Item 1A. Risk Factors

You should carefully consider the risks described below, as well as general economic and business risks and the other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The occurrence of any of the events or circumstances described below or other adverse events could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition and could cause the trading price of our common stock to decline. Additional risks or uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also harm our business.

Risks Related to Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital

We have a limited operating history and have not generated substantial product revenues to date, which may make it difficult to evaluate the success of our business and to assess our future viability.

We were incorporated in March 2017 and our operations to date have been largely focused on staffing our Company, raising capital, advancing the development of our product candidates, including conducting clinical and preclinical studies and establishing our commercial organization. We have only one product approved for commercial sale, and have limited experience in obtaining marketing approvals, manufacturing products on a commercial scale, and conducting sales and marketing activities necessary for successful commercialization. Consequently, predictions about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history or a history of successfully commercializing products.

We expect our financial condition and operating results to continue to fluctuate from quarter to quarter and year to year due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control. We are transitioning from a company with primarily a research and development focus to a company also capable of undertaking commercial activities. We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications and delays, and may not be successful in such a transition.

We have incurred significant operating losses since inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur substantial operating losses for the foreseeable future and may never achieve or maintain profitability.

Since our inception, we have incurred significant operating losses. Our net loss was $179.1 million and $165.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. As of December 31, 2023, we had a stockholders’ deficit of approximately $56.5 million. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for the foreseeable future. We have only one product candidate approved for marketing in the U.S., none in any other jurisdiction, and may never receive approval beyond the one product approved to date. It could be several years, if ever, before we have a commercialized product that generates significant revenues through sales of IGALMITM or our product candidates, if approved. As a result, we are uncertain when or if we will achieve profitability and, if so, whether we will be able to sustain it. The net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year. We anticipate that our expenses may increase in the long term as we:

• evaluate the development of our product candidates;

•continue to develop, maintain, expand and protect our intellectual property portfolio;

•potentially hire additional clinical, commercial, regulatory, scientific and finance personnel; and

•incur additional legal, accounting and other expenses in operating as a public company.

Table of Contents

To become and remain profitable, we must develop and commercialize more products or product candidates with significant market potential. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including completing clinical trials of our product candidates, developing commercial scale manufacturing processes, obtaining marketing approval, manufacturing, marketing, and selling IGALMITM and any current and future product candidates for which we may obtain marketing approval, and satisfying any post-marketing requirements. We may never succeed in any or all of these activities and, even if we do, we may never generate sufficient revenue to achieve profitability.

Although we have obtained U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) approval for IGALMITM, because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with product development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of expenses or when, or if, we will obtain marketing approval to commercialize any additional product candidates. If we are required by the FDA, or other regulatory authorities such as the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”) to perform studies and trials in addition to those currently expected, or if there are any delays in the development, or in the completion of any planned or future preclinical studies or clinical trials of our current or future product candidates, our expenses could increase and profitability could be further delayed. For example, developments with respect to our TRANQUILITY program evaluating BXCL501 in patients with dementia due to probable Alzheimer’s disease may increase the likelihood that we experience such costs or delays, as discussed in the risk factor below entitled: “Developments relating to our TRANQUILITY II Phase 3 trial may impact the timing of our development plans for, and prospects for seeking or obtaining regulatory approval of, BXCL501 for the acute treatment of agitation (non-daily) associated with dementia in patients with probable Alzheimer’s disease.”

Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis.

Our failure to become and remain profitable would decrease the value of our Company and could impair our ability to raise capital, maintain our research and development efforts, expand our business or continue our operations. A decline in the value of our Company also could cause you to lose all or part of your investment.

Our strategic reprioritization and related reduction in force may not achieve our intended outcome.

In August 2023, we announced a broad-based strategic reprioritization (the “Reprioritization”). We have taken actions to reduce certain operational and workforce expenses that are no longer deemed core to our ongoing operations in order to extend our cash runway and drive innovation and growth in high potential clinical development and value creating opportunities. These actions include a shift in commercial strategy for IGALMITM in the institutional setting, a reduction of in-hospital commercialization expenses, a suspension of programs no longer determined to be core to ongoing operations, and a prioritization on at-home treatment setting opportunities for BXCL501. As part of this strategy, we reduced our workforce by approximately 60%. As of December 31, 2023, the Reprioritization was substantially completed.

The reduction in force may result in unintended consequences and costs, such as the loss of institutional knowledge and expertise, attrition beyond the intended number of employees, decreased morale among our remaining employees, and the risk that we may not achieve the anticipated benefits of the reduction in force. In addition, while positions have been eliminated, certain functions necessary to our operations remain, and we may be unsuccessful in distributing the duties and obligations of departed employees among our remaining employees. The reduction in workforce could also make it difficult for us to pursue, or prevent us from pursuing, new opportunities and initiatives due to insufficient personnel, or require us to incur additional and unanticipated costs to hire new personnel to pursue such opportunities or initiatives. The workforce reduction could also harm our reputation, making our ability to recruit skilled personnel difficult. If we are unable to realize the anticipated benefits from the reduction in force, or if we experience significant adverse consequences from the reduction in force, our business, financial condition, and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

In addition, we may not realize the benefits of or there may be unanticipated costs associated with our Reprioritization. As a result of the Reprioritization, including our strategic refocus, we may not generate material revenues from IGALMITM in the near term because our commercial force will be significantly reduced. If we are unable to commercialize IGALMITM in a different setting or unable to develop, receive marketing approval for and successfully commercialize BXCL501, BXCL701 and any of our other product candidates on our own or with any future

Table of Contents

collaborator, or experience delays because of any of these factors or otherwise, our business could be materially and substantially harmed.

In addition, because we have limited financial and managerial resources, under our Reprioritization, we intend to focus on specific product candidates, indications and development programs. We may also conduct several clinical trials for our product candidates in parallel over the next several years, which may make our decision as to which product candidates to focus on more difficult. As a result, we may forgo or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or other indications that could have had greater commercial potential or likelihood of success. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through future collaborations, licenses and other similar arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate. If we are not successful in increasing our efficiency as a result of this Reprioritization, our efforts to develop and commercialize our product candidates may be delayed or halted and our business could be materially adversely impacted.

Furthermore, we may undertake further similar cost-saving initiatives, which may include additional restructuring or workforce reductions. These types of cost-reduction activities can be complex and result in unintended consequences and costs, including decreased employee morale, loss of institutional knowledge and expertise and adversely impact our business.

We will need substantial additional funding, and if we are unable to raise capital when needed, we could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our product development programs or commercialization efforts or otherwise seek strategic alternatives. In addition, the failure to raise additional financing in accordance with the minimum capital raising requirements of our Credit Agreement (as defined herein) would trigger an event of default thereunder.

We will require additional future funding to support current and anticipated future expenses. We currently anticipate continuing to develop and conduct clinical trials with respect to our current and any future product candidates; seek to identify and develop additional product candidates; acquire or in-license other product candidates or technologies; seek regulatory approvals for our product candidates that successfully complete clinical trials, if any; establish sales, marketing, distribution and other commercial infrastructure to support the commercialization of products for which we may obtain marketing approval; require the manufacture of larger quantities of product candidates for clinical development and, potentially, commercialization; maintain, expand and protect our intellectual property portfolio; hire and retain limited additional personnel, such as clinical, quality control and scientific personnel; add operational, financial and management information systems and personnel, including personnel to support our product development and help us comply with our obligations as a public company; and add equipment and physical infrastructure to support our research and development programs.

We may be required to expend significant funds to continue to commercialize IGALMITM in the U.S. and advance the development of BXCL501, BXCL701, BXCL502 and our other product candidates. In addition, while we may seek one or more collaborators for future development of our current product candidates or any future product candidates that we may develop for one or more indications, we may not be able to enter into a collaboration for any of our product candidates for such indications on suitable terms, on a timely basis or at all. In any event, our existing cash will not be sufficient to fund all of the efforts that we plan to undertake or to fund the completion of development of our product candidates or our other preclinical programs. Accordingly, we will be required to obtain further funding through public or private equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations and licensing arrangements or other sources. We may also seek third-party investments in or other strategic options for our subsidiary, OnkosXcel. Further financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. In addition, we are reliant on the financial institutions with which we hold our cash and cash equivalents. If such institutions were to close, we may not be able to recover all of our cash or cash equivalents held at such institutions. Moreover, market volatility resulting from COVID-19, credit crises, adverse macroeconomic conditions, such as high interest or inflation rates, or other factors, as well as Company-specific factors such as the progress of our development pipeline, adverse clinical events or results, regulatory investigations, or ongoing or potential legal proceedings, could also adversely impact our ability to access capital as and when needed. Our failure

Table of Contents

to raise capital as and when needed would have a negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to pursue our business strategy.

Management believes that, after giving effect to the Reprioritization, the Company’s cash and cash equivalents of $65.2 million as of December 31, 2023 will allow the Company to fund its operations and meet its liquidity requirements into mid-2024. However, the expected cost benefit of the Reprioritization cannot be assured, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to extend our cash runway by meeting the conditions for additional funding under the terms of our Credit Agreement (defined below) or otherwise. In addition, the failure to raise additional financing in accordance with the minimum capital raising requirements of our Credit Agreement would trigger an event of default thereunder. The Fourth Amendment to our Credit Agreement includes covenants that we will receive, (i) after March 20, 2024, which is the effective date of the Fourth Amendment, and on or before April 15, 2024, at least $25.0 million in gross proceeds from the issuance of our common stock, warrants and/or pre-funded warrants, and/or in non-refundable cash consideration from partnering transactions entered into after March 20, 2024 (so long as such partnering transactions would not require us or any of our subsidiaries to make any cash investments in connection with the partnering transactions and no such cash investments are made), and (ii) after March 20, 2024 and on or before November 30, 2024, at least $50.0 million (for the avoidance of doubt, inclusive of amounts previously counted toward the preceding clause (i)) in gross proceeds from the issuance of our common stock, warrants and/or pre-funded warrants, and/or in cash and/or non-cash consideration (measured at fair market value, as determined by the Administrative Agent (as defined in the Credit Agreement) in its sole discretion from partnering transactions entered into after March 20, 2024. Failure to perform this covenant would constitute (A) a default under the Credit Agreement and (B) an event of default under the Credit Agreement, subject to a cure period in the case of clause (i) of the preceding sentence, until May 15, 2024. For the avoidance of doubt, failure to perform clause (ii) would constitute an immediate event of default under the Credit Agreement without any cure or grace period.

Furthermore, our estimate as to how long we expect our existing cash to be able to continue to fund our operations is based on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Further, changing circumstances, some of which may be beyond our control, could cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned. Our future funding requirements, both short-term and long-term, will depend on many factors, including:

● the costs, timing and outcome of seeking regulatory approvals;

● changes in regulatory policies or laws that may affect our operations;

Table of Contents

● the costs of acquiring potential new product candidates or technology;

● the costs of operating as a public company;

● the extent to which our operations continue;

● the costs of legal proceedings and investigations; and

As we continue our research and development activities, we will require additional resources to continue as a going concern. We can provide no assurance that we will successfully obtain additional resources to improve our financial condition. If we are unable to obtain necessary additional capital, we could be compelled to pursue alternative options, including, without limitation, implementing further workforce reductions, reducing or ceasing product development programs and advancement of our clinical trials and product candidates, selling our assets or seeking other strategic alternatives.

We have significant indebtedness and other contractual obligations that could impair our liquidity, restrict our ability to do business and thereby harm our business, results of operations and financial condition. We may not have sufficient cash flow from operations to satisfy our obligations under the Credit Agreement.

As of December 31, 2023, we had aggregate principal indebtedness of $102.7 million outstanding under our Credit Agreement and Guaranty (as amended, the “Credit Agreement”) by and among the Company, as the borrower, certain subsidiaries of the Company from time to time party thereto as subsidiary guarantors, the lenders party thereto (the “Lenders”), and Oaktree Fund Administration LLC (“OFA”) as administrative agent.

Restrictive covenants in the Credit Agreement place limits on our ability to conduct our business. The Credit Agreement contains customary representations and warranties and customary affirmative and negative covenants, including, among other things, restrictions on indebtedness, liens, investments, mergers, dispositions, prepayment of other indebtedness, and dividends and other distributions, subject to certain exceptions, including specific exceptions with respect to product commercialization and development activities. In addition, certain events, including receipt of a warning letter from the FDA, may constitute an event of default. We must also comply with certain covenants under the Credit Agreement, including a financial covenant that requires we maintain a minimum cash liquidity amount of $15 million (or higher upon certain events, including as described in the Fourth Amendment to the Credit Agreement described in Note 19, Subsequent Events in the audited financial statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K) and a minimum revenue requirement measured on a quarterly basis based on the revenue attributable to BXCL501 for the six consecutive month period ending on the last day of the relevant quarter, subject to cure payments of not less than $1.0 million if we fail to meet the minimum revenue requirement. The minimum revenue requirement applies beginning with the preceding six-month period ending on December 31, 2024, and ranges from approximately $4.5 million for the fourth quarter of 2024 to approximately $47.9 million for the first quarter of 2027. If we fail to meet the minimum revenue requirements for the preceding six-month periods ending on December 31, 2024, March 31, 2025, June 30, 2025 and September 30, 2025, we could be required to make revenue cure payments for the revenue shortfalls of up to $4.5 million, $6.2 million, $8.5 million, and $8.5 million, respectively, plus aggregate prepayment fees of $1.9 million. Under the Credit Agreement, these cure payments would be due on April 21, 2025, June 6, 2025, September 5, 2025 and December 8, 2025, respectively. We are only permitted to make cure payments for revenue shortfalls up to three times during the term of the Credit Agreement, after which we would default on the Credit Agreement if we are unable to satisfy the minimum revenue requirement for any subsequent fiscal quarter. In addition, certain events, including certain regulatory events and any “going concern” or similar qualification in a report of the Company’s independent registered public accountants relating to the Company’s annual financial statements, constitute an event of default under the Credit Agreement. The report of our independent registered public accounting firm included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K contains a “going concern” explanatory paragraph. In March 2024 we entered into a Fourth Amendment to the Credit Agreement, pursuant to which the Lenders waived compliance with this covenant with respect to the report contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The Fourth Amendment to the Credit Agreement also includes other covenants relating to minimum cash liquidity covenants and minimum capital raising requirements, as described further in Note 19, Subsequent Events in the audited financial statements included elsewhere in this Annual

Table of Contents

Report on Form 10-K, and failure to comply with such obligations, or other obligations required under the Credit Agreement, could trigger an event of default. Certain change of control events can also trigger an event of default under the Credit Agreement, including control by any entity or group of entities, other than BioXcel LLC and its affiliates, that acquires 35% or more of our voting capital stock.

Our ability to make scheduled payments or payments to maintain compliance with covenants or to restructure or refinance these and other outstanding debt obligations depends on our financial and operating performance, including growth in revenue from IGALMITM and BXCL501, which will be affected by prevailing economic, industry and competitive conditions and by financial, business and other factors beyond our control. A failure to pay our debt, fixed costs and other obligations or a breach of our contractual obligations or other event of default could result in a variety of adverse consequences, including the acceleration of our obligations or the exercise of remedies by our creditors and lessors. In such a situation, it is unlikely that we would be able to cure our breach, fulfill our obligations, make required payments or otherwise cover our fixed costs, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

In addition, historically we have relied on debt and equity financings as our primary sources of liquidity. If our future cash flows and capital resources are insufficient to fund our debt service obligations, we may be forced to reduce or delay expenditures, sell assets, seek additional capital or seek to restructure or refinance our indebtedness. Any refinancing or restructuring of our indebtedness could be at higher interest rates and may require us to comply with more onerous covenants. These alternative measures may not be successful and may not permit us to meet our scheduled or any accelerated debt service obligations. In the absence of such cash flows and resources, we could face substantial liquidity problems and might be required to sell material assets or pursue other strategic alternatives to attempt to meet our debt service obligations.

We have identified conditions and events that raise substantial doubt regarding our ability to continue as a going concern.

As of December 31, 2023, we had $65.2 million in cash and cash equivalents. Based on our existing cash, cash equivalents and lack of current availability under our funding facilities, we do not believe we have sufficient cash on hand to support current operations and service our debt obligations for at least one year from the date of issuance of the audited consolidated financial statements appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. This condition raises substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern for at least one year from the date that our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2023 are issued. In order to mitigate the current and potential future liquidity issues, we have undertaken the Reprioritization and may, among other things, seek to raise capital through the issuance of common stock, or by restructuring, refinancing, and/or amending the terms of the Credit Agreement (including with respect to regulatory related events of default that do not contain a cure period) or pursue other strategic alternatives. However, such transactions may not be successful and we may not be able to raise additional equity and/or financing necessary to meet our obligations. Moreover, our Credit Agreement contains covenants that we may be unable to comply with and which could result in the acceleration of our debt service obligations, further reducing our capital resources and ability to fund our operations. As such, there can be no assurance that we will be able to continue as a going concern and we may be forced to delay, reduce or discontinue our product development programs or commercialization efforts in order to preserve cash. For additional cost-saving and other strategic initiatives we may be compelled to pursue, see the risk factor entitled, “We will need substantial additional funding, and if we are unable to raise capital when needed, we could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our product development programs or commercialization efforts or otherwise seek strategic alternatives.”

Risks Related to the Discovery and Development of Product Candidates

We have limited experience in drug discovery and drug development.

Prior to the acquisition of our product and product candidates, we were not involved in and had no control over their preclinical and clinical development. In addition, we are relying upon the parties we acquired our product candidates from to have conducted research and development in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, accurately reported the results of all clinical trials conducted prior to our acquisition of the applicable product candidate, and correctly collected and interpreted the data from these studies and trials. To the extent

Table of Contents

any of these activities did not occur, our expected development time and costs could increase, which could adversely affect our prospects for marketing approval of, and receiving any future revenue from, these product candidates.

Developments relating to our TRANQUILITY II Phase 3 trial may impact the timing of our development plans for, and prospects for seeking or obtaining regulatory approval of, BXCL501 for the acute treatment of agitation (non-daily) associated with dementia in patients with probable Alzheimer’s disease.

Following our discovery of principal investigator misconduct at one of the clinical sites in our TRANQUILITY II Phase 3 clinical trial, we initiated an investigation into the issues associated with the trial. This principal investigator had previously been subject to a December 2022 FDA inspection of her clinical site in connection with the TRANQUILITY II clinical trial. At the conclusion of this inspection, the FDA issued an FDA Form-483 identifying three inspectional observations. These observations related to the principal investigator’s failure to adhere to the informed consent form approved by the Institutional Review Board for a limited number of subjects whose records the FDA reviewed, maintain adequate case histories for certain patients whose records the FDA reviewed, and adhere to the investigational plan in certain instances. For example, the FDA cited the principal investigator’s delay in informing the sponsor’s medical monitor or pharmacovigilance safety vendor of an SAE, for one of the subjects, which report was made to our vendor outside of the 24 hour time period prescribed by the clinical trial protocol. The principal investigator for this clinical site responded to the FDA observations within the time period requested. The FDA inspection remains open, however, as the FDA has not issued an Establishment Inspection Report.

In May 2023, it came to our attention that this same principal investigator in the TRANQUILITY II clinical trial may have fabricated email correspondence around the time of the FDA inspection, purporting to demonstrate that the investigator timely submitted to our pharmacovigilance safety vendor a report of an SAE from a different subject than the one cited in the FDA Form-483, and purporting to show that the vendor had confirmed receipt. Upon receipt of this information, we promptly initiated an investigation and received confirmation that the principal investigator fabricated the email correspondence related to the timing of the reporting of this SAE to our pharmacovigilance vendor to make it appear as though this SAE had been timely reported as required by the clinical trial protocol. This principal investigator has not participated in any other clinical trial sponsored or conducted by us. Both we and the principal investigator’s employer have reported this incident to the FDA.

Since that time, we have taken steps to further investigate and evaluate the conduct of the TRANQUILITY II trial at this clinical site. Based on these steps to date, we believe that there have been no further instances of misconduct or fraud or other findings that adversely impact the data integrity or reliability of the eligibility, safety, and efficacy data obtained at the clinical trial site in question.

However, the FDA may not accept or agree with our conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh their importance differently. Further, if we or the FDA determine that there are issues with data integrity and/or compliance with good clinical practice (“GCP”) requirements at the trial site, we may be unable to use some or all of the subject data generated at this clinical site to support a marketing application. Any issues identified at this trial site may also be identified at other trial sites. If all of data from this clinical trial site were discarded, the TRANQUILITY II trial would no longer be adequately powered for statistical significance or would not be considered adequately well-controlled by the FDA, and in either case, we would need to conduct a new comparable clinical trial before we are able to seek any approval of BXCL501 for use in patients with acute agitation (non-daily) due to dementia in probable Alzheimer’s disease. If a substantial portion of the data were discarded, similar outcomes may also occur.

In addition, we are continuing to seek feedback from the FDA with respect to our TRANQUILITY program. For example, on February 20, 2024, we held a Type B/Breakthrough Therapy designation meeting with the FDA. The original purpose of this meeting was to obtain feedback on the design of a proposed at-home study that did not include caregiver-collected efficacy endpoints, based on our belief that obtaining caregiver assessments of efficacy would be challenging. We believe there are no validated caregiver endpoints for assessing efficacy in Alzheimer’s disease patients in the at-home setting. As a result, we focused on requesting feedback from the FDA regarding our proposal for an at-home clinical study with safety as the primary objective, and to better understand what additional data would be required to submit an sNDA to support labeling for BXCL501 to include the acute treatment of agitation associated with dementia in probable Alzheimer’s disease or, in the alternative, in this population in the care setting only. In its preliminary responses, the FDA reiterated its prior comments that we generate additional efficacy data, including repeat-

Table of Contents

dose efficacy data, to support an sNDA submission, as the FDA indicated that our proposed efficacy database, which currently includes the 70 patients who have been treated with 60 mcg of BXCL501 in TRANQUILITY I and TRANQUILITY II, would not contain substantial evidence of effectiveness absent additional data. The FDA advised that we generate the necessary efficacy data in care facilities prior to conducting any trials in the at-home setting. In addition, the FDA indicated the need to generate long-term safety data to support an sNDA submission, including from probable Alzheimer’s disease patients exposed to BXCL501, for up to one year. We have received the final meeting minutes from the FDA, which we believe are consistent with the FDA’s preliminary responses and the subsequent meeting discussion. Based on the FDA’s feedback, we are currently planning to generate additional Phase 3 efficacy and safety data, in a variety of relevant care-facility settings and across severity of dementia using the PEC as the primary efficacy measure, as used in the prior TRANQUILITY II study. In addition, we plan to discuss the details of the requirement for long-term safety data at a future meeting with the FDA. Also, although we announced in November 2023 that we were planning to conduct a Phase 3 trial in the at-home setting, with safety as the primary objective (TRANQUILITY At Home), given the priority to expand the database to generate additional efficacy and safety data in care facilities, we are re-evaluating the timing for initiating TRANQUILITY At Home. Conducting any new clinical trial can take significant time, funding and resources, and there are no assurances we could raise the capital or have the liquidity and resources to conduct further clinical trials in our TRANQUILITY program. Any new clinical trials conducted in our target patient populations may have different safety or efficacy results from the topline data the Company previously announced for the TRANQUILITY II clinical trial. Further, any government investigation, disqualification, or debarment of, or proceeding or action against the principal investigator, or any government investigation, proceeding or action against us, could further delay development and approval of BXCL501 for this indication, and otherwise have a material adverse effect on us, our financial condition (including triggering a potential event of default under our Credit Agreement), results of operations and prospects.

We have limited clinical data supporting potential safety or efficacy of BXCL501 for use in the at-home setting.

In August 2023, we announced our intention to pursue a strategic reprioritization of our commercialization and development efforts (the “Reprioritization”), including among other things, a shift in focus to primarily develop BXCL501 for use in expanded settings, including the at-home setting and care facilities, for the acute treatment of agitation in patients with dementia due to probable Alzheimer’s disease and the acute treatment of agitation in schizophrenia and bipolar patients in the at-home setting. Although we have conducted several clinical trials that evaluated BXCL501 in the institutional setting, we have limited data supporting BXCL501’s potential use in the at-home setting. In particular, we have not conducted a clinical trial evaluating the at-home use of BXCL501 in the acute treatment of agitation in patients with dementia due to probable Alzheimer’s disease.

Although we will seek additional feedback from the FDA regarding the potential of its ongoing or completed clinical trials to support submission of one or more sNDAs and to support a label for use in the home, it is possible that the FDA may not consider our available data adequate to support such submissions. For example, on October 11, 2023, we received feedback from the FDA that TRANQUILITY I and TRANQUILITY II alone are not sufficient to support an sNDA submission for the use of BXCL501 to treat acute agitation (non-daily) in patients with dementia due to probable Alzheimer’s disease in either the at-home setting or care facilities, and the FDA indicated that we should, among other things, conduct a further clinical trial to evaluate safety and collect efficacy data of BXCL501 before we are able to submit an sNDA seeking approval of BXCL501 for use in such populations.

For a description of recent developments relating to our TRANQUILITY program, please see the prior risk factor, “Developments relating to our TRANQUILITY II Phase 3 trial may impact the timing of our development plans for, and prospects for seeking or obtaining regulatory approval of, BXCL501 for the acute treatment of agitation (non-daily) associated with dementia in patients with probable Alzheimer’s disease.” We cannot provide assurance that we will be able to seek or obtain approval of BXCL501 for treatment of agitation in patients with dementia due to probable Alzheimer’s disease in the at-home setting based on this updated development plan.

Although we continue to seek feedback from the FDA with respect to our TRANQUILITY program, the FDA may not agree that any trial designs we propose are sufficient to establish both the safety and efficacy of BXCL501 for the acute treatment of agitation associated with dementia due to probable Alzheimer’s disease in either a care setting or an at-home setting. For example, to assess safety, the FDA has indicated that we need to expose more patients to BXCL501 for a longer period of time and that an efficacy trial of a shorter duration, combined with the patients in its previous

Table of Contents

trials, would not support submissions of an sNDA. Further, to assess efficacy in the home setting, the FDA may determine that we cannot rely on our previous studies of BXCL501 for this proposed indication since those studies were conducted in assisted living facilities and they are not comparable to the at-home setting. The FDA may also require us to seek approval for BXCL501 for use in care facilities prior to seeking any approval for at-home use in the targeted AD patient population. In particular, we are planning to generate additional Phase 3 safety and efficacy data in a variety of relevant care-facility settings, but even if our planned clinical efforts are successful and even if we are able to obtain approval of BXCL501 for use in patients with dementia due to probable Alzheimer's disease, we cannot provide assurance that we will be able to seek or obtain approval of BXCL501 for the treatment of agitation in patients with dementia due to probable Alzheimer’s disease in the at-home setting based on this data and we will be required to generate additional data to evaluate the at-home use of BXCL501 in our targeted Alzheimer's dementia population before we are able to seek approval for such at-home use in this population, if ever. In addition, the FDA may determine that we cannot rely on the data from our prior TRANQUILITY II Phase 3 trial to support an sNDA as a result of potential data integrity issues at the trial site, as the FDA may not agree with our belief that data reliability and integrity remain intact. See Part II, Item 1A, “Risk Factors—Risks Related to the Discovery and Development of Product Candidates—Developments relating to its TRANQUILITY II Phase 3 trial may impact the timing of its development plans for, and prospects for seeking or obtaining regulatory approval of, BXCL501 for the acute treatment of agitation (non-daily) associated with dementia in patients with probable Alzheimer’s disease” for additional information. If the FDA does not accept the data from our prior TRANQUILITY II Phase 3 trial, we could be required to conduct additional clinical trials beyond those we currently contemplate, which would increase our costs and delay potential submission of an sNDA for BXCL501 which in turn would adversely affect our financial position and operations.

Accordingly, if the FDA reaches these conclusions or otherwise finds that our proposed clinical studies would not adequately evaluate the safety and efficacy of BXCL501 for the acute treatment of agitation associated with dementia due to probable Alzheimer’s disease in an at-home setting and/or care setting, we may need to evaluate more patients for a longer period of time to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of BXCL501.

With respect to our SERENITY program, we also held a Type C Meeting with the FDA on March 6, 2024 to obtain further feedback on our proposed changes to the design of SERENITY III Part 2, including with respect to the trial endpoints, and to discuss the content and format of a potential sNDA submission to expand the label of IGALMITM 120 micrograms to the acute treatment of agitation associated with schizophrenia and bipolar disorders in the outpatient setting. IGALMITM is already approved at the 120 mcg dose based on efficacy data that we previously generated in treating a single episode of agitation. Consistent with the data generated to date, the label for IGALMITM currently includes a limitation on use (“LOU”), noting the lack of efficacy or safety data beyond 24 hours following the first dose. During our March 6, 2024 Type C meeting with the FDA, we discussed, among other things, whether evaluating the at-home use of BXCL501 120 mcg, with safety as the primary objective and efficacy measures as exploratory endpoints, if successful, could support the submission of an sNDA seeking expansion of the current label for IGALMITM 120 mcg to allow at-home use and labeling without the current LOU. Based on current FDA feedback, we plan to amend the SERENITY III protocol to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the 120 mg dose in the at-home setting. We believe that our ability to seek labeling without the current LOU will depend, in part, on the number of agitation episodes we observe during our planned study period. Even if our amended SERENITY III trial is successful in demonstrating safety in the at-home setting, and even if the IGALMITM 120 mcg label is expanded to allow outpatient use, there is no guarantee that we will observe and/or treat a sufficient number of agitation episodes during the study period to support removal of the current LOU. We plan to provide further guidance regarding our plans for the SERENITY program following receipt of the final meeting minutes from the FDA. Even if the protocol for SERENITY III Part 2 is amended as described above, and even if the study produces favorable data, such data may not be sufficient for approval without additional clinical studies.

Any modifications to our proposed trial designs by the FDA would delay our initiation of such proposed trials, increase the costs of any trial that we do conduct and delay our submission of an sNDAs for BXCL501. Requirements to conduct additional clinical trials evaluating BXCL501 in support of our planned sNDAs seeking approvals for BXCL501 for our targeted patient populations in at-home settings would increase our costs, and could have a material adverse effect on our prospects and results of operations.

Table of Contents

In the near term, we are dependent on the success of IGALMITM, and the development of four of our product candidates, BXCL501, BXCL502, BXCL701 and BXCL702. If we are unable to complete the clinical development of or obtain marketing approval for our product candidates or successfully commercialize IGALMITM and our other product candidates, either alone or with a collaborator, or if we experience significant delays in doing so, our business could be substantially harmed.

We currently have only one product that has received regulatory approval and may never be able to develop additional marketable product candidates. We are continuing to invest a significant portion of our efforts and financial resources in the commercialization of IGALMITM and development of our four product candidates, BXCL501, BXCL502, BXCL701 and BXCL702, as well as other product candidates. In connection with the Reprioritization, we have significantly reduced the resources devoted to commercialization of IGALMITM and it is possible that will have adverse consequences on the revenue that we are able to generate from IGALMITM in the near term. As part of the Company’s Reprioritization, the IGALMITM commercial team shifted focus to a hospital/Integrated Delivery Network (“IDN”) contracting strategy with a Corporate Account Director (CAD) team. The goal of the realigned CAD team is to work with large IDNs and drive sales utilizing a top-down approach. Over time, the revised commercial effort is expected to allow the Company to continue to make inroads into the institutional market in a more cost-efficient manner. However, we have limited experience in drug development and commercialization, and our prospects are substantially dependent on our ability, or that of any future collaborator, to develop, obtain marketing approval for and successfully commercialize product candidates in one or more additional disease indications.

The success of IGALMITM, and of BXCL501, BXCL701, BXCL502 and our other product candidates will depend on several factors, including the following:

● the timing and performance of our current and future collaborators;

● protection of our rights in our intellectual property portfolio;

● successful launch of commercial sales following any marketing approval;

Table of Contents

● a continued acceptable safety profile following any marketing approval;

● our ability to compete with other therapies.

Many of these factors are beyond our control, including the results of clinical trials, the time required for the FDA, or any comparable foreign regulatory authorities, to review any regulatory submissions we may make, potential threats to our intellectual property rights and the manufacturing, marketing and sales efforts of any future collaborator. If we are unable to commercialize IGALMITM or develop, receive marketing approval for and successfully commercialize BXCL501, BXCL701 and our other product candidates, on our own or with any future collaborator, or experience delays because of any of these factors or otherwise, our business could be substantially harmed.

Interim “top-line” and preliminary data from our clinical trials, that we announce or publish from time to time, 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 data.

From time to time, we may publicly disclose top-line or preliminary data from our clinical trials, which is based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data. The results and related findings and conclusions based on such preliminary data are subject to change, and have in the past changed, following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, the top-line or preliminary results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Top-line or preliminary data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the top-line or preliminary data we previously published. As a result, top-line and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available.

From time to time, we may also disclose interim data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials. Interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Adverse differences between interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects. Further, disclosure of interim data by us or by our competitors could result in volatility in the price of our common stock.

Further, others, including regulatory agencies, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate or product and our Company in general. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure.

If the interim, top-line or preliminary data that we report differ from actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, operating results, prospects or financial condition.

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

The time required to obtain approval by the FDA and comparable foreign authorities is unpredictable but typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. It is not uncommon for companies in the biopharmaceutical industry to suffer significant

Table of Contents

setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to nonclinical findings made while clinical studies are underway and safety or efficacy observations made in clinical studies, including previously unreported adverse events. Our future clinical trial results may not be successful, and notwithstanding any potential promising results in earlier studies, we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. The historical failure rate for product candidates in our industry is high. In addition, approval policies, regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. We obtained regulatory approval for our first product candidate for the acute treatment of agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar I or II disorder, which is in the early stages of commercialization. It is possible that none of our other product candidates, or any product candidates we may seek to develop in the future, will ever obtain regulatory approval.

Our current product candidates, or any that may be developed in the future, could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including the following:

We have limited experience in completing clinical trials of product candidates. Consequently, we may not have the necessary capabilities, including adequate staffing, to successfully manage the execution and completion of clinical trials we initiate in a way that leads to our obtaining marketing approval for our product candidates in a timely manner, or at all. This lengthy approval process as well as the unpredictability of future clinical trial results may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates, which would significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, even if we were to obtain approval, regulatory authorities may approve our product candidates for fewer or more limited indications than we request, may not approve the price we intend to charge for our products, may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials, may approve a product candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of that product candidate or may restrict its distribution. Any of the foregoing scenarios could materially harm the commercial prospects for our product candidates.

We have only submitted one NDA to the FDA and have not submitted any similar marketing applications to comparable foreign authorities, for any product candidate, and we cannot be certain that our product candidates currently in development, or any than may be developed in the future, will be successful in clinical trials or receive regulatory approval. Further, our product candidates currently in development, or any that may be developed in the future, may not

Table of Contents

receive regulatory approval even if we believe they are successful in clinical trials. If we do not receive regulatory approvals for additional product candidates, we may not be able to continue our operations. For any regulatory approvals to market one or more of our product candidates, our revenues will be dependent, in part, upon the size of the markets in the territories for which we gain regulatory approval and have commercial rights. If the markets for patients that we are targeting for IGALMITM or our other product candidates are not as significant as we estimate, we may not generate significant revenues from sales of IGALMITM or such other product candidates, if approved.

We plan to seek regulatory approval to commercialize our product candidates in the U.S., the European Union (“EU”) and in additional foreign countries. While the scope of regulatory approval is similar in other countries, to obtain separate regulatory approval in many other countries we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of such countries regarding safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials and commercial sales, pricing and distribution of our product candidates, and we cannot predict success in these jurisdictions.

In addition, the FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies with respect to clinical trials may change and additional government regulations may be enacted. For instance, the regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the EU recently evolved. The EU Clinical Trials Regulation (“CTR”), which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. While the Clinical Trials Directive required a separate clinical trial application (“CTA”), to be submitted in each member state in which the clinical trial takes place, to both the competent national health authority and an independent ethics committee, the CTR introduces a centralized process and only requires the submission of a single application for multi-center trials. The CTR allows sponsors to make a single submission to both the competent authority and an ethics committee in each member state, leading to a single decision per member state. The assessment procedure of the CTA has been harmonized as well, including a joint assessment by all member states concerned, and a separate assessment by each member state with respect to specific requirements related to its own territory, including ethics rules. Each member state’s decision is communicated to the sponsor via the centralized EU portal. Once the CTA is approved, clinical study development may proceed. The CTR foresees a three-year transition period. The extent to which ongoing and new clinical trials will be governed by the CTR varies. For clinical trials whose CTA was made under the Clinical Trials Directive before January 31, 2022, the Clinical Trials Directive will continue to apply on a transitional basis for three years. Additionally, sponsors could choose to submit a CTA under either the Clinical Trials Directive or the CTR until January 31, 2023 and, if authorized, those are governed by the Clinical Trials Directive until January 31, 2025. By that date, all ongoing trials will become subject to the provisions of the CTR.

If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies governing clinical trials, our development plans may be impacted.

Clinical trials are expensive, time-consuming, difficult to design, difficult to conduct, and involve an uncertain outcome.

Before obtaining marketing approval from the FDA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, for the sale of our product candidates, we must complete preclinical development and extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates, in accordance with applicable law and regulations. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. Although we are planning for certain clinical trials relating to BXCL501, BXCL701, BXCL502 and our other product candidates, there can be no assurance that the FDA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, will accept our proposed trial designs as sufficient to establish the safety and/or efficacy of our product candidates.

We may experience delays in our clinical trials and we do not know whether planned clinical trials will begin on time, need to be redesigned, enroll patients on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. Clinical trials can be delayed for a variety of reasons, including delays related to:

Table of Contents

● dependence on the needs and timing of third-party collaborators;

● changes to clinical trial protocols;

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

● addressing patient safety concerns that arise during the course of a trial;

● having patients complete a trial or return for post-treatment follow-up;

● adding a sufficient number of clinical trial sites;

● lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial;

● any changes to our manufacturing process that may be necessary or desired;

Table of Contents

We could encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, by the Data Safety Monitoring Board (“DSMB”) for such trial or by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Such authorities may impose such a suspension or termination due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a drug, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. Furthermore, we rely on CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials and, while we have agreements governing their committed activities, we have limited influence over their actual performance, which increases the risk that such CROs or trial sites may fail to perform in accordance with regulatory requirements, clinical trial protocols or with the agreements governing their services to us. For example, investigator misconduct affecting our TRANQUILITY II trial, which evaluated BXCL501 in patients with probable Alzheimer’s disease, may have a material adverse impact on our development program for BXCL501 in these patients, as described more fully in the risk factor above entitled: “Developments relating to our TRANQUILITY II Phase 3 trial may impact the timing of our development plans for, and prospects for seeking or obtaining regulatory approval of, BXCL501 for the acute treatment of agitation (non-daily) associated with dementia in patients with probable Alzheimer’s disease.”

Further, conducting clinical trials in foreign countries, as we may do for our current and future product candidates, presents additional risks that may delay completion of our clinical trials. These risks include the failure of enrolled patients in foreign countries to adhere to clinical protocol due to differences in health care services or cultural customs, managing additional administrative burdens associated with foreign regulatory schemes, as well as political and economic risks relevant to such foreign countries. For example, current geopolitical conflicts in Eastern Europe and the Middle East may adversely impact our ability to conduct trials in those regions and elsewhere.

If we experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates will be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenues from any of these product candidates will be delayed. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.

We depend on enrollment of patients in our clinical trials to continue development of our product candidates. If we are unable to enroll patients in our clinical trials, our research and development efforts could be adversely affected.

The timely completion of clinical trials in accordance with their protocols depends, among other things, on our ability to enroll a sufficient number of patients who remain in the study until its conclusion. We may experience difficulties in patient enrollment in our clinical trials for a variety of reasons. Patient enrollment is affected by many factors including the size and nature of the patient population, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the eligibility criteria for the trial, the design of the clinical trial, the size of the patient population required for analysis of the trial’s primary endpoints, our ability to recruit clinical trial investigators with the appropriate competencies and experience, our ability to obtain and maintain patient consents, the risk that patients enrolled in clinical trials will drop out of the trials before completion, and competing clinical trials and clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the drug being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new drugs that may be approved for the indications we are investigating. Many pharmaceutical companies are conducting clinical trials in patients with the disease indications that our product candidates are designed to target. As a result, we must compete with them for clinical sites, physicians and the limited number of patients who fulfill the stringent requirements for participation in clinical trials. Also, due to the confidential nature of clinical trials, we do not know how many of the eligible patients may be enrolled in competing studies and who are consequently not available to us for our clinical trials. Our clinical trials may be delayed or terminated due to the inability to enroll enough patients. The delay or inability to meet planned patient enrollment may result in increased costs and delay or termination of our trials, which could have a harmful effect on our ability to develop products.

Table of Contents

Our product candidates may cause undesirable side effects or have other properties that could delay or prevent their regulatory approval, limit the commercial profile of an approved label, or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval.

Undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other comparable foreign authorities. The clinical evaluation of BXCL501, BXCL502, BXCL701, BXCL702 and our other product candidates in patients, in many cases, is ongoing and it is possible that there may be side effects associated with their use. Results of our trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of these or other side effects. For example, in our Phase 2 clinical trial of BXCL701 for the treatment of emergent neuroendocrine prostate cancer, one patient experienced acidosis with a fatal outcome. Although the clinical investigator could not determine that the fatality was related to treatment with BXCL701, it is possible that BXCL701 could be tied to unacceptable side effects in the future.

If we observe drug-related AEs or other unacceptable safety concerns in clinical trials, we, the FDA, the IRBs at the institutions in which our studies are conducted, or the DSMB could suspend or terminate our clinical trials or the FDA, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, could order us to cease clinical trials or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. For example, the FDA placed Point Therapeutics, Inc.’s IND for BXCL701 on clinical hold following an increase in observed mortality in patients receiving BXCL701 in a Phase 3 trial in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Though we believe that this result was caused by, among other things, an imbalance in the disease severity of patients enrolled in the active arm of the clinical trial, there is no guarantee that excess mortality will not be observed in future clinical studies. Treatment-related side effects could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the clinical trial or result in potential product liability claims. In addition, these side effects may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff. We expect to have to train medical personnel using our product candidates to understand the side effect profiles observed in our clinical trials and upon commercialization of any of our product candidates that may receive regulatory approval. Inadequate training in recognizing or managing the potential side effects of our product candidates could result in patient injury or death. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Additionally, if we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by IGALMITM or any other product candidate that receives marketing approval, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

● regulatory authorities may withdraw approvals of such products;

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

● our product may become less competitive; and

● our reputation may suffer.

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular product or product candidate, if approved, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

Table of Contents

The discovery and development of product candidates based on EvolverAI, BioXcel LLC’s proprietary pharmaceutical discovery and development engine, and our artificial intelligence (“AI”) platform is novel and unproven, and we do not know whether we will be able to develop any products of commercial value.

We are leveraging our own AI platform and BioXcel LLC’s EvolverAI, a proprietary pharmaceutical discovery and development engine, to create a pipeline of neuroscience and immuno-oncology product candidates for patients whose diseases have not been adequately addressed to date by other approaches and to design and conduct efficient clinical trials with a higher likelihood of success. While we believe that applying our AI platform and BioXcel LLC’s EvolverAI to create medicines for defined patient populations may potentially enable drug research and clinical development that is more efficient than conventional drug research and development, our approach is novel. Although we obtained FDA approval for IGALMITM, because our approach is novel, the cost and time needed to develop our product candidates is difficult to predict, and our efforts may not result in the discovery and development of commercially viable medicines. We may also be incorrect about the effects of our product and product candidates on the diseases of our defined patient populations, which may limit the utility of our approach or the perception of the utility of our approach. Furthermore, our estimates of our defined patient populations available for study and treatment may be lower than expected, which could adversely affect our ability to conduct clinical trials and may also adversely affect the size of any market for medicines we may successfully commercialize. Our approach may not result in time savings, higher success rates or reduced costs as we expect it to, and if not, we may not attract collaborators or develop new drugs as quickly or cost effectively as expected and therefore we may not be able to commercialize our approach as originally expected.

The Company’s AI platform and BioXcel LLC’s EvolverAI may fail to help us discover and develop additional potential product candidates.

Any drug discovery that we are conducting using the Company’s AI platform and BioXcel LLC’s EvolverAI may not be successful in identifying compounds that have commercial value or therapeutic utility. The Company’s AI platform and BioXcel LLC’s EvolverAI may initially show promise in identifying potential product candidates, yet fail to yield viable additional product candidates for clinical development or potential commercialization for a number of reasons, including:

Regulators may limit our ability to develop or implement our proprietary AI algorithms and/or may eliminate or restrict the confidentiality of our proprietary technology, which could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Our future success depends on our ability to continue to develop and implement our proprietary AI algorithms and models, and to maintain the confidentiality of this technology. Changes to existing regulations, their interpretation or implementation, or new regulations could impede our use of this technology or require that we disclose our proprietary

Table of Contents

technology to our competitors, which could impair our competitive position and result in an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We obtained Fast Track designation for certain of our product candidates, and we may seek Fast Track designation for other indications or for our other product candidates, but we might not receive such designations, and even if we do, such designations may not actually lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process.

If a product candidate is intended for the treatment of a serious condition and nonclinical or clinical data demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical need for this condition, a product sponsor may apply for FDA Fast Track designation. The sponsor of a Fast Track product candidate has opportunities for more frequent interactions with the applicable FDA review team during product development and, once an NDA is submitted, the product candidate may be eligible for priority review if the relevant criteria are met. An NDA for a Fast Track product candidate may also be eligible for rolling review, where the FDA may consider for review sections of the NDA on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the NDA, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the NDA and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the NDA. We obtained Fast Track designation for BXCL501 for the acute treatment of mild-to-moderate agitation associated with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and dementia, and we further obtained Fast Track designation for BXCL701, in combination with a checkpoint inhibitor, for the treatment of patients with metastatic SCNC with progression on chemotherapy and no evidence of microsatellite instability, and we may seek additional Fast Track designation for BXCL501 or BXCL701 or for one or more of our other product candidates, but we might not receive such designations from the FDA. However, even if we receive Fast Track designation, Fast Track designation does not ensure that we will receive marketing approval or that approval will be granted within any particular timeframe. We may not experience a faster development or regulatory review or approval process with Fast Track designation compared to conventional FDA procedures. In addition, the FDA may withdraw Fast Track designation if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program. Fast Track designation alone does not guarantee qualification for the FDA’s priority review procedures.

A Breakthrough Therapy designation by the FDA, even if granted for any of our product candidates, may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process and it does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval.

We obtained Breakthrough Therapy Designation for BXCL501 for the acute treatment of agitation associated with dementia, and we may seek additional Breakthrough Therapy designations for our product candidates if the clinical data support such a designation for one or more product candidates. A Breakthrough Therapy is defined as a drug or biologic that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs or biologics, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For product candidates that have been designated as Breakthrough Therapies, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens. Product candidates designated as Breakthrough Therapies by the FDA also receive the benefits associated with Fast Track designation, including the potential for rolling review of an NDA.

Designation as a Breakthrough Therapy is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe one of our product candidates meets the criteria for designation as a Breakthrough Therapy, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. In any event, the receipt of a Breakthrough Therapy designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to drugs considered for approval under non-expedited FDA review procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one or more of our product candidates qualify as breakthrough therapies, the FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened.

Table of Contents

If the FDA does not conclude that our product candidates satisfy the requirements for the 505(b)(2) regulatory approval pathway, or if the requirements for approval of any of our product candidates under Section 505(b)(2) are not as we expect, the approval pathway for our product candidates will likely take significantly longer, cost significantly more and encounter significantly greater complications and risks than anticipated, and in any case may not be successful.

We intend to seek FDA approval through the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway for certain of our product candidates. The Hatch-Waxman Act added Section 505(b)(2) to the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”). Section 505(b)(2) permits the filing of an NDA where at least some of the information required for approval comes from studies that were not conducted by or for the applicant. If the FDA does not allow us to pursue the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway for our product candidates as anticipated, we may need to conduct additional clinical trials, provide additional data and information and meet additional standards for regulatory approval. If this were to occur, the time and financial resources required to obtain FDA approval for our product candidates would likely substantially increase. Moreover, the inability to pursue the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway could result in new competitive products reaching the market faster than our product candidates, which could materially adversely impact our competitive position and prospects. Even if we are allowed to pursue the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway for a product candidate, we cannot assure you that we will receive the requisite or timely approvals for commercialization of such product candidate. In addition, we expect that our competitors will file citizens’ petitions with the FDA in an attempt to persuade the FDA that our product candidates, or the clinical studies that support their approval, contain deficiencies. Such actions by our competitors could delay or even prevent the FDA from approving any NDA that we submit under Section 505(b)(2).

If we are required by the FDA, or similar regulatory authorities, to obtain approval (or clearance, or certification) of a companion diagnostic device in connection with approval of one of our product candidates, and we do not obtain, or face delays in obtaining approval (or clearance, or certification) of a companion diagnostic device, we will not be able to commercialize the product candidate, and our ability to generate revenue will be materially impaired.

According to FDA guidance, if the FDA determines that a companion diagnostic device is essential to the safe and effective use of a novel therapeutic product or indication, the FDA generally will not approve the therapeutic product or new therapeutic product indication if the companion diagnostic is not also approved or cleared for that indication. If a satisfactory companion diagnostic is not commercially available, we may be required to create or obtain one that would be subject to regulatory approval requirements. For example, we may decide to collaborate with patient diagnostic companies during our clinical trial enrollment process for BXCL701 to help identify patients with tumor gene alterations that we believe may be most likely to respond to treatment with BXCL701. The process of obtaining or creating such diagnostic is time consuming and costly.

Companion diagnostics are developed in conjunction with clinical programs for the associated product and are subject to regulation as medical devices by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and, to date, the FDA has generally required premarket approval of companion diagnostics for cancer therapies. Generally, when a companion diagnostic is essential to the safe and effective use of a therapeutic product, the FDA requires that the companion diagnostic be approved before or concurrent with approval of the therapeutic product and before a product can be commercialized. The approval of a companion diagnostic as part of the therapeutic product’s labeling limits the use of the therapeutic product to only those patients who express the specific genetic alteration that the companion diagnostic was developed to detect. In January 2024, the FDA announced that it intends to initiate the process to reclassify most in vitro diagnostic tests (“IVDs”) that are currently Class III into Class II, including companion diagnostic IVDs. If such reclassification efforts occur, any companion diagnostics that are the subject of the down-classification may no longer require premarket approval, but rather may be marketed pursuant to the generally less burdensome 510(k) clearance process. However, there is no assurance that any companion diagnostic required for our pharmaceutical development programs will benefit from the reclassification, or that the reclassification, even if it does occur, will result in a shorter timeline to development or marketing of the companion diagnostic.

If the FDA, or a comparable foreign regulatory authority, requires approval (or certification or clearance) of a companion diagnostic for any of our product candidates, whether before or after the product candidate obtains marketing approval, we and/or third-party collaborators may encounter difficulties in developing and obtaining approval (or clearance, or certification) for these companion diagnostics. Any delay or failure by us or third-party collaborators to develop or obtain regulatory approval (or clearance, or certification) of a companion diagnostic could delay or prevent

Table of Contents

approval or continued marketing of our related product candidates. We may also experience delays in developing a sustainable, reproducible and scalable manufacturing process for the companion diagnostic or in transferring that process to commercial partners or negotiating insurance reimbursement plans, all of which may prevent us from completing our clinical trials or commercializing our product candidates, if approved, on a timely or profitable basis, if at all.

Approval, clearance or certification of companion diagnostics may be subject to further legislative or regulatory reforms notably in the EU. On May 25, 2017, the new In Vitro Medical Devices Regulation No. 2017/746 (“IVDR”) entered into force. The IVDR repeals and replaces the EU In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices Directive. Unlike directives, which must be implemented into the national laws of the EU member states, regulations are directly applicable (i.e., without the need for adoption of EU member states laws implementing them) in all EU member states and are intended to eliminate current differences in the regulation of medical devices among EU member states. The IVDR, among other things, is intended to establish a uniform, transparent, predictable and sustainable regulatory framework across the EU for medical devices and ensure a high level of safety and health while supporting innovation. The IVDR became effective in May 2022. However, on October 14, 2021, the European Commission proposed a “progressive” roll-out of the IVDR to prevent disruption in the supply of in vitro diagnostic medical devices. The European Parliament and Council adopted the proposed regulation on December 15, 2021. The IVDR has applied since May 26, 2022, but there is a tiered system extending the grace period for many devices (depending on their risk classification) before they have to be fully compliant with the regulation.

The regulation of companion diagnostics in the EU is subject to further requirements since the IVDR became applicable as it introduced a new classification system for companion diagnostics. Companion diagnostics will have to undergo a conformity assessment by a notified body. Before it can issue an EU certificate, the notified body must seek a scientific opinion from the EMA on the suitability of the companion diagnostic to the medicinal product concerned if the medicinal product falls exclusively within the scope of the centralized procedure for the authorization of medicines, or the medicinal product is already authorized through the centralized procedure, or a marketing authorization (“MA”) application for the medicinal product has been submitted through the centralized procedure. For other substances, the notified body can seek the opinion from a national competent authority or the EMA.

These modifications may make it more difficult and costly for us to obtain regulatory clearances, approvals or certifications for our companion diagnostics or to manufacture, market or distribute our products after clearance, approval or certification is obtained.

Although the FDA has approved IGALMITM for the acute treatment of agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar I or II disorder, we will still face extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements and obligations for IGALMITM and for any product candidates for which we obtain approval.

Any regulatory approvals that we may receive for IGALMITM or any of our product candidates will require the submission of reports to regulatory authorities and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product, may contain significant limitations related to use restrictions for specified age groups, warnings, precautions or contraindications, and may include burdensome post-approval study or risk management requirements. For example, the FDA-approved label for IGALMITM includes certain warnings and precautions regarding hypotension, orthostatic hypotension, bradycardia, somnolence, and QT interval prolongation. The FDA may also require a REMS to approve a product candidate, which could entail requirements for a medication guide, physician training and communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools.

In addition, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, AE reporting, storage, advertising, promotion, import, export and recordkeeping for IGALMITM are and will remain subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, and on-going compliance with cGMPs, and GCPs for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. In addition, manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic, unannounced inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP regulations and standards. If we or a regulatory authority discover previously unknown problems with a product, such as AEs of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facilities where the product is manufactured, a regulatory

Table of Contents

authority may impose restrictions on that product, the manufacturing facility or us, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing.

In addition, discovery of previously unknown AEs or other problems with our products, manufacturers or manufacturing processes or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may yield various results, including:

● restrictions on manufacturing such products;

● restrictions on the labeling or marketing of products;

● restrictions on product manufacturing, distribution or use;

● requirements to conduct post-marketing studies or clinical trials;

● warning letters or untitled letters;

● withdrawal of the products from the market;

● recall of products;

● fines, restitution or disgorgement of profits or revenues;

● suspension or withdrawal of marketing approvals;

● refusal to permit the import or export of our products;

● product seizure; or

● injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

Further, the policies of the FDA and other regulatory authorities may change, and additional government regulations may be enacted that could impose extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements and obligations on any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval. We also cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action, either in the U.S. or abroad.

The FDA and other regulatory agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses.

The FDA and other regulatory authorities strictly regulate marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of prescription drugs. These regulations include standards and restrictions for direct-to-consumer advertising, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, promotional activities involving the internet and off-label promotion. Any regulatory approval that the FDA or any other regulatory authority may grant is limited to those specific diseases and indications for which a product is deemed to be safe and effective. For example, the FDA-approved label for IGALMITM is currently limited to the acute treatment of agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar I or II disorder in adults to be self-administrated by patients under the supervision of a health care provider.

While physicians in the U.S. may choose, and are generally permitted, to prescribe drugs for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and for uses that differ from those tested in clinical trials and approved by the regulatory authorities, our ability to promote the products is narrowly limited to those indications that are specifically approved by the FDA. These “off-label” uses are common across medical specialties and may constitute an appropriate treatment for some patients in varied circumstances. For example, other formulations of Dex, the active ingredient in IGALMITM, have been approved for uses beyond those authorized in IGALMITM approved labeling, such as for use in sedation of surgical patients, and we are continuing to develop BXCL501 for potential use in patients with dementia, MDD, Alzheimer’s disease and other indications. We do not market or promote IGALMITM for these uses.

Table of Contents

Regulatory authorities in the U.S. generally do not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. Regulatory authorities do, however, restrict communications by pharmaceutical companies on off-label use. If we are found to have promoted our products for any off-label uses, the U.S. federal government (and other foreign governments) could levy civil, criminal and/or administrative penalties, and seek fines against us. The FDA, or other regulatory authorities, could also require that we enter into a consent decree or a corporate integrity agreement, or seek a permanent injunction against us under which specified promotional conduct is monitored, changed or curtailed. If we cannot successfully manage the promotion of IGALMITM or our product candidates, if approved, we could become subject to significant liability, which would materially adversely affect our business and financial condition.

Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies caused by funding shortages or global health concerns could hinder their ability to hire, retain or deploy key leadership and other personnel, or otherwise prevent new or modified products from being developed, approved or commercialized in a timely manner or at all, which could negatively impact our business.

The ability of the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory and policy changes, the FDA’s or foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s or foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities have fluctuated in recent years as a result of some of these aforementioned issues. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies, such as the EMA, following its relocation to Amsterdam and corresponding staff changes, may also slow the time necessary for new drug or modifications to approved drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical FDA employees and stop critical activities.

Separately, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA postponed most inspections of domestic and foreign manufacturing facilities at various points. Even though the FDA has since resumed standard inspection operations, any resurgence of the virus or emergence of new variants may lead to further inspectional delays. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We may conduct certain of or portions of our clinical trials for our product candidates outside of the U.S. and the FDA may not accept data from such trials, in which case our development plans will be delayed, which could materially harm our business.

We may choose to conduct one or more of our clinical trials or a portion of our clinical trials for our product candidates outside the U.S. The acceptance of study data from clinical trials conducted outside the U.S. or another jurisdiction by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority may be subject to certain conditions or may not be accepted at all. In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the sole basis for marketing approval in the U.S., the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (i) the data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice; (ii) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to GCP regulations; and (iii) the data may be considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA, or if the FDA considers such inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. In addition, even where the foreign study data are not intended to serve as the sole basis for approval, if the clinical trial was not otherwise subject to an IND, the FDA will not accept the data as support for an application for marketing approval unless the study was conducted in accordance with GCP requirements and the FDA is able to validate the data from the study through an on-site inspection if deemed necessary. Many foreign regulatory authorities have similar approval requirements. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the U.S. or the applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory

Table of Contents

authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which could be costly and time-consuming, and could result in current or future product candidates that we may develop not receiving approval for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.

We may be subject to extensive regulations outside the U.S. and may not obtain marketing approvals for products in Europe and other jurisdictions.

In addition to regulations in the U.S., should we or our collaborators pursue marketing approvals for IGALMITM, and for BXCL501, BXCL502, BXCL701, BXCL702 and our other product candidates internationally, we and our collaborators will be subject to a variety of regulations in other jurisdictions governing, among other things, clinical trials and any commercial sales and distribution of our products. Whether or not we, or our collaborators, obtain FDA approval for a product, we must obtain the requisite approvals from regulatory authorities in foreign countries prior to the commencement of clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries. The requirements and process governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary from country to country.

We expect to pursue marketing approvals for IGALMITM, and may pursue marketing approvals for BXCL501, BXCL502, BXCL701, BXCL702 and our other product candidates in Europe and other jurisdictions outside the U.S. with collaborative partners. The time and process required to obtain regulatory approvals and reimbursement in Europe and other jurisdictions may be different from those in the U.S. Also, regulatory approval in one jurisdiction does not ensure approvals in any other jurisdiction; however, negative regulatory decisions in any jurisdiction may have a negative impact on the regulatory process in other jurisdictions.

Following a national referendum and enactment of legislation by the government of the United Kingdom (“UK”), the UK formally withdrew from the EU on January 31, 2020 and ratified a trade and cooperation agreement governing its future relationship (commonly referred to as “Brexit”). The agreement, which was applied provisionally from January 1, 2021 and entered into force on May 1, 2021, addresses trade, economic arrangements, law enforcement, judicial cooperation and a governance framework including procedures for dispute resolution, among other things. Because the agreement merely sets forth a framework in many respects and requires complex additional bilateral negotiations between the UK and the EU as both parties continue to work on the rules for implementation, significant political and economic uncertainty remains about how the precise terms of the relationship between the parties will differ from the terms before withdrawal.

Since January 1, 2021, the UK operates under a distinct regulatory regime to the EU. EU pharmaceutical laws only apply in respect of the UK to Northern Ireland (as set out in the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland). EU laws which have been transposed into UK law through secondary legislation continue to be applicable as “retained EU law”. While the UK has indicated a general intention that new laws regarding the development, manufacture and commercialization of medicinal products in the UK will align closely with EU law, there are limited detailed proposals for future regulation of medicinal products. The trade and cooperation agreement includes specific provisions concerning medicinal products, which include the mutual recognition of cGMP, inspections of manufacturing facilities for medicinal products and cGMP documents issued (such mutual recognition can be rejected by either party in certain circumstances) but does not foresee wholesale mutual recognition of UK and EU pharmaceutical regulations. For example, it is not clear to what extent the UK will adopt legislation aligned with, or similar to, the EU CTR which became applicable on January 31, 2022 and which significantly reforms the assessment and supervision processes for clinical trials throughout the EU. On January 17, 2022, the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”) launched an eight-week consultation on reframing the UK legislation for clinical trials which aimed to streamline clinical trials approvals, enable innovation, enhance clinical trials transparency, enable greater risk proportionality, and promote patient and public involvement in clinical trials. The MHRA responded to the consultation on March 21, 2023 and confirmed that it would bring forward changes to the legislation. The final legal texts introduced by the UK Government will ultimately determine the extent to which the UK clinical trials framework aligns with or diverges from the EU CTR. A decision by the UK not to closely align its regulations with the new approach that will be adopted in the EU may have an effect on the cost of conducting clinical trials in the UK as opposed to other countries.

Therefore, there remains political and economic uncertainty regarding to what extent the regulation of medicinal products will differ between the UK and the EU in the future. Any divergences will increase the cost and complexity of running our business, including with respect to the conduct of clinical trials. Brexit also materially impacted the

Table of Contents

regulatory regime with respect to the approval of our product candidates. Great Britain is no longer covered by the EU’s procedures for the grant of MAs (Northern Ireland is covered by the centralized authorization procedure and can be covered under the decentralized or mutual recognition procedures). As of January 1, 2021, all existing centralized MAs were automatically converted into UK MAs effective in Great Britain and issued with a UK MA number on January 1, 2021 (unless MA holders opted out of this scheme). A separate MA is now required to market drugs in Great Britain. It is currently unclear whether the regulator in the UK, the MHRA, is sufficiently prepared to handle the increased volume of MA applications that it is likely to receive. Any delay in obtaining, or an inability to obtain, any regulatory approvals, as a result of Brexit or otherwise, would prevent us from commercializing our product candidates in Great Britain and restrict our ability to generate revenue and achieve and sustain profitability. If any of these outcomes occur, we may be forced to restrict or delay efforts to seek regulatory approval in Great Britain for our product candidates, which could significantly and materially harm our business. Any of these factors could have a significant adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

If we are found in violation of federal, state or foreign health care “fraud and abuse” laws, we may be required to pay significant fines and penalties, including, without limitation, debarment, suspension or exclusion from participation in federal, state or similar health care programs, which may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In the U.S., we are subject to various federal and state health care “fraud and abuse” laws, including anti- kickback laws, false claims laws and other laws intended to reduce fraud and abuse in federal and state health care programs, which could affect us, and our ability to successfully commercialize our products in the U.S. We may have to comply with similar laws and regulations outside the U.S. These laws include:

Table of Contents

The risk of our being found in violation of these laws is increased by the fact that many of them have not been fully interpreted by the regulatory authorities or the courts, and their provisions are open to a variety of interpretations. Any action against us for violation of these laws, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental laws and regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, the exclusion from participation in federal and state or foreign health care programs, additional reporting obligations and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, any of which could adversely affect our ability to market our products and adversely impact our financial results.

We may be unable to maintain sufficient clinical trial liability insurance.

Our inability to retain sufficient clinical trial liability insurance at an acceptable cost to protect against potential liability claims could prevent or inhibit our ability to conduct clinical trials for product candidates we develop. We may be unable to obtain appropriate levels of such insurance. Even if we do secure clinical trial liability insurance for our programs, we may not be able to achieve sufficient levels of such insurance. Any claim that may be brought against us could result in a court judgment or settlement in an amount that is not covered, in whole or in part, by our insurance or that exceeds the limits of our insurance coverage. We have supplemented our clinical trial coverage with product liability coverage in connection with the commercial launch of IGALMITM and expect that we would similarly supplement our coverage for any of our other product candidates that may receive regulatory approval, but we may be unable to obtain such increased coverage on acceptable terms or at all. If we are found liable in a clinical trial lawsuit or a product liability lawsuit in the future, we will have to pay any amounts awarded by a court or negotiated in a settlement that exceed our coverage limitations or that are not covered by our insurance, and we may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient capital to pay such amounts.

Risks Related to Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

If our products do not gain market acceptance or if we fail to accurately forecast demand or manage our inventories, our business will suffer because we might not be able to fund future operations.

A number of factors may affect the market acceptance of our products or any other products or product candidates we develop or acquire, including, among others:

Table of Contents

● our ability to fund our sales and marketing efforts; and

If our products do not gain market acceptance, we may not be able to fund future operations, including developing, testing and obtaining regulatory approval for new product candidates and expanding our sales and marketing efforts for our approved products, which would cause our business to suffer.

We plan to continue to commercialize IGALMI TM sublingual film for the acute treatment of agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar I or II disorder, to be self-administered by patients under the supervision of a healthcare provider, which is our only approved product to date. However, in connection with the Reprioritization, we significantly reduced the resources devoted to commercialization of IGALMI TM and it is possible that will have adverse consequences on the revenue that we are able to generate from IGALMI TM. Revenues for IGALMI TM for the year ended December 31, 2023 were $1.4 million. If our commercial products do not gain market acceptance, we may not be able to fund future operations, including developing, testing and obtaining regulatory approval for an sNDA for other BXCL501 indications, including in the at-home setting for the acute treatment of agitation (non-daily) associated with dementia due to probable Alzheimer’s disease, or for other product candidates that it may develop. Our results of operations could be materially harmed if we are unable to successfully commercialize IGALMI TM for any currently or additionally approved indications or any future product candidates that we may have approved.

Our results of operations could be materially harmed if we are unable to accurately forecast customer demand for IGALMITM and manage our inventory. To ensure adequate inventory supply, we must forecast inventory needs and place orders with our suppliers based on our estimates of future demand for IGALMITM. Our ability to accurately forecast demand for IGALMITM could be negatively affected by many factors, including our failure to accurately manage our expansion strategy, product introductions by competitors, an increase or decrease in customer demand for IGALMITM or for products of our competitors, our failure to accurately forecast customer acceptance of new products, unanticipated changes in general market conditions or regulatory matters, and weakening of economic conditions or consumer confidence in future economic conditions. Inventory levels in excess of customer demand may result in inventory write-downs or write-offs, which would cause our gross margin to be adversely affected and could impair the strength of our brand. Conversely, if we underestimate customer demand for IGALMITM, our third-party contract manufacturer may not be able to deliver products to meet our requirements, and this could result in damage to our reputation and customer relationships. In addition, if we experience a significant increase in demand, additional supplies of raw materials or additional manufacturing capacity may not be available when required on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all, or suppliers or our third-party manufacturers may not be able to allocate sufficient capacity in order to meet our increased requirements, which could have an adverse effect on our ability to meet customer demand for IGALMITM and our results of operations.

We seek to maintain sufficient levels of inventory to protect ourselves from supply interruptions. As a result, we are subject to the risk that a portion of our inventory will become obsolete or expire, which could have a material adverse effect on our earnings and cash flows due to the resulting costs associated with the inventory impairment charges and costs required to replace such inventory.

Our estimated number of episodes of agitation and our corresponding estimated total addressable market are subject to inherent challenges and uncertainties. If we have overestimated the number of episodes or the size of our total addressable market for our current and potential future products or product candidates, or if any approval that we obtain is based on a narrower definition of the patient population, our revenue and ability to achieve profitability may be harmed.

We have based our potential market opportunity on a number of internal and third-party estimates and resources, including, without limitation, management’s estimates and research, as well as industry and general publications and

Table of Contents

research, surveys and studies conducted by third parties, which may be incorrect. Our estimated potential market opportunity is based on estimates of episodes of agitation across our indications, and these estimated episodes of agitation are also based on internal and third-party estimates and market resources using data self-reported by patients. The conditions supporting our assumptions or estimates and the market data supporting these assumptions and estimates may change at any time or otherwise be inaccurate, thereby reducing the predictive accuracy of these underlying factors. Our total addressable market will ultimately depend upon, among other things, the number of actual treatable episodes, the diagnosis criteria included in the final label for each of our product candidates, if approved for sale for these indications, acceptance by the medical community and patient access, drug pricing and reimbursement. The number of patients and treatable episodes in the United States and other major markets and elsewhere may turn out to be materially lower than expected, the number of treatable episodes may be significantly fewer than total episodes experienced, patients may not be otherwise amenable to treatment with our product candidates or new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, all of which would harm our results of operations and our business. For example, our estimates of the monthly average episodes for patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder and patients diagnosed with schizophrenia and, therefore, our estimated total addressable market are based on third-party market surveys which differ from an observational study in the EU of inhaled loxapine for the treatment of agitation in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder conducted which found that only 40% of enrolled patients reported agitation episodes in the six-month study period. If third-party or internally generated data prove to be inaccurate or we make errors in our assumptions based on that data, our total addressable market may be meaningfully smaller than we have estimated, our future growth opportunities and sales growth may be impaired, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We obtained Orphan Drug Designation for BXCL701 for the treatment of pancreatic cancer, melanoma, acute myeloid leukemia and soft tissue sarcoma and we may seek Orphan Drug Designation for other indications or product candidates, and we may be unable to maintain the benefits associated with Orphan Drug Designation, including the potential for market exclusivity, and may not receive Orphan Drug Designation for other indications or for our other product candidates.

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the U.S. and EU, may designate drugs intended for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a drug as an orphan drug if it is a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the U.S., or a patient population greater than 200,000 individuals in the U.S. where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the U.S. In the EU, orphan drug designation is granted by the European Commission based on a scientific opinion of the EMA’s Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products. A medicinal product may be designated as orphan if its sponsor can establish that (i) the product is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition; (ii) either (a) such condition affects no more than 5 in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) the product, without the benefits derived from orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the EU to justify investment; and (iii) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of such condition authorized for marketing in the EU, or if such a method exists, the medicinal product will be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition. The application for orphan designation must be submitted before the application for MA.

In the U.S., orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user-fee waivers. In addition, if a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan drug exclusivity in the U.S. provides that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a full NDA, to market the same drug for the same disease or condition for seven years. In limited circumstances, the applicable exclusivity period is 10 years in the EU. The EU exclusivity period can be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that a drug no longer meets the criteria for orphan drug designation or if the drug is sufficiently profitable so that market exclusivity is no longer justified.

In January 2021, the FDA granted Orphan Drug Designation to BXCL701 for the treatment of soft tissue sarcoma. In September 2019, the FDA granted Orphan Drug Designation to BXCL701 for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia. Prior to 2019, the FDA granted Orphan Drug Designation to BXCL701 for the treatment of pancreatic cancer and melanoma. We may seek Orphan Drug Designations for BXCL701 in other diseases or conditions or for other product candidates. There can be no assurances that we will be able to obtain such designations.

Table of Contents

Even if we, or any future collaborators, obtain orphan drug designation for a product candidate, we, or they, may not be able to obtain or maintain orphan drug exclusivity for that product candidate. We may not be the first to obtain marketing approval of any product candidate for which we have obtained orphan drug designation for the orphan- designated indication due to the uncertainties associated with developing pharmaceutical products, and it is possible that another company also holding orphan drug designation for the same product candidate will receive marketing approval for the same disease or condition before we do. If that were to happen, our applications for that disease or condition may not be approved until the competing company’s period of exclusivity expires. In addition, exclusive marketing rights in the U.S. and abroad may be limited if we seek approval for an indication broader than the orphan-designated disease or condition or may be lost if the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if we are unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. Further, even if we, or any future collaborators, obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs with different active ingredients may be approved for the same disease or condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities can subsequently approve the same drug with the same active ingredient for the same condition if the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities conclude that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care or the manufacturer of the product with orphan exclusivity is unable to maintain sufficient product quantity. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development or regulatory review time of a drug, nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process and does not prevent competitors from obtaining approval of the same product candidate as ours for indications other than those in which we have been granted orphan drug designation.

If we are unable to develop satisfactory sales and marketing capabilities, we may not succeed in commercializing IGALMITM or any product candidate for which we may obtain regulatory approval.

We have limited experience in marketing and selling drug products. We have not entered into arrangements for the sale and marketing of IGALMITM, BXCL501, BXCL502, BXCL701, BXCL702 or any other product candidate. Typically, pharmaceutical companies would employ groups of sales representatives and associated sales and marketing staff numbering in the hundreds to thousands of individuals to call on the large number of physicians and hospitals. Following our Reprioritization, we may need to rebuild a commercial sales and marketing team if we seek to modify our commercial strategy for IGALMITM or initiate commercial sales for any product candidate in the future, which will likely require significant cost. We may seek to collaborate with a third-party to market our drugs or may seek to market and sell our drugs by ourselves. If we seek to collaborate with a third-party, we cannot be sure that a collaborative agreement can be reached on terms acceptable to us. We may also need to hire additional personnel skilled in marketing and sales for our direct marketing and selling efforts. We cannot be sure that we will be able to acquire, or establish third-party relationships to provide, any or all of these marketing and sales capabilities. The maintenance and expansion of our direct sales force or establishment of a contract sales force, or a combination thereof, as applicable, to market our products is expensive and time-consuming and could delay any product launch. In addition, reputational harm from the Reprioritization may adversely impact our efforts to hire personnel skilled in marketing and sales. Further, we can give no assurances that we will be able to maintain a direct and/or contract sales force for any period of time or that our sales efforts will be sufficient to grow our revenues or that our sales efforts will ever lead to profits. A direct sales force has in the past subjected and may in the future subject us to higher fixed costs than those of companies that market competing products through independent third parties, due to the costs that we bear associated with employee benefits, training, and managing sales personnel. As a result, we could be at a competitive disadvantage. Additionally, these fixed costs may slow our ability to reduce costs if needed, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

We operate in a highly competitive and rapidly changing industry.

Biopharmaceutical product development is highly competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological advancements. Our success is highly dependent upon our ability to in-license, acquire, develop and obtain regulatory approval for new and innovative products on a cost-effective basis and to market them successfully. In doing so, we face and will continue to face intense competition from a variety of businesses, including large, fully integrated, well-established pharmaceutical companies who already possess a large share of the market, specialty pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical companies, academic institutions, government agencies and other private and public research institutions in the U.S., the EU and other jurisdictions.

Table of Contents

Many of the companies against which we are competing or against which we may compete in the future have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved drugs than we do. These third parties compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. Mergers and acquisitions in the biopharmaceutical industry could result in even more resources being concentrated among a small number of our competitors.

Competition may further increase as a result of advances in the commercial applicability of technologies and greater availability of capital for investment in these industries. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing, on an exclusive basis, products that are more effective or less costly than any product candidate that we may develop.

Established biopharmaceutical companies may invest heavily to accelerate discovery and development of novel compounds or to in-license novel compounds that could make our product candidates less competitive. In addition, any new product that competes with an approved product must demonstrate compelling advantages in efficacy, convenience, tolerability and safety to overcome price competition and to be commercially successful. Accordingly, our competitors may succeed in obtaining patent protection, discovering, developing, receiving FDA approval for or commercializing drugs before we do, which would have an adverse impact on our business and results of operations.

The availability of our competitors’ products could limit the demand and the price we are able to charge for products and product candidates, if any, that we commercialize. The inability to compete with existing or subsequently introduced drugs would harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Although we obtained FDA approval for IGALMITM, our products and product candidates may not be accepted by physicians or the medical community in general, and there may be insufficient insurance coverage and reimbursement.

There can be no assurance that IGALMITM, or BXCL501, BXCL502, BXCL701, BXCL702 and our other product candidates or any other product candidate successfully developed by us, independently or with partners, if approved, will be accepted by physicians, hospitals and other health care facilities. IGALMITM competes, and BXCL501, BXCL502, BXCL701, BXCL702 and any future product candidates we develop will compete, with a number of products manufactured and marketed by major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. The degree of market acceptance of IGALMITM and any drugs we develop depends on a number of factors, including:

● product label and package insert requirements;

● strength of sales, marketing, and distribution support;

● product pricing in absolute terms and relative to alternative treatments;

● future changes in health care laws, regulations, and medical policies; and

Table of Contents

Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of IGALMITM or any product candidate for which we obtain regulatory approval. In the U.S. and other countries, sales of IGALMITM and any other products for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale will depend in part on the availability of coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors. Third-party payors include government health administrative authorities, such as Medicaid and Medicare, managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations.

Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical products and services. It will be time consuming and expensive for us to go through the process of seeking coverage and reimbursement from Medicare and private payors. IGALMITM and any other products for which we receive regulatory approval may not be considered cost-effective, and coverage and reimbursement may not be available or sufficient to allow us to sell our proposed products on a profitable basis. Further federal, state and foreign government proposals and health care reforms are likely which could limit the prices that can be charged for IGALMITM and the product candidates that we develop and may further limit our commercial opportunities. Our results of operations could be materially adversely affected by proposed health care reforms, by the Inflation Reduction Act and other drug pricing legislation in the U.S., by the possible effect of such current or future legislation on amounts that private insurers will pay and by other health care reforms that may be enacted or adopted in the future.

Health care reform measures could hinder or prevent our product candidates’ commercial success.

The U.S. government and other governments have shown significant interest in pursuing health care reform. Any government-adopted reform measures could adversely impact the pricing of health care products and services in the U.S. or internationally and the amount of reimbursement available from governmental agencies or other third-party payors for IGALMITM and the product candidates that we develop. The continuing efforts of the U.S. and foreign governments, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of health care services to contain or reduce health care costs may adversely affect our ability to set prices for our products, which we believe are fair, and our ability to generate revenues and achieve and maintain profitability.

New laws, regulations and judicial decisions, or new interpretations of existing laws, regulations and decisions, that relate to health care availability, methods of delivery or payment for products and services, or sales, marketing or pricing, may limit our potential revenue, and we may need to revise our research and development programs. The pricing and reimbursement environment may change in the future and become more challenging due to several reasons, including policies advanced by the current executive administration in the U.S., new health care legislation or fiscal challenges faced by government health administration authorities. Specifically, in both the U.S. and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change the health care system in ways that could affect our ability to sell our products profitably.

For example, in the U.S., the ACA, which was enacted in 2010, has substantially changed the way health care is financed by both government health plans and private insurers, and significantly impacts the pharmaceutical industry. For example, the ACA imposed a non-deductible excise tax on pharmaceutical manufacturers or importers that sell branded prescription drugs to government programs. In addition, as part of the ACA’s provisions closing a funding gap that existed in the Medicare Part D prescription drug program, manufacturers are required to provide a discount on branded prescription drugs for drugs provided to certain beneficiaries who fall within the “donut hole.” Similarly, the ACA increased the level of Medicaid rebates payable by manufacturers of brand-name drugs from 15.1% to 23.1% of the average manufacturer price and required collection of rebates for drugs paid by Medicaid managed care organizations. The ACA also included changes to the Public Health Service’s 340B drug pricing program (the “340B program”) including expansion of the list of eligible covered entities that may purchase drugs under the program.

Since its enactment, there have been judicial, executive and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the ACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Thus, the ACA will remain in effect in its current form.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the U.S. since the ACA was enacted. These changes include the Budget Control Act of 2011, which resulted in aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers, which went into effect on April 1, 2013, and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will

Table of Contents

remain in effect through 2032, unless additional Congressional action is taken. Furthermore, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. More recently, on March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, beginning January 1, 2024.

Most significantly, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”) into law. This statute marks the most significant action by Congress with respect to the pharmaceutical industry since adoption of the ACA in 2010. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare (beginning in 2026), with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap; imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023); and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new discounting program (beginning in 2025). The IRA permits the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. On August 29, 2023, HHS announced the list of the first ten drugs that will be subject to price negotiations. HHS has issued and will continue to issue guidance implementing the IRA, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. While the impact of the IRA on the pharmaceutical industry and our business cannot yet be fully determined, it is likely to be significant.

The cost of prescription pharmaceuticals in the U.S. will likely continue to be the subject of considerable discussion. Members of Congress and the Biden Administration have indicated they will continue to pursue further legislative or administrative measures to control prescription drug costs. There have been several Congressional inquiries, as well as legislative and regulatory initiatives and executive orders designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. We cannot predict with certainty what impact any federal or state health reforms will have on us, but such changes could impose new or more stringent regulatory requirements on our activities or result in reduced reimbursement for our products, any of which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Individual states in the U.S. continue to consider and have enacted legislation to limit the growth of health care costs, including the cost of prescription drugs and combination products. A number of states have either implemented or are considering implementation of drug price transparency legislation that may prevent or limit our ability to take price increases at certain rates or frequencies. Requirements under such laws include advance notice of planned price increases, reporting price increase amounts and factors considered in taking such increases, wholesale acquisition cost information disclosure to prescribers, purchasers, and state agencies, and new product notice and reporting. Such legislation could limit the price or payment for certain drugs, and a number of states are authorized to impose civil monetary penalties or pursue other enforcement mechanisms against manufacturers who fail to comply with drug price transparency requirements, including the untimely, inaccurate, or incomplete reporting of drug pricing information. If we are found to have violated state law requirements, we may become subject to penalties or other enforcement mechanisms, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Furthermore, there has been increased interest by third-party payors and governmental authorities in reference pricing systems and publication of discounts and list prices.

It is likely that federal and state legislatures within the U.S. and foreign governments will continue to consider changes to existing health care legislation. We cannot predict the reform initiatives that may be adopted in the future or whether initiatives that have been adopted will be repealed or modified. The continuing efforts of governments, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of health care services to contain or reduce costs of health care may adversely affect the demand for IGALMITM and any other drug products for which we may obtain regulatory approval, our ability to set a price that we believe is fair for our products, our ability to obtain adequate coverage and reimbursement approval for a product, our ability to generate revenues and achieve or maintain profitability, and the level of taxes that we are required to pay.

In the EU, similar developments may affect our ability to profitably commercialize our product candidates, if approved. In addition to continuing pressure on prices and cost containment measures, legislative developments at the EU or member state level may result in significant additional requirements or obstacles that may increase our operating costs. The delivery of healthcare in the EU, including the establishment and operation of health services and the pricing

Table of Contents

and reimbursement of medicines, is almost exclusively a matter for national, rather than EU, law and policy. National governments and health service providers have different priorities and approaches to the delivery of health care and the pricing and reimbursement of products in that context. In general, however, the healthcare budgetary constraints in most EU member states have resulted in restrictions on the pricing and reimbursement of medicines by relevant health service providers. Coupled with ever-increasing EU and national regulatory burdens on those wishing to develop and market products, this could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to commercialize our product candidates, if approved. In markets outside of the U.S. and EU, reimbursement and healthcare payment systems vary significantly by country, and many countries have instituted price ceilings on specific products and therapies.

On December 13, 2021, Regulation No 2021/2282 on Health Technology Assessment (“HTA”) amending Directive 2011/24/EU, was adopted. While the regulation entered into force in January 2022, it will only begin to apply from January 2025 onwards, with preparatory and implementation-related steps to take place in the interim. Once applicable, it will have a phased implementation depending on the concerned products. The regulation intends to boost cooperation among EU member states in assessing health technologies, including new medicinal products as well as certain high-risk medical devices, and provide the basis for cooperation at the EU level for joint clinical assessments in these areas. It will permit EU member states to use common HTA tools, methodologies, and procedures across the EU, working together in four main areas, including joint clinical assessment of the innovative health technologies with the highest potential impact for patients, joint scientific consultations whereby developers can seek advice from HTA authorities, identification of emerging health technologies to identify promising technologies early, and continuing voluntary cooperation in other areas. Individual EU member states will continue to be responsible for assessing non-clinical (e.g., economic, social, ethical) aspects of health technology, and making decisions on pricing and reimbursement.

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

We participate in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program (“MDRP”) and other federal and state government pricing programs in the U.S., and we may participate in additional government pricing programs in the future. These programs generally require manufacturers to pay rebates or otherwise provide discounts to government payors in connection with drugs that are dispensed to beneficiaries of these programs. As a condition of having federal funds being made available for covered outpatient drugs under Medicaid and Medicare Part B, a manufacturer must enroll in the MDRP. Under this program, we must pay a rebate to state Medicaid programs for each unit of our covered outpatient drug dispensed to a Medicaid beneficiary and paid for by a state Medicaid program. Medicaid drug rebates are based on pricing data that we must report on a monthly and quarterly basis to CMS. For the MDRP, this data includes the average manufacturer price (“AMP”) for each drug and, in the case of an innovator product, like IGALMITM, the best price. If we become aware that our MDRP price reporting submission for a prior period was incorrect or has changed as a result of recalculation of the pricing data, we must resubmit the corrected data for up to three years after the data originally was due. Further, under the IRA, AMP figures we report will also be used to calculate a rebate on Medicare Part D utilization, triggered by price increases that outpace inflation. If we fail to provide information timely or are found to have knowingly submitted false information to the government, we may be subject to civil monetary penalties and other sanctions, including termination from the MDRP, which would result in payment not being available for our covered outpatient drugs under Medicaid or, if applicable, Medicare Part B. Failure to make necessary disclosures and/or to identify overpayments additionally could result in allegations against us under the Federal False Claims Act and other laws and regulations.

Federal law requires that a manufacturer that participates in the MDRP also participate in the 340B program in order for federal funds to be available for the manufacturer’s drugs under Medicaid and Medicare Part B, and we participate in the 340B program. The 340B program is administered by the Health Resources and Services Administration (“HRSA”) and requires us to charge statutorily defined covered entities no more than the 340B “ceiling price” for our covered outpatient drugs used in an outpatient setting. These 340B program covered entities include a variety of community health clinics and other entities that receive health services grants from the Public Health Service, as well as hospitals that serve a disproportionate share of low-income patients. The 340B ceiling price is calculated using a statutory formula, which is based on the AMP and rebate amount for the covered outpatient drug as calculated under the MDRP. In general, products subject to Medicaid price reporting and rebate liability are also subject to the 340B ceiling price calculation and discount requirement. We must report 340B ceiling prices to HRSA on a quarterly basis, and HRSA

Table of Contents

publishes them to 340B covered entities. HRSA has finalized regulations regarding the calculation of the 340B ceiling price and the imposition of civil monetary penalties on manufacturers that knowingly and intentionally overcharge covered entities for 340B eligible drugs. HRSA has also finalized an administrative dispute resolution process through which 340B covered entities may pursue claims against participating manufacturers for overcharges, and through which manufacturers may pursue claims against 340B covered entities for engaging in unlawful diversion or duplicate discounting of 340B drugs. In addition, legislation may be introduced that, if passed, would further expand the 340B program, such as adding further covered entities or requiring participating manufacturers to agree to provide 340B program discounted pricing on drugs used in an inpatient setting.

In order to be eligible to have drug products paid for with federal funds under Medicaid and Medicare Part B and purchased by certain federal agencies and grantees, we also must participate in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) Federal Supply Schedule (“FSS”) pricing program. Under the VA/FSS program, we must report the Non-Federal Average Manufacturer Price (“Non-FAMP”) for our covered drugs to the VA and charge certain federal agencies no more than the Federal Ceiling Price, which is calculated based on Non-FAMP using a statutory formula. These four agencies are the VA, the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S. Public Health Service (including the Indian Health Service). We must also pay rebates on products purchased by military personnel and dependents through the TRICARE retail pharmacy program. If we fail to provide timely information or are found to have knowingly submitted false information, we may be subject to civil monetary penalties.

Individual states continue to consider and have enacted legislation to limit the growth of health care costs, including the cost of prescription drugs and combination products. A number of states have either implemented or are considering implementation of drug price transparency legislation that may prevent or limit our ability to take price increases at certain rates or frequencies. Requirements under such laws include advance notice of planned price increases, reporting price increase amounts and factors considered in taking such increases, wholesale acquisition cost information disclosure to prescribers, purchasers, and state agencies, and new product notice and reporting. Such legislation could limit the price or payment for certain drugs, and a number of states are authorized to impose civil monetary penalties or pursue other enforcement mechanisms against manufacturers who fail to comply with drug price transparency requirements, including the untimely, inaccurate, or incomplete reporting of drug pricing information. If we are found to have violated state law requirements, we may become subject to penalties or other enforcement mechanisms, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Pricing and rebate calculations are complex, vary among products and programs, and are often subject to interpretation by manufacturers, governmental or regulatory agencies, and the courts. The terms, scope and complexity of these government pricing programs change frequently, as do interpretations of applicable requirements for pricing and rebate calculations. Responding to current and future changes may increase our costs and the complexity of compliance will be time-consuming. Any required refunds to the U.S. government or responding to a government investigation or enforcement action would be expensive and time consuming and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Price recalculations under the MDRP also may affect the ceiling price at which we may be required to offer products under the 340B program. Civil monetary penalties can be applied if we are found to have knowingly submitted any false price or product information to the government, if we fail to submit required price data on a timely basis, or if we are found to have charged 340B program covered entities more than the statutorily mandated ceiling price. In the event that CMS were to terminate our Medicaid rebate agreement, pursuant to which we participate in the MDRP, no federal payments would be available under Medicaid or Medicare for our covered outpatient drugs. We cannot assure you that price data submissions we make will not be found to be incomplete or incorrect.

Risks Related to Our Relationship with BioXcel LLC

BioXcel LLC has significant influence over the direction of our business, and the concentrated ownership of our common stock will prevent you and other stockholders from influencing significant decisions.

As of December 31, 2023, BioXcel LLC owned approximately 29% of the economic interest and voting power of our outstanding common stock and BioXcel LLC is controlled by BioXcel Holdings, Inc. Our Chief Executive Officer and member of our board of directors, Vimal Mehta, Ph.D., is the Chief Executive Officer, President, Treasurer and Secretary and a member of the board of managers of BioXcel LLC and Chief Executive Officer, President, Treasurer

Table of Contents

and Secretary and the sole member of the board of directors of BioXcel Holdings, Inc. See “The management of and beneficial ownership in BioXcel LLC by our executive officers and our directors may create, or may create the appearance of, conflicts of interest.” below. Even though BioXcel LLC controls less than a majority of the voting power of our outstanding common stock, it may influence the outcome of such corporate actions so long as it owns a significant portion of our common stock.

Approval of commercial terms between us and BioXcel LLC does not preclude the possibility of stockholder litigation, including but not limited to derivative litigation nominally against BioXcel LLC and against its directors and officers and also against us and our directors and officers.

The commercial terms of the Separation and Shared Services Agreement (as amended and/or restated and in effect as of the date hereof, the “Services Agreement”), and the Amended and Restated Asset Contribution Agreement (as amended and/or restated and in effect as of the date hereof, the “Contribution Agreement”), that we entered into with BioXcel LLC have not been negotiated by persons consisting solely of disinterested directors.

BTAI US Equity

BTAI · 10-K · period ended 2023-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors

BTAI US Equity☆

BTAI · 10-K · period ended 2023-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors

BTAI US Equity