminations in a clinical trial, the commercial prospects for the related product candidate will be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenues will be delayed.

Our success depends on our ability to attract, retain, and motivate highly qualified management, scientific, and commercial personnel. In particular, our development programs depend on our ability to attract and retain highly skilled development personnel, especially in the fields of central nervous system disorders, including neuropsychiatric and related

disorders. We are currently hiring, and in the future we expect to need to continue to hire, additional personnel as we expand our research and development efforts for pimavanserin and commercial activities for NUPLAZID. We face competition for experienced scientists, clinical operations personnel, commercial and other personnel from numerous companies and academic and other research institutions. Competition for qualified personnel is particularly intense in the San Diego, California area. Many of the other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies with whom we compete for qualified personnel have greater financial and other resources, different risk profiles and longer histories in the industry than we do. They also may provide more diverse opportunities and better chances for career advancement. Some of these characteristics may be more appealing to high quality candidates than that which we have to offer. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high quality personnel, the rate and success at which we can develop and commercialize products and product candidates will be limited. If we are unable to attract and retain the necessary personnel, it will significantly impede our commercialization efforts for NUPLAZID and the achievement of our research and development objectives.

All of our employees are “at will” employees, which means that any employee may quit at any time and we may terminate any employee at any time. We do not carry “key person” insurance covering members of senior management.

If we receive approval of NUPLAZID in additional indications, including ADP, we would need to continue to increase the size of our organization. We may encounter difficulties with managing our growth, which could adversely affect our results of operations.

As of December 31, 2021, we employed approximately 510 employees. Our current infrastructure may be inadequate to support our development and commercialization efforts and expected growth. Future growth will impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including the need to identify, recruit, and integrate additional employees and retain existing employees, and may take time away from running other aspects of our business, including development and commercialization of our product candidates.

Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize NUPLAZID and any other product candidates that receive regulatory approval and to compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to manage any future growth effectively. In particular, as we commercialize NUPLAZID, we will need to support the training and ongoing activities of our sales force. To that end, we must be able to:

•

manage our development efforts effectively;

•

integrate additional management, administrative and manufacturing personnel;

•

develop our marketing and sales organization; and

•

maintain sufficient administrative, accounting and management information systems and controls.

We may not be able to accomplish these tasks or successfully manage our operations and, accordingly, may not achieve our research, development, and commercialization goals. Our failure to accomplish any of these goals could harm our financial results and prospects.

If we fail to develop, acquire or in-license other product candidates or products, our business and prospects would be limited. Even if we obtain rights to other product candidates or products, we will incur a variety of costs and may never realize the anticipated benefits.

A key element of our strategy is to develop, acquire or in-license businesses, technologies, product candidates or products that we believe are a strategic fit with our business. The success of this strategy depends in large part on the combination of our regulatory, development and commercial capabilities and expertise and our ability to identify, select and acquire or in-license clinically-enabled product candidates for the treatment of neurological disorders, or for therapeutic indications that complement or augment our current product candidates, or that otherwise fit into our development or strategic plans on terms that are acceptable to us. Identifying, selecting and acquiring or in-licensing promising product candidates requires substantial technical, financial and human resources expertise, and we have limited experience in identifying acquisition targets, successfully completing proposed acquisitions and integrating any acquired businesses, technologies, services or products into our current infrastructure. Efforts to do so may not result in the actual acquisition or in-license of a particular product candidate, potentially resulting in a diversion of our management’s time and the expenditure of our resources with no resulting benefit. If we are unable to identify, select and acquire or license suitable product candidates from third parties on terms acceptable to us, our business and prospects will be limited. In particular, if we are unable to add additional commercial products to our portfolio, we may not be able to successfully leverage our commercial organization that we have assembled for the marketing and sale of NUPLAZID.

The process of integrating any acquired business, technology, service, or product may result in unforeseen operating difficulties and expenditures and may divert significant management attention from our ongoing business operations. As a result, we will incur a variety of costs in connection with an acquisition and may never realize its anticipated benefits. Moreover, any product candidate we identify, select and acquire or license may require additional, time-consuming development or regulatory efforts prior to commercial sale, including preclinical studies, if applicable, and extensive clinical testing and approval by the FDA and applicable foreign regulatory authorities. All product candidates are prone to the risk of failure that is 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. In addition, we cannot assure you that any such products that are approved will be manufactured or produced economically, successfully commercialized or widely accepted in the marketplace or be more effective or desired than other commercially available alternatives.

In addition, if we fail to successfully commercialize and further develop NUPLAZID or our product candidates, there is a greater likelihood that we will fail to successfully develop a pipeline of other product candidates, and our business and prospects would therefore be harmed.

We expect our net losses to continue for the next few years and are unable to predict the extent of future losses or when we will become profitable, if ever.

We have experienced significant net losses since our inception. As of December 31, 2021, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $2.2 billion. We expect to incur net losses over the next few years as we invest in the commercialization of NUPLAZID and advance our development programs.

Even though we began commercializing NUPLAZID in the U.S. in May 2016, we still expect to incur significant expenses and net losses for at least the next few years as we continue our commercialization efforts for NUPLAZID and pursue the further development of NUPLAZID and our product candidates. Substantially all of our revenues since May 2016 were from net product sales of NUPLAZID.

We expect that our revenues over the next few years will be entirely dependent on our ability to generate net product sales of NUPLAZID. To the extent that we cannot generate significant revenues from the sale of NUPLAZID to cover our expenses, including the significant expenses associated with commercializing NUPLAZID and continuing to develop pimavanserin in additional indications, we may never achieve profitability and/or may have to reduce our commercialization and/or research and development activities to become profitable, which would harm our future growth prospects. Additionally, to obtain revenues from product candidates other than NUPLAZID, we must succeed, either alone or with others, in developing, obtaining regulatory approval for, manufacturing and marketing compounds with significant market potential. We may never succeed in these activities and may never generate revenues from our commercialization of NUPLAZID, or from other product candidates that may be approved, that are significant enough to achieve profitability.

We have consumed substantial amounts of capital since our inception. Our cash, cash equivalents, and investment securities totaled $520.7 million at December 31, 2021. While we believe that our existing cash resources will be sufficient to fund our cash requirements through at least the next twelve months, we may require significant additional financing in the future to continue to fund our operations. Our future capital requirements will depend on, and could increase significantly as a result of, many factors including:

•

the progress in, and the costs of, our ongoing and planned development activities for pimavanserin, post-marketing studies for NUPLAZID to be conducted over the next several years, ongoing and planned commercial activities for NUPLAZID, and other research and development programs;

•

the costs of our development activities for trofinetide, ACP-044, ACP-319 and the M1 PAM program and any other product candidates;

•

the costs of commercializing NUPLAZID, including the maintenance and development of our sales and marketing capabilities;

•

the costs of establishing, or contracting for, sales and marketing capabilities for other product candidates;

•

the amount of U.S. product sales from NUPLAZID;

•

the costs of preparing applications for regulatory approvals for NUPLAZID in jurisdictions other than the U.S., and in additional indications other than in PDP, and for other product candidates, as well as the costs required to support review of such applications;

•

the costs of manufacturing and distributing NUPLAZID for commercial use in the U.S.;

•

our ability to obtain regulatory approval for, and subsequently generate product sales from, NUPLAZID in jurisdictions other than the U.S. or in additional indications other than in PDP, or from trofinetide, ACP-044, ACP-319 and the M1 PAM program and any other product candidates;

•

the costs of acquiring additional product candidates or research and development programs;

•

the scope, prioritization and number of our research and development programs;

•

the ability of our collaborators and us to reach the milestones and other events or developments triggering payments under our collaboration or license agreements, or our collaborators’ ability to make payments under these agreements;

•

our ability to enter into new collaboration and license agreements;

•

the extent to which we are obligated to reimburse collaborators or collaborators are obligated to reimburse us for costs under collaboration agreements;

•

the costs involved in filing, prosecuting, enforcing, and defending patent claims and other intellectual property rights;

•

the costs of maintaining or securing manufacturing arrangements and supply for clinical or commercial production of pimavanserin, trofinetide or other product candidates; and

•

the costs associated with litigation, including the costs incurred in defending against any product liability claims that may be brought against us related to NUPLAZID.

Unless and until we can generate significant cash from our operations, we expect to satisfy our future cash needs through our existing cash, cash equivalents and investment securities, strategic collaborations, public or private sales of our securities, debt financings, grant funding, or by licensing all or a portion of our product candidates or technology. In the past, periods of turmoil and volatility in the financial markets have adversely affected the market capitalizations of many biotechnology companies, and generally made equity and debt financing more difficult to obtain. For example, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and actions taken to slow its spread, the global credit and financial markets have experienced extreme volatility and disruptions, including diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, increases in unemployment rates and uncertainty about economic stability. These events, coupled with other factors, may limit our access to additional financing in the future. This could have a material adverse effect on our ability to access sufficient funding. We cannot be certain that additional funding will be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. If funds are not available, we will be required to delay, reduce the scope of, or eliminate one or more of our research or development programs or our commercialization efforts. We also may be required to relinquish greater or all rights to product candidates at an earlier stage of development or on less favorable terms than we would otherwise choose. Additional funding, if obtained, may significantly dilute existing stockholders and could negatively impact the price of our stock.

We expect that our results of operations will fluctuate, which may make it difficult to predict our future performance from period to period.

Our operating results have fluctuated in the past and are likely to do so in future periods. Some of the factors that could cause our operating results to fluctuate from period to period include:

•

the success of our commercialization of NUPLAZID in the U.S. for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with PDP;

•

the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our business, including the ability of our field sales force to meet with healthcare providers, visit physician’s offices, hospitals and other healthcare facilities (including long-term care and skilled nursing facilities);

•

the status and cost of our post-marketing commitments for NUPLAZID;

•

the variation in our gross-to-net adjustments from quarter to quarter, primarily because of the fluctuation in our share of the donut hole for Medicare Part D patients;

•

the status and cost of development and commercialization of pimavanserin for indications other than in PDP and in jurisdictions other than the U.S.;

•

the status and cost of development and commercialization of our product candidates, including compounds being developed under our collaborations;

•

whether we acquire or in-license additional product candidates or products, and the status of development and commercialization of such product candidates or products;

•

whether we generate revenues or reimbursements by achieving specified research, development or commercialization milestones under any agreements or otherwise receive potential payments under these agreements;

•

whether we are required to make payments due to achieving specified milestones under any licensing or similar agreements or otherwise make payments under these agreements;

•

the incurrence of preclinical or clinical expenses that could fluctuate significantly from period to period, including reimbursement obligations pursuant to our collaboration agreements;

•

the initiation, termination, or reduction in the scope of our collaborations or any disputes regarding these collaborations;

•

the timing of our satisfaction of applicable regulatory requirements;

•

the rate of expansion of our clinical development, other internal research and development efforts, and pre-commercial and commercial efforts;

•

the effect of competing technologies and products and market developments;

•

the costs associated with litigation, including the costs incurred in defending against any product liability claims that may be brought against us related to NUPLAZID; and

•

general and industry-specific economic conditions.

We believe that comparisons from period to period of our financial results are not necessarily meaningful and should not be relied upon as indications of our future performance.

From time to time, we provide guidance relating to our expectations for NUPLAZID net sales and certain expense line items based on estimates and the judgment of management. If, for any reason, our actual net sales or expenses differ materially from our guidance, we may have to revise our previously announced financial guidance. If we change, update or fail to meet any element of such guidance, our stock price could decline.

Changes in tax laws or regulations that are applied adversely to us or our customers may have a material adverse effect on our business, cash flow, financial condition or results of operations.

New income, sales, use or other tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be enacted at any time, which could adversely affect our business operations and financial performance. Further, existing tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be interpreted, changed, modified or applied adversely to us. For example, the Biden administration and Congress have proposed various U.S. federal tax law changes, which if enacted could have a material impact on our business, cash flows, financial condition, or results of operations. In addition, it is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to federal tax laws. Future tax reform legislation could have a material impact on the value of our deferred tax assets, could result in significant one-time charges, and could increase our future U.S. tax expense.

Our ability to use net operating losses and certain other tax attributes to offset future taxable income or taxes may be limited.

Portions of our net operating loss carryforwards could expire unused and be unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. Under current law, federal net operating losses incurred in tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such federal net operating losses in tax 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 federal tax laws. In addition, under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code), and corresponding provisions of state law, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” which is generally defined as a greater than 50 percent change, by value, in its equity ownership over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change net operating loss carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. We have experienced ownership changes in the past and we may experience additional ownership changes in the future as a result of subsequent shifts in our stock ownership, some of which may be outside of our control. If an ownership change occurs and our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards is materially limited, it would harm our future operating results by effectively increasing our future tax obligations. In addition, at the state level, there may be periods during which the use of net operating loss carryforwards is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed. As a result, if we earn net taxable income, we may be unable to use all or a material portion of our net operating loss carryforwards and other tax attributes, which could potentially result in increased future tax liability to us and adversely affect our future cash flows.

Tax authorities could reallocate our taxable income among out subsidiaries, which could increase our overall tax liability.

In 2015, we licensed worldwide intellectual property rights related to pimavanserin in certain indications to Acadia Pharmaceuticals GmbH, our wholly owned Swiss subsidiary (Acadia GmbH), and in July 2020 we licensed additional related rights to Acadia GmbH. Our goals for the establishment of Acadia GmbH, and the licensing of worldwide intellectual property rights for pimavanserin, include building a platform for long-term operational and financial efficiencies, including tax-related efficiencies. Future changes in U.S. and non-U.S. tax laws, including implementation of international tax reform relating to the tax treatment of multinational corporations, if enacted, may reduce or eliminate any potential financial efficiencies that we hoped to achieve by establishing this operational structure. Additionally, taxing authorities, such as the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, may audit and otherwise challenge these types of arrangements, and have done so with other companies in the pharmaceutical industry. If any such changes in tax law are enacted, or our licensing of worldwide intellectual property rights for pimavanserin to our Swiss subsidiary is otherwise challenged, this could materially adversely affect our business.

On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared a pandemic resulting from the disease known as COVID-19 caused by a novel strain of coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2. The rapid global spread of COVID-19 has had a major impact on the financial markets, the global economy and the economies of particular countries or regions, and led to travel restrictions, quarantines, “work-at-home” and “shelter-in-place” orders imposed by authorities and the extended shutdown of certain non-essential businesses in the U.S. throughout the world, including in countries where we have planned or active clinical trials. In an effort to protect the health and safety of our employees and our stakeholders, we adopted recommended policies applicable to office-based employees such as working from home, limiting the number of employees on site, and limiting business travel. For our field-based commercial and medical affairs personnel, we have instituted a protocol to assess the safety of employees to conduct in-person interactions on a localized basis in accordance with applicable regulatory guidance and local policies. We continue to closely monitor the COVID-19 situation and will reopen our offices to allow employees to return when appropriate. We may face several challenges or disruptions upon a return back to the workplace, including re-integration challenges by our employees and distractions to management related to such transition. The effects and duration of such measures could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Our sales force has had physical access to hospitals, clinics, long-term care and skilled nursing facilities, healthcare providers and pharmacies curtailed, which may have a material adverse effect on our future sales. Currently, health care providers are conducting patient visits in-person and through telemedicine and our sales force has been able to call upon medical clinics, hospitals, long-term care facilities and skilled nursing facilities either in person in accordance with applicable regulatory guidance and local policies or virtually. While digital tools are available to our field employees to facilitate remote meetings with healthcare providers that are unable to meet in-person, we cannot ensure that these methods will be effective. Additionally, patients who are currently using NUPLAZID or who are eligible to use NUPLAZID, may be unable to meet with their healthcare providers in person, which may reduce the number of prescription refills or new patient starts, affecting our revenues both in our currently approved indication and potentially impacting our anticipated launches in other indications, if approved.

Our clinical trials have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. We temporarily paused enrollment of new patients in our ongoing clinical trials as well as commencement of new trials, and our data collection and site monitoring activities relating to currently active clinical trials could be delayed or otherwise impeded by travel and access restrictions and diversion of healthcare resources toward treating COVID-19 patients, among other things. However, we have re-initiated enrollment in clinical trials on a study-by-study and site-by-site basis. It is possible that future enrollment in these studies, or enrollment in future studies, could be impacted due to COVID-19.

During 2021, sales of NUPLAZID were negatively impacted by ongoing conditions related to the pandemic, including a reduction in patient office visits and a continuing reduced occupancy rates at long-term care facilities. While we observed incremental improvements in some of these factors during the latter part of the year, their levels are still meaningfully below where they were pre-pandemic. It remains difficult to predict the duration of the pandemic’s impact and the pace of, and no assurances can be given that the pandemic will not continue to have additional negative impacts on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Earthquake or fire damage to our facilities could delay our research and development efforts and adversely affect our business.

Our headquarters and research and development facilities in San Diego are located in a seismic zone, and there is the possibility of an earthquake, which could be disruptive to our operations and result in delays in our research and development efforts. In addition, while our facilities have not been adversely impacted by local wildfires, there is the possibility of future fires in the area. In the event of an earthquake or fire, if our facilities or the equipment in our facilities is significantly damaged or destroyed for any reason, we may not be able to rebuild or relocate our facilities or replace any damaged equipment in a timely manner and our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. We do not have insurance for damages resulting from earthquakes. While we do have fire insurance for our property and equipment located in San Diego, any damage sustained in a fire could cause a delay in our research and development efforts and our results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

Our businessinvolves the use of hazardous materials, and we and our third-party manufacturers and suppliers must comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, which can be expensive and restrict how we do, or interrupt our, business.

Our research and development activities and our third-party manufacturers’ and suppliers’ activities involve the generation, storage, use and disposal of hazardous materials, including the components of our products and product candidates and other hazardous compounds and wastes. We and our manufacturers and suppliers are subject to environmental, health and safety laws and regulations governing, among other matters, the use, manufacture, generation, storage, handling, transportation, discharge and disposal of these hazardous materials and wastes and worker health and safety. In some cases, these hazardous materials and various wastes resulting from their use are stored at our and our manufacturers’ facilities pending their use and disposal. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination or injury, which could result in an interruption of our commercialization efforts, research and development efforts and business operations, damages and significant cleanup costs and liabilities under applicable environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. We also cannot guarantee that the safety procedures utilized by our third-party manufacturers for handling and disposing of these materials and wastes generally comply with the standards prescribed by these laws and regulations. We may be held liable for any resulting damages costs or liabilities, which could exceed our resources, and state or federal or other applicable authorities may curtail our use of certain materials and/or interrupt our business operations. Furthermore, environmental, health and safety laws and regulations are complex, change frequently and have tended to become more stringent. We cannot predict the impact of such changes and cannot be certain of our future compliance. Failure to comply with these

environmental, health and safety laws and regulations may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions. We do not currently carry hazardous waste insurance coverage.

Risks Related to Our Relationships with Third Parties

In the past, we have selectively entered into collaboration agreements with third parties. We relied on our collaborators for financial resources and for development, regulatory, and commercialization expertise for selected product candidates and we had limited control over the amount and timing of resources that our collaborators devoted to our product candidates. We may choose to rely on collaborations in the future for certain portions of our pimavanserin program or other product candidates, or for the commercialization of NUPLAZID in certain territories outside of the U.S.

Our collaborators may fail to develop or effectively commercialize products using our product candidates or technologies because they:

•

do not have sufficient resources or decide not to devote the necessary resources due to internal constraints such as limited cash or human resources or a change in strategic focus;

•

decide to pursue a competitive product developed outside of the collaboration; or

•

cannot obtain the necessary regulatory approvals.

We also face competition in our search for new collaborators, if we seek a new partner for our pimavanserin program or other programs. Given the current economic and industry environment, it is possible that competition for new collaborators may increase. If we are unable to find new collaborations, we may not be able to continue advancing our programs alone.

If conflicts arise with our collaborators, they may act in their self-interests, which may be adverse to our interests.

Conflicts may arise in our collaborations due to one or more of the following:

•

disputes or breaches with respect to payments that we believe are due under the applicable agreements, particularly in the current environment when companies, including large established ones, may be seeking to reduce external payments;

•

disputes on strategy as to what development or commercialization activities should be pursued under the applicable agreements;

•

disputes as to the responsibility for conducting development and commercialization activities pursuant to the applicable collaboration, including the payment of costs related thereto;

•

disagreements with respect to ownership of intellectual property rights;

•

unwillingness on the part of a collaborator to keep us informed regarding the progress of its development and commercialization activities, or to permit public disclosure of these activities;

•

delay or reduction of a collaborator’s development or commercialization efforts with respect to our product candidates; or

•

termination or non-renewal of the collaboration.

Conflicts arising with our collaborators could impair the progress of our product candidates, harm our reputation, result in a loss of revenues, reduce our cash position, and cause a decline in our stock price.

In addition, in our past collaborations, we generally have agreed not to conduct independently, or with any third party, any research that is directly competitive with the research conducted under the applicable program. Any collaborations we establish in the future may have the effect of limiting the areas of research that we may pursue, either alone or with others. Conversely, the terms of any collaboration we may establish in the future might not restrict our collaborators from developing, either alone or with others, products in related fields that are competitive with the products or potential products

that are the subject of these collaborations. Competing products, either developed by our collaborators or to which our collaborators have rights, may result in the allocation of resources by our collaborators to competing products and their withdrawal of support for our product candidates or may otherwise result in lower demand for our potential products.

We rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials and perform data collection and analysis, which may result in costs and delays that prevent us from successfully commercializing product candidates.

Although we design and manage our current preclinical studies and clinical trials, we currently do not have the ability to conduct clinical trials for our product candidates on our own. We rely on contract research organizations, medical institutions, clinical investigators, and contract laboratories to perform data collection and analysis and other aspects of our clinical trials. In addition, we also rely on third parties to assist with our preclinical studies, including studies regarding biological activity, safety, absorption, metabolism, and excretion of product candidates. Some of these third parties may experience shutdowns or other disruptions as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and therefore may be unable to provide the level of service that we have received in the past.

Our preclinical activities or clinical trials may be delayed, suspended, or terminated if:

•

these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or fail to meet regulatory obligations or expected deadlines;

•

these third parties need to be replaced; or

•

the quality or accuracy of the data obtained by these third parties is compromised due to their failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements or for other reasons.

Failure to perform by these third parties may increase our development costs, delay our ability to obtain regulatory approval, and delay or prevent the commercialization of our product candidates. We currently use several contract research organizations to perform services for our preclinical studies and clinical trials. While we believe that there are numerous alternative sources to provide these services, in the event that we seek such alternative sources, we may not be able to enter into replacement arrangements without delays or additional expenditures.

Even if we or our collaborators successfully complete the clinical trials of product candidates, the product candidates may fail for other reasons.

Of the large number of product candidates in development, only a small percentage result in the submission of an NDA to the FDA or comparable regulatory filing to regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions, and even fewer are approved for marketing. We cannot assure you that, even if clinical trials are completed, either we or our collaborators will submit applications for required authorizations to manufacture and/or market potential products or that any such application will be reviewed and approved by the appropriate regulatory authorities in a timely manner, if at all. Even if we or our collaborators successfully complete the clinical trials of product candidates and apply for such required authorizations, the product candidates, such as pimavanserin, may fail for other reasons, including the possibility that the product candidates will:

•

fail to receive the regulatory clearances required to market them as drugs;

•

be subject to proprietary rights held by others requiring the negotiation of a license agreement prior to marketing;

•

be difficult or expensive to manufacture on a commercial scale;

•

have adverse side effects that make their use less desirable; or

•

fail to compete with product candidates or other treatments commercialized by competitors.

We currently depend, and in the future will continue to depend, on third parties to manufacture NUPLAZID, trofinetide and any other product candidates. If these manufacturers fail to provide us or our collaborators with adequate supplies of clinical trial materials and commercial product or fail to comply with the requirements of regulatory authorities, we may be unable to develop or commercialize NUPLAZID, trofinetide or any other product candidates.

We have no manufacturing facilities and only limited experience as an organization in the manufacturing of drugs or in designing drug-manufacturing processes. We have contracted with third-party manufacturers to produce, in collaboration with us, NUPLAZID and our product candidates.

We have contracted with Patheon Pharmaceuticals Inc. to manufacture NUPLAZID 10 mg tablet and 34 mg capsule drug product for commercial use in the U.S. We have also contracted with a second contract manufacturing organization to manufacture NUPLAZID 34 mg drug product for commercial use in the U.S. Additionally, we have contracted with Siegfried AG to manufacture active pharmaceutical ingredient (API), to be used in the manufacture of NUPLAZID drug product for commercial use. However, we have not entered into any agreements with any alternate suppliers for 10 mg NUPLAZID drug product or NUPLAZID API, and we may face delays or increased costs in our supply chain that could jeopardize the commercialization of NUPLAZID. While we currently have sufficient API and NUPLAZID finished product on hand to continue our commercial and clinical operations as planned, depending on the length of the COVID-19 pandemic and whether further disruptions occur, we may face such delays or costs in future years. If any third party in our supply or distribution chain for materials or finished product is adversely impacted by restrictions resulting from the COVID-19 outbreak, including staffing shortages, production slowdowns and disruptions in delivery systems, our supply chain may be disrupted, limiting our ability to manufacture and distribute NUPLAZID for commercial sales and our product candidates for our clinical trials and research and development operations. Additionally, if NUPLAZID is approved for commercial sale in jurisdictions outside the U.S., we will need to contract with a third party to manufacture such products for commercial sale in the U.S. and/or in such other jurisdictions.

We have contracted with manufacturers to produce clinical supplies of trofinetide to support the development program. If trofinetide or any other product candidate is approved by the FDA or other regulatory agencies for commercial sale, we will need to contract with a third party to manufacture such products for commercial sale in the U.S. and/or in such other jurisdictions.

Even though we have agreements with Patheon for the manufacture of NUPLAZID 10 mg tablet and agreements with Patheon and another manufacturer for the manufacture of 34 mg capsule drug product, and with Siegfried for the manufacture of NUPLAZID API for commercial use, and even if we successfully enter into long-term agreements with other manufacturers, the FDA may not approve the facilities of such manufacturers, the manufacturers may not perform as agreed, or the manufacturers may terminate their agreements with us. Presently, we have only one supplier of API, two suppliers for the 34 mg capsule and one supplier for the 10mg tablet of NUPLAZID. If any of the foregoing circumstances occur, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, maintain or obtain, as applicable, regulatory approval for or market NUPLAZID or trofinetide or any other product candidates. While we believe that there will be alternative sources available to manufacture NUPLAZID and trofinetide and any other product candidates, in the event that we seek such alternative sources, we may not be able to enter into replacement arrangements without delays or additional expenditures. We cannot estimate these delays or costs with certainty but, if they were to occur, they could cause a delay in our development and commercialization efforts.

The manufacturers of NUPLAZID and trofinetide and any other product candidates, including Patheon and Siegfried, are obliged to operate in accordance with FDA-mandated current good manufacturing practices (cGMPs), and we have limited control over the ability of third-party manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel to ensure compliance with cGMPs. In addition, the facilities used by our third-party manufacturers to manufacture NUPLAZID and trofinetide and any other product candidates must be approved by the FDA pursuant to inspections that will be conducted prior to any grant of regulatory approval by the FDA. If any of our third-party manufacturers are unable to successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the FDA’s strict regulatory requirements, or pass regulatory inspection, they will not be able to secure or maintain approval for the manufacturing facilities. Additionally, a failure by any of our third-party manufacturers to establish and follow cGMPs or to document their adherence to such practices may lead to significant delays in clinical trials or in obtaining regulatory approval of product candidates, or result in issues maintaining regulatory approval of NUPLAZID and trofinetide and any other product candidate that receives regulatory approval, negatively impact our commercialization of NUPLAZID, or lead to significant delays in the launch and commercialization of trofinetide or any other products we may have in the future. Failure by our third-party manufacturers or us to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, failure of the government to grant pre-market approval of drugs, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, seizures or recalls of products, operating restrictions, and criminal prosecutions.

The manufacture of pharmaceutical products requires significant capital investment, including the development of advanced manufacturing techniques and process controls. Manufacturers of pharmaceutical products often encounter difficulties in production. These problems include difficulties with production costs and yields, quality control, including stability of the product, quality assurance testing, shortages of qualified personnel, as well as compliance with strictly enforced federal, state and foreign regulations. We cannot assure you that any issues relating to the manufacture of NUPLAZID or trofinetide or any other product candidates will not occur in the future. Additionally, our manufacturers may experience manufacturing difficulties due to resource constraints or as a result of labor disputes or unstable political environments. If our manufacturers were to encounter any of these difficulties, or otherwise fail to comply with their contractual obligations, our ability to commercialize NUPLAZID in the U.S., or provide trofinetide or any other product candidates to patients in clinical trials, would be jeopardized. Any delay or interruption in our ability to meet commercial demand for NUPLAZID and any other approved products will result in the loss of potential revenues and could adversely affect our ability to gain market acceptance for these products. In addition, any delay or interruption in the supply of clinical trial supplies could delay the completion of 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.

Failures or difficulties faced at any level of our supply chain could materially adversely affect our business and delay or impede the development and commercialization of NUPLAZID or trofinetide or any other product candidates and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

If we fail to comply with the obligations in agreements under which we license intellectual property rights from third parties, we could lose license rights to certain of our product candidates.

In August 2018, we entered into a license agreement with Neuren, and obtained exclusive North American rights to develop and commercialize trofinetide for Rett syndrome and other indications. In March 2020, we entered into a license agreement with Vanderbilt University, and obtained exclusive worldwide license to develop and commercialize our M1 PAM program, and we may enter into additional license agreements in the future. In January 2022, we entered into a license and collaboration agreement with Stoke to discover, develop and commercialize novel RNA-based medicines for the potential treatment of severe and rare genetic neurodevelopmental diseases of the CNS.

Our agreements with Neuren, Vanderbilt University and Stoke impose, and we expect that future agreements where we in-license intellectual property will 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 these agreements, or we are subject to bankruptcy-related proceedings, the licensor may have the right to terminate the license, in which event we would not be able to market products covered by the license.

Disputes may arise between us and our licensors regarding intellectual property 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 of the licensor that is not subject to the licensing agreement;

•

our right to sublicense patents and other rights to third parties;

•

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

•

our right to transfer or assign the license; 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 that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may not be able to successfully develop and commercialize the related product candidates, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

We may not be able to continue or fully exploit our collaborations with outside scientific and clinical advisors, which could impair the progress of our clinical trials and our research and development efforts.

We work with scientific and clinical advisors at academic and other institutions who are experts in the field of central nervous system disorders. They assist us in our research and development efforts and advise us with respect to our clinical trials. These advisors are not our employees and may have other commitments that would limit their future availability to us. Although our scientific and clinical advisors generally agree not to engage in competing work, if a conflict of interest arises between their work for us and their work for another entity, we may lose their services, which may impair our reputation in the industry and delay the development or commercialization of our product candidates.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

Our ability to compete may decline if we do not adequately protect our proprietary rights.

Our commercial success depends on obtaining and maintaining intellectual property rights to our products and product candidates, including NUPLAZID, and technologies, as well as successfully defending these rights against third-party challenges. Successful challenges to, or misappropriation of, our intellectual property could enable competitors to quickly duplicate or surpass our technological achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market. To protect our intellectual property, we rely on a combination of patents, trade secret protection and contracts requiring confidentiality and nondisclosure. If our patents are successfully challenged, we may face generic competition prior to the expiration dates of our U.S. Orange Book listed patents. In addition, potential competitors have in the past and may in the future file an Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) with the FDA for generic versions of NUPLAZID, seeking approval prior to the expiration of our patents. In response, we have filed complaints against these companies alleging infringement of certain of our Orange Book-listed patents covering NUPLAZID. For a more detailed description of these matters, see section captioned “Legal Proceedings” elsewhere in this report. While we intend to defend the validity of such patents vigorously, and will seek to use all appropriate methods to prevent their infringement, such efforts are expensive and time consuming. Any substantial decrease in the revenue and income derived from NUPLAZID would have an adverse effect on our results of operations.

With regard to patents, although we have filed numerous patent applications worldwide with respect to pimavanserin, not all of our patent applications resulted in an issued patent, or they resulted in an issued patent that is susceptible to challenge by a third party. Our ability to obtain, maintain, and/or defend our patents covering our product candidates and technologies is uncertain due to a number of factors, including:

•

we may not have been the first to make the inventions covered by our pending patent applications or issued patents;

•

we may not have been the first to file patent applications for our product candidates or the technologies we rely upon;

•

others may develop similar or alternative technologies or design around our patent claims to produce competitive products that fall outside of the scope of our patents;

•

our disclosures in patent applications may not be sufficient to meet the statutory requirements for patentability;

•

we may not seek or obtain patent protection in all countries that will eventually provide a significant business opportunity;

•

any patents issued to us or our collaborators may not provide a basis for commercially viable products, may not provide us with any competitive advantages, or are easily susceptible to challenges by third parties;

•

our proprietary technologies may not be patentable;

•

changes to patent laws that limit the exclusivity rights of patent holders or make it easier to render a patent invalid;

•

recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court limiting patent-eligible subject matter;

•

litigation regarding our patents may include challenges to the validity, enforceability, scope and term of one or more patents;

•

the passage of The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the America Invents Act), introduced new procedures for challenging pending patent applications and issued patents; and

•

technology that we may in-license may become important to some aspects of our business, however, we generally would not control the patent prosecution, maintenance or enforcement of any such in-licensed technology.

Even if we have or obtain patents covering our product candidates or technologies, we may still be barred from making, using and selling our product candidates or technologies because of the patent rights of others. Others have or may have filed, and in the future are likely to file, patent applications covering compounds, assays, genes, gene products or therapeutic products that are similar or identical to ours. There are many issued U.S. and foreign patents relating to genes, nucleic acids, polypeptides, chemical compounds or therapeutic products, and some of these may encompass reagents utilized in the identification of candidate drug compounds or compounds that we desire to commercialize. Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications owned by others exist in the area of central nervous system disorders and the other fields in which we are developing products. These could materially affect our freedom to operate. Moreover, because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending applications, unknown to us, that may later result in issued patents that our product candidates or technologies may infringe. These patent applications may have priority over patent applications filed by us.

We regularly conduct searches to identify patents or patent applications that may prevent us from obtaining patent protection for our proprietary compounds or that could limit the rights we have claimed in our patents and patent applications. Disputes may arise regarding the ownership or inventorship of our inventions. For applications in which all 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 U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (U.S. PTO), to determine who was the first to invent the invention at issue. It is difficult to determine how such disputes would be resolved. Applications containing a claim not entitled to priority before March 16, 2013, are not subject to interference proceedings due the change brought by the America Invents Act to a “first-to-file” system. However, a derivation proceeding can be brought by a third-party alleging that the inventor derived the invention from another.

Periodic maintenance fees on any issued patent are due to be paid to the U.S. PTO and foreign patent agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patent. The U.S. PTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases 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. Non-compliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. In such an event, our competitors might be able to enter the market, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

Some of our academic institutional licensors, research collaborators and scientific advisors have rights to publish data and information to which we have rights. We generally seek to prevent our collaborators from disclosing scientific discoveries until we have the opportunity to file patent applications on such discoveries, but in some cases, we are limited to relatively short periods to review a proposed publication and file a patent application. If we cannot maintain the confidentiality of our technology and other confidential information in connection with our collaborations, then our ability to receive patent protection or protect our proprietary information may be impaired.

Confidentiality agreements with employees and others may not adequately prevent disclosure of our trade secrets and other proprietary information and may not adequately protect our intellectual property, which could limit our ability to compete.

Because we operate in the highly technical field of drug discovery and development of small molecule drugs, we rely in part on trade secret protection in order to protect our proprietary technology and processes. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. We enter into confidentiality, nondisclosure, and intellectual property assignment agreements with our corporate partners, employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers, and other advisors. These agreements generally require that the other party keep confidential and not disclose to third parties all confidential information developed by the party or made known to the party by us during the course of the party’s relationship with us. These agreements also generally provide that inventions conceived by the party in the course of rendering services to us will be our exclusive property. However, these agreements may not be honored and may not effectively assign intellectual property rights to us. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally obtained and is using our trade secrets is difficult, expensive and time consuming and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, courts outside the U.S. may be less willing to protect trade

secrets. We also have not entered into any noncompete agreements with any of our employees. Although each of our employees is required to sign a confidentiality agreement with us at the time of hire, we cannot guarantee that the confidential nature of our proprietary information will be maintained in the course of future employment with any of our competitors. If we are unable to prevent unauthorized material disclosure of our intellectual property to third parties, we will 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.

A dispute concerning the infringement or misappropriation of our proprietary rights or the proprietary rights of others could be time-consuming and costly, and an unfavorable outcome could harm our business.

There is a substantial amount of litigation involving patents and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, as well as administrative proceedings for challenging patents, including post-issuance review proceedings before the U.S. PTO or oppositions and other comparable proceedings in foreign jurisdictions.

Central provisions of the America Invents Act went into effect on September 16, 2012 and on March 16, 2013. The America Invents Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These changes include provisions that affect the way patent applications are being filed, prosecuted and litigated. For example, the America Invents Act enacted proceedings involving post-issuance patent review procedures, such as inter partes review (IPR), and post-grant review, that allow third parties to challenge the validity of an issued patent in front of the U.S. PTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Each proceeding has different eligibility criteria and different patentability challenges that can be raised. IPRs permit any person (except a party who has been litigating the patent for more than a year) to challenge the validity of the patent on the grounds that it was anticipated or made obvious by prior art. Patents covering pharmaceutical products have been subject to attack in IPRs from generic drug companies and from hedge funds. If it is within nine months of the issuance of the challenged patent, a third party can petition the U.S. PTO for post-grant review, which can be based on any invalidity grounds and is not limited to prior art patents or printed publications.

In post-issuance proceedings, U.S. PTO rules and regulations generally tend to favor patent challengers over patent owners. For example, unlike in district court litigation, claims challenged in post-issuance proceedings are given their broadest reasonable meaning, which increases the chance a claim might be invalidated by prior art or lack support in the patent specification. As another example, unlike in district court litigation, there is no presumption of validity for an issued patent, and thus, a challenger’s burden to prove invalidity is by a preponderance of the evidence, as opposed to the heightened clear and convincing evidence standard. As a result of these rules and others, statistics released by the U.S. PTO show a high percentage of claims being invalidated in post-issuance proceedings. Moreover, with few exceptions, there is no standing requirement to petition the U.S. PTO for inter partes review or post-grant review. In other words, companies that have not been charged with infringement or that lack commercial interest in the patented subject matter can still petition the U.S. PTO for review of an issued patent. Thus, even where we have issued patents, our rights under those patents may be challenged and ultimately not provide us with sufficient protection against competitive products or processes.

We may be exposed to future litigation by third parties based on claims that our product candidates, technologies or activities infringe the intellectual property rights of others. In particular, there are many patents relating to specific genes, nucleic acids, polypeptides or the uses thereof to identify product candidates. Some of these may encompass genes or polypeptides that we utilize in our drug development activities. If our drug development activities are found to infringe any such patents, and such patents are held to be valid and enforceable, we may have to pay significant damages or seek licenses to such patents. A patentee could prevent us from using the patented genes or polypeptides for the identification or development of drug compounds. There are also many patents relating to chemical compounds and the uses thereof. If our compounds are found to infringe any such patents, and such patents are held to be valid and enforceable, we may have to pay significant damages or seek licenses to such patents. A patentee could prevent us from making, using or selling the patented compounds.

In addition to the patent infringement lawsuits that we have recently initiated against the filers of ANDAs pertaining to NUPLAZID, we may need to resort to litigation to enforce other patents issued to us, protect our trade secrets or determine the scope and validity of third-party proprietary rights. From time to time, we may hire scientific personnel formerly employed by other companies involved in one or more areas similar to the activities conducted by us. Either we or these individuals may be subject to allegations of trade secret misappropriation or other similar claims as a result of their prior affiliations. If we become involved in litigation, it could consume a substantial portion of our managerial and financial resources, regardless of whether we win or lose. We may not be able to afford the costs of litigation. Any legal action against us or our collaborators could lead to:

•

payment of damages, which could potentially be trebled if we are found to have willfully infringed a party’s patent rights;

•

injunctive or other equitable relief that may effectively block our ability to further develop, commercialize, and sell products; or

•

we or our collaborators having to enter into license arrangements that may not be available on commercially acceptable terms, or at all.

As a result, we could be prevented from commercializing current or future products.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of pre-trial document and witness 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. In addition, during the course of this kind of litigation, there could 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 substantial adverse effect on the trading price of our common stock.

The patent applications of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies involve highly complex legal and factual questions, which, if determined adversely to us, could negatively impact our patent position.

The strength of patents in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology field can be highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions. For example, some of our patent applications may cover the uses of gene sequences. The patentability of gene sequences and the use of gene sequences has been seriously undermined by recent decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. PTO’s interpretation of the Supreme Court’s decisions and the standards for patentability it sets forth are uncertain and could change in the future. Consequently, the issuance and scope of patents cannot be predicted with certainty. Patents, if issued, may be challenged, invalidated or circumvented. U.S. patents and patent applications may also be subject to interference proceedings as mentioned above, and U.S. patents may be subject to reexamination and post-issuance proceedings in the U.S. PTO (and foreign patents may be subject to opposition or comparable proceedings in the corresponding foreign patent office), which proceedings could result in either loss of the patent or denial of the patent application or loss or reduction in the scope of one or more of the claims of the patent or patent application. Similarly, opposition or invalidity proceedings could result in loss of rights or reduction in the scope of one or more claims of a patent in foreign jurisdictions. In addition, such interference, reexamination, post-issuance and opposition proceedings may be costly. Accordingly, rights under any issued patents may not provide us with sufficient protection against competitive products or processes.

In addition, changes in or different interpretations of patent laws in the U.S. and foreign countries may permit others to use our discoveries or to develop and commercialize our technology and products without providing any compensation to us or may limit the number of patents or claims we can obtain. In particular, there have been proposals to shorten the exclusivity periods available under U.S. patent law that, if adopted, could substantially harm our business. The product candidates that we are developing are protected by intellectual property rights, including patents and patent applications. If any of our product candidates becomes a marketable product, we will rely on our exclusivity under patents to sell the compound and recoup our investments in the research and development of the compound. If the exclusivity period for patents is shortened, then our ability to generate revenues without competition will be reduced and our business could be materially adversely impacted. The laws of some countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as U.S. laws and those countries may lack adequate rules and procedures for defending our intellectual property rights. For example, some countries, including many in Europe, do not grant patent claims directed to methods of treating humans and, in these countries, patent protection may not be available at all to protect our product candidates. In addition, U.S. patent laws may change which could prevent or limit us from filing patent applications or patent claims to protect our products and/or technologies or limit the exclusivity periods that are available to patent holders. For example, the America Invents Act (2012) included a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These included changes to transition from a “first-to-invent” system to a “first-to-file” system and to the way issued patents are challenged. These changes may favor larger and more established companies that have more resources to devote to patent application filing and prosecution. It is still not clear what, if any, impact the America Invents Act will ultimately have on the cost of prosecuting our patent applications, our ability to obtain patents based on our discoveries and our ability to enforce or defend our issued patents.

If we fail to obtain and maintain patent protection and trade secret protection of our product candidates, proprietary technologies and their uses, we could lose our competitive advantage and competition we face would increase, reducing our potential revenues and adversely affecting our ability to attain or maintain profitability.

Risks Related to Government Regulation and Our Industry

Healthcare reform measures may negatively impact our ability to sell NUPLAZID or our product candidates, if approved, profitably.

In both the U.S. and certain foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that could impact our ability to sell NUPLAZID, and any other potential products, as described in greater detail in the Government Regulation section of our Annual Report.

For example, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively the ACA), as well as other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we may receive for any approved product, including NUPLAZID. With respect to pharmaceutical products, the ACA, among other things, expanded and increased industry rebates for drugs covered by Medicaid and made changes to the coverage requirements under Medicare Part D, Medicare’s prescription drug benefits program. There have been legal and political challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, the 2017 Tax Act included a provision that repealed, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the ACA 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”. In addition, the 2020 federal spending package permanently eliminated, effective January 1, 2020, the ACA-mandated “Cadillac” tax on high-cost employer-sponsored health coverage and the medical device tax and, effective January 1, 2021, also eliminated the health insurer tax. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (BBA), among other things, amended the ACA, effective January 1, 2019, to close the coverage gap in most Medicare drug plans, commonly referred to as the “donut hole”, and also increased the percentage that a drug manufacturer must discount the cost of prescription drugs from 50% to 70%. Given that the current patient population for NUPLAZID is primarily Medicare beneficiaries, accelerating the closure of the coverage gap and the increase in the discount that must be paid, could have a significant impact on the Company’s business in 2021 and beyond. Furthermore, on June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds that argued the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress. Thus, the ACA will remain in effect in its current form. Moreover, prior to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, on January 28, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order that initiated a special enrollment period for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace, which began on February 15, 2021 and remained open through August 15, 2021. 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 ACA. It is possible that the ACA will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how any such challenges and other litigation, and the healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the ACA and our business.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the U.S. since the ACA. Through the process created by the Budget Control Act of 2011, there are automatic reductions of Medicare payments to providers up to 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect in April 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments, including the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, will remain in effect through 2031 unless additional Congressional action is taken. However, COVID-19 pandemic relief legislation suspended the 2% Medicare sequester from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022. Under current legislation the actual reduction in Medicare payments will vary from 1% in 2022 to up to 3% in the final fiscal year of this sequester. 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. In January 2013, President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to certain providers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. In addition, Congress is considering additional health reform measures as part of the budget reconciliation process.

An expansion in the government’s role in the U.S. healthcare industry may increase existing congressional or governmental agency scrutiny on price increases, such as the ones we have implemented for NUPLAZID, cause general downward pressure on the prices of prescription drug products, lower reimbursements for providers using NUPLAZID or any other product for which we obtain regulatory approval, reduce product utilization and adversely affect our business and results of operations. There have been several recent U.S. presidential executive orders, Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, reduce the cost of drugs under Medicare, and reform

government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. For example, the Trump administration used several means to propose or implement drug pricing reform, including through federal budget proposals, executive orders and policy initiatives. For example, on July 24, 2020 and September 13, 2020, the Trump administration announced several executive orders related to prescription drug pricing that attempt to implement several of the administration’s proposals. The FDA concurrently released a final rule and guidance in September 2020 implementing a portion of former President Trump’s importation executive order announced in July 2020, providing pathways for states to build and submit importation plans for drugs from Canada. Further, on November 20, 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) finalized a regulation removing safe harbor protection for price reductions from pharmaceutical manufacturers to plan sponsors under Part D, either directly or through pharmacy benefit managers, unless the price reduction is required by law. The implementation of this rule has been delayed by the Biden administration from January 1, 2022 to January 1, 2023 in response to ongoing litigation. The rule also creates a new safe harbor for price reductions reflected at the point-of-sale, as well as a new safe harbor for certain fixed fee arrangements between pharmacy benefit managers and manufacturers, the implementation of which have also been delayed until January 1, 2023. In addition, on November 20, 2020, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued an interim final rule implementing former President Trump’s Most Favored Nation executive order, which would tie Medicare Part B payments for certain physician-administered drugs to the lowest price paid in other economically advanced countries, effective January 1, 2021. As a result of litigation challenging the Most Favored Nation model, on December 27, 2021, CMS published a final rule that rescinded the Most Favored Nation model interim final rule. Further, in July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order that included 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. No legislation or administrative actions have been finalized to implement these principles. Individual states in the U.S. have also increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

The implementation of cost-containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize NUPLAZID or any other products for which we may receive regulatory approval. It is also possible that additional governmental action may be taken in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

We are subject, directly and indirectly, to federal, state and foreign healthcare and data protection laws and regulations, including healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws, physician payment transparency laws and health information privacy and security laws. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face substantial penalties.

Our operations are directly, and indirectly through our customers and third-party payors, subject to various U.S. federal and state healthcare laws and regulations, including, without limitation, the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the U.S. federal False Claims Act, and physician payment sunshine laws and regulations. These laws may impact, among other things, our clinical research, sales, marketing, grants, charitable donations, and education programs and constrain the business or financial arrangements with healthcare providers, physicians, charitable foundations that support Parkinson’s disease patients generally, and other parties that have the ability to directly or indirectly influence the prescribing, ordering, marketing, or distribution of our products for which we obtain marketing approval. In addition, we and any current or potential future collaborators, partners or service providers are or may become subject to data privacy and security regulation by both the U.S. federal government and the states in which we conduct our business, including laws and regulations that apply to our processing of personal data or the processing of personal data on our behalf. Finally, we may be subject to additional healthcare, statutory and regulatory requirements and enforcement by foreign regulatory authorities in jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include:

•

the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons or entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or paying any remuneration (including any kickback, bribe, or certain rebates), directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce, or in return for, either the referral of an individual, or the purchase, lease, order or recommendation of any good, facility, item or service, for which payment may be made, in whole or in part, under U.S. federal and state healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;

•

the U.S. federal civil and criminal false claims laws, including the civil False Claims Act, which can be enforced through civil whistleblower or qui tam actions, and civil monetary penalties laws, which impose criminal and civil penalties on individuals or entities for, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented to the U.S. federal government, claims for payment or approval that are false or fraudulent or from knowingly making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the U.S. federal government. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items and services resulting from a violation of the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act;

•

the U.S. federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), which imposes criminal and civil liability for, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or obtain, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, any of the money or property owned by, or under the custody or control of, any healthcare benefit program, regardless of the payor (e.g., public or private) and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up by any trick or device a material fact or making any materially false statement, in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items or services. Similar to the U.S. 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, and its implementing regulations, and as amended again by the Final HIPAA Omnibus Rule, Modifications to the HIPAA Privacy, Security, Enforcement and Breach Notification Rules Under the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH) and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act; Other Modifications to the HIPAA Rules, published in January 2013, which imposes certain obligations, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information on covered entities subject to the rule, such as health plans, healthcare clearinghouses and certain healthcare providers as well as their business associates, individuals or entities that perform certain services involving the use or disclosure of individually identifiable health information on behalf of a covered entity and their subcontractors that use, disclose or otherwise process individually identifiable health information;

•

the U.S. Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), which prohibits, among other things, the adulteration or misbranding of drugs, biologics and medical devices;

•

the U.S. federal physician payment transparency requirements, sometimes referred to as the “Physician Payments Sunshine Act”, which was enacted as part of the ACA and its implementing regulations and requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program to report annually to CMS information related to certain payments and other transfers of value made to physicians (as defined to include doctors of medicine, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors under such law), other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners), and teaching hospitals, as well as information regarding ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members;

•

analogous state and local laws and regulations, including: state anti-kickback and false claims laws, which may apply to our business practices, including but not limited to, research, distribution, sales and marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including private insurers; state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the U.S. federal government, or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; state and local laws and regulations that require drug manufacturers to file reports relating to pricing and marketing information, which requires tracking gifts and other remuneration and items of value provided to healthcare professionals and entities and/or the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives; and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts; and

•

European and other foreign law equivalents of each of the laws, including reporting requirements detailing interactions with and payments to healthcare providers and personal data protection, such as the European General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR), which became effective in May 2018 and contains new provisions specifically directed at the processing of health information, higher sanctions and extra-territoriality measures intended to bring non-EU companies under the regulation, including companies like us that conduct clinical trials in the European Economic Area (EEA); we anticipate that over time we may expand our business operations to include additional operations in the EU and with such expansion, we would be subject to increased governmental regulation in the EU countries in which we might operate, including the GDPR.

The GDPR has increased our responsibility and liability in relation to personal data that we process where such processing is subject to the GDPR, and we may be required to put in place additional mechanisms to ensure compliance with the GDPR, including as implemented by individual countries. Failure to comply with the GDPR carries significant risk as potential fines for noncompliant companies of are up to the greater of €20 million or 4% of annual global revenue and potential penalties include a prohibition on use of personal data subject to the GDPR, which could impact our operations and ability to develop our products and provide our services, including interrupting or ending EEA clinical trials. Compliance with the GDPR and the laws and regulations of applicable EU Member States and similar data protection laws in domestic and other foreign jurisdictions (such as Switzerland and the United Kingdom) is a rigorous and time-intensive process that may increase our cost of doing business or require us to change our business practices, and despite those efforts, there is a risk that we may be subject to fines and penalties, and reputational harm in connection with our activities.

In addition, certain jurisdictions have enacted data localization laws and laws regulating or restricting cross-border personal data transfers. For example, European data protection laws, including the GDPR, generally restrict the transfer of personal data from Europe, including the EEA, United Kingdom and Switzerland, to the United States and most other countries unless the parties to the transfer have implemented specific safeguards to protect the transferred personal data. A decision by the Court of Justice of the European Union (the “Schrems II” ruling), however, invalidated the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework, which was one of the primary mechanisms used by U.S. companies, including us, to import personal data from Europe, and raised questions about whether the European Commission’s Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs), one of the primary alternatives to the Privacy Shield, can lawfully be used for personal information transfers from Europe to the U.S. or most other countries. Similarly, the Swiss Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner opined that the Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield is inadequate for transfers of personal data from Switzerland to the U.S. The United Kingdom, whose data protection laws are similar to those of the European Union, may similarly determine that the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield is not a valid mechanism for lawfully transferring personal information from the UK to the U.S. In June 2021, the European Commission released a set of “Standard Contractual Clauses” that are designed to be a valid mechanism by which entities can transfer personal data out of the EEA to jurisdictions that the European Commission has not found to provide an adequate level of protection. Currently, these Standard Contractual Clauses are a valid mechanism to transfer personal data outside of the EEA. The Standard Contractual Clauses, however, require parties that rely upon them to comply with additional obligations, such as conducting transfer impact assessments to determine whether additional security measures are necessary to protect the at-issue personal data. Moreover, due to potential legal challenges, there exists some uncertainty regarding whether the Standard Contractual Clauses will remain a valid mechanism for transfers of personal data out of the EEA. If we are unable to implement a valid compliance mechanism for cross-border personal data transfers, we may face increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and injunctions against processing or transferring personal data. For example, inability to import personal data from Europe to the United States may limit our ability to conduct clinical trial activities in Europe, limit our ability to collaborate with contract research organizations, service providers, contractors and other entities subject to European data protection laws, adversely impact our operations, product development and ability to provide our products, and require us to increase our data processing capabilities in Europe at significant expense.

Further, the United Kingdom’s vote in favor of exiting the EU, often referred to as Brexit, has created uncertainty with regard to data protection regulation in the United Kingdom. The data protections in the GDPR continue to apply to United Kingdom-related processing of personal data in substantially unvaried form under the so-called “UK GDPR.” However, going forward, there will be increasing potential for divergence in the application and interpretation of the data protection laws as between the United Kingdom and the EEA. Furthermore, the relationship between the United Kingdom and the EEA in relation to certain aspects of data protection law remains somewhat uncertain. On June 28, 2021, the European Commission issued an adequacy decision under the GDPR which allows personal data transfers from the EEA to the United Kingdom to continue without restriction for four years (ending June 27, 2025). After that period, the adequacy decision may be renewed, however, only if the United Kingdom continues to ensure an adequate level of data protection. During this time, the European Commission will continue to monitor the situation in the United Kingdom and could intervene at any point if the United Kingdom deviates from the level of data protection in place at the time of the issuance of the adequacy decision. If the adequacy decision is withdrawn or not renewed, transfers of personal data from the EEA to the United Kingdom will

require a valid ‘transfer mechanism’ and we may be required to implement new processes and put new agreements in place, such as SCCs, to enable transfers of personal data form the EEA to the United Kingdom to continue.

Moreover, states in the U.S. are constantly adopting new data protection laws or amending existing laws, requiring attention to frequently changing regulatory requirements. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA), imposes obligations on businesses to which it applies. These obligations include, without limitation, providing specific disclosures in privacy notices, affording California residents certain rights to their personal data, and requiring businesses subject to the CCPA to implement certain measures to effectuate California residents’ personal data rights. The CCPA allows for statutory fines for noncompliance (up to $7,500 per violation). In addition, it is anticipated that the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (CPRA), effective January 1, 2023, will expand the CCPA. For example, the CPRA establishes a new California Privacy Protection Agency to enforce the CCPA (as amended), which could increase the risk of an enforcement action. Although the CCPA and the CPRA exempt some personal information processed in the context of clinical trials, these laws, to the extent applicable to our business and operations, may increase our potential liability with respect to other personal information we maintain about California residents. Moreover, other states have enacted data privacy laws. For example, Virginia passed the Consumer Data Protection Act and Colorado passed the Colorado Privacy Act, both of which differ from the CPRA and become effective in 2023.

Compliance with U.S. and foreign data protection laws and regulations could require us to take on more onerous obligations in our contracts, restrict our ability to collect, use and disclose personal data, or in some cases, impact our ability to operate in certain jurisdictions. Data protection laws worldwide are, and are likely to remain, uncertain for the foreseeable future. While we strive to comply with applicable data protection laws, external and internal privacy and security policies, and contractual data protection obligations and other data protection obligations to the extent possible, we may at times fail to do so, or may be perceived to have failed to do so. Moreover, despite our efforts, we may not be successful in achieving compliance if our personnel, collaborators, partners or vendors do not comply with applicable data protection obligations. Actual or perceived failure to comply with our protection obligations could result in government enforcement actions (which could include civil or criminal penalties), investigations, private litigation, other liabilities and/or adverse publicity and could negatively affect our operating results and business. Moreover, clinical trial subjects about whom we or our potential collaborators obtain information, as well as the providers who share this information with us, may contractually limit our ability to use and disclose the information. Claims that we have violated individual’s privacy rights, even if we are found not liable, could be expensive and time consuming to defend.

We are also subject to the terms of our external and internal privacy and security policies, representations, certifications, publications and frameworks, and contractual obligations to third parties related to privacy, information security and processing. Failure or a perceived failure to comply with these policies, or if these policies are, in whole or part, found or perceived to be inaccurate, incomplete, deceptive, unfair, or misrepresentative of our actual practices, could result in reputational harm; result in litigation; cause a material adverse impact to business operations or financial results, and; otherwise result in other material harm to our business.

ACAD US Equity

ACAD · 10-K · period ended 2021-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

ACAD US Equity☆

ACAD · 10-K · period ended 2021-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

ACAD US Equity